Re: [9fans] wstat and atomic directory change
On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Giacomo Tesio giac...@tesio.it wrote: As far as I can read intro(5), it explicitly excludes slash as a valid character for the Plan 9 OS, but it also explicitly states that the protocol has no such restriction. My reading is that a 9p2000 server might allow a filename of the form b/c; e.g. this tree is possible: a |-- b | +-- c | +-- d +-- b/c +-- d Note that a / b / c / d is distinct from a / b/c / d. Plan 9, because of its Unix heritage, will not be able to deal with this, but the protocol has no such limitation. On the other hand, if you bypass the OS and issue a Walk to a/b/c/d, there is a well-defined response required in the protocol -- either open the file with that (impossible) name, or fail. Still, using this protocol feature to enable atomic directory change could be useful in my use cases, but I don't want to build yet another 9p2000 extension. It'll have to be an extension -- a technically incompatible one, though the incompatibilities will not ever happen. --Joel
Re: [9fans] Purely historical question on variadic function notation
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Gergő Födémesi fge...@gmail.com wrote: Who invented ... notation in c? I'll appreciate any hints. I'd guess this comes from C++, along with all function prototypes. --Joel
Re: [9fans] List Interactions and GSoC
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Devon H. O'Dell devon.od...@gmail.com wrote: This isn't a healthy way to keep Plan 9 active. Please, in the interest of advancing the software (or at least advancing the knowledge of others), can we please tone the vitriol down a notch? Agreed. I mean, I had a joke I'd waited four years less three weeks to post, and it flew completely past everyone. (Or maybe it wasn't all that funny.) —Joel
[9fans] ISO C and typestr
Has anyone presented the 9c extension typestr to the C standardization committee (WG14)? Looking at the documents at http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/, I see that various vendors have let the committee know about their extensions, both to offer directions for future standardization and to ensure that the committee's new ideas don't break existing code based on those extensions. BTW, the C11 standard includes a restricted form of 9c's anonymous sub-structs (with no pointer conversion). —Joel
Re: [9fans] ISO C and typestr
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Charles Forsyth
charles.fors...@gmail.com wrote:
On 15 March 2013 16:52, Joel C. Salomon joelcsalo...@gmail.com wrote:
BTW, the C11 standard includes a restricted form of 9c's anonymous
sub-structs (with no pointer conversion).
isn't the pointer conversion most of the point of them?
Given this code:
typedef struct Foo Foo;
struct Foo {
int flag;
Lock;
} *foo;
C11 allows you to write `lock(foo-Lock)`, or to directly access named
members of `struct Lock` as if they were members of `struct Foo`. An
early draft of the feature did allow `lock(foo)`, but that was
rejected (I don't know why).
—Joel
Re: [9fans] A note about new software for Plan 9
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Bakul Shah ba...@bitblocks.com wrote: To do something similar you will have to constrain each jail to see a subset of processes, give it its own /dev, /env etc. Not sure how you do this. So long as processes in the jail use /dev, /env, etc., etc., as inherited from/shared with their parent processes, this seems doable, if tedious: provide a synthetic file system that shows a limited view on /dev, /env, etc. But the child process can always mount #x for various x, and get out of jail. —Joel
Re: [9fans] X11
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 12:19 PM, dexen deVries dexen.devr...@gmail.com wrote:
#define exit(status) do { exit(status); return 0; } while (0)
What does kenc do with a void function attempting to return 0?
—Joel
Re: [9fans] plan9.bell-labs.com, sources down this
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:35 AM, Charles Forsyth charles.fors...@gmail.com wrote: On 31 October 2012 10:13, kali kali.m...@web.de wrote: is it still offline ? the name doesnt even resolve. There has been a storm, I believe. Seems Plan 9 is after all vulnerable to a certain kind of buffer overflow…. ☺ —Joel
Re: [9fans] integer width on AMD64
On 05/05/2012 05:06 PM, Comeau At9Fans wrote:
On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Charles Forsyth wrote:
if it's performance you're worried about, for programs that don't
care about width, i'd expect 32 bits at least
to match performance with 64 bits (if there's a measurable
difference). for one thing, cache lines will contain
more values, and several will be fetched at once when cache lines
are filled.
And for programs that do care about this, C99 provides things such as
int_fast64_t (which IIRC 8c et al does not currently support).
stdint.h is just a bunch of typedef's, some of which have been
included, under different names (u{8,16,32,64}int), in u.h. Wouldn't
be hard to provide for APE if anyone wants it.
--Joel
Re: [9fans] assembly syntax in plan 9
On 01/16/2012 08:08 AM, Charles Forsyth wrote: Plan 9 doesn't use a base pointer, because everything can be addressed relative to the stack pointer, and the loader keeps track of the SP level. thus FP is a virtual register, that the loader implements by replacing offsets relative to it by the current appropriate offset from the hardware stack pointer register (whatever that might be on a given platform). That's esp on the x86. the TEXT directive specifies the space a function requires for its stack frame, and the loader then adds appropriate code at start and end to provide it. 0(FP) is the first argument, 4(FP) is the second, and so on. 0(SP) is the bottom of the current frame, and 0(SP), 4(SP) etc are referenced to build the arguments for outgoing calls (but that space must be accounted for in the TEXT directive). This would make it difficult to implement C99's variable-length (actually, run-time-determined--length) arrays. The best compiler-only change I can think of would be to define a hidden variable `size_t __size_of_all_vlas`, and add code to adjust SP by that amount before after each function call. [Or we could just skip C99, and make the compiler C11-compliant by pre-defining __STDC_NO_VLA__. ☺] (it's probably not very different in effect from -fno-frame-pointer or whatever it is for gcc, which also doesn't use ebp except that is implemented entirely by the compiler.) Google turns up http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39337, indicating that GCC had issues combining VLAs and -fomit-frame-pointer; I don't know how they managed the combination. --Joel
Re: [9fans] du vs. ls: duplication or not?
On 01/16/2012 06:46 AM, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote: It seems what I'm trying to say is not clear. I know that shipping Plan9 has no '-R'. What I mean is, since find(1) and others are not here because they are duplicating other utils, and can be recreated with other primitives, why du(1) was kept and not simply ls(1) extended with a '-R'? Since ls(1) already displays the size of a file (in bytes). My guess would be that this discussion illustrates exactly why: ls(1) is a gadget that pretty-prints the directory entry. Extending it with '-R' would require it to learn about possibly-circular mount points; yuck. On the other hand, du(1) has this sort of feature as its raison d'être. --Joel
Re: [9fans] assembly syntax in plan 9
On 01/16/2012 02:03 PM, Bakul Shah wrote: On Jan 16, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Greg Comeau comeauat9f...@gmail.com wrote: What we do in problematic cases with Comeau is to generate code to arrange for the allocation of the VLA on the heap. I'm not saying this is perfect, but at least it gets the feature implementable and up and running as a portable implementation versus perhaps not being able to implement it at all on some platforms. How do you deal with longjmp? I recall reading the source for a (mostly-) portable alloca() that checked where on the call-stack is was invoked from and released memory for any alloca() invocation from lower on the stack. (The allocations themselves were on the heap.) --Joel
[9fans] Returning to Plan 9: Virtualization, Distributions
After a long hiatus, I'd like to get back to experimenting with Plan 9. I have an Ubuntu Linux laptop with AMD's virtualization extensions supported by the CPU, so I figure my best bet is one of the umpteen virtualization tools. Which is best supported by Plan 9 — virtualbox, qemu, or something else? Also, what distributions are best for amd64? Bell Labs'? 9front? 9atom? Thanks, —Joel
Re: [9fans] Returning to Plan 9: Virtualization, Distributions
On 11/22/2011 9:39 AM, Joel C. Salomon wrote: After a long hiatus, I'd like to get back to experimenting with Plan 9. I have an Ubuntu Linux laptop with AMD's virtualization extensions supported by the CPU, so I figure my best bet is one of the umpteen virtualization tools. Which is best supported by Plan 9 — virtualbox, qemu, or something else? On 11/22/2011 02:41 PM, Jack Norton wrote: I have had good luck with qemu-kvm. I've even got a VPS running with all the management bells and wistles like libvirt and such. It has been running solid since march (lab's plan9 with fossil only). On 11/22/2011 05:14 PM, John Floren wrote: I found that Virtualbox worked very well when I was fiddling with my Macbook on the way back from IWP9. I haven't tried it on the thinkpad yet. Thanks; I'll try them in turn, see if I get one to work. —Joel
Re: [9fans] Returning to Plan 9: Virtualization, Distributions
On 11/22/2011 10:46 AM, ron minnich wrote: If you're serious about booting a 64-bit os you need NIX. But you're not going to get graphics. To which, on 11/22/2011 11:00 AM, erik quanstrom responded: today's nix is quite raw. unless you're working on nix itself, you'll be happier with plan 9. Is NIX the only distribution for amd64, then? I just want to play around in user space: learn Go, use Unicode in C, c., c. Would I be better off using a 32-bit distro? —Joel
Re: [9fans] NUMA
On 07/17/2011 03:01 AM, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote: On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 11:39:50PM -0400, Joel C. Salomon wrote: On 07/16/2011 04:02 AM, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote: I wonder what minimum set of keywords could be added, say, to C, so that the situation can be greatly improved without the burden being greatly increased. [non-predicative routines being, from a parallel point of view, atomic] Have a look at what the C1x standard is proposing wrt atomics. Thanks for the tip! BTW, if I understand correctly the purpose of the next C standard, I guess there is no urge for kencc to support C99 since it is already a transitory only partially supported standard. The only place in which that's relevant is that C1x creates language subsets and some of the new language features are optional. (I.e., if your compiler doesn't implement feature x, predefine this macro X and you can still call your compiler conforming.) The only C99 feature listed as optional is VLAs. BTW, C1x standardizes part of kencc's nested-anonymous-struct feature. --Joel
Re: [9fans] NUMA
On 07/16/2011 04:02 AM, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote: What is the minimal hints the programmer shall give? At least predicativity. I wonder what minimum set of keywords could be added, say, to C, so that the situation can be greatly improved without the burden being greatly increased. [non-predicative routines being, from a parallel point of view, atomic] Have a look at what the C1x standard is proposing wrt atomics. --Joel
Re: [9fans] [RFC] fonts and unicode/utf [TeX]
On 06/17/2011 11:37 AM, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:18:20AM -0400, Joel C. Salomon wrote: At which point you've reinvented XeTeX. I've given a look at it. I don't want to start a discussion about Unicode, since, supplementary to the characters snip there are formatting commands or rendering snip that I don't think should be there (only the historical ASCII controls should be there; others should be undefined). Ignore 'em. Or map them to TeX control sequences. but no hieroglyphes or Linear B, so it's not complete ;) The fonts may be lacking, but Hieroglyphs Linear B *are* in Unicode; see alanwood.net/unicode/egyptian-hieroglyphs.html and alanwood.net/unicode/linear_b_syllabary.html. (the ligature fi is not a character; but in the XeTeX FAQ it is said user has to insert directly the Unicode for this codepoint since there is no ligature), That's true for TeX's -- and --- pseudo-ligatures; the XeTeX way is to insert the Unicode en- em-dashes, or to use the tex-text font mapping. But for fi c., or the more exotic ones, XeTeX will use whatever ligatures the font's designer has put into the OTF file. (Also be aware that the XeTeX FAQ on the SIL site is *seriously* out-of-date.) But for XeTeX and Plan9 there is a special point: XeTeX uses some C++. As I have answered privately to someone, it is not an absolute obstacle---the files are not very numerous so a C flavour could be achieved. But if people start throwing me XeTeX in the legs, I will start crying for a C++ compiler on Plan9... A C version of the PDF library XeTeX uses to translate its extended XDVI format to PDF would be interesting. C++, though No, I'll not reopen that can of worms today. --Joel
[9fans] Formats %H, $, %[ (Was re. ratrace problem; debuggers welcome)
On 02/14/2011 01:03 AM, erik quanstrom wrote: that doesn't really work for me. either the kernel should always print as hex, or the decision should be made for the whole string. the \x notation requires that any \x be excaped. you potentially need to escape both and \. it's a difficult and non-standard quoting scheme for plan 9. if you think the kernel really needs to be making a decision based on utf-8/not utf-8 (not 7-bit ascii!), i would think the most standard way of formatting this would be nil, %.*q or %.*H. I remembered reading of, and using, the %q format, but %H is new to me. The web version of print(2) doesn’t describe it, so I went to the source. In libc.h I found #pragma varargcktype void* #pragma varargcktype[ void* #pragma varargcktypeH void* #pragma varargcktypelHvoid* but none of these are in the knownfmt[] array in sys/src/libc/fmt/fmt.c and I don’t see where fmtinstall() is called for them. What do these formats do? --Joel
Re: [9fans] 9doom
On 01/16/2011 03:29 PM, Jacob Todd wrote: http://jtomaschke.blogspot.com/ snip Input needed to be worked out, though. That’s nothing new: http://9fans.net/archive/1995/09/281. —Joel
Re: [9fans] Plan9 development
On 11/18/2010 05:50 PM, Federico G. Benavento wrote: On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 2:30 AM, Joel C. Salomon joelcsalo...@gmail.com wrote: Why is __func__ listed as “unwanted”? I’ve found it useful for some logging functions. isn't this redundant with cpp(1)'s __FUNCTION__? if __FUNCTION__ isn't standard, then we should change it to __func__ in cpp and that's it Um, how can the preprocessor know what function it’s in middle of? (That’s why, unlike the preprocessor symbols __FILE__ __LINE__, C99’s __func__ is an identifier.) --Joel
Re: [9fans] Plan9 development
On 11/14/2010 04:44 PM, Charles Forsyth wrote: the list of unimplemented items in /sys/src/cmd/cc/c99* is: snip i can think of something else that's not been noticed, but what other things have you found? Why is __func__ listed as “unwanted”? I’ve found it useful for some logging functions. --Joel
Re: [9fans] utf-8 on 9fans.net/archive
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 3:33 PM, LiteStar numnums lites...@gmail.com wrote: The haiku is short a syllable on the first line, unless you pronounce it con-fu-sed No, it's alright as it stands; see http://9fans.net/archive/2002/07/154. (We discuss *everything* on this list, don't we?) —Joel Salomon
Re: [9fans] TeX: hurrah!
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Karljurgen Feuerherm kfeuerh...@wlu.ca wrote: It occurred to me that a profitable thing to do here would be to mention some things that would be nice to see in a new improved TeX... I believe bidirectional was mentioned already. The other thing that is essential for folk like me is complete Unicode compatibility [Yes, I know. UTC has committed many sins :] There are a few projects (in the TeX world) for that, primarily XeTeX and Omega. Omega is not much in use anymore, but its ideas live on in LuaTeX. The lack of C++ is going to hinder efforts to port these projects to Plan 9 as-is; and these are significant efforts, not likely to be duplicated by 9fans. (Perhaps the C++ library for PDF handling can be rewritten in C, and then XeTeX LuaTeX can be ported. But don't expect the projects to use the rewrite in favor of the original libraries.) —Joel Salomon
Re: [9fans] Recommended emulators/VMs for P9 install
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Federico G. Benavento benave...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Joel C. Salomon joelcsalo...@gmail.com wrote: My computer died, so I'm in the market for a new one. I figure I'd like to get back into hacking on Plan 9 so I plan to install it beneath a VM in whatever machine I buy. I'm even considering Windows 7 Pro with Virtual PC, but I think I'd prefer Xen or one of the Linux-based things (VirtualBox, etc.). Ease of installation is important, as is the ability to run a somewhat normal (Windows or Linux) host OS. Are there any recommendations? vmware, the rest just suck, qemu and virtual box being the slowest How about Xen? Has anyone here had luck wit it? —Joel C. Salomon
Re: [9fans] TeX: hurrah!
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 10:27 AM, Alexander Sychev santu...@gmail.com wrote: IFAIK, XeTeX/XeLaTeX based on C++ code. XeTeX itself is based on patches to Knuth's WEB source code for TeX. It's the PDF-producing section (xdvipdf or some such) that's written using a C++ library for handling PDF. There will be the same problem with LuaTeX; I think also with pdfTeX. —Joel Salomon
[9fans] Recommended emulators/VMs for P9 install
My computer died, so I'm in the market for a new one. I figure I'd like to get back into hacking on Plan 9 so I plan to install it beneath a VM in whatever machine I buy. I'm even considering Windows 7 Pro with Virtual PC, but I think I'd prefer Xen or one of the Linux-based things (VirtualBox, etc.). Ease of installation is important, as is the ability to run a somewhat normal (Windows or Linux) host OS. Are there any recommendations? —Joel
Re: [9fans] make slides in plan 9
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Steve Simonst...@quintile.net wrote: TeX is available seperately - created a contrib package for it or there is an iso (which has bitrotted a little but is still usable). Beware: downloading it will take a long time (hours). The last time this came up, I did some research into the dependencies of the newer TeX engines (XeTeX, pdfTex, luaTeX). Seems they all depend on a PDF-manipulation library written in C++. But so long as you stick to the tex | dvips | ghostscript route, there's some really nice stuff that's been done in the last ten years in TeX that can be ported to Plan 9. —Joel
Re: [9fans] aux/acidleak pool pathology
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 10:13 PM, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote: unfortunately, i think this will just encourage users to aim for 10 messages in their inbox. Have you ever pointed an IMAP client at “[Gmail]/All Mail” and asked it to download all headers? —Joel
Re: [9fans] request for more GSoC project suggestions
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 7:26 PM, erik quanstrom quans...@coraid.com 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 compilers. at the risk of being called stupid twice in one day, i have to say i don't see what the payoff would be. doing something with gcc helps with gcc-specific code. what does llvm give us? Current versions of LLVM use GCC's front-end for C C++, so porting the back-end to Plan 9 effectively gives us GCC. When clang is completed, LLVM will be GCC-compatible without including GCC code. —Joel Salomon
[9fans] LLVM Exceptions (Was re. request for more GSoC project suggestions)
Devon H. O'Dell 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 compilers. Something to watch out for with such a project: The LLVM back-end for Windows does not support C++ (nicely) because of issues with exception handling; Windows provides a mechanism for stack unwinding—especially across DLL boundaries—that neither GCC nor LLVM handle well. Porting LLVM to Plan 9 may well have some of the same troubles. Those who have dealt with the GCC port can answer this: What does g++ do on Plan 9? Does it add DWARF debugging tables to the executable so that the stack can be unwound? Does it play games with setjmp/longjmp? Does it even work at all? Otherwise, a large part of an LLVM project would be a port of some exception mechanism. Does plan9port’s mach-stack(3) have any precedent in Plan 9? and is that the correct basis for exception-like stack unwinding? (I.e., a program unwinding its own stack, rather than a debugger tracing the stack back.) —Joel Salomon P.s.: I am not raising the question of whether exception handling via stack unwinding is a good idea—which has been done to death on this list; see the “Same Functions Everywhere” thread from 2003 at http://preview.tinyurl.com/cou63b and message 56 responses at http://preview.tinyurl.com/cun6vg—just asking how to implement it under Plan 9 using the existing tools as far as possible. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [9fans] music video that everone on this list will agree with :-)
…and do you believe in yesterday(1)? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BXDikj1i7w or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpdiXspBALg; no idea which is the more faithful rendition. —Joel Salomon
Re: [9fans] python csp
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 4:08 AM, roger peppe rogpe...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/3/11 gd...@9grid.es: www.stackless.com not viable. it doesn't even support alt, as far as i can see. It seems to me from http://www.stackless.com/wiki/Channels#channel-balance that Stackless Python's Channels have alt-like capability built-in, i.e., support for multiple readers writers. —Joel Salomon
Re: [9fans] texlive port to plan 9
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 10:35 AM, xiantingmanbu xiantingma...@gmail.com wrote: Is there anyone porting TexLive to Plan 9? Plan 9 hasn't so many tex- related programs. Tex and MF is not enough. Bear in mind that some of the newer TeX programs (pdfTeX, XɘTeX, luaTeX) use a C++ library to handle PDF files. —Joel
Re: [9fans] Venti by another name
On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 10:34 AM, matt mattmob...@proweb.co.uk wrote: It's a P2P system where data blocks are traded not files. A file becomes a set of blocks and if requested, anyone who has the block can supply the data, even if they don't possess the same file. Sounds vaguely like Freenet. —Joel
Re: [9fans] sed crash
erik quanstrom wrote:
next we'll be replacing :-) (':' '-' ')' for those with impaired mail
readers) with a jpeg.
This is Plan 9: replace it with ☺.
—Joel
Re: [9fans] Very Off-Topic: Anybody here reads Sci-Fi? :)
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 2:02 PM, Lorenzo Fernando Bivens de la Fuente [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think Dune is a must read for any scifi fan... Dune is one of the few books I put down partly-read. Came a point where I just didn't care what happened to the characters on the other side of the page, and I never turned the page to look. Try for some of the older books and authors—Hal Clement, Lester del Rey, Fredric Brown, C. M. Kornbluth, C. L. Moore. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Age_of_Science_Fiction. I am a retro-scifi fan... I love to read the stories, but sometimes a 50's movie can tell a story quite nicely... Crappy FX require a better plot to keep you watching... In the visual media, Joss Whedon's Firefly is some of the best science fiction I've seen. - Solaris (both Soviet and American remake) Also read the story. Or other books by Stanisław Lem. —Joel
Re: [9fans] Very Off-Topic: Anybody here reads Sci-Fi? :)
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 5:32 AM, Eris Discordia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are the Great Three, of course. Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke, and Robert A. Heinlein. Anything they wrote is worth a read. Sometimes a number of reads. Clarke particularly interests me. Try the short story The Nine Billion Names of God. The series of Odyssey novels are very readable--2001 is a magnum opus of Clarke, and of science fiction. Clarke's short stories are great, as are many of his novels. Quick tip, though: DON'T read any sequels. 2001 is great, 2010 so-so, 2100 blah, and 3001 well-nigh unreadable. Same with the Rama books: read the first, ignore the rest. Also, if there's a short story, and then an expanded novel, stick with the short story. Especially Guardian Angel/Childhood's End. If you want short stories, look for the Best of … set by del Rey books. Great introduction to many authors, especially Golden Age ones. —Joel
Re: [9fans] mmap
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Enrico Weigelt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Convenience is one point (sometimes be a big point), but another important one is sharing. Without mmap(), an (real) shared library support most likely will require special kernel support. Actually, almost any kernel support for shared libraries will need something like mmap() internally. I forget who said it, and the local firewall won't allow me to search the online copy of /sys/games/lib/fortunes, but there should be a line there about Linux having 200+ system calls, most of them emulatable with mmap(). --Joel
Re: [9fans] mmap
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Joel C. Salomon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I forget who said it, Found it in http://9fans.net/archive/2002/08/130: On Tue, 13 Aug 2002 07:43:45 -0400, David Gordon Hogan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On freebsd and Linux, exec happens via an mmap (more or less). snip So [gigantic leap here], not only does Linux have ~250 system calls, but most of them can be emulated with mmap? --Joel
Re: [9fans] Plan 9 and multicores/parallelism/concurrency?
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Roman V. Shaposhnik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: the day. I don't think that Plan9 scheduler has had an opportunity to be tuned for such an environment. Same goes for virtual memory page related algorithms. The scheduling code does have a heuristic for processor affinity, so there's a model for what to tune when you have the MSMP machine to play with. --Joel
Re: [9fans] Bits of Plan 9 I wish were more popular...
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 7:13 PM, Steve Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So you have the source for the quadrature encoder, and a DAC cannot be thar complex can it? why not email Comedi and ask them for card programming info. Comedi is an Open Sores project to unify the worlds data acquisition devices under one driver model. It's about as good a model as fits the Linux Way™ of these things, and there's enough sample code included to make it feasible to bring up a new card fairly quickly. Rather have Comedi drivers than some random vendor's conceptions of how to program the device, but it's nothing like a simple write(2) to /dev/analogout0/channel1. The only issue is that I can't justify the time needed to write Plan 9 drivers when a usable system already exists. Still you could use 9vx to run plan9 on top of this system, that way you could maybe migrate the system gradually. Unless vx32 can run real-time tasks (pretty sure it cannot) that's not much use. Almost every bit of my code (all except a very thin command interface) is living in a loadable kernel module Don't you want Kalman filters in *your* OS kernel? Russ has a version of libthread for windows on his web page. Do you mean libtask? That could be helpful too, but the system uses interrupts so cannot entirely be run as cooperative multithreading. The discipline of thinking in terms of channels. even if the implementation has gone a-gley, is proving useful too. --Joel
Re: [9fans] bug in echo?
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 9:13 AM, Gorka Guardiola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, my question remains, why not?. Even in the UPE it says that the echo -n ' ' is ugly... …At this point the Plan 9 realized history repeating itself, and although she did not want to offend either, she decided it was better to offend the impatient youth rather than subject all her suitors to yet another surfeit of notation. —From Plan 9 and the Echo, with apologies to Doug McIlroy by Russ Cox, linked to in my previous post.
Re: [9fans] bug in echo?
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 2:58 PM, Pietro Gagliardi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there a valid reason to have echo process the arguments given? I'm leaning toward Eric's suggestion of splitting echo in twain. When facing south, the Plan 9 will open her mouth to echo nothing; when facing north (echo-n or echon or something) she won't. --Joel
Re: [9fans] Porting XeTeX
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 5:28 AM, erik quanstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: what do you mean doesn't work too well anymore? i haven't noticed anything going broken. But lucio has had trouble. I guess I overstated the case a bit. --Joel
