On Feb 17, 2010, at 1:21 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
* David Leimbach wrote:
A lot of "plug in" functionality you'll find on other platforms
that requires a shared library approach can be implemented via
a file system service technique.
Of course, and I would really like to see that approa
On Feb 17, 2010, at 10:04 AM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
* Steve Simon wrote:
We recompile the relevant executables. The speed of kencc makes this
much less painful than you might expect. It also happens very rarely
on plan9 - I cannot remember the last time we had a "big" pull.
Okay, but the
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 03:33:03PM +0100, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
>
> ah, already suspected that ;-o
>
> I know that plan9's standard libraries are so small, that they
> dont really need to be shared. But when more and more applications
> von *nix world get ported, the problem might arise again.
>
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 3:16 PM, EBo wrote:
> Nathaniel W Filardo said:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 03:06:57PM +0100, Gorka Guardiola wrote:
> > > > * each module may have an entry point (main module w/o is allowed,
> > > > even if it wouldn't make much sense ;-o), these are called after
> >
Nathaniel W Filardo said:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 03:06:57PM +0100, Gorka Guardiola wrote:
> > > * each module may have an entry point (main module w/o is allowed,
> > > even if it wouldn't make much sense ;-o), these are called after
> > > relocation, along the dependency tree, from leaf to
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 03:06:57PM +0100, Gorka Guardiola wrote:
> > * each module may have an entry point (main module w/o is allowed,
> > even if it wouldn't make much sense ;-o), these are called after
> > relocation, along the dependency tree, from leaf to root.
>
> no modules.
That's not e
* Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * David Leimbach wrote:
>
> > No I'm not saying replace all library code with filesystems. I don't know
> > why you'd want an RPC interface to an XML parser :-).
>
> You need to implement an RPC protocol for that. And most likely you
> want to get the parsed content i
* David Leimbach wrote:
> No I'm not saying replace all library code with filesystems. I don't know
> why you'd want an RPC interface to an XML parser :-).
You need to implement an RPC protocol for that. And most likely you
want to get the parsed content into some convenient in-memory structure
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
>> And another important feature of shared libraries is, that when
>> some lib is updated, importing programs dont have to be recompiled.
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Actually, that's just a matter of clean dependency handling.
> Include an API/ABI version in the filename, etc.
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * David Leimbach wrote:
>
> > A lot of "plug in" functionality you'll find on other platforms
> > that requires a shared library approach can be implemented via
> > a file system service technique.
>
> Of course, and I would really like t
>
> Even synthetic filesystems are good for moving bigger things to their
> own services, there're many cases where that wouldnt make sense, for
> example parsers. I doubt you'd really suggest putting an XML parser
> to its own filesystem for real productional use ;-p (having such a
> thing surely
> Okay, but then (as an admin) you have to know which apps have
> to be recompiled. For a small system this might be okay, but
> that doesnt scale well ;-o
Plan 9 _is_ a small system.
* David Leimbach wrote:
> A lot of "plug in" functionality you'll find on other platforms
> that requires a shared library approach can be implemented via
> a file system service technique.
Of course, and I would really like to see that approach in the GNU
world too (actually, I already did th
> And if you do want to
> recompile everything, running mk in /sys/src will recompile
> everything and not take all that long doing it, especially if you
> keep the object files around.
And I can vouch for the fact that this works just fine for the ARM
(impersonated in this case by a SheevaPlug) w
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Stuart Morrow wrote:
> On 2/17/10, Steve Simon wrote:
> >> And another important feature of shared libraries is, that when
> >> some lib is updated, importing programs dont have to be recompiled.
> >> What's the Plan9 solution here ?
> >
> > We recompile the rele
On 2/17/10, Steve Simon wrote:
>> And another important feature of shared libraries is, that when
>> some lib is updated, importing programs dont have to be recompiled.
>> What's the Plan9 solution here ?
>
> We recompile the relevant executables.
also, plan 9 uses filesystems for many things tha
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Steve Simon wrote:
> > And another important feature of shared libraries is, that when
> > some lib is updated, importing programs dont have to be recompiled.
> > What's the Plan9 solution here ?
>
> We recompile the relevant executables. The speed of kencc makes
>> We recompile the relevant executables. The speed of kencc makes this
>> much less painful than you might expect. It also happens very rarely
>> on plan9 - I cannot remember the last time we had a "big" pull.
>
> Okay, but then (as an admin) you have to know which apps have
> to be recompiled. F
> > We recompile the relevant executables. The speed of kencc makes this
> > much less painful than you might expect. It also happens very rarely
> > on plan9 - I cannot remember the last time we had a "big" pull.
>
> Okay, but then (as an admin) you have to know which apps have
> to be recompiled
> * blstu...@bellsouth.net wrote:
>
>> If you're interested in how to do dynamic loading in a clean
>> and elegant way, take a look at Inferno.
>
> hmm, isnt this an interpreter-based system ?
The application language is Limbo which is compiled to
Dis machine code. Dis is run in a virtual ma
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Gorka Guardiola wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Enrico Weigelt
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > just curious: which binfmt does Plan9 use ?
> > > How are share libraries handled (if they exist at all) ?
> >
> > a.o
* Steve Simon wrote:
> We recompile the relevant executables. The speed of kencc makes this
> much less painful than you might expect. It also happens very rarely
> on plan9 - I cannot remember the last time we had a "big" pull.
Okay, but then (as an admin) you have to know which apps have
to be
* blstu...@bellsouth.net wrote:
> If you're interested in how to do dynamic loading in a clean
> and elegant way, take a look at Inferno.
hmm, isnt this an interpreter-based system ?
> Along the lines of what you're suggesting, everything is a module.
> The only thing necessary to make a mo
> And another important feature of shared libraries is, that when
> some lib is updated, importing programs dont have to be recompiled.
> What's the Plan9 solution here ?
We recompile the relevant executables. The speed of kencc makes this
much less painful than you might expect. It also happens v
> * the whole loader sits in the kernel (maybe w/ some additional
> helper deamon in userland), but userland can pass parameters
> like search pathes, etc via env.
>
> IMHO having the dynamic loader in kernel-land (in contrary to ELF
> on GNU) not just removes the need for lots of syscalls, b
* Gorka Guardiola wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > just curious: which binfmt does Plan9 use ?
> > How are share libraries handled (if they exist at all) ?
>
> a.out(6)
> no shared libraries.
ah, already suspected that ;-o
I know that pl
And all of the below are some of the reasons I still love plan 9.
Simplicity first is a really great way to work (I've learned over the
years).
Dave
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 6:06 AM, Gorka Guardiola wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > just
> Oh, and we also talk about fat vs. tiny libraries, etc.
> Maybe you'd like to join in ;-)
please remember that this isn't a linux list.
- erik
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> just curious: which binfmt does Plan9 use ?
> How are share libraries handled (if they exist at all) ?
a.out(6)
no shared libraries.
>
> Inspired by recent discussions @ gentoo-user, I'm thinking a bit
> how an simple and e
* Jacob Todd wrote:
> Where was this thread at? I'm subscribed to gentoo-user, but I don't have
> any threads about binary formats in my inbox. Was the discussion in
> another thread (maybe the giant HAL thread)?
Exactly this one ;-p
Oh, and we also talk about fat vs. tiny libraries, etc.
Mayb
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 02:31:09PM +0100, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> just curious: which binfmt does Plan9 use ?
> How are share libraries handled (if they exist at all) ?
>
> Inspired by recent discussions @ gentoo-user, I'm thinking a bit
> how an simple and efficient binfmt could
Hi folks,
just curious: which binfmt does Plan9 use ?
How are share libraries handled (if they exist at all) ?
Inspired by recent discussions @ gentoo-user, I'm thinking a bit
how an simple and efficient binfmt could look like. Some key
ideas are:
* purely runtime information (no debug stuff, e
32 matches
Mail list logo
