Re: about GNU Hurd

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   The flaws are real.  I recall that at least in part of that
   discussion I thought that the flaws were not absolutely fatal, that
   the Hurd on GNU Mach could still be useful for some things.

Those flaws could also be fixed without rewritting everything, as was
shown by several people including the people who actually wrote the
Hurd.  Sadly, nobody wishes to waste time working on something that
will (not might, but will) be discarded.

   I don't recall what my conclusion was at the end of the discussion.

Your conclusion was `work on both'.

   But it is clear that our best hope for making the Hurd really good
   is Hurd-NG.

Anyone who think that Hurd-NG will not have as flaws just like the
Hurd currently has should not write software.  And as Olaf pointed
out, nobody, not even Marcus, knows what Hurd-NG will look like, there
is no goal, not even an idea behind it.