First, some problems about /hurd that have come up on irc just now. 1) is /hurd versioned? Or is /hurd a 'special' filesystem(kinda like devfs for linux), that lists the available services that have been compiled into the kernel?
2) Could the ideas that the items placed in /hurd be useful outside of hurd? Ie, could other operating systems make use of translators? Now, for some other analogies, to existing practices, showing that /hurd is not needed, *at all*. In the current FHS, there is documentation about /lib/modules. Currently, this describes Linux drivers. However, I see no reason it can't be used for hurd as well(hurd purists will say that because Linux came up with it, it *CAN'T* be good, so they don't want to use it). However, unlike /hurd, /lib/modules does not contain any reference to the kernel that is being run. I'd much rather have hurd use /lib/modules, instead of tainting file system layouts with special /linux, /hurd, /freebsd crap. I also wonder if the idea of filesystem translation could be useful outside of hurd. In fact, there already is use, in Linux. Think user-space nfs(a kernel-based nfs module talking to a user-space nfs daemon). cfs works this way, as does probably sfs. Also, autofs is a simple form of this as well. It's just that linux doesn't have a well-defined way of having translators run as normal users(most run as root, or something). So, why then do we really need /hurd? What are the *real* reasons? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]