From: "Eric Van Hensbergen" <ericvh@gmail.com>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] why not Lvx for Plan 9?
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 12:46:37 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a4e6962a0807081046v5d4db595n5c78a867a2fba7e1@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e5af0901972596525e14b0067d3bc305@quanstro.net>
On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 11:04 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
>> I believe the reasoning is as such:
>>
>> Linux has more drivers than Plan 9, therefore Plan 9 should run on linux.
>
> in this model, all plan 9 does is add an extra layer of goo
> on top of linux. it's not like you can avoid admining
> linux by hiding on a vm running on linux.
>
That's not entirely true depending on the virtualization layer used.
I'm not experienced yet with vx32, but for example, lguest/kvm/xen can
be setup to pass-through device access to network, disk, audio,
whatever. The logical partition running Plan 9 can be essentially
pinned to a processor (or processors) and on that processor it rules
the roost. Linux just deals with device access.
I don't really think this undermines Plan 9 in any way unless you are
keen on optimizing device performance -- in which case you do indeed
most likely want native. But my point is, the Linux "I/O layer" is
essentially non-administered. It doesn't need user accounts, an IP
address, or even much of a file system (just enough to boot Plan 9
like in THX).
-ericvh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-08 17:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-08 15:28 kokamoto
2008-07-08 15:58 ` David Leimbach
2008-07-08 16:04 ` erik quanstrom
2008-07-08 16:33 ` ron minnich
2008-07-08 16:47 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-07-09 4:33 ` LiteStar numnums
2008-07-08 17:46 ` Eric Van Hensbergen [this message]
2008-07-08 17:49 ` erik quanstrom
2008-07-08 18:38 ` a
2008-07-08 19:01 ` erik quanstrom
2008-07-08 19:46 ` a
2008-07-08 20:03 ` Eric Van Hensbergen
2008-07-08 20:15 ` William Josephson
2008-07-08 20:38 ` Eric Van Hensbergen
2008-07-08 21:25 ` ron minnich
2008-07-08 22:16 ` Steve Simon
2008-07-08 22:32 ` David du Colombier
2008-07-09 0:01 ` don bailey
2008-07-09 0:13 ` ron minnich
2008-07-09 3:17 ` Eric Van Hensbergen
2008-07-09 3:43 ` ron minnich
2008-07-09 3:45 ` erik quanstrom
2008-07-09 4:44 ` David Leimbach
2008-07-08 18:50 ` David Leimbach
2008-07-08 17:19 ` Skip Tavakkolian
2008-07-10 12:58 ` matt
2008-07-10 13:47 ` Russ Cox
2008-07-10 14:03 ` erik quanstrom
[not found] ` <B94154D0-97B5-4FFF-A140-E47D95FC1307@flyingwalrus.net>
2008-07-12 15:59 ` erik quanstrom
2008-07-10 15:18 ` ron minnich
2008-07-10 16:33 ` Charles Forsyth
2008-07-10 16:36 ` ron minnich
2008-07-10 19:25 ` cinap_lenrek
2008-07-10 19:50 ` ron minnich
2008-07-11 9:10 ` Kernel Panic
2008-07-11 16:12 ` ron minnich
2008-07-10 14:01 ` erik quanstrom
2008-07-08 17:27 ` Russ Cox
2008-07-08 17:39 ` a
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=a4e6962a0807081046v5d4db595n5c78a867a2fba7e1@mail.gmail.com \
--to=ericvh@gmail.com \
--cc=9fans@9fans.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).