Re: L4-HURD , POSIX, UNIX

[Bas Wijnen]

On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 05:10:58PM +0100, Filip Brcic wrote:
> > > I like persistence as well, mostly because I feel it results in a more
> > > robust system.  However, if people already see concrete problems with it,
> > > I'd like to hear them now, not after we decided that we want persistence.
> 
> Persistence could be an option. There are issues with persistence (such as 
> reloading the corrupt code on every boot), and therefore it should not be 
> enforced. Personaly, I would like to see persistence in GNU/Hurd.

As far as I understood Shapiro, applications don't have to do this.  They have
to accept remote resources (network connections for example) to disappear, but
they have to accept that without persistence as well anyway.  The low level
system code to handle it may be a little complex, but that's a one-time job to
write.  And it means we don't have to write the complex boot-script stuff. :-)

I'll wait for Shapiro's mail about the good and bad things of persistence, but
in the absence of problems, I think it is a good idea to make a persistent
system.  And that means we don't allow the choice, because I think it'd be a
waste of time to write support for boot scripts.

> Strong security and robustness can always find some use. My opinion is that
> it must not be enforced for the regular (future) Desktop user of Hurd, but
> it is very important for server computers and embedded devices. If you have
> experience and knowledge, you should be welcomed to use it for building a
> secure and reliable Hurd.

Strong security and robustness cannot be added to an insecure and fragile
system.  We can provide the option of making the system insecure and/or
fragile when we have a secure and robust core, but I see no reason to do so.
Except if security and robustness comes at the price of usability of course,
but the idea is that it doesn't. :-)

Where it does, we should allow users to choose.

> > > I understood that you offered yourself as our mentor (correct me if I
> > > misunderstood).
> >
> > You understood correctly.
> 
> The mentor in the Free Software is not the position you get appointed to.

It is however something you can refuse to do.  In this case, it would have
been very well possible that Shapiro would be interested in the current
discussion, and go away again when the actual implementation begins.  The fact
that he offered to be a mentor means that he will not do that.  We can of
course accept or decline the offer, and for some people that may depend on
what kernel we choose.  Personally, I am very pleased that he offers this, and
I accept this offer, independantly from the kernel.  Of course I cannot do
this in the name of "the Hurd people", and I do not pretend that I do.

> It is more a position that you earn in time through contributions of good
> software, ideas, thoughts, algorithms, etc. Therefore, I urge you to try to
> become the mentor of the GNU/Hurd project.

IMO he has already done that.  If you are not so impressed yet, just wait.  I
am convinced that he will not stop contributing to the discussions (and if we
choose to use Coyotos, also to the code :-) ).

Thanks,
Bas

-- 
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 http://129.125.47.90/e-mail.html

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature