[no subject]

Me too! ;-)

> HAL as in hald isn't quite the same thing as HAL as in NT's HAL.  In NT
> (substitute XP, 2000, 2003, whatever), the HAL sits between the OS and
> the hardware and was key to the now long-forgotten capability of running
> NT on Alpha AXP and MIPS processors.  
> 
> But in Linux, HAL is a mechanism to help straighten out the mess that is
> impermanent devices, along with udev, etc.

What you describe above are two nearly identical things.  HAL is HAL, in 
Microsoft's or any other vendors' OS.  The reason for having a HAL is so 
that the OS can be consistent across different hardware, regardless if 
those differences are the platform, processor, power mgmt, BIOS, or bus.

-Jim P.




</pre>
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
<hr>
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
<!--X-References-->
<ul><li><strong>References</strong>:
<ul>
<li><strong><a name="00398" href="msg00398.html">[ale] hald</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> drifter at oppositelock.org (Sean Kilpatrick)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="00402" href="msg00402.html">[ale] hald</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> jimpop at yahoo.com (Jim Popovitch)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="00405" href="msg00405.html">[ale] hald</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> hbbs at comcast.net (Jeff Hubbs)</li></ul></li>
</ul></li></ul>
<!--X-References-End-->
<!--X-BotPNI-->
<ul>
<li>Prev by Date:
<strong><a href="msg00405.html">[ale] hald</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by Date:
<strong><a href="msg00414.html">[ale] Auditing root shells</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Previous by thread:
<strong><a href="msg00405.html">[ale] hald</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by thread:
<strong><a href="msg00403.html">[ale] hald</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Index(es):
<ul>
<li><a href="maillist.html#00406"><strong>Date</strong></a></li>
<li><a href="threads.html#00406"><strong>Thread</strong></a></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>

<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
<!--X-User-Footer-->
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
</body>
</html>