On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Tod Beardsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Thanks heaps for your responses. Plan 9 it is then. Expect a lot of
> really irritating questions over the next few weeks. :)
>
Often times, googling to find the answer to irritating questions can keep
repetitive traffic d
Thanks heaps for your responses. Plan 9 it is then. Expect a lot of
really irritating questions over the next few weeks. :)
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Brian L. Stuart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I think a more precise way of saying it is that in 9p2000 and
>> the new styx, authentication h
> I think a more precise way of saying it is that in 9p2000 and
> the new styx, authentication has been moved outside the
> protocol proper. styx==9p now; the names are used by
> convention to imply the auth method, if any.
You're right. I stand corrected. For some reason I
had thought that the
> So now [9p]'s almost the same as Styx, except for
> the Inferno authentication.
I think a more precise way of saying it is that in 9p2000 and
the new styx, authentication has been moved outside the
protocol proper. styx==9p now; the names are used by
convention to imply the auth method, if any.
> Speaking of which, is Styx just a different name for 9P2000 or
> are there still some little differences?
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it
goes like this. The original 9P and Styx were
just different enough that they couldn't interoperate.
That was part of the motivation for 9P20
On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 17:55 +, Brian L. Stuart wrote:
> That's partly because there's a separate Inferno list. And
> you're right that they're not the same, but are closely
> related. The original Inferno kernel was based on (and
> used code from, I think) the Plan 9 kernel that was current
>
Inferno (and Limbo) has its own mailing list. Talk on those topics
isn't particularly discouraged here, as there's obviously lots of
overlap in both ideas and community, but it mostly lives on
elsewhere.
They're conceptually very similar, and share much of their
implementation. There are important
> I'm just about ready to take the plunge (again) into Plan 9 for file
Welcome to the pool. The water's great.
> started to get the impression that Inferno is perhaps a better way to
> go for a newbie like me to the whole rio/acme/fossil Way. Is this
> mistaken?
For rio/acme/fossil, you do want
Hi 9fans --
I'm just about ready to take the plunge (again) into Plan 9 for file
serving in my home network, partly because fossil seems like a
superior file system for lots of reads, rare writes, and cheap disks
(mp3 jukebox), and partly because I've had a quasi-mystical
fascination with Plan 9 f
