On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 11:46:16AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Jeroen Dekkers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I already asked Marcus and Jeff on IRC whether OSKit-Mach is going to > > be gnumach 2.0. > > For what it's worth, I have no particular objection, however it's > really a sort of one-shot switch. Once we switch, we blow away the > old gnumach, and we're switched, with whatever bugs that entails.
I don't think OSKit-Mach will have a lot more bugs than gnumach, especially bugs which can't be fixed. > (Well, we might choose to do parallel releases like Linux, but I > really think that's more effort than it's worth for us, at this > point.) I don't think we will ever need it. When we have enough manpower we could just do it Right and implement more things in user-space, like device drivers. Then those device drivers can all have their own stable releases. I think the device driver part is the biggest thing in Mach. > > Having the same ABI for GNU/Linux and GNU/Hurd would be nice, > > especially for the Debian project. A lot of the linux-* binaries could > > be the same as the hurd-* binaries. This is certainly appreciated with > > a hurd-powerpc port underway. ;-) > > This is definitely true, and it's a long-term goal, but not a > short-term one. Depends on how you define short and long. In the long-term everybody might just use GNU/Hurd. (Yeah, maybe I'm a bit too optimistic :-) Jeroen Dekkers -- Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org IRC: jeroen@openprojects
msg03002/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
