Why Plan 9?
Because on one of these days some big company (hint: where are the ex Bell
Labsers working with a very much Plan 9 / inferno / Limbo insipired new
programming language) adopts the Plan 9 / Inferno in a a more or less varied
incarnation. I could imagine Android having a new kernel not
On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 13:45:02 +, Bruce Ellis wrote:
Very succinct, and better than I could do 'til the coffee kicks in.
You could have pointed out that the entire source tree is smaller than
the gcc manual.
WAT!?!
Ahem.. pardon my manners please, but this caught me completely of guard.
If I recall correctly, Ape is a complete POSIX implementation
including Bourne shell, C libraries, etc. I think there are also ports
of some of the GNU extended utilities as well.
On Tue, 2010-10-12 at 08:33 +, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
Is there already an implemented.. POSIX compatibility
For any use-case I personally care about (and probably any
workstation/server use case you care about as well,) the Linux kernel
with the GNU userspace will blow anything out of the water, both in
performance and usability. If you don't recognize this you're sticking
your head in the sand. I know
2010/10/12 Max E maxxed...@comcast.net:
For any use-case I personally care about (and probably any
workstation/server use case you care about as well,) the Linux kernel
with the GNU userspace will blow anything out of the water, both in
performance and usability.
I don't think the GNU
Is there already an implemented.. POSIX compatibility layer, library, or
something? Hopefully, something that is very, very thin??
http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/ape.pdf
this will allow you to recompile nice clean ansi posix code.
compiling gnu code may require more work as much of it is
There's APE, the Ansi Posix Environment.
On Oct 12, 2010 4:40 AM, Aleksandar Kuktin akuk...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 13:45:02 +, Bruce Ellis wrote:
Very succinct, and better than I could do 'til the coffee kicks in.
You could have pointed out that the entire source tree is
On Oct 12, 9:21Â am, porttik...@gmail.com (Anssi Porttikivi) wrote:
we really do not need protocols above the network layer, but HTTP, SMTP,
DNS, SOAP, IIOP, IMAP, IRC, SSH, SSL, TP, SNMP and hundred others can all be
replaced by remote file access.
This sounds pretty interesting.
You may
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 1:51 AM, Max E maxxed...@comcast.net wrote:
If I recall correctly, Ape is a complete POSIX implementation
including Bourne shell, C libraries, etc. I think there are also ports
of some of the GNU extended utilities as well.
Not to mention you can get firefox to run
the twitter example you gave is perhaps too simple, could the tweets
not just be text written to a publicly writable file. the users could connect
with 9p but as the user none son they will need no auth.
better examples of the everything is a file aproach are wikifs (a file server
which
prvides
On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 11:27:45 +, Steve Simon wrote:
Is there already an implemented.. POSIX compatibility layer, library,
or something? Hopefully, something that is very, very thin??
http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/ape.pdf
this will allow you to recompile nice clean ansi posix code.
I was reading the suckless.org website the other day, and they seemed
quite keen on Plan 9. I am running Linux. Is there a useful summary
document that explains where plan9port fits in with Glendix, and why
anyone should care about Plan 9 anyway (hope that doesn't come across
as rude)?
Hi Mark !
Plan9 IS (and was) research os prototype.
I use it because I'm interested in ideas that was included in original
UNIX and Plan9 (inferno)
Read more documents at -
http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/1st_edition/designing_plan_9
Linux is another os, it imported ideas from Plan9 (/proc, private
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:05 AM, Mark Carter alt.mcar...@gmail.com wrote:
I was reading the suckless.org website the other day, and they seemed
quite keen on Plan 9. I am running Linux. Is there a useful summary
document that explains where plan9port fits in with Glendix, and why
anyone
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Robert Raschke rtrli...@googlemail.comwrote:
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:05 AM, Mark Carter alt.mcar...@gmail.comwrote:
I was reading the suckless.org website the other day, and they seemed
quite keen on Plan 9. I am running Linux. Is there a useful summary
why anyone should care about Plan 9 anyway
Because: getting things right the first time around is much more of a
practical matter than you may at first realize.
Nick
Very succinct, and better than I could do 'til the coffee kicks in.
You could have pointed out that the entire source tree is smaller than
the gcc manual.
But as I say - do what you like. I know people who would rather spend
$5k on an Apple PC than $200 on a slicker plan9 box. I have my FS
getting it right:
- less code in plan 9 than in most configure scripts (hard to believe but true)
- plan 9 memory management code is 1 file, linux is 55
- almost no assembly in plan 9 ; # lines assembly is GROWING in linux
- growth of linux code size is exponential (this is part of the
getting
18 matches
Mail list logo
