While fuse allows for a user-space file system implementation, you still have the same underlying file system requiring a privileged mode in the kernel. End users get to see some of the benefits of having a user-space file system while still being potentially affected by the underlying architecture's limitations. Here is some more information on the differences between monolithic kernels and microkernels: http://kilobug.free.fr/hurd/pres-en/...tml/node2.html
Originally Posted by TheBlackCat
A system-wide user-space file system is just one benefit the Hurd has over Linux, and there are a few others that I've read about but am not very technically familiar with. The link above points to a good document on the subject. The last thing I would add is that we constantly hear of developers and different types of users wanting to add/remove/change various aspects of the Linux kernel so that it is more suitable for their use. In particular, there is a constant struggle between the server, desktop, laptop, mobile and corporate worlds in regards to the changes they want (and don't want) to see in the kernel. A microkernel would be able to handle these differences much easier for a couple of reasons. The first is that, because the microkernel itself (gnumach for now) is responsible for much less functionality, it would be easier to handle the issues/requests that arise between these competing groups. The other reason is that the Hurd servers can be individually used or not depending on the type of use desired, and completely new Hurd servers which are specific to certain types of uses can be brought up as needed for these otherwise competing users. The Hurd is much more modular than Linux by design.
Etoile is decent but they seem to be reinventing the wheel a bit. Last time I went into their codebase they had basically cloned System preferences.app under the name of hardware.app or something similar and the individual preferences icons were implemented the same as in system preferences.app in GNUStep. They should have just been making add ons for systempreferences.app. Where they were intending to go originally seemed to be pretty interesting but they appear to have lost their focus recently. Every time I speak to the GNUStep/Etoile developers they seem to have these crazy outlandish ideas of what they want to accomplish with their project (dynamic GUIs building themselves at runtime, you can have a button ANYWHERE!!!! that's nice but I want it in a place I'm used to, not anywhere.), but they never get the implementation down to drive interest. They need to focus on the browser/desktop environment. It has mail/music/irc/text/programming. Web browser/Video/hardware config would finish the base DE so you could use it every day as your only platform. That would drive developers towards programming for it. Right now a gnu step app looks nothing like a gnome/kde app and you need gnome/kde apps to plug the holes in the platform. If they remove those holes, more people will move to the platform. Would anyone use a mac if it had no web browser, no video playback and no display/sound controls? Of course not. GNUStep has the same problem, the developers are trying to run before they can walk.
Last edited by DMJC; 10-17-2011 at 03:14 AM.
This thread is now about evaluating reindeer meat.
I find it's good.
And that's why releasing Hurd like it is now in a working state is absolutely pointless, because if we want something that works; there is Linux with a lot more drivers already.
Originally Posted by 89c51
So the only way for Hurd to succeed is being at least a thousand times more awesome in terms of design than Linux, otherwise it's just wasted time.
They want to replace google earth with open source software running with openstreetmap data? How exactly are you going to get satellite imagery from GPS traces? Right, didn't think it would work..... the data HAS to come from *somewhere*, and GPS traces won't provide it.
There is already Marble and there has already been data given by the US and other countries and states to Open Street Map.
Originally Posted by droidhacker
TomTom navigation, for example, already allows people to update maps by tracking in case of when road work is being done or streets have changed. It actually works better than the official maps, because those are drawn.
GPS tracking is more precise. It's like MS Office where it gets more usefull the more it is used.
Last edited by V!NCENT; 10-17-2011 at 09:45 AM.
You're missing the entire point, or have no idea what google earth actually IS.
Originally Posted by V!NCENT
Google earth is about the SATELLITE PICTURES. Not the street maps. I'm not arguing against the utility of GPS traces, but about the INAPPLICABILITY TO THE PROBLEM.
Its like your boss coming to you and telling you that they need rocket guidance software, and you give them a word processor. Your word processor may be really great, but does nothing to guide rockets -- you missed the point.
Satalite images are what was donated. Not streets.
I have to admit that they suck. (Zoomlevel not higher than the size of Germany, lol.)