From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 16:54:07 -0600 From: "Eric Van Hensbergen" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] consterm In-Reply-To: <5d375e920711061439l2397764cq8037fe056c46054d@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <5d375e920711061439l2397764cq8037fe056c46054d@mail.gmail.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: ed67de78-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On 11/6/07, Uriel wrote: > Why not just use Inferno? Caerwyn posted two lines that can > be run on an inferno terminal and will 'cpu' into a plan9 box. > I'm looking for something lighter weight than Inferno or full-blown Drawterm -- something that lets me 'cpu' from an xterm is just about right -- and I can accept using a 'consterm' version of drawterm to get that light-weight access. Part of this is personal laziness -- I usually need to get in and out to copy files, which I could do if I just used a proper v9fs setup plus factotum. I actually wanted one of these for Inferno as well - we were using a single Inferno instance to manage multiple libOS partitions - it seemed kind of silly to start up other Inferno partitions just to launch applications on the "controller" Inferno. I ended up working around this in another way, but something like cpu would have been preferable. However, I'm also thinking longer term - towards the FastOS project where users aren't going to necessarily want to fire up a whole 'environment' such as Inferno or Drawterm just to execute an application on the cluster -- particularly if that application isn't graphical. -eric