So we're all putting it here?  Okay then.  I agree with pretty-much
everything hiro said this time.

Regarding differences between forks, what springs to my mind is the
fixes 9front needed to host  The site was switched to a
9front server at the time of Uriel's death, news of which triggered a
huge traffic increase for a while.  It was evident that no-one had put
Plan 9 under that kind of load before, or if they had, they hadn't
released their fixes.  I remember someone saying, "Everyone who used
Plan 9 seriously must have maintained their own fork."

Hosting may be unusual load.  Web server and CMS are both a
lot of shell scripts, so there is a lot of pipes and new processes all
the time.  9front has received more fixes relating to hosting it over
the years.

There was also a change to factotum to prevent it deadlocking the
filesystem.  I don't remember what triggered that bug!

Plenty of other stuff, but I'm out of time to write (for once).  I
have no idea if any other forks picked up any of the changes, although
I'm sure 9atom has its own fixes particularly related to NAS work.

Reply via email to