Reorganize the Hurd FAQ in a single place

move all the hurd faq pages to the top-level faq directory;
the faq.mdwn index now uses two simples map of all the subpages
(one for the debian items, and the other for the non-debian items)

TODO: now some of the items would need better titles

1 files changed, 145 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/faq/old_hurd_faq.txt b/faq/old_hurd_faq.txt
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..4ebe019b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/faq/old_hurd_faq.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,145 @@
+The Unofficial (and no longer maintained) GNU Hurd FAQ, Version 0.13
+
+Contributions by:
+
+Michael I. Bushnell <mib@gnu.org>
+Len Tower <tower@gnu.org>
+Trent Fisher <trent@gnurd.uu.pdx.edu>
+jlr@usoft.spb.su
+Remy Card <Remy.Card@masi.ibp.fr>
+Louis-Dominique Dubeau <hallu@info.polymtl.ca>
+
+Original Document by: Derek Upham <upham@cs.ubc.ca>
+
+
+==============================
+
+Contents:
+
+Q0.  Where can I get the Unofficial GNU Hurd FAQ?
+Q2.  Where can I get a copy?
+Q3.  Why bother writing a new OS when we have Linux and 386/BSD?
+Q4.  What's all this about Mach 3.0 (and Mach 4.0)?
+Q5.  Where can I find more information?
+Q7.  What sort of machines will run Hurd in the future?
+Q8.  What is the current development status?
+Q9.  What sort of system would we have if the Hurd was bootable today?
+
+==============================
+
+Q0.  Where can I get the Unofficial GNU Hurd FAQ?
+
+The Unofficial Hurd FAQ (what you are reading now) is occasionally
+posted to the USENET newsgroup, gnu.misc.discuss.  It is also
+available from
+
+   http://www.enci.ucalgary.ca/~gord/hurd/hurd-faq.txt  (Broken Link ?)
+
+If you don't have WWW access, you may send mail to me, Gordon
+Matzigkeit <gord@enci.ucalgary.ca> with a subject line that reads:
+
+   Subject: send hurd-faq
+
+You should receive a PGP-signed copy of the current version of this
+document in a matter of minutes.
+
+
+Q2.  Where can I get a copy?
+
+To put it simply, you can't.  It is still under development (by
+Michael Bushnell, Roland McGrath and Miles Bader).  It is almost, but
+not quite, at the point where you can do real work on it.  Keep your
+fingers crossed.
+
+Some people have actually bootstrapped it, but the work is not easy,
+and the current snapshot won't work until a new multiserver boot
+mechanism is made.
+
+If you *really* want to try it, beware that it is still pre-alpha
+code, and that it will likely crash on you.  See Trent Fisher's Hurd
+pages (under question 5) for the latest information.
+
+
+Q3.  Why bother writing a new OS when we have Linux and 386/BSD?
+
+For one thing, Linux and BSD don't scale well.  Hardware designers are
+shifting more and more toward multiprocessor machines for performance,
+and standard Unix kernels do not provide much multiprocessor support.
+The Hurd, on the other hand, runs on top of the Mach 3.0 micro-kernel
+[[1]] from CMU.  Mach was designed precisely for multiprocessing
+machines, so its portability should carry over nicely to the Hurd.
+
+In addition, the Hurd will be considerably more flexible and robust
+than generic Unix.  Wherever possible, Unix kernel features have been
+moved into unprivileged space.  Once there, anyone who desires can
+develop custom replacements for them.  Users will be able to write and
+use their own file systems, their own `exec' servers, or their own
+network protocols if they like, all without disturbing other users.
+
+The Linux kernel has now been modified to allow user-level file
+systems, so there is proof that people will actually use features such
+as these.  It will be much easier to do under the Hurd, however,
+because the Hurd is almost entirely run in user space and because the
+various servers are designed for this sort of modification.
+
+
+Q4.  What's all this about Mach 3.0 (and Mach 4.0)?
+
+As mentioned above, Mach is a micro-kernel, written at Carnegie Mellon
+University.  A more descriptive term might be a greatest-common-factor
+kernel, since it provides facilities common to all ``real'' operating
+systems, such as memory management, inter-process communication,
+processes, and a bunch of other stuff.  Unfortunately, the system
+calls used to access these facilities are only vaguely related to the
+familiar and cherished Unix system calls.  There are no "fork",
+"wait", or "sleep" system-calls, no SIGHUPs, nothing like that.  All
+this makes it rather difficult to, say, port GNU Emacs to a Mach box.
+
+The trick is, of course, to write an emulation library.  Unix programs
+can then use (what they think are) POSIX system calls and facilities
+while they are really using Mach system calls and facilities.
+
+The simplest way of going about this is to take an ordinary Unix
+kernel, open it up, and rip out all the machine-specific guts; any
+time the Unix kernel talks to the machine, replace the code with calls
+to the Mach micro-kernel.  Run this fake kernel on a Mach machine and
+you end up with something that looks and acts just like Unix (even to
+GNU Emacs).  Note that the Unix kernel we have implemented is just one
+Really Big Mach program (called a single-server).
+
+The Hurd, on the other hand, breaks the giant Unix kernel down into
+various Mach programs running as daemons.  Working in concert with
+facilities placed in the C library, these daemons provide all of the
+POSIX system-calls and features; from the outside they look just like
+a standard Unix kernel.  This means that, for practical purposes,
+anything that you can port to Linux will also port to the Hurd.
+
+Of course, if a user wishes to run his own daemons, he can do that as
+well....
+
+Mach 4.0 is an enhanced version of Mach 3.0, put out by the people at
+the University of Utah.  They are working on another free operating
+system, and part of it includes an enhanced, more flexible version of
+Mach.  The Hurd has moved to Mach 4.0, which is good, because it is a
+lot easier to build than 3.0 was.
+
+You can find more information on Mach by browsing the Hurd pages given
+in the next answer, or by looking at the Project Mach and Flux
+homepages at:
+
+Carnegie Mellon University (for Mach versions before 4.0):
+
+   http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/project/mach/public/www/mach.html
+
+the University of Utah (for Mach 4.0):
+
+   http://www.cs.utah.edu/projects/flux/mach4/html/
+
+
+
+==============================
+
+Footnotes:
+
+[[1]] Yes, I know that ``micro-kernel'' is about as apt a description
+as ``Reduced Instruction Set Chip'', but we're stuck with it.