[Top][All Lists]

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

Challenge: Find potential use cases for non-trivial confinement

From: Marcus Brinkmann
Subject: Challenge: Find potential use cases for non-trivial confinement
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 23:17:53 +0200
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.7 (Sanjō) APEL/10.6 Emacs/21.4 (i486-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)


because the discussion has gone way out of hand, I will try to push
this into a constructive, forward-moving direction.

The challenge:

Propose a use case for non-trivial confinement.


(1) The use case must be specific and complete.  This is the opposite
    of abstract or incomplete!

(2) The use case must contribute to the GNU Hurd as a free software,
    general-purpose operating system.

I will collect the suggestions and reply to them at some later point
by doing one of the following:

(A) I demonstrate why the use case is not specific or complete enough
    to allow for an answer, or

(B) I demonstrate why the use case does not apply to the GNU Hurd, or

(C) I demonstrate how an equivalent, alternative mechanism exists that
    does not use non-trivial confinement (whereby equivalence respects
    the conditions (1) and (2) above), or

(D) I conceed that a use case has been found that does not allow for a
    response according to (A) to (C).

Admittedly, the term "free software, general-purpose operating system"
requires some explanation.  Free software is to be understood as
defined by the GNU project.  General-purpose operating system is
harder to define.  It means here that the contribution must provide
either a significant value to the free software community or to the
general public.  In other words: Narrow fields of endeavours with no
broader impact on society (or our community) are not qualified as use

The contributed value must be explicit (that means, not speculative)
and obvious.  Please include the content of the contribution in your

The term "equivalence" in (C) also deserves an elaboration.  It means
that the alternative mechanism will address at least the specific and
complete use case proposed, and that it will stay within the
requirements of the GNU Hurd.


reply via email to

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