From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 11:57:20 +0000 From: "John S. Dyson" Message-ID: <8kf0s012ck0@enews3.newsguy.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [9fans] Any significant gotchas? Topicbox-Message-UUID: d703a8b0-eac8-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 As some of you'all *might* know, I like playing with OSes... Any major gotchas in a planned booting of plan9 on my SMP box? :-). (Dell Precision 620, dual 866 Xeon, with 1GB.) Over the last few years, I have been planning to do a fully distributed kernel. It seems that plan9 might be the best, common, at least semi-free entry in the market -- and I just don't have the energy to do a whole effort myself. Even though it isn't EXACTLY what I have been planning, it seems to be a reasonable alternate 'opinion' that I could adopt. How do you like plan9 (primarily as an experimental, education or even useful) tool? I have been intriqued by it, only primary worry so far would be scalability and other such issues (from my outside viewpoint.) Do you guys think that it would be worthwhile to invest serious time on upgrading and improving the kernel for large scale usage (on a per-cpu basis.) Has it improved alot over the last few years so that an effort isn't even appropriate? (I have NO need or desire for private use of my work, and plan to donate everything back for review and potential incorporation, as the powers that be see fit.) Thanks for your input, and I really look forward to playing with and investigating this very interesting OS entry. Hopefully, I'll be booting Plan9 in the next day or so. It does seem that Plan9 has been slowly (and lately more quickly) taking off, since the license has been made more favorable. (Please, no license advocacy, there are other places for that :-)). John