From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] USB developments From: Fco.J.Ballesteros In-Reply-To: <20040115164415.I25947@cackle.proxima.alt.za> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 15:56:36 +0100 Topicbox-Message-UUID: b9ef230e-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 > Or am I being utterly blind to something? I suppose what I'm > suggesting is to streamline the kernel so the USB, PCMCIA and > IDE/SCSI bottom halves become as close to interchangeables as > possible. It may be overkill, but once it's done, it may turn out > to be the type of investment that makes Plan 9 even more superior. With enough effort put on that, I'd probably agree with you. However, I think that would require a lot of effort to learn how to split them clearly (consider that you'd want your kernel to be operational despite user programs problems). Given that, I'd vote for duplication of code. With some effort, the code can be borrowed "as is", without keeping a different version.