I know I have posted some comments on this mailing list that seem to support POSIX being the default interface for the Hurd.  In fact, I know for a fact that I specifically said that once; however, upon further reading and studying the current and future design of the Hurd, I would like to recant that statement.

I still think POSIX should be well supported since so many apps (many that I and other developers use) are badly needed in a new system.  However, the multiple environments that can co-exist simultaneously on the Hurd brings me to the conclusion that we should just create a better default environment (or library, if that's how it will be implemented).

So I guess the next question in our design should be: What should we make the new environment look like?  Is it possible to start with the POSIX design, find the flaws, and build a new design based on POSIX but with all the flaws removed, or do we need to design something completely new?  It doesn't matter to me which one we do; for me, a new design would be easier to follow.  However, those that know POSIX internals may have a different viewpoint, but I think a totally new design could also be easier to build correctly from the beginning.

Please note that I have not seriously about these questions yet.  I'm still in the process of gathering more information from a broad variety of microkernel OS papers to build my device driver framework thesis proposal, and my DDF will use, to the best of my ability, whatever environment is in place.

--
William M. Grim
Master of Computer Science, Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville
Unix Network Administrator, SIUE, CS. Dept.
_______________________________________________
L4-hurd mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd

Reply via email to