9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Dorman edorman@Tanya.ucsd.edu
Subject: The future of Plan9?
Date: Mon,  5 May 1997 17:45:31 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <19970506004531.Ehp5UNPg1IwgjlPCfFEriPen-CaziON2WMw1glarvkQ@z> (raw)


>> The central idea of Plan9 with a *single* unified structure for all
>> architectures is intensely appealing.
>Plan 9 is not the only operating system that runs on multiple
>architectures.  Solaris, Linux, NetBSD, and OpenBSD all run on
>multiple targets, and I suspect NetBSD runs on more of them than Plan
>9.

True, but one is still left with a bunch of unix systems, rather
than a single unified _structure_ that encompasses all the
architectures, not just being able to build from the same 
source tree.  I can't easily keep a single tree with objects
for all architectures available. Cross-compilation environments
in the past have been clumsy to maintain (for me at least); 
maintaining more than 1 target would be horrendous.

>The price in itself is damaging but not fatal; a lot of good OS
>development effort comes out of universities, where finding $350 to
>buy a Plan 9 distribution is easy.  But why would I want to spend my
>time working on a proprietary system when I can work on my pick of
>freely redistributable Unix systems?

Indeed.  The freenix systems are pretty stable, particularly
x86; stable enough that there are some brave souls that use
it in production.  That is, however, just another unix box
on the net somewhere... there's basically no hassle-free
integration above the single-unit level.

>I'm not happy with the state of the OS world today, but if Plan 9
>wants to be considered as a step in the right direction, it has to
>either have real commercial backing or be free.  From my opinionated
>point of view, AT&T's lawyers and management consigned Plan 9 to the
>permanent status of "interesting curio" when they set the distribution
>policy.  Maybe Inferno will go somewhere else.

I agree.. unfortunately Inferno doesn't solve the problems I need
to cope with, and nothing anywhere eases my administrative and 
software burdens without causing more pain that it's worth.  Sigh.
All that horsepower going to waste.

Sincerely,

Eric Dorman
University of California at San Diego
Department of Radiology
edorman@tanya.ucsd.edu





             reply	other threads:[~1997-05-06  0:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
1997-05-06  0:45 Eric [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1997-05-08  4:39 Adam
1997-05-05 14:02 Brandon
1997-05-04  9:04 Markus
1997-05-02 22:04 Bengt
1997-05-02 12:26 Digby
1997-05-02  0:59 Digby
1997-05-01 19:14 Greg
1997-05-01 18:28 Eric
1997-05-01 16:04 Berry
1997-05-01 15:25 Tom
1997-05-01 12:46 bwong
1997-05-01  7:45 Steve_Kilbane
1997-05-01  3:54 Digby
1997-04-30 23:48 Scott
1997-04-30 21:11 rsc
1997-04-30 20:09 Lucio
1997-04-30 17:06 Digby
1997-04-30  7:38 Borja
1997-04-30  6:01 Brandon
1997-04-29 23:28 Alex
1997-04-29 23:06 Digby

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=19970506004531.Ehp5UNPg1IwgjlPCfFEriPen-CaziON2WMw1glarvkQ@z \
    --to=9fans@9fans.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).