From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Russ Cox" <rsc@plan9.bell-labs.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] software quality and popularity
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20010522203105.AAA6E19A21@mail.cse.psu.edu>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:31:02 -0400
Topicbox-Message-UUID: a55f4ba6-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

the "unix code is harder to port to plan 9
than plan 9 code is to port to unix" observation,
while empirically true, is not a function of
those systems so much as the code itself.
as boyd points out, there exist portable programs
written for unix.  it's more a question of 
whether the author thought about good interfaces,
and to date plan 9 software has a better history
of that.  (that may change, of course, once plan 9
displaces windows nt and linux as the dominant server 
operating system.)