From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
In-Reply-To: <2899e2610705070002w6149e8ael8906f08dd18d511c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2e4a50a0705041308l35428c44w2e16f8d26a72a22f@mail.gmail.com>
	<32d987d50705041917p35c4ef7dnd031b96c1a858181@mail.gmail.com>
	<2899e2610705070002w6149e8ael8906f08dd18d511c@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Message-Id: <995FEF92-5BD4-4A41-8304-E3375DE7EE80@tinker.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Kim Shrier <kim@tinker.com>
Subject: Re: [9fans] rio & acme & plan9
Date: Mon,  7 May 2007 11:57:21 -0600
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 5edbcf20-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On May 7, 2007, at 1:02 AM, Wes wrote:

> I've had some success compiling a cpu+auth+term plan9 kernel for a
> learning box before, worked really well too.  I would ask why it's not
> done by default but then I remind myself 'thats not the plan9 way to
> think!' and ignore my own question. :)
>
> Wes
>

OK, since I am new to plan 9, and I am interested in the plan 9 way
to think, could you explain what is wrong with a cpu+auth+term kernel?
Just to put forward my ignorance, I would think that you would need
to have term plus any other server you needed.  I would think that I
need some sort of console access to any kind of server.  Would that
not entail having a terminal server at a minimum?

Kim