Linked by the_randymon on Mon 7th Jan 2013 18:56 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes The mostly-morubund Hurd project is well known for what it's not: the kernel at the heart of the GNU/Linux system. But there's a long and interesting story about what it could have been, too. From Linux User magazine: "The design of the Hurd was an attempt to embody the spirit and promise of the free software movement in code." Those are mighty ambitions, and this story is as much about competing visions as competing kernels. Says Thomas Bushnell: "My first choice was to take the BSD 4.4-Lite release and make a kernel. I knew the code, I knew how to do it. It is now perfectly obvious to me that this would have succeeded splendidly and the world would be a very different place today." This is a well-written and fascinating read.
Permalink for comment 547776
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by kurkosdr
by kurkosdr on Tue 8th Jan 2013 12:36 UTC
Member since:

" "GNU/Linux" came about because Stallman draws the line between "operating system" and "extras" at the bare minimum you need to run a terminal with a Bourne-family shelland emacs..."

This is because Stallman is a honorary professor (whatever this is) and not a real professor. A real professor knows the "bare minimum" for "operating system" is the ability to boot and allocate resources. And maybe to interact with I/O or disks (not necessarily both). Linux met those requirements before it took any GNU code. Hence, Linux was an OS before it took any GNU code. Read my previous post.

Instead, the bare minimum for "kernel" is to "allocate resources". No boot.

I am an undergraduate and even I know that!

PS: The "run terminal" thing is completely silly. Symbian OS didn't offer a terminal with bourne yet it was an OS...

Edited 2013-01-08 12:41 UTC

Reply Score: 0