From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 06:26:47 +0100 From: Enrico Weigelt To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Message-ID: <20081110052646.GA22532@nibiru.local> References: <7f331fded9cdd5a14d095ebf7cb854a6@quanstro.net> <8D6F3BBA-4FB8-47D8-9866-2CEC7C84CE99@sun.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8D6F3BBA-4FB8-47D8-9866-2CEC7C84CE99@sun.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Subject: Re: [9fans] Do we have a catalog of 9P servers? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 37c28904-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 * Roman Shaposhnik wrote: Hi, > See that's the problem. I was asking for the arguments that might > help me convince somebody who hasn't ever been exposed > to Plan9/Inferno OSes (and hasn't ever been on this list) to > consider 9P (as a protocol) to be added (as a fronted) to a major > service that Sun wants to roll out. Personally, I ran out of > ammo. Actually, I'm even going some steps further and advocating 9P and the idea of representing resources just as filesystem hierachy as a generic and elegant way of IPC in complex applications, eg. Mozilla. Right now, there's an discussion about moving things into their own processes (eg. one process per tab) @ dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org, and I just digged out my (old but still unrecognized) point of using 9P as IPC and splitting off the currently monolithic app into a bunch of fileservers. Perhaps some of you like to subscribe there and jump at my side ;) cu -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/ cellphone: +49 174 7066481 email: info@metux.de skype: nekrad666 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme ----------------------------------------------------------------------