Ognyan Kulev wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please do not ignore or flame down me because I'm not so used to
hacking
that stuff. I think I'm experienced enough to GNU/Linux to know how
a
realization should not look like, and I'd like GNU/Hurd to be
better.
It's good you are concerned with Hu
Ognyan Kulev wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please do not ignore or flame down me because I'm not so used to
hacking
that stuff. I think I'm experienced enough to GNU/Linux to know how
a
realization should not look like, and I'd like GNU/Hurd to be
better.
It's good you are concerned with Hu
At Sun, 13 Jun 2004 15:00:26 +0200,
azeem wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2004 at 01:51:07PM +0200, "Sören Schulze" wrote:
> > GNU/Linux:
> [...]
>
> > Example:
> > Every Desktop Environment has its own handling of virtual file systems
> > (which will become redundant in the Hurd) and URL openings
Marco Gerards wrote:
There was quite a lot of testing done by people in #hurd. Some people
use a >2GB partition as root partition, IIRC.
That's nice to hear :-)
Can you tell us how people can help you? Testing? Bug reports? etc...
Yes, the easiest is just to use it. When there is a problem, I
Ognyan Kulev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>> As long as work on ext3fs is progressing I'm personally quite happy,
>> since you can always use ext3fs to mount a ext2 partition. Heck, I
>> don't particulary see the need for the ext2fs patch if ext3fs will
>> exist; but that
So I agree with Marcus, and I want to bring the key issue into
highlight:
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There are basically two philosophies when it comes to a sound card:
> One is to think of it as an integral part of the system console.
This is sometimes clearly right. For e
At Sun, 13 Jun 2004 19:43:14 +0200,
Bas Wijnen wrote:
>
> [1 ]
> [1.1 ]
> Hi,
>
> A comments which I consider more important, which is also the reason I
> crosspost this to l4-hurd:
>
> Suppose we have a system in a classroom, as described below. At (local)
> login, a capability for the sound
Perhaps the GNU project should have thought about a portable
virtual-file system library in the spririt of gnulib back then when
it become at least possible that the Hurd was not ready as basis
for the desktop.
Or perhaps people should shutup and make the Hurd a viable choice for
the d
X may be outdated, but many programs use it.
Please back up these claims; or provide reasons why you think it is
so.
Do you know about XGGI?
A project that is far more "outdated" then X11.
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://list
May I quote you?
That you have a crystal ball that can look into the future? Sure why
not. But only if you make this crystal ball avaiable for everyone to
look into.
You said once software wasn't something magic. ;)
And I still claim that it isn't; claming that it is shows that one
does n
So the goal of the GNU project is
chmod -R a+rwx /
Learn to read, "without screwing up for others".
___
Bug-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>Starting X does not make sense from a remote machine.
>
> Starting X sessions remotly makes perfect sense, which is what I am
> talking about. Fireing up a X server remotely makes also perfect
> sense, take the example that the X server crashed or you upgraded it
> or
Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>AFAIK GNU/Hurd will mainly support GGI/KGI instead.
>
> Didn't know that you have a crystal ball that can look into the
> future... :)
May I quote you?
You said once software wasn't something magic. ;)
Software is made by human decisions, and what I told you was also
Concrete cases are completely irrelevant. You can't contruct all cases
in 15 mails; there is at least one important case you can't think of.
As I understand the idea behind the design principles of the Hurd is:
Let the user decide, how to use his computer, so give him all
possibilities. The user
Rian Hunter wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-06-13 at 10:34, "Sören Schulze" wrote:
> > Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> > >I know about Xnest and I think it's a good idea, but it does not
> > >fix general design lacks in XFree86.
> > >
> > > Fixing XFree86 is kinda out of the scope of GNU/Hurd...
> >
> >
On Sun, Jun 13, 2004 at 12:05:50PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Note that Desktop Environments such as GNOME are not Linux specific.
> > GNOME runs (and is well supported by Sun) on Solaris, for example. Of
> > course, GNU/Hurd might have a b
Starting X does not make sense from a remote machine.
Starting X sessions remotly makes perfect sense, which is what I am
talking about. Fireing up a X server remotely makes also perfect
sense, take the example that the X server crashed or you upgraded it
or whatever.
X uses the hardware o
Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Note that Desktop Environments such as GNOME are not Linux specific.
GNOME runs (and is well supported by Sun) on Solaris, for example. Of
course, GNU/Hurd might have a better implementation of virtual file
systems as Linux, b
Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Note that Desktop Environments such as GNOME are not Linux specific.
> GNOME runs (and is well supported by Sun) on Solaris, for example. Of
> course, GNU/Hurd might have a better implementation of virtual file
> systems as Linux, but nevertheless you ne
On Sun, 2004-06-13 at 10:34, "Sören Schulze" wrote:
> Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> >I know about Xnest and I think it's a good idea, but it does not
> >fix general design lacks in XFree86.
> >
> > Fixing XFree86 is kinda out of the scope of GNU/Hurd...
>
> Of course.
> AFAIK GNU/Hurd will ma
Hi,
A comments which I consider more important, which is also the reason I
crosspost this to l4-hurd:
Suppose we have a system in a classroom, as described below. At (local)
login, a capability for the sound card should be given out. At logout, this
capability should be revoked, including all c
I think being able to change the volume remote would be a nice
feature.
You can already do that on any machine you have a account on.
The box that I mentioned, Paxillus, has aumix running on a port where
you can telnet to and set the volume without having to actually "log
in". Which is ver
"Alfred M. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>GNU/Hurd is quite an unfinished system,
>
> The only finished systems are the ones that are dead.
>
>I know about Xnest and I think it's a good idea, but it does not
>fix general design lacks in XFree86.
>
> Fixing XFree86 is kinda out of
AFAIK GNU/Hurd will mainly support GGI/KGI instead.
Didn't know that you have a crystal ball that can look into the
future... :)
(doesn't mean it won't support XFree86 any further, but I don't
know ...)
X11 must be supported as long as X11 programs are used and as long as
the GNU deskto
Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
As long as work on ext3fs is progressing I'm personally quite happy,
since you can always use ext3fs to mount a ext2 partition. Heck, I
don't particulary see the need for the ext2fs patch if ext3fs will
exist; but thats me.
ext2fs patch is much more important, because it ne
These libraries are basic GNU/Hurd libraries. You will have them
installed anyway.
And you will still have to install libFOO to be able to use whatever
one wants to use, so the point is moot. In what package the library
is avaiable in is quite irrelevant.
libbonobo, on the other hand,
Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>> I don't know whether it's possible for text-based software to use
>> libgnomevfs, but it only depends on libbonobo and not the core
>> GNOME libraries so I don't see why it should be impossible.
>
>It's probably possible, but you'll have to link against M
Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>I know about Xnest and I think it's a good idea, but it does not
>fix general design lacks in XFree86.
>
> Fixing XFree86 is kinda out of the scope of GNU/Hurd...
Of course.
AFAIK GNU/Hurd will mainly support GGI/KGI instead.
(doesn't mean it won't support XFree86
> How is the work with ext2fs comming along anyway?
Stalled. I'm distracted with many things and my main Hurd fight is
ext3fs now, not the ext2fs patch.
As long as work on ext3fs is progressing I'm personally quite happy,
since you can always use ext3fs to mount a ext2 partition. Heck,
I only suppose they developed it mainly using GNU/Linux.
And GNU/Hurd is mostly developed on GNU/Linux. And alot of GNU
software was developed on non-free platforms back in the days... :-)
> I don't know whether it's possible for text-based software to use
> libgnomevfs, but it only de
Michael Banck wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2004 at 01:51:07PM +0200, "Sören Schulze" wrote:
> > GNU/Linux:
> [...]
>
> > Example:
> > Every Desktop Environment has its own handling of virtual file systems
> > (which will become redundant in the Hurd) and URL openings (would be
> > done by somethi
GNU/Hurd is quite an unfinished system,
The only finished systems are the ones that are dead.
I know about Xnest and I think it's a good idea, but it does not
fix general design lacks in XFree86.
Fixing XFree86 is kinda out of the scope of GNU/Hurd...
If something like an error, tha
Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
How is the work with ext2fs comming along anyway?
Stalled. I'm distracted with many things and my main Hurd fight is
ext3fs now, not the ext2fs patch.
The last problem with ext2fs patch was with building Debian's glibc
(freeze when first patch 00cvs is applied) but it wa
> Please do not ignore or flame down me because I'm not so used to
> hacking that stuff. I think I'm experienced enough to GNU/Linux
> to know how a realization should not look like, and I'd like
> GNU/Hurd to be better.
It's good you are concerned with Hurd's future, but I think we
And while GNU/Hurd is not ready for that stuff, we can talk about
technical realization.
Why not just make it ready for this stuff instead? Or if that ain't
your game, why not implement this "technical realization".
Seriously, less talk and more code. :) Post some rough implementation
of w
On Sun, Jun 13, 2004 at 01:51:07PM +0200, "Sören Schulze" wrote:
> GNU/Linux:
[...]
> Example:
> Every Desktop Environment has its own handling of virtual file systems
> (which will become redundant in the Hurd) and URL openings (would be
> done by something like httpfs in the Hurd).
> Though
Ognyan Kulev wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Please do not ignore or flame down me because I'm not so used to
>> hacking
>> that stuff. I think I'm experienced enough to GNU/Linux to know how
>> a
>> realization should not look like, and I'd like GNU/Hurd to be
>> better.
>
> It's good
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please do not ignore or flame down me because I'm not so used to hacking
that stuff. I think I'm experienced enough to GNU/Linux to know how a
realization should not look like, and I'd like GNU/Hurd to be better.
It's good you are concerned with Hurd's future, but I think w
Hi hackers,
We have discussed it on IRC and that has influenced this posting, but IRC is
bad for long discussions - so I'm writing here.
GNU/Hurd is quite an unfinished system, so it has rather the chances of
implementing a *clean* UI than any other system with an already existing and
working UI
39 matches
Mail list logo
