Re: Reviewing Hurd-on-L4 (and considering its future?)

[arnuld]

> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:36 PM, Rick Hodgin <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> Forwarding my two replies sent directly to Paul and RMS to the list

> ...SNIP...

> I contacted Richard Stallman in 2012 and asked him about continuing
> development on the HURD kernel.  He told me that it wasn't really need-
> ed anymore because we have Linux.  I tried to convince him that GNU
> needed its own kernel and we shouldn't rely upon Linux, but he told
> me that instead of spending time working on a GNU kernel, I should
> move to work on making a compatible Adobe reader, and other such
> practical applications.

Exactly.

That is similar reply I got from him back in 2010 when I wanted to
work on HURD. I was young and so much passionate that even my gravatar
was HURD logo. I kinda lost it since then. But I think he has a point,
Linux kernel is under GPLv2 + binary blobs. Working on removing those
blobs is a good idea.

There are 2 points, Linus never liked GPLv3 and that is why Linux may
never be under GPLv3 or 4 or any newer versions that come out. Free
Software licenses need to be in updated when situation demands.
M$-Novell deal (Suse Linux) created a situation which led to the
update of GPLv2 to v3.  2nd, L4 is microkernel, much better than
monolithic Linux. Because of these reasons, I prefer to work on HURD
than removing binary blobs from Linux or working on other Free
Software. In 1980s, RMS left kernel work and put more effort on
creating Free Software which runs on the top of a free kernel because
there were so many licensing/legal problems with 4.4 BSD and Mach
microkernel and work was being delayed and delayed and then someone
else was already putting GNU software on a kernel called "Freaks"
(that was the name Linus gave but later it was changed to Linux). I
would have preferred to work on a kernel first but I was never a
kernel developer in 1980s and I don't have first hand experience of
Free Software movement of 1980s and I am not RMS :) .