Re: [9fans] renaming rio to rioc!

[Ethan Gardener <eekee57@fastmail.fm>]

On Tue, Oct 2, 2018, at 3:28 PM, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> since it's not the original rio in plan9port, how about renaming it to
> rioc (rio clone)?

Why? :)  I can think of a good reason, but why don't you say why you want to do it?  Just feelings of what is right and wrong?  Personally, my own feelings of right and wrong with respect to computing have too often proved to be harmful, so I try not to take too much notice of them these days.

If, on the other hand, you want to write a draw device implementation for the Linux framebuffer (or whatever) and port Plan 9's rio to it, bear in mind you'll also have to replace plan9port's devdraw binary.  Just renaming it won't do; other programs launch it by name.  Having users put your devdraw ahead of p9p in $PATH will work if I remember right, and the same trick will work for your rio.  If you're distributing your own fork of plan9port, you have every right to rename or remove its supplied rio and devdraw.

--
Progress might have been all right once, but it has gone on too long -- Ogden Nash