On Wed, 10 May 2000, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> Indeed. I don't really have experience with CORBA, but I don't think
> the issues in this thread are relevant in this stage of Hurd
> development. Right now the core Hurd protocols are defined by the MiG
> .defs files. At one side this defines the C ABI, at the other side
> this defines the layout of messages and conventions on how to handle
> the data contained in them for use with Mach IPC. None of these can
> be easily changes without rewriting most of the Hurd.
First thought was that Hurd should have its ORB to be treated
an Enterprise level OS. I heard about possibility of inter-computer
communications using Mach messages, but I suspect it doesn't function
in Hurd now.
I started with studying Flick from FLUX which theoretically allows
to generate Mach3 IPC from CORBA IDLs. And I think that using
CORBA allows mush more people start writing new servers and porting
existing software to Hurd. It's just more convenient way for programmers
who already knows CORBA.
> I also fail to see why we need an ORB. The Mach kernel handles most
> of the things the ORB usually does.
I did'n mean complitly replace of Mach IPC with CORBA IIOP. Instead I meant
using IDL as a front-end to Mach IPC. However IIOP can be accepted for
IPC over network.
> Now MiG has some drawbacks, and therefore, one day, we'll want to
> switch to a more sane IDL. That's why there is some blurb in the task
> list. It would make sense to choose an IDL that's already widely
> used, such as the CORBA IDL. Especially since one day we might want
> to run the Hurd on other microkernels besides Mach. We might need
> some sort of an ORB too, but this should probably be tightly
> integrated with the underlying microkernel.
I have nothing against this. I just want to take part of this
happening.
> Feel free to talk about this stuff if you want. Just don't expect any
Probably I've started this conversation too early. I need to know more
about Mach server writing.
> of the core Hurd developers to take part in it. That might be a good
It's sad. But I'll be appreciated any feedback from community.
> reason to take it off the bug-hurd mailing list.
Which list is could be in ? I supposed it's about low level
development.
Regards. Sergey.
