Re: L4Hurd at Sourceforge

[Ian Duggan]

> > 1) Is the fiasco kernel the right choice here? We can easily add other
> > L4 microkernels as modules.
> 
> My religion is against C++. So if there's a decent plain C/assembler
> alternative, I'd prefer that.

This seems to be a common desire. Which of the C based microkernels is
the most stable and complete?

> > 2) Hurd Module
> >
> >    CVSROOT/hurd   (Hurd from official CVS)
> 
> I think it is desirable to minimize hacking all over the hurd. On the
> other hand, some components, like libports, will be quite central for
> the L4 port. So perhaps it makes sense to import it all. An
> alternative might be to create a branch or something on the official
> hurd repository.

Agreed. We should closely track changes being made to the Hurd as things
progress. For convenience, however, we need a sandbox to play in. I was
thinking we could use the third-party source tracking features of CVS to
deal with this.

> > 3) Is this the correct way to setup CVS? Are there any other
> > suggestions?
> 
> Another module that you'll need is glibc, or at least those parts of
> it that Farid packaged up as libhurd.

Is it enough to just use the glibc source from Debian? I'm not familier
with the relationship or how often Hurd dependent stuff gets folded into
glibc.

> And pthreads (I don't remember current status on that).

Pthreads seem to be forever on the TODO list.

-- Ian

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ian Duggan                    address@hidden
                              http://www.ianduggan.net