From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <b0eb305b973b3f00b0e4aa5f90fbc9fb@orthanc.cc.titech.ac.jp>
To: rminnich@lanl.gov, 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] xcpu fix for Plan9.c
From: YAMANASHI Takeshi <9.nashi@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 11:14:06 +0900
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: 
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 9db35a6c-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> This argv model was in the original xcpu stuff, should we really instead 
> be doing this:
> echo exec date > ctl, i.e. just require the args as part of the exec 
> command? It seems easier to me somehow to do it this way.

This model looks easier to me too.  I'm curious why the original
author didn't do it this way though.
-- 
"on travel, off the network ... and a fossil in my pocket"