Submitted by It is the GNU project’s 30th birthday, and we are pleased to announce version 0.5 of the GNU Hurd.
The GNU Hurd is the GNU project’s replacement for the Unix kernel. It is a collection of servers that run on the Mach microkernel to implement file systems, network protocols, file access control, and other features that are implemented by the Unix kernel or similar kernels (such as Linux).
A bit late, but there you have it. Does anyone here actually use Hurd?
At this time – and for many, many years -, HURD is not trying to compete with anything. It’s mostly a research project, a very slow moving one. To be fair, GNU doesn’t actually need HURD, because it already proved to be successful with Linux.
They could compete (just finishing Viengoos) in the virtualized area, and they would erase every other OS from that sector(assuming they improve other things, like UTF8 everywhere ala Plan 9 and a mix of 9P and QNX’s TDP )
I haven’t hurd anything about this project in awhile. See what I did there… eh?
Love to test it under a VM. By the way, any news from SkyOS? It’s dead I think.
SkyOS is rather dead, yes. There was a news item about it a few weeks ago, http://www.osnews.com/story/27260/Last_SkyOS_5_0_beta_released_for_…
Can’t access skyos.org site, any link for download?
Edit: Maybe from pastebin: http://pastebin.com/AE6pjFC6 as posted in your osnews link. Sources should be available for any OS dev to work on it.
Edited 2013-10-02 07:08 UTC
Wow, I missed that news. skyos.org is working for me right now.
As dead as it has been for the last couple of years, apart from the free download which overloaded their server.
i guess the l4 port crashed and burned? mach is outdated crufty junk for a microkernel. Honestly I wouldn’t mind something architecturally like plan9 with some more mainstream userspace.
HURD has been a running joke for years… It even outpaces Duke Nukem Forever.
may be a running joke, but this does not mean that it is not interesting. there are some very appealing and reasonable ideas behind it.
personally i prefer the l4ka nanokernel, as it beautiful in its simplicity. mach was the obvious choice ‘back then’ but it imposed lot of burden on a hurd’s design:
http://walfield.org/papers/200707-walfield-critique-of-the-GNU-Hurd…
Hurd isn’t even a very good microkernel… read through this Hacker News thread, specifically the comments by luckydude:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6460750
They were vapid. So, he is so intelligent he blew his lecturer out the water then took over his class, apparently.
Without making any case against Mach, other than QNX’s microkernel fits in a 4k cache, he basically says nothing of substance and talks more about what he has to do with his kids than anything else.
Sounds a lot like a guy with a big ego and strong opinions to me [typical keyboard warrior].
Edited 2013-10-03 08:15 UTC
Yeah, walking in and taking over the grad OS class @ CMU. The BS-meter started going off right about there…
Is there an actual study or published source that states the actual shorcomings of MACH?
https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/history/port_to_another_microkerne…
… and another