9base in Fedora?

[seth vidal]

On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 17:52 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 05:59:36PM +0200, Petr Sabata wrote:
> > On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 11:36:10AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > > The question is - why does having incompatible plan9 implementations of
> > > common commands make Fedora 'better', outside of "having more stuff"?
> > > 
> > 
> > You could say the same about most of Fedora packages.
> > 
> > 'Better', giving people tools to use, to choose from. Fedora isn't one of those
> > pure, minimalist distributions anyway. We have a lot of alternatives for a lot
> > of stuff. Some do more, some do less, some do the same but differently.
> 
> What would cause someone to choose to use these tools rather than the 
> ones that exist in Fedora already?

They come from an environment where plan9 is more commonly used and want
to preserve the behaviors they know/like?

-sv