Re: [9fans] what heavy negativity!
> So the question is... is plan9 still lean and mean enough to fit onto a
> machine with a 64K address space?
Lean in concepts and algorithms doesn't necessarily imply lean in
resource usage -- sometimes the opposite. I don't have access to
1st edition source, but the 2nd edition C compiler used a simplified
malloc() which grew the address space in 50 byte hunks, and a
free() which was even simpler:
void
free(void *p)
{
USED(p);
}
It seems that already in 1995, virtual memory was assumed to be
not particularly constrained.
Re: [9fans] what heavy negativity!
clearly the more certain people think the more text gets created. > Let's take a step back here feel free, it will save everybody's time.
Re: [9fans] what heavy negativity!
Let's take a step back here, and stop treating jerks like Kurt (or me, for that matter) the way they treat the ideas they perceive to be hare-brained. It's weird that with all the time in the world to "think before posting", knee-jerk reactions still find their way to a mailing list like this one that is capable of extremely high quality discussion. The psychology is clearly complex, mixing territoriality with competence with defensiveness with mere human frailties, I would not even like anyone to start investigating that: who knows what it may reveal? What I see, though, is that part of the quality displayed here depends on the like of Hiro and Kurt (and others, I'm not picking on the two of them) to set a high bar, while others are willing to offer what may even be misplaced empathy and thus also encourage a certain type of contribution that may seem weak at best. No one has a monopoly of "what's good for Plan9...", although if I was the King here, I'd whip everyone into blending divergent "distros" - for that despicable moniker describes precisely what they are - into a modular system where each divergence is carefully documented so that even newbies can slot into their base system exactly what they perceive as being valuable. So, in the interest of not discouraging hare-brained ideas that may benefit us all, while ensuring that the spirit of Plan 9 is not diluted by the lure of Linux and associates, let's give everyone some space and help those that feel offended or victimised to understand that the rules of the game, here, at least, include considerable pain. Happy coding, everyone! Lucio.
Re: [9fans] what heavy negativity!
ooh, there's an idea for new project... I also have a soft spot for the old PDP11 architecture and aesthetics, and like the idea of an emulator sitting behind an 11/70 front panel, but I havn't been able to decide what software to run on it... Unix ran quite nicely on an 11/70 back in the late 70s, but I doubt you would squeeze much more than the boot loader of a modern bloated system onto one And a Unix image from that era would probably be a little limited. (I don't really have enough history with RT11/RSTS to want to use them). So the question is... is plan9 still lean and mean enough to fit onto a machine with a 64K address space? Doing a port would certainly provide plenty of opportunity to tinker with the lights and switches on front panel, and if it the port was initially limited to being a CPU server, there would be no need to worry about displays and mass storage just the compiler back end and low level kernel support. Has anyone already looked at that? I expect it would be a fun, educational and nostalgic exercise, but of course not of much practical use... Regards, DigbyT On Sat, 6 Oct 2018 at 00:23, Brian L. Stuart wrote: > Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 12:11 AM Mayuresh Kathe wrote: > > man, i experienced such heavy negativity towards my efforts to build ... > > > > the idea was to have a 64-bit linux kernel with the advantages of > > plan9port (small and elegantly designed+developed tools). > > Mayuresh, > To echo what others have said, don't let the negativity > itself affect your work. Consider only the technical points > that have been raised. To the extent that you evaluate > them and consider them relevant to your objectives, factor > them into your work. > > It really doesn't matter if anyone else ever cares about > or uses your work. If you learn from it, get intellectual > satisfaction from it, and it's useful to you, then it's worth > doing. If others can benefit too, great, but lack of interest > on the part of others is not a good reason for lack of > initiative on your part. As far as I can tell, I'm the only > one using a file system I developed. Sure, in some ways > I would like if everyone thought it was as great as I do, > but just because they don't doesn't stop me from benefitting > from it. > > As for the specifics of your project, I personally don't think > I'd be all that interested in the results. As much as I like > the elegance and simplicty of the implementation of the > Plan 9 user-land, much of the beauty of the system comes > from the simplicity and elegance of the kernel. So if I > were using the Plan 9 user-land on top of the LInux kernel, > I wouldn't feel the same sense of beauty, intellectual satisfaction, > and connection to the original developers as I do running > the same user-land on the Plan 9 kernel. But just because > I wouldn't be interested is no reason to stop your research. > Just be sure to study the similar efforts that have come > before and that have been mentioned here. What did > they accomplish? Did they go wrong somewhere? Can > you get to that goal avoiding those mistakes? If nothing > else, the whole experience will almost certainly give you > a greater appreciation for the Plan 9 kernel. > > Just a couple of thoughts from an old-timer who misses > the days of working on PDP-11s. > > BLS > >
Re: [9fans] what heavy negativity!
You're being a real jerk, Kurt. I don't really care what your rationale is; it's simply unnecessary. Flame away, --dho Op vr 5 okt. 2018 om 08:00 schreef Kurt H Maier : > > On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 10:39:36AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote: > > > > sorry that i bothered you all. > > > > apology accepted, try to do better next time > > khm > >
Re: [9fans] what heavy negativity!
On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 10:39:36AM +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote: > > sorry that i bothered you all. > apology accepted, try to do better next time khm
Re: [9fans] what heavy negativity!
Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 12:11 AM Mayuresh Kathe wrote: > man, i experienced such heavy negativity towards my efforts to build ... > > the idea was to have a 64-bit linux kernel with the advantages of > plan9port (small and elegantly designed+developed tools). Mayuresh, To echo what others have said, don't let the negativity itself affect your work. Consider only the technical points that have been raised. To the extent that you evaluate them and consider them relevant to your objectives, factor them into your work. It really doesn't matter if anyone else ever cares about or uses your work. If you learn from it, get intellectual satisfaction from it, and it's useful to you, then it's worth doing. If others can benefit too, great, but lack of interest on the part of others is not a good reason for lack of initiative on your part. As far as I can tell, I'm the only one using a file system I developed. Sure, in some ways I would like if everyone thought it was as great as I do, but just because they don't doesn't stop me from benefitting from it. As for the specifics of your project, I personally don't think I'd be all that interested in the results. As much as I like the elegance and simplicty of the implementation of the Plan 9 user-land, much of the beauty of the system comes from the simplicity and elegance of the kernel. So if I were using the Plan 9 user-land on top of the LInux kernel, I wouldn't feel the same sense of beauty, intellectual satisfaction, and connection to the original developers as I do running the same user-land on the Plan 9 kernel. But just because I wouldn't be interested is no reason to stop your research. Just be sure to study the similar efforts that have come before and that have been mentioned here. What did they accomplish? Did they go wrong somewhere? Can you get to that goal avoiding those mistakes? If nothing else, the whole experience will almost certainly give you a greater appreciation for the Plan 9 kernel. Just a couple of thoughts from an old-timer who misses the days of working on PDP-11s. BLS
Re: [9fans] what heavy negativity!
Hi Mayuresh, Please don't be discouraged. The Plan 9 community is small and has its fair share of trolls. If you feel strongly about this effort then by all means move forward! In the past, I've found that a prototype/proof of concept can speak far more than any email I could write ahead of time. Give this a shot - test our your ideas, and if you're pleased with the result share it! This is a great opportunity to learn more about plan9port, it's relationship with Linux and more importantly what a minimal system could look like. Regards, Steve On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 12:11 AM Mayuresh Kathe wrote: > > man, i experienced such heavy negativity towards my efforts to build a > linux kernel based plan9port vehicle that i am sure considering > abandoning the effort. > > the idea was to have a 64-bit linux kernel with the advantages of > plan9port (small and elegantly designed+developed tools). > > no, really, there was too much negativity. > > sorry that i bothered you all. > > ~mayuresh > >
Re: [9fans] what heavy negativity!
it's sad that technical disagreements have to lead to such hysteria :(
Re: [9fans] what heavy negativity!
Hi Mayuresh ! Can't help offering the quote: *First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. * *Mahatma Gandhi* I have read with considerable bemusement the many responses to your proposal. Granted that it does look like a huge challenge. Knowledgeable people can see many problems with what you are contemplating. But you have to remember that you might learn a great deal if you attempt your idea and sometimes good things come from attempting grand challenges. Just think what would have happened if Columbus had given up when his proposal was first rejected. May I suggest that you overlook the emotional negativity and look at the technical specifics of why many others see your proposal as foolhardy. Then having given due consideration to the technical issues and your resources (both time and knowledge) you would be in a far better position to make an informed decision. IMHO Plan9 offers a great deal of potential but is hamstrung by the lack of resources to advance device drivers and accommodate the evolution of hardware since the times it was designed. To many people the visual aspects of the user interface are unappealing and yet to others that is exactly what appeals to them. So it is impossible to please all the people all the time. I for one, would very much like to see the Plan9 architecture and thus concepts become available within more mainstream environments. On Fri, 5 Oct 2018 at 15:11, Mayuresh Kathe wrote: > man, i experienced such heavy negativity towards my efforts to build a > linux kernel based plan9port vehicle that i am sure considering > abandoning the effort. > > the idea was to have a 64-bit linux kernel with the advantages of > plan9port (small and elegantly designed+developed tools). > > no, really, there was too much negativity. > > sorry that i bothered you all. > > ~mayuresh > > >
