Re: plan 9 (was /proc/pid again)
Snow Cat (snowcat@gd.cs.csufresno.edu)
Sat, 24 Jun 1995 17:53:38 -0700 (PDT)
Brian Ward once wrote:
>
> I hate to go off like this, but there are a few misunderstandings here..
>
> Darin Johnson <djohnson@cs.ucsd.edu> writes:
> |Yes and no. Plan 9 is really a research kernel. It will have many
> |problems if it is tried to fit into the real world. Unlike UNIX, it
> |does not have outside development, and only features that Rob Pike
> |thinks are useful get in (there's no terminal control, thus no editors
> |but the mouse oriented one).
>
> The whole point behind "no terminal control" is that terminals are an
> antiquated idea of the '60s. The plan 9 idea is to throw all the antiques
> into the junkyard because they're slow, inefficient, and downright backwards.
> You've got "modern" hardware now, so it's time to actually use it. Which
> brings us now to: "so why haven't they written a compatibility library yet?"
> Why should they? People would just use their outdated, scummy vt100 programs
> until the end of time. (I would miss the bsd games, though... time to port.).
>
Well, does your definition of "modern hardware" include 9600 and 14400bps
modems? I am running term on a 14400 line and I am unimpressed with
performance of remote X applications. It's much more fun to run "emacs -nw"
than emacs.
--
Snow ^oo^ Cat <snowcat@gd.cs.CSUFresno.EDU>
_ -> <- aka Oleg Kibirev <oleg@gd.cs.CSUFresno.EDU>
___(_) _ _)_
/ _)
\_.-._
|___/ Purr!