* Roman Shaposhnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi,
> See that's the problem. I was asking for the arguments that might > help me convince somebody who hasn't ever been exposed > to Plan9/Inferno OSes (and hasn't ever been on this list) to > consider 9P (as a protocol) to be added (as a fronted) to a major > service that Sun wants to roll out. Personally, I ran out of > ammo. Actually, I'm even going some steps further and advocating 9P and the idea of representing resources just as filesystem hierachy as a generic and elegant way of IPC in complex applications, eg. Mozilla. Right now, there's an discussion about moving things into their own processes (eg. one process per tab) @ [EMAIL PROTECTED], and I just digged out my (old but still unrecognized) point of using 9P as IPC and splitting off the currently monolithic app into a bunch of fileservers. Perhaps some of you like to subscribe there and jump at my side ;) cu -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/ cellphone: +49 174 7066481 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] skype: nekrad666 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme ----------------------------------------------------------------------
