Slashdot Mirror


GNU Hurd To Develop SATA, USB, Audio Support

An anonymous reader writes "Hurd, the GNU micro-kernel project that was founded by Richard Stallman in 1983, may finally be catching up with Linux on the desktop... Plans were shared by its developers to finally bring in some modern functionality by working on support for Serial ATA drives, USB support, and sound cards. There are also ambitions to provide x86-64 CPU architecture support. GNU Hurd developers will be doing an unofficial Debian GNU/Hurd 'Wheezy' release this year but they hope for the Debian 'Jessie' release their micro-kernel in Debian will make it as part of some official CDs."

13 of 274 comments (clear)

  1. Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Finally, 2013 is the year of Hurd on the desktop!

  2. Not in Debian by KiloByte · · Score: 5, Informative

    they hope for the Debian 'Jessie' release their micro-kernel in Debian will make it as part of some official CDs.

    Sorry, but Hurd is being demoted to a second-class (ie, unofficial) port. The rules say that a port that fails to be included in two subsequent releases, gets moved to the debian-ports ghetto, with shining neighbours like hppa (long dead) or sh4 (never has been).

    In some ways, that's a pity -- like, improving other code by forcing removal of buffer overflows/asinine truncations related to PATH_MAX. In others, well, it's Hurd...

    --
    The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
  3. Duke Nukem is a Punk by Bob9113 · · Score: 5, Funny

    It is good that Hurd is a live project regardless of how much production use it sees. It explores kernel design theory; valuable work in itself.

    Still, I can't help a little ribbing.

    founded by Richard Stallman in 1983,

    Duke Nukem? Feh. Only took 15 years to go gold. Hurd is 30 and they just started working on sound cards.

  4. Re:Why should I bother? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why should I bother to use this kernel? What benefit would it give me over using just the regular Linux kernel or *BSD?

    Its name is a mutually recursive acronym!

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  5. Re:Misguided by wvmarle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Being able to run on a somewhat modern computer (they all come with SATA drives and USB ports nowadays - no support for those two basic technologies means your kernel just won't work on any hardware that's not totally obsolete by now), and being able to actually use all the hardware in that computer, is a fairly important feature of a useable OS, imho.

  6. HURD not founded in 1983 by RMS by paroneayea · · Score: 5, Informative

    HURD wasn't started till much later, in 1990: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurd The operating system of GNU was started in 1983, work on the kernel wasn't till much later.

    --
    http://mediagoblin.org/
  7. Re:Really, who cares? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think Poor Richard has lived in an ivory tower far too long.

    But hey, he may get lauded by Tanenbaum for staying with a microkernel design.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  8. Re:Absurd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Any user oriented system in development (as HURD clearly is) has to add support for USB, sound cards and SATA at some point. That is no reason for ridicule.
    This particular project does development in an openly visible way, so you can see the daily progress. That is still no reason for ridicule.
    This particular project progresses ... "very" ... slowly. That may or may not be a reason for ridicule, depending on your character.

  9. Re:Really, who cares? by CRCulver · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think Poor Richard has lived in an ivory tower far too long.

    I hate to interrupt your Stallman bashing, but RMS isn't involved in Hurd development. He has been content to use Linux for many years now. Hurd development is driven mainly by other developers who are in it purely as a hobby, a way to play around with microkernel design, and they are not striving to reach a mass market.

  10. Re:Real artists ship. by gpierce11 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not only did Stallman write EMACS, but he also wrote parts of GCC, the debugger, and gmake. These are not negligible contributions.

  11. Re:Real artists ship. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    You'd be surprised how often Stallman's name appears in a Man page for something REALLY useful in Linux. The only reason you don't hear about more recent projects from him is because a lot of the stuff he's written follows the UNIX ideology of giving people a lot of really small tools that can be combined in unique and useful ways.

    Granted none of the stuff his name appears on works outside of the terminal, but 50% of my day in Linux is spent in a terminal because I do embedded development. The guy's tools just work, which is great.

  12. Re:And when will Linux on the desktop catch up? by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Funny

    Catching up to the last in the race is no achievement.

    Wrong - catching up with the last in the race is a great achievement - you've just managed to bypass the rules of logic.

  13. GCC by Skiron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    RMS coded GCC by himself - it was only later others got on board:

    GCC history

    And. of course, if it wasn't for RMS and GCC. Linus would not have been able to get a 'free' compiler for his project.

    RMS is the seed of all of this. Don't knock him or his values. It is why we have a great 'free' OS (in all it's varieties) today.