Re: Re: Re: Reviewing Hurd-on-L4 (and considering its future?)

[William ML Leslie]

Darn reply-to-all; foiled again!

On 25 May 2018 at 17:52, Arne Babenhauserheide <address@hidden> wrote:
>> The state of the art seems to have moved so far from when the Hurd was
>> engineered,
>
> I wish this were the case, but I see so many bad designs piled on top of 
> Linux, just because it lacks features of the Hurd, that I feel a lot of value 
> in the Hurd. It looks like the need for Hurdish features became so big that 
> people now accept crutches.
>
> But I'm not fully up to date on microkernel dev.
>

I wasn't talking about things that are now features of GNU/Linux,
rather things anyone should probably consider doing differently in
hurd-ng; like safe languages for essential features and better support
for asynchronity.

-- 
William Leslie

Notice:
Likely much of this email is, by the nature of copyright, covered
under copyright law.  You absolutely MAY reproduce any part of it in
accordance with the copyright law of the nation you are reading this
in.  Any attempt to DENY YOU THOSE RIGHTS would be illegal without
prior contractual agreement.