Re: [9fans] 9n

2018-05-02 19:24 GMT+02:00 Fran. J Ballesteros : > I just learned to love absolute paths. > Actually they kind of emerge from my design by themselves. > IIRC, there was no deadlock caused that you should be aware of. > I'ts been a long time and quite a few protocols since then,

Re: [9fans] 9n

I just learned to love absolute paths. IIRC, there was no deadlock caused that you should be aware of. I'ts been a long time and quite a few protocols since then, I can look for the source; there must be also some docs in the web. Also, I'm more in favor of prefix mount tables, that they are very

Re: [9fans] 9n

2013-06-17 21:06 GMT+02:00 Nemo : > You should ask if anyone else did that before doing it, instead of saying > they are un-spined life forms. > Here I am, finally! :-) I'm designing yet another file protocol for my toy/research os (whose kernel is derived from Charles

Re: [9fans] 9n

It's a modified stock kernel, no need to ask because I made the changes directly there. ;) Now seriously..., no plan 9 secret society has ever been actually secret and hiding code, as far as I know, that is. The only times I saw someone was keeping code without publishing it was because the

Re: [9fans] 9n

Now seriously..., no plan 9 secret society has ever been actually secret and hiding code, as far as I know, that is. The only times I saw someone was keeping code without publishing it was because the code was not considered to be ready enough for others to try. a lot of effort has gone

Re: [9fans] 9n

On Mon Jun 17 12:55:25 EDT 2013, ara...@mgk.ro wrote: a lot of effort has gone into making code public. But it would be zero effort if code wouldn't be secret in the first place. and usually one gets pissed on for going to the effort. - erik

Re: [9fans] 9n

On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:01 AM, erik quanstrom quans...@quanstro.net wrote: On Mon Jun 17 12:55:25 EDT 2013, ara...@mgk.ro wrote: a lot of effort has gone into making code public. But it would be zero effort if code wouldn't be secret in the first place. and usually one gets pissed on for

Re: [9fans] 9n

Thanks for clearing that up. I haven't looked at the code, but the changes in the paper looked interesting. On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Nemo nemo.m...@gmail.com wrote: It's a modified stock kernel, no need to ask because I made the changes directly there. ;) Now seriously..., no plan 9

Re: [9fans] 9n

On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 02:01:08PM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote: On Mon Jun 17 12:55:25 EDT 2013, ara...@mgk.ro wrote: a lot of effort has gone into making code public. But it would be zero effort if code wouldn't be secret in the first place. There is code that is neither secret nor

Re: [9fans] 9n

On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 08:20:56PM +0200, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote: There is code that is neither secret nor published. Code that does the or some job for the writer but that the writer does not want to maintain (for a public audience). There is no Hague Convention specification that you

Re: [9fans] 9n

You should ask if anyone else did that before doing it, instead of saying they are un-spined life forms. Don't you have a tricorder? On Jun 17, 2013, at 8:40 PM, Kurt H Maier kh...@intma.in wrote: It is annoying to have to replicate work someone else has done merely because they lack the spine

Re: [9fans] 9n

all i see from you are pronouncements. show us your code. On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Kurt H Maier kh...@intma.in wrote: On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 08:20:56PM +0200, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote: There is code that is neither secret nor published. Code that does the or some job for the

Re: [9fans] 9n

all i see from you are pronouncements. show us your code. That's how this all started. -sl

[9fans] 9n

Hi, I have copied at sources.lsub.org/9n a copy of a modified plan 9 kernel that has a new mount table and mount driver, (everything near namec changed), along with a variant of fossil that speaks 9P2000.ix aka 9pix. See 9n.README for the details. It's experimental, so use with caution. I'm

Re: [9fans] 9n

On Jun 6, 2013, at 7:40 PM, Francisco J Ballesteros n...@lsub.org wrote: concat us Since concat'ing us may be disgusting, I should have written contact us. sorry.