Hacker News Reader

Comment by zozbot234 | Hacker News Reader

Plan9 allows for implementing file servers in user space and exporting a whole file tree as a virtual "folder", so it's really more of "everything as a file server". No different than FUSE, really.

View on HN

From what I've seen, Plan 9 fans turn their noses up at FUSE. They say FUSE is not "it", but don't really seem to explain what "it" is to differentiate it from FUSE.

And as Feynman said, you don't truly understand a thing until you can teach it. So that leaves us in a weird predicament where the biggest proponents of Plan 9 apparently don't understand Plan 9 well enough to teach it to the rest of us.

It depends what you mean by "it". FUSE clearly doesn't give you every feature in plan9, and in fact you can't have that without giving up the current Linux syscall API completely and replacing it with something vastly simpler that leaves a lot more to be done in user space. That's not something that Linux is going to do by default, seeing as they have a backward compatibility guarantee for existing software. Which is totally OK as far as it goes; the two systems just have different underlying goals.

You're frustrating me. You replied to me saying "it's basically FUSE" and then after I replied to you, you come back and say, "it's not really FUSE."

Plan 9 supports file server processes natively, and that's the part that's most FUSE-like. The full OS also has many other worthwhile features that are not really addressed by FUSE on its own, or even by Linux taken as a whole.

Like. WHAT!!!???

One key difference is that the equivalent to kernel syscalls on *nix generally involves userland-provided services, and this applies to a lot more than just ordinary file access. The local equivalents to arbitrary "containerization/namespacing" and "sandboxing" are just natively available and inherent to how the system works. You can't do this out of the box on *nix where every syscall directly involves kernel facilities, so the kernel must have special provisions to containerize, sandbox, delegate specific things to userland services etc.

9P is a protocol, FUSE isn't.

"Plan 9 praisers who don't actually use Plan 9" have a tendentious way of speaking, that's actually a lot like "AI slop", that Plan 9 users can instantly recognise. Telltale signs include speaking about Plan 9 in the past tense, and a belief that with Plan 9 you can somehow just strap all your computers together to get more performance or something. Because "you have 9P".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com