first there was gnu-mack, then came l4-pistachio now
coyotes
if its goin to be a gnu/os, then why not stick with a gnu
microkernal,
why change the microkernal so frequently, is it some thing
to do with the hurd's expectations
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matheus Morais
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 7:45 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A simple question
On 4/11/06, Tom
Bachmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In fact, the Hurd on top of L4 microkernel isnt completly dead yet, it's just stalled. Indeed if Coyotos will be build with successful to run Hurd on top of it, L4-Hurd could be considered dead. Currently we can use L4-Hurd as an 'plan B' if Coyotos fail.
Thanks
Matheus Morais
hurd/pistachio is considered dead. We're currently looking at another
(not-yet-existing) microkernel called coyotos.
- --
- -ness-
In fact, the Hurd on top of L4 microkernel isnt completly dead yet, it's just stalled. Indeed if Coyotos will be build with successful to run Hurd on top of it, L4-Hurd could be considered dead. Currently we can use L4-Hurd as an 'plan B' if Coyotos fail.
Thanks
Matheus Morais
DISCLAIMER:
This email (including any attachments) is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient/s and may contain material that is CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVATE COMPANY INFORMATION. Any review or reliance by others or copying or distribution or forwarding of any or all of the contents in this message is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by email and delete all copies; your cooperation in this regard is appreciated..
_______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
