One more thing... (was Re: Wondering about Ncurses instructions)

Björn Lindberg at
Fri Jun 14 14:34:39 PDT 2002

Archaic wrote:

> First, unless your definition of microkernel is different that what I've
> read, Linux is a microkernel. It started monolithic as maintenance was
> not the design goal. Instead at the time, speed of coding was the more

I don't think Linux is considered a micro-kernel in the traditional
sense, and it is /definitely/ not a micro-kernel in the way the Hurd is.
I agree with Jack Brown (his reply to you).

As to why the Hurd is never finished, I think that is in a way to blame
on the GNU way of always trying to make things "better". Look at some of
the common GNU tools. They are all trying to be "better" than the
standard variants, like date, bison, tar, etc.

Emacs is a grandiose project (in size :-)), where the goal is set so
much higher than to simply create an editor. I read somewhere that they
are going for "a fully programmable word processor".

Now, where does Hurd fit in? Hurd is not just Yet Another Attempt at a
UNIX Kernel, like Linux started. Hurd is destined to be "better" than
that. I believe that is why the can never get it ready. :-)

When I read the above, I realise it might sound a bit negative. I
actually think that most GNU tools are indeed better, and Emacs is
religiously my choice of editor. Sometimes they go a bit overboard
though. :-)

Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-chat' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-chat mailing list