From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <1538642351.2461724.1530360128.301FCC7C@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Ethan Gardener To: 9fans@9fans.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2018 09:39:11 +0100 References: <212BE98CB8836987E226EAC522589E24@ewsd.inri.net> <884BE8B1-6929-4EC3-8B4D-CA9D3A24C266@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <884BE8B1-6929-4EC3-8B4D-CA9D3A24C266@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [9fans] plan9port : complete system : kernel : freebsd || linux ? Topicbox-Message-UUID: e6e763a0-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, at 8:50 AM, Rui Carmo wrote: > I wouldn=E2=80=99t allow the passive-aggressive mood that surfaces here f= rom=20 > time to time to turn me off the project.=20 >=20 > That said, I=E2=80=99m fascinated by how often (and how quickly) some thr= eads=20 > devolve into =E2=80=9Cthere is no point in doing that=E2=80=9D or =E2=80= =9Cwe don=E2=80=99t need those=20 > modern contraptions=E2=80=9D arguments - reminds me a lot of some of the = hard=20 > boiled academia types I used to work with back when VMS started losing=20 > ground.=20 I think a lot of us are hard boiled academic types, whether we've been thro= ugh academia or not. :) > As much as some folk here are not exactly fond of various nuances of=20 > modern tech (from Linux to X to git, etc.), I don=E2=80=99t think there= =E2=80=99s any=20 > need for dissing personal efforts to use or improve various aspects of=20 > Plan9 (including, horror of horrors, making the user land a bit more=20 > modern and usable, or at least more accessible to mainstream users). My perspective is, "More modern or more usable, which do you mean?" :) Man= y years ago, when I was under constant stress and had healed far less than = I have now, modern GUIs were, in practice, the uttermost extreme of unusabi= lity! The situation improved as I healed, as mouse technology improved, an= d as the worst excesses of 80s/90s GUI practice diminished somewhat, but I = still find them insanely restrictive and awkward for the most part. Even t= he parts which I find helpful are delivered in an awkward way, such as menu= s. Then there's the question of what Mayuresh is trying to do. His goal neces= sarily necessarily includes retaining parts of Linux which I've found throu= gh experience to be horrible! Some of these parts would be the same in var= ious BSDs; the userland for them is the same. In some of these cases GUIs = actually improve the situation, but Mayuresh's plan is to exclude those GUI= s; you cannot have them with "minimal xorg". As far as I'm concerned, the = way of minimal POSIX is the way of pain. Other people with different aptit= udes may find it easier, I suppose. --=20 Progress might have been all right once, but it has gone on too long -- Ogd= en Nash