Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GNU Hurd 0.6 released

permalink.gmane.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 118 posts

Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released

#91

Post by legulere »

duncan_bayne wrote: post #2

I'm sure there will be a few people chuckling at the news that the Hurd is still under development. Yesterday I learned from one of my colleagues that the newer versions of OSX will only run kernel extensions signed by Apple. The need for the GNU project is as great now as it was in the 1980s.

I wonder why still so many people fall for the bullshit around GNU.

You can turn off the kernel needing signed kernel extensions. It is a big annoyance - so much is true. You don't tell the reason why Apple is doing it - Security. That's the reason why Linux is also adopting it [1]. You do this to put Apple as the big evil in contrast to our saviour GNU (and RMS is Jesus or what?). But the thing is that you don't need GNU for a system with free software. Nobody needs Hurd when we have Linux. We also don't need GCC anymore as we have LLVM+Clang. The GNU project doesn't like that as they're becoming less and less needed.

[1]: http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.7#head-a04c2b7827323d26a659...

Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released

#92

Post by legulere »

beefsack wrote: post #44
JohnTHaller wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windows code signing is performed using a certificate available from the usual certificate authorities (Verisign, Thawte, etc, etc) that you pay to verify your identity and issue you a signing certificate. Apple is the only one that enables OSX signing and it's done in conjunction with your Apple ID that you pay Apple a yearly fee to enable developer abilities on.

The fact that this became a back and forth of people arguing which is worst just highlights the fact that this sort of low level infrastructure needs to be free and open.

Yes we indeed need freedom to install kernel boot kits wherever we want.

Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released

#93

Post by lmm »

pwaring wrote: post #86
duncan_bayne wrote: post #2

I'm sure there will be a few people chuckling at the news that the Hurd is still under development. Yesterday I learned from one of my colleagues that the newer versions of OSX will only run kernel extensions signed by Apple. The need for the GNU project is as great now as it was in the 1980s.

The need for the GNU project and philosophy is still great, I'm not sure there's a need for the Hurd though. We already have a popular, well-supported (by companies and individuals) kernel which is available under the GPL (and another which is available under the BSD licence, which provides useful competition). I think it would be better if the GNU project put their full weight behind Linux rather than trying to work…

Linux has plenty of issues. It's more modular than it was it's a source-level monolith which means very poor support for old drivers that weren't merged into the tree for whatever reason. The recent tight coupling to systemd is making it much more so.

The HURD design was always more elegant, and should result in a more stable and secure system. That's absolutely a project worth pursuing.

Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released

#94

Post by lmm »

bandrami wrote: post #81
kinghajj wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well technically yes, because of semver 2.0's rule #4: "Anything may change at any time. The public API should not be considered stable."

Nope. 0.6 cannot be a correct semver number, as it lacks a patch level.

I never understood that. Under semver 0.6.0 → 0.7.0 has exactly the same semantics as 0.6.0 → 0.6.1 (because MAJOR==0). So why insist on the extra number?

Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released

#95

Post by Joeboy »

pwaring wrote: post #86
duncan_bayne wrote: post #2

I'm sure there will be a few people chuckling at the news that the Hurd is still under development. Yesterday I learned from one of my colleagues that the newer versions of OSX will only run kernel extensions signed by Apple. The need for the GNU project is as great now as it was in the 1980s.

The need for the GNU project and philosophy is still great, I'm not sure there's a need for the Hurd though. We already have a popular, well-supported (by companies and individuals) kernel which is available under the GPL (and another which is available under the BSD licence, which provides useful competition). I think it would be better if the GNU project put their full weight behind Linux rather than trying to work…

I'm pretty sure Hurd development is still limping along because individuals are interested in working on it, not because GNU is allocating resources that would otherwise be devoted to Linux.

Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released

#96

Post by crististm »

azinman2 wrote: post #70
bsaul wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that the weirdest UX feature of HN. In the age of mobile, having two 10px high buttons with opposite meaning separated by 5pixel is absurd.

Do you need a minimum karma level for that? I don't ever have any down arrows and have always wondered. I'm near 500 karma so kinda surprised. Probably in some faq that I'm too lazy to lookup

Many years ago you did not need any karma to down-vote anything. That has changed a long time ago and for years I refrained to get higher karma just to regain the ability to down-vote.

It seems there is a 500 karma threshold for down-voting comments and another one to down-vote posts.

Edit: And another karma level to down-vote comments beaten to death.

Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released

#97

Post by gtirloni »

lmm wrote: post #93
pwaring wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The need for the GNU project and philosophy is still great, I'm not sure there's a need for the Hurd though. We already have a popular, well-supported (by companies and individuals) kernel which is available under the GPL (and another which is available under the BSD licence, which provides useful competition). I think it would be better if the GNU project put their full weight behind Linux rather than trying to work…

Linux has plenty of issues. It's more modular than it was it's a source-level monolith which means very poor support for old drivers that weren't merged into the tree for whatever reason. The recent tight coupling to systemd is making it much more so. The HURD design was always more elegant, and should result in a more stable and secure system. That's absolutely a project worth pursuing.

Are you saying the Linux kernel will show issues if not running in cooperation with systemd? Where's the tight coupling?

Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released

#98

Post by Angostura »

UweSchmidt wrote: post #74
azinman2 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it? But then who polices it? Id be curious to know of an instance where apple abuses their power and denied a competitor the ability to sign a binary. Personally I'd much rather have someone like apple be able to have some kind of audit where by malicious extensions can be revoked. There might be some super clever way that you could do this with the block chain or the like, but ultimately I don't know how this d…

"Id be curious to know of an instance where apple abuses their power and denied a competitor the ability to sign a binary." This will happen the instant it becomes opportune, Apple being a business, having shareholders and all that. No precedent is needed (they surely have used their power to deny stuff that is not "malicious" in the App Store before).

> This will happen the instant it becomes opportune

You'll see. Personally, I'm happy to be at least notified when something random attempts to install an unsigned kernel extension.

Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released

#99

Post by belorn »

legulere wrote: post #92
beefsack wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that this became a back and forth of people arguing which is worst just highlights the fact that this sort of low level infrastructure needs to be free and open.

Yes we indeed need freedom to install kernel boot kits wherever we want.

I think most people would just like to be able to install software on devices they have bought. Proper respect for property laws, sale laws and so on.

Re: GNU Hurd 0.6 released

#100

Post by fleitz »

lmm wrote: post #93
pwaring wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The need for the GNU project and philosophy is still great, I'm not sure there's a need for the Hurd though. We already have a popular, well-supported (by companies and individuals) kernel which is available under the GPL (and another which is available under the BSD licence, which provides useful competition). I think it would be better if the GNU project put their full weight behind Linux rather than trying to work…

Linux has plenty of issues. It's more modular than it was it's a source-level monolith which means very poor support for old drivers that weren't merged into the tree for whatever reason. The recent tight coupling to systemd is making it much more so. The HURD design was always more elegant, and should result in a more stable and secure system. That's absolutely a project worth pursuing.

It should result in a more stable and secure system, however, it doesn't run on 64 bit chips... and runs on only a few pieces of 32 bit kit.
Post reply on HN