diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'hurd')
| -rw-r--r-- | hurd/faq/which_microkernel.mdwn | 81 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | hurd/ng.mdwn | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | hurd/running/live_cd.mdwn | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | hurd/running/qemu.mdwn | 6 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | hurd/subhurd.mdwn | 48 |
5 files changed, 57 insertions, 84 deletions
diff --git a/hurd/faq/which_microkernel.mdwn b/hurd/faq/which_microkernel.mdwn deleted file mode 100644 index c5026afa..00000000 --- a/hurd/faq/which_microkernel.mdwn +++ /dev/null @@ -1,81 +0,0 @@ -[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2009, 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] - -[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable -id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this -document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or -any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant -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]]."]]"""]] - -[[!meta title="What happened to the L4 / Coyotos / Viengoos microkernels?"]] - -L4 was promising but happened to not be suitable for implementing a general-purpose operating system on top of it. See [[history/port_to_l4]] for the historical details. - -Coyotos is abandoned upstream - -Neal Walfield started working on a newly designed kernel called [[viengoos|microkernel/viengoos]]. Unfortunately, he currently lacks time and the projects it paused. - -In the meanwhile, people are thus continuing with [[microkernel/mach]]. - ---- - -IRC, #hurd, 2011-01-12. - -[[!taglink open_issue_documentation]] - - <Pete-J> Hello i am just curious of the development of Hurd - what's the - current mission on the microkernel i see projects like l4 and viengoos, - will one of these projects replace Mach? or will you stick with Mach - <Pete-J> as i understand is that Mach is a first generation microkernel - that's very old in design and causes alot of issues - <Pete-J> that's where l4 and viengoos comes in - they are trying to be the - next generation Mach - am i correct? - <neal> l4 is not a drop in replacement for Mach - <neal> it doesn't actually do much resource management - <neal> for instance, you still have to implement a memory manager - <neal> this is where several issues are with Mach - <neal> l4 doesn't address those issues; it punts to the operating system - <Pete-J> and what about viengoos? - <neal> it's unfinished - <neal> and it implemented some untested ideas - <neal> i.e., parts of viengoos were research - <neal> there has not been a sufficient evaluation of those ideas to - determine whether they are a good approach - <Pete-J> meaning that viengoos is a research kernel that could aid Mach? - <neal> I'm not sure I understand your question - <Pete-J> Well is viengoos trying to be a replacement for Mach, or will - viengoos be an experiment of new ideas that could be implemented in Mach? - <Pete-J> i am sorry for my limited english - <neal> viengoos was designed with a Hurd-like user-land in mind - <neal> in that sense it was a Mach replacement - <neal> (unlike L4) - <neal> viengoos consisted of a few experiments - <neal> one could implement them in mach - <neal> but it would require exposing new interfaces - <neal> in which case, I'm not sure you could call the result Mach - <Pete-J> Well as i understand you develop two microkernels side by side, - wouldnt it be more effective to investigate viengoos more and maybe move - the focus to viengoos? - <antrik> no - <antrik> having something working all the time is crucial - <antrik> it's very hard to motivate people to work on a project that might - be useful, in a couple of years, perhaps... - <Pete-J> Well Mach is meant to be replaced one day - i see no reason to - keep on developing it just because it works at this moment - <Pete-J> *if Mach is meant to be replaced - <antrik> it's not at all clear that it will be replaced by something - completely different. I for my part believe that modifying the existing - Mach is a more promising approach - <Pete-J> as i understand man power is something you need - and by spreading - out the developers just makes the progress more slow - <antrik> but even if it *were* to be replaced one day, it doesn't change - the fact that we need it *now* - <antrik> all software will be obsolete one day. doesn't mean it's not worth - working on - <antrik> the vast majority of work is not on the microkernel anyways, but - on the system running on top of it - <Pete-J> ahh i see - <antrik> manpower is not something that comes from nowhere. again, having - something working is crucial in a volunteer project like this - <antrik> there are no fixed plans diff --git a/hurd/ng.mdwn b/hurd/ng.mdwn index de33949d..481386a4 100644 --- a/hurd/ng.mdwn +++ b/hurd/ng.mdwn @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ This section explains the motivations behind the new design: * [[Issues_with_L4_Pistachio]] * [[Limitations_of_the_original_Hurd_design]] - * History of the [[history/port_to_L4]] + * History of the [[history/port_to_another_microkernel]] # Work already done diff --git a/hurd/running/live_cd.mdwn b/hurd/running/live_cd.mdwn index 42d85c5b..c9360594 100644 --- a/hurd/running/live_cd.mdwn +++ b/hurd/running/live_cd.mdwn @@ -1,4 +1,6 @@ -You can download a gzipped iso of a Hurd Live CD at +[[Arch Hurd|hurd/running/arch_hurd/]] offers Hurd LiveCDs at <http://www.archhurd.org/gethurd.php>. + +Also you can download a gzipped iso of a Hurd Live CD at <http://www.superunprivileged.org/hurd/live-cd/>. The Superunpriveleged crew also offers a tiny Hurd Live CD that is under 10 diff --git a/hurd/running/qemu.mdwn b/hurd/running/qemu.mdwn index c5b2cf1c..141ab2b1 100644 --- a/hurd/running/qemu.mdwn +++ b/hurd/running/qemu.mdwn @@ -27,6 +27,12 @@ Also you can use qemu to easily try one of our [[Hurd_LiveCDs|hurd/running/live_ # What is Needed to create a QEMU image +## Debian Installer + +Instructions for creating a qemu image from the install CDs from debian installer can be found in the README alongside the d-i Hurd images: <http://people.debian.org/~sthibault/hurd-i386/installer/cdimage/> + +## Old method + 1. First thing is to install [[/QEMU]]. 2. A [[grub]] boot disk for the floppy disk image needed for booting. The [0\.97 version](ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/grub/grub-0.97-i386-pc.ext2fs) works fine. I downloaded it and renamed to `floppy.img`. Alternatively, the Debian grub-disk package (up till version 0.97-28) is fine as well. 3. You will need a [Debian/Hurd installation CD](http://www.debian.org/ports/hurd/hurd-cd). K16 works fine. diff --git a/hurd/subhurd.mdwn b/hurd/subhurd.mdwn index cb4a40a8..b8e595d3 100644 --- a/hurd/subhurd.mdwn +++ b/hurd/subhurd.mdwn @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2007, 2008, 2010 Free Software Foundation, +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] [[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable @@ -21,6 +21,8 @@ possible to use [[debugging/gdb/noninvasive_debugging]], but this is less flexible.) Vice versa, it is also possible to use a subhurd to debug the *main* Hurd system, for example, the latter's root file system. +[[!toc levels=2]] + # Howto @@ -139,3 +141,47 @@ translator|translator/ext2fs]]'s [[PID]], but this is no problem, as currently [[PID]]s are visible across subhurd boundaries. (It is a [[!taglink open_issue_hurd]] whether this is the right thing to do in [[open_issues/virtualization]] contexts, but that's how it currently is.) + + +<a name="unit_testing"></a> +## Unit Testing + +freenode, #hurd channel, 2011-03-06: + +From [[open_issues/unit_testing]]. + + <youpi> it could be interesting to have scripts that automatically start a + sub-hurd to do the tests + <youpi> though that'd catch sub-hurd issues :) + <foocraft> so a sub-hurd is a hurd that I can run on something that I know + works(like linux)? + <foocraft> Virtual machine I would think + <foocraft> and over a network connection it would submit results back to + the host :p + * foocraft brain damage + <youpi> sub-hurd is a bit like chroot + <youpi> except that it's more complete + <foocraft> oh okay + <youpi> i.e. almost everything gets replaced with what you want, except the + micro-kernel + <youpi> that way you can even test the exec server for instance, without + risks of damaging the host OS + <foocraft> and we know the micro-kernel works correctly, right youpi? + <youpi> well, at least it's small enough that most bugs are not there + <foocraft> 1) all tests run in subhurd 2) output results in a place in the + subhurd 3) tester in the host checks the result and pretty-prints it 4) + rinse & repeat + <youpi> the output can actually be redirected iirc + <youpi> since you give the sub-hurd a "console" + <foocraft> youpi, yup yeah, so now it's more like chroot if that's the case + <youpi> it really looks like chroot, yes + <foocraft> but again, there's this subset of tests that we need to have + that ensures that even the tester running on the subhurd is valid, and it + didn't break because of a bug in the subhurd + <tschwinge> As long as you do in-system testing, you'll always (have to) + rely on some functionality provided by the host system. + <foocraft> the worst thing that could happen with unit testing is false + results that lead someone to try to fix something that isn't broken :p + <tschwinge> Yes. + <youpi> usually one tries to repeat the test by hand in a normal + environment |