GNU Hurd

Jeroen Dekkers jeroen at
Sun Mar 17 02:29:28 UTC 2002

On Sat, Mar 16, 2002 at 05:00:59PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> >From jeroen at Sat Mar 16 13:43:27 2002
> >> Any OS that nobody likes to run cdrecord on could be considered dead these
> >> days....
> >You're a funny dude. And arrogant one, thinking that cdrecord is such
> >an important program. I can name dozens of programs which are far more
> >important than cdrecord and most of them already run on GNU/Hurd. I
> >would recommend people who want to port programs to GNU/Hurd to port
> >some of the more important and useful programs instead of porting
> >cdrecord.
> You are the arrogant person!

> I am only telling you facts. 

The fact is that the Hurd isn't death. The opposite is the fact: the
Hurd has more developers today than it ever had in its existence. The
conclusion that the Hurd is death is based on your arrogant assumption
that cdrecord is one of the most important programs.

> So far not a single person did show
> interest for a HURD port of cdrecord and cdrecord is one of the free
> programs wit the highest interest. 

Cdrecord one of the free programs with the highest interest? That's a

> Name a non-trivial program that has
> been ported because there was a demand for it.

There are dozens. Read the debian-hurd mailinglist archive and look in
the debian bug tracking system if you want to know them. I can only
guess what you mean with "non-trivial program" so I can't really name
good examples.

> >I know OSes with more potential than 80% of the OSes cdrecord is
> >ported to. Also cdrecord runs on some really dead OSes (NT-3.5, BEos).=20
> There are more then zero people with interest for BeOS, there are zero people
> with interest for cdrecord on HURD. 

I guess you can't read the mind of all the people on this planet, so
tou actually mean:
There are more than zero people who mailed you with interest about
BeOS. There were zero people who mailed you about the Hurd.

Now BeOS isn't developped anymore according to my knowledge. The Hurd
is under heavy development at the moment. I consider the Hurd a less
dead system than BeOS based on this fact.

Based on the fact that one person mailed you with interest about a
Hurd port today, it's nice that since today the Hurd isn't dead

> It there were people doing everydays
> work on HURD, then there would be interest for cdrecord on HURD. 

I don't want cdrecord because I don't have a burner in m
I probably don't want to use cdrecord on GNU/Hurd even if I had a

> This is
> a simple statement so even you should understand it.

Just two simple statements so you can even understand that cdrecord
isn't the most important program on earth.
> Sorry, but I don't like to continue a discussion this way if it is biased
> by your way of only counting ideas if they are compatible with your mind.

Your conclusions are based on wrong assumptions. You are just
spreading FUD by saying that the Hurd is death. I'll keep telling the
true story if people are telling lies on this mailinglist.

Jeroen Dekkers
Jabber supporter - Jabber ID: jdekkers at
Debian GNU supporter -
IRC: jeroen at openprojects
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the Discussion mailing list