Re: Posix implementation of Plan 9 cpu(1) (Was: [9fans] Command to set samterm label)

[Michael Misch <michaelmisch1985@gmail.com>]

I’ve started toying with that very idea Lucio, but I haven’t had much time to really vet the ideas. My work has been specifically for 9front and rcpu

> On Jul 18, 2021, at 9:53 PM, Lucio De Re <lucio.dere@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 7/19/21, adr via 9fans <9fans@9fans.net> wrote:
>> [ ...].  Running samterm locally is way more efficient than
>> using X forwarding.
>> 
> I have adopted on my Linux (Mint) workstations - plural - the paradigm:
> 
> ssh -fX remote acme -l lib/task.acme # for different tasks
> 
> and it works even remotely pretty adequately. The remotes tend to be
> pretty slick Debian servers, but even locally that is a  boon (NetBSD
> rules the Posix roost in my office).
> 
> What I can't do is to do the same from the Plan 9 workstation that I
> still prefer for development. I was bemoaning this in some notes to
> myself just before reading the exchange.
> 
> Now, it is very common, even after all these years of Plan 9 use, for
> me to miss the wood for the trees. I think, not very deeply, that P9P
> "cpu" running on the remote Posix server might be what I need - Plan 9
> SSH and I seem to be sworn enemies and X-fdorwarding is not even a
> twinkle in SSH's eye - and here I note that Steve Simon's cpu server
> for Windows has not been included in P9P (I heard Steve bring that up,
> but I have never explored it as I don't own a Windows platform).
> 
> In short, is it out of the question to cpu into a Posix server to
> initiate an acme session, rather than using SSH to forward X?
> 
> Lucio.

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T09fcdec9c87bfde4-M6851a6eec7243162cd9dc1d7
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription