lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [May]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Plan-9 is definitely _NOT_ a failure (Re: Ken Thompson interview in IEEE Computer magazine (fwd))
Dammit, I wish people would actually quote my remarks in a thread (not
you, David).

My reply in THIS thread was that Plan 9 was never a mainstream commercial
sucess, and commending on Ken Thompson's use of the phrase "[Linux] will
probably not be very suscessful".

I remember a lot of buzz in the mid 90's that Plan 9 was designed to be
the next "Unix killer", and then the project got pulled. If you go through
Bell Labs web pages on Plan 9, there is a comment that there is no on at
Bell working on it, instead most members got pulled to Inferno, or other
projects.

AND I stated that my impression was that technically, Plan 9 was a very
good and elegant system. It just didn't go anywhere.

jf


On Thu, 6 May 1999, David Miller wrote:

> Isn't plan9 what the AT&T ES switches run for an OS? I'd certainly not
> consider it a failure under those circumstances.
>
> And to call plan9 a failure because it hasn't achieved a widely accepted
> position in the computer comunity is simply ignorant:(
>
> --- David Miller
>


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:51    [W:0.262 / U:1.900 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site