> Hi, > > > so you might get more hardware support, but you'd lose all the userspace > > code, so would it really end up that much more capable? > > I don't understand what "lose all the userspace code" means. The > objective of the exercise is to enable Plan 9's userspace to work > unmodified on Linux. > > It boils down to Linux's drivers/schedulers/et.al. but Plan 9's > programming environment. You'd still use /net to do network programming, > use libdraw and not X, so to the programmer the fact that the > distribution is running the Linux kernel is not known. > > Performance-wise, I see how it would be a bad idea; since read/write to > /net will ultimately result in a socket-like call, so there would be a > overhead. > > -- > Anant
what an unholy marrage! what happens when you're tracking a bug? do you give up when it enters linux? how do you configure hardware if you're not going to use the linux machinery? why are linux schedulers interesting? i think that rather than the best of both worlds, you'd end up with the worst of both. all the joys of linux administration and yet no (insert favorite browser here). - erik
