the block bitmap on a fakeworm is at the end of the sub
device/partition. see fworm.c:
int
fwormread(Device *d, Off b, void *c)
{
Iobuf *p;
Device *fdev;
Devsize l;
if(chatty > 1)
fprint(2, "fworm read %lld\n", (Wideoff)b);
fdev = FDEV(d);
oh! nice!
that resolves all.
thanks a lot
i will try
On 2013/03/25, at 16:19, cinap_len...@gmx.de wrote:
> the block bitmap on a fakeworm is at the end of the sub
> device/partition. see fworm.c:
>
> int
> fwormread(Device *d, Off b, void *c)
> {
> Iobuf *p;
> Device *fdev;
> D
On Saturday 23 of March 2013 12:37:17 Rob Pike wrote:
> (...) and because go install does
> transitive dependencies correctly, which mk does not.
anybody care to explain what is the limitation of mk here? can't wrap my head
around it...
--
dexen deVries
[[[↓][→]]]
> anybody care to explain what is the limitation of mk here? can't wrap my head
> around it...
It only knows about the rules you give it. It does not understand the real
dependencies in your software.
Also, because of this you tend to give it general rules which are not always
right.
There are
> It does not understand the real dependencies in your software.
what does "understand" mean in that context?
I would think if this is all done automagically with go it would need
to follow even more general rules, no?
mk doesn't parses '#include' directives in C and even if it did, it
wouldn't help.
I think that's what hes referring to.
2013/3/25 hiro <23h...@gmail.com>
> > It does not understand the real dependencies in your software.
>
> what does "understand" mean in that context?
> I would think if this i
On Mar 25, 2013, at 11:33 AM, hiro <23h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> what does "understand" mean in that context?
> I would think if this is all done automagically with go it would need
> to follow even more general rules, no?
No, they are concrete and specialized for go (the language). Go (the tool)
On Mar 25, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Bence Fábián wrote:
> mk doesn't parses '#include' directives in C and even if it did, it wouldn't
> help.
> I think that's what hes referring to.
Yes.
On Monday 25 of March 2013 11:33:55 hiro wrote:
> > It does not understand the real dependencies in your software.
>
> what does "understand" mean in that context?
> I would think if this is all done automagically with go it would need
> to follow even more general rules, no?
if mk understood 8c'
On Monday 25 of March 2013 11:40:32 Bence Fábián wrote:
> mk doesn't parses '#include' directives in C
gnu make can use output of gcc -M as rules describing prerequisites. it's
somewhat tedious and error-prone, though, as indicated by multitude of -Mx
options.
--
dexen deVries
[[[↓][→]]]
> of course, the deeper you go into this rabbit hole, the closer you get to
> something resembling GNU autotools.
The autotools attempt to be the answer to questions that have stopped
being asked ten or twenty years ago. That baggage is what I presume
the Go developers have tried to eliminate in
What if you want to make postscript from troff files?
Mk is a general tool and a good one. But it will never
have intricate knowledge about the files it works on.
2013/3/25 dexen deVries
>
> if mk understood 8c's construct ``#pragma lib "libbio.a"'' and used it to
> link
> correct libraries, it
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 11:43:36AM +0100, dexen deVries wrote:
>
> if mk understood 8c's construct ``#pragma lib "libbio.a"'' and used it to
> link
> correct libraries, it could be said to understand the actual dependencies as
> expressed by code.
>
Except that there is a topological sorting
On 25 March 2013 11:16, wrote:
> since the
> linking with libraries is order dependent. And one will need to
> explicitely state that some lib depends on some others for the
> linking (except if the symbols in the library are scanned to detect
> unsatisfied dependencies and a search is done in st
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 11:55:19AM +, Charles Forsyth wrote:
>
> the loaders do that using pragma lib:
> The order of search to resolve undefined symbols is to load
> all files and libraries mentioned explicitly on the command
> line, and then to resolve remaining
> [Mk] only knows about the rules you give it. It does not
> understand the real dependencies in your software.
> Also, because of this you tend to give it general rules
> which are not always right.
I thirk this might be a good place to mention that I'm
working on a build tool which, in effect, e
On Mon Mar 25 07:10:21 EDT 2013, beg...@gmail.com wrote:
> What if you want to make postscript from troff files?
> Mk is a general tool and a good one. But it will never
> have intricate knowledge about the files it works on.
mk does know how to expand and archive (see ar(6)) and
tell if the sour
On Mon Mar 25 06:27:26 EDT 2013, pau...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > anybody care to explain what is the limitation of mk here? can't
> > wrap my head around it...
> >
> It only knows about the rules you give it. It does not understand the
> real dependencies in your software. Also, because of this
On Mon Mar 25 00:37:51 EDT 2013, cinap_len...@gmx.de wrote:
> i was thinking about this some time ago... theres the fakeworm
> device "f" that will maintain a block bitmap of
> the blocks that have already been written. one could write
> a program that also backups the block bitmap and on backup,
>
> neither is a big issue in practice. but that leads me to an interesting
> question, does go rebuild everything if the go compiler has changed?
i think it stops at package "runtime". at least that's what it builds
first when I tell it to "rebuild everything".
On 23/03/2013 20:23, ron minnich wrote:
I'll happily pay the price of bigger binaries for things such as the %v format.
I don't write hello, world that often, or even care about its size when I do.
One demo we used to do for Unix was show we could write an executable
program that was 2 bytes. I
> it is better to have efficient backup tool. (but not exists yet though)
> cwfs is not so easy to backup compared to venti.
> venti is easy to backup because filled areas are shielded and guaranteed not
> to be modified.
> but cwfs is not. unwritten blocks exist in deep dumped area.
> these bloc
I see once again it's a matter of tone.
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 08:27:33AM +0200, lu...@proxima.alt.za wrote:
>
> Philosophically, Plan 9 has rattled the proverbial cage and Go is an
> earthquake by comparison. The outcome is still to be evaluated. But
> not everyone is going to see it in the
In C, source files do not depend on other source files, they merely depend on
headers, eg:
foo.$O: foo.c foo.h bar.h
bar.$O: bar.c bar.h baz.h
baz.$O: baz.c baz.h
So, because the dependencies exist and do not depend on the outputs of other
commands, it's possible to build the obect
> I know that the population of 9fans contains a sizeable percentage of
> people who would like to cast Plan 9 in amber, to hold it immutable as
> an example to future generations. That's an unrealistic expectation.
Maybe, but maybe that's the best we can do, given that the conditions
that gave r
> Maybe, but maybe that's the best we can do, given that the conditions
> that gave rise to Plan 9 have long ceased to exist and are unlikely to
> recur.
And maybe we're missing the point but there are still
a few of us out there using Plan 9 daily as our primary
interface to computers. For some o
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:19 PM, wrote:
>> Maybe, but maybe that's the best we can do, given that the conditions
>> that gave rise to Plan 9 have long ceased to exist and are unlikely to
>> recur.
>
> And maybe we're missing the point but there are still
> a few of us out there using Plan 9 daily
> And how do you manage to browser the web?
9front did some work on mothra. For trivial javascript
I try charon (which was sufficient to configure my wifi
router). As a last resort I VNC to another operating
system.
For the vast majority of what I do, mothra is sufficient.
-sl
> Maybe, but maybe that's the best we can do, given that the conditions
> that gave rise to Plan 9 have long ceased to exist and are unlikely to
> recur. A version of Plan 9 untainted by the predominance of the Intel
> and Windows philosophies is needed to reminds us of how things could
> have tur
> what conditions do you feel gave rise to plan 9 that no longer exist?
Modem speeds below 19200bps? Reality engines costing as much as
houses and considerably less accessible? Skill sets in IT
practitioners way above the norm? Everything that the desktop PC
eventually brought to an end, I supp
> what conditions do you feel gave rise to plan 9 that no longer exist?
I think there is a feeling that Plan 9 was created to address
specific problems (refraining from turning easy jobs into hard
jobs, translated as getting real work done on slow hardware) that
have been overtaken by history and
> In a word, elitism, largely earned rather than inherited. You did
> ask!
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4398842
it doesn't matter if it's real or not :)
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 01:51:56PM -0600, andrey mirtchovski wrote:
> > In a word, elitism, largely earned rather than inherited. You did
> > ask!
>
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4398842
>
> it doesn't matter if it's real or not :)
This is the first time, I feel I match one criterion t
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 03:38:26PM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
>
> what conditions do you feel gave rise to plan 9 that no longer exist?
>
> - erik
>
Bell Labs' budget, talent pool, and institutional administrative
philsosophy.
khm
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 07:31:27PM +, aram wrote:
>
> And how do you manage to browser the web?
>
It is possible to use computers without also using javascript.
khm
> if mk understood 8c's construct ``#pragma lib "libbio.a"'' and used it to
> link
> correct libraries, it could be said to understand the actual dependencies as
> expressed by code.
> of course, the deeper you go into this rabbit hole, the closer you get to
> something resembling GNU autotool
> It is possible to use computers without also using javascript.
But it's a strange thing to want to do. A bit like asking for the
Ford Model T gear shift in a modern car.
Choices have been made by those who had the right influence (you may
want to call it power) and some of those choices were k
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 06:45:33AM +0200, lu...@proxima.alt.za wrote:
> But it's a strange thing to want to do. A bit like asking for the
> Ford Model T gear shift in a modern car.
I reject this analogy and the implied value judgement.
> Choices have been made by those who had the right influenc
38 matches
Mail list logo
