From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Tue,  9 May 2000 00:11:15 +0400
From: Roman V. Shaposhnick vugluskr@unicorn.math.spbu.ru
Subject: [9fans] Plan 9 future (Was: Re: Are the Infernospaces gone?)
Topicbox-Message-UUID: a8bb481e-eac8-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025
Message-ID: <20000508201115.IRdZCc7ggraNQ59R3lccRQ3JJHjcl9QH0yxeKJ206Dc@z>

On Mon, May 08, 2000 at 12:12:52PM -0400, Russ Cox wrote:
> Many of the tools stand without the per-process
> namespaces.  That's why I think the ported libraries
> would be useful.  It's not clear to me how to implement
> something like 9spaces usefully.  As Dave mentioned,
> Dong has built 9P support into FreeBSD, and now
> we know someone is doing one for Linux too.  But there's
> still no per-process namespace.  I started something

  We hope to get the similar thing in Linux. A lot of work
has been done at a kernel level already, but the real problem
is userspace. Thus, I guess that from 2.4 Linux will be an
ideal environment to do that kind of porting.

Thanks,
Roman.