Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-21 Thread erik quanstrom
On Sat Jan 30 08:33:54 PST 2016, cinap_len...@felloff.net wrote: > in the rc shell, when one has exec statement and the exec fails, rc tries to > continue interpreting statements after the exec which fails with a strange > EOF error because in the process of preparing filedescriptors for exec, > th

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-02 Thread Kurt H Maier
On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 06:37:52PM -0600, Sean Hinchee wrote: > Go 1.5.1 built and is running on 9Front/amd64 I thought, but doesn't on > 9Front/386? That's correct, but the actual point is that it's still full of weird bugs and is not 100% functional, even after it builds. Doesn't stop some goo

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-02 Thread sl
> Go 1.5.1 built and is running on 9Front/amd64 I thought, but doesn't on > 9Front/386? Sorry, my report was precisely backwards. This is what I have on my systems: dl; echo $cputype 386 dl; go version go version go1.4.2 plan9/386 dl; fs; echo

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-02 Thread Sean Hinchee
Go 1.5.1 built and is running on 9Front/amd64 I thought, but doesn't on 9Front/386? On 02/02/2016 11:11 AM, s...@9front.org wrote: I think when people say "works" they mean that tip builds. The outstanding bugs with the language on Plan 9 are still outstanding (see the open issues), regardless

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-02 Thread sl
I think when people say "works" they mean that tip builds. The outstanding bugs with the language on Plan 9 are still outstanding (see the open issues), regardless of which Plan 9 you are running. I think it's great if someone's programs work. I use a few go programs (built with go 1.4.2 for both

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-02 Thread Wes Kussmaul
Now's your chance! No match for domain "9COULD.NET". >>> Last update of whois database: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 17:22:15 GMT <<< On 02/02/2016 11:52 AM, Skip Tavakkolian wrote: Autocorrect fail! And yet Apple is winning big. Sigh... I mean 9pcloud.net On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-02 Thread sl
I think when people say "works" they mean that tip builds. The outstanding bugs with the language on Plan 9 are still outstanding (see the open issues), regardless of which Plan 9 you are running. I think it's great if someone's programs work. I use a few go programs (built with go 1.4.2 for both

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-02 Thread Skip Tavakkolian
Autocorrect fail! And yet Apple is winning big. Sigh... I mean 9pcloud.net On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 8:46 AM Skip Tavakkolian wrote: > Same here. The namespace manager for 9pcould.net is written in Go and > most definitely runs on a (slightly modified) Labs Plan 9, 386. > > On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-02 Thread Skip Tavakkolian
Same here. The namespace manager for 9pcould.net is written in Go and most definitely runs on a (slightly modified) Labs Plan 9, 386. On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 7:47 AM wrote: > > You got confused. It works (but there are still issues) on both 9front's > > and Charles' amd64 kernel, but not on 9fron

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-02 Thread David du Colombier
>> You got confused. It works (but there are still issues) on both 9front's >> and Charles' amd64 kernel, but not on 9front's 386 kernel (since November >> 2014). > > Are you all saying that Go does not work on Plan 9 legacy and that all > my code is just faking it? No, Go works fine on Bell Labs

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-02 Thread lucio
> You got confused. It works (but there are still issues) on both 9front's > and Charles' amd64 kernel, but not on 9front's 386 kernel (since November > 2014). Are you all saying that Go does not work on Plan 9 legacy and that all my code is just faking it? I know Go is broken in my 9vx installa

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-02 Thread David du Colombier
> For 386, Go barely works. For amd64, current Go doesn't currently work > on 9front (but works on Charles' kernel), probably due to a kernel > bug. You got confused. It works (but there are still issues) on both 9front's and Charles' amd64 kernel, but not on 9front's 386 kernel (since November 20

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-02 Thread hiro
> That serves as a useful test to gauge interest (and quality) in Go on Plan 9. No, only in Go on 9front. It might be that other people are using their own version of Plan 9 with Go at the same time. Also, what about people who just don't think it's worth upgrading cause stuff still works for them

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-02 Thread Aram Hăvărneanu
For 386, Go barely works. For amd64, current Go doesn't currently work on 9front (but works on Charles' kernel), probably due to a kernel bug. Either way, Go on Plan 9 is held together with duck tape, especially networking bits. Btw, Go broke on 9front about a year ago (or was it more than that?)

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-02 Thread Richard Miller
> Cinap assured me that go works on 9front. For some value of "works".

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-01 Thread Lyndon Nerenberg
> On Feb 1, 2016, at 8:21 PM, Prof Brucee wrote: > > Every time I bend something it breaks. I remember the "where's Bruce" from the ... whereever the hell it was Plan9 workshop video.

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-01 Thread Prof Brucee
Every time I bend something it breaks. On 02/02/2016 3:18 PM, "Lyndon Nerenberg" wrote: > > > On Jan 31, 2016, at 8:06 PM, erik quanstrom > wrote: > > > > i don't believe the offer was made with a straight face. > > But perhaps with a bent compiler. > >

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-01 Thread Lyndon Nerenberg
> On Jan 31, 2016, at 8:06 PM, erik quanstrom wrote: > > i don't believe the offer was made with a straight face. But perhaps with a bent compiler.

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-01 Thread Prof Brucee
Cinap assured me that go works on 9front. Please send a wish list. Here docs in functions are on it. Exec was the ball buster. On 02/02/2016 8:53 AM, wrote: > > Thank you, but mostly I've just updated and titivated the previous > > work from Lucio and Gorka, to the state where it should pass the

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-01 Thread lucio
> Thank you, but mostly I've just updated and titivated the previous > work from Lucio and Gorka, to the state where it should pass the > codereview and does pass all the go1.6 tests (with *ncpu=1). I need to point out that I really added nothing other than a minute amount of coordination at the t

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-02-01 Thread Richard Miller
> Richard Miller is contributing a lot of great stuff to Go for plan9/arm. Thank you, but mostly I've just updated and titivated the previous work from Lucio and Gorka, to the state where it should pass the codereview and does pass all the go1.6 tests (with *ncpu=1). For multicore I am still chas

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-01-31 Thread lucio
> i don't believe the offer was made with a straight face. Hard to tell, with Prof Brucee. Do you have evidence of the professor being a go-skeptic? Like, no syscall-53 in his kernel? :-) Lucio. PS: I know cinap had his qualms about Go, but I have no recent evidence there, either. PPS: and f

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-01-31 Thread erik quanstrom
On Sun Jan 31 16:56:19 PST 2016, henesy@gmail.com wrote: > Will this project (rc-go?) be hosted at a particular bitbucket/hg > repository for pull requests, etc? > > On 01/31/2016 12:58 AM, Skip Tavakkolian wrote: > > Sign me up for testing. > > > > On Sat, Jan 30, 2016, 5:16 PM Prof Brucee

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-01-31 Thread Sean Hinchee
Will this project (rc-go?) be hosted at a particular bitbucket/hg repository for pull requests, etc? On 01/31/2016 12:58 AM, Skip Tavakkolian wrote: Sign me up for testing. On Sat, Jan 30, 2016, 5:16 PM Prof Brucee > wrote: Any objections to me rewriting rc

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-01-30 Thread Skip Tavakkolian
Sign me up for testing. On Sat, Jan 30, 2016, 5:16 PM Prof Brucee wrote: > Any objections to me rewriting rc in go without all known bugs? > On 31/01/2016 3:36 AM, wrote: > >> in the rc shell, when one has exec statement and the exec fails, rc tries >> to >> continue interpreting statements aft

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-01-30 Thread lucio
> Any objections to me rewriting rc in go without all known bugs? None from me, although you may want to rename it. And benchmark it, for what that is worth. Lucio.

Re: [9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-01-30 Thread Prof Brucee
Any objections to me rewriting rc in go without all known bugs? On 31/01/2016 3:36 AM, wrote: > in the rc shell, when one has exec statement and the exec fails, rc tries > to > continue interpreting statements after the exec which fails with a strange > EOF error because in the process of prepari

[9fans] rc exec error behaviour

2016-01-30 Thread cinap_lenrek
in the rc shell, when one has exec statement and the exec fails, rc tries to continue interpreting statements after the exec which fails with a strange EOF error because in the process of preparing filedescriptors for exec, the very fd thats used to read the script was closed. burnzez provided an