1. 26
  1. 2

    I like it. Sadly, I can’t use it. Too many things I need are missing.

    1. 2

      Hint: launch 9front in qemu with a vnc unix domain socket, set it up from it, then connect to it through the (latest) drawterm.

      You will have a resizable “plan 9 window” with a well-integrated copy-paste buffer, that have access to the host’s files through /mnt/term/home/user/Images/wallpaper.png on plan 9.

      Operating systems are fun. Why limit to just 1?

      Feel free to tell me if more details are requested.

    2. 2

      I wish I could like Plan 9 and 9front but ever since my RSI got real bad I can’t use acme or 9term anymore, and some of the weird quirks were getting annoying. If only Plan 9 had come with normal terminals and normal editors and normal tools - then it probably would’ve recieved some adoption, but the UX is far too alien to switch people from POSIX.

      1. 4

        Plan 9 has ed, sam, awk, sed, etc. The full raft of pipeline enabled tools. I guess you miss curses? But how does Ctrl-[foo] tomfoolery help with your RSI?

        Plan 9 was pretty much dead before Linux really got off the ground, mass adoption wise. Even before the web was a requirement. Back then, people were mad about the license, and FUD spread quickly in the era of the BSD lawsuits.

        Most of the stuff that’s missing is missing on purpose. The authors didn’t want to repeat the same mistakes, and preferred to keep the base system spartan. Worse being better. The onus was on users to implement desired features, with no expectation of having those changes accepted back into the system. Kind of like Research UNIX.

        1. 1

          But how does Ctrl-[foo] tomfoolery help with your RSI?

          I don’t use many programs that require the ctrl key for normal usage, but I use an ergodox and ctrl is under my thumb anyhow where it’s far more sufferable on a bad say. Sam and acme require massive mouse usage. ed, although it is the standard text editor, really does not work for me as an editing environment.

          Even if you consider with these tools the gang’s all here - you can’t scroll terminals without the mouse, you can’t interrupt a process using the keyboard from a command line (instead of inside rio’s terminal where it is del), just weird little things all throughout the UX that made it feel like things suck.

          1. 2

            I use the sam -d option (no graphics), which presents an interface similar to ed.

            Scrolling in a terminal is not tied to the mouse; up arrow/down arrow, pgup/pgdn, home/end, also work fine. In 9front’s rio you can even hold down shift to cause the arrow keys to scroll only one line.

            Many programs respond to Ctl-d (and other signals), but it sounds like you’re complaining specifically about running rc on UNIX, where indeed, many terminal’s default settings will not honor Del in the way rc expects. This is an artifact of your specific combination of tools, not really a fault of Plan 9, which doesn’t expect you to be running its tools on UNIX.

            If you don’t like it you don’t like it, but some of these criticisms consist essentially of misunderstandings about how the system works. It is true Plan 9 asks the user to reconsider entrenched habits, but that’s going to be true of any sufficiently radical departure from the status quo.

            I used to be a vi purist.

            1. 2

              Re job control: you might want to check out hubfs: https://bitbucket.org/mycroftiv/ants9front/src/default/

            2. 2

              you can’t interrupt a process using the keyboard from a command line (instead of inside rio’s terminal where it is del)

              What do you mean, “from a command line”? How is that distinct from a Rio terminal? Do you mean the VGA text console? Why are you using that? It’s basically there so that you can start rio, or debug a CPU server.

          2. 2


            Plan9 can be mostly driven from its filesystem.

            Also you might want to try rlwrap drawterm -G which adds a curses input layer over a plain text rc shell.

            1. 2

              If you want normal editors and normal tools, you already know where to get them. Why bother with plan 9?

              1. 3

                Presumably because once you get out of the basic things like editors and terminals, trying to do more advanced things on plan9 are Just Better. Classic example: containers/jails. Not sure if Plan 9 has the tools for application-level isolation to this extent, but having an actually uniform device interface model with namespaces and per-application mount points and such is far superior to Linux’s random piles of kernel-defined capabilities.

                1. 2

                  Classic example: containers/jails. Not sure if Plan 9 has the tools for application-level isolation to this extent

                  It doesn’t. Take a look at the ‘#/’ device. With it, access ‘/’. To get rid of it, you need to get rid of other things like creating pipes.

                  Edit: Also, the people suggesting changes to plan 9 invariably don’t care enough to actually work on those changes. There’s not much interest in back-seat drivers.

                2. 1

                  It has a better system architecture, it has a better design ethos, and I like a lot of the tools more or equally as much as the POSIX equivalent.

                  1. 3

                    FWIW, vim and emacs have both been ported to Plan 9. There even exists a UNIX-y terminal emulator called vt(1).