Re: [9fans] What are you using Plan 9 for?

[dexen deVries <dexen.devries@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4122 bytes --]

i'm using plan9port (thanks, rsc) on linux for some 8 years now, for all
coding - mostly low-brow web dev
primarily Acme as IDE, Rc and awk for scripting the necessary tooling

back when i was stuck at a corpo and had to use Windows on workstation, i
installed
p9p on one of build servers and ran Acme over LAN, through Xming
there was no noticeable latency; it felt snappier than the corpo blessed
IDE on windows

my typical setup is: slackware linux, p9p, Acme maximized on the right
screen.

a few years ago i've coded a minimalist IRC client for Acme, was
surprisingly comfy, but never followed it up
another small use case was simplistic HTTP server for game map files coded
in Rc;
just enough to handle HTTP GET with Range header. was maybe 50 lines of
shell.


On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 11:06 AM, Rui Carmo <rui.carmo@gmail.com> wrote:

> I’m late to the thread, but this seems like a good point to step in.
>
> I’m using plan9 on a quad-core Raspberry Pi as a sort of universal
> terminal to manage some of my home machines, and recently deleted the
> 9front VM I had on my home KVM server because even though the programming
> model and Go support were nice, most of my day-to-day work is on cloud
> solutions and there was no easy way to make those co-exist with Plan9 usage.
>
> There were a few discussions in this thread around dev stacks, browsers,
> etc., and my $0.02 on that is that I could probably work in Plan9 on a
> daily basis _if_ it had a usable (i.e., all the warts including JavaScript
> and fonts) web browser, but that the lack of alignment (intended or
> otherwise) with Linux tools and app stacks (SSH, Node, Python, Java) would
> make it very painful.
>
> Running a remote browser (which is what I do often in that Pi) sort of
> works, but you never get the full benefits you’d get with a native process.
> And lack of access to modern app stacks renders the platform unattractive
> for mainstream development work.
>
> But what killed it for me was the need for chording (mouse or keys). Using
> a modern trackpad on a MacBook or Surface device is a quantum leap beyond
> using a mouse for general use, and the lack of a modernised Rio with enough
> thoughtful design to overcome the differences in philosophy is the first
> barrier to continued usage.
>
> Acme is something I miss on occasion, but modern GUI editors compensate in
> other ways (at the expense of resource usage, etc., but with a massive
> boost in productivity for me). Also, I’m typing this on an iMac 5K with
> nearly unmatched font rendering and legibility (the only thing that comes
> close is the Surface Pro alongside it). Visuals matter a great deal.
>
> There is an unmatchable degree of purity in Plan9, but (even though the
> diehards will stick their ground and claim it’s perfect to the exclusion of
> other modern comforts) to coexist successfully it has to provide more
> affordances.
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> R.
>
> > On 14 Jun 2018, at 04:53, 刘宇宝 <liuyubao@yingmi.cn> wrote:
> >
> > Compared to "not for you", "don't care",  "intend to not be successful",
> I like more the topic of cat-v irc channel on freenode set by aiju:  "fun
> fact: you can use multiple operating systems at the same time".
> >
> > Certainly Plan 9 can't replace Linux/macOS/BSD/Windows, I'm still
> curious its upper bound for a sensible daily usage,  and the best practice
> from you happy experienced Plan 9 users.
> >
> > I checked mail headers in this mailing list, seems all use Apple Mail,
> iPhone Mail, WebMail with AJAX, Gmail(a lot), ProtonMail,  these emails
> went through Postfix and Exim servers, probably on Linux.
> >
> > In great harmony, we use kinds of operating system and kinds of software
> on them.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Yubao Liu
> >
> >> On Jun 14, 2018, at 10:53 AM, N. S. Montanaro <nsm@airmail.cc> wrote:
> >>
> >> I think a lot of people discover Plan 9 and want it to be something it
> isn’t, rather than stumble upon it out of necessity. As the FQA says, “Plan
> 9 is not for you."
> >
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4757 bytes --]