I could swear that I remember the following question being asked during
the times when 9P2000 was being introduced, but I simply can't find
any relevant threads. I do apologize if my google-foo is failing me,
but here it goes: what is the reason for not allowing writes to the
directories (with the
On Mar 25, 2009, at 6:51 PM, Paul Lalonde wrote:
A cfront-ish approach to templates leads to hellish duplication of
template-generated code in each module, and thence to even worse
code bloat.
That's not the case, really. The compiler (well, at least the
conventional one, not the one like
On Mar 25, 2009, at 6:10 PM, Chris Brannon wrote:
Erik Quanstrom wrote:
On Wed Mar 25 16:39:16 EDT 2009, cmbran...@cox.net wrote:
The Comeau C++ compiler [1] uses the cfront technique, doesn't
it? It is
supposed to be very standards-compliant.
[1] http://www.comeaucomputing.com
where do t
On Mar 25, 2009, at 4:26 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
On Wed Mar 25 19:22:23 EDT 2009, devon.od...@gmail.com wrote:
Another student I spoke to on IRC spoke of the possibility of
bootstrapping LLVM for Plan 9 on Linux and getting it to run
natively.
That would give us a whole bunch of different c
On Mar 21, 2009, at 12:00 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
I could swear that I remember the following question being asked
during
the times when 9P2000 was being introduced, but I simply can't find
any relevant threads. I do apologize if my google-foo is failing me,
but here it goes: what i
On Mar 26, 2009, at 12:35 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
question: is there anything that HTTP makes us lose except
for the transactional nature of create?
sanity?
That's dead and buried already :-( But I've got be honest
with you -- REST is actually the closes thing to 9P
that has a potential to
On Mar 26, 2009, at 12:44 PM, Eric Van Hensbergen wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
On Mar 21, 2009, at 12:00 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
The story here is that we are building a bunch of RESTful APIs
and my personal preference is to bend HTTP as close to 9P
as I
On Mar 26, 2009, at 2:10 PM, J.R. Mauro wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Mukhitdinov Manzur
wrote:
Hello!
I'm a cs student from Saint-Petersburg,Russia(sea-gull on
#plan9-soc).
I'm interested in your project of implementing Git file system
for Plan9.
Implementing Gitfs when
On Mar 26, 2009, at 1:54 PM, Eric Van Hensbergen wrote:
I have thought about that too, but became convinced that POST is more
like create (or more like write on a subdirectory -- hence the
original
question). With the clone operation it is the *opening* of the clone
device that provides you wi
On Mar 24, 2009, at 5:51 AM, roger peppe wrote:
http://www.classhat.com/tymaPaulMultithread.pdf
Java has its own share of issues when it comes to multithreading, I'd
rather see a presentation like that from the sort of guys who do
VoIP servers in C/C++ and things like that.
Thanks,
Roman.
On Mar 27, 2009, at 6:36 PM, Uriel wrote:
Some of us have been thinking about a 'sane' subset of HTTP plus some
conventions, that could reasonably map to 9p.
Interestingly enough, that's exactly the quest I'm on. I'd appreciate
a chance
of talking to likeminded folks.
The main issue is the
On Jul 3, 2009, at 5:34 AM, sqweek wrote:
2009/7/3 Balwinder S Dheeman :
On 07/02/2009 01:22 AM, Russ Cox wrote:
Arguing about mouse vs keyboard misses the point.
I'm very happy with acme's use of the mouse, but
acme's power comes from the rest of its design.
True, but seems to me, by other p
On Jul 18, 2009, at 6:06 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
On Sat Jul 18 14:41:02 EDT 2009, r...@sun.com wrote:
In the "mom, why sky is blue" department, here's a silly question:
is there any good reason that read(2) on a hangup channel returns
an error, while write(2) on a hangup channel terminates an
On Jul 19, 2009, at 2:30 AM, Charles Forsyth wrote:
perhaps i've been asleep at the swtch, but i don't recall seing
writes
on closed channels terminate programs with a note.
sys: write on closed pipe
mainly to kill off a pipeline when the thing at the end has finished.
i think that might be
On Jul 19, 2009, at 2:01 PM, Francisco J Ballesteros wrote:
Bescause consumers produce pipeline results why
producers do not?
ls | wc > /tmp/nfiles
I want nfiles to be ok.
however
ls | date
should probably let ls die as soon as date completes
True. However, you'd get the same result if wri
On Jul 19, 2009, at 2:55 PM, Charles Forsyth wrote:
not for network connections?
i think pipe is the only case, and even that is suppressed
for pipes that carry 9p, after mounting.
one last kick of a dead horse: see that's exactly what I'm
talking about -- all these exceptions and for what? I
On Jul 30, 2009, at 9:31 AM, sqweek wrote:
2009/7/30 Roman V Shaposhnik :
This is sort of off-topic, but does anybody have any experience with
Ceph?
http://ceph.newdream.net/
Good or bad war stories (and general thoughts) would be quite
welcome.
Not with ceph itself, but the description
On Jul 31, 2009, at 10:41 PM, ron minnich wrote:
I'm not a big fan of lustre. In fact I'm talking to someone who really
wants 9p working well so he can have lustre on all but a few nodes,
and those lustre nodes export 9p.
What are your clients running? What are their requirements as
far as POS
On Aug 6, 2009, at 4:47 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
Works like a charm. Knowing the the correct manual page(s) to be
looking
at certainly helps!
I can't help though but be curious as to why there's no command, or
an additional switch to changeuser, to remove users from the keyfile.
I guess du
On Aug 6, 2009, at 1:08 PM, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
Hi there,
I revived the 9base project which was asleep for nearly 3 years som
days ago and created a new version based on Russ' plan9port from
20090731. You can download it from:
http://code.suckless.org/dl/tools/9base-3.tar.gz
its project pa
On Aug 6, 2009, at 11:13 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
poorly. massive, overengineered, and yet lacking:
http://lwn.net/Articles/344117
This looks like a case in desperate need of Peter Gutmann's Wave
Therapy:
http://diswww.mit.edu/bloom-picayune/crypto/14238
"Whenever someone thinks tha
On Aug 6, 2009, at 12:33 PM, Daniel Lyons wrote:
It's easy for me to object to what they're coming up with but it
would be hard for me to describe in detail how exactly factotum +
all the other stuff encompass it, and I don't think that the paper
we have on factotum or the section in nemo's
On Aug 6, 2009, at 1:45 AM, Nick LaForge wrote:
This one still has a fan. Is there anything decent *and* fanless out
there?
Thanks,
Roman.
Intel's 'netbook' platform (no amd64) -- fanless, uses a 12V DC brick
-- for mini-itx:
http://www.intel.com/products/desktop/motherboards/D945GSEJT/D945GS
Silly question: is there any way of buying 3d edition (or better yet
2nd edition)
original manuals?
Thanks,
Roman.
On Aug 11, 2009, at 7:07 PM, Tim Newsham wrote:
i didn't mean translating from one /dev/audio to the next.
i ment dealing with azalia audio vs. ac97 vs. soundblaster.
and ogg/vorbis vs. mp3 vs pem vs. *law.
I agree here. I envision a separate codec server that
sits on top of an audio server an
On Aug 11, 2009, at 9:24 PM, Russ Cox wrote:
It's hard to do the low-level hardware stuff outside
the kernel. It's possible, but it's a lot easier inside.
Just keep the inside simple.
I've done audio on a handful of operating systems
and all I ever want to do with the card is set it up
to play
On Aug 11, 2009, at 9:25 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
May be its better to call this latency, since we can all appreciate
some of the shortcomings that 9P has when it comes to it.
i think you're drawing the wrong conclusion from a too-abstract
view of the facts.
My ears begged to differ ;-)
9p
On Aug 11, 2009, at 10:10 PM, Tim Newsham wrote:
I'm not sure either latency or RT is proper terminology here. But
I believe what I meant was clear: when you need overall latency
to be around 5ms you start to notice 9P.
It sounds like you have a specific app in mind, and a real-time
one at that
On Aug 11, 2009, at 10:15 PM, Tim Newsham wrote:
The simplicity is definitely attractive in its own right,
and I'll consider it. However, the devices do provide hardware
support for other formats which do require some work to convert.
mu-law and a-law come to mind..
In all my life doing multim
On Aug 11, 2009, at 10:43 PM, Anthony Sorace wrote:
Tim Newsham wrote:
// Yah, this format doesnt come up that often.. perhaps its not
// worth the effort, but then again the ability to switch a device's
// encoding isnt very much work either... About as hard as
// changing the sampling rate or
On Aug 11, 2009, at 10:59 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
With multichannel playback you have those two options:
1. drive each channel separately with PCM
2. do AC-3/DTC/MP3 passthrough
Meant to include a URL for the curious ones (was trigger-happy):
http://www.mplayerhq.hu/DOCS/tech
On Aug 11, 2009, at 10:54 PM, Lawrence E. Bakst wrote:
3. video (when I say video I mean movies and not graphics)
If you think you are ever going to want to use your new audio system
with a corresponding video system, you need to consider that from
the outset. Audio and video need to be kept
On Aug 12, 2009, at 4:18 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
In fact, perhaps even the page(1) command is falwed. What should've
happened was a next layer over rio, where /dev/draw/n/data would
be able to accept any kind of image encoding.
i think page is a good thing. pushing data
translation to the ed
On Aug 12, 2009, at 12:50 PM, Tim Newsham wrote:
Still would love to hear if anyone knows the answer to these:
- What software exists for each of these formats?
If you are asking about non Plan9 software I'd start with
ffmpeg.
- Which format is the most "popular"?
I don't think I underst
On Aug 12, 2009, at 1:28 AM, Tim Newsham wrote:
I agree wrt. "mp3". I'm considering the possibility of supporting
alaw, ulaw, pcm8, pcm16 in big/little and signed/unsigned formats,
and adpcm, using the hardware features...
Here's a complete list of audio formats that one can make hardware
eit
I've just been enlightened by a friend of mine who explained
to me that binary RPC is still alive and kicking:
http://incubator.apache.org/thrift/
http://incubator.apache.org/thrift/static/thrift-20070401.pdf
and, of course, nothing in CS is complete these days unless
there's somebody at
On Aug 12, 2009, at 8:49 PM, Tim Newsham wrote:
Am I totally missing something or hasn't been the binary RPC
of that style been dead ever since SUNRPC? Hasn't the eulogy
been delivered by CORBA? Haven't folks realized that S-exprs
are really quite good for data serialization in the heterogeneous
There's been a *lot* of speculation on this thread and very little fact.
I'd encourage everybody to play with the feature before forming
any kind of final judgement.
On Sep 3, 2009, at 8:52 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
Did you even read the article or any of the examples? There are
plenty
of thin
On Sep 4, 2009, at 5:14 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
But this has no more to do with parallelism than any other
feature of C. If you used __block vars in a block, you'd
still need to lock them when the block is called from
different threads.
that's a lot worse than a function pointer. with
a func
On Sep 4, 2009, at 2:15 AM, Greg Comeau wrote:
In article <1251993672.16936.4779.ca...@work.sfbay.sun.com>,
Roman V Shaposhnik wrote:
On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 08:44 -0700, David Leimbach wrote:
The blocks aren't interesting at all by themselves, I totally agree
with that. However what they do t
On Sep 3, 2009, at 6:20 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
On Thu Sep 3 20:53:13 EDT 2009, r...@sun.com wrote:
"None of those technologies [NFS, iSCSI, FC] scales as cheaply,
reliably, goes as big, nor can be managed as easily as stand-alone
pods
with their own IP address waiting for requests on HTTP
On Sep 4, 2009, at 2:37 AM, matt wrote:
I concur with Erik, I specced out a 20tb server earlier this year,
matching the throughputs hits you in the wallet.
I'm amazed they are using pci-e 1x , it's kind of naive
see what the guy from sun says
http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5899-Some-perspe
On Sep 4, 2009, at 9:58 AM, Iruata Souza wrote:
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
There's been a *lot* of speculation on this thread and very little
fact.
(...)
Trust me, I've seen how it is generated.
so we should trust you and not the facts? is that wh
Guys,
the agony of Sun being slowly swallowed was too much for me to handle.
I left the company and decided to pursue my cloud interests elsewhere
(which, sadly enough, puts IWP9 and GSOC mentor summit out reach for
me because of the scheduling conflicts -- need to travel).
That, in itself, is no
Guys,
has anybody seen 9P implemented in Lua? Either client, server or both?
Thanks,
Roman.
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Sergey Zhilkin wrote:
> http://9p.cat-v.org/implementations - may be usefull :)
Not in this case: "Implementations in progress for: lua and others.
But don't let that deter you from writing your own!"
However, I've seen this thread:
http://hn.whyslow.net/item
Guys,
I remember Russ authoring a paper on running Venti over distributed hash tables,
but I can't find the pdf anymore. All Google gives me is this:
http://74.125.155.132/scholar?q=cache:6Wu_j9JaaUcJ:scholar.google.com/&hl=en
Help?
Thanks,
Roman.
To all those who might have hesitated (for all the wrong reasons I might add)
to buy this book before, now is an ideal time:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/1418837695/ref=sr_1_olp_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1255461503&sr=8-1
Just got mine from bookbyte123 and it really is in a brand new c
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:01 PM, wrote:
>
> As I said, I'm only the author, so I don't have all the numbers
> to these things, but after being a little closer to the process,
> I understand a little better where the cost comes from. At the
> same time, as the dad of a girl headed for college nex
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Tim Newsham wrote:
> Rethinking multi-core systems as distributed heterogeneous
> systems. Thoughts?
Somehow this feels related to the work that came out of Berkeley a year
or so ago. I'm still not convinced what is the benefits of multiple
kernels. If you are m
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Tim Newsham wrote:
> I'm not familiar with the berkeley work.
Sorry I can't readily find the paper (the URL is somewhere on IMAP @Sun :-()
But it got presented at the Birkeley ParLab overview given to us by
Dave Patterson.
They were talking thin hypervisors and th
> And how does one deal with heterogeneous cores and complex on chip
> interconnect topologies?
Good question. Do they have to be heterogeneous? My oppinion is that the
future of big multicore will be more Cell-like.
> There's no real evdence that single kernels do well with hundreds of real
> co
Well, since Russ is silent (and since this is not the first time this
question has come up: http://9fans.net/archive/2008/05/401) here's
a reliable link for anybody who might still be interested:
http://web.archive.org/web/20060308015519/http://project-iris.net/isw-2003/papers/sit.pdf
Thanks
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 10:03 AM, Sam Watkins wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 12:50:48PM +0100, Richard Miller wrote:
>> > It's easy to write good code that will take advantage of arbitrarily many
>> > processors to run faster / smoother, if you have a proper language for the
>> > task.
>>
>> ...
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 12:06 AM, ron minnich wrote:
> the use of qualitative terms such as "embarassingly parallel" often
> leads to confusion.
>
> Scaling can be measured. It can be quantified. Nothing scales forever,
> because at some point you want to get an answer back to a person,
> and/or t
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Sam Watkins wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 04:21:16PM +0100, roger peppe wrote:
>> BTW it seems the gates quote is false:
>>
>> http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Gates
>
> maybe the Ken quote is false too - hard to believe he's that out of touch
I think the reve
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Sam Watkins wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 06:50:28PM -0700, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>> > The mention that "... the overhead of cache coherence restricts the ability
>> > to scale up to even 80 cores" is also eye openeing. If we
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 6:06 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote
>> It is. But what's your proposal on code sharing? All those PC
>> registers belonging to
>> different cores have to point somewhere. Is that somewhere is not shared me=
>> mory
>> the code has to be put
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> So I added several block types: eg. blob (payload data) and inode
> (holding the tree).
>From these I infer that you've build an object store, not just a block sotre.
How close was it to this:
http://oceanstore.cs.berkeley.edu/publicatio
I'm so envious :-(
Sent from the hotel in China :-)
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Eric Van Hensbergen wrote:
> Everyone is busy drinking and debating protocol semantics. I think we've
> managed to empty the coraid fridge of beer.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 22, 2009, at 10:35 PM, Mic
Stop making me salivate ;-) Post the videos already! ;-)
Thanks,
Roman.
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 10:33 AM, wrote:
>> Thanks to everyone who attended and to Erik Quanstrom and Coraid for a
>> rockin'
>> IWP9.
>
> I second that! It was a great meeting.
>
> BLS
>
>
>
On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 11:26 AM, ron minnich wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 8:01 PM, wrote:
>
>> but wouldn't be slightly nicer to have something like a set of dynamic
>> probes
>> which queue up blobs of data up for userland code to do the hairy lifting
>> on?
>
> yeah. You are right. Is ther
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 5:56 PM, Jonas A wrote:
> Does anyone have pictures from the workshop?
And videos?
Thanks,
Roman.
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Nathaniel W Filardo wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 12:07:22AM +, dav...@mac.com wrote:
>> yet too dangerous due to its possible unbounded runtime
>
> I keep hearing this brought up, but (while I am not an expert) AFAICT, the
> runtime for each D hook should b
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:46 PM, ron minnich wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Nathaniel W Filardo wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 12:07:22AM +, dav...@mac.com wrote:
>>> yet too dangerous due to its possible unbounded runtime
>>
>> I keep hearing this brought up, but (while I am not
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Devon H. O'Dell wrote:
> 2009/11/9 erik quanstrom :
> That said, my knowledge of DTrace internals greatly surpasses my knowledge of
> how to
> actually use it, so I'll let Roman help out on that front :)
Which means -- we can nicely compliment each other ;-)
>> b
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:21 PM, wrote:
> On 10 Nov 2009, at 01:00, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>>
>> What exactly do you want to know? I worked with DTrace quite extensively.
>
> What is the upper bound on the runtime of a single D bytecode sequence?
>
> Or to put
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 5:00 PM, andrey mirtchovski
wrote:
> but will it run on Plan 9?
If you look at the infomercial -- it seems like it might run on Plan9. At least
the name of the compiler suggests it: 6g ;-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwoWei-GAPo
Thanks,
Roman.
P.S. Russ, are you work
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Russ Cox wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 5:04 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
>> On Tue Nov 10 20:02:34 EST 2009, mirtchov...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> but will it run on Plan 9?
>>
>> would the authors care to contrast go with limbo?
>
> The common concepts—channels, slic
http://code.google.com/p/go/issues/detail?id=9
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:31 PM, Nick LaForge wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Roman V Shaposhnik wrote:
>
>> Personally I think you'd be better off exploring a connection that a
>> language called Lua has to C. In the immortal words of Casablanca it
>> just could be "the begging of a bea
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:37 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
>> > Speaking of VMs (and Limbo) -- I'm wondering if Go is eventually going
>> > to have it anyway. Any reason not to?
>>
>> It can be perceived as a competitor to C if it has a runtime, but not
>> if it has a VM. So I don't think it would gro
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:34 PM, wrote:
> "Go" has added a cat amongst the pigeons :-)
>
> I'm a language aficionado
Makes two of us and I wouldn't mind comparing notes (in fact,
it would be quite helpful if all of us here at 9fans did). I wish I had
more time to devote to it, but so far the fol
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 12:46 PM, pmarin wrote:
> fortunately, the unix world is less radical, you can use rlfe
> http://per.bothner.com/software/
There's also versatile socat:
http://www.dest-unreach.org/socat/doc/socat.html#EXAMPLE_ADDRESS_READLINE
Thanks,
Roman.
Is there such a thing?
I believed Rob when he said how easy it would be to write servers in Go,
but I want proof ;-) And I'd rather read than write in order to get it.
Thanks,
Roman.
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Latchesar Ionkov wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Andrey Mirtchovski and I wrote 9P server and client libraries/packages for Go.
Perfect
> The hg repository with the code is available at
> http://bitbucket.org/f2f/go9p/.
>
> Once downloaded the code should be moved to $GOROOT/s
This appears to be an interesting way of solving an HA problem:
http://nss.cs.ubc.ca/remus/papers/remus-nsdi08.pdf
It is also different from a typical approach of checkpointing in HPC.
One thing that I'm wondering about though is whether Plan9 architecture
of things like /net and /dev/sd woul
On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 15:55 -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > is anyone already working on an factotum port to p9p or native Linux ?
> >
> > I've just wrote a patch to Linux kernel which allows changing
> > another process' privileges (uid, etc). The /dev/caphash and
> > /dev/ca
On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 16:19 -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
> >
> > Any particular (security?) reason for not having a PAM-aware factotum
> > or is it just lack of interest?
> >
>
> if i understand p9p correctly, it's object is to get along with
> the system, not replace bits of it.
I see. Speaki
On Fri, 2008-05-30 at 15:04 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Very well explained. I've seen this question come up lots of times
> when introducing fs-based interfaces to people. When we had some
> off-shore devs to bring up to speed, they kept coming back to it: "so
> can we just define a protocol
On Mon, 2008-06-02 at 14:55 -0700, ron minnich wrote:
> now I time the run 10 times (I can run longer but it seems good enough
> to establish behavior). I should get some rough idea of the cost of
> the branch.
I hate to say it: but these days you can't time anything in isolation.
The CPU is just
On Mon, 2008-06-02 at 22:37 +0200, Uriel wrote:
> He was boasting about how wonderful it was to be able to debug and
> profile stuff with this huge kernel hack (third biggest subsystem in
> the Solaris kernel, forgot exactly how many, but a few hundred
> thousand lines of code). In the end to do st
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 16:45 +0100, Charles Forsyth wrote:
> > than a Cray, but Linux isn't *that* demanding is it?
>
> last week i added 1gb RAM to my previously 512mbyte lenovo (3000 N100) to stop
> the linux system from thrashing. all i run directly is firefox and drawterm.
> the system was fin
On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 14:23 -0400, Russ Cox wrote:
> I find it much easier just to set up
> a dedicated machine of the right OS and architecture
> and use its native tools
Speaking of which: am I the only one betraying the true
cross-compiling in favor of virtualized copies of the
OS/platform? I m
First of all, if you happen to be around San Francisco Bay Area
on Sep 30, you might be interested in joining an unconference
that is being hosted at Sun's campus where I work:
http://cloudcamp-silicon-valley-08.eventbrite.com/
In fact, if there's enough interest we can meet early and I can
giv
On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 19:09 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> // ...is there a piece of software already available
> // that would act like an adapter between NFS
> // clients and 9P servers...
>
> nfsserver(8) might work for you: it'll grab a 9p server
> and export it over nfs, allowing clients w
Guys,
somehow it dawned on me that plan9port lacks
an application to serve a local filesystem
over 9P. Is this on purpose? Am I missing
something fundamental that would allow
for a moral equivalent of exportfs?
The best I could come up with was to possibly
use u9fs, but that begs a question -- sh
On Nov 1, 2008, at 12:05 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
I really fail to see what is your problem here. There's no
rule that source code repository has to correspond 1-1
to the binary package. In fact, it is quite common
to use a single repository for producing a number of
different binary packages.
On Nov 1, 2008, at 8:04 AM, Eric Van Hensbergen wrote:
On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Rudolf Sykora
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Again, "What should mv do to a tree that resides on multiple file
servers?"
what about: mv dirA dirB ==
mkdir dirB
dircp dirA dirB
rm -r dirA
... if you are able
On Nov 1, 2008, at 9:30 AM, Josh Wood wrote:
All that said, it's not like I've never cursed a directory that
wouldn't mv for me in Plan 9 -- so if someone had an answer for
Rob's question: "What should mv do to a tree that resides on
multiple file servers?", it could be interesting to discus
On Nov 1, 2008, at 7:12 PM, Eric Van Hensbergen wrote:
On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Nov 1, 2008, at 8:04 AM, Eric Van Hensbergen wrote:
I would imagine that 99% of the time (more?) the behavior people
desire would be what you describe.
Guys,
I've been experimenting with how Plan 9 handles notes for processes and
I must confess that I'm now confused and in need your help.
First of all, the proc(3) man page says that "A read [from /proc/n/
note] of at least ERRLEN
characters will retrieve the oldest note posted to the process a
Guys,
when somebody tries to stop a process that is waiting for the IO the
process
doesn't get transferred to a Stopped state immediately but only when
the scheduler sees it for the first time. This leads to a process
writing to
a /proc/n/ctl being put in a Stopwait state which is a bit inc
On Nov 4, 2008, at 8:01 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
I'm asking is -- "dear kernel, please don't advance this process even
if you otherwise can". All I need is a frozen state so that I can
not so easy on a multiprocessor. (unless you turn all but one
processor off.)
Hm. May be its getting late
On Nov 4, 2008, at 8:00 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
i don't think the kernel has this level of control.
let's suppose that we have a process that gets a stop message
that's doing i/o. let's suppose that it's doing io to a particularly
cranky device with lots of neat locks that really hates gettin
On Nov 3, 2008, at 9:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frankly, I was trying to see whether an external process reading
on somebody else's /proc/n/note would make any sense. One thing
that I wanted to implement was a "note thief" process that would
constantly read on a target's /proc/n/note and han
On Nov 3, 2008, at 5:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A thought ...
Shared libraries do 2 possibly useful things:
1) save space
2) stop you having to re-link when a new library is released.
Now 2) doesn't really happen anyway, due to .so versioning hell,
so we're left with 1) ...
I know it's ki
Really cool! Are you going to talk about this @SuperComputing?
Thanks,
Roman.
On Nov 5, 2008, at 5:53 PM, ron minnich wrote:
Just booted Plan 9 on a 1024+16 node BG/P this week. .
All credit to jmk, ericvh, and charles for this fantastic test run and
the existence of this new kernel.
Plan is
On Nov 5, 2008, at 2:13 PM, ron minnich wrote:
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Eris Discordia
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
yes, I agree, I was being terribly unfair to plan 9. Acme on plan
9 is
about 1/2 M. Vim on DOS is 3x larger? impressive.
My intent was, of course, to show your comparison
On Nov 4, 2008, at 9:16 PM, ron minnich wrote:
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 9:05 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Nov 3, 2008, at 9:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frankly, I was trying to see whether an external process reading
on somebody else's /proc/n/note would mak
1 - 100 of 167 matches
Mail list logo
