I have no problem with HURD itself, just Stallman’s ridiculous claims about the HURD…that it is somehow realy advanced (80’s design)…and that it is useable today (doesn’t even run half the software Linux and the BSDs do)…these statements are just absolutely ludicrousĮveryone seems to bash RMS - are you doing it because everyone seems to think it’s cool to do it or do you have a real reason to. HURD is interesting from a concepts and research OS standpoint, but does anyone honestly ever expect to the HURD to be a truly useful OS? by the time they even acheive the functionality of Minix they’ll be decades behind the rest of the world’s OSes…and how much longer before this is server grade? last I knew, HURD could barely run XFree, let alone a desktop environment of any sort When will stallman get it…HURD is developing slowly because the world has lost interest in it (if the world even ever had much interest in it)…and yes it does reveal it’s 1980’s era design in several ways…micro kernels are a glorious academic failure, nearly every system that started off as a microkernel has morphed into a modular monolithic or faded into obscurity (Windows NT – morphed, NextSTEP/OS X – morphed, mkLinux – faded, lites – faded)…Īlso, Stallman is definitely out to get Linux because his control-freak personality clashes with the refusal of Linus to be Stallman’s bitch… (Hell, I’m sure I’ve got an old 2Gb drive lying around somewhere…) Sure, dual booting is fine when you explicitly trust the OS (such as my wife’s machine, which dual boots Win98SE & Gentoo, or my work server (still to be migrated) which is currently running Win2K Server & Win2K Prof.) However, if that trust isn’t there (such as an initial release of a new OS that has already had some form of file system issues, it gets its own disk and thus save me a heap of heartache! Why? Because I never bother putting the covers back on my machine, so I’ll just whip the poor bugger’s IDE cable out, throw it in another drive and voila! Robert is your father’s wife’s brother!

When a “feature” of Win95a toasted the partition table on my OS/2 box (which subsequently killed the filebase for my BBS!) I have taken to the theory that when testing a new OS, that it should have its own hard drive.

Parrot security os 3.0