I know this is in jest, but because of the "hurr durr" connotations, only the absolute most bearded of free software zealot neckbeards are going to ever run GNU Hurd beyond simplytest driving it.
Open source continues its unbroken streak of showing us why naming things is important.
Does anyone more familiar with Hurd know how they addressed performance issues encountered by other Mach-based kernels? I remember reading that one of Mach's bottlenecks was validating that each IPC message had proper permissions/access when sending them between processes due to the large number and frequency of messages.
Mach's problem wasn't that it had slow IPC, but rather that in terms of microkernels, Mach was pretty damn big.
There are some very fast microkernels out there, like the L4 family, which negate the IPC overhead of microkernels by being small enough to fit entirely in the L2 cache of most processors. Linux may only have the single IPC call per round trip, but it's a fucking huge kernel and there is typically a ton of cache thrashing going on.
Are you saying there is cache thrashing because callers often sercice rheid own requests themselves? If you don't want to service requests in the same thread, doesnt it mean you have to spend entire core(s) for running the kernel?
Yes, you want to do more IPC, its basically linear with the increase in performance. So the amount of overhead stays the same basically. At least in IPC benchmarks and those tend to be important.
> 9P is perhaps not as robust or as fault tolerant as NFS
How is it not robust? What metric did they use? Fault tolerance is not explained here so I don't know what they mean by this. You can use aan(8) on 9front which runs on each side of the connection and holds it open if the network breaks, then resume on reconnect.
I hold out hope for (human) work to coalesce on creating a stable/secure microkernel (SeL4 anybody???) and getting it mature enough to build an OS on.
Once that is done, then you build out the absolutely massive collection of userspace drivers that would be needed to replace linux by leveraging LLMs and other automated techniques. The good part is that by keeping the drivers in userspace, the security risk of generative techniques for driver development is pretty low.
While I upvoted this, as being true for the general population, for me Linux has made it on the desktop (and laptop) much more than 2 decades ago, around 2003, when the remaining problems that had forced me to use dual-booting with Windows had been solved (i.e. when it became possible in Linux to play movies, read DVDs and use TV tuners). When that happened, I wiped out Windows from my computers.
If you have a pro to help you, already for a long time Linux has been fine on the desktop for anyone. My parents, over 80 years old, have used Linux on their PCs for many years, and they did not even know what "Linux" is. That was possible because I installed and configured for them the operating system and all the applications they needed for reading and writing documents, Internet browsing, e-mail, music listening and movie watching etc.
Windows is easy only because it comes preinstalled. I have installed Windows at work on many kinds of computers and during installation I have encountered much more problems impossible to solve for a non-expert than when installing Linux.
As a sign in the window of a tiny shop in my quiet suburb says "Laptop and phone repairs - Windows, Linux and MacOS". If that doesn't count, I don't know what else could.
Eric S. Raymond opines that now that Microsoft makes its profits mainly from Azure, some product owner in Microsoft will be allowed to enshittify Windows for collection short-term profit, thus paving way for Linux on the desktop.
First there will be the Desktop Linux of the year
breakthrough. Evil folks say it will coincide with
the end of the world via a total global catastrophy
but these people don't understand beauty - such as
TempleOS, the most perfect OS of all times.
I can't help but feel disappointed that after 35 years the first thing they're talking about is an SVG logo. I mean, there's a certain novelty that it was made on a laptop running Hurd itself, but still I was left with a sense that progress is meandering and whimsical.
I remember being excited by Hurd's ambitions after studying Tanenbaum's OS book in university and drinking the microkernel kool-aid; now I'm too old and jaded to believe it'll be a viable alternative.
Next year will be the year of GNU Hurd, as well as
The Desktop Linux Year and people really using
HaikuOS on real hardware for years. You read it here
first!
It seems Samuel Thibault is still there, sweet.
ps: some slides from earlier this year https://fosdem.org/2026/events/attachments/7FZXHF-updates_on...
full vid here https://fosdem.org/2026/schedule/event/7FZXHF-updates_on_gnu...
Cool to finally see some small silly tech stuff here that isn't trying to make money.
You are calling a Linux (sorry, GNU/Linux) killer small silly stuff?
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as GNU/Linux, is in fact, just Linux.
7 replies →
Of course it’s a large and complex project in terms of code, but in terms of industrial impact it’s unlikely to ever amount to much.
Linux just has too much momentum and there are too few real benefits to Hurd.
This is not GNU/Linux. GNU Hurd is a totally different kernel.
I know this is in jest, but because of the "hurr durr" connotations, only the absolute most bearded of free software zealot neckbeards are going to ever run GNU Hurd beyond simplytest driving it.
Open source continues its unbroken streak of showing us why naming things is important.
3 replies →
[flagged]
Does anyone more familiar with Hurd know how they addressed performance issues encountered by other Mach-based kernels? I remember reading that one of Mach's bottlenecks was validating that each IPC message had proper permissions/access when sending them between processes due to the large number and frequency of messages.
Mach's problem wasn't that it had slow IPC, but rather that in terms of microkernels, Mach was pretty damn big.
There are some very fast microkernels out there, like the L4 family, which negate the IPC overhead of microkernels by being small enough to fit entirely in the L2 cache of most processors. Linux may only have the single IPC call per round trip, but it's a fucking huge kernel and there is typically a ton of cache thrashing going on.
Are you saying there is cache thrashing because callers often sercice rheid own requests themselves? If you don't want to service requests in the same thread, doesnt it mean you have to spend entire core(s) for running the kernel?
Is that a bottleneck anymore? Maybe something that was appreciable in 1994 isn't a big performance hit in 2026?
Yes, you want to do more IPC, its basically linear with the increase in performance. So the amount of overhead stays the same basically. At least in IPC benchmarks and those tend to be important.
Making that fast is fundamental to any OS.
Isn't it even worse now? The faster computers get, the more that software-induced bottlenecks hurt.
6 replies →
Is there reason to think they've addressed them?
Lets get to a usable feature set before optimization.
> I plan to build bootable images and boot the kernel on Apple M1
GuixSD with GNU Hurd would be a really fun way to repurpose an old MBP.
My M1 is currently running Guix on Fedora, I would love to see this!
> 9pfs for the Hurd
From the wiki:
> 9P is perhaps not as robust or as fault tolerant as NFS
How is it not robust? What metric did they use? Fault tolerance is not explained here so I don't know what they mean by this. You can use aan(8) on 9front which runs on each side of the connection and holds it open if the network breaks, then resume on reconnect.
I hope Hurd has its day. Maybe in 100 years or something.
Instead of rewriting Bun, maybe Anthropic should have thrown some tokens at finishing Hurd.
I hold out hope for (human) work to coalesce on creating a stable/secure microkernel (SeL4 anybody???) and getting it mature enough to build an OS on.
Once that is done, then you build out the absolutely massive collection of userspace drivers that would be needed to replace linux by leveraging LLMs and other automated techniques. The good part is that by keeping the drivers in userspace, the security risk of generative techniques for driver development is pretty low.
We'd have to name it Turd then.
1 reply →
Relevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1508/
Fun fact: Duke Nukem Forever shipped before GNU Hurd.
Maybe they are still in the same level of forever. Oh well.
1 reply →
Nah, Claude will finish it over night
That's what they tell us, but for some reason software still looks just as bad or worse than it ever has.
Hurd will have its day once Linux makes it on the desktop :-)
While I upvoted this, as being true for the general population, for me Linux has made it on the desktop (and laptop) much more than 2 decades ago, around 2003, when the remaining problems that had forced me to use dual-booting with Windows had been solved (i.e. when it became possible in Linux to play movies, read DVDs and use TV tuners). When that happened, I wiped out Windows from my computers.
If you have a pro to help you, already for a long time Linux has been fine on the desktop for anyone. My parents, over 80 years old, have used Linux on their PCs for many years, and they did not even know what "Linux" is. That was possible because I installed and configured for them the operating system and all the applications they needed for reading and writing documents, Internet browsing, e-mail, music listening and movie watching etc.
Windows is easy only because it comes preinstalled. I have installed Windows at work on many kinds of computers and during installation I have encountered much more problems impossible to solve for a non-expert than when installing Linux.
Linux has made it to the desktop, packaged inside VMs served by Apple, Microsoft and Google.
14 replies →
As a sign in the window of a tiny shop in my quiet suburb says "Laptop and phone repairs - Windows, Linux and MacOS". If that doesn't count, I don't know what else could.
Linux hit 10% desktop usage recently
4 replies →
Eric S. Raymond opines that now that Microsoft makes its profits mainly from Azure, some product owner in Microsoft will be allowed to enshittify Windows for collection short-term profit, thus paving way for Linux on the desktop.
https://x.com/esrtweet/status/2084605702203424896
1 reply →
First there will be the Desktop Linux of the year breakthrough. Evil folks say it will coincide with the end of the world via a total global catastrophy but these people don't understand beauty - such as TempleOS, the most perfect OS of all times.
I can't help but feel disappointed that after 35 years the first thing they're talking about is an SVG logo. I mean, there's a certain novelty that it was made on a laptop running Hurd itself, but still I was left with a sense that progress is meandering and whimsical.
I remember being excited by Hurd's ambitions after studying Tanenbaum's OS book in university and drinking the microkernel kool-aid; now I'm too old and jaded to believe it'll be a viable alternative.
It’s like farmer’s market craft fair tech. Same vibes.
Last neckbeards standing?
Tales from the crypt.
Someone should do the blasphemous thing and have Opus 5 finish HURD.
Actually in all seriousness reviving dead interesting FOSS projects is one use for AI coding I've thought about.
Next year will be the year of GNU Hurd, as well as The Desktop Linux Year and people really using HaikuOS on real hardware for years. You read it here first!
Wow.