Re: Plan 9 (was: Re: Software Design (was: Re: [tlug] Confessions of a closet OpenBSD user))

[Uva Coder <uvacoder@example.com>]

On Sun, Jun 30, 2002 at 11:02:54AM -0400, Viktor Pavlenko wrote:
>  
> Thanks. Okay, you have intrigued me. Now the question is: how usable
> Plan9 is? Anybody run it? Is it worth playing with? (I do remember
> jokes about Plan9 in people's signatures).

I find it very usable, but there is a bit of a learning curve. Plan 9
isn't UNIX. Imagine having a 'cp' command without the '-R' switch.
You will need to find a work around for some things that you take for
granted, but otherwise it is a remarkable system. You'll not find much,
if any, bloat. BTW the OS Inferno (Plan 9-like w/ modifications) does
have a more comfortable command line, and the '-R' switch does exist in
the Inferno environment. The documentation was written by developers 
and might be difficult to interpret the meaning at times. There isn't
much in the way of HOWTOs just yet, so the enjoyment of Plan 9 amoung
individuals might vary greatly.

I'm currently evaluating the web and dns services under Plan 9. Plan 9
is secure after a fresh install. So far I have not had any problems 
running Plan 9 on my network, but I'm trying hard to find them before
possibly replacing my current web and dns servers.

Plan 9 version 2 didn't fair well with many people. Then the Plan 9
version 3 open source license was disapproved by R. Stallman as not
being a real open source license. Stallman is correct, but I'm happy to
be able to view the source anyway. Plan 9 version 4 has been overhauled
and a verdict hasn't been made to my knowledge. Having worked with
Plan 9 (versions 2, 3, and 4), I can say that Plan 9 has come a *very*
long way. 

BTW I don't subscribe to the idea that any one operating system can or
should do it all. I'm not throwing out my NetBSD and Linux CDs. But 
Plan 9, however, can currently fill a middleware niche very well. That's
my 2 cents. :)

-- Uva Coder