On Nov 6, 2008, at 3:01 AM, Kernel Panic wrote:
http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sources/contrib/cinap_lenrek/photos/iwp9.2008/dscn0213.jpg
This one is truly awesome!
Thanks,
Roman.
On Nov 5, 2008, at 9:40 PM, Nathaniel W Filardo wrote:
Would this suffice?
It sounds like exactly the kind of thing I was talking about.
Did I miss something obvious?
And this would be a million dollar question here. I don't
think you did (although Eric constantly warns us of
dragons), but
On Nov 5, 2008, at 4:55 AM, 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 lat
On Nov 4, 2008, at 4:34 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
So the question remains -- what is the proper way of putting a
process
that waits for an IO into a Stopped state?
i don't think it's possible without changing the kernel.
but it's a good question, why does it work this way?
obviously one doesn
On Nov 7, 2008, at 7:56 PM, ron minnich wrote:
And FUSE, as I realize now, seems to fit the bill quite nicely.
It is available on quite a few OSes and the list of resource sharing
protocols for which adapters are already available seems to be quite
large.
And little lacks in 9p like symlnks, xa
On Nov 8, 2008, at 4:11 AM, Francisco J Ballesteros wrote:
It seems that MS is pushing webdav hard.
True. But it is not MS that worries me in this particular case. At least
they don't have anything to offer yet. This:
http://docs.amazonwebservices.com/AmazonS3/2006-03-01/
on the other hand,
On Nov 8, 2008, at 11:15 AM, John Barham wrote:
It seems that MS is pushing webdav hard.
that's what's needed when heavy things run out of fuel.
Even as a potential substitute for ftp webdav is a farce. Speaking
from personal experience, the amount of XML you need to generate for a
directory
On Nov 8, 2008, at 2:19 PM, Bruce Ellis wrote:
I wrote a functional 9P S3 client but it just seemed silly in the end.
Buy a few T of disk and fossil+venti and it's over. Even aging kenfs
will do.
The most ironic thing of all is that one would expect a company which
stood behind a technology li
On Nov 8, 2008, at 3:11 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
Even as a potential substitute for ftp webdav is a farce. Speaking
from personal experience, the amount of XML you need to generate
for a
directory listing is at least 20 times the size of the equivalent
ftp
listing, and then you twiddle you
On Nov 11, 2008, at 8:36 AM, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:
I just want to have
separate protocol ops for messages versus a single extension op. I
suppose the difference is largely an implementation decision assuming
your protocol operation space is large enough
the thinking is that it's the least po
On Nov 11, 2008, at 8:30 AM, Uriel wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 4:37 PM, Skip Tavakkolian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
operations like these (symlink, readlink, lock, etc.) that only have
significance at the extremities should not worry the transit relays.
that was the reason for Text/Rext pro
On Nov 11, 2008, at 6:11 PM, sqweek wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 4:54 AM, Eric Van Hensbergen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have two measurements of success:
a) what keeps me working on Plan 9 related technologies in a paid
position
b) what switches people from using NFS, GPFS, or other hor
On Nov 10, 2008, at 3:27 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
At least in case of cpu(1) the magic is a bit perverse and quite
unlike the rest of the system. The way notes are managed make
a local end of a cpu(1) jump through considerable hoops in order
for the notes to be properly delivered. That was a sad
On Nov 11, 2008, at 8:58 PM, ron minnich wrote:
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 6:11 PM, sqweek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 4:54 AM, Eric Van Hensbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
I have two measurements of success:
a) what keeps me working on Plan 9 related technologies in a pa
On Nov 13, 2008, at 8:37 AM, Dan Cross wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 2:13 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
stat(5) specifies exclusive-access files, which we do use for
locking.
In what sense is that not `doing locking'? It's not POSIX byte-range
read- or write-locking per fcntl, but it's not
On Nov 13, 2008, at 8:55 AM, sqweek wrote:
I understand that if you import a gateway's /net on each computer
in a
rather large internal network you will be consuming a huge amount
of mostly
redundant resources on the gateway. My impression is that each
imported
instance of /net requires a pe
On Nov 15, 2008, at 3:21 AM, Eris Discordia wrote:
Exactly! An idle TCP connection costs you nothing except the state
that
Would you mind reading my response, too, and then informing me of
your opinion?
It would be helpful if you can quote exactly the part on which you are
requesting
my
On Nov 15, 2008, at 2:07 PM, Eris Discordia wrote:
What field?
Out of the field := clueless
I believe our conversation stops right here. Should you
ever consider restarting it -- a simple apology for
being an asshole would do the trick.
Thanks,
Roman.
On Nov 15, 2008, at 2:13 PM, Micah Stetson wrote:
I'm unclear as to what "amount of state" iptables needs to keep
After you do something like:
# iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -p TCP -j MASQUERADE
the Linux kernel module called nf_conntrack starts allocating
data structures to do its job. I'
On Nov 14, 2008, at 8:38 AM, Eric Van Hensbergen wrote:
There are those that say too many cooks spoil the broth.
This isn't our problem.
Our problem is that we have a kitchen full of food critics attempting
to direct the cooks.
Ok, since I happen to be on a soul searching expedition today --
On Nov 19, 2008, at 6:55 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
i think the answer to your question is that it's a lot more useful
to know that it's #s/boot rather than /net/il/0/data.
Really? Why? With /net/il/0/data you have an option of digging
deeper and
finding out the other end's address, etc. Or to f
On Nov 19, 2008, at 7:32 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
Sure it can:
% srv tcp!sources.cs.bell-labs.com!9fs test
% ls /net/tcp
/net/tcp/0
/net/tcp/1
/net/tcp/2
/net/tcp/clone
% mount -n /net/tcp/2/data /n/test
%
; mount /net/il/0/data /n/x
mount: mount /n/x: version c
On Nov 19, 2008, at 8:14 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
On Nov 19, 2008, at 7:32 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
Sure it can:
% srv tcp!sources.cs.bell-labs.com!9fs test
% ls /net/tcp
/net/tcp/0
/net/tcp/1
/net/tcp/2
/net/tcp/clone
% mount -n /net/tcp/2/data /n/test
%
; mount /net
On Nov 30, 2008, at 4:40 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Hi folks,
I'm currently playing around with some ideas for a new (or perhaps
very old ? ;-o) computing architecture, based on 9P + Java.
It's a bit of old Burroughs MF, a bit of Ambric and a bit ja Java ;-o
The idea bind: have a bunch of tiny
Hi Guys!
I've been trying to implement a "lazy bind/mount" in Plan9 and it
dawned on
me that I don't really know any way of modifying calling process's
namespace
on-demand. In a automounter-like style.
Now, before you tell me that I shouldn't be doing it (well, may be I
shouldn't, but
pl
On Dec 4, 2008, at 8:35 PM, Dave Eckhardt wrote:
At some distant point in the past (last century, actually)
I was drawn to AFS because of the features, but left in
horror because of the complexity.
The goal was adding an enterprise-scale distributed file
system to an existing operating system (
On Dec 4, 2008, at 8:43 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
On Thu Dec 4 23:37:02 EST 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
supported 400 users on 120 workstations in 1984; this
evening CMU's AFS cell hosts 30,821 user volumes, roughly
half a gigabyte each; there are cells with more users and
cells with more bi
On Dec 2, 2008, at 5:36 PM, Dan Cross wrote:
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 7:07 PM, erik quanstrom
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
currently one can prevent external changes to a
namespace by creating a unique ns with rfork.
if /proc/$pid/ns were writable, one would not not
be possible without yet another
On Dec 6, 2008, at 11:28 AM, Dave Eckhardt wrote:
More globally, if the high adoption rate of NFS is an argument
in favor of its architecture,
It is most definitely not. At least in my opinion. However, adoption
is the only thing that I know of that can potentially justify excessive
*engineerin
On Dec 6, 2008, at 6:27 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
To some extent, the popularity of NFS (is there any NAS box
that talks AFS?) and Linux is one big testament to the
power of "good enough" or "worse is better".
i really hate this meme. it doesn't mean anything.
It depends on the point of view
On Dec 6, 2008, at 9:20 PM, Rob Pike wrote:
i don't understand this thread. the "moral" equivalent? surely you
mean "functional" or "rough" or "approximate" or some other adjective,
not "moral".
Isn't "moral equivalent of an X" an idiomatic expression that goes
beyond
the original use of it
http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sources/plan9/sys/src/
Object not found
The object /plan9/sys/src/ does not exist on this server.
errstr: '/bin/ip/httpd/sources' does not exist
uri host:
header host:
actual host: plan9.bell-labs.com
On Dec 17, 2008, at 4:33 PM, ron minnich wrote:
so here's a potentially interesting idea. Since you are running plan 9
under Linux with 9vx, consider using the TAU toolkit to measure it.
http://www.cs.uoregon.edu/research/tau/home.php
we've used these tools to optmize an MPI library and they ar
On Dec 17, 2008, at 4:10 PM, Devon H. O'Dell wrote:
* Automatic provisioning via a web browser. Yeah, Plan 9 in the web
browser (if you have Java, I guess -- otherwise it's just VNC).
http://testbed.dh0.us/ -- this code isn't version controlled, but I
could probably put it in hg with little effor
I guess this is mainly a question for Russ: I'm using 9pfuse for a
proof-of-concept project here at Sun and it all works quite
well. My goal is to avoid the 9P2000.u route and use 9P2000
semantics as much as possible, yet allow most of the POSIX
FS functionality to simply work.
In order to do th
On Dec 18, 2008, at 3:57 PM, Russ Cox wrote:
I would just seek to the end.
Got it. In that case, is there any reason the current version
of 9pfuse doesn't just skip O_APPEND (like it does with
O_LARGEFILE, etc.)? Since 9pfuse revalidate i_size
before writes that's the best one can do anyway(*)
On Dec 18, 2008, at 4:03 PM, ron minnich wrote:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Russ Cox wrote:
I would just seek to the end.
That's fine unless you have multiple
programs writing O_APPEND simultaneously,
in which case you are asking for trouble.
yep. The code in nfs clients to support O_AP
On Dec 18, 2008, at 7:43 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
Agreed. Now, here's a bit that I still don't quite
understand: Plan9 does have DMAPPEND on
a per-Qid basis. Why was it decided not to
have it on a per-Fid basis (which would match
POSIX semantics 100%)?
The way I understand -- DMAPPEND is just a
On Dec 18, 2008, at 7:26 PM, ron minnich wrote:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 7:06 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
Its fun, yes. But I believe this is more of a testament to the
statelessness
of the NFS
plus the fact that the "end of file" is not a well defined offset
(unlike
beginning o
On Dec 19, 2008, at 12:23 AM, Russ Cox wrote:
Append-only and exclusive-use are properties of files
and need to be enforced uniformly across all clients
to be meaningful. They must be per-file, not per-fd.
Two questions:
1. But before I ask this one: I don't deny that per-file append-only
On Dec 19, 2008, at 8:44 AM, ron minnich wrote:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 7:59 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
On Dec 18, 2008, at 7:26 PM, ron minnich wrote:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 7:06 PM, Roman Shaposhnik
wrote:
Its fun, yes. But I believe this is more of a testament to the
statelessness
On Dec 19, 2008, at 11:56 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
Two questions:
1. But before I ask this one: I don't deny that per-file append-
only
is *extremely* useful. My question is a different one: what is
the danger of N clients accesing the file X in append-only mode
and M clients ac
On Dec 21, 2008, at 6:45 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
is your 9p server ever going to be running on an nfs-mounted
partition?
As with any software -- it would be pretty difficult for me to
prevent
somebody from doing that, but in general -- no.
i use "in general" to mean the exact opposite of
On Dec 22, 2008, at 8:41 AM, Charles Forsyth wrote:
Is there any preferred way to get changelogs / diffs these days?
yesterday -d ...
when i'm especially curious or anxious.
But yesterday won't work in a more lightweight environment (such as
9vx) will it?
it probably wouldn't hurt to have a
On Dec 24, 2008, at 12:04 PM, andrey mirtchovski wrote:
cpu -h $sysname -u vdharani
wouldn't auth/login vdharani also work?
Thanks,
Roman.
On Dec 22, 2008, at 8:46 PM, Nathaniel W Filardo wrote:
Hi,
The contrib index mentions that daily changelogs for Plan 9 are in
sources/extra/changes, but those haven't been updated since early
2007.
Is there any preferred way to get changelogs / diffs these days?
Relatedly, is there a bette
On Dec 24, 2008, at 10:40 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
Is there any preferred way to get changelogs / diffs these days?
yesterday -d ...
when i'm especially curious or anxious.
But yesterday won't work in a more lightweight environment (such as
9vx) will it?
exactly the same as plan 9 does.
a
On Dec 25, 2008, at 6:37 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
despite the season, and typical attitudes, i don't think that
development practices are a spiritual or moral decision.
they are a practical one.
Absolutely! Agreed 100%. My original question was not
at all aimed at "saving" Plan9 development
On Dec 25, 2008, at 8:57 PM, Anthony Sorace wrote:
erik offered some suggestions for hosting various bits of things
outside 9vx and connecting to that in order to get the dumps. those
options are valid, but you can just as well host the entire thing
within 9vx. it's not the default configuration,
Sorry for coming into this discussion rather late, but...
On Dec 23, 2008, at 5:10 PM, Nathaniel W Filardo wrote:
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 12:53:06AM +0100, Francisco J Ballesteros
wrote:
You can post a fd at /srv for others to use
/srv is not an ideal answer, though it is the one I feared wo
On Dec 24, 2008, at 5:36 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
EricVH's /srv replacement. See
http://graverobbers.blogspot.com/2008/12/srv-next-generation-service-registry.html
perhaps i don't understand the srv² proposal, to which there
are many parts, but part of the problem seems to be finding
a servic
I thought that sources is a general purpose fossil server that archives
everything in venti dumps, but apparently not:
term% 9fs sourcesdump
term% ls -l /n/sourcesdump/2008/1225/dist/replica
term%
In fact, if one looks at the /n/sources/dist/replica it seems
that the directory itself was
On Dec 26, 2008, at 5:27 AM, Charles Forsyth wrote:
while a descriptive history is good, it takes a lot of extra work
to generate.
i've rarely found per-change histories to be any more useful than
most other comments, i'm afraid.
I believe that it all depends on what is it that you look at
On Dec 27, 2008, at 3:56 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
I'm actually still trying to figure out how replica/* fits together
with
sources being a fossil server. These two, somehow, have to
click, but I haven't figured out the connection just yet. Any
pointers
to the good docs?
there's no connect
On Jan 5, 2009, at 3:00 AM, Charles Forsyth wrote:
Things like
term% cd '#|'
term% pwd
#|
just don't seem right.
you ask for fish; you get fish.
what's the trouble?
I supposed this is a matter of taste. There's as little
trouble with the above as with //foo != /foo on certain
legacy system
On Jan 4, 2009, at 9:12 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
Well, I guess I really got spoiled by ZFS's ability to do things like
$ zfs snapshot pool/projects/f...@yourtextgoeshere
and especially:
$ zfs clone pool/projects/f...@yourtextgoeshere pool/projects/
branch
I'm still trying to figure out
Cool! Looks like I found a "bi-lingual" person! ;-) Andrey,
would you mind if I ask you to translate some other things
between ZFS and venti/fossil for me?
On Jan 4, 2009, at 9:24 PM, andrey mirtchovski wrote:
Well, I guess I really got spoiled by ZFS's ability to do things like
$ zfs snapshot
On Jan 4, 2009, at 10:20 PM, Russ Cox wrote:
I don't believe you can write a race-free implementation of
the pipe system call using #|.
Could you, please, elaborate on what particular race do you have
in mind? Indeed, I ran into a problem with devpipe implementation,
but it isn't a race, its a
I think I'm now ready to pick up this old thread (if anybody's still
interested...)
On Jan 7, 2009, at 5:11 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
Lets see. May be its my misinterpretation of what venti does. But so
far I understand that it boils down to: I give venti a block of any
length, it gives me a sco
Hi Andrey!
Sorry, it took me a longer time to dig through the code than
I hoped to. So, if you're still game...
On Jan 6, 2009, at 6:22 AM, andrey mirtchovski wrote:
i'm using zfs right now for a project storing a few terabytes worth of
data and vm images.
Is it how it was from the get go, or
On Jan 23, 2009, at 2:03 AM, pavel.klinkov...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
In Plan9 I missed the simple way to repeat previous (or previous of
previous etc.) command in the terminal.
I prepared a very small (an stupid) program to allow that.
Compile the following source code and run it in that way:
On Jan 23, 2009, at 4:56 AM, roger peppe wrote:
one problem with this approach is that you won't be able
to use mouse editing as usual on the command line,
as the program grabs each keystroke as it's typed.
Do you enjoy mouse editing? May be I'm just an old
TTY junkie, but for me mouse is a dev
On Jan 26, 2009, at 7:42 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:
On a serious note: do you guys ever edit text that
is way after the output point?
i do. in hold mode. that's generally how i compose
email when not using acme.
Yeah, that's about the only thing that is useful to me
as well. The rest require
On Jan 26, 2009, at 8:39 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
This approach will work too. But it seems that asking fossil
to verify a checksum when the block is about to go to venti
is not that much of an overhead.
if checksumming is a good idea, shouldn't it be available outside
fossil?
It is availabl
On Jan 26, 2009, at 9:37 AM, erik quanstrom wrote:
the other part of the argument — the "write hole"
depends on two things that i don't think are universal
a) zfs' demand for transactional storage
Huh?!?
b) a particular raid implentation.
fancy raid cards
I think you missed what I in RAID
On Feb 7, 2009, at 9:32 AM, Giacomo Tesio wrote:
I'd like to move our softwares to Linux + Apache (where mounting a
9p fileserver would be easy), but actually it's a Windows + IIS.
I would write a session state service for ASP.NET connecting it in
9p (using c# and the 9pc implementation link
This is simply amazing news!
Thanks to everyone who made it happen!
Thanks,
Roman.
P.S. Aaaand I can now get my bootleg 2nd Ed tarball from under the
floorboards ;-)
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 6:08 AM wrote:
> We are thrilled to announce that Nokia has transferred the copyright of
> Plan 9 to t
101 - 167 of 167 matches
Mail list logo
