Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?

Steve, thanks for the thoughtful reply. Your solution wouldn’t work for me, but it obviously does for you, so go in peace. And the answer to the question in my subject line is obviously “No”. > On Jul 28, 2016, at 10:49 PM, Steve Simon wrote: > > I have a different

[9fans] (no subject)

Subject change to ether Yuk driver for 88E8036 I noticed the 9fans reopen now. I tried this mail at June 16, 2016, but failed... I'd like to announce this to all, particulary eric. I posted a mail to 9fans, but I don't have received that mail, so retries it to this mailing-list. I asked the

[9fans] linux mount -t 9p permissions problem

I have ufs (https://github.com/rminnich/go9p/) running on a FreeBSD box and I'm trying to mount it on linux but the directory has permission 0: ~$ 9mount -in 'tcp!fs!5640' fs mount -t 9p -o tcp,trans=tcp,name=ctn,uname=ctn,noextend,nodev,uid=1000,gid=1000,dfltuid=1000,dfltgid=1000,port=5640

Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?

And even though they’re free, you’d presumably say that the price is still too high. > On Jul 28, 2016, at 9:15 PM, Staven wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 01:41:43PM +1200, Winston Kodogo wrote: >> I was kind of wondering if there was an option for people who like

Re: [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9

> Ironically 9front is the only variant that does work, because it has a > driver for virtio-net. Well done cinap and thank you. nick owens (mischief) deserves the credit for it, i just reviewed code, suggested changes and helped fixing the bugs. -- cinap

Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?

I have a different approach. Personally I have only command line utilities as I keep Plan9 as my desktop (raspberry PI). I need to cross compile on windows so I have a tool to cpu into a windows box (called dos). This allows me to have a rio window onto a a dos shell. It does the trick like

Re: [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9

Thanks, both. I use VB because it works well for what I need it for (running Linux on Win and Mac) and for me it works better than qemu in that respect. I'd rather stick to one virtualisation solution if possible. I've narrowed the problem down to the emulated ethernet card - the Intel MT

Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 01:41:43PM +1200, Winston Kodogo wrote: > I was kind of wondering if there was an option for people who like Microsoft > development tools to build Plan9 tools, which are admittedly a minority taste > in the Windows world, without spending several weeks installing 3rd

[9fans] Browsing and editing files with white spaces in their names with Sam.

I've put the little changes and the scripts I've wrote here: https://bitbucket.org/trebol5/trebol_sam Maybe I'll clean it a little, but I put it there just in case someone find it useful, I'm not interesting in doing nothing more with it. Regards, trebol.

Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?

just use drawterm on windows and connect to some 9front instance (for example inside vmware, on the same machine). i don't think the alternative is worth it.

Re: [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9

peter: don't listen to mveety, one of his hobbies is setting himself on fire.

Re: [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9

I run 9front in virtualbox, and, while I totally agree that its a waste of time to test it because they *always* break something in vbox, you're pretty safe if you stay on the 4.3 series and 5.0 series (on my end: 4.3 on freebsd is tested and 5.0 on windows is tested). I know you don't get the