Re: /hurd/init and /hurd/proc

2013-07-15 Thread Roland McGrath
> That's not what he said. He said there is a lot of information > propagated from init to proc, and thus the separation is questionable. Are you talking about bootstrap, or what?

Re: /hurd/init and /hurd/proc

2013-07-15 Thread Samuel Thibault
Roland McGrath, le Mon 15 Jul 2013 09:44:52 -0700, a écrit : > They are separate because they do different things. This doesn't seem like > it should need a lot of justification to Hurd hackers. If you want to roll > things together just because you always run them both, That's not what he said.

Re: /hurd/init and /hurd/proc

2013-07-15 Thread Roland McGrath
They are separate because they do different things. This doesn't seem like it should need a lot of justification to Hurd hackers. If you want to roll things together just because you always run them both, maybe you should be hacking on a monolithic kernel instead.

Re: /hurd/init and /hurd/proc

2013-07-15 Thread Samuel Thibault
Justus Winter, le Tue 25 Jun 2013 17:47:49 +0200, a écrit : > This special interface they both use and the fact that init does lot's > of process related things might be an indication that the seperation > does more harm than good. It seems to make the code more complex, and > fixing the issue of k