> I'm taking an informal survey of people who use the Hurd, to get some
> idea of how things are progressing. Please reply to me privately, or
> to [EMAIL PROTECTED] as appropriate.
>
> 1) Have you successfully gotten the Hurd running?
Yes I have, but I have not had the time to keep current. The last
time I installed was just before Christmas, 1999. I intend to reinstall
everything afresh in about two weeks.
>
> 2) If so, is your Hurd box currently running as you expect it to?
When I was using it, it seemed to be afflicted with random hangs and
inexplicable pauses. In particular, the network seemed to take forever
to come up. It would sometimes take 5 minutes after a login prompt
appeared before the NFS mounts or pings worked. Things appear to be
very flakey. They are not necessarily unstable in the sense of
the entire system crashing, but some part of it will crash, and the
rest of the system will be difficult to use until the crash is repaired.
Since I am not an expert, it is usually easier for me to just reboot.
If I were pressed to make a purely qualitative judgement, however,
I would say that the Hurd is about as stable as Windows 3.1 at its best.
I don't have any normative data on which to judge the stability of either
the Hurd or Windows 3.1. Also, the things I run on the Hurd and on,
say, Windows 98 or Linux are different. The Hurd crashes less frequently
than Winodows 98 for me, but that's because I run games with experimental
3D video drivers on Windows98, so it's not surprising that things crash
frequently. On the Hurd I mostly ran simple applications - the compilers,
the nfs translator, and other networking tools like ping. I never worked
on any device drivers or any kernel level stuffs.
>
> 3) If it is not running, what appears to be the problem?
>
> I'll post the results after a week or so has elapsed,
>
> --
> Gordon Matzigkeit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> //\ I'm a FIG (http://fig.org/)
> Committed to freedom and diversity \// I use GNU (http://gnu.fig.org/)
>
>
