From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: lyndon@orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2017 19:34:11 -0700
Subject: [TUHS] Charles Forsyth on putting Unix on a diet.
In-Reply-To: <20171028020100.26A50156E7D7@mail.bitblocks.com>
References: <20171027103648.4030118C08A@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
 <CAC20D2MEkvO_yOYjiR0_reL7VB=GmtHS0RTGCBEf56_ZWPc7Ew@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.BSF.2.02.1710270922200.5457@frieza.hoshinet.org>
 <CALMnNGiKFq4UpdOxqoit1+24vakP=qH6bn+PsQxtApSQOVKOXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20171028020100.26A50156E7D7@mail.bitblocks.com>
Message-ID: <921D6FFC-DD60-406F-B90E-EC40DB638624@orthanc.ca>

> I wish there was a way to evolve plan9 into a modern Unix.
> Making an existing modern Unix diet into a lean OS is close to
> impossible.

But if you try to turn Plan9 into a lean UNIX, you lose everything that Plan9 advocates.  In particular, I don't see how you can possibly integrate namespaces into UNIX in any meaningful way.  Without those, it's no longer Plan9, and therefore a pointless endeavour.

> A unix kernel boils down to a few subsystems: device drivers +
> device switch, scheduling, VM, networking and network switch,
> filesystems + filesystem switch, interrupt handling, process
> management. Some graphics support. A bunch of this can be
> pushed out of the kernel without much loss of efficiency.  And
> may be the original design decisions of Unix need to be
> revisited for 21st century hardware.

The release of the 10th Edition UNIX source is much more enlightening.  Here you can see a fully functional UNIX with what, 29?, system calls?  And you can see the genesis of many of the Plan9 concepts (/proc, dial(), mk, mux, etc).

--lyndon