From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201105052345.27828.errno@cox.net> References: <20110506042334.GA5763@fangle.proxima.alt.za> <201105052345.27828.errno@cox.net> Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 09:08:08 +0200 Message-ID: From: ron minnich To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: Re: [9fans] Compiling 9atom kernel WAS: Re: spaces in filenames Topicbox-Message-UUID: de3710c8-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 8:45 AM, errno wrote: > The above described standard thing is more in line with my capabilities. yes, but that is not the issue, or should not be. The issue should be "what's the way to get to goal in an esthetic manner". There's plenty of systems you can take what you know and get something going. If you're not here to learn, then what's the point? > In other words, I think I can manage to eventually port small ad-hoc > stuff; and then slowly "bake" it closer and closer to something that > is more and more "9'ish". I don't agree. Put it this way: if your something doesn't start with webfs then it's probably impossible to make 9-ish. > After a few months of reading and learning and actual hands-on > experience, I've found that rio and acme and mk and 8c ,etc., are > far less interesting than union directories, per-process namespaces, > 9p and intrinsic, ubiquitous distributed computing - that's where I > personally think the action is at. The I humbly submit that you may have Missed The Point. > > I don't care what editor or compiler someone uses; but the idea of cpu'ing > from a smartphone to run heavy-weight processes (for just one example) > gets the geek in me pretty excited with possibility. well, maybe you haven't :-) ron