hpr-knowledge-base/hpr_transcripts/hpr3675.txt

Episode: 3675
Title: HPR3675: Plan 9: An exercise in futility
Source: https://hub.hackerpublicradio.org/ccdn.php?filename=/eps/hpr3675/hpr3675.mp3
Transcribed: 2025-10-25 03:28:20

---

This is Hacker Public Radio Episode 3675 for Friday the 2nd of September 2022.
Today's show is entitled, Plan 9 and Exercise in Futility.
It is hosted by Binar C and is about 80 minutes long.
It carries an explicit flag.
The summary is I talk about the design of Plan 9 and how I use it.
This episode is about Plan 9, an exercise in futility.
That title is kind of tongue in cheek.
I actually really enjoy using Plan 9, but it's kind of…
It is kind of an exercise in futility for a lot of, I guess, actually useful things.
So getting into it some ideas about Plan 9, it has been described as the uncanny valley
of Unix.
It's cool, useless.
Ken Thompson, when describing Plan 9, said it does everything Unix does, only less reliably.
And 9 front, one of the Plan 9, I guess modern Plan 9 forks, in their FQA, they say if
you cannot imagine a use for a computer that does not involve a web browser, Plan 9 may
not be for you.
And the last that I have is no list in concatenation.
So a little bit of history.
The boys at a battle laps, they decided that Unix wasn't good enough.
They wanted to build something better.
I think in order to record a Plan 9 episode, I almost had to record an episode about Unix
first, sort of as boilerplate to kind of understand why Plan 9.
So the boys at a battle laps, they wanted to make a distributed multi-user operating system,
composed of heterogeneous machines.
A lot of the ideas are similar to Unix, but taken a little bit to extremes, like Unix
philosophy pushed into absurdity.
So for example, the idea that everything is a file, it becomes very apparent.
And sometimes this abstraction can feel a little bit over-obstracted.
That's the biggest idea in Plan 9, everything is a file, and the other biggest idea is
the concept of private namespaces.
Private namespaces make the concept of virtual file systems kind of look like babies first
file system abstraction.
So just like Unix Plan 9 started as a research operating system, both of these operating systems
are enjoyed by hobbyists.
Both of them are fun and interesting ways to use a computer, but the systems do diverge
after the research similarity.
The big aspect is that Unix's mainstream, everybody runs Unix except for the people who
are running Plan 9 pretty much.
And Plan 9 licensing, just like early Unix, it was proprietary, there were weird licensing
issues.
You know, you had to pay a bunch of money if you wanted to see Compiler to compile
GCC on your proprietary Unix.
Plan 9 had similar weird licensing things in the past, but now all of it is currently distributed
under the MIT license.
So what is Plan 9?
I took this from the intro man page on Plan 9.
So quoting, Plan 9 is a distributed computing environment assembled from separate machines
acting as terminals, CPU servers, and file servers.
A user works at a terminal running a Windows system on a raster display.
Some Windows are connected to CPU servers.
The intent is that having computing should be done in those Windows, but it is also possible
to compute on the terminal.
A separate file server provides file storage for large terminals and CPU servers alike.
So this multi-machine Unix installation, you could think of it like, not a lot of people
really run Plan 9 in this way anymore, I mean some people do is sort of as an exercise,
but most people just run all of these services on a single machine so that your laptop
can be one functional Plan 9 installation.
So that means your laptop is functioning as the terminal, the file server, the CPU server,
and depending on which Plan 9 fork you're running the authentication server.
And in my notes I put, most modern Plan 9 users just run Plan 9 on a single machine
because maintaining many machines to achieve a single usable operating system is really
unnecessary.
And I think it's because out of the people interested in Plan 9, like all 20 of them,
one user, me, that's not enough to justify running for separate machines to get an operating
system.
I shouldn't, I don't really want to run separate terminals, CPU, file, and authentication
servers, just so that I can write a little bit of C code.
So use cases.
The intended use case is a distributed multi-user network that's not on a single mainframe
machine, and then later in the lifecycle of Plan 9 before it was abandoned, it was
mostly for embedded programming.
I put in the notes, Unix was too bad is good to be stopped.
The actual use case, not the intended use case, the actual use case, I see most of the
time is, you know, people using Plan 9 because it makes them feel like a Unix hipster.
People pretending that Plan 9 is anything other than vaporware.
People running Plan 9 just to post screenshots on abandoned forums and really operating systems
tourism.
I think that's a phrase I've kind of coined when I was writing about Plan 9 and sort of
using Plan 9 over the last couple of weeks.
So Plan 9 in the wild, what are some things that came from Plan 9?
Unicode came from Plan 9.
R4C came from Plan 9, the R4C system call, the 9P 2000 protocol, 9P is a way of presenting
a file system over the network, the Microsoft Linux virtual machines that sort of discourage
people from actually running Linux or an open source Unix.
That uses 9P, although fairly poorly because SSH is faster, for some reason than using
the native 9P Microsoft whatever.
And also QEMUs for FS uses 9P.
Various window managers for Unix sort of follow the Plan 9's window manager way of doing
things.
It's written by like nine fans, but not nine users, right, people who are fans of it but
don't really use it.
In quotes, cool idea, I'm adding it to Linux.
A lot of Plan 9 ideas were sort of implemented into Linux, like private namespaces.
The way of doing that on Linux is C groups, union directories, a lot of Docker looks
a lot like how you would do things in Plan 9 with private namespaces.
So the design, right, so let's talk about the design.
The goal of Plan 9 was to build a distributed operating system that expands upon these
Unix ideas, not to build something backwards compatible with Unix.
Keep this in mind as I continue talking about this and why you might not want to use Plan
9.
So wanting to improve Unix, improve upon those ideas is kind of mutually exclusive to
it.
We want to port Unix user-land utilities to this swacking new kernel.
Unix programs and large, really large programs like Firefox, they're difficult or almost
entirely impossible to port to Plan 9 because of this design choice.
So like some smaller tools are portable, but most of the big graphical things are not
and I'll get into that as we keep going through my notes here.
So part of the design distributed operating systems, so Plan 9 was designed to be a distributed
operating system over the network.
So a lot of the internals of the system are sort of oriented around networking.
So on the single system laptop installation, like I mentioned previously, all the components
that make a Plan 9 network work are actually running on that one system in a client server
model.
The file system is presented as a service, the CPUs prevented as a service, the terminals
prevented as a service.
This type of abstraction from physical hardware, it's kind of hard to describe and think
about Plan 9 in this way.
At least for me anyway, and I'll keep talking about these ideas and I'll get to a valid
explanation of how this thing works.
So when you think about Plan 9 as a heterogeneous network of machines, it starts to make a
lot of sense.
And if you think about it as sort of a single system laptop installation, it's a little
bit harder to sort of wrap your head around how all the pieces come together to give you
an operating system.
So I had this idea when I was writing about Plan 9 or writing my notes, thinking about
the client server model.
So when you have like a lamp stack or a lamp stack and you're running a MySQL server,
on that lamp stack, the database server is actually running on the same system as the
web server and your PHP process is the client to the server that is the MySQL server.
And they communicate over the loop back device on local host.
So the design for the database for MySQL is to run it on a separate database machine.
But because how these things are presented over the network, we can run MySQL on the
same system as our web server and sort of have the two pieces pretend that they're across
the network, but really they're just talking across local host on the loop back device.
That's kind of how everything in Plan 9 works.
Everything is a file system.
The file system is presented as a server no matter what physical machine is running on.
The CPU is also presented as a server no matter what physical machine is running on.
The terminal is also presented as a server no matter what machine is running on.
And on a Plan 9 installation, all of these services that you might traditionally think
on a unique system can only function on local host.
Like, you know, running X11 across the network, it's possible, but it's really tough.
On Plan 9, it's really easy to do that.
So the system is designed as if all of these components are running remotely.
And the local machine is really only a client for all of these remote services.
Where remote is sort of an air quotes because you can run, you know, the remote service
locally, presenting everything over the network makes it easier to write code for,
but it's kind of hard to wrap your head around the concept unless you think about it.
So the 9P is the Plan 9 file system protocol.
It's a networking protocol that makes the client server model possible.
So internally, the file system is served to the client over 9P.
Pretty much everything in Plan 9 talks to the system over 9P.
So your text editors talk to the system over 9P.
The windowing system uses 9P.
The plumber uses 9P.
So in Unix, sort of, the biggest idea is that everything is a file.
But in Plan 9, it makes more sense to say everything is a file system that you can access
over 9P.
Other big design ideas, private namespaces, and union directories.
So the most important aspect of Plan 9 and the thing that makes it kind of difficult
to use sometimes is private namespaces.
I had a little bit of trouble understanding this until I stopped thinking so hard.
So a private namespace is when each process constructs its own unique view of the file
system.
It is a per process view of the file system.
The easiest way that I can sort of think about namespaces and sort of a Unix analogy is
like a virtual directory where you'll bind, use a bind mount.
This is a use for a bind mount, right?
Last episode I talked about, never using one.
Now after using Plan 9 a whole bunch, consecutive days in a row after having not used it in
a very long time, bind mounts are useful now.
So you bind mount and link in a bunch of things into your virtual directory.
Unix has virtual file systems, Plan 9 has virtual directories.
The concept of namespaces allows a user to pull resources from all over the network and
present them as a single local file system.
It doesn't matter where these resources are coming from.
It doesn't matter what physical machine it's on.
It's presented as if it's all locally.
So in order to construct a namespace, union directories are used.
Union directories are when you bind several directories to the same directory.
This is just like a bind mount.
And this sort of distributed idea for computing.
What this means is that if you're on a Plan 9 network and you're logging into your terminal,
you only have to pull in the parts of your system that you want.
You can sort of build your system.
At runtime, pulling in components from all over the network, pulling in resources from
all over the network and excluding those that you don't need.
So it can be as light or as heavy or have as many resources pulled in as you want.
The Plan 9 kernel only keeps separate mount tables for each process and using namespaces.
Systems administrators can create isolated environments like a charute.
That's like how containers or like a docker would work using private namespaces.
So processes and their children are grouped together in process groups and this allows
for inheritance basically.
So because private namespace means per process view of the file system, we need some way
to sort of have namespace inheritance that way or process responsible for mounting or
remote file system doesn't exit.
And now we don't have any, you know, where this file system is functionally not mounted
in the current namespace.
We need to be able to group processes together to actually accomplish something.
So the per process namespace concept.
It's a little bit confusing to at least me as a unix user, especially when binding or
mounting resources.
So when I first started using Plan 9, I was really confused because I would bind something
in one terminal window and then switch to another terminal window and then I got lost
because the thing that I had just mounted somehow disappeared.
But really what it was, I didn't really understand this at the time.
This was probably, you know, years ago, is that each window has its own namespace.
So I have an example of mounting the boot partition.
In one window you run 9FS, 9FS is just to strip the 9FAT partition, 9FAT is equivalent
to having like a NBR DOS partition on a unix system.
And then I list the files on that boot partition.
And then in another window, the boot partition doesn't seem to be mounted and it's really
confusing that, you know, on a unix system you type Mount Drive here and that file system
is available for all users.
But on Plan 9 it's not really per user, it's per process, which is a little bit of something
you have to think about if you're unfamiliar with using a system in that way.
So the second most important aspect of Plan 9 is everything is a file.
And I think it's almost absurd how many things are files.
So the kernel presents hardware devices as files bound to slash dev within the namespace.
Devices are just files.
Outside the namespace, devices are named with a leading hash symbol to help typically
administrators and programmers to distinguish between what is a pseudo file that represents
a device and what is a physical device.
So physical devices bound to dev, easy administration, easy programming, everything is a file,
and sort of pushing everything into this paradigm even if it doesn't always make the most
amount of sense, it reduces the number of system calls quite greatly.
Now I can't remember off the top of my head how many system calls Plan 9 has, I think
it's either 50 or 150, it's not a lot.
Compare that to something like Linux or FreeBSD when you have somewhere around 500 system
calls.
You can pretty much memorize all of the system calls on Plan 9 in a couple of days whereas
trying to memorize all of the system calls on a large unit system would be difficult.
So I have an example of everything as a file.
So the clipboard in Plan 9 is called slash dev slash snarf.
So you can read and write to dev snarf just like any other file, that's the pseudo device
for the system clipboard.
So in my example I cat slash dev slash snarf and it prints out whatever I had copied.
And then the next command I run is fortune and then an output redirect the right angle
bracket slash dev slash snarf and then I cat slash dev slash snarf and it prints out
that fortune.
Sort of the idea of being able to send a command output to the clipboard and use clipboard
content really easily as if it were any other file.
I think that's something although it doesn't really scale to large systems where we have
to have the ability to know about mym type center clipboard in Plan 9 everything kind of
pretty much just this text.
So it's okay that it's just a text clipboard.
So the display is called slash dev slash screen.
So how you take a screenshot, so in my little terminal session I didn't take screenshots
I just included text because text is more accessible.
So I type file slash dev slash screen.
It tells me dev slash screen is a Plan 9 image.
So how do I take a screenshot cat slash dev slash slash screen, pipe it to ping and
then write in right angle bracket right output redirect to screenshot dot ping.
And then I do file screenshot dot ping and it tells me it's a ping image.
So everything as a file or data streams it makes sort of scripting and meta programming
really quite enjoyable.
There's not a lot of like boilerplate C you have to write when you have all of these
tiny utilities and everything is presented in a simple way where any any standard utility
you might want to use will be able to understand how to access this resource on the system.
So another thing on Plan 9 is that it has a message oriented file system.
So this message oriented file system processes can offer services to other processes by
placing virtual files into the namespaces owned by other processes and then file IO on
this virtual file is interprocess communication.
Similar to a unique socket but with significantly less overhead and significantly less difficulty
to program all of the hard parts are abstracted is just file IO which is kind of a thing that
I like about Plan 9.
The other thing about that Plan 9 is about virtual file systems.
So on Plan 9 there is the slash proc file system.
The slash proc file system presents processes as if they were files in a file system.
This makes writing programs that manage processes really easy and it reduces the number of
system calls because you can tell a process exactly what you wanted to do.
So this means you can kill a process, halt a process, sleep a process just by echoing
that keyword into the processes file.
So let me try, I have my Plan 9 laptop over here, let's try something.
Okay, so I have opened my Plan 9.innie in a page, the page program is kind of like
a PDF reader except it can read more than just PDFs.
So if I do PS, AUX, scrap page, it tells me it looks like the process is 463.
So if I do CD slash proc 463 and then I echo, kill into the CTL file, it kills the
page.
Some of these things are easier to demonstrate in like a video format or sort of images,
but that's how you kill a process in Plan 9 is by echoing kill into slash proc, slash
pid, slash CTL.
And you can send other messages to that process as well, not just kill, but kills an example.
And this sort of proc file system means that users can manage their processes using regular
tools like cat, echo, LS.
And then Linux borrowed the idea of a slash proc file system as well.
Another thing that came from Plan 9 is Unicode.
So Unicode is ubiquitous across the entire system.
Although the implementation is not complete and it is not fully internationalized, a UTF8
is there.
And their Unicode is fully backwards compatible with ASCII.
And thanks to Plan 9, we now have people who write exclusively using primitive hieroglyphics
instead of words when they are putting text on the internet.
Thanks Plan 9 for that, making it harder for people to read.
Another thing about Plan 9, portability, just like Unicode was designed with portability
in mind, Plan 9 is written in a strange dialect of ANCC that aids in its portability.
So the system is self-hosting, but typically like installation images you will find or
make yourself, those are not self-hosted.
So how you would go about porting Plan 9 to one of these strange architectures are building
an image for it is that you will download the generic AMD64 or i386 installation image,
cross compile the system sources for your target architecture, wrap it up in an installer,
and then install that on the strange architecture.
And then after you've got this bootstrap cross-compiled thing, what you want to do is recompile
the system so that the software you're running is self-hosting.
Although the bootstrap intermediate step to get there is cross-compiled rather than self-hosted.
And the compiler suite is kind of clever, each compiler and linker, and object files
even.
Our name according to the target architecture, and so there's an alpha numeric prefix
and suffix for these things associated with linkers and assemblers.
So zero C is for MIPS 3000, that's the compiler for MIPS 3000.
One C is for Motorola 6800, two C's for Motorola 6800, 6080, 5C is for little
Indian arm, six C's for AMD 64, seven C's for arm 64, eight C's for the 386, a case
C's for Sunswork, VC's for big Indian MIPS, and then the linkers, so it would be instead
of like six C for AMD 64 compiler, six L would be the AMD 64 linker.
And I'll talk about compilers later, this is just sort of, you know, small details.
File systems, so multiple file systems are supported on Plan 9, most of them suck.
Most people, most operating systems, tourists, have only ever heard of fat, but I use the
CWFS file system, it's kind of a strange file system, CWFS stands for the caching
worm file system, so every night this file system makes a dump to what's called a worm
drive.
Now, worm stands for right once read many, typically at least in a historical context, your
worm drive would be sort of a tape drive.
So the actual hard disk layout would look like having a hard drive and then all of the
content on that hard drive is backed up to more permanent storage.
Sort of the idea behind a worm is that it's an infinite amount of storage because you
can just change the tape or clean out files.
We need no longer need them or remove old backups.
I think in a modern context, something like ZFS, the sort of dumping thing, dumping to
worm, it's kind of like a ZFS snapshot, except that ZFS snapshots make, it does like
delta differences, so a snapshot doesn't take any space until you start making changes,
but a dump to the worm drive instantly takes up space, because files that change are
backed up and everything else is kind of like Simlinked.
How you mount these dumps is you run the 9FS command, you do 9FS dump, that mounts the
worm drive, and then you just CD to slash N, slash dump, slash year, year, year, slash
month, month, day, day, that's where the backups are stored.
So managing the file server and trying to uncorrupt CWFS, like I said, everything is pretty
much just the files.
So you can either echo commands into slash SRV, slash cwfs.cmd, so you can echo commands
for the file server into that file, or if you type con-capital C, and then that path
and open up like an interactive terminal.
So you can actually run a plan 9 installation without a worm, but it's kind of a bad idea
because these file systems aren't necessarily very reliable, there's no copy on right,
there is no journaling.
All that is there is sort of this nightly backup to rely on that also functions as built
in version control.
Data integrity is not guaranteed.
Some other cool things about plan 9, two programs, Factotum and Sextor.
So Factotum stores passwords in memory, this is kind of like how SSH agent works.
And if you want to store these passwords to NVRAM, you can use Sextor, Sextor is almost
identical to Factotum, the way you format your password strings.
I don't use Sextor just because I'm a little bit wary of writing things to NVRAM over
and over again, mostly because the NVRAM in most computers, that's where your BIOS is.
And that partitions not necessarily meant to be written to over and over again, now
you can create a partition on your hard drive that functions as Sextor, I just don't
do it, I just type in the password every time for things and then I just don't reboot
my system very often.
So I really am only typing in passwords every once in a while, but a built in password
manager is kind of an interesting concept.
Those some known forks of Plan 9, I'll go over all of the forks that are dead and then
I will go over all of the forks that are not dead, probably on life support.
So Plan 9 from Bell Labs, sometimes you'll hear it called Labs 9, it's the original,
that's abandoned, that's dead.
Nine Adam, the domain has expired, it's dead, it's gone.
Macarose, I think the domain still works for that one, but development hasn't happened
in a long time.
Harvey is an attempt to port Plan 9 to GCC slash clang, that's dead, gone.
Nix, dead, gone.
Johanio S, dead, gone.
No nine, gone forever.
Inferno, Inferno is sort of a continuation of Plan 9, it's in permanent limbo, which
is funny because limbo is sort of like a, it's a programming language for Inferno.
Now my life support category, nine front, that's the one that I use, it's actively developed,
there's quality of life patches like a usable SSH client, a Wi-Fi support, audio support
sometimes, except for recording, at least on my thinkpad, I can't record audio.
Like general stability, the system doesn't randomly crash, USB support, I get client, those
types of things that you would want to be able to use as a system, this kind of nine
fronts really the only choice.
Nine legacy that's still going on, nine legacy is just patches applied to labs nine, quality
of life patches, I haven't used nine legacy or any of the patches, but I have used labs
nine and comparing labs nine to nine front, nine front really does seem like the one that
I think most listeners would want to use.
And the last one is plan nine from user space, sometimes this is also called plan nine
port, if you use this you're going to be laughed at, really it's useless, unless you really,
really want to use Acme on Unix, or if you're just testing cross compilation, but I'll
get into the compilers in a minute, I have links for all of these in the show notes.
So you can visit all of these websites, if any of them are still up, I'm sure at least
one of the dead forks websites, one of the domains has expired since I started recording.
So now that we have a little bit of the family tree underway, some of the history, let's
talk about what actually using plan nine looks like.
So the plan nine experience in 2022, you see about this thing on a forum, you put plan
nine of virtual machine, posted a screenshot, and then shut down the VM and continue using
Ubuntu because you can't play video games on plan nine, and you can't watch videos on
plan nine, that's what I see in most cases, people who want to try plan nine, hardware
support and nine front is expanding, but it's still limited, I run nine front on my
think pad X220, everything seems to just work, Wi-Fi works, VGA works, the ethernet port
does work, the internal monitor works, audio works, recording doesn't work, but audio works,
everything seems to work, and it is fairly stable, I've left it on for a week now, and
it hasn't crashed yet.
Some people run nine front on a Raspberry Pi because they have a Raspberry Pi image,
but nine front on a Pi is difficult because none of the documentation for every other
architecture lines up with how to actually do things on the plan nine.
Also for example, mounting your boot partition on i386 or AMD 64, you do 9FS, 9FAT, and
then you go to slash N, slash 9FAT, and that's your boot partition.
On the Raspberry Pi, however, that boot partition is called PIDOS, and there's not really an
easy, maybe there is now, but when I was trying these things, there wasn't really an easy
way to mount that.
There's no scripting duct tape, like the 9FS command, all the 9FS command does is, it's
just a shell script, pretty much, that automate some of these things.
I have ran a plan nine in KVM and QEMU, it works quite well, it's fairly stable.
If you're an operating systems tourist, there's lots of options for you, for everybody
else, try it on real hardware, it's a lot more fun on real hardware.
I didn't add a K message, talking about ThinkPad support, on plan nine it's not called
a D message, it's called a K message, and you get that by typing cat slash dev slash
K message, let me check that, I think that's what it is.
Yeah, it's cat slash dev slash K message, that's the equivalent of a D message.
And I didn't add it, because either plan nine is going to work for you or it won't.
Available software, so sort of an idea I had when writing this, good new might not be
Unix, but plan nine isn't even trying to be Unix, it's not even pretending.
So plan nine has a graphical user interface, unlike Unix plan nine was designed with graphics
and mine.
Some people have said that plan nine looks kind of like a small talk machine.
I disagree that's really only at me, and even then it's a little bit more like, it's
hard to describe, it's something you have to use.
I think really the plan nine window manager, Rio, it seems to be really the only good stacking
window manager, because it gets out of your way.
And you can, you have to have a three button mouse to use plan nine left click middle
click and right click are all used and you have to have a middle click and a right click
in order to actually really do anything with the window manager at all.
If you don't have a middle click, let's say you didn't buy a think pad with a middle
click, you have some other janky old laptop, you can push shift, hold down the shift key
and press right click and I will emulate a middle click.
So the window manager is called Rio, it's a successor to the eight and a half window
manager and Rio is really lightweight compared to X11 because graphical hardware support
and sort of the way you access graphical hardware is built into the kernel and how
you access this graphical hardware is using files and namespaces, that's how you access
input devices to.
So the window manager, it's pretty much just file IO, that's how you would program Rio.
I think the easiest way to explain Rio is I think of a rectangle multiplexer where each
rectangle is a client to a nine piece server, each having its own namespace and I think
using Rio is kind of counterintuitive at first but thinking less hard made it a lot easier
for me to use.
I still have a little bit of trouble using a mouse becoming efficient, especially after
using a terminal almost exclusively for years and years.
I do prefer the way Rio uses a mouse over most other systems because using the mouse in
Rio is pretty intuitive when you stop fighting it and thinking, oh this is like Windows.
And I do prefer if I have to use a mouse, if someone held me down and said you have to
use something that requires a mouse to be able to accomplish work, I would probably
choose Rio.
And sort of the argument for mouse-centric computing is that text editing is faster.
The idea that if you can point the mouse directly over the text you want and just click,
that's faster than using the arrow keys.
I think this is correct for people who don't use a computer all the time.
But for someone who uses VIM, the average VIM user is editing text faster than they can
even think faster than the speed of thought.
But most people aren't the average VIM user.
All they know how to do is move the cursor with arrow keys and they sort of don't want
to or can't memorize hundreds of VIM key bindings.
For those types of people a mouse is faster and you know after all these years of memorizing
key bindings I have forgotten the names and birth dates of all my family members, but
at least I'm fast editing text without a mouse.
The mouse controls are kind of confusing at first because it's sort of a click and hold
pattern and then you hover over the option you want and then release.
And the release selects the option.
So in Rio, the right click menu is window management controls.
That's controls like new resize, move, delete, hide.
Middle click is text manipulation controls.
So you highlight the text and then do the hold hover over the option you want and release
to select.
The middle click options are cut, paste, snarf, plumb, look, and send.
Snarf is copy.
Plum sends the highlighted text to a process or it will open the file with the appropriate
program.
Look, we'll search for the highlighted text and send will run the highlighted text through
the command interpreter through the shell.
And also under middle click, sort of my notes broke down here.
Also under middle click is an option called scroll.
This toggles auto scrolling or paging mode.
The windows have a built in pager, which is something I quite enjoy using now that I've
been using it a lot more and stop fighting it at least recently.
And there's also a concept of mousecording.
I can't really explain mousecording over an audio format, but it's kind of the idea
where when you're on a keyboard, for example, if you're used to using something like Emax
when you have these key cords, imagine that, but with your mouse.
I typically don't use mousecording because I use the SAM editor, not so much the Acme
editor, where the mousecording is really implemented.
Rio and its windows, they also support a couple unique style keyboard shortcuts.
Some of them are a little bit unfamiliar to people who might have used any somewhat
posixie or born like shell ever.
So control U deletes from the cursor to the start of the line.
Control W deletes the word before the cursor.
Control H deletes the character before the cursor.
Control A moves the cursor to the start of the line.
Control E moves the cursor to the end of the line.
Control B moves the cursor back to the prompt.
Control F is the autocomplete key.
This is like tab completion.
So on plan 9, when you push tab, it inserts a literal tab character.
To do autocomplete, you have to push control F.
And then the delete key is equivalent to control C on Unix, which cancels, or I guess, kills
the running process.
So in text windows, the arrow keys page up, page down, they all behave as expected.
Home and end, keys scroll the page as expected.
And these text windows have a built-in pager.
There's no more command, there's no less command.
And I think I kind of like this built-in paging.
So for example, when you type, hypothetically, a man command.
So if you type man in trial, that's the first page you should read if you start using
plan 9.
What it does is it prints the first top of the command.
And then in order to see the rest of that man page, you have to scroll through the buffer.
So instead of scrolling past the user and missing all of the text, you can use the space
key or the arrow keys to page up and down.
On the color scheme of Rio, Rio looks kind of dull, it's pastel, and this was an intentional
design decision.
The less vibrant colors are less obvious, and they fade away with usage.
You don't even realize there's colors the more you use it.
I think color schemes like tango, the Linux console colors, solarized, any theme that
has ever been made for KDE, and Windows XP, these are examples of things that are very
bright, very obvious, and not necessarily in a good way.
Bright colors are subtly distracting, and it makes it difficult to concentrate.
And typically a borrow Rio's color scheme for, like if I'm configuring DWM, because it's
kind of just an anti-theme, and I think it's kind of charming.
Custom color themes are also a thing you can do.
You just modify the source code for Rio, recompile, and then restart.
People will laugh at you if you do this.
Setting a wallpaper is also possible, I don't do this.
Moving on, like a big Linux system running GNOME, I typically just set the wallpaper
to just a blank color, or if I do set it, you know, I have Windows covering it all the
time anyway, so why should I even worry if I have to see a dull gray background as soon
as I start my system, and then never once again after that?
As for X11, the Equus X11 server can run through the Linux Compat layer, but the issue
with the Linux Compat layer is it only supports 32-bit Linux.
You have to be running a 32-bit Plan 9 system, and it's really unreliable, and the lack
of an X11 server, this is one of the big reasons that Plan 9 has no programs.
In order to port something like Firefox, not only do you have to port all of Unix, but
you also have to port X11.
It's a lot of things that people don't want, or don't want to do the work for.
So the next thing, command line utilities, the shell on Plan 9 is called RC.
I sort of took my handle from here, I think last year, I needed a handle, and I looked
down and I see the Shabang bin RC, and that's okay.
Obviously, everyone wants to be a cool opcode, a cool interrupt.
Let's just pick this one instead, because nobody knows what Plan 9 is, and nobody wants
to associate themselves with it.
But I like it, I think it's fun.
So RC is kind of like any other shell you've ever used.
You might expect it to be like Bornshell, but it's not.
Here are Unix shell concepts, pipes, file redirects, you know, two ampersands for and
and two pipes for or or.
All of those things seem to work just fine.
It's all familiar, and similar scripting is not really positive at all.
So if you want to write an RC script, you probably should read the man page.
And various scripts as examples.
As for shell utilities, they exist.
A lot of the standard Unix ones seem to exist, although some of them are missing, especially
if you use GNU core utilities a lot.
There's a lot of things in GNU that aren't necessarily standard Unix tools.
Like for example, the Schuff command, that's not a standard Unix tool, how you do that
on Linux, not Linux on freeBSD is like, I think it's cat-r for random.
So programs like op, op, grep, said, cat, tar, gzip, ed, they're all there.
Editors, there are three, I guess they're technically four primary ways of editing text
on plan nine.
So you have ed, the standard editor, Sam and Akmi.
There is no vi, except for a MIPS emulator.
There is no emax, except for a man page explaining why there is no emax.
I've primarily used Akmi in the past lately I've been using Sam.
And I really like to use Sam because it's a graphical version of ed.
And as we all know, vi is like a graphical version of ed.
Of course different implementations, different usage paradigms.
Some of the familiar vi commands are available in Sam which makes it easier for me to use
after using them for years and years.
And regular expressions, the way you would do them in VIM like a search and replace on
a buffer.
Those types of things are things that I require in a text editor, you know, said styles
and text, research and replace.
I do like Sam a lot, but it seems to corrupt files when the system crashes.
Any have a file open that could just be anecdotal, but it's happened to me twice now.
Of course I went back up to the file section, a file system section and cleared those corrupted
files.
Akmi is a window manager, it's a file browser, it's a terminal emulator, it's an email
client and some people use it as a text editor.
The coolest part about Akmi is the ability to write arbitrary editor commands and system
commands in the menu bar and then execute them.
This is hard to explain over audio at the very bottom of the show notes, there should
be a visual demonstration of Akmi and also a visual demonstration of Rio.
Because you know, explaining a graphical program over audio is difficult.
So some of the supported networking protocols, IMAP exists, good luck, NTP exists, IRC exists,
there are a couple clients.
I think the one that comes by default is called IRCRC, yeah, that's the only one that
exists.
There are other non-default implementations, FTP exists, HTTP is typically with WebFS,
so Mothra is the standard web browser, it doesn't support CSS, it doesn't support
all of the HTML tags, JavaScript is entirely unsupported, another web browser is called
ABACO that exists, I've used it a few times, it's hard to use but I think the way it renders
pages is slightly better than Mothra, although Mothra is easier to use.
There are various inferno vaporware, browsers you can use, the ports don't work, those also
don't support CSS or JavaScript, some imported net surf to 9 front by leveraging components
of ape, and I'll talk about ape here in a minute, a net surf kind of works, I think CSS
kind of works, no JavaScript whatsoever, of course, and then there's the age-get program,
it's kind of like curl but it behaves a lot more like the fetch program on FreeBSD, in
that it defaults to printing to standard out rather than creating a file, so SSH, this
is 9 front specific, I should have said that at the beginning of the section, but everything
from here on out is 9 front specific, so SSH, it only works in conjunction with the VT
command, so the VT command is a virtual terminal emulator, when you connect over SSH, you kind
of have to be emulating a virtual terminal, if you've used like SSH through PowerShell
and it behaves really strangely, that's sort of why you want to run a VT, that's my analogy,
it's like trying to use SSH from like windowscmd.exe or PowerShell.exe, SSHFS, that's really the
only way you can get files on and off of a plan 9 easily, because as I said, file system
support is almost non-existent, you can also use SSHnet for proxying traffic, VNC works,
I have attempted to play a video game over VNC, a video game running on my Linux system,
but then I remembered that VNC plus Genome equals nothing works and you have to restart GDM.
I had better success using, I think it must have been something small like XFCE or I3, it
was probably I3WM connecting to that on the remote system, of course this isn't a problem
with plan 9, it's a problem with Genome and the way it handles VNC, various torrenting software
exists, but magnet links are supported, draw term and RCPU, those things exist, my response
to draw term is no, don't even try it, good luck and we're going to laugh at you, of course
9p, that's the one that you would have expected, now I have a security aside here, so
although various server implementations for these protocols exist, I personally wouldn't
allow them to touch the WAN, a lot of them are ancient, un-maintained, un-audited and easier
to exploit, so prime example, a bunch of GenTumen, a bunch of boys on G, they found a path traversal
of vulnerability in the 9 front website, in the actual HTTPD server, then they leveraged this
vulnerability to exploit a vulnerability in the authentication system, to print all of the
users on the system, they didn't do anything malicious with this bug, it was mostly ha-ha,
these guys need to secure their web server, but the ability to own a system by sending
a get request, that is all you need to know about the current state of security in plan 9,
firewall, no disc encryption, unreliable access control, what,
file system, here's something interesting about the file system, so CWFS has a
poorly documented, in some cases, undocumented, special user called NONE,
the NONE user is allowed to connect to fossil file servers, CWFS servers, and probably
HDFS servers without a password, how you disable the NONE user is you enter your CWFS command prompt,
you enter the server's command prompt, and you type no, none,
don't even think about putting plan 9 on the internet, the Unix compatibility layer,
it's called 8, it stands for the ANSI, POSIX, emulator, it doesn't work,
it's almost entirely empty, there are lots of programs to write to get it to be sort of
a POSIX complete, nobody wants to write these tiny programs, and I think there's a general
attitude among plan 9 users, sort of that plan 9 is unique, and porting all of POSIX, porting
all of Unix to plan 9 ruins the appeal of even using it, because plan 9 exists to improve
upon Unix ideas, not carry the legacy of sort of the drawbacks to the Unix implementations,
I think I almost agree with the sentiment of porting POSIX to plan 9, ruins plan 9,
sex store in fact totem, my notes are broken, so there's some emulation layers 2 on 9
Linux emulator, don't even try it, Gameboy, Gameboy Advance, NES, SNES, Mega Drive, Commodore 64,
most of the game emulators seem to just work because they're very simple systems,
and then there's another one, VMX, it's a PC emulator, it's kind of like QEMU, it's effectively
virtualization, my experience, it's really slow, it almost works, it doesn't work, it will crash
your system, it will corrupt your file system, in air quotes, it runs OpenBSD, Linux,
and ancient versions of Windows with graphics support, I haven't had any good luck with it,
I got OpenBSD, an OpenBSD installation about halfway completed before it crashed and corrupted
a bunch of files, and then the next time I tried to install it, it refused to load the
BSD.rd file to install it, there are various emulators also for obscure architectures,
version control system, Mercurial used to come with 9 front, that implied Python 2,
both of these things have been removed because nobody used it, CVS exists, but it's not on the
base system, and then the 9 front maintainers wrote a native Git implementation, it is in the
base system, it's bare bones, it mostly works, there are also various community maintain programs
and software, so I have links, everything I have has a link in the show notes, they're almost
everything, so the 9 front community has been collecting programs, various other communities
have been collecting programs, these can be found at the Contrib Subdomain and the Wiki Subdomain,
both are served as a port system similar to a BSD style system, except you can't just make all
of them at once, there are no binary packages and the makes files, at least in my experience,
the ones I've tried, they can be broken or just not even work,
at one point a lot of, I guess ancillary third party programs were hosted on Bitbucket, but when
Bitbucket, it was either subversion, when Bitbucket pretty much went to Git only, a lot of those
old repositories sort of stopped existing, so let's talk about programming on Plan 9, so programming
languages, instead of the make command, there's the MK command, the simplest syntax is identical to
a Unix make command, if you know how to use Unix make using a MK file is identical,
there is C, so the absurdities of Plan 9c, Plan 9c is syntaxically similar to ANCC, but it varies,
ANCC is like when you read the K and RC book, the standard libraries on Plan 9 are also
simpler and smaller, so in POSICC how you do a hello world, hash includes standardio.h, int main
printf, hello world, return 0, on Plan 9, that same program looks like hash include u.h, hash
libc.h, void main, print, hello world, exits 0, the interesting thing about Plan 9c is that
you return strings instead of integers, that's why the main function is void, it returns the
string 0, and sort of the idea there is, it's easier for debugging purposes to return a string
if you encounter some error, then it is to return a number and then have to refer to your source
code to figure out that number means, so the unit h header file contains cp, specific instructions,
and libc.h contains all of the system calls, time functions, math functions, unit code functions,
print functions, so how you compile a c program on Unix, you do cc, main.c, and then how you run it,
dot slash a dot out, and there's your hello world, how you compile on Plan 9, this is if you're
running an AMD 64 processor, remember how the programs for compiling and linking have a letter
or a number to prefix for the architecture, so on AMD 64 you run 6c main.c, that's how you
compile to an object file, you're on 6l main.c, that's how you link the object file, and then to run,
you do 6 dot out, and you have your hello world, the architecture suffix is maintained, it kind of
helps you remember what architecture it's for and what op codes it contains, and it also tells you
that the binary is for what processor, this is useful for cross-compiling, so you can copy everything
with like 6 dot whatever to your new installation image, so I have another example program here,
the simplest Unixi program I could think of with buffers, so this program reads from standard in
and writes to standard out, so in POSICC, at least how I would do this, hash includes standard
h, int main, char buff, size 32, size t buff is size of char times 32, size t and red is equal to zero,
while n red equals f read, buff one buff size standard in is greater than zero, f write buff one
and read standard out, this writes whatever you put into standard in to standard out, and then
I return zero in the program ends, and plan 9c, it's very similar but subtly different,
so in plan 9c, hash include u dot h, hash include libc dot h, void main, char buff size 32,
char buff size is equal to size of char times 32, I'm not sure why my buff size is a character here,
int n red equals zero, while n red equals read zero, buff, buff s is greater than zero,
write one buff and read x at zero, I have this source code in the show notes and it would be
beneficial for you to look at it, it's kind of difficult to dictate source code and be able to
understand it in any way, if it's not a shell script, at least for me anyway,
so if you compare the f read and f write functions from
pausicc to plan 9c, you'll see that the file descriptors are different, so in plan 9 standard in
is file descriptors zero, standard out is file descriptor one standard error is two,
really it's identical when the process starts these files are automatically open,
and I did an interesting thing comparing the binary sizes between these two
programs that are functionally identical, except that they are written on different systems
for different systems and compiled with different compilers, so the plan 9 binary is four
kilobytes and the gcc binary on Linux is 28 kilobytes, I also compiled the pausicc with clang,
just as an experiment, it was also 28 kilobytes, why this is interesting is that binaries on plan 9
are aesthetically linked, and at least for me it's strange to see a aesthetically linked binary that
is smaller than something dynamically linked, and then using plan 9 port, I compiled the
plan 9c code, and that binary was very large, it was 40 kilobytes, I haven't written plan 9c in a
long time, I can't say a whole lot more so refer to the c programming in belabs and plan 9
from belabs paper, there's also a debugger called acid, it's hard to use if you're not fluent
in assembly, the next programming language is ancient go, I think go, or at least a modern go
might run, but I don't, I've never ran go, my only experience with go is the Hugo static site generator
and that it isn't very reliable, or at least when I used it a couple of years ago it was very
unreliable, you can also write shell scripts using the RC shell, the last thing about using plan 9
is Wi-Fi, so some Wi-Fi cards are supported on 9 front, I think pad X 220 uses the
IWL drivers, the 9 front FQA is vague when it comes to using the drivers, good luck,
so the big question, the big question is why isn't plan 9 more popular if it supposedly improves
on these bad unix ideas, so sort of unix is just good enough, just good enough, we don't need to
improve it, that's sort of the legacy argument, plan 9 is not better enough to beat out just good
enough, another reason porting software is difficult or straight up impossible because plan 9 was
deliberately written to not be backwards compatible, sort of if you port it they will come, plan 9 is
kind of uncomfortable to use, if you have unix muscle memory, there's no modern web browser,
there are no video games except there is a Doom and Quake source port,
multimedia consumption is hard, and there's no Genu, therefore no emax, and I think really the
final question before I conclude is why do people use plan 9 if it's so bad, I'm not sure about
the other 20 people in the world who use plan 9, but for myself it's because I have a genuine
curiosity and love for computing and I sort of have this motivation to learn obscure and unnecessary
and boring things related to computers, it brings me a sense of satisfaction and enjoyment and
accomplishment, sort of at one point Linux stopped being fun for me because I realized that all
distributions are basically the same, I started exploring BSD after that and then I sort of realized
that all unixes are the same, all unix-like operating systems are basically the same, I still have
a lot of fun with BSD, but I am quite burned out on Linux and I have been for some time now,
and I think when I sit down to use a computer my goal is always to discover something new,
learn something new, explore alternative paradigms and have fun, but for a lot of people that's
not there and go on a computer, I think for a lot of people plan 9 ends up being a tourism experience,
but for me it seems like the final frontier of unix-y operating systems, I don't know nearly as much
about plan 9 as I know about unix, but every time I swap out my free BSD hard drive I have
a bunch of hard drives, but not enough laptops to run all of them, so I'll switch hard drives back
and forth, every time I switch to my plan 9 hard drive it feels like I'm home in a strange way,
even though plan 9 can sometimes be uncomfortable for me, it feels uncanny and sort of, I think,
uncomfortable is the right word, I think sometimes honestly I'm willfully resistant
to becoming an expert on plan 9, because what am I going to use next? What other operating systems
are there to explore that are not only viable for daily use, but also actually usable,
and when I think about using a computer, what do I do on a computer, learn about it,
write about it, tell people about it, and sometimes write programs, and I think a lot of people they
really use a computer as a media consumption device and sort of plan 9 is anti-media consumption,
you know, it's possible to play video and audio, it's just difficult to do,
and you know not having a modern web browser unless you can figure out how to get a virtual
machine running, put Firefox in it, it's sort of liberating in a strange way, and I think really
the way that I do use a computer which is terminal and web browser, typically web browser without
a JavaScript, or what I'll do is I'll block third party scripts, scripts not from the domain
that I'm contacting. I think plan 9 is viable for someone like me, maybe not other people,
but for someone like me it's entirely viable, so my conclusion, so when someone says,
how do I do XYZ on plan 9? My answer is don't search engines aren't going to help you,
a man page is probably won't help you, a cis slash doc might help, reading the source code probably
won't help, but most of all have fun, I think one of the things I love most about plan 9 is that
it's still a research operating system, so there's a lot of components that have only been
completed to sort of a proof of concept stage, and you know lack of feature completeness,
lack of stability, that keeps things exciting where a big unique system is pretty much stable,
stable in the sense that you can't just remove things or add things, or improve things
for your own use because a lot of things seem to just work, and I think some final tips,
you know, how do I do XYZ on plan 9? Just SSH to a Unix machine,
put that inside of VT and you have to run the terminal reset command a bunch of times,
also VNC, so my link section some further reading, the 9 front FQA, FQA is kind of like FAQ
except it stands for frequently questioned answers, it's very humorous, there's good information,
it's not always complete, and it refers you to the man pages and source code a lot, you can
also read the papers in slash sys slash doc, so how you do that on your plan 9 system is you cd
to slash sys slash doc, run the make command mk, and then cat the paper you want to read and pipe
it through the pager program, the pager program being page, you can also read these online on
cat-v.org, I have links for this, all that this is the links section, so there's links for everything,
an interesting talk, plan 9, not dead, just resting, that's a talk similar to this one, maybe more
on the how do I use this every day, not so much on the talking about operating systems design,
I have a link for a visual demonstration of RIO and a visual demonstration of ACME,
watch those ones if you're curious about how these things work and look,
see programming and plan 9 from Bill Labs, that's a paper, I found some guy who wrote a
plan 9 desktop guide, I page through it pretty quickly, there's not a lot of usefulness in there,
I honestly think mantin pages are better, at least for a lot of the stuff I'm trying to do,
which is not recreate elenix workflow on a different kernel, it might be useful for some people
though, there's a youtube channel, I'm not sure how to say the name, c04tl3, he has lots of cool
videos, lots of good information, and an introduction to operating systems abstractions using plan 9
from Bill Labs, it's a PDF I found on archive.org and some of the
ccode there helped me write a couple of small toy programs,
so that's the plan 9 episode, because plan 9 is sort of a spiritual continuation of unix,
I had to do a unix episode beforehand because plan 9 implies everything that's unix and then some,
um, and I'm not sure what other episodes I could record from here, I've sort of
exhausted the unique ideas that I think about, or I guess, the large big in-depth ideas that I
think about quite frequently, so my request for shows, if anyone knows how to write
hawk scripts with the awk programming language, that is something I want, also ed, if anyone
knows how to use the ed editor, I would like a show on that, if you have any show requests,
for me, leave a comment or send an email, if you have any questions about plan 9,
I guarantee you that I will not have a 100% answer, but feel free to send an email,
I quite like receiving and sending emails, or even if you just want to say hi, and again,
future shows from me, if anything in here made you think I want to hear more, say something,
I have a few ideas bouncing around, but these sort of fallen out of scope as I have been using
plan 9 almost exclusively for the last couple weeks, so I'll have to revisit some of those things
and start thinking about them again. Anyway, thanks for listening.
You have been listening to Hacker Public Radio, as Hacker Public Radio does work. Today's show
was contributed by a HBR listener like yourself, if you ever thought of recording a podcast,
and click on our contribute link to find out how easy it really is. Hosting for HBR has been
kindly provided by an honesthost.com, the internet archive, and our sings.net. On the Sadois
stages, today's show is released under Creative Commons' Attribution 4.0 International License.