6 ms·

Everything in UNIX is modelled as a "file", whereas in Plan9 everything is modelled after a "burrito" - some guy on Slashdot

by jff 13y ago

mikecb 13y ago
That's in the 9 fortunes file is it not?
frik 13y ago
Plan9 needs a wider adoption. It is an evolution of UNIX design concepts: * all objects are either files or file systems * communication is over a network * private namespaces (transparent access to remote processes) [1] Even more modern concepts are in the NT kernel by Dave Cutler (VMS fame). NT uses an object metaphor that is pervasive throughout the architecture of the system. Not only are all of the things in the UNIX file metaphor viewed as objects by NT, but so are things such as processes and threads, shared memory segments, the global registry database and even access rights. [2] You can browse the NT object tree e.g. with the ReactOS Explorer on Windows or ReactOS. [3] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_9_from_Bell_Labs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_9_from_Bell_Labs [2] http://old.reactos.org/en/about.html http://old.reactos.org/en/about.html [3] http://www.foxplanet.de/explorer/ http://www.foxplanet.de/explorer/
- pjmlp 13y ago
  The NT Kernel is quite good.
  - e12e 13y ago
    I recall hearing old NT hands saying that in the early versions of NT, it was more of a micro-kernel -- eg. the video driver ran in user space. So if the video-driver crashed (obviously leaving the screen in an unusable state) -- it was still possible to restart the driver via the keyboard -- no OS reboot needed. But at the time, they couldn't get the performance they wanted, so moved the stuff into the kernel -- the rest is a long history of blue screens of death...
    - pjmlp 13y ago
      That is true story. Thankfully as of Vista, video drivers are back in userspace. NT is still a microkernel by design. What Microsoft did was to keep the modules logically separated and use kernel internal RPC to switch between areas of responsibility in the kernel. Even if it looks like a monolithic one. This is how hybrid mikrokernels tend to work. Since Vista the support for user space drivers has been improved a lot.
- rodgerd 13y ago
  It's quite fascinating, in lights of the idelogical bunfights over kdbus, systemd, and Wayland which are plaguing the Linux world, to look at what the designers of Linux did as a followup: binary IPC is baked in. Everything is a file. And so on.
  - jff 13y ago
    These guys didn't design Linux; it would work better if they had. They created Unix. Also, know how you do init in Plan 9? You add commands to an init file, and they run when the machine boots. If a service goes down for some reason, you GO RESTART IT YOURSELF.
    - rodgerd 13y ago
      > These guys didn't design Linux; it would work better if they had. They created Unix. I'm glad in your haste to snark on a typo you managed to leap over all the bits that don't correspond with your worldview.
    - lmm 13y ago
      But it's ok because plan 9 services don't crash?
      - nousernamesleft 13y ago
        Correct. Just like unix. If something crashes, there is a serious problem. Restarting it blindly is typically going to do more harm than good (allowing the attacker who crashed it infinite chances to keep trying to exploit the bug rather than just crash the process). When something crashes, you fix it, you don't just restart it and pretend that is supposed to happen.
        rodgerd 13y ago
        > If something crashes, there is a serious problem Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Providing the system owner the ability to make that decision is a feature.

Everything in UNIX is modelled as a "file", whereas in Plan9 everything is modelled after a "burrito" - some guy on Slashdot

by jff 13y ago

Everything in UNIX is modelled as a "file", whereas in Plan9 everything is modelled after a "burrito" - some guy on Slashdot

mikecb 13y ago

That's in the 9 fortunes file is it not?

frik 13y ago

Plan9 needs a wider adoption. It is an evolution of UNIX design concepts: * all objects are either files or file systems * communication is over a network * private namespaces (transparent access to remote processes) [1] Even more modern concepts are in the NT kernel by Dave Cutler (VMS fame). NT uses an object metaphor that is pervasive throughout the architecture of the system. Not only are all of the things in the UNIX file metaphor viewed as objects by NT, but so are things such as processes and threads, shared memory segments, the global registry database and even access rights. [2] You can browse the NT object tree e.g. with the ReactOS Explorer on Windows or ReactOS. [3] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_9_from_Bell_Labs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_9_from_Bell_Labs [2] http://old.reactos.org/en/about.html http://old.reactos.org/en/about.html [3] http://www.foxplanet.de/explorer/ http://www.foxplanet.de/explorer/

pjmlp 13y ago
The NT Kernel is quite good.
- e12e 13y ago
  I recall hearing old NT hands saying that in the early versions of NT, it was more of a micro-kernel -- eg. the video driver ran in user space. So if the video-driver crashed (obviously leaving the screen in an unusable state) -- it was still possible to restart the driver via the keyboard -- no OS reboot needed. But at the time, they couldn't get the performance they wanted, so moved the stuff into the kernel -- the rest is a long history of blue screens of death...
  - pjmlp 13y ago
    That is true story. Thankfully as of Vista, video drivers are back in userspace. NT is still a microkernel by design. What Microsoft did was to keep the modules logically separated and use kernel internal RPC to switch between areas of responsibility in the kernel. Even if it looks like a monolithic one. This is how hybrid mikrokernels tend to work. Since Vista the support for user space drivers has been improved a lot.
rodgerd 13y ago
It's quite fascinating, in lights of the idelogical bunfights over kdbus, systemd, and Wayland which are plaguing the Linux world, to look at what the designers of Linux did as a followup: binary IPC is baked in. Everything is a file. And so on.
- jff 13y ago
  These guys didn't design Linux; it would work better if they had. They created Unix. Also, know how you do init in Plan 9? You add commands to an init file, and they run when the machine boots. If a service goes down for some reason, you GO RESTART IT YOURSELF.
  - rodgerd 13y ago
    > These guys didn't design Linux; it would work better if they had. They created Unix. I'm glad in your haste to snark on a typo you managed to leap over all the bits that don't correspond with your worldview.
  - lmm 13y ago
    But it's ok because plan 9 services don't crash?
    - nousernamesleft 13y ago
      Correct. Just like unix. If something crashes, there is a serious problem. Restarting it blindly is typically going to do more harm than good (allowing the attacker who crashed it infinite chances to keep trying to exploit the bug rather than just crash the process). When something crashes, you fix it, you don't just restart it and pretend that is supposed to happen.
      - rodgerd 13y ago
        > If something crashes, there is a serious problem Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Providing the system owner the ability to make that decision is a feature.