Slashdot Mirror


GNU Hurd 0.6 Released

jrepin writes It has been roughly a year and a half since the last release of the GNU Hurd operating system, so it may be of interest to some readers that GNU Hurd 0.6 has been released along with GNU Mach 1.5 (the microkernel that Hurd runs on) and GNU MIG 1.5 (the Mach Interface Generator, which generates code to handle remote procedure calls). New features include procfs and random translators; cleanups and stylistic fixes, some of which came from static analysis; message dispatching improvements; integer hashing performance improvements; a split of the init server into a startup server and an init program based on System V init; and more.

24 of 229 comments (clear)

  1. Mandatory xkcd by NotInHere · · Score: 5, Funny
    1. Re:Mandatory xkcd by Shillo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, re-read the summary. They introduced a real SysV init.

      Systemd integration is the obvious next step for HURD.

      --
      I refuse to use .sig
    2. Re:Mandatory xkcd by sethradio · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why do people dislike systemd so much?

      --
      "Nationalism is an infantile sickness. It is the measles of the human race." -Albert Einstein
    3. Re:Mandatory xkcd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually I was pretty happy with the systemd learning curve. What I wasn't happy about was not being able to figure out why my network interface insisted on getting a DHCP address despite the fact I had explicitly disabled DHCP and assigned a static IP address to it via the unit files, because *there was no log of what unit/configuration files were being executed/read and when*, and - as far as I'm aware - there is no way to enable logging or figure out exactly what is going on.

      And just think, with System V Init or RC scripts I could have just added a few "echo" statements to figure out what was going on instead of Googling for several hours until I found what the actual problem was.

      THAT is what is stupid about systemd.

    4. Re:Mandatory xkcd by TWX · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, I dislike it because it makes it much harder to administer a box as a UNIX-type machine with a simple text editor. Now it seems like I'm stuck with meta-scripts invoking meta-scripts invoked by other scripts to do something as simple as changing my DNS servers. A whole lot of stuff just got a lot harder because of an abstraction layer.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    5. Re:Mandatory xkcd by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are many reasons:

      It doesn't play well with others. It works well enough with a use case that exactly matches the expectations of the developers, but put a toe outside that and you're in for some genuine hell. It takes a nice modular system and turns it into an all or nothing hairball of dependencies.

      People keep claiming it's simple, but they never seem to notice the big pile of crap in /lib/systemd, /var/lib/systemd, etc etc.

      It takes a joke like the "COME FROM" statement and actually implements it!

      It won't quit metastasizing.

      There is nothing it does that couldn't be implemented in a truly modular and far less invasive way.

      It's a solution looking for a problem.

    6. Re:Mandatory xkcd by CronoCloud · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, I dislike it because it makes it much harder to administer a box as a UNIX-type machine with a simple text editor. Now it seems like I'm stuck with meta-scripts invoking meta-scripts invoked by other scripts to do something as simple as changing my DNS servers.

      I run Fedora 21, a systemd distro. You want to change your dns servers on Fedora 21?

      You can use the Network GUI thing nm-connection-editor or whatever equivalent your desktop uses.

      Or if you prefer the terminal or console you can use nmtui which is the same thing in a terminal/console

      Or you can
      vim /etc/resolv.conf That still works. You might still need to reset the connection after the change.

      Or you can:
      nmcli con mod connection-name ipv4.dns "8.8.8.8 8.8.4.4"

    7. Re:Mandatory xkcd by devent · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's why people want systemd. If I look at sysvinit scripts, there are a ton of magic stuff going on that I don't know, and maybe nobody knows. On Ubuntu 12.04 the sysvinit script for Apache is over 7000 bytes long, and it includes bad stuff like "# wait until really stopped" with a loop of kill and sleep. The ClamAV init script is even bigger, over 9000 byes long. Is there any maintainer who really knows what it does?

      --
      http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
    8. Re:Mandatory xkcd by muirhead · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why do people dislike systemd so much?

      It is largely down to terrible marketing and poor public relations. We all need to have someone to hate.

  2. Both users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It was rumored that both users could be hurd rejoicing.

    1. Re:Both users by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 4, Funny

      So its user base has doubled? Amazing!

  3. 0.6? Are you serious? by msobkow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They announced work on Hurd when I was still in university. I've worked a career, ended up disabled, retired, and spent years on a pet project since then, producing 13 point releases. Over 30 years have gone by.

    Yet they've still only reached release 0.6? So one decimal point release every FIVE YEARS?

    Jesus.

    Stick a fork in this project.

    It's done -- as in dead. Pushing up daisies. Pining for the fjords. Defunct. Deceased. Non functional.

    It's not even worthy of being called a pipe dream any more. Even "Duke Nukem' Forever" beat them to the punch, and everyone gave up on that project long before it was released.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  4. Too bad... by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's too bad Linus wasted all this time making a temporary kernel that was just going to be surpassed a mere 24+? years later by the official GNU kernel. Nothing stings more than when the code you write isn't being used.

  5. Re:I want to try it by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well Hurd did not get the developer attention that Linux got. Obviously, this means that progress in Hurd is going to be slower than Linux.

    MenuetOS has less than a handful of developers and yet has had USB support for at least 7 years now.

  6. Re:systemd by ClickOnThis · · Score: 3, Informative

    From the GNU Hurd Wiki page:

    It's time [to] explain the meaning of "Hurd". "Hurd" stands for "Hird of Unix-Replacing Daemons". And, then, "Hird" stands for "Hurd of Interfaces Representing Depth". We have here, to my knowledge, the first software to be named by a pair of mutually recursive acronyms.

    —Thomas (then Michael) Bushnell

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  7. Re:For me, there are two questions. by ckatko · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who the hell works on the 99% of open source software that isn't popular, and why do they care? Because they do.

  8. Re:0.6? Are you serious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    He hasn't finished his answer yet. Check back in a few years.

  9. Re:Microkernal Boner by qpqp · · Score: 4, Informative

    If your boner for microkernals lasts more than 25 years, you should probably consult a physician.

    I recommend a look at Andrew S Tannenbaum's baby:

    MINIX 3 is a free, open-source, operating system designed to be highly reliable, flexible, and secure. It is based on a tiny microkernel running in kernel mode with the rest of the operating system running as a number of isolated, protected, processes in user mode. It runs on x86 and ARM CPUs, is compatible with NetBSD, and runs thousands of NetBSD packages.

    Minix

  10. Re:Why do people dislike systemd so much? by Foresto · · Score: 3, Informative

    The reasons for disliking it vary, but there is at least one common thread among those who are upset about it: Systemd is being shoved down their throats, in that several of the most widely used, widely loved, deeply entrenched linux distributions have announced that they are adopting it. Many people who use those distributions do so for very good reasons, and since there are no equivalent alternatives, these people are being forced to either accept systemd (which will cause them unwanted trouble) or migrate to an inferior distribution (which will also cause them unwanted trouble). That kind of thing is enough to piss anyone off.

  11. Re:Why do people dislike systemd so much? by devman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The problem is when you fork your own distro you quickly discover that using systemd is the easiest way to maintain it. It isn't a coincidence that medium and small distros like Arch Linux picked it up in addition to the big boys. Unit-files save package maintainers boatloads of time they used to spend having to writing and maintaining initscripts a lot of which is copypasta boilerplate anyway but its usually distro specific copypasta.

    This is the source of a lot of the strife in my opinion. The people who actually do work to maintain distros like systemd, the users not so much.

  12. Interesting discussion by peppepz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    101 posts and not a single one with technical content. Somebody should create a slashdot post generator, with modules producing output of these kinds:
    - internet meme repeater ("year of Linux on the desktop", "stallman eats his own toes", "thou shalt not compare to nazi");
    - xkcd repeater (its output is prefixed by the string "obligatory" and displays a strong prevalence of this one);
    - project deprecator ("this software is so stupid, I could write a better one with one arm tied behind my back, except I'm too smart to actually do it");
    - Google/Apple/Microsoft PR ("it's not Google who kills kittens! It's their subcontractors!");
    and, last but not least,
    - Slashdot deprecator ("slashdot is no longer a nice site to read these days").

  13. Re:I want to try it by serviscope_minor · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ah, it's turned into a "let'smake our selves feel important by shitting on someone't hobby" day.

    Yeah USB only a few years ago. Their goal is to write a microkernel OS and figure out how to make it work well for a UNIX like system with far more felxibility. The feature list and malleability of the system is impressive.

    If they spent all their times on drivers and none on the base OS, they'd have yet another OS which is quite similar to all the others out there in terms of features. Their goal is not to get acceptance from random bitter blowhards like yourself on the internet.

    End result: they've contributed more to the world than you ever will.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  14. Re:For me, there are two questions. by DrXym · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The debate about micro or monolithic kernels was just a backdrop. The real reason HURD failed had more to do with the mindset of the people involved.

    Linus (impatient with the pace of HURD) developed a quick and dirty kernel that a Unix user land could be built on top of. He took a lot of shortcuts, he didn't think too much about portability and basically just made a beeline for the end line - to get a shell and hence other stuff running over a kernel. The kernel filled out and became portable as the project gained momentum and volunteers.

    Whereas HURD got stuck up its own ass for correctness and politics. And that's even before Linux existed as a thing. It's hardly a surprise that when Linux did appear that people jumped ship.

    It's true there was a debate about micro kernel designs but that alone doesn't explain HURD's failure.

  15. Does it now support HDDs larger than 2 GB? by Qbertino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Does it now support HDDs larger than 2 GB? I'm not even joking here.

    Last time I heard (like 10 years ago or so) it was a theorists wet dream but basically unusable.

    What's the state of things with Hurd nwo? Is it usefull already?
    What are big steps Hurd still needs to take to be ready for prime time?
    What are the plans? When are we there?

    Please note: I have no problem replacing Unix with something better, like ome coolDMI thing where everything isn't a file but an object and the system is cleanly designed from top to bottom and back. Top notch but everything modifiable. But it has to be real-world usable and useful. Until then I'm sticking with *nix derivates such as OS X on Apple hardware or some x86 Linux like Debian or Ubuntu on ThinkPads.

    Could someone give some enlightenment on this issue?

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca