"Alfred M\. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > You make it sound as the choice is trivial, yet you write in a > > mail that is only a few minutes older: > > > > Work on the L4 codebase is valuable in my opinion; work on the > > Mach codebase is valuable. They are both valuable in > > different ways, and I think that there is not a good reason to > > regard them as so separable. > > There is not a good reason to regard them as so separate. > > If you cannot share code between them, then I think one should > consider them `very seperate'.
Who said we cannot share code? Maybe a useful course would be: 1) Continue thinking about and experimenting with L4 2) Using that experience to see what kinds of things are unlikely to be in any future microkernel we want; 3) abstract bits of Mach away from existing parts of the Hurd _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
