It kind of seems like the least interesting possible thing to do with Hurd, given its major architectural differences from Linux, is to make it as much like Linux as possible. I'm just not sure who the target users are for "Debian GNU/Hurd" or why they'd ever be better served by it than by Debian Linux?<p>Edit to add: That said, since Debian seems to be the main group willing to do any kind of binary distribution with Hurd, they get to call the shots.
This advantages page is interesting: <a href="http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/advantages.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/advantages.html</a>
> Switch to pthreads.<p>I'm not aware what they used before, but why pthreads? Isn't this perfect opportunity to try to develop something better, introduce new concepts (async, coroutines or some kind of userspace deterministic job management)? Not sure if backward compatibility is best way to go here, but maybe i'm just talking gibberish
Sorry to see them selling themselves short, as far as I can tell, coverage increased from 70% to 80% (not from 73%) -- so it's more an increase of 14%, not 10%!<p>Great to see this port moving forward, now I'm no longer certain my next playdate will be with Debian/kFreeBSD after all!
Sysvinit? Really?<p>systemd is becoming the standard free-Unix init. Even the OpenBSD folks acknowledge the need for a systemd-compatible init and have started a GSoC project for just that.