GNU Hurd Begins Supporting Sound, Still Working On 64-bit & USB Support (phoronix.com) 312
An anonymous reader writes: GNU developer Samuel Thibault presented at this weekend's FOSDEM conference about the current state of GNU Hurd. He shared that over the past year they've started working on experimental sound support as their big new feature. They also have x86 64-bit support to the point that the kernel can boot, but not much beyond that stage yet. USB and other functionality remains a work-in-progress. Those curious about this GNU kernel project can find more details via the presentation media.
In future news (Score:4, Funny)
We're proud to announce that GNU Hurd can now save and load files.
Re: In future news (Score:2)
A billion trillion years from now, Hurd will be the only sentient being left. As the rest moved onto a higher plane of existence.
Re:In future news (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They're skipping over 8 inch disks?
What's the point (Score:5, Interesting)
What's the point of continuing with Hurd?
I mean, apart from making make laugh whenever they have "news".
Re: (Score:2)
Hurd probably does make make laugh!
Re:What's the point (Score:4, Interesting)
This is an interesting question. It's one thing if the HURD was making progress but based on this kind of news it would seem that technology is actually being developed faster than the kernel.
Hurd is the kernel component of GNU Emacs (Score:2)
Seriously, if you google "GNU Guix", you'll see that system startup scripts will be written in Lisp, the package manager will use Lisp to describe packages. Also, I note that the microkernel architecture will allow code that is traditionally part of the kernel to run in user mode and be written in Lisp.
It looks to me that they are building a new system that combines the best aspects of Unix and the legendary Lisp Machine. Which would be kind of cool.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The microkernel architecture makes it quite cool.
For that, why not go to Minix, which is FOSS under a BSD license, and is well documented, since AST's book is the documentation of the OS. It's a good learning platform, and has some neat features, like a 'reincarnation server' that lowers the priority of hung drivers until they are effectively killed, and restart them again.
Last I hurd, HURD is still based on Mach 3, which was a first generation microkernel, but a lot of developments have happened in microkernel concepts that have not made it to Ma
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If you want a microkernel architecture, then why not OS X or at least Darwin?
Because neither Darwin nor OS X have a microkernel architecture.
Re: (Score:3)
You mean Mach. That's the microkernel underlying both OSX and Hurd. OSX basically sticks one massive process on top of that for unix services. Hurd actually goes the full microkernel style. It's a research system which means unlike OSX its hardware support is poor but it can do interesting things from an OS perspective.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Its like trying to talk someone out of a cult they are following.
Re:What's the point (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
"you will no longer have to reboot system just to get rid of that stale lock on an accidentally removed USB disk or unmountable --bind mount in /proc/mounts due to non-existing user/usecount or due to some crashed driver locking up your PCI device etc."
Before or after my 115th birthday?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Before or after my 115th birthday?
I'm not sure when they'll succeed in getting USB going in GNU HURD, but I predict it will eventually become a killer feature of Windows 95.
Re: (Score:3)
Ok. So by which century will Hurd be usable enough that I can take advantage of the features? And don't say "now" because not having sound support or full workinf x86_64 support does not make a usable kernel.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What's the point (Score:4, Insightful)
Odd. Linux has sound, full 64-bit support, is free (as in both speech and beer), and I didn't have to write any of it.
I'm having trouble seeing HURD as being superior to that.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That's great and all, but if one can't actually use it it's rather useless to try to impress us with theoretical capabilities that will take countless more decades to actually happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, yes the old, tried and true "Fix it yourself, bum" response.
Re: (Score:3)
The sooner you will write that the sooner you will get it. That's all what Free software guarantees you and I find it superior to anything else.
So because it fulfills a need that's not actually there, never.
Re: (Score:2)
We know what microkernels are good for. What we don't know is what the Hurd is good for. Development is moving so slow that it is forever trying to keep up with the calendar.
Re:What's the point (Score:5, Insightful)
There is an implicit false dichotomy there, namely "ancient design monolithic kernel" and "ancient-style microkernel". There are many other choices.
Actually, since NTFS under Linux runs in user space, yes you can. In fact, for many kernel services (USB, file systems, networking, etc.), the kernel can call upon separate servers to handle those services. And that's another problem with microkernels: their design focuses not on what users need and the question of how to best provide that, but rather on a mechanism.
Re: (Score:2)
There is an implicit false dichotomy there, namely "ancient design monolithic kernel" and "ancient-style microkernel".
But in the choice between Linux or BSD on the one hand, and Hurd on the other, that is the choice we're being asked to accept. Well, unless the L4 or Viengoos variants of Hurd come good.
Re: (Score:3)
Adding to your comments, you won't have this issue in HURD due to the lack of USB removable device support, so that stale lock wouldn't exist to begin with.
Re:What's the point (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
How about it works, and does all the things I need, while microkernels don't. "Poor man's a workaround" beats "missing" any day of the week.
Re: (Score:3)
I really am not interested in using a kernel whose primary claim to fame is "we crash a lot, but when we do you don't need to reboot to recover!". Seems to me that's kind of missing the point. Why did your driver crash to start with? Try coding things better so that unexpected states do not cause the system to lock or crash and you will not need to worry about it. It's kind of like they're trying to sell canoes made out of cardboard, but throwing in unlimited duct tape at no extra charge.
Because you inevitably will experience that driver crash, and the reason can often be quite difficult to find, especially in today's environments. Trying to issue a bug fix for every little problem is like playing whack-a-mole, and all these bug fixes start to conflict with each other at some point, and then eventually somenody throws the whole hairball out in its entirety and makes a new one. The real programmer's way of solving this is to simply make the problems impossible to begin with, and while micro
Re: (Score:3)
What's the point of continuing with Hurd?
A long time ago you could've asked the same question about Linux. Just because it is not useful right now (or might never be...) doesn't mean it is not worth working on.
I'd much love to have a production-ready, open source microkernel OS to toy with.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think we need to wait till the year 2047 to answer the question, or maybe the year 4095.
Or maybe 2059. [xkcd.com]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You already have one. It's called Minix 3. It can be used today and even has full sound support and USB support since many years ago. The Hurd is just a one-man wankfest at this point.
Re: (Score:2)
Hardly production ready though. Does Minix support modern filesystems, aka ext3/ext4? M3 didn't last time i checked, but that was a while ago.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, you can most certainly mount ext4 under Minix, just use ext4fuse [github.com] since Minix 3 now supports FUSE. [minix3.org]
Hell, Minix 3 already sports some binary compatibility with NetBSD...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: What's the point (Score:3)
"news"
Properly called "gnus".
Re: (Score:2)
Careful of the dyslexic anti-gun crowd will be banning GNU.
Yeah, those darn SWJs...
Re:What's the point (Score:5, Insightful)
What's the point of continuing with Hurd?
For the same reason anyone does something they enjoy for fun and recreation, namely so we don't become hollow and joyless, reserved to asking on forums why other people do things they enjoy :P
I note you both read slashdot and posted to slashdot today, as well as aren't out working to do something "useful".
Don't you think it a tad off to spend your free time doing things you enjoy at the same time as questioning other people doing the same?
Re: (Score:2)
Today I worked on an addon for a popular open source javascript-based code editor, added some minor features to one of my open source projects and added a bunch of much needed unittests to another of my open source projects.
I also took a few minutes to read some Slashdot posts and make a few comments.
Amazingly, both can be done in a single day!
Re:What's the point (Score:4, Interesting)
Today I worked on an addon for a popular open source javascript-based code editor, added some minor features to one of my open source projects and added a bunch of much needed unittests to another of my open source projects.
I also took a few minutes to read some Slashdot posts and make a few comments.
Amazingly, both can be done in a single day!
Indeed! Just as the Hurd team can play on Hurd and contribute to other more useful projects :}
And I apologize for the accusation as well, it's just that the vast majority of people who question others free time activities have a high likelihood of both demanding productivity from others while not living to the same standard themselves.
I suppose it was mostly the fact I quite literally formed the thought "I wonder which of the top three posts will ask 'what is the point?'" as I clicked the article to open the comments, and there this was right at the top in spot 1 with that exact phrase and already modded up to max.
But I am pleasantly surprised for you shattering that expectation.
Re: (Score:2)
This is the best answer to the question. In fact, it is probably the only good answer to this particular question.
Re: (Score:2)
These are the advantages [gnu.org] and challenges [gnu.org] of the GNU kernel. If you want to understand why people like the Hurd kernel, I would suggest reading that.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't work on it, but if i would work in researching micro kernel OSes, I could imagine that a OS which is running (forget about USB or sound, for most purposes in OS research it is fine to run in an emulator) is a good base to start.
Re: (Score:3)
What's the point of continuing with Hurd?
Well the FSF doesn't really have an operating system kernel representative of the Free Software ideology. The closest thing is the Linux kernel which Linus has clearly said [lkml.org] simply uses the GPLv2 for tit-for-tat contributions because it is a good license, not because Linux is a free software project. Of course it also doesn't do copyright assignment to the FSF and also is not GPLv3 and is unlikely to migrate to further revisions of the GPL in future.
As the FSF evolves the Linux kernel's position on free soft
Re: (Score:3)
While this is true, RMS had abandoned HURD a long time ago, and instead took Linux, stripped it of any 'non-free' components, branded it 'libre-Linux' and promotes THAT. There are a few distros that the FSF does endorse - like Trisquel, gNewSense, and a few others that seem primarily localized for Latin America.
If I'm not mistaken, they wasted a lot of time in determining an ideal microkernel. What I don't get is why they didn't just fork Minix, which was there, put their fork under GPL3, and then make
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is probably a project to study the concept of operating systems.
You'd expect more papers to have come out of it, were that the case.
Re: (Score:2)
Minix is STILL primarily an OS for teaching OS concepts. And far more advanced than HURD. If you want to use it in a production environment, such an embedded systems, it's currently being developed for the Beaglebone. If one wants, one could try porting it to Raspberry Pi, Arduino, et al.
There is no reason, other than religious (extreme devotion to the GPL) to prefer HURD to Minix.
Re: What's the point (Score:3)
Make no mistake, Microsoft executives hold regular meetings where the agenda is: 1) How to make more money, 2) How to drive customers towards Microsoft products.
FTFY
Linux is not an industry juggernaut threatening to overtake Microsoft market share... Just curious, has Linux share of the desktop market exceeded the current (2016) market share of Microsoft Vista
Re: (Score:2)
Open software (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The fact that something *can* be audited is meaningless if no one actually *is* constantly auditing it.
Re: (Score:3)
Couldn't be bothered to read my entire sentence? Unless domain experts are constantly auditing he code it means very little that Joe Average can browse the code.
Heartbleed (Score:2)
Then, when a project becomes more widely used, there will be domain experts looking at the sources
How long did it take for Heartbleed to become public?
Many kinds of freedom (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It does not make sense for the rm command to render 3D fractals.
I mean, what if I had a car into which I put a "free" operating system. Then I suddenly couldn't switch to the highest gear, and the high beam lights wouldn't work, and the stereo would randomly not power up properly. Surely it does make sense for my car to do those things? Surely using this "free" OS would limit my freedom of using the car in the way that I want, and in the way that it is originally designed?
Re: (Score:2)
I was wondering the other day what the limits of tolerance should be in Western society. I concluded that the only thing we mustn't tolerate is attempts to replace tolerance with intolerance. In other words, sort of political GPL: you have the freedom to do anything you want, except take that freedom away from others. As an example, after the overthrow of Mubarak in Egypt, the democratically elected government set about using its mandate to dismantle democracy ("one person, one vote - one time"), and so had
Re: (Score:2)
We have sound! (Score:2)
Hopefully one of the days we'll support that Internet thing I hear is all the rage with the kids these days.
Wow (Score:2)
He shared that over the past year they've started working on experimental sound support as their big new feature.
Truly, we live in the future.
great news!!! (Score:2)
Hurd? (Score:2)
By the time Hurd hits the streets, we're going to need a 128-bit version. I wonder if there'll be a Duke Nukem port?
Sound? (Score:2)
There's a guy that can help you with sound support. While he's at it, he could replace your Hurd kernel with his new init system.
Just an observation... (Score:3)
Scanning through the discussion, it looks like conversations relating to HURD get ugly fast. Obviously there are strong feelings at work here.
I view the whole thing somewhat with nostalgia, as I was babysitting Vaxen running BSD when I first heard of HURD. Regardless of its merits or lack of same, it seems to be on track for the world's record for slowest development of any currently developed OS. Kinda the Duke Nukem Forever of operating systems.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone cares about it for some reason. I don't think anyone, even the developers themselves, are claiming that Hurd will be useful in and of itself.
If you ask me I suspect it's a long lead-up to a joke about playing DNF on Hurd...
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, that's exactly what RMS did eons ago. That project is no longer his, and I wonder whether it's even a GNU project any more. It's probably just some hobbyists who found a bit of time to tinker w/ it, and got a bit of sound working, and some level of USB support.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
There is no reason that HURD couldn't have come up w/ a stable base for x86, and then considered x64. Actually, given their goal of running only libre software - presumably software that is GPL 3 or AGPL 3, chances are that they'd not use x11 either. Probably come up w/ something of their own - like maybe a GNUstep based UX. Or just live and work in emacs
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe next version. Maybe.
Re: (Score:2)
Whoa slow down bro! That's like a decade too advanced for Hurd.
Re:Experimental audio support (Score:5, Funny)
Does that include Sound Blaster for IBM's MicroChannel Architecture?
No, currently it only supports setting the bit that puts a positive pulse on the PC speaker. Work is in progress on support for resetting that bit, so in the meantime it's a maximum of one click sound per session.
The cool part, though, is that with the microkernel architecture, this is all managed via userspace code!
Re: (Score:2)
Does that include Sound Blaster for IBM's MicroChannel Architecture?
Yes, the support is still spotty. Dr. Sbaitso announces himself quite nicely but the talking parrot still has trouble laughing, unfortunately. This is expected to be fixed by 2021.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, even he's wiped his hands of it years ago. Hurd is just a one-man wankfest at this point.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, even he's wiped his hands of it years ago. Hurd is just a one-man wankfest at this point.
Hasn't some schizophrenic nutter developed his own OS more useful than the Hurd in ASM already, starting after the Hurd? I mean, he has a leg up because he's more than one person, but still
Re:It's important for a tech ecosystem (Score:4, Interesting)
I agree.
But they have to be usable.
Technically, FreeDOS had USB before GNU Hurd.
And 64-bit.
And that had to emulate a Microsoft piece of software not that much older than itself too, to the point that all DOS programs (even things like BIOS Flashing utilities) still work.
GNU Hurd is just a dead-end. An intellectual project of little practical use. It's like pushing for MINIX or similar. Yes, alternative OS are all good. But only if they are vaguely in the same decades as the machines you can buy today.
Re: (Score:2)
GNU Hurd is just a dead-end. An intellectual project of little practical use.
Yeah and? This is "news for nerds", not "news for practical businessmen".
Articles on hurd == news for nerds
Pretty much by definition.
Also, it's not of no practical use. It may never be a mainstream OS, but features of microkernels as they have proven useful have slowly been working their way into monolithic kernels. Like modules, userspace drivers, user space graphics, users space sound mixing and etc. Research projects serve well
Re: (Score:2)
Linux started to skyrocket when large companies like Red Hat, HP, IBM and Novell picked it up.
Here's the secret: when you have a big of team full-time engineers working on something, the speed of development will quickly accelerate to completely new levels. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The greatest salesman in history.
Heresy!!! [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
1995 all over (Score:5, Funny)
I do recall, in the early days of slashdot that the GNU/Hurd enthusiasts were proclaiming how silly people were to be wasting time on Linux, when Hurd was just around the corner. I was in high school then. It's great to hear that audio works, maybe one of my grandchildren one day will be able to actually use it for video.
Re: (Score:2)
So, let's be clear on this: their source code quality is SO crappy, that they can't recompile the 32-bit files in 64-bit and have them work.
The kernel can boot, so they've done all the ugly assembly bits; the fact that the rest won't run right means that the code implicitly assumes that pointers are 32 bit. Wonderful. What a great advance in technology. I'm sure that once they've worked through this issue, the rest of the code is 100% clean and bug free.