* [9fans] fun quote @ 2009-09-17 12:14 erik quanstrom 2009-09-17 12:34 ` Jack Norton 2009-09-17 16:27 ` matt 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: erik quanstrom @ 2009-09-17 12:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 9fans i don't know how ingo managed to put his finger on so many reasons i enjoy plan 9 by counterexample. Linux is a 18+ years old kernel, there's not that many easy projects left in it anymore :-/ Core kernel features that look basic and which are not in Linux yet often turn out to be not that simple. -- Ingo Molnar - erik ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] fun quote 2009-09-17 12:14 [9fans] fun quote erik quanstrom @ 2009-09-17 12:34 ` Jack Norton 2009-09-17 12:52 ` erik quanstrom 2009-09-17 16:27 ` matt 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Jack Norton @ 2009-09-17 12:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs erik quanstrom wrote: > i don't know how ingo managed to put his > finger on so many reasons i enjoy plan 9 > by counterexample. > > Linux is a 18+ years old kernel, there's not that > many easy projects left in it anymore :-/ Core kernel > features that look basic and which are not in Linux > yet often turn out to be not that simple. > -- Ingo Molnar > > - erik > > Now, Plan 9's kernel is pretty old too, isn't it? If Plan9 had become a bit more widely accepted, even as late as, let's say, 2002, do you think it would have become an unruly and frighteningly complicated beast as linux has? What has saved other 'popular' kernels from this? For instance, no body ever complains about FreeBSD being a complex cluster f***, but it has pretty wide adoption (even as a 'desktop'). What about OS X? Has Apple's arrogance and secrecy saved it from.... open source development? It seems like they release code only after they are damn sure they've gotten all they can out of it. So, is Linux the unwanted poster-child of open source development? I think an argument could be made. -Jack ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] fun quote 2009-09-17 12:34 ` Jack Norton @ 2009-09-17 12:52 ` erik quanstrom 2009-09-17 15:30 ` Jack Norton 2009-09-17 16:02 ` David Leimbach 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: erik quanstrom @ 2009-09-17 12:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 9fans > Now, Plan 9's kernel is pretty old too, isn't it? that's the point. age is a red herring. > What has saved other 'popular' kernels from this? For instance, no body > ever complains about FreeBSD being a complex cluster, but it has > pretty wide adoption (even as a 'desktop'). What about OS X? Has > Apple's arrogance and secrecy saved it from.... open source > development? It seems like they release code only after they are damn > sure they've gotten all they can out of it. so you're saying that osx is not complicated? - erik ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] fun quote 2009-09-17 12:52 ` erik quanstrom @ 2009-09-17 15:30 ` Jack Norton 2009-09-17 16:00 ` james toy 2009-09-17 16:05 ` David Leimbach 2009-09-17 16:02 ` David Leimbach 1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Jack Norton @ 2009-09-17 15:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs erik quanstrom wrote: >> Now, Plan 9's kernel is pretty old too, isn't it? >> > > that's the point. age is a red herring. > > >> What has saved other 'popular' kernels from this? For instance, no body >> ever complains about FreeBSD being a complex cluster, but it has >> pretty wide adoption (even as a 'desktop'). What about OS X? Has >> Apple's arrogance and secrecy saved it from.... open source >> development? It seems like they release code only after they are damn >> sure they've gotten all they can out of it. >> > > so you're saying that osx is not complicated? > > - erik > > No, no, it is, what I mean is that I haven't heard similar sentiments towards the open source released by Apple. Apple's 'open source' is software that is developed in a closed source fashion, then released as open source when the time is right, as opposed to Linux and related software, which are developed, almost from the ground up, as open source. This is the impression I get anyway. -Jack ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] fun quote 2009-09-17 15:30 ` Jack Norton @ 2009-09-17 16:00 ` james toy 2009-09-17 16:05 ` David Leimbach 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: james toy @ 2009-09-17 16:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs ==8<== > No, no, it is, what I mean is that I haven't heard similar sentiments > towards the open source released by Apple. Apple's 'open source' is > software that is developed in a closed source fashion, then released as > open source when the time is right, as opposed to Linux and related > software, which are developed, almost from the ground up, as open source. > This is the impression I get anyway. ==8<== Yes and no; a lot of xnu is derived from FreeBSD. There are certainly caveats and areas where this is not true; however, I believe that anyone can get their hands on the source code whilst in development with a premier apple developer account. In some ways I understand this method or source control and in others I do not. It seems geared to a more "professional" crowd because I highly doubt many people are willing to shell out _thousands_ of dollars to get their hands on source code ~6-12 months in advance. It seems more a company would be willing to have an ADC account to get the xnu source early because they need to provide updates to drivers etc etc etc.. james francis toy iv ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] fun quote 2009-09-17 15:30 ` Jack Norton 2009-09-17 16:00 ` james toy @ 2009-09-17 16:05 ` David Leimbach 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: David Leimbach @ 2009-09-17 16:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1895 bytes --] On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Jack Norton <jack@0x6a.com> wrote: > erik quanstrom wrote: > >> Now, Plan 9's kernel is pretty old too, isn't it? >>> >>> >> >> that's the point. age is a red herring. >> >> >> >>> What has saved other 'popular' kernels from this? For instance, no body >>> ever complains about FreeBSD being a complex cluster, but it has pretty wide >>> adoption (even as a 'desktop'). What about OS X? Has Apple's arrogance and >>> secrecy saved it from.... open source development? It seems like they >>> release code only after they are damn sure they've gotten all they can out >>> of it. >>> >> >> so you're saying that osx is not complicated? >> >> - erik >> >> >> > No, no, it is, what I mean is that I haven't heard similar sentiments > towards the open source released by Apple. Apple's 'open source' is > software that is developed in a closed source fashion, then released as > open source when the time is right, as opposed to Linux and related > software, which are developed, almost from the ground up, as open source. > This is the impression I get anyway. > -Jack > > As a former member of the OpenDarwin project, I can tell you your impression of Apple's open source is pretty correct. They like to share the source, and people are allowed to port things they do to other platforms, and submit patches and stuff gets into the mainline (like FreeBSD support for libdispatch and such seems like it's going to). Or you can just fork it and make your own thing, but they're goal is probably the wider code review that the community offers more so than sharing and being a nice open source community member. It is nice that they've started licensing some stuff under Apache instead of some of their other licenses of the past, however I really feel Apple's open source is more of a one-way street. Dave [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2678 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] fun quote 2009-09-17 12:52 ` erik quanstrom 2009-09-17 15:30 ` Jack Norton @ 2009-09-17 16:02 ` David Leimbach 1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: David Leimbach @ 2009-09-17 16:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 921 bytes --] On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 5:52 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>wrote: > > Now, Plan 9's kernel is pretty old too, isn't it? > > that's the point. age is a red herring. > > > What has saved other 'popular' kernels from this? For instance, no body > > ever complains about FreeBSD being a complex cluster, but it has > > pretty wide adoption (even as a 'desktop'). What about OS X? Has > > Apple's arrogance and secrecy saved it from.... open source > > development? It seems like they release code only after they are damn > > sure they've gotten all they can out of it. > > so you're saying that osx is not complicated? > I think Mach makes me go cross-eyed. It's not at all what it was meant to be. Wedging that stuff in with IOKit and BSD stuff makes me feel lost, and yes I've hacked on XNU, the hybrid beast that it is, and run Mac OS X on my own kernels. > > - erik > > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1495 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] fun quote 2009-09-17 12:14 [9fans] fun quote erik quanstrom 2009-09-17 12:34 ` Jack Norton @ 2009-09-17 16:27 ` matt 2009-09-17 16:45 ` erik quanstrom 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: matt @ 2009-09-17 16:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs look who's trolling now :) >i don't know how ingo managed to put his >finger on so many reasons i enjoy plan 9 >by counterexample. > >Linux is a 18+ years old kernel, there's not that >many easy projects left in it anymore :-/ Core kernel >features that look basic and which are not in Linux >yet often turn out to be not that simple. > -- Ingo Molnar > >- erik > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] fun quote 2009-09-17 16:27 ` matt @ 2009-09-17 16:45 ` erik quanstrom 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: erik quanstrom @ 2009-09-17 16:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 9fans On Thu Sep 17 12:28:18 EDT 2009, maht-9fans@maht0x0r.net wrote: > look who's trolling now :) if that's your opinion, then maybe you have misunderstood my point. perhaps i made it poorly. the plan 9 kernel often looks basic but is actually quite sophisticated. (this is even more true of the fileserver kernel.) it is also easy to understand and modify. it does not seem logical to assume that this point is not widely a conviction that leads to action. - erik ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-09-17 16:45 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2009-09-17 12:14 [9fans] fun quote erik quanstrom 2009-09-17 12:34 ` Jack Norton 2009-09-17 12:52 ` erik quanstrom 2009-09-17 15:30 ` Jack Norton 2009-09-17 16:00 ` james toy 2009-09-17 16:05 ` David Leimbach 2009-09-17 16:02 ` David Leimbach 2009-09-17 16:27 ` matt 2009-09-17 16:45 ` erik quanstrom
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).