Is it possible to compare L4 and Mach side-by-side and have list of
features that are there in L4?
Not easily, the differences are just to big. One can make quite a
crude sketch of what the differences are, but not side-by-side in a
detailed fashion.
Is the design of Mach flawed or is i
Hi All,
Is it possible to compare L4 and Mach side-by-side and
have list of features that are there in L4? Is the
design of Mach flawed or is it the implementation that
lacks the original vision? Or the focus is changing
too fast from one option to the other ?
- Ashish
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrot
El mié, 21-12-2005 a las 02:20 +0100, Gianluca Guida escribió:
> Hi there,
>
> On 12/20/05, Sergio Lopez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I've written a list of tasks that I think we need to improve in GNU
> > Mach. If you find anything missing here, please feel free to add a entry
> > with a short
That depends on your definition of what a new microkernel is. If
the changes you need to make are very fundamental, the result is
arguably a new microkernel.
New in the sense: Drop GNU Mach, use something else. Changing GNU
Mach to suit our needs so that it becomes vastly different is n
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 03:43:56PM +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>There are some problems with Mach which seem very hard or even
>impossible to fix without using a new microkernel.
>
> Impossible it is not, very hard it is or might be, but so is porting
> to a new kernel, which is infact
At Thu, 22 Dec 2005 13:45:05 +0100,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A couple of years ago, Marcus (and some others), more and more exposed
> to the problems in Mach, made the claim that Hurd/Mach has no future,
> and further developement should be directed to a port to a modern
> microkernel like L4.
I'm looking for improve my skills and I would like to help
too. What can I do? ;)
It all depends on what your skills are, but running through the bug
reports in the bug tracker, and double checking what still happens,
and what doesn't is a good start. Making proper bug testcases is also
a
On 12/21/05, Alfred M. Szmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Unless someone has problem with me or the points listed I can volunteer on working and reporting about the first two tasks, that is: * Clean up the Code. (Assigned to: We need YOU here!) * Update the core architecture and d
There are some problems with Mach which seem very hard or even
impossible to fix without using a new microkernel.
Impossible it is not, very hard it is or might be, but so is porting
to a new kernel, which is infact even harder.
For that reason, we are looking at other microkernels. We
Hi,
> please excuse my ignorance, but what's the Status of GNU Mach? I heard
> the L4 microkernel is favored for the Hurd. Do you guys try to catch
> up?
Well, the question is, favored by whom? It's actually quite a long
story, and also I weren't around to get all of it first hand; but I'll
try t
please excuse my ignorance, but what's the Status of GNU Mach? I
heard the L4 microkernel is favored for the Hurd. Do you guys try
to catch up?
GNU Mach has always been favoured over L4 since it has always worked.
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
Bu
Unless someone has problem with me or the points listed I can
volunteer on working and reporting about the first two tasks, that
is:
* Clean up the Code. (Assigned to: We need YOU here!)
* Update the core architecture and drivers. (Assigned to: We need YOU
here!)
Please st
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 09:38:50AM +0100, Patrick Leslie Polzer wrote:
> Hello list,
Hi,
> please excuse my ignorance, but what's the Status of GNU Mach?
GNU Mach is currently the only microkernel which is supported by the Hurd.
That is: If you want to run Hurd, you need Mach. That may change,
Hello list,
please excuse my ignorance, but what's the Status of GNU Mach?
I heard the L4 microkernel is favored for the Hurd. Do you guys
try to catch up?
Kind regards,
Leslie
--
PGP-KID: 0x52D70289
pgpa1pTuqUMtq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_
Hi there,
On 12/20/05, Sergio Lopez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've written a list of tasks that I think we need to improve in GNU
> Mach. If you find anything missing here, please feel free to add a entry
> with a short description.
>
> http://hurd.gnufans.org/bin/view/Mach/GNUMachRevivalProjec
Hello!
I've written a list of tasks that I think we need to improve in GNU
Mach. If you find anything missing here, please feel free to add a entry
with a short description.
http://hurd.gnufans.org/bin/view/Mach/GNUMachRevivalProject
Happy Hacking!
--
Sergio Lopez
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
16 matches
Mail list logo
