Re: [9fans] porting from vs. porting to Plan 9

[bs <bs@nospam.com>]

Here are my thoughts:

To interoperate with other OS's out there one should port 9P2000 and
the 9fs (u9fs) to those OS's at a minimum, and support CIFS and NFS at
a minimum.
Slamming the namespace into the other OS's might pose a problem, or
almost close to impossible.
With this, one can get into co-existing everywhere.

With the port of the libraries from p9, one can, if they want, start
writing portable code going forward. This way we can build up the base.

The bigger challenge now is how to work with all the h/w bits out there:
If one can only understand the clear differences between a
plan9 device driver and a linux/bsd driver, even twits like me can
contribute to converting them. Hey, run through a translator, compile
a few times and get it standing up.

This IMO can atleast help getting p9 closer to the masses. (This will
still not get us a browser, but if the python port is complete, one
can try porting Grail over. May be we need Tk too.).

-bs