Hi, On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 07:13:44PM +0700, Ivan Shmakov wrote: > >>>>> <olafbuddenha...@gmx.net> writes:
> > However, I have been planning to get an extra router box for quite > > some time now -- so that is really only a temporary consideration. > > (Holding me back so far is the excessive cost of suitable x86-based > > boxes, and the inconvenience and limitations of MIPS-based ones...) > > I'm not quite sure on what boxes were considered, but > personally, I've ended up using an Intel Atom 330-based system > in a Mini-ITX (InWin BM648) case as a router (1 Ethernet > interface on-board + 1 PCI + 1 USB). I was thinking of something that actually resembles a "normal" router -- small, silent, robust, and not consuming more than a few watts. The problem is that standard WLAN routers have too little RAM to run Debian, and I don't feel like getting to grips with OpenWRT, or in fact any other distribution. My time is too precious for that. There are a few Geode-based x86 boxes that mostly fit the bill -- but the affordable ones all have three network ports at best. For a router, I want at least four or five -- I don't want to run an extra hub/switch, which would effectively double the power consumption... x86-based router-like machines with 4+ ports are very expensive OTOH. (Around 250 Euro at least.) I've also seen some pretty powerful MIPS-based router barebones (680 MHz, 256 MiB RAM) with enough ports. These are quite affordable actually at around 100 Euro. I'm just unsure whether the fact that they are MIPS-based rather than x86 wouldn't cause too much hassle... > ??? message passing on top of Linux: > > ??? with a user-space daemon; > > ??? with a kernel module. > > Do I understand it correctly that once a Mach could be made to > run in user-space (the same trick as with User-mode Linux), > making Hurd run on top of it will be straightforward? > > This effectively makes the Hurd only a single command, namely: > > # apt-get install hurd > > away from from a J. Random (Debian) GNU/Linux user. > > For those wishing for a better experience, a Linux kernel module > version of Mach could be developed at some time later. > > Then, the sole question will be the tasks that Hurd covers. > Eventually, some users may find that they use little or no > native Linux modules, but instead use the Hurd ones. The > transition to GNU/Hurd[/Linux] will be over for them. Indeed that's a scenario I have been pondering for some time now. One of the many projects on my ToDo list... -antrik-
