I think tb has covered the essence here already. tschwinge, your comments here are really not apropos, and frankly they seem gratuitously hostile to the basic principles that have always driven Hurd development. I really do appreciate your frustrations. We've felt them for a very long time too. But the easy way out is not the way that leads anywhere we want to wind up.
Look, everyone has things "more important to do" than working on the Hurd at all. What are we here for? It's not to get a nominally working GNU system out the door fast. We have one of those. We call it GNU/Linux. Once upon a time, the Hurd was going to be done "within the 1990s, to be sure". We backed off on that claim a while ago, and noone goes around saying "within the third millenium, to be sure", because, well, it might not be done then. If you're in a hurry and you want to make compromises to make quicker progress, you are really in the wrong project. If you're frustrated about the lack of progress, then welcome to the club and get used to it. It's going to be too slow. It really, really is. I'd much rather have everyone here pissed at me for not having rewritten threads and signal handling in the last ten years than to have people up in arms about not giving up on our principled incompatibility with things that are wrong with other systems. This is what we are about. It's what we have always been about. It's what will continue to define the Hurd's mission for as long as there are Bushnells and McGraths who can remember what a Hurd is. Thanks, Roland _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
