Re: Help compiling oskit-mach

[Farid Hajji]

[Discussion moved to address@hidden

> I've followed the L4/Hurd effort for several years now, casually checking in
> on their websites every so often. Not much so far. It really sucks that I

which websites are your referring to?

> What about the "Fiasco" L4 variant. I would have thought that it would
> be rather ideal for Hurd in that it is written in a much more portable 
> manner
> than L4 itself. Hurd aims to be the ultimate cross platform environment, so
> getting extra ports for free right at the start is a really good thing.

Hurd/L4 will use L4ka::Pistachio,
  http://l4ka.org/projects/pistachio/

Fiasco implements an older L4 API/ABI, which we don't plan to use
in Hurd/L4. Only Pistachio currently implements V4 API.

> Actually with the incredible processing speed and power of the latest
> cpu designs, the overhead of Mach is still rather negligable in most
> instances compared to the benefits it could achieve were it really
> used in the way it was intended, Hurd always seemed to me somewhat
> slower than a similar Linux setup on the same machine; however it
> was slow in peculiar ways suggesting that some libs were just not very
> optimized yet. I know when I get Gnumach to boot on this XP2400+
> it will be scary fast. WOOT  :-{P

CPU speed is not the issue here. The Hurd is currently being
redesigned to better fit L4 (and future uKernels) semantics.
L4 is actively developed and supported by the research community,
unlike Mach.

-- 
Farid Hajji. http://www.farid-hajji.net/address.html