From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3e1162e60807081150h19fc1991sada17c19e4ed855f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 11:50:41 -0700 From: "David Leimbach" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@9fans.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_27479_23443698.1215543041349" References: <3e1162e60807080858o499bc3c4l514056f090751e4@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [9fans] why not Lvx for Plan 9? Topicbox-Message-UUID: defc990e-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 ------=_Part_27479_23443698.1215543041349 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 9:04 AM, erik quanstrom wrote: > > I believe the reasoning is as such: > > > > Linux has more drivers than Plan 9, therefore Plan 9 should run on linux. > > if that's the argument, wouldn't it make sense to get > rid of plan 9? I'm just saying I would never consider running linux on plan 9. I can't think of a single reason I'd ever want to do that, because, linux is so much easier to get installed on real hardware than plan 9. > > in this model, all plan 9 does is add an extra layer of goo > on top of linux. it's not like you can avoid admining > linux by hiding on a vm running on linux. If the goal was to avoid admining linux then one shouldn't run linux. That's not much of an argument. May as well run 9vx on FreeBSD :-) Same argument holds. > > i don't mean to use a broad brush. there are good reasons > for running plan 9 in a vm on linux -- like you want to use > a linux hosting company. > > but linux didn't get where it is by using windows as > a device driver. Nope Linux got where it is by apache. > > > - erik > > > ------=_Part_27479_23443698.1215543041349 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline

On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 9:04 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
> I believe the reasoning is as such:
>
> Linux has more drivers than Plan 9, therefore Plan 9 should run on linux.

if that's the argument, wouldn't it make sense to get
rid of plan 9?

I'm just saying I would never consider running linux on plan 9.  I can't think of a single reason I'd ever want to do that, because, linux is so much easier to get installed on real hardware than plan 9.



in this model, all plan 9 does is add an extra layer of goo
on top of linux.  it's not like you can avoid admining
linux by hiding on a vm running on linux.

If the goal was to avoid admining linux then one shouldn't run linux.  That's not much of an argument.  May as well run 9vx on FreeBSD :-)  Same argument holds.



i don't mean to use a broad brush.  there are good reasons
for running plan 9 in a vm on linux -- like you want to use
a linux hosting company.

but linux didn't get where it is by using windows as
a device driver.

Nope Linux got where it is by apache.
 


- erik



------=_Part_27479_23443698.1215543041349--