Re: [9fans] Plan 9

[Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu>]

On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Wladimir Mutel wrote:

> Thomas Bushnell, BSG <tb+usenet@becket.net> wrote:
>
> > What do people think about per-process directory hierarchies?  I've
> > asked the question about four times now, and sadly, nobody in this
> > happy collaborative environment has anything to say.
>
> 	Nice thing. Linux is to borrow it :>

Not likely, unless you can show a damn good reasons why it's a good idea.

> > To repeat: Plan 9 has a nifty idea of making mount tables per-process,
> > and as a result gets huge benefits across the board.  But why stop
> > there?  Why should not *all* links (instead of just some) be a
>
> 	Linux should also borrow 'fileserver' concept.
> 	Nice to have it instead of VFS-layer. And to make userspace
> 	fileserver-processes instead of kernel VFS modules.

Huh?  What in your opinion VFS is and how could userland filesystems
replace it?  BTW, Plan 9 _does_ have VFS equivalent - code that deals
with channels, mounts, etc.