From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 11:06:28 +0100
From: lejatorn@gmail.com
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] interesting potential targets for plan 9 and/or inferno
Message-ID: <20070312100628.GD3982@gluon>
References: <45EF5CB6.4040902@gmail.com>
	<19652.1173689144@lunacy.ugrad.cs.cmu.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <19652.1173689144@lunacy.ugrad.cs.cmu.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 1fa1cea4-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

Honestly, I happen to boot plan9 from times to times, when I find enough
time to play with it and try to get to know it, and so far rio has not
been the major  problem for me. After all, once a term is opened, I
don't really have much more to ask from the window managing system when
it comes to getting to know the system underneath.

I'm more slowed down by:
-obviously the fact that it's quite a different system from unix,
-the fact I find the documentation unreadable in a term so I have to
read the docs in a browser on my other comp, 
-the lack of completion with tab (I know it can be done with another
key, but it's hard to break the tab habit), 
-and last but not least, getting used to edit with sam or acme 
(which of course means using the mouse) while I'm working all day with
vim without ever using the mouse.

At least now rio is starting with a dvorak keymap, otherwise it would
have been a no go :)

Cheers,
Mathieu.

On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 04:45:44AM -0400, Dave Eckhardt wrote:
> > I'm really with Minnich on this one. The GUI is what *everyone*
> > complains about and it's always the *first* thing they complain
> > about.  I deal with pretty intelligent people in the security
> > community and they can't handle Rio and don't want to.
> 
> In response, a serious, non-flame, question:  what's the realistic
> alternative?  It would be possible, if arduous, to replace rio with
> a clone of, say, fvwm.  But what about fluxbox and icewm and sawfish
> and windowmaker and enlightenment?  Is "the problem" really rio per
> se, or is the problem that for each person rio isn't the thing they
> already use?
> 
> I guess my question translates into "Is there *one* X window manager
> which, if cloned for Plan 9, would solve the 'rio problem'?".
> 
> Dave Eckhardt
> 
> P.S. And I guess the follow-on question is "Would that window manager
> be sufficient, or are bash and turning vt into xterm necessary too?".

-- 
GPG key on subkeys.pgp.net:

KeyID:	| Fingerprint:
683DE5F3 | 4324 5818 39AA 9545 95C6 09AF B0A4 DFEA 683D E5F3
--