Re: [9front] inquery: plans for phasing out cpu, rx and import

[Steve Simon <steve@quintile.net>]

yep,

still on the labs code base.

btw. is there a documented way to jump ship to 9 front?

-Steve

> On 9 Aug 2016, at 16:33, Kurt H Maier <khm@sciops.net> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 11:09:41AM -0400, stanley lieber wrote:
>> 
>> So we keep things like ftp and nfs clients in the base system but remove the ability to talk to Plan 9?
>> 
> 
> I didn't see this as removing support for a protocol so much as removing
> an older version of the protocol -- like not shipping support for nfsv1
> or whatever.  I have reconsidered and I agree, we should keep them.
> 
>> Disabling the listeners on 9front is obvious, and since Plan 9 is dead, maintenance is not really needed, but why remove it, exactly? Just to feel "clean"?
> 
> Originally I supported removing them because they were completely
> superseded by rcpu et al; if what we have is sufficient, it would
> simplify code maintenance and documentation, presumably, to remove the
> cruft.
> 
>> We still keep a lot of other dirty stuff, specifically so we can talk to other outmoded servers that are not even Plan 9. Maybe Plan 9 systems are so rare it doesn't matter, but this policy seems quite randomly applied.
> 
> This is what made me reconsider -- as long as sources is up, I don't
> like the idea of losing access to labs contrib.  Obviously we could
> make it available with our tools...
> 
> ... on the other hand, when was the last time any of us saw a labs plan
> 9 installation that wasn't some transient nerd totem, like a raspberry
> pi or something?  
> 
> Anyone on this list touch labs plan 9 on the regular?
> 
> khm