-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
I do understand your arguments, but not > it may turn out that HurdNG > should build it's own microkernel. you say: > [...] designing your own > kernel while borrowing a lot of stuff from an existing kernel. If you > need to build a new kernel, this is a good way to go, but the cost of > doing things this way is about 10x what people naively estimate. > In my opinion, the L4-Hurd and mainstream Hurd communities simply do not > have the (human) resources to build both a microkernel and an OS before > most of this list has died of old age. So 2 and 3 are simply no alternatives, both from your argumentation and in my opinion. Therefore, in fact, we have to a) find a microkernel that perfectly matches our needs or b) find a microkernel that is fitting more or less, with a team that is willing to work together with us and (we have to) be willing to to make compromises. a) is unrealistic, so b) is the only alternative left. And i hope we have found b). it is up to us to use the chance. IMHO. - -- - -ness- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFESfLuvD/ijq9JWhsRAuC7AJ9E3qZu2gpwYMqjErFK6E59zme7dwCeMc/5 RTY5YPBZNZWN4ndboT8v2n8= =TFyL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
