Re: configuration

[Ron Farrer]

OKUJI Yoshinori (address@hidden) wrote:

>   Do all of you agree that the basic idea should be to construct a
> generic but yet powerful layer and rewrite Hurd on the top of the
> microkernel-independent layer? But don't forget that GCC still has
> some predefinitions of Mach. We need to consider (1) simply getting
> rid of them, (2) replacing them with generic ones (e.g. -DMOM), or (3)
> still defining microkernel-specific constants, to allow to implement
> microkernel-dependent features.
> 
>   BTW, what is the difference between libmom and libvk? I think it is
> just what you want to call them. For me, MOM is a better name, because
> this is an existing English word. :)

I agree with you and am curious what the best way to fix gcc and friends is? 

Also we need to discuss  this microkernel-independent layer (at least
it's somewhere to get started).

We also need to keep things from being x86 specific. If we want hurd to
be successful we need to help make it platform independant (which it
already mostly is). Same goes for the helper layers and whatnot. I
personally don't care AT ALL for x86, I use Alphas and only Alphas. :-) 

Ron

pgpqR0jIW4Vp6.pgp
Description: PGP signature