2006/8/17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> is yet another one confusing me. If /mnt stands for "mount", what does /n
> stand for?
actually, the main distinction seems to be that /n holds filesystems
that contain regular files, and /mnt has service interfaces.
personally i wouldn't mind losing /mnt - /n is so much easier to type.
i don't know if that's too silly of me, but having this separation
with this semantics (regular files vs service interfaces) doesn't goes
against the idea that in plan9 one wouldn't have to differentiate
between types of files unless he/she wishes so?
