Re: [9fans] novel userspace paradigms introduced by plan 9

[simon softnet <ph.softnet@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1589 bytes --]

Plan 9 is good because it is a system designed with such principles in mind
from the start.
I don't see any meaning in Linux "adopting" some set of plan 9
commands...vanity..

On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 8:36 PM, dexen deVries <dexen.devries@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Saturday 02 July 2011 20:23:02 Eli Cohen wrote:
> > I have used gentoo extensively and plan9 for a few years now as well, and
> > this concept of "namespaces" for processes is a confusing but interesting
> > concept.
>
> linux'c `clone()' syscall (the underpinnings of fork()) actually do accept
> CLONE_NEWNS, CLONE_NEWNET, CLONE_VM and other flags, pretty close to p9's.
> there's also chroot() that moves an inch into the right direction.
>
> however, due to security reasons (the SUID bit comes to mind, but must be
> other ones too), all that -- and mount() and mount(MS_BIND, ...) -- are
> restricted to superuser only; what a shame
>
>
> maybe it is be possible to create a SUID-less Linux distro, based on
> factotum
> perhaps, that'd allow everybody access to those syscalls and options.
>
>
>
> > One major difference is X11.  In plan9, the system handles the graphics
> > more directly.
>
> afaik, x11 is considered an afterthought, bolted onto POSIX systems, and
> thus
> not integrated all that well. you can take a `screenshot' of textual
> console
> with the `cat' command, FWIW.
>
>
>
> --
> dexen deVries
>
> > (...) I never use more than 800Mb of RAM. I am running Linux,
> > a browser and a terminal.
> rjbond3rd in http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2692529
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2138 bytes --]