Re: [9fans] MirOS ksh (mksh) building out-of-the box on Plan9/APE
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 08:59:30 +0200 Jens Staal staal1...@gmail.com wrote: Dear all, From yesterday upstream mksh (cvs and future R48 and onwards) builds out of the box on Plan9 simply by: ape/psh ./Build.sh One issue remains and that is that the shell will get stuck after executing an external command. To build a working shell, there is a temporary work-around by issuing: CFLAGS=-DMKSH_NOPROSPECTOFWORK ./Build.sh This disables a number of features in the shell. I have uploaded an R47 build with the modified Build.sh (with -DMKSH_NOPROSPECTOFWORK) at /n/sources/contrib/staal1978/pkg/mksh-R47.tbz. In order to get a fully-functional mksh, something needs to be fixed host-side. A good guess is that it is the way APE handles SIGCHLD, since the same freezing has occurred on a number of other ports of mksh: http://www.mail-archive.com/miros-mksh@mirbsd.org/msg00215.html Is there interest in fixing SIGCHLD on APE and if so, what would be the best approach? If there is interest, it would thus be entirely possible to have an upstream, modern and mantained ksh shell which builds unmodified for APE (possibly as replacement of the old pdksh port now acting as sh). The mksh shell is used in many different contexts, most notably as shell in the more modern versions of Android. The R48 of mksh is now released, so from now on one should basically be able to download the latest tarball at any given time from https://www.mirbsd.org/MirOS/dist/mir/mksh/ and build it on Plan9 by ape/psh ./Build.sh and until the SIGCHLD thing gets resolved, just build with CFLAGS=-DMKSH_NOPROSPECTOFWORK ./Build.sh
Re: [9fans] MirOS ksh (mksh) building out-of-the box on Plan9/APE
Would it be interesting to know how the other mksh ports (I think Syllable and Win32) implemented SIGCHLD emulation? I also saw after some googling that some tests in Go had to be ignored due to SIGCHLD issues on Plan9, so I guess there are more use-cases than this one. Unfortunately I know too little to actually give input on the actual solution - most of it will come out as hot air (which hopefully won't stink...). go does not use ape. - erik
Re: [9fans] MirOS ksh (mksh) building out-of-the box on Plan9/APE
go does not use ape. That is irrelevant to what he said. -- Aram Hăvărneanu
Re: [9fans] MirOS ksh (mksh) building out-of-the box on Plan9/APE
On Sat Jul 27 11:12:59 EDT 2013, ara...@mgk.ro wrote: go does not use ape. That is irrelevant to what he said. the question at hand was the emulation of SIGCLD, which on plan 9 is an ape-specific question. go can't have it both ways. either it needs to have a solution that doesn't rely on SIGCLD, or it needs to be ported to ape, where SIGCLD makes sense and the ape runtime can be extendedto support it. - erik
Re: [9fans] MirOS ksh (mksh) building out-of-the box on Plan9/APE
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 11:23:03AM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote: On Sat Jul 27 11:12:59 EDT 2013, ara...@mgk.ro wrote: go does not use ape. That is irrelevant to what he said. the question at hand was the emulation of SIGCLD, which on plan 9 is an ape-specific question. it's an ape-specific question because the go maintainers chose to route around the problem. his point was that mksh is not the only program that has run into SIGCHLD. his point had nothing to do with whether go uses ape, which is a question nobody has ever asked. khm
Re: [9fans] MirOS ksh (mksh) building out-of-the box on Plan9/APE
it's an ape-specific question because the go maintainers chose to route around the problem. his point was that mksh is not the only program that has run into SIGCHLD. his point had nothing to do with whether go uses ape, which is a question nobody has ever asked. SIGCHLD is not defined for plan 9, except in ape. that's what i would call ape-specific. - erik
Re: [9fans] MirOS ksh (mksh) building out-of-the box on Plan9/APE
SIGCHLD is not defined for plan 9, except in ape. that's what i would call ape-specific. You're intentionally missing the point. -- Aram Hăvărneanu
Re: [9fans] MirOS ksh (mksh) building out-of-the box on Plan9/APE
On Sat Jul 27 18:41:08 EDT 2013, ara...@mgk.ro wrote: SIGCHLD is not defined for plan 9, except in ape. that's what i would call ape-specific. You're intentionally missing the point. i don't think so. ape must solve the sigchld problem since that is a posix interface, and ape's raison d'etre is posix emulation. go, not using ape and not implemeting posix, does not. also since we only have to worry about go, we can take a look at its specific use of sigchld and figure out another implementation. if the runtime is using it, then it would be easy enough to just generate a note on exit. - erik
Re: [9fans] MirOS ksh (mksh) building out-of-the box on Plan9/APE
SIGCHLD is not defined for plan 9, except in ape. that's what i would call ape-specific. This is degenerating into politics (or religion, same thing) quite unnecessarily. In my opinion, Go is a better APE (I'm convinced that Rob agrees with me :-). The way I see it and the reason I like Go a lot, is that it seems to aim to great portability across different platforms. In my particular dream I saw myself developing in the comfort of Plan 9 for the Windows environment (when that still mattered) and today for the mobile phone and various tablets (somebody keeps moving the goal posts, but we'll catch them eventually). In this respect, Go is perhaps closer to Posix than to APE, and then maybe not: these are intentionally closely coupled. Where SIGCLD/SIGCHLD (evidently Posix didn't quite get this one nailed down) is concerned, APE and Go need to provide the same service and therefore need to duplicate the implementation. If, as cinap suggests, there is no support in the kernel for it and it cannot be implemented purely in user user space, then it makes sense to do the job once, in the kernel and I'd like to leave it to those who are familiar with such things to determine what is actually necessary. But I think it is clear that Go and APE can retain their separation, migrating Go to APE makes no sense at all. ++L
[9fans] MirOS ksh (mksh) building out-of-the box on Plan9/APE
Dear all, From yesterday upstream mksh (cvs and future R48 and onwards) builds out of the box on Plan9 simply by: ape/psh ./Build.sh One issue remains and that is that the shell will get stuck after executing an external command. To build a working shell, there is a temporary work-around by issuing: CFLAGS=-DMKSH_NOPROSPECTOFWORK ./Build.sh This disables a number of features in the shell. I have uploaded an R47 build with the modified Build.sh (with -DMKSH_NOPROSPECTOFWORK) at /n/sources/contrib/staal1978/pkg/mksh-R47.tbz. In order to get a fully-functional mksh, something needs to be fixed host-side. A good guess is that it is the way APE handles SIGCHLD, since the same freezing has occurred on a number of other ports of mksh: http://www.mail-archive.com/miros-mksh@mirbsd.org/msg00215.html Is there interest in fixing SIGCHLD on APE and if so, what would be the best approach? If there is interest, it would thus be entirely possible to have an upstream, modern and mantained ksh shell which builds unmodified for APE (possibly as replacement of the old pdksh port now acting as sh). The mksh shell is used in many different contexts, most notably as shell in the more modern versions of Android.
Re: [9fans] MirOS ksh (mksh) building out-of-the box on Plan9/APE
plan9 kernel doesnt send notes on process exit to the parent. i do not see any trivial way to emulate SIGCHLD as ape might spawn also native processes so we cannot just add code to ape to emit the signal on exit. we might handle wait records in a separate process tho using the devproc's wait file (that means also we would need to reimplement the various wait functions in ape as one would get a Einuse error on wait() when someone reads your wait file, ugh) and also generate a signal. but its not trivial :( -- cinap
Re: [9fans] MirOS ksh (mksh) building out-of-the box on Plan9/APE
On Fri Jul 26 12:30:20 EDT 2013, cinap_len...@gmx.de wrote: plan9 kernel doesnt send notes on process exit to the parent. i do not see any trivial way to emulate SIGCHLD as ape might spawn also native processes so we cannot just add code to ape to emit the signal on exit. we might handle wait records in a separate process tho using the devproc's wait file (that means also we would need to reimplement the various wait functions in ape as one would get a Einuse error on wait() when someone reads your wait file, ugh) and also generate a signal. we may also have to do this if we wish to support pthreads with processes. pthreads allow one thread to wait for the children started by a second thread. - erik
Re: [9fans] MirOS ksh (mksh) building out-of-the box on Plan9/APE
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:01:16 -0400 erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote: On Fri Jul 26 12:30:20 EDT 2013, cinap_len...@gmx.de wrote: plan9 kernel doesnt send notes on process exit to the parent. i do not see any trivial way to emulate SIGCHLD as ape might spawn also native processes so we cannot just add code to ape to emit the signal on exit. we might handle wait records in a separate process tho using the devproc's wait file (that means also we would need to reimplement the various wait functions in ape as one would get a Einuse error on wait() when someone reads your wait file, ugh) and also generate a signal. Would it be interesting to know how the other mksh ports (I think Syllable and Win32) implemented SIGCHLD emulation? I also saw after some googling that some tests in Go had to be ignored due to SIGCHLD issues on Plan9, so I guess there are more use-cases than this one. Unfortunately I know too little to actually give input on the actual solution - most of it will come out as hot air (which hopefully won't stink...). we may also have to do this if we wish to support pthreads with processes. pthreads allow one thread to wait for the children started by a second thread. - erik A native APE pthread implementation would be awesome! I have been using Gnu Pth some, but getting a proper APE variant would be much more preferrable :)
