From: Roman Shaposhnik <rvs@sun.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] directly opening Plan9 devices
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 21:02:45 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9D53E35A-6A8A-43C7-A1A7-98D566FC061A@sun.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fc9503cdf5b5bcce1224bc177b0d072d@terzarima.net>
On Jan 5, 2009, at 3:00 AM, Charles Forsyth wrote:
>> Things like
>> term% cd '#|'
>> term% pwd
>> #|
>> just don't seem right.
>
> you ask for fish; you get fish.
> what's the trouble?
I supposed this is a matter of taste. There's as little
trouble with the above as with //foo != /foo on certain
legacy systems. Or, as was pointed out by Roman Z,
with MS-DOS drive nomenclature. They all work fine.
Yet, the closer I can get to a single namespace rooted
at / the better I feel. With #X I get at least two: one rooted
at / and the other one rooted at #.
And just to be completely clear: the #X notation doesn't
bother me when #X can be thought of as a weird cousin
of '/srv/#X'. Both are simply channels that need to be
mounted in order for the file hierarchy to appear. See,
I would go even as far as to say that, even though I know
there's no 9P involved with #X, I wouldn't mind at all
if open("#X", ORDWR) gave me an illusion of 9P messages
being exchanged.
The implicit attach that happens behind my back
when I access #X/foo is what makes me cringe.
Thanks,
Roman.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-06 5:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-03 21:44 Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-03 21:46 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-03 21:56 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-03 22:03 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-03 22:40 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-03 22:46 ` Francisco J Ballesteros
2009-01-03 22:56 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-04 5:00 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-04 5:40 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-04 4:58 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-03 22:57 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-03 23:15 ` Russ Cox
2009-01-03 23:17 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-04 5:07 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-04 5:05 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-03 22:21 ` Francisco J Ballesteros
2009-01-03 22:40 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-04 5:12 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-04 5:27 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-04 5:39 ` lucio
2009-01-04 5:42 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-05 0:52 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-05 6:21 ` Roman Zhukov
2009-01-05 11:00 ` Charles Forsyth
2009-01-06 5:02 ` Roman Shaposhnik [this message]
2009-01-06 14:17 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-07 16:55 ` ron minnich
2009-01-07 17:16 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-08 5:13 ` ron minnich
2009-01-08 13:37 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-08 14:03 ` Charles Forsyth
2009-01-08 15:36 ` ron minnich
2009-01-08 15:44 ` erik quanstrom
2009-01-08 17:34 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-08 17:35 ` Charles Forsyth
2009-01-08 7:45 ` Dave Eckhardt
2009-01-08 17:43 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-08 23:30 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
2009-01-04 7:01 ` Russ Cox
2009-01-04 11:41 ` lucio
2009-01-04 13:01 ` Uriel
2009-01-04 13:16 ` lucio
2009-01-05 0:41 ` Roman V. Shaposhnik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9D53E35A-6A8A-43C7-A1A7-98D566FC061A@sun.com \
--to=rvs@sun.com \
--cc=9fans@9fans.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).