Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!pt!dld From: dld@F.GP.CS.CMU.EDU (David Detlefs) Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss Subject: Re: Mach rumors ??? Message-ID: Date: 12 Sep 89 20:32:04 GMT Organization: CMU CS Department Lines: 51 My officemate is Mike Young, one of the main graduate students involved in the Mach Project. He was kind enough to take time out from writing his thesis to comment on this post: >I know this was asked a month or so ago but I never saw a reply. A rumor >was going around that: (I'll ask this in parts) > > 1. CMU was rewriting the ATT code in the kernel. > > 2. Mach would be released in the "public domain" in September. > (Anyone at CMU care to comment?) > > 3. The Free Software Foundation (ie RMS and friends) were going > to use the Mach kernel. > >Can any of this be true? ( ... maybe I just dreamed it all. ) Some answers: 1) is at least partly true. In the semi-near term (Mike declined to discuss exact dates, interpret my expressions as you will) it may be possible to obtain a "pure" Mach kernel that does not require a Unix license. Note, however, that the sense in which Mike is using kernel here may be different from the sense in which you are used to hearing it. This would provide the Mach task and thread abstractions, but little else. In particular, a Unix emulation package would be required to make it look like Unix. As currently envisioned, this would originally contain AT&T licensed code. (Note that the "pure" Mach kernel would also be a suitable platform on which to implement an OS/2 emulation package, for example.) In the "medium-term," this emulation code may be rewritten to obviate the need for a Unix license. This still only covers the operating-system level of Unix -- no effort is envisioned to rewrite user-level utilities, except occasionally to take advantage of Mach-specific features. In short, "kind of, but don't hold your breath." 2) Mach is not in "the public domain," and there are no plans to make it so in the future. Users of Mach must sign a Mach license agreement, which, among other things requires them to give back any significant modifications to CMU. Note that even if it becomes the case that no Unix license is required to run a Unix-like Mach, CMU may be constrained by the project funding source (i.e., the Defense Department) from distributing Mach to non-US users. 3) I dunno, but the above makes it unlikely in the very near term. -- Dave Detlefs Any correlation between my employer's opinion Carnegie-Mellon CS and my own is statistical rather than causal, dld@cs.cmu.edu except in those cases where I have helped to form my employer's opinion. (Null disclaimer.)