Re: [dev] How about sta.li ? - libc tangent

On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 11:36 PM, yy <yiyu.jgl_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/8/1 Ethan Grammatikidis <eekee57_AT_fastmail.fm>:
>>
>> Along with support servers this could
>> ultimately give a very complete Plan 9 experience without any of the
>> performance issues of virtualisation or the other issues of 9vx.
>
> Do you know what would give a more complete Plan 9 experience? Plan 9.
>
> I can see the beauty of a GNU-free staticly linked system, it is
> indeed an interesting project, but it woulld not be too useful for me.
> The reason I use p9p/9vx on top of unix is because of all the shit I
> cannot run on a native Plan 9 system, and all that shit (X and web
> browsers included) is from my pov the real challenge of the project.
> But why running Plan 9 tools on top of a crippled Unix? I'd really
> like to know a real use-case where neither a native system neither
> glibc are feasible solutions.

Most werc setups are an example of real use cases where one wants to
run Plan 9 user space tools on linux (due to
hosting/hardware-support/performance/web-server issues) while one
wants to avoid glibc mainly because it makes static linking really
hard, and dynamic linking makes fork/exec SLOW.

uriel

>
> That said, it would probably be easier to fix the issues with 9vx than
> what you are proposing. Performance is not a real problem, and it can
> be improved. Bugs can be fixed (let me know if you find any issues).
> And if 9vx does not fullfill your expectations, just use the real
> thing.
>
> --
> - yiyus || JGL . 4l77.com
>
>
Received on Mon Aug 02 2010 - 16:53:16 CEST