Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 14th Sep 2012 22:30 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 535242
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2008-10-30
I don't know why people offend themselves when I call GNUL a Hack when GNUL developers consider themselves hackers.
If you look into GNUL history it has been a hack. Although it was not considered "Unix" they made it unix like and POSIX compliant, although it was not supported in some platforms they managed to make it work over them. There is no driver support no problem just change some lines in the kernel and compile. Although there was no kernel they managed to get a temporary kernel called Linux which it is still ticking despite being temporal.
That sounds like a hack to me. If you think a hack is bad then theres is nothing to discuss.