* [9fans] any reason not to have srv in namespace?
@ 2003-03-28 19:07 Fco.J.Ballesteros
2003-03-28 19:14 ` Russ Cox
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Fco.J.Ballesteros @ 2003-03-28 19:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans
Now that we got `.' in namespace, I'm wondering if
there's any reason not to have srv there too.
We had to add a srv command and some mount & binds to our termrc
despite that smelling to a namespace(6) thing.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] any reason not to have srv in namespace?
2003-03-28 19:07 [9fans] any reason not to have srv in namespace? Fco.J.Ballesteros
@ 2003-03-28 19:14 ` Russ Cox
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Russ Cox @ 2003-03-28 19:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans
I don't think srv should be there.
For one thing, it's too big and clunky.
Cpurc and termrc exist to set up
the initial environment. Namespace
is for setting up a new name space
from the existing environment.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-03-28 19:14 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-03-28 19:07 [9fans] any reason not to have srv in namespace? Fco.J.Ballesteros
2003-03-28 19:14 ` Russ Cox
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).