If there is a package to do this, then surely this bug can be closed?
There is a way to use a GNU/Hurd system easily, so we don't need a bug
report open for it.
** Changed in: ubuntu
Status: Confirmed => Invalid
--
[Wishlist] Ubuntu GNU/HURD port
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/343452
You
Scottuss, I disagree. Having a compatible-but-different kernel behind
the scenes could promote innovation (much like eglibc vs glibc does at
the libc level and pulse vs alsa vs etc does at the sound level).
"crosshurd" is a package (dapper through maverick) that lets you create
a separate gnu/hur
Just read about this on the Ubuntu Forums. It's a terrible idea,
especially if it would detract developer resources away from developing
and improving Ubuntu as it is now (i.e with a Linux kernel)
--
[Wishlist] Ubuntu GNU/HURD port
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/343452
You received this bug noti
** Changed in: ubuntu
Status: New => Confirmed
--
[Wishlist] Ubuntu GNU/HURD port
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/343452
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
htt
