Re: about GNU Hurd

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   If we are sure we need HURD-NG, it is no-sense to work in Hurd on
   gnumach anymore. To ask people to work in Hurd on gnumach is then
   to ask hackers to work in something that wont be useful.

   If we are sure we need HURD-NG, lets call it HURD, stop the
   development of the current Hurd on gnumach, write new webpages,
   make a new development group able to help Marcus, and replace the
   current project. Having people working in the current Hurd project
   waiting for rumours about the new microkernel doesnt seems very
   logic to me.

Problem is that nobody, not including the peoplw who are trying to
work/design Hurd-NG, know what it will look like, let alone what
kernel to use.

We already wasted many years choosing one kernel, first it was Sprite,
then Mach, then Sprite again, and we finally settled on Mach.  Then
after a few years, it was said that we must use L4 because Mach was
not sufficient, but that we should wait until L4 X.2 was released.
When L4 X.2 was finally released several years after that, and had
already been out for many years, it was said that L4 X.2 would not do,
and now we are in the same situation that we were back at the start of
the Hurd project.

I would like to request yet again that we stick with Mach, or ditch
the Hurd completely and use Linux.  Linux is already capable of doing
everything we ever could imaging for the Hurd, it would be far easier
to get Linux do all the other funky things we'd like than rewritting
the Hurd.  Seeing that nobody wishes to maintain the Hurd, and Richard
doesn't see any good candidates as maintainers for the Hurd, the only
sane and logical solution is to put an end to the project.


Please Richard, you of all people should know how painful it is to
recreate systems, you have done it many times already, I cannot see
why you wish to do it yet another time when we already have _two_
good--maybe not excellent--operating systems, GNU and GNU/Linux.