[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Getting started with Hurd development.

From: Bas Wijnen
Subject: Re: Getting started with Hurd development.
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 10:27:38 +0200
User-agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050116)

address@hidden wrote:

I like device drivers, scheduling, memory managment, security.
I've read that device drivers are a good and simpler way to get
started in kernel development...

It sounds to me that you are interested in working on the L4 port,
particularly the device driver framework.  It would be very nice if
there would be some usable code for that (which may be replaced
completely again later, as I'm sure implementing things will cause some
changing of minds), so I very much encourage that. :-)

Another source of information is IRC.  There are a lot of people who
can help you and some that might scare you away.  But you can have a
look on #hug and #hurd on irc.freenode.net for general Hurd discussion
and on #hurd-l4 if you are interested in the L4 Hurd development.

Is it expected that Hurd will completely move to the L4 microkernel?
In other words, should development not be focused on Mach anymore
and just on L4?

It depends who you ask. :-)  I think everyone agrees that Mach is not
the future microkernel for the Hurd.  L4 probably is (although possibly
not the only one).  Currently, there is a working GNU/Hurd system on
Mach.  The L4 port is not workable at all yet, it only just executed its
first program.

So if we assume that L4 is indeed the way to go, it will still take some
time before it will be as usable as Mach.  The question is then if we
should all make that happen sooner, or if we should fix bugs in the Mach
version while "waiting" for the L4 port to "happen".  Because different
people answer the question differently, something in between is
happening.  Bugs get fixed in the Mach version, and work on L4 is done.

Because most bugfixes on the Mach port can be used on the L4 port
without much (or any) change, this bug fixing is not a waste of time. ;-)

However, I would definitely encourage you to work on the L4 port if you
like to do low-level stuff.  It needs quite a lot of work and not
everyone likes this type of programming.


I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
   in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word.
Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either.
For more information, see

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]