Linked by Michael on Thu 21st Jul 2011 14:08 UTC
Benchmarks Phoronix has conducted some preliminary benchmarks, comparing Debian GNU/Hurd to Debian GNU/Linux. "There was only a handful of tests that could be successfully run under Debian GNU/Hurd and in those results the numbers were generally close, though Debian GNU/Linux was running about 4% faster in some and with the MP3 encoding the Linux OS was nearly 20% faster. Debian GNU/Hurd is an interesting project but for now its support is still in shambles, the hardware support is vastly outdated, and there is also no SMP support at this time. Regardless, it will be interesting to see how Debian GNU/Hurd turns out for the 7.0 Wheezy milestone."
Thread beginning with comment 481915
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by andih
by andih on Thu 21st Jul 2011 21:21 UTC
andih
Member since:
2010-03-27

I think one day Hurd will become a major player.
I wish them luck at what theyre doing! Although I totally love linux, I can barely wait until Hurd is stable and working well ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by andih
by Delgarde on Thu 21st Jul 2011 21:58 in reply to "Comment by andih"
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

I think one day Hurd will become a major player.


*Think* it will, or just *hope* it will? Because this project has been going over twenty years already, and after all that, has very little to show for it. Indeed, it's actually getting worse over time - according to the FAQ, it used to support SMP, but the code no longer works.

Ultimately, I don't think the project will ever achieve anything, unless they get an influx of new contributors. Because with just the current handful of people working on it, they're not going to keep up, no matter how hard they work.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by andih
by fithisux on Fri 22nd Jul 2011 08:13 in reply to "RE: Comment by andih"
fithisux Member since:
2006-01-22

The major problem with Hurd from my small research is the choice of uKernel. But what is worse is the Hurd is tightly coupled to Mach (the same mistake as MacOSX). On the other hand GenodeOS is portable to various uKernels. Even if GNU-Mach supports various modern CPUs and drivers are moved to the user-space then the performance will be slow and possible have many other problems. Hurd is totally built for Mach, and this is a fatal design flaw.Even if they choose the in-kernel embedding of Mach, another fatal design fault of Apple they will still have problems. The FOSS software depends a lot on modularization and Hurd made the fatal decision not to follow it.

In my understanding they could go with NOVA and create a thin a Mach-portability layer for IOKit and Hurd. But I may be wrong.

Reply Parent Score: 2