Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230
Debian GNU/Hurd.
Re: Debian GNU/Hurd.
It is a replacement for the Unix kernel. Thus, in their opinions Linux is Unix and not Unix-like?
Re: Debian GNU/Hurd.
Linux is in fact only the kernel. The rest is GNU utilities. The combination is officially called GNU Linux.
Instead of a Linux kernel, you could use the GNU Hurd kernel. That's what you get in Debian GNU/Hurd. It's Debian, but with a Hurd instead of a Linux kernel.
iMHO, there are no advantages in using Hurd instead of the Linux kernel. If you want to try it, you can. Just make sure the hardware is as "standard" or "compatible" as possible, as Hurd supports nowhere near the amount of hardware the Linux kernel does.
Instead of a Linux kernel, you could use the GNU Hurd kernel. That's what you get in Debian GNU/Hurd. It's Debian, but with a Hurd instead of a Linux kernel.
iMHO, there are no advantages in using Hurd instead of the Linux kernel. If you want to try it, you can. Just make sure the hardware is as "standard" or "compatible" as possible, as Hurd supports nowhere near the amount of hardware the Linux kernel does.
-
- Emeritus
- Posts: 2435
- Joined: 2010-12-07 19:55
- Has thanked: 14 times
- Been thanked: 54 times
Re: Debian GNU/Hurd.
Is Debian GNU/Hurd a serious project and using in wide range? Can it the future of Debian or it just a "Vaporware" ?
Re: Debian GNU/Hurd.
It is not vaporware, and it is a serious project. However, it has nothing to do with the future of Debian. Debian's main kernel is and always will be Linux.
The GNU/Hurd team have their reasons for working on it. I for one am not planning to use it, since it has no advantages over the Linux kernel and lots of disadvantages. If you want to experiment, that's fine.
The GNU/Hurd team have their reasons for working on it. I for one am not planning to use it, since it has no advantages over the Linux kernel and lots of disadvantages. If you want to experiment, that's fine.
Re: Debian GNU/Hurd.
Google!!!
No its not the future, gets a tiny fraction of the development efforts as compared to the Linux kernel but would still consider it a serious project nonetheless. Google!!
No its not the future, gets a tiny fraction of the development efforts as compared to the Linux kernel but would still consider it a serious project nonetheless. Google!!
Most powerful FREE tech-support tool on the planet * HERE. *
Re: Debian GNU/Hurd.
Disadvantages?Bloom wrote:It is not vaporware, and it is a serious project. However, it has nothing to do with the future of Debian. Debian's main kernel is and always will be Linux.
The GNU/Hurd team have their reasons for working on it. I for one am not planning to use it, since it has no advantages over the Linux kernel and lots of disadvantages. If you want to experiment, that's fine.
Re: Debian GNU/Hurd.
Mostly how little hardware it supports. Based on what I read about it, there are also serious performance issues.
But if you google it, you can read all about it yourself.
But if you google it, you can read all about it yourself.
Re: Debian GNU/Hurd.
The questions that you have bombarded this thread are hard to answer with any simple factual once-and-for-all answer. There are obvious advantages to the Hurd kernel. Most microkernels can, for example, diminish the amount of code tht has high privileges. Kernel modules/drivers can be made to "not be a part of the kernel". Some microkernel operating systems can fully update themselves without having to reboot because of this. Even Linus Thorvalds has admitted that the microkernel organization of things in theory is better. However, in practice things are quite different. First of all, linux just worked. It was faster to get into a state where people can adapt it as a UNIX replacement (possiblt partially vecause of the compromises it made) and thus it got more traction more rapidly. Second, a microkernel designe leads to many hard problems with respect to the parts communicating with each other. Yet, there are many widely used operating systems that do have microkernel design. For example, the L4 kernels have been used in military tech and in automobile computer and mobile devices
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L4_microkernel_family
There are also specific problems wih the Hurd/mach kernel of GNU. First of all, it is a quite old microkernel (1st gen). Second, and most important, the hardware support is very poor. There is no x86 64.bit support at all. No USB drivers, no sound. Try to get it to boot on something. It is hard.
GNU has later designed their own operating system (GUIX SD) which is based on "deblobbed liberated linux kernel" and their own package management (which actually is quite good).
https://guix.gnu.org/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L4_microkernel_family
There are also specific problems wih the Hurd/mach kernel of GNU. First of all, it is a quite old microkernel (1st gen). Second, and most important, the hardware support is very poor. There is no x86 64.bit support at all. No USB drivers, no sound. Try to get it to boot on something. It is hard.
GNU has later designed their own operating system (GUIX SD) which is based on "deblobbed liberated linux kernel" and their own package management (which actually is quite good).
https://guix.gnu.org/
- Head_on_a_Stick
- Posts: 14114
- Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
- Location: London, England
- Has thanked: 81 times
- Been thanked: 133 times
Re: Debian GNU/Hurd.
See also https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=248330 — our OP started a thread there about Arch Hurd but it was quickly TGN'd and turned into a social thread, which was nice.
seL4 ftw!
seL4 ftw!
deadbang
- sunrat
- Administrator
- Posts: 6495
- Joined: 2006-08-29 09:12
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Has thanked: 118 times
- Been thanked: 476 times
Re: Debian GNU/Hurd.
What's TGN? I even looked it up and Thai satellite TV, an Australian nickel mining company, and the protein Thyroglobulin don't seem to fit the context.Head_on_a_Stick wrote:See also https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=248330 — our OP started a thread there about Arch Hurd but it was quickly TGN'd and turned into a social thread, which was nice.
Link appears to be non-existent now too.
“ computer users can be divided into 2 categories:
Those who have lost data
...and those who have not lost data YET ” Remember to BACKUP!
Those who have lost data
...and those who have not lost data YET ” Remember to BACKUP!
Re: Debian GNU/Hurd.
I just want to know more. If the hurd kernel is old and useless then why Debian released a new of it!!Head_on_a_Stick wrote:See also https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=248330 — our OP started a thread there about Arch Hurd but it was quickly TGN'd and turned into a social thread, which was nice.
seL4 ftw!
Re: Debian GNU/Hurd.
Debian doesn't release the hurd kernel, they just offer a Debian distribution based on it. Why? Because they can. Debian is a non-profit, so they don't have to look at what's commercial or not.
- Head_on_a_Stick
- Posts: 14114
- Joined: 2014-06-01 17:46
- Location: London, England
- Has thanked: 81 times
- Been thanked: 133 times
Re: Debian GNU/Hurd.
The Arch forums have a section called Topics Going Nowhere which is used as a storage area for threads of little or no technical value, when a thread is sent there the moderators say it has been TGN'n. It is only accessible by members and so is out of reach of the search engines, which is why the link is dead for you.sunrat wrote:What's TGN?
GNU Hurd uses the Mach microkernel. Ask a search engine about it, looks like you could do with the practicehack3rcon wrote:the hurd kernel
deadbang
Re: Debian GNU/Hurd.
Maybe because it is not useless?? You concluded from "it is not very useful to many users right now" that it is "useless". That's like if a farmer inquired how useful the rain outside might be for his crops... and someone told him that "well it is not raining that much now", and the farmer would conclude from that that "it is not raining at all/rain is useless". It just logically does not follow...hack3rcon wrote: I just want to know more. If the hurd kernel is old and useless then why Debian released a new of it!!
Also remember that it is 0.9, now, and presumably will be called 1.0 when it is "ready"