On 19/03/14 22:47, Justin Cormack wrote:
> OK, this branch now passes all the tests. It needs a bit of a cleanup
> plus some merging of stuff from master.
>
> It also works fine on NetBSD as well as Linux, which is a significant
> benefit, as well as not needing wrappers, so inclined to merge it into
> master after cleanup...
Oh that's pretty nice! I did have "merge shellenv" on the near-term
todo list, but I think that's not necessary now, and I can dedicate my
coming weeks on drawing a fancy architecture diagram for the wiki.
> Currently everything is compiled for rumpremote, it should also work
> in rumprun style too with minor changes.
So what's the current plan with rumprun vs. rumpremote? For rumpremote,
do we still provide a .-able shell file which sets a path and displays
$RUMP_SERVER on the prompt? rumprun will still require some different
sort of handling. I'm thinking about this from the "would be nice to
have binary packages" angle, but not with any particularly useful results.
In a matrix representation, I think it looks a bit like this:
"userspace" "kernel"
===========================
rump_server
rumpremote
rumprun rumprun
?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their
applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field,
this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/13534_NeoTech
_______________________________________________
rumpkernel-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rumpkernel-users
