Re: [9fans] p9f mention of 9front

[silas poulson]

What’s Dorren continent referencing?

Silas

On 24 Jun 2021, at 22:25, Wes Kussmaul 
mailto:w...@reliableid.com>> wrote:



All versions of Plan9, Inferno, derivatives, forks, et al are welcome on the 
Glenda continent.







9fans / 9fans / see 
discussions + 
participants + delivery 
options 
Permalink


--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: 
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T523d6e906a17a7cc-M7b4febdc7dfcb5246fa8f366
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

Re: [9fans] /net/ether1 is not found

[lchg]

It works, thank you.
--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: 
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tda2a54289176223b-Mc94d235c9264265642d1e83b
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

Re: [9fans] p9f mention of 9front

[Wes Kussmaul]

All versions of Plan9, Inferno, derivatives, forks, et al are welcome on 
the Glenda continent.







--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: 
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T523d6e906a17a7cc-Ma32a526a9ee3953b55afcc24
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

Re: [9fans] p9f mention of 9front

[unobe]

Quoth hiro <23h...@gmail.com>:
> > Foundation and 9front can work to figure out how to make it so there's
> > one distribution.
> 
> For 9front this doesn't matter so much. We do not have a problem with
> there being multiple (sometimes experimental) distributions. For
> non-experimental things like 9legacy and miller's rpi releases, we're
> already benefiting from each other and sharing code without any
> issues.

So perhaps I should have said 'one code base under version control',
not 'distributions'.  That is, have a master branch and different
branches for experimental things and for formal releases.  I think
getting 9front onto git is a good push forward in that direction,
since the Plan 9 is released by P9F under the MIT license from git,
too.

> > There appear to be entrenched philosophical differences, but both
> > "sides" agree that 9front is a fork and 9legacy isn't (one point of
> > view is described @ http://9legacy.org/intro.html and the other is @
> > http://fqa.9front.org/fqa0.html#0.1 ).
> 
> I disagree here.
> 
> When 9front was created it was technically a fork, because there was
> still a diverging bell-labs plan 9 distribution.
> 
> We may seem to have new non-accreditated "management", but we are all
> fascinated what Plan 9 brought to this world and we would all like to
> build on the general wisdom of the Plan 9 philosophy.
> 
> Now that bell-labs is gone, there have been no more mainline plan9 releases.
> 
> Instead we have a few remaining relevant distributions like 9legacy or
> miller's rpi releases, all of which technically are about as much a
> fork as 9front is.
> 
> Erik's 9atom has been unmaintained for a longer time so we didn't have
> any problems following those patches.
> 
> Harvey and related distributions are highly experimental, they diverge
> much further from Plan 9 basic architecture without any will of
> keeping backwards compatibility.
> They are more revolutionary than some of us can stomach.
> 
> A lot of people from the old crew at bell-labs completely abandoned
> mainline bell-labs plan9 even before 9front has been started because
> they seem content with just having a p9p layer on top of their
> macbooks or other unix machines.
> 
> Apart from the occasional trolling that keeps on coming up on this
> list, I don't see what deep trenches people are imagining would impair
> the Plan 9 Community from working together on a well maintained Plan 9
> distribution with simple procedures for sharing code in all
> directions. Whose wrong foot did you suffer from when 9front got first
> made?

For one, not having fossil.  The removal of fossil might be what some
users cannot accept?  The setup and wiki preserved at 9p.io talk about
how to setup fossil+venti and yet that cannot be done on 9front--it
was removed completely.  I think I recall you saying it was bug-ridden
and unmaintainable, but could be misremembering who said what.  From
what I can gather, there was a serious bug that was fixed in fossil
after 9front forked, and yet there is no intention of including it
back into 9front.

Additionally, I didn't realize initially that there was only one
kernel for both cpu and terminal in 9front, as opposed to two in Plan
9.  (I like that there's only one, personally.) That makes a
difference because of the documentation in each system on how to setup
a server.

Those are two things that I can think of off the top of my head.

Philosophically, I think the 9front maintainers/developers are much
more willing to chuck older code and to replace with new code.  I have
personally benefitted from this approach so I'm not against it.
9legacy is much more conservative.


--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: 
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T523d6e906a17a7cc-Ma33a7ff5d2238a0c5a82a824
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

Re: [9fans] p9f mention of 9front

[Ethan Gardener]

On Thu, Jun 24, 2021, at 11:12 AM, Philip Silva via 9fans wrote:
> I wonder if this could be copied from how plan9port behaves on macOS 
> for instance. Using a single tap and then toggling/chording using alt 
> and command keys. Maybe on a multi-touch input the distance of the 2nd 
> and 3rd finger could help to identify which modifier/button it 
> translates to.

Doesn't P9P do something more than this on macOS already? I recall something 
about some multitouch arrangements as a replacement for chords. Some pro users 
liked it very much, but I've forgotten what the arrangements were. Caveat: it 
might have been optimized for Acme only.

--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: 
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T523d6e906a17a7cc-M959527dd82998773b268d056
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

Re: [9fans] p9f mention of 9front

[unobe]

Quoth Philip Silva via 9fans <9fans@9fans.net>:
> I wonder if this could be copied from how plan9port behaves on macOS for 
> instance. Using a single tap and then toggling/chording using alt and command 
> keys. Maybe on a multi-touch input the distance of the 2nd and 3rd finger 
> could help to identify which modifier/button it translates to.

What I did with my Pinephone, but not run directly.  I ran drawterm.
I mapped the hardware vol up/down buttons to buttons 2&3.  That gave
me some chording ability (with 1-2 and 1-3), and simple keypresses for
2 & 3 (no swiping with 2, or swiping with 3).  It didn't seem too odd.


--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: 
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T523d6e906a17a7cc-Mbe4fa7cadb978896acecdb8d
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

AW: [9fans] p9f mention of 9front

[sirjofri]

Hello all,

Klong mail incoming. I hope my English is ok and I don't tread on other's 
toes.)


from my perspective it looks like this:

There are multiple Plan 9 forks kor distributions). They all are 
philosophically and technically different, but they still share patches 
(even if many people don't know). This is fine.


It would be great to have some kind of compatibility. i'm not necessarily 
talking about binary/ABI compatibility, but network compatibility, shell 
scripting and usability. People are actively working on it. I personally 
have no reason to run 9legacy in my network since 9front has everything I 
need, but other people do.


The community is split into multiple different areas. Some areas are open 
to communicate with others, some actively work together and some are very 
"unique": you don't really hear from them in most channels, besides some 
email here and there, but that's it.


I can name #cat-v, #plan9, ##9fans (bridged to discord) and the 9fans and 
9front mailing lists.


P9f is some very special case: They have the rights to the original 
codebase, they stare noble goals, but they seem to actively hide the fact 
that 9front exists. Hardcore 9front people don't really care about that, 
but the community (and I) do. I consider it really sad that 9front seems 
so cut away from the Plan 9 history just because some people try to hide 
it. Many people asked about mentioning 9front on the p9f page.


When p9f started they told us that they focus on more important stuff 
first (which I can totally understand). Some activities (also mentioned 
at 9front.org/who/p9f) make me think that they just don't want 9front to 
exist.


They state they want to push all stuff in the plan 9 family (9p, plan9 
with forks, inferno), but they seem to actively promote 9legacy (which is 
fine, it's the most original continuation of plan9) and hide 9front 
(which is just sad). This is especially sad since 9front is probably the 
most modern and most active Plan 9 system currently existing.


I just hope we all find a way to still respect each other and to grow as 
a community. Misunderstandings happen as well as lots of other human 
factors.


My long 2 cents

sirjofri

Disclaimer: I actively used the original Plan 9 4e, Plan 9 on rpi, 
inferno, and I am an active 9front user.


--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: 
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T523d6e906a17a7cc-M0a6e0197e217adff3f184fd7
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

Re: [9fans] p9f mention of 9front

[hiro]

> Foundation and 9front can work to figure out how to make it so there's
> one distribution.

For 9front this doesn't matter so much. We do not have a problem with
there being multiple (sometimes experimental) distributions. For
non-experimental things like 9legacy and miller's rpi releases, we're
already benefiting from each other and sharing code without any
issues.

> There appear to be entrenched philosophical differences, but both
> "sides" agree that 9front is a fork and 9legacy isn't (one point of
> view is described @ http://9legacy.org/intro.html and the other is @
> http://fqa.9front.org/fqa0.html#0.1 ).

I disagree here.

When 9front was created it was technically a fork, because there was
still a diverging bell-labs plan 9 distribution.

We may seem to have new non-accreditated "management", but we are all
fascinated what Plan 9 brought to this world and we would all like to
build on the general wisdom of the Plan 9 philosophy.

Now that bell-labs is gone, there have been no more mainline plan9 releases.

Instead we have a few remaining relevant distributions like 9legacy or
miller's rpi releases, all of which technically are about as much a
fork as 9front is.

Erik's 9atom has been unmaintained for a longer time so we didn't have
any problems following those patches.

Harvey and related distributions are highly experimental, they diverge
much further from Plan 9 basic architecture without any will of
keeping backwards compatibility.
They are more revolutionary than some of us can stomach.

A lot of people from the old crew at bell-labs completely abandoned
mainline bell-labs plan9 even before 9front has been started because
they seem content with just having a p9p layer on top of their
macbooks or other unix machines.

Apart from the occasional trolling that keeps on coming up on this
list, I don't see what deep trenches people are imagining would impair
the Plan 9 Community from working together on a well maintained Plan 9
distribution with simple procedures for sharing code in all
directions. Whose wrong foot did you suffer from when 9front got first
made?

The few remaining people that actually care about collaborating
together and keeping Plan 9 alive as a proper operating system running
on real hardware, please add your views in case I am ignoring some
other side of all this.

--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: 
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T523d6e906a17a7cc-M439abc986009d978dc66f867
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

Re: [9fans] p9f mention of 9front

[Philip Silva via 9fans]

I wonder if this could be copied from how plan9port behaves on macOS for 
instance. Using a single tap and then toggling/chording using alt and command 
keys. Maybe on a multi-touch input the distance of the 2nd and 3rd finger could 
help to identify which modifier/button it translates to.

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐

Frank D. Engel, Jr.  schrieb am Donnerstag, 24. Juni 2021 
um 10:24:

> The rio environment would need to identify if you were using finger 1, 2
>
> or 3 to tap on something so it would know if it was to move or resize
>

--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: 
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T523d6e906a17a7cc-Ma226d19a1eea70cb2dc82b62
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

Re: [9fans] plan9 and touch screens

[Lucio De Re]

On 6/24/21, Richard Miller <9f...@hamnavoe.com> wrote:
> Inferno can work quite comfortably with a touchscreen and a virtual
> "bitsy" keyboard. It's a different user interface from rio, but not
> horribly worse. Likely Plan 9 could be adapted to do the same.
>
And handwriting may have been discarded in the recent past, but it can
be brought back if, say, speech recognition won't work.

We've moved on and Plan 9 can catch up. If not, then I think
obsolescence looms large. But I don't think so, I think it just needs
the ability to absorb lessons from the ecosystem.

Lucio.

--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: 
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T93744379e79c6971-M5fa24cba9e3d66a7f8ff253a
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

[9fans] plan9 and touch screens

[Richard Miller]

fde...@fjrhome.net:
> Either that or you would need to replace rio with something more 
> touchscreen-friendly, in the process losing much of what makes the Plan 
> 9 environment as unique as it is from a user interface perspective.
> 
> Most "modern" phones also lack a suitable keyboard to provide reasonable 
> interaction with the command line (and it can be difficult to type 
> efficiently on something that small anyway).

Inferno can work quite comfortably with a touchscreen and a virtual
"bitsy" keyboard. It's a different user interface from rio, but not
horribly worse. Likely Plan 9 could be adapted to do the same.


--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: 
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T93744379e79c6971-M02879a98ecf562634ea3842d
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

Re: [9fans] p9f mention of 9front

[Frank D. Engel, Jr.]

I don't think the touchscreen technology has figured out how to 
distinguish between fingers yet.


The rio environment would need to identify if you were using finger 1, 2 
or 3 to tap on something so it would know if it was to move or resize 
the window, which context menu to open, etc...


Either that or you would need to replace rio with something more 
touchscreen-friendly, in the process losing much of what makes the Plan 
9 environment as unique as it is from a user interface perspective.


Most "modern" phones also lack a suitable keyboard to provide reasonable 
interaction with the command line (and it can be difficult to type 
efficiently on something that small anyway).



On 6/24/21 12:06 AM, Lucio De Re wrote:

The other oddity is the smart mobile computer we like to call a
"phone". Why is there no Plan 9 flavour running on at least some
flavour of it?


--
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: 
https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T523d6e906a17a7cc-M84bef267275597c3ab44884a
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription