Re: [OT] HURD vs Linux/HURD

[John Bradford <john@grabjohn.com>]

> >                                                              We are
> > discussing what parts of the Hurd and GNU Mach contain code derived
> > from Linux.  That's actually quite interesting, and on-topic.
>
> Why? Are you planing to take anything from Hurd? Or complain that they
> (legally!) are taking GPLed code and use it elsewhere? In the fist case,
> discussion about the _technical_ merit of the code to swipe is on-topic,
> all else isn't. The second case is none of your business, (unless you wrote
> the code and did not GPL it).

I'm certaily _not_ going to complain that code has been taken from
Linux - as you pointed out, that is perfectly legal.

The use of the Linux drivers in the Hurd is the closest thing[1] we've
got to a fork[2] of the Linux kernel.

So, yes, I am interested in seeing if they have done anything better
than we have, or have investigated possibilities we haven't.

John.

[1] I am _NOT_ saying that the Hurd is a fork of Linux, but that it's
about the only codebase which took Linux kernel code, and has let it
evolve separately from mainline over a number of years.  OK, the Vax
port has lived outside of mainline for a number of years too, but
that's mainly architecture specific changes.

[2] OK, ELKS is a fork of the Linux kernel, but not specifically
targeted at 386+ boxes.

John.