From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201107022036.52943.dexen.devries@gmail.com> References: <201107022036.52943.dexen.devries@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2011 01:10:36 +0200 Message-ID: From: simon softnet To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015174c3f42e909a404a71e3db6 Subject: Re: [9fans] novel userspace paradigms introduced by plan 9 Topicbox-Message-UUID: f93541e2-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --0015174c3f42e909a404a71e3db6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 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 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 > > --0015174c3f42e909a404a71e3db6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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&qu= ot; 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 bu= t interesting
> concept.

linux'c `clone()' syscall (the underpinnings of fork()) actua= lly 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 factot= um
perhaps, that'd allow everybody access to those syscalls and options.



> One major difference is X11. =A0In plan9, the system handles the graph= ics
> 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 co= nsole
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=3D2692529


--0015174c3f42e909a404a71e3db6--