On 21/05/17 13:45, Justus Winter wrote:
Samuel Thibault writes:
Though there was some work, a reimplementation if memory serves, of the
netmsg servers. The archive should have some infos on that.
Yes, by Brent who was the instigator of the original thread that I was
belatedly commenting t
Samuel Thibault writes:
> Justus Winter, on dim. 21 mai 2017 15:39:07 +0200, wrote:
>> Samuel Thibault writes:
>>
>> > Mark Morgan Lloyd, on sam. 20 mai 2017 12:18:01 +, wrote:
>> >> Finally, what is the Hurd portability situation? Way back I worked on a
>> >> microkernel in '386 protected
Justus Winter, on dim. 21 mai 2017 15:39:07 +0200, wrote:
> Samuel Thibault writes:
>
> > Mark Morgan Lloyd, on sam. 20 mai 2017 12:18:01 +, wrote:
> >> Finally, what is the Hurd portability situation? Way back I worked on a
> >> microkernel in '386 protected mode that used segmentation heavi
Samuel Thibault writes:
> Mark Morgan Lloyd, on sam. 20 mai 2017 12:18:01 +, wrote:
>> Finally, what is the Hurd portability situation? Way back I worked on a
>> microkernel in '386 protected mode that used segmentation heavily, am I
>> correct in assuming that that sort of thing is completel
Mark Morgan Lloyd, on sam. 20 mai 2017 12:18:01 +, wrote:
> Finally, what is the Hurd portability situation? Way back I worked on a
> microkernel in '386 protected mode that used segmentation heavily, am I
> correct in assuming that that sort of thing is completely deprecated in the
> interest
Please excuse my raising my head above the parapet, most of the time I'm
a lurker but I prefer the idea of a robustly-partitioned system and I
think the industry-wide events of the last week or so reinforce that.
>> [Brent said] The payoff is a supercomputer operating system that
>> presents an
On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 03:44:30PM -1000, Brent W. Baccala wrote:
> I've got the CMU code from Mach 3 for netmsg. How do you deal with its
> copyright?
Not sure what you mean. Compare the notice with what we have in
GNU Mach. Personally, I strongly recommend starting from scratch.
This code is us
Well, then I suppose I'll go ahead and get netmsg running on a current Hurd
system. It'll have all kinds of problems, of course, but I've never
written a Hurd translator, so it seems like a good place to start.
I've been trying to get Hurd running on qemu/kvm, but I'm having a lot of
problems wit
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 01:42:16PM -1000, Brent W. Baccala wrote:
> I've been wondering about using Hurd on a cluster computer;
[...]
> If so, then the first step would be to modify Mach,
[...]
Pretty much everything you describe has actually been considered in the
original des
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 07:34:39PM -1000, Brent W. Baccala wrote:
> Any recent attempts to get netmsg running on GNU Mach? NORMA?
None, recent or otherwise.
--
Richard Braun
Richard,
Thanks for the reference to "single system image"; it helped me much to
know what to Google for.
I've looked into the network proxy you described. It seems to have taken
several forms. First, a Mach server called "netmsg" relayed Mach messages
using UDP. The big drawback was the overh
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 01:42:16PM -1000, Brent W. Baccala wrote:
> Can Hurd work, well, in such an environment?
No, it was not designed for this kind of usage, although anything can
be done with enough time and work.
> First, it's basically Mach that would have to be modified, right? Changes
>
Hi -
I've been wondering about using Hurd on a cluster computer; i.e, a
configuration where each node has multiple identical cores and its own
memory. For example, an eight node cluster where each node has 8 GB of RAM
and eight cores. I stress that the cores are identical, so that processe
13 matches
Mail list logo
