because 9fans not only agree to disagree, they also disagree to agree :)
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Anton <fluffyl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yep, with 3.1 9vx runs fine for an hour already. However, I want to
> try installing Plan 9 natively. Tomorrow. Btw, why there are 9atom and
> 9front?
> I mean, why they aren't joined together? What the difference between them?
> 2011/11/22 Skip Tavakkolian <skip.tavakkol...@gmail.com>
>>
>> i'll modify what i said to "... suspect the host os first". it's been
>> my experience that every autoupdate on Ubuntu and Windows brings in
>> its share of new bugs (hopefully less than the number of bugs it
>> fixes)
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 12:32 PM, erik quanstrom <quans...@quanstro.net>
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon Nov 21 15:20:58 EST 2011, skip.tavakkol...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> i run 9vx occasionally. a while back i built 9vx from ron's
>> >> repository. i was having problems with it under Ubuntu 10.04 x86_64,
>> >> where sometimes both cores were pegged at 100%; it was a problem with
>> >> linux (judging by ubuntu mailing lists). without changing 9vx, things
>> >> got stable after 10.10 (currently on 11.10). so, when in doubt,
>> >> suspect the host os.
>> >
>> > !? the fact that one bug was found in linux doesn't imply that bugs are
>> > likely
>> > in any host os. the oses are better tested than 9vx, so given no other
>> > information
>> > i would conclude the opposite; 9vx is more likely at fault. and
>> > regardless, we
>> > have little chance of fixing the os.
>> >
>> > - erik
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
