Re: [tlug] Peeling onions.

[Josh Glover <jmglov@example.com>]

On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 00:50:39 +0900, Uva Coder
<uva.coder@example.com> wrote:

> Yeah, but I see GRUB and LILO as being train wrecks. I only see them
> as getting worse.

While I would agree with you whole-heartedly on LILO, I actually think
GRUB is quite nice. Elegant design within the limitations imposed by
each architecture, very extensible. What makes you see a train wreck,
specifically?

> I view the GNU way as a more restrictive paradigm than other closed or
> open source projects. I don't see GNU as a coherent foundation where
> all applications can share resources through a system protocol (i.e.,
> P9 protocol). From my understanding, even V Kernel did the same thing
> to allow for process migration. GNU addresses neither. But that is
> just the tip of the iceberg.

Isn't this the Unix paradigm, though? I thought that Unix provided
these different IPC methods so that the messaging protocols could be
deferred to the application level. While I see the power of a system
protocol like P9 (please excuse my blatant assumptions here about what
P9 does--I am just inferring from context as I go here, being ignorant
of Plan 9's design and implementation), I also understand why you need
generic IPC as well. (Again, I know nothing of Plan 9, but knowing the
way the BL chaps think--or at least, I *think* that I know how they
think, having devoured all of the books that they have written--I
imagine that it does both).

> I won't bore the ideas about namespaces and globally sharing system
> resources.

I would love to find out more. Is there a document on the order of
10-25 pages that hits the highlights of Plan 9's design? If so, please
point me to it.

> As for sharing data, the popular things nowadays are nfs,
> scp, ftp, and http; how sad an existence we live. I believe we can do
> much better. Why not a single protocol that extends across all
> boundaries to access data the same way, securely and safely across
> networks? A file is a file, right? If you are concerned about opening
> a file the protocol doesn't do that but a utility.

Agreed. And, if I am not totally off-base, that is one of the biggest
ideas behind Plan 9, right?

> I'll end here. I'm sure folks are getting tired of my ideas.

Au contraire, mon frere (rhyme intended, give me a cookie)! I am
finding this discussion one of the most interesting that we have had
in these parts in many moons. Hell, I think SJT and wileyc have posted
more in this thread (and the related ones) than in the past year
combined! :)

Seriously, this is quite reminiscent of the atmosphere that first
attracted me to TLUG, five years ago.

-Josh