I don't know if you're much into kernel hacking

I used to a lot of it. I still do it least as much as is necessary to debug OpenAFS, which over the last few days has been a lot due to how lookups works and how we support rewriting part of the path based on the OS you're running (basically).

But part of the reason I've taken up the Mac gauntlet is massive disappointment at what's happened with Linux 2.6. I'm not interested in doing weird stuff so I can have the capability of having groups of processes running with the same unix uid having disjoint, possibly conflicting, groups of authentication credentials. What we did before was really a hack, and it won't work anymore without an even more heinous hack to allow it (Linux has no loadable syscall interface, and changes happened to make it hard to load a syscall anyway). That doesn't bother me. What bothers me is that basically people seem uninterested in either taking any interface offered which will solve the problem, or providing one, or suggestions to what they want, if they don't like what they've seen.

jaharkes did a patch for the issue which consisted of something like 47 lines of changes (add/change/removed lines); Really, having a small blob in the task structure to store presistent data which gets copied on fork/clone doesn't seem like a huge burden. Yet, here we are.

So, I'm basically ignoring the other issues which need to be dealt with before OpenAFS will run on Linux 2.6 (without the missing functionality, but it would still be able to read and write files); Either someone else will deal, or one of my jobs will force me to deal, or I'll blissfully not care.

Hijack, at least, is probably interesting enough to overcome the "I'm bitter at Linux", if I had something to do which might be interesting or useful. But I suspect I'd do poorly at implementing a graphics API. I might try anyhow.