From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-Id: <200603171203.k2HC3pN08923@zamenhof.cs.utwente.nl>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] ports from GPL
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 17 Mar 2006 06:33:59 -0500."
	<ed8d145bfd0c3a5e60d9b88704574452@coraid.com>
References: <ed8d145bfd0c3a5e60d9b88704574452@coraid.com>
From: Axel Belinfante <Axel.Belinfante@cs.utwente.nl>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 13:03:51 +0100
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 156222c8-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> > i think that open source code has a very different outlook
> > on the world than plan 9. it's very hard (and frustrating) to
> > deal with the culture clash when porting.
>
> That brings to mind something that I've been thinking about for a
> couple of years.  In watching the stuff in Linux and poking around the
> simulators and old code, I can see at least three different cultures.
> Murry Hill (Bell Labs), 545 Technology Sq (MIT), and Berkeley.  These
> cultures have belief systems that are mutually exclusive.  And there
> must be subcultures as well.  The socket interface, for example, is
> really MIT culture thru BBN to BSD.
>
> Anyone else see this?  More cultures?

Cannot help with that.

Is there a compact description of these cultures,
and/or the differences between them?