faq/which_microkernel: Resurrect Olaf's text, and work on it some more.

2 files changed, 12 insertions, 23 deletions

diff --git a/history/port_to_another_microkernel.mdwn b/history/port_to_another_microkernel.mdwn
index b347cf38..a8ec3fe7 100644
--- a/history/port_to_another_microkernel.mdwn
+++ b/history/port_to_another_microkernel.mdwn
@@ -11,9 +11,16 @@ License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
 
 [[!meta title="Porting the Hurd to another microkernel"]]
 
-At first, there was an effort to port the Hurd from the [[Mach
-microkernel|microkernel/mach]] to the [[L4_microkernel_family|microkernel/l4]].
-Then the story continued...
+<!-- This page shares some text with faq/which_microkernel.  -->
+
+It is a frequently asked question, [[faq/which_microkernel]] the Hurd should be
+based upon assuming that [[microkernel/Mach]] is no longer considered state of
+the art, and it is well known that there has been a lot of discussion about
+this topic, and also some code produced, but then, years later, the Hurd is
+still based on [[GNU Mach|microkernel/mach/gnumach]].
+
+At first, there was an effort to directly port the Hurd to the
+[[L4_microkernel_family|microkernel/l4]].  Then the story continued...
 
 [[!toc levels=2]]
 
@@ -139,7 +146,7 @@ As of 2005, development of Hurd/L4 has stopped.
 # Coyotos
 
 Following that, an attempt was started to use the kernel of the
-[[microkernel/Coyotos]] system.  As Coyotos is an object capability system
+[[microkernel/Coyotos]] system.  As Coyotos is an object-capability system
 througout, the microkernel would obviously be more suitable for this purpose;
 and it looked pretty promising in the beginning.  However, further
 investigations found that there are some very fundamental philosophical
@@ -152,7 +159,7 @@ actual code.)
 
 By now (that is, after 2006), there were some new [[microkernel/L4]] variants
 available, which added protected [[IPC]] paths and other features necessary for
-object capability systems; so it might be possible to implement the Hurd on top
+object-capability systems; so it might be possible to implement the Hurd on top
 of these.  However, by that time the developers concluded that microkernel
 design and system design are interconnected in very intricate ways, and thus
 trying to use a third-party microkernel will always result in trouble.  So Neal
diff --git a/history/port_to_another_microkernel/discussion.mdwn b/history/port_to_another_microkernel/discussion.mdwn
index 1a06c8ba..f2161195 100644
--- a/history/port_to_another_microkernel/discussion.mdwn
+++ b/history/port_to_another_microkernel/discussion.mdwn
@@ -8,24 +8,6 @@ Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.  A copy of the license
 is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation
 License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
 
-I can't say that I like the merge of FAQ entry an Hurd/L4 page. The stuff taken
-from the L4 page creates the impression that Mach is a relic that we urgently
-need to get rid of -- an impression I carefully tried to avoid in my own
-writeup. Also, it's way too long IMHO. (In fact my own writeup is already on
-the fringe of being too wordy I fear.) And I don't think that bare links to
-other pages make good FAQ answers in general.
-
-IMHO the original FAQ entry should be restored (with some details fixed); while
-the Hurd/L4 page can be referenced for further details.
-
--- antrik
-
-> OK, I understand (and accept) your rationale; [[!taglink
-> open_issue_documentation]].  --[[tschwinge]]
-
-
----
-
 IRC, #hurd, 2011-01-12.
 
 [[!taglink open_issue_documentation]]