On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 11:04 AM, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I believe the reasoning is as such:
>>
>> Linux has more drivers than Plan 9, therefore Plan 9 should run on linux.
>
> in this model, all plan 9 does is add an extra layer of goo
> on top of linux. it's not like you can avoid admining
> linux by hiding on a vm running on linux.
>
That's not entirely true depending on the virtualization layer used.
I'm not experienced yet with vx32, but for example, lguest/kvm/xen can
be setup to pass-through device access to network, disk, audio,
whatever. The logical partition running Plan 9 can be essentially
pinned to a processor (or processors) and on that processor it rules
the roost. Linux just deals with device access.
I don't really think this undermines Plan 9 in any way unless you are
keen on optimizing device performance -- in which case you do indeed
most likely want native. But my point is, the Linux "I/O layer" is
essentially non-administered. It doesn't need user accounts, an IP
address, or even much of a file system (just enough to boot Plan 9
like in THX).
-ericvh
