From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3F6B6589F529BEAECE105A71@192.168.1.2> References: <3F6B6589F529BEAECE105A71@192.168.1.2> Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 15:35:42 -0400 Message-ID: <3aaafc130904101235w4b6d7e68j5e15dcd450007f70@mail.gmail.com> From: "J.R. Mauro" To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] a bit OT, programming style question Topicbox-Message-UUID: d9f25632-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Eris Discordia w= rote: >> this is the "space-shuttle dichotomy." =A0it's a false one. =A0it's a >> continuum. its ends are dangerous. > > So somewhere in the middle is the golden mean? I have no objections to th= at. > *BSD systems very well represent a silver, if not a golden, mean--just my > idea, of course. > >> it is interesting to me that some software manages to run off both >> ends of this continuum at the same time. =A0in linux your termcap >> from 1981 will still work, but software written to access /sys last >> year is likely out-of-date. > > While I won't vouch for Linux as a good OS (user-land and kernel combined= ) I > understand what you see as its eccentricity is merely a side-effect of > openness. Tighten the development up and you get a BSD-style system > (committer/contributor/maintainer/grunt/user highest-to-lowest ranking, w= ith > a demiurge position for Theo de Raadt). Tighten it even further up with > in-ken shared among a core group of old-timers and thoroughbreds transmit= ted > only to serious researchers and you get Plan 9. > > You are right, after all. It all lies on a continuum. Actually, more tigh= tly > regulated Linux distros such as Slackware readily demonstrate that; they > easily beat all-out all-open distros like Fedora (whose existence is > probably perceived at Red Hat as a big brainstorming project). > >> your insinuation that *bsd is a real serious system and plan 9 is >> a research system doesn't make any historical sense to me. =A0they >> both started as research systems. =A0i am not aware of any law that >> prevents a system that started as a research project from becoming >> a serious production system. > > What I am insinuating is more like this: any serious system will sooner o= r > later have to grow warts and/or contract herpes. That's an unavoidable > consequence of social life. If you do insist that Plan 9 has no warts, or > far less warts than the average, or that it has never seen a cold sore on > its upper lip then I'll happily conclude it has never lived socially. And= I > haven't really ever used Plan 9 or "been into it." The no-herpes indicato= r > is that strong. So you're saying that I don't have a social life since I've never gotten he= rpes? I suppose from your demeanor that we can compare you to, say, Windows ME? > >> i know of many thousands of plan 9 systems in production right >> now. > > Good for you. Honestly. > > --On Thursday, April 09, 2009 11:06 AM -0400 erik quanstrom > wrote: > >> On Thu Apr =A09 10:48:08 EDT 2009, eris.discordia@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> Most of it in the 19 lines for one TERMCAP variable. Strictly a relic o= f >>> the past kept with all good intentions: backward compatibility, and >>> heeding >> >> [...] >> >>> Quite a considerable portion of UNIX-like systems, FreeBSD in this case= , >>> is =A0the way it is not because the developers are stupid, rather becau= se >>> they =A0have a "constituency" to tend to. They aren't carefree research= ers >>> with =A0high ambitions. >> >> this is the "space-shuttle dichotomy." =A0it's a false one. =A0it's a >> continuum. its ends are dangerous. >> >> on the one hand, if you change things, the new things are likely >> to be buggy. =A0on the space shuttle, this is bad. =A0people die. >> >> on the other hand, systems are not perfect. =A0and if the problems >> are not addressed, eventually the system will need to much fixing >> and will be abandoned. >> >> yet bringing a new system on line is an even bigger risk. =A0everything >> is new simultaneously. >> >> it is interesting to me that some software manages to run off both >> ends of this continuum at the same time. =A0in linux your termcap >> from 1981 will still work, but software written to access /sys last >> year is likely out-of-date. >> >> your insinuation that *bsd is a real serious system and plan 9 is >> a research system doesn't make any historical sense to me. =A0they >> both started as research systems. =A0i am not aware of any law that >> prevents a system that started as a research project from becoming >> a serious production system. >> >> i know of many thousands of plan 9 systems in production right >> now. >> >> - erik >> > >