4 ms·
Though I agree the Minix 3 microkernel is more elegant than GNU Mach, the Debian GNU/Hurd distribution has >80% of the package base building and largely running
by vezzy-fnord 11y ago
Though I agree the Minix 3 microkernel is more elegant than GNU Mach, the Debian GNU/Hurd distribution has >80% of the package base building and largely running, which means it has a higher software selection.
The Hurd's documentation is pretty good for a project of limited manpower, just scattered.
Because strictly speaking the Hurd is only the userland servers, there's plenty of opportunities to work on porting and hacking them. The Debian GNU/Hurd might get USB and sound soon with NetBSD's rump kernel drivers phasing out the DDE framework in Mach, for instance.
- justincormack 11y agoIs this happening? (the dde->rump switch?) I know there was a talk about it at Fosdem a while back, but I havent heard much since.
- synchronise 11y agoWhat if.... there was an effort to replace the Mach kernel with Minix3? Or if Debian decided to do a Debian GNU/Minux3 release?
- justincormack 11y agoMinix is basically ABI compatible with NetBSD, so going from a Debian/kNetBSD port to Minix would be easy. There was one once, way back https://www.debian.org/ports/netbsd/ https://www.debian.org/ports/netbsd/ but its dead. Not sure it makes a lot of sense though.
- mrweasel 11y agoDoesn't Minix 3 have pkgsrc from NetBSD available? I don't know how many package actually built, so that might be a limiting factor.