why hasn't that old unix restriction been removed yet?
is there any point to it at all any more?
localhost-only announcing i suppose.
2009/2/2 Roman V. Shaposhnik r...@sun.com:
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 20:27 -0800, Russ Cox wrote:
as for listening, 9vx by default uses the host ip stack,
and plan
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 8:54 AM, roger peppe rogpe...@gmail.com wrote:
why hasn't that old unix restriction been removed yet?
is there any point to it at all any more?
They depend on it now more than ever. Don't believe me? Just look at
what port many people use for NFS nowadays.
Lots of bad
They depend on it now more than ever. Don't believe me? Just look at
what port many people use for NFS nowadays.
Lots of bad things have never been fixed, and this is one of them. I
guess it's more fun to lard GUI software over top and hope nobody
notices.
too bad that there seems to be
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 20:27 -0800, Russ Cox wrote:
as for listening, 9vx by default uses the host ip stack,
and plan 9 services tend to use their own port numbers,
And sometimes these port # tend to be 1024 which means that
you have to run 9vx as root.
Thanks,
Roman.
Hello,
Simple question: how hard would it be to modify 9vx so it can be used
as a cpu server?
As I naively see it, the two main problems are:
1) to have 9vx running a cpu server kernel instead of a stand alone
terminal one (I don't even know if that's the case actually).
2) to have the host
As I naively see it, the two main problems are:
1) to have 9vx running a cpu server kernel instead of a stand alone
terminal one (I don't even know if that's the case actually).
i think there would be a little work in getting this going.
2) to have the host forwarding whatever packets should
As I naively see it, the two main problems are:
1) to have 9vx running a cpu server kernel instead of a stand alone
terminal one (I don't even know if that's the case actually).
i think there would be a little work in getting this going.
Ok, so it's possible then. :)
I'll see if I can
2009/2/1 Mathieu lejat...@gmail.com:
As I naively see it, the two main problems are:
1) to have 9vx running a cpu server kernel instead of a stand alone
terminal one (I don't even know if that's the case actually).
i think there would be a little work in getting this going.
Ok, so it's
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Mathieu lejat...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Simple question: how hard would it be to modify 9vx so it can be used
as a cpu server?
As I naively see it, the two main problems are:
1) to have 9vx running a cpu server kernel instead of a stand alone
terminal one
