Hi Greg,
Yes - it would be great to get support for elixir. I did try and engage with
the elixir community before to see how we could use the same tooling - but I
didn’t get much back. I’ll contact you off list…
Cheers
Rick
> On 13 Oct 2021, at 06:53, Gregory Burd wrote:
>
>
> Rick,
>
>
Rick,
I've been following your work with rebar3 and considering adapting it into
distillery (https://github.com/bitwalker/distillery). I'd love to be able
to generate an image (AMI, or whatever format) that is the combination of
OSv, Elixir, BEAM, etc. in a single easy step. Thanks for digging
On Mon, 2021-10-04 at 10:37 +0300, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> You're welcome. If you have patches that might be useful to others as
> well, please post them.
Will do. Not there yet - but once I can verify things, I'll send
patches..
Cheers
Rick
--
You received this message because you are
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 10:27 AM Rick Payne wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2021-10-04 at 09:38 +0300, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> >
> > So the good (?) news is that the shm_* code didn't matter at all.
> > Maybe it isn't even getting used... The problem is something
> > completely different:
>
> Ah, I think
Hi,
On Mon, 2021-10-04 at 09:38 +0300, Nadav Har'El wrote:
>
> So the good (?) news is that the shm_* code didn't matter at all.
> Maybe it isn't even getting used... The problem is something
> completely different:
Ah, I think the shm_open is still relevant. For now I'm including the
musl file
On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 3:27 PM Rick Payne wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2021-10-03 at 11:04 +0300, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> > I'm curious where -
> > Maybe we have a bug in our /dev (fs/devfs/*) implementation? It
> > should generate good errors when trying to open /dev/shm/something -
> > not assertion
On Sun, 2021-10-03 at 11:04 +0300, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> I'm curious where -
> Maybe we have a bug in our /dev (fs/devfs/*) implementation? It
> should generate good errors when trying to open /dev/shm/something -
> not assertion failures and crashes.
Well, this is one of those rabbit holes...
On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 10:49 AM Rick Payne wrote:
> On Sun, 2021-10-03 at 10:38 +0300, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> >
> > Shared memory support was never a big priority because it's main use
> > case is multiple processes that want to share memory, and those
> > (multiple processes) were never a thing
On Sun, 2021-10-03 at 10:38 +0300, Nadav Har'El wrote:
>
> Shared memory support was never a big priority because it's main use
> case is multiple processes that want to share memory, and those
> (multiple processes) were never a thing in OSv. However, you're right
> that it's a shame to lose
On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 10:08 AM Rick Payne wrote:
>
> I've been playing around with my rebar3_osv tool (which turns an erlang
> application into an OSv image). I'm trying to move everything to the
> latest erlang release (24.1).
>
> OTP-24 comes with asmjit which can give quite a performance
I've been playing around with my rebar3_osv tool (which turns an erlang
application into an OSv image). I'm trying to move everything to the
latest erlang release (24.1).
OTP-24 comes with asmjit which can give quite a performance boost in
some cases. However, it requires the use of shm_open
11 matches
Mail list logo
