Watch Out Linux, GNU Hurd Coming 463
sfcrazy writes "Debian now has concrete plans to bring GNU Hurd to the larger community. GNU Hurd is expected to be released with the release of Debian 7.0 Wheezy towards the end of 2012 or beginning of 2013. Debian maintainer Samuel Thibault has already produced a Debian GNU/Hurd CD Set with a graphic installer which is available to download."
This can't be!! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This can't be!! (Score:5, Funny)
Must be the fault of the LHC. It keeps destroying all the highly probable universes.
So now the only universes left are ones where DN Forever and Hurd both actually see the light of day.
Next up:
- Irrefutable proof that OJ is innocent.
- Irrefutable proof that Casey Anthony is innocent.
- OJ and Casey Anthony get married and have a child; and both her and the child live to old age.
- Chicago Bears win a Super Bowl
Man ... the universe is becoming a really scary place!
Re: (Score:2)
The Bears won in 1986 against the Patriots.
You're probably thinking of the Cubs winning the World Series, or even just the NL championship.
Re:This can't be!! (Score:5, Interesting)
I first waited for this, back before FTP distribution was possibe. Stallman sent GNUsletters on xerox paper. With stamps.
GNU emacs was distributed in source. On QIC-02 tape.
And CMU Mach was to be the centrepiece of a system with the few GNU utilities.
Was that 1988? I think so.
Re:This can't be!! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
1985 never happened for you?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
- Buffalo Bills win a Super Bowl
FTFY
Re:This can't be!! (Score:5, Funny)
Ouch. I guess you haven't heard the old proverb: "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me FOUR times..."
Re: (Score:3)
But the poor Cubs still don't win a World Series.
Re:This can't be!! (Score:4, Funny)
But the poor Cubs still don't win a World Series.
Well, yeah, there are only an infinite number of possible universes. This would require infinity plus one.
Re:This can't be!! (Score:4)
Harlan Ellison is going to release "The Last Dangerous Visions" right about that time. What a coincidence.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
and Gmail is no longer in beta!
Re:This can't be!! (Score:4, Funny)
Question is, if someone makes a non-free/FOSS driver for it, what happens?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
You can't, it'll cause an internal compiler error in gcc when you try to compile your code.
That'd still be an improvement. (Score:5, Interesting)
If that can actually be done safely and efficiently, it also means a non-free driver can't crash the kernel or fuck up other drivers. I would guess there are security implications as well.
Right now, a bug in the nVidia kernel driver on Linux could compromise the security of the entire machine, or crash the entire OS, or flip some bit in some other unconnected kernel system (or userland process), and it's hard enough to debug these things when you do have source code. So wanting an untainted kernel makes a lot of sense.
Missed the point entirely. (Score:3)
...they need to go write their own OS where proprietary drivers are okay, because we Linux users don't want them.
Fuck you, you do not speak for all Linux users.
I would much prefer an open source driver to a proprietary one, all things being equal. All things are not equal. As cool as AMD has been lately, their proprietary Linux drivers still have far better 3D performance than the open ones.
More importantly, I run proprietary software on Linux, even proprietary software I've paid for! I'm ok with that.
I would still rather my system be open source, and I would especially like it if the proprietary stuff I run (even dr
Re: (Score:3)
Re:This can't be!! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, you're spot on - all your facts are good evidence that someone mucked around with our calendar, and it's actually 2012. A global conspiracy would easily explain that.
Re: (Score:3)
Wait... it's 2011. Damn it's been a *long* day. Seemed like a year.
No, the calendar peopel simply made an Off-by-One error somewhere, screwing up the zero-based system
Re: (Score:3)
sub-120MHz
I'm completely lost. MHz are Mayan Hot zones, right?
Re: (Score:2)
The Patriots have won three Super Bowls, two of them on clutch place-kicking. Check.
South Carolina has won back-to-back College World Series. Check.
Red Sox win two World Series. Check.
Hmm. . . This could be a sign.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not knowing how to count to 3 (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
and finally Half-Life 3.
No, of course not. The final Half-Life sequel would be a "creative reimagining to recapture the true essence of the original" called simply "Half-Life".
It would be an isometric third-person puzzler set on Mars during WW2 and involve Zeppelins. Gordon Freeman would be GladOS' daughter and she'd constantly make wisecracks.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, this is another sign of the apocalypse. One more, and it's all over!
Re: (Score:3)
Flash was released for 64-bit Linux yesterday.
PINCH-A-GRAM (Score:3)
FROM: martin-boundary
TO: jlechem
This is a pinch-a-gram. To activate, please pinch yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
No, the reverse of that.
Re: (Score:3)
DNF was finished...
People who've played it would disagree.
Oh NOOOOOOO! (Score:2)
Oh lawd! Somebody catch me. I've caught the vapors!
*snore* (Score:4)
Much like it's long-awaited vaporware cousin, Duke Nukem Forever, the wait will not be worth it.
Re:*snore* (Score:5, Funny)
That's "Duke GNU/kem Forever" to you, sir!
- RMS
2011 (Score:5, Funny)
Will be the year of the Hurd Desktop. 'Nuff said.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Only if you follow the rest of the sheep
Hey, i resent that! I'm not one to just blindly follow the hurd!
A random observation (Score:5, Interesting)
One of the very few people to put me on her Slashdot enemies list did so because I made a derogatory statement about the length of the HURD development process. In, as I recall, the year 2000 or 2001. It was a running joke at least five years before that.
Way to be timely and relevant, GNU.
Where did I leave my puffer? (Score:3, Funny)
Way to be timely and relevant, GNU.
What could be greater show of health and vigor than naming your first release "Debian Wheezy?"
Re: (Score:3)
Debian is running out of Toy Story names, so they're planning on using the next release to segue over to 1970s sitcoms. Wheezy will be followed by George and Florence. That will in turn lead to Greg, Peter, Bobby, Jan, Cindy and finally Marcia, Marcia, Marcia.
Re: (Score:3)
I think it had the "must be perfect" syndrome. That is they stay true to idealism and discard pragmatism. From the very first day that GNU Hurd was announced people were saying it was too ambitious. All the hallmarks of vaporware: announce a large project with lofty goals before starting work on it. Meanwhile Linux and BSD kept releasing kernels that aren't quite finished but are good enough to do work with, without a lot of micromanagement or grand visions.
Re: (Score:3)
It doesn't help that the Hurd team goes out of it's way to port the Hurd to completely different microkernels at the drop of a hat, only to return to GNUMach when development of the other microkernels goes south.
Or for other reasons. L4/HURD was really interesting, and L4 is still very actively developed.
I've been following HURD for a while now, but it's becoming less and less relevant. Microkenels are great, but modern 'monolithic' kernels are starting to adopt most of the beneficial attributes of them. You've been able to run filesystem drivers in userspace for a while. Infiniband and GPU drivers typically use userspace command submission, where the kernel just sets up an IOMMU and allocates a channel and
Re:A random observation (Score:4, Interesting)
Not really. Apple doesn't use Mach as a microkernel, they use it as a hardware abstraction layer. A few things in OS X use Mach ports, because they do have some advantages (e.g. being able to easily tell which process sent the message, in an unspoofable way - implementing Keychain without that is really hard). Everything else is done via the BSD subsystem. When you make a system call on a traditional Mach system, you send a Mach message. When you make a system call on XNU, you just issue a syscall / sysenter instruction and jump straight to the BSD system call handler.
Comparing HURD, which is a multi-server microkernel, to XNU, which is a monolithic kernel implemented as a single-server Mach kernel, is meaningless.
And for my next trick... (Score:5, Funny)
BSD userland on top of GNU Hurd.
"What the hell do you call an OS like that?"
"I'll call it 'The Aristocrats'"
--
BMO
Re: (Score:2)
"What the hell do you call an OS like that?"
An core OS for Windows to run on top of, in the future
Re: (Score:2)
rofl. Well done sir.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Now that you put it that way....
Excuse me for not getting your joke.
I'm going to need surgery to remove my hand from my forehead now.
--
BMO
Re: (Score:3)
Fuck man, do you want me to spit coffee all over my screen?
I believe that level of subtle humor requires projection of caffeinated beverages via the nasal cavities.
Deja Vu? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Yes, but the headline said the inventor would release it right after he took his next shower.
It's finally come to fruition.
This just in... (Score:5, Insightful)
Debian maintainer Samuel Thibault has already produced a Debian GNU/Hurd CD Set with a graphic installer which is available to download.
It speaks volumes that the highlight is the inclusion of a graphical installer. Likely no mouse support though....
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'm still calling it Linux! (Score:5, Funny)
Who cares? (Score:3, Informative)
Seriously, it's been, what, 15+ years? The project seems to have two main phases of development:
1) Several months of intense bickering followed by factions breaking off to make half-assed attempts at porting to a more modern microkernel.
2) A year or two of complete silence as the ports are abandoned and a couple of diehards continue to work on Mach.
Where are they now? They've got a couple of novelty builds that almost work reliably enough to play with for a weekend. Big fuckken deal.
Interesting, but.. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
it is designed to be easier to port than monolithic kernels like Linux.
but Hurd is still Mach and is therefor pretty much garbage (Hurd/L4 died). Hurd lacks the speed of Linux and FreeBSD or the clustering transparency of Plan9.
You'd probably get more out of Plan9 for doing web development than Hurd. Even though Plan9 is probably not a viable platform without significant commercial investment.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Interesting, but.. (Score:5, Interesting)
It has always been interesting for me to reflect on the HURD. The issue of mind share was crucial when comparing Linux and the HURD. Back in 1991 (or early 1992, maybe... can't remember that far back) I tried to contribute to the HURD. I had done some work on Mach in an OS course at school and was interested in playing more with it. But since I was pretty much a new grad and didn't have a proven track record working on OS kernels, the HURD team told me to take a hike. Well, they were polite about it, but were clear that they didn't want help from a nobody.
Linux was completely different. Linus may have blasted your code, but he accepted any and all help. This created mind share. For those who weren't around at the time, the whole idea of accepting work from any random joe off the street was a relatively new concept. The "Cathedral and the Bazaar" hadn't been coined by ESR yet and the normal way to do things in the free software world was to have one or two uber programmers hacking away, never seeing the light of day. Now everybody realises that a key indicator of success on a free software project is having an open and unobstructed development process.
The HURD has some good ideas, but their initial attitude killed them. Even though the team is very different now (from what I've hear, anyway -- lost interest in it more than a decade ago), there is really no chance of making a comeback, I think. Enticing eyeballs away from other projects will just be too difficult. Linus' biggest contribution to free software was *not* the Linux kernel, IMHO, but rather the development process that Linux used. He showed everyone how it should be done.
Re: (Score:3)
>Hurd was a Victim of Good Enough
Moreso a victim of the Perfect being the Enemy of the Good (assuming you're willing to give it that much credit).
And it has given new meaning to "next generation" software, coming a full *human* generation later . . .
hawk
They're probably thinking about December 21, 2012 (Score:5, Funny)
They have probably noticed the end of the world is December 21, 2012 and they hope it's true. That way no one will actually notice Hurd was postponed again ...
What is the GNU Hurd? (Score:2)
"The Hurd is the GNU project's replacement for UNIX, a popular operating system kernel."
From http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd/what_is_the_gnu_hurd.html [gnu.org]
First Duke Nukem (Score:2)
Then Linux 64 bits native Adobe Flash Reader
And Finally the HURD...
The world is coming to an end !
Can it be? (Score:2)
Does this mean I'll actually see a GNU operating system in my lifetime?
I estimate that if I'm lucky I've got another 40-45 years.
Finally released (Score:2)
Like, after a decade?
Re: (Score:2)
Closer to two decades actually. In fact I think Apple was above a 10% market share the last time we had news about Hurd.
More than a decade (Score:2)
As I recall, it was already late when I was a CS major in 1991 using GNU Emacs on SunOS.
Summary of Hurd Summary (Score:3)
It's a Mach microkernel with a bunch of daemons and glibc to emulate the UNIX interface.
How about Debian GNU/Plan 9? (Score:2)
Plan 9 could use some love. Maybe someone could make it a GUI that doesn't look like it's from the late 1980s.
This reminds me of... (Score:3)
This reminds me of the scene in Austin Powers where the guy screams as a steamroller comes barreling at him at a couple feet per minute. And he stands there and screams for the entire two minutes it takes for the steamroller to reach him and run him over.
Hey! In two years, I'll release the bestest mesh network system ever! I promise!
Non story (Score:4, Insightful)
GNU Hurd is expected to be released with the release of Debian 7.0 Wheezy towards the end of 2012 or beginning of 2013.
A couple of years now. Just like cheap solar panels and sustainable fusion and the replacement for the space shuttle. Just a couple more years now.
How about you call us when it's working?
Seriously, stop telling us what you are going to do. Instead tell us what you have done. One is impressive and the other is not.
It will be in Wheesy -- OR ELSE! (Score:3)
From the minutes of the March 2011 FTPMaster meeting [debian.org] if it's not ready for some sort of release it will be evicted from the main archives.
The TODO list is getting better ... but we shall see.
Arch Hurd (Score:3, Informative)
Attitudes about HURD: why slashdot is irrelavant (Score:5, Insightful)
This posting illustrates something very interesting: Why slashdot is irrelevant.
Any community that becomes so ingrained in the belief that it is superior is bound for failure. Because once you start believing no one can be better than you, you start to become complacent. The architecture on which HURD is based is technically superior to Linux. Whether this technical superiority translates to superiority in the marketplace is another issue entirely.
In my opinion the slashdot community consists of a lot of wannabes and not a whole lot of doers. Instead of criticizing and making fun of projects which are new or different why don't you embrace them and welcome them? This is one of the reasons I think the open source community has stagnated in recent years.
GC
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The parent poster illustrates something very interesting: Why having a sense of humor and self-irony is still relevant.
Also, ignoring the "I'm better than you"-irony in your post, "technically superior to Linux" can easily be discussed. I think the kernel community would gladly point out that "the best technology" quickly becomes irrelevant if it's impossible to work with (say if takes two decades of flip-flopping just to release something people can use). And having "developer friendliness" as part of the
Re: (Score:3)
The architecture on which HURD is based is technically superior to Linux.
Citation needed.
Citation provided (Score:4, Informative)
For those too lazy to use a search engine:
http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/community/weblogs/ArneBab/technical-advantages-of-the-hurd.html
This just in: (Score:4, Insightful)
Developers of HURD think HURD is superior to the competition. Film at 11.
I guess we should have specified that we wanted an INDEPENDENT look at whether the HURD was superior.
Re: (Score:3)
And the counterexamples:
http://yarchive.net/comp/microkernels.html
http://www.realworldtech.com/forums/index.cfm?action=detail&id=66630&threadid=66595&roomid=2
Re:Attitudes about HURD: why slashdot is irrelavan (Score:4, Insightful)
This posting illustrates something very interesting: Why slashdot is irrelevant.
Any community that becomes so ingrained in the belief that it is superior is bound for failure. Because once you start believing no one can be better than you, you start to become complacent. The architecture on which HURD is based is technically superior to Linux. Whether this technical superiority translates to superiority in the marketplace is another issue entirely.
In my opinion the slashdot community consists of a lot of wannabes and not a whole lot of doers. Instead of criticizing and making fun of projects which are new or different why don't you embrace them and welcome them? This is one of the reasons I think the open source community has stagnated in recent years.
GC
Because taking the piss is far more amusing to us in our juvenile little minds.
In all seriousness though, the big problem is that GNU Hurd has just been going on too long. You might notice that many people are comparing it to Duke Nukem, this is because they have both been successively over hyped for too many years. It is like people crying wolf, eventually the would be rescuers just stop listening and let you get eaten.
I started reading this thinking that GNU Hurd had finally found some developers an was on course for a stable release in the near future. After looking around the site it seems that you only have 4 or 5 active developers and are in dire need of more people to make the Wheezy release. If this is the case then try and ask the community for help, cap in hand with humility. You are far more likely to bring developers to the system by that than by simply posting a projected release date which may or may not be achievable.
You are right though when you say the slashdot community has changed a great deal as it certainly has. But some of the people here are still exactly the people you would like to bring to your projects, either GNU Step or Hurd or whatever. The trick is to appeal to them and ignore the mass of immature wanna bees you are so critical of.
The whole problem with hurd has never been a technical shortcoming, it has always been that the people leading the project lacked the people skills needed. Thats certainly not to say that Linus is perfect in this regard, but something certainly made more people throw time at his pet Linux project all those years ago.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you trying to illustrate your words by acting as if you were yourself really "superior" ?
I heard about hurd long time ago and it was already a long time project. I heard it will soon be released so many time that I can't count them. I even actually spoke with people working on it (about ten years ago) that were assuring me that the project was on the run for a stable release.
Ten years later, I'm acting as supervisor for student writing their own kernels every year: in 4 years of activities I have seen a
Re:Attitudes about HURD: why slashdot is irrelavan (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is it superior? Just because it's a microkernel?
Microkernels were the darling of OS research for almost the entirely of the 90's. But by the end of the 90's, most researchers had had enough. The alleged gains in configurability, reliability, security, and so on never materialized; but what never disappeared was the fact that they were stinking slow. Context switching is a fundamental limitation of such an architecture. And from what I've heard, a lot more complicated to program -- which leads to more programming errors and ugly performance hacks to compensate for any potential increase in reliability, security and so on they might have gained.
It's possible that Hurd has managed to overcome these limitations. But it has definitely earned its reputation of being slow and cumbersome; if that has changed, the burden of proof is on the Hurd community.
There are a few True Believers out there, still working on Hurd and Minix and L4 and the like, but they have yet to produce anything shown to be worth using.
I think the fact that Andrew Tanenbaum riduculed Linux in 1993 for being an "outdated architecture", when Minix just got paging working last year after 20 years of development, encapsulates my point completely.
Re: (Score:3)
I made an assumption because GGP didn't explain himself. If he doesn't want people to misunderstand him then he needs to be more explicit.
In any case, I didn't tear the idea apart. I said that historically, the experience of people using microkernels has been (1) they're really slow, and (2) they're more complicated to program because of the isolation / message passing architectures, and thus more prone
Re: (Score:3)
I did some research, and according to this article [roughlydrafted.com], although OSX does use Mach, it is nonetheless not a microkernel:
Re: (Score:3)
This posting illustrates something very interesting: Why slashdot is irrelevant.
Any community that becomes so ingrained in the belief that it is superior is bound for failure. Because once you start believing no one can be better than you, you start to become complacent. The architecture on which HURD is based is technically superior to Linux. Whether this technical superiority translates to superiority in the marketplace is another issue entirely.
In my opinion the slashdot community consists of a lot of wannabes and not a whole lot of doers. Instead of criticizing and making fun of projects which are new or different why don't you embrace them and welcome them? This is one of the reasons I think the open source community has stagnated in recent years.
GC
I agree.
Is this slashdot or huffington post? (Score:3)
I have never seen such ignorant arguments:
- Conflation of development time with product quality: "Minix just got paging working last year" Last I heard, quality products take MORE time to develop, not less.
- Complaints of "inefficiency" when the target platform has 10X the necessary compute power for the task at hand.
- Complaints about "long development time" when compared to the 20+ years that it has took for BSD to achieve commercial success in the market as OSX.
If any of you people would actually stop to read the hurd design docs you would realize that it has already had influence on your desktop. FUSE and SELinux are bolted-on implementations of concepts that were first fleshed out and implemented in the hurd.
Re: (Score:2)
But as for actually running it day-to-day, the Hurd never was relevant simply because it never had the broad driver support that users need. That won't change unless and until Hurd attracts a substantial developer base - but this is a
Re: (Score:2)
GPLv3 (Score:5, Insightful)
Who cares? I mean really... we have all the bases covered by Linux and BSD...
If you need a GPLv3 licensed OS for some reason, this will be one. Linux will probably never contain the patent guards Hurd will. That might be important for some folks.
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Interesting)
Nope. All I saw was an organization that maintains a distribution that is the basis for one of the fastest growing Linux distributions offer a distribution based on a kernel made by an organization that maintains one of the most used software compiler suites and userland tools. Please tell me where I should be looking. :P
Re: (Score:2)
nVidia drivers for HURD? VMware on HURD?
Your evocation of the unholy names of proprietary software packages and Hurd in the same sentence make Stallman cry. Please stop that.
Re: (Score:2)
There's nothing like a thick client when you have to compile a few thousand files.
Re:A de(cade) late and a dollar short (Score:5, Insightful)
"A" decade?
Here's what Linus Torvalds had to say about the GNU OS in 1992
"If the GNU kernel had been ready last spring, I'd not have bothered to even start my project: the fact is that it wasn't and still isn't. Linux wins heavily on points of being available now." [www.dina.dk]
Re: (Score:2)
I'm using /. time:
http://apple.slashdot.org/story/11/07/14/2137238/After-a-Decade-Mac-Sales-Again-Top-10 [slashdot.org]
It IS Accurate (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Linux the kernel is just as ideologically pure as the Hurd, even from the point of view of Richard M. Stallman. Every one of the millions of lines of code in Linux is still licensed under the GPL last time I checked. The reason why the Hurd is so far behind is not ideology, but largely because their development process over the last decade looks pretty much the way Duke Nukem Forever's went over the last decade. They lost focus. They shifted from Mach to L4 to Coyotos as the base microkernel over the course
Re: (Score:3)
The question I'd posit at this point is why? Why support a project that was already well on its way to being defunct fifteen years ago? Why support a project whose punchline was "Duke Nukem Forever"? Yes, it would have been an awesome thing in the early and mid-90s, but Linux came along and the GNU userland tools were compiled on top of it, and the rest, as they say, is history. So why on Earth would I want to support Hurd, a project that even if it got a big whack of cash right now probably wouldn't ha