I do not mean to feed any trolls with this one, but I need to know how
people what some of this addressed in the future.
I've been catching a little flack off and on about the Plan 9's naming
convention of adding a '9' in front of program names. I've also noticed
that using emulators, on the linu
Yes, it can be easier in a sense that you sometimes get the explanation
that you would not have gotten in a obvious manner by reading the code.
If I don't need the answer to the issue right away, and if I want to work
on something else in the meanwhile, it can be better to wait and see what
you wi
>Is it more reasonable in this case to name the executive vx32 instead of
>9vx since it is a plan 9 emulator for linux?
not really, because vx32 is the library, and 9vx is just one sample application.
(there are others.)
> On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 7:19 PM, erik quanstrom
> wrote:
> > have you set $LPSCRATCH?
>
>
> No; I thought it was supposed to be set by /sys/lib/lp/bin/lpscratch?
i don't see that being run from /rc/bin/service/!tcp515.
- erik
> I've been catching a little flack off and on about the Plan 9's naming
> convention of adding a '9' in front of program names. I've also noticed
> that using emulators, on the linux side, prefixing a 9 breaks history
> utilization functionality in most of the shells I use.
your shell is broke
On 14 Jun 2010, at 03:46, erik quanstrom wrote:
plan 9 is fairly unique in that it's a system one can
reasonablly hope to understand by reading the source.
that's it? really, that's it.
Plan 9 has given me a feeling about computing I haven't had since my 8-
bit days. So refreshing!
Somewh
> your shell is broken. [0-9] are perfectly valid anywhere in a unix file
> name.
does bash completion work for you on *anything*? Or does it get confused
thinking that you are specifying a previous command (!### in the history)?
Yes, a file/script named [0-9]* is valid, but still breaks thing
> does bash completion work for you on *anything*?
that's a purely theoretical question. i use rc.
- erik
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 8:47 AM, EBo wrote:
>
>> your shell is broken. [0-9] are perfectly valid anywhere in a unix file
>> name.
>
> does bash completion work for you on *anything*? Or does it get confused
> thinking that you are specifying a previous command (!### in the history)?
> Yes, a fil
Would a phonetic morphology à la the ceePlusPlus of wiki would suffice
for our lexically challenged friends?
This is what mine has (default):
if(/sys/lib/lp/bin/lpscratch){
exec /$cputype/bin/aux/lpdaemon >>[2] `{cat
/env/LPSCRATCH}^/log/lpdaemonl
}
In any case, I set the environment variable
through /cfg/sounine/cpustart just to make
sure, as well as in the service file, but to
no avail.
ak
it's interesting that neither of philippe's changes,
however justified, make any visible difference
to 9vx on my ubuntu 10.04LTS system: 9vx still
fails almost immediately. that's consistent with
9vx behaving itself as well as on any other platform
until i changed the linux and/or ubuntu version.
i
Charles,
Can you please give us stack information with gdb ?
Phil;
On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 20:15 +0100, Charles Forsyth wrote:
> it's interesting that neither of philippe's changes,
> however justified, make any visible difference
> to 9vx on my ubuntu 10.04LTS system: 9vx still
> fails almost imm
I tried running 9 9term in bash and had no problems.
Perhaps you haven't set up your $PATH correctly?
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010 21:10:38 +, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I tried running 9 9term in bash and had no problems.
> Perhaps you haven't set up your $PATH correctly?
I can run "9 9term", but what happens when you run something like "9vx -u
glenda -r /some/very/long/path/" and then run
> I can run "9 9term", but what happens when you run something like "9vx -u
> glenda -r /some/very/long/path/" and then run "!9vx" the next time to rerun
> the last command starting with ? It probably runs the 9'th command in the
> history. Sorry I was not clear. I consider this a minor his is a
If anyone can help me with some valgrind patches we can see if
valgrind can be useful.
Charles, I am really puzzled about your ubuntu experience.
Oh, wait, can you set
LANG=C
and try again? Or is it?
BTW when you get the immediate explosion does a window even ever come
up or does it die before
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Philippe Anel wrote:
> I tried with adding :
>
> while (p->mach)
> sched_yield();
>
>
> at the end of sched.c:^runproc(), before the return.
>
> It seems to work well.
>
> What do you think ?
Not sure I understand all the implications but I'll try anythin
18 matches
Mail list logo
