> I'm thinking about going through another installation, and I'm wondering > whether there's usefulness in undertaking a standalone terminal install > using only kfs rather than fossil? And if so, how is this currently done?
there's currently no kfs/cwfs install option. it's only my list of things to do. > As far as I can tell, I'd want to use Erik's 9atom iso - which seems to > support Ken's fs (http://www.quanstro.net/plan9/9atom/index.html)? - > but the current install scripts only prompt for fossil or fossil+venti. remember that kfs != ken's fs != cwfs. but they are all three strongly related. ken's fs stands apart in being a stand alone kernel with no user space; it only make sense to provide an install option for the other two. - erik
