Hello everyone,
I'm still fairly new to plan9 after only a little over a week of exposure and
intense absorption
into that world. At this point, I'm coming up for air in order to see what the
long time prospects
are. To be honest, I'm not sure, in particular with respect to its life outside
a
there is a pull script in glenda's bin. use that.
- erik
I was giving that a shot, but get a few errors. Looks like it's not pulling
new files:
! sys/src/cmd/ratrace.c: not replicated; will not update
! sys/src/9/kw/devtwsi.c: not replicated; will not update
! sys/src/9/omap/screen.c: not
error: copying /n/boot/386/9load: '/tmp/replica00098100' permission denied
Not somthing as trivial as you have no /tmp? (its usually bound to $home/tmp in
profile).
So is the proper thing to do to convert a new install to a cpu/file server
(fossil)
to change ownership of all files to
You might want to look at /tmp, you may not have a writable one from
the login. Executing ramfs normally takes care of that issue.
I saw the ratrace.c error this early morning, but it seems to have
been transient. I guess you ought to try a second time, by then somebody
more savvy than me
There is a small error in the compilation of /sys/src/cmd/ip/snoopy
(for the ARM, I expect the same for the 386 ... and it is):
mk snoopy
5c -FTVw aoemask.c
ip/snoopy/aoemask.c:42 name not declared: aoerr
mk: 5c -FTVw aoemask.c : exit status=rc 5630: 5c 5632: error
This is on a combined CPU/auth server, and was run as the hostowner (bootes).
Are the permissions wrong out-of-the-box? Could this be because some
directories
are owned by sys while others by bootes? bootes is a member of the sys
group, but
as we discussed previously, that won't be
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 1:23 AM, Benjamin Huntsman
bhunts...@mail2.cu-portland.edu wrote:
bootes is a member of the sys group, but
as we discussed previously, that won't be honored in the current
implementation.
I'm pretty sure we did not say anything like that.
ron
The most effective way I've found to build from sources is to use
mercurial. The second most effective way is replica.
I have found I quite enjoy building from and hacking on a sources tree
backed by mercurial. YMMV.
ron
this is almost certainly incorrect. (you don't mention you're using 9vx' #Z.)
plan 9 fileservers that store files on disk (fossil, kfs, kenfs, cwfs, etc) do
maintain their own groups. you may wish to put your fs into allow mode
for pull.
it's plan 9 file servers living in the local kernel, e.g.
you may wish to put your fs into allow mode for pull.
You can do that on fossil? I thought you had to have kfs for that?
I don't believe you can simply switch fossil into and out of allow mode,
you can specify -P to open to disable permission checking (enable allow)
see fossilcons(8) but that
Wasn't that what we found just last week regarding the /dev/sd00/nvram thing?
This is
on native Plan 9, (er, under VMware), not 9vx or anything like that. The
filesystem is
fossil, not kfs.
i think you are confusing the block filesystem served by #S, which
does not do (real) group
I don't believe you can simply switch fossil into and out of allow mode,
you can specify -P to open to disable permission checking (enable allow)
see fossilcons(8) but that would require a reboot.
As I described before, this should not be necessary, and is not for me.
just run bull as hostowner,
sys/src/9/omap/screen.c: not replicated; will not update
I wonder if your replica databases have got in a mess? Somone whith more
nous of replicas internals may be able to help there.
-Steve
Local replica DB mismatches can be handled like pull conflicts: with
either -s path or -c path.
In
I think it worths to mention: for convenience, run as hostworner once:
cd
mkdir lib/replica
cp -x /dist/replica/network lib/replica/sys
Since then, pulls can be done as easy as replica/pull -v sys
- Yaroslav
Wasn't that what we found just last week regarding the
/dev/sd00/nvram thing? This is
on native Plan 9, (er, under VMware), not 9vx or anything
like that. The filesystem is
fossil, not kfs.
The file servers that maintain on-disk file systems
like kfs, fossil, kenfs, etc. all do use groups
I'll check the permissions on /tmp, and I bet you're right
there.
There's a good chance your /tmp issue is not permissions,
but a lack of /tmp being mounted. If your hostowner
doesn't have a lib/profile or its lib/profile doesn't
mount /tmp, then you won't be able to write anything
to it. As
The file servers that maintain on-disk file systems
like kfs, fossil, kenfs, etc. all do use groups in
the expected way.
yes. but there are obscure exceptions.
dossrv is fully updatable, but doesn't bother with groups.
but of course that's cheating. fat doesn't even support users.
and it
17 matches
Mail list logo
