adriangrigore

You're making me explain this whole post. :p

Their April Fools' jokes are real and work as you can see in the submitted link.

So basically, a Plan 9 web browser, would be a great April Fools' prank! (because, again, their "pranks" are real and work)

The problem is porting the compilers! There is no C++ compiler on Plan 9.

Yeah, convince Russ and some investors! :D I would laugh my ass off for years at this joke! Yeah, please do this next year's April Fools'!

There are solutions, like VNC to some UNIX-ish machine, but, yeah, a native browser would be cool! 9front has a hypervisor, you could run something in there. https://man.9front.org/1/vmx

Webinar in progress (Google Meet) https://ftp.plan9.ts.net/webinar

echo "/poll?poll=1741036740&vote=awk" | nc gopher.icu 70

to vote for awk for example

Author here, it's simple to use if you're building simple stuff, it's complicated to use if you're building complicated stuff. Cool thing is, it gives you the flexibility to build complicated things without getting in your way.

From an email with the author:

"On Unix, I used RCS fairly happily. It was too verbose, but I fixed that. RCS, like most version control systems, also believed that the RCS archive or repository was authoritative and I don't accept that, I think that the checked-out source is authoritative. If you are grepping source, you really don't want to grep the archive files, and you shouldn't have to check out source just to compile. I view the archive as just history. So I added options to do things my way.

For my purposes, the Plan 9 dump, cp, diff and idiff work well. I don't miss a formal version control system.

Git is a horrific botch of a version control system: wasteful, slow, stupid, and unpredictable. When I check in source file(s), I want a snapshot taken always, and I don't want to be told, no, you can't do that, you have to rebase. The fundamental problem is that companies want to believe that multiple programmers can edit the same program at the same time. That's a great way to introduce bugs and break things. When editing a program, you want to have a stable view of it, so you know what you can rely on, you don't want it to be shifting underfoot. The idea that you can apply an arbitrary set of diffs, or subset, to some version of that program, and get a meaningful and correct program out is absurdly optimistic; I wouldn't trust it."

PDF was extracted from an archive on http://www.collyer.net/who/geoff/9/, that's why it's hosted on my web site.

I only created https://mkws.sh/ for duplication and templates. Those are the only problems it solves. I think it's portable enough.

Things have sure gotten better now. :D

I also jokingly refer to https://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/Provider/ShellScript.html as the first version of my static site generator https://mkws.sh/

There is no try. :D

Yup! :) You could use https://www.msys2.org/ I think!

To be honest, I thought he was running it bare metal.

You might enjoy mine https://mkws.sh/. It's shell based.

I prefer my own UNIX web dev solution https://mkws.sh! Man pages ar too much imo.

Plan 9 from User Space binaries are on /usr/local/plan9/bin/ on OpenBSD.

May I recommend my personal creation https://mkws.sh/? Simple, sh based, very customizable, very lightweight.

Why escape?

I don't have a good scrollwheel, not easy to browse the site. :(

I use shell in the same way https://mkws.sh/docs for static site generation!

Best rule I believe is just iterate until satisfied.

Why get out of the hamster wheel?