From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 11:44:57 +0300 From: "Filipp Andronov" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] A newbie question... In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <0e742be69697735012d14c6319071fa1@terzarima.net> <5d375e920802020941k6f662ab1s3ac9a41d6d95bb66@mail.gmail.com> <20080202182756.GA862@shodan.homeunix.net> <47A50832.7000801@gmail.com> <7359f0490802021630x565b53al44c4642a8ea7909@mail.gmail.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: 41a33f50-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Hmmm, my question was not about new ideological war "GNU vs Plan9". )) I think that my bad English does not allow me to ask my question in correct form, so i will show some sample :) For example, in Linux i have some big application. This application using autotools, so if a want to port it, for example on different OS (of course if this OS has autotools) or hardware all i need is go throw sources and put something like: #ifdef RUN_IN_CYGWIN // some specific code #endif After that i need to add extra tests in configure and autotools will do all magic for me :) The main trouble is that all sources has really many pieces of #ifdef code, so it could be very painful to drop out "portability in GNU way". But it's ok, until that is a only way. Ok, for me "porting" to plan9 looks like: 1. Drop out autotools from project 2. Replace all OS specific code to Plan9 equivalent 3. Replace all libs to it's equivalent for plan9 4. and so on Main trouble in 1 step. Because after that i couldn't post in project mail list, "Hey gays, i have create Plan9 port of your application, please check it out and put in CVS trunk". If i "port" some application in that way, that mean that I've start new one, "from scratch" and just copy & paste some code from original project :(( I hope that i have logical mistakes in my example, and you show me that, because if not it could be very sad :)) 2008/2/3, Eris Discordia : > On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 00:30:38 -0000, Rob Pike wrote: > > >> An alternative interpretation is that the facts are skewed by the Bell > >> Labs reality distortion field. The syllogism goes something like this: > >> > >> All things not made at Bell Labs are bad > >> GNU is not made at Bell Labs > >> Therefore, GNU is bad > >> > > > > If you think about what the letters of GNU stand for, you might > > appreciate > > that the forms are in mutual opposition. They provide completely > > different > > approaches to software. "Good" and "Bad" are value judgments. If > > you think GNU is the right way to build things, Plan 9 is probably not > > for you, and vice versa. > > > > -rob > > Is that "the" Rob Pike? "The R?" > > If so, please accept me humble reverence, sire! Hallowed be thy practice > (of programming)! > > P. S. Down here in my country, Iran, we have this tradition of inventing > sacred things out of thin air. A considerable proportion of "the divine > and the sacred" spilled all over the globe began with that frailty of ours > :-D > > -- > Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ >