From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 18:13:37 -0800
From: Roman Shaposhnick <rvs@sun.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] [OT] linux origins, why not?
Message-ID: <20060330021336.GB17479@submarine>
References: <442B3496.9060308@lanl.gov>
	<0f1fee4b1152f4a6e32e0dd8c5c11acd@quanstro.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <0f1fee4b1152f4a6e32e0dd8c5c11acd@quanstro.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 25fedaea-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 08:40:55PM -0600, quanstro@quanstro.net wrote:
> do you have some pointers to papers from these guys?
>
> from my uneducated position, it seems to me that plan9 has a large
> percentage of what microkernels claim.

  Personally, one virtue of the founding fathers I admire the most
  is their ability to come up with really cool ideas and then always
  know where to stop. The sort of difference cherry on top makes,
  if you know what I mean:

     without a cherry on top: C,       Plan9,  Acme
     with a cherry on top:  C++, MACH/Spring, Emacs

  both lists go on.


Thanks,
Roman.