GNU Guix Begins Publishing System Images Based On Hurd

[vladpetric]

heh, the committee can get pretty far even without paying attention to consumer/end users too, especially in government and businness sector.
The reasons something gets ignored are more because of PR reasons and timing of introduction than anything else.

You just made me feel better about my job (in the private sector, of course)

TY Sir.

[tuxd3v]

We both know Hurd is older, if even by a smaller margin

When you refereed to it, it left the idea that the project is considerably older than Linux, which is false.

They have both the same Age,
The difference was that the Gnu Foundation started in 1985 with the desire to release free compilers , free userspace tools, free libc, and *maybe*, a free kernel..
When the GNU foundation released its compiler toolchain in 1990, later,
They started to work on Hurd, it was based in the mach microkernel..

So we don't know when it really started to be developed, nor when Linux started to be developed because only Linus know about that( Linus released the first version in 1991 )

So to be honest I don't really know what is older... or, for how many time was Linus, and others working in the Linux kernel..

What we know is that when Hurd was released was incomplete, but Linux wasn't better either at the time..
Since Linux made its appearances in 1991, Hurd lost its importance for the fact that a kernel already existed. being it micro or monolithic.

It was not a race to get first a kernel up and running, it were different projects with different goals, that in one specific case interests overlapped( the need to get a kernel.. ).

The processing power needed for a microkernel to be speedy( due to the ipc work needed for communication ), was at the time a limitation( slow processing power cpus ) that Hurd had and the Linux Kernel don't, also, the Linux kernel saw a lot of contributions to the project. which was good..

So the GNU Foundation lost the interest in duplicating the effort to develop a kernel , they were already in a plethora of gigantic tasks, and they delivered them, the same way as the Linux kernel has been developed since..

Long Story short, the projects have more or less the same Age, with Hurd losing priority over time..
Today Hurd could make a lot more sense than in the past( but is still a duplication of efforts ), even tough that its focus is based on security.. and in today's world security could matter most..

If spare time exists from developers to go for it, then its better to have 3 choices( linux, bsd,hurd ), than only 2

[starshipeleven]

When you refereed to it, it left the idea that the project is considerably older than Linux, which is false.

Maybe but it was not the point of my post. My point was that while Hurd is technically older than Linux, it's still well into the "hobby OS" realm so the point of the guy I was responding is debatable.

[tuxd3v]

Maybe but it was not the point of my post. My point was that while Hurd is technically older than Linux, it's still well into the "hobby OS" realm so the point of the guy I was responding is debatable.

The webservers for the Hurd project run debian + Hurd.( probably runs on i686, but I don't know if its virtualized or not...probably is ).

Drivers is the biggest problem
It can't be done without proper commitment from the vendors.. and vendors start to be committed to Linux,
So less probability to see Hurd with lots of drivers to support real hardware..

Apple MacOS also uses mach kernel( but a Hybrid variant ), it would be a good option to bring in drivers( but we know how Apple work.. )..

I would love to see Hurd running on Mips, RISCV, ARM devices, and also as an alternative to linux/bsd in amd64
The project has very few releases( the last was in 2016.. ).