Re: [9fans] troff book
I've written some math papers in troff. I spent less time doing math and more time tinkering with troff, to get things to show up properly. LaTeX looks prettier still, but handling UTF-8 in the source goes a long way towards legibility (especially if you have to come back to it after a while). I also ported Lout (contrib/akumar/lout.tgz) to Plan 9. It looks even prettier, and the source files end up looking much prettier than LaTeX. However, there is no UTF-8 support. ak On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 2:42 PM, hugo rivera wrote: > I think I'll reconsider using troff for my thesis, because some math > is sure to come across. But learning more about troff is indeed > useful. > > 2011/12/2 simon softnet : >> By the way, I am currently forced to use LaTeX. >> It's because formulas look nicer, and also because my current >> supervisor asks me to. >> >> I was thinking of writing a program that accepts a file formated with >> -ms or -me macros and translates it to LaTeX equivalent macros. This >> way, I would hopefully have the best of both worlds: the elegance of >> troff syntax and the neatness of TeX output. >> Is anyone interested in helping me out? >> >> Simon. >> >> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 11:24 PM, simon softnet wrote: >>> I have written my bachelor's thesis (80 pages with graphs, tables, >>> diagrams, equations, etc..) in pure troff -me. >>> It went as smooth as I could ever hope for. >>> LaTeX is much more difficult to use, IMO. >>> >>> Simon. >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:02 PM, wrote: On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 10:45:24AM -0800, John Floren wrote: > > > There was even a bunch of connections last week because somebody was > > looking for TeX on phones... (I don't know why, but the community marvel > > named TeXlive didn't seem to be the first choice in this case...) > > > > Ah, I think that was due to me... I read > http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3264341 and suggested that they > take a look at kerTeX :) Yes, you were one of the two (the other one has identified himself now... ;)). [I suspected this from the initials of the author of the mail.] And for others, BTW, if LaTeX sure works, it's because John was brave enough to try and not to give up after initial errors. Thanks! -- Thierry Laronde http://www.kergis.com/ Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C >> > > > > -- > Hugo >
Re: [9fans] go v. mk
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 4:06 PM, Steve Simon wrote: >> It can't be that >> hard to parse out DIR= from there and turn it into a native mkfile. > > Ok, its not that simple but perhaps somthing along the lines of > /sys/src/cmd/mk/mkconv could help? Did you try it? Might be worth trying it. We did. But maybe it's time to try things first and then send email :-) ron
Re: [9fans] go v. mk
Ok, its not that simple but perhaps somthing along the lines of /sys/src/cmd/mk/mkconv could help? /^DIR=,^$/...
Re: [9fans] go v. mk
> It can't be that > hard to parse out DIR= from there and turn it into a native mkfile. Ok, its not that simple but perhaps somthing along the lines of /sys/src/cmd/mk/mkconv could help? -Steve
Re: [9fans] make out?
i guess ant is the solution. http://xkcd.com/927/ http://xkcd.com/912/
Re: [9fans] make out?
On Fri, 02 Dec 2011 14:29:05 PST Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > make > nmake > pmake > bmake > mk > gmake jam cmake scons > i guess ant is the solution. http://xkcd.com/927/
Re: [9fans] make out?
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 02:34:49PM -0800, Christopher Nielsen wrote: > On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 14:29, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > make > > nmake > > pmake > > bmake > > mk > > gmake > > > > i guess ant is the solution. lord knows posix could not decide on a single > > syntax. because it would mean picking one syntax. which was against the > > rules. unlike all the places where they did that in the C library. fecking > > eeegits. > > Having had to (grudgingly) deal with ant, I would say that it is > definitely not the solution. Ant uses XML for its syntax. I think that > says it all. And seeing the mess, wanting to be able to compile and cross-compile on whatever; or wanting to not need tens of gigabytes of free space to compile a "thing" to finally obtain tens of megabytes of programs (solution: program the framework so that intermediary objects are removed once the target is obtained); and definitively _not_ wanting autoconf and automake, I have designed R.I.S.K. for KerGIS, used now for kerTeX too (and others not published): it has taken me even not one day of work (it for sure shows). Not to say that R.I.S.K. is the solution. But there are a lot of threads that take an amount of time reading sufficient to have the job done... -- Thierry Laronde http://www.kergis.com/ Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C
Re: [9fans] troff book
I think I'll reconsider using troff for my thesis, because some math is sure to come across. But learning more about troff is indeed useful. 2011/12/2 simon softnet : > By the way, I am currently forced to use LaTeX. > It's because formulas look nicer, and also because my current > supervisor asks me to. > > I was thinking of writing a program that accepts a file formated with > -ms or -me macros and translates it to LaTeX equivalent macros. This > way, I would hopefully have the best of both worlds: the elegance of > troff syntax and the neatness of TeX output. > Is anyone interested in helping me out? > > Simon. > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 11:24 PM, simon softnet wrote: >> I have written my bachelor's thesis (80 pages with graphs, tables, >> diagrams, equations, etc..) in pure troff -me. >> It went as smooth as I could ever hope for. >> LaTeX is much more difficult to use, IMO. >> >> Simon. >> >> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:02 PM, wrote: >>> On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 10:45:24AM -0800, John Floren wrote: > There was even a bunch of connections last week because somebody was > looking for TeX on phones... (I don't know why, but the community marvel > named TeXlive didn't seem to be the first choice in this case...) > Ah, I think that was due to me... I read http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3264341 and suggested that they take a look at kerTeX :) >>> >>> Yes, you were one of the two (the other one has identified himself >>> now... ;)). [I suspected this from the initials of the author of the >>> mail.] >>> >>> And for others, BTW, if LaTeX sure works, it's because John was >>> brave enough to try and not to give up after initial errors. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> -- >>> Thierry Laronde >>> http://www.kergis.com/ >>> Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C >>> > -- Hugo
Re: [9fans] make out?
Having had to (grudgingly) deal with ant, I would say that it is definitely not the solution. Ant uses XML for its syntax. I think that says it all. But is the ant not tattooed on the camel's nose?
Re: [9fans] make out?
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 14:29, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > make > nmake > pmake > bmake > mk > gmake > > i guess ant is the solution. lord knows posix could not decide on a single > syntax. because it would mean picking one syntax. which was against the > rules. unlike all the places where they did that in the C library. fecking > eeegits. Having had to (grudgingly) deal with ant, I would say that it is definitely not the solution. Ant uses XML for its syntax. I think that says it all. -- Christopher Nielsen "They who can give up essential liberty for temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson
Re: [9fans] troff book
By the way, I am currently forced to use LaTeX. It's because formulas look nicer, and also because my current supervisor asks me to. I was thinking of writing a program that accepts a file formated with -ms or -me macros and translates it to LaTeX equivalent macros. This way, I would hopefully have the best of both worlds: the elegance of troff syntax and the neatness of TeX output. Is anyone interested in helping me out? Simon. On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 11:24 PM, simon softnet wrote: > I have written my bachelor's thesis (80 pages with graphs, tables, > diagrams, equations, etc..) in pure troff -me. > It went as smooth as I could ever hope for. > LaTeX is much more difficult to use, IMO. > > Simon. > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:02 PM, wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 10:45:24AM -0800, John Floren wrote: >>> >>> > There was even a bunch of connections last week because somebody was >>> > looking for TeX on phones... (I don't know why, but the community marvel >>> > named TeXlive didn't seem to be the first choice in this case...) >>> > >>> >>> Ah, I think that was due to me... I read >>> http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3264341 and suggested that they >>> take a look at kerTeX :) >> >> Yes, you were one of the two (the other one has identified himself >> now... ;)). [I suspected this from the initials of the author of the >> mail.] >> >> And for others, BTW, if LaTeX sure works, it's because John was >> brave enough to try and not to give up after initial errors. >> >> Thanks! >> -- >> Thierry Laronde >> http://www.kergis.com/ >> Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C >>
[9fans] make out?
make nmake pmake bmake mk gmake i guess ant is the solution. lord knows posix could not decide on a single syntax. because it would mean picking one syntax. which was against the rules. unlike all the places where they did that in the C library. fecking eeegits.
Re: [9fans] troff book
I have written my bachelor's thesis (80 pages with graphs, tables, diagrams, equations, etc..) in pure troff -me. It went as smooth as I could ever hope for. LaTeX is much more difficult to use, IMO. Simon. On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:02 PM, wrote: > On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 10:45:24AM -0800, John Floren wrote: >> >> > There was even a bunch of connections last week because somebody was >> > looking for TeX on phones... (I don't know why, but the community marvel >> > named TeXlive didn't seem to be the first choice in this case...) >> > >> >> Ah, I think that was due to me... I read >> http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3264341 and suggested that they >> take a look at kerTeX :) > > Yes, you were one of the two (the other one has identified himself > now... ;)). [I suspected this from the initials of the author of the > mail.] > > And for others, BTW, if LaTeX sure works, it's because John was > brave enough to try and not to give up after initial errors. > > Thanks! > -- > Thierry Laronde > http://www.kergis.com/ > Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C >
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
s/that's just code/"that's just code"/ in my previous email.
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
> if the rule is literally "zero change", then we should give up now. Russ has been most accommodating with changes in the Go tree. As far as go portability to Plan 9 is concerned, that's not a problem (except the few actual problems that need fixing, but that's just code). The issue is polluting the go tree with yet another build framework which is 1) not really necessary, 2) about to be taken out anyway and 3) possible to devise programatically. Russ has said privately (jokingly) that he'd accept mkfiles if each one said "|<$GOROOT/mkmk.rc Makefile" and, knowing what we know now, it's not impossible to do. rminnich-9go's mkfiles for the go package library were mostly created with such a script. more important issues exist than just how to build go (which boils down to "pick any of the 3 current methods and go for it") -- for example, in order to complete running the full test suite one needs to solve a signal handling bug in the plan9-specific code of the go runtime.
Re: [9fans] FYI: Chibi-scheme on plan9
Yes, for the R7RS small language. And a very nice one! Alex has been very open and responsive about integrating plan9 related fixes. I'd like to see a native code compiling Scheme impl on plan9 as well but that can wait until we have some useful code that would benefit from any compilation speed up! Till then Chibi is plenty good! On Dec 2, 2011, at 9:24 AM, David Leimbach wrote: > I think this is the reference implementation for r7rs as well isn't it? > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Bakul Shah wrote: > Alex Shinn's Chibi-scheme is a r7rs "small" language > compatible Scheme. It can be used standalone for scripting or > as a library to provide an extension language. Full guide at > http://synthcode.com/scheme/chibi/ > > Installation: > hget http://chibi-scheme.googlecode.com/files/chibi-scheme-0.5.1.tgz | \ >gunzip | tar xv > cd chibi-scheme-0.5.1 > mk install > > Its plan9 support needs more work: access to more of plan9 > API, mkfile needs work + targets for .a, html docs, more > tests, etc. but the port is eminently usable. > >
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
On Fri Dec 2 13:21:09 EST 2011, rminn...@gmail.com wrote: > On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Francisco J Ballesteros wrote: > > +1 for using parallel mkfiles. > > as I say, I liked this too, but it fails the zero changes rule. if the rule is literally "zero change", then we should give up now. - erik
Re: [9fans] troff book
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 10:45:24AM -0800, John Floren wrote: > > > There was even a bunch of connections last week because somebody was > > looking for TeX on phones... (I don't know why, but the community marvel > > named TeXlive didn't seem to be the first choice in this case...) > > > > Ah, I think that was due to me... I read > http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3264341 and suggested that they > take a look at kerTeX :) Yes, you were one of the two (the other one has identified himself now... ;)). [I suspected this from the initials of the author of the mail.] And for others, BTW, if LaTeX sure works, it's because John was brave enough to try and not to give up after initial errors. Thanks! -- Thierry Laronde http://www.kergis.com/ Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C
Re: [9fans] go v. mk
nobody is stopping you from doing anything. go for it. ron
[9fans] go v. mk
My freebsd-current flamewar is dying out, so time for something new ... Why are parallel mkfiles in the /go tree considered eeevil? They seemed to be very low overhead. Surely accomodations are being made for Windows. Regardless, if we want native go, is it that unreasonable to maintain a port ala spin? My fiddling with the go tree makes me think it isn't that hard to set up an overlay that adopts the live go tree to what Plan9 needs for a build. bind(1) is a wonderful thing -- we should use it! The most dynamic part of the go source tree these days seems to be pkg/Makefile (as far as a native build is concerned). It can't be that hard to parse out DIR= from there and turn it into a native mkfile.
Re: [9fans] troff book
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:29 AM, wrote: > On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 10:16:26AM -0800, ron minnich wrote: >>[...] >> tex/latex, once clean and small, are now a beast, > > Uh! There are days when I wonder why I have done kerTeX... (well, I know > why: because _I_ use it!). Do you know that kerTeX has everything, > including BibTeX (hell to fix!) and can "do" LaTeX and also AMSTeX and > "Comptes-rendus de l'Académie des Sciences" (based on LaTeX) and so on. > > And it is small since I have sent 99% of the crap to the biggest storage > till now and forever: /dev/null. kerTeX is awesome! Anybody doing typesetting on Plan 9 (or even on Linux/*BSD) should try grab it. > There was even a bunch of connections last week because somebody was > looking for TeX on phones... (I don't know why, but the community marvel > named TeXlive didn't seem to be the first choice in this case...) > Ah, I think that was due to me... I read http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3264341 and suggested that they take a look at kerTeX :) John
Re: [9fans] troff book
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 10:16:26AM -0800, ron minnich wrote: >[...] > tex/latex, once clean and small, are now a beast, Uh! There are days when I wonder why I have done kerTeX... (well, I know why: because _I_ use it!). Do you know that kerTeX has everything, including BibTeX (hell to fix!) and can "do" LaTeX and also AMSTeX and "Comptes-rendus de l'Académie des Sciences" (based on LaTeX) and so on. And it is small since I have sent 99% of the crap to the biggest storage till now and forever: /dev/null. There was even a bunch of connections last week because somebody was looking for TeX on phones... (I don't know why, but the community marvel named TeXlive didn't seem to be the first choice in this case...) http://www.kergis.com/en/kertex.html -- Thierry Laronde http://www.kergis.com/ Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C
Re: [9fans] troff book
Could be worse, they might require using IE on Windows 7 to submit them. Or perhaps they already do? Silverlight runs on Macs, too.
Re: [9fans] troff book
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 01:13:37PM -0500, ?? ??? wrote: > IMHO, for anything on the scale of a doctoral dissertation, a better solution > would be to develop a native Plan 9 C port of TeX, METAFONT, and LaTeX for > Plan 9 from Bell Labs. Troff is ill-suited for typesetting mathematics, as > anyone who has tried to use troff to typeset formulas and equations of any > complexity will readily attest. Hum? "a native Plan 9 C port of TeX, METAFONT etc." ---LaTeX is a set of macros, that's all, so is is usable with TeX...---is already done: http://www.kergis.com/en/kertex.html -- Thierry Laronde http://www.kergis.com/ Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C
Re: [9fans] troff book
Could be worse, they might require using IE on Windows 7 to submit them. Or perhaps they already do? On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 7:16 PM, ron minnich wrote: > Irony alert! The Bell Labs journal now requires submissions in *word*.
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Francisco J Ballesteros wrote: > +1 for using parallel mkfiles. as I say, I liked this too, but it fails the zero changes rule. But we'll let the guys doing the work make the rules. First one to produce a useable Go tree wins -- if, that is, they make updates from the mainline go tree easy. Be aware that no go tree I know of passes the Go test suite, yet. Lots of fun ahead. Anthony, you do know that there is a mk based version of Go that builds, right? ron
Re: [9fans] troff book
I've done papers and "books" in latex forever (don't want to say how long). At the time, I was a troff refugee, having gotten annoyed with troff on unix after a few years. when I was at lsub last may, I got used to their nice scripts and such and now would much rather do short papers in troff than anything else. My new rule is < 20 pages, < 1 chapter, no need for complex math, do troff. Else, do latex. Part of the reason is being that the open source community has, as usual, come up with 50 ways to do anything in latex, most incompatible with the other, and in many cases latex and pdflatex are mutually exclusive: latex and pdflatex either fail to produce the same output, or, worse, can not accept the same input. tex/latex, once clean and small, are now a beast, like unto most other open source stuff nowadays. Troff has the virtue of having changed little in that time. Now if someone can do a set of IEEE macros for troff Irony alert! The Bell Labs journal now requires submissions in *word*. ron
Re: [9fans] troff book
IMHO, for anything on the scale of a doctoral dissertation, a better solution would be to develop a native Plan 9 C port of TeX, METAFONT, and LaTeX for Plan 9 from Bell Labs. Troff is ill-suited for typesetting mathematics, as anyone who has tried to use troff to typeset formulas and equations of any complexity will readily attest. All the best. Отправлено с iPhone Dec 2, 2011, в 13:00, Francisco J Ballesteros написал(а): > I have written books both in latex and in troff. > It's a nightmare, no matter in what, to get things like > indexes and tocs right. > > Doing it in troff required me to write a few scripts to > generate some of the tables. > > Doing it in latex required me to write a few scripts to > fix up things not handled well by latex (I'm sorry, but don't > remember which ones were the actual problems, it was long ago). > >
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
> And now that the camel is firmly in the tent, we might as well > create a /camel hierarchy to parallel /ape, for all the > camel cruft (i.e. /$cputype/camel/make vs. /$cputype/bin/gmake). shouldn't that be /tent and /$cputype/tent the camels sneak in the tent, not the other way around. - erik
Re: [9fans] troff book
I have written books both in latex and in troff. It's a nightmare, no matter in what, to get things like indexes and tocs right. Doing it in troff required me to write a few scripts to generate some of the tables. Doing it in latex required me to write a few scripts to fix up things not handled well by latex (I'm sorry, but don't remember which ones were the actual problems, it was long ago).
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
(i.e. /$cputype/camel/make Yes, I meant /$cputype/bin/camel/make. You get the general idea ...
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
+1 for using parallel mkfiles. If they are few, we don't need to import gmake and we could still build just by adding them to the std tree. On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: >>> modify ape/make. > > > I was just waiting for this :-P > > Please do NOT fuck with ape/make. As the paper says, APE has become more of > a tool to write conforming ANSI / POSIX code vs. porting the stuff to Plan > 9. Please don't take apes' virginity. > > If people insist on inflicting gmake upon us, fine. I guess. But please > (please?) don't screw the ape: deposit it in /$cputype/bin/gmake instead. > > And now that the camel is firmly in the tent, we might as well > create a /camel hierarchy to parallel /ape, for all the camel > cruft (i.e. /$cputype/camel/make vs. /$cputype/bin/gmake). > > Then, people who want to ride camels through the desert can run bsh(1) to > obtain a suitably inhospitable environment. (bsh as in baking-hot shell, > although bs(1) seems like a reasonable alternative.) >
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
modify ape/make. I was just waiting for this :-P Please do NOT fuck with ape/make. As the paper says, APE has become more of a tool to write conforming ANSI / POSIX code vs. porting the stuff to Plan 9. Please don't take apes' virginity. If people insist on inflicting gmake upon us, fine. I guess. But please (please?) don't screw the ape: deposit it in /$cputype/bin/gmake instead. And now that the camel is firmly in the tent, we might as well create a /camel hierarchy to parallel /ape, for all the camel cruft (i.e. /$cputype/camel/make vs. /$cputype/bin/gmake). Then, people who want to ride camels through the desert can run bsh(1) to obtain a suitably inhospitable environment. (bsh as in baking-hot shell, although bs(1) seems like a reasonable alternative.)
Re: [9fans] troff book
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 5:02 AM, hugo rivera wrote: > Hi, > soon I'll begin to write my thesis and I am planing to use troff. I > previously wrote some documents with it, mostly with the ms macro, > which I think I'll use for the thesis. Can you advice some book about > troff with some introduction on how to write troff macros? > Saludos y gracias, > > -- > Hugo > Hi Hugo Having recently written my thesis, I strongly recommend using LaTeX. I love troff, I always enjoy writing short papers (such as my IWP9 submissions) in troff, but I think I would have gone insane writing my thesis without LaTeX. BibTeX alone is a huge incentive for me. Plus, it's quite possible that your school may already have a sample LaTeX thesis for you to work from; in my case, we had a style definition file (.sty) to include in the thesis source, and then a sample document using it. KerTeX is pretty neat, so if you want to write your thesis on Plan 9 it's a good option. John
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 6:33 AM, Anthony Martin wrote: > modify ape/make. That strikes me as a good approach. The Go Makefiles do use very standard Plan 9 like idioms but there are a few things they do that looked gmake-dependent to me. There are very few of them however. ron
Re: [9fans] FYI: Chibi-scheme on plan9
I think this is the reference implementation for r7rs as well isn't it? On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Bakul Shah wrote: > Alex Shinn's Chibi-scheme is a r7rs "small" language > compatible Scheme. It can be used standalone for scripting or > as a library to provide an extension language. Full guide at > http://synthcode.com/scheme/chibi/ > > Installation: > hget http://chibi-scheme.googlecode.com/files/chibi-scheme-0.5.1.tgz | \ >gunzip | tar xv > cd chibi-scheme-0.5.1 > mk install > > Its plan9 support needs more work: access to more of plan9 > API, mkfile needs work + targets for .a, html docs, more > tests, etc. but the port is eminently usable. > >
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 12:49 AM, Francisco J Ballesteros wrote: > Well, that's actually the approach Ron would choose for nix. > IIRC, there were a bunch of mkfiles added to the std. go tree > to make it compile, but I may be mistaken. > Ron knows better. My first hope was pretty much what others have said here: parallel mkfiles to the Makefiles, because I expected they would change slowly if at all. Andrey and I did get this going, and a simple mk install in go/src sufficed to build and install all Go packages and produce some working binaries, however that approach is not going to be accepted, because it requires mkfiles in the Go source tree. For the record, it takes a surprisingly small amount of effort to make this work, once you know what is going on. Oh, and, there are some bugs in the Go source that are uncovered when one builds on NIX. I've submitted one fix and have one or two more in the works. The work has not been in vain. I think we need to be realistic about how much we can influence the Go mainline source. I keep seeing comments on 9fans about how we can change the way the Go source is written/built/managed, and those comments envision some signiifcant changes. To repeat, I have been told in no uncertain terms that changing the way Go is set up to accommodate great Plan 9 ideas is just not going to happen, and that our "footprint" in the Go source tree must remain very small. I think that is the correct approach on the part of the Go team. We have made minor changes on NIX to accomodate Go. Simple examples: /*/mkfile have an entry for the name of the Go compiler. There is a /go directory. Based on the Python experience, where Plan 9's python is always far behind the leading edge, I still believe that it is best if the following always worked: hg clone the-official-go-tree go cd go/src ./some-shell-script I do not think it makes sense to have Go source distributed as part of the Plan 9 distro or contrib mechanism as that approach has not worked well (in my view) for Python. Again, what I'd like to have is a Go that always builds on Plan 9 from the mainline go source tree, without having to dump in lots of patch files and other junk or change the Makefiles. Andrey and I worked toward a "build with zero changes" model. We did not get done and decided to wait for Go 1 anyway because the number of Makefiles will be greatly reduced in Go 1 -- I expect there will be less than 10 or so. I believe the Go authors will accept a single shell script or two and a go/9/include tree as part of the standard distro, so we need to think in those terms. What I have in go/9/include today are some u.h files, and that and a very simple set of changes should suffice to let us build Go on Plan 9 with *zero* changes from the standard go source. I hope that last paragraph was not too confusing. Thanks ron
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
i think having Go is worth dealing with the beast. On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 6:57 AM, erik quanstrom wrote: >> IMO using anything other than Make to build >> the Go distribution is a fool's errand and >> simply too much of a maintenance burden. >> We would have to carefully watch upstream >> changes to any of the many Makefiles. >> >> Using make isn't as bad as some make it out >> to be and, to be clear, I'm only advocating >> the use of make to build the distribution; >> we can still add rules for building tools >> or libraries written in Go to the standard >> mkfiles in /sys/src. > > the camel has his nose in the tent. > > - erik >
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
> I have had the most recent version of Gmake running as the APE tool of > choice, but I seem to have misplaced it. Still, no need to treat > Gmake and ape/make as different, they should be close enough for all > intents and purposes. > > In fact, compiling Gmake itself is not much of a mission, unlike bison. This is what I found: term% 8.out -v GNU Make 3.81 Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. This program built for Plan 9/386 I'm not sure if there is a later version, it's been a long time since I looked. ++L
Re: [9fans] troff book
Thanks for the feedback. I'll have a look at some of those books. 2011/12/2 Steve Simon : > By far the best books on troff (IMHO) are the pair by Gehani and Lally, > Document Formatting and Typesetting on the Unix system, volume 1 and 2. > > They are out of print but available from alibris.com and somtimes on > amazon new & used. > > -Steve > -- Hugo
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
> I plan to switch from GNU Make to APE make > once I have the time to look closely at the > Go Makefiles for any GNU specific features > and then make the necessary changes or even > modify ape/make. I have had the most recent version of Gmake running as the APE tool of choice, but I seem to have misplaced it. Still, no need to treat Gmake and ape/make as different, they should be close enough for all intents and purposes. In fact, compiling Gmake itself is not much of a mission, unlike bison. ++L
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
erik quanstrom once said: > > IMO using anything other than Make to build > > the Go distribution is a fool's errand and > > simply too much of a maintenance burden. > > We would have to carefully watch upstream > > changes to any of the many Makefiles. > > > > Using make isn't as bad as some make it out > > to be and, to be clear, I'm only advocating > > the use of make to build the distribution; > > we can still add rules for building tools > > or libraries written in Go to the standard > > mkfiles in /sys/src. > > the camel has his nose in the tent. This specific camel happens to be bearing gifts on his nose. I trust most 9fans to keep the rest of him out. :-) Anthony
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
I plan to switch from GNU Make to APE make once I have the time to look closely at the Go Makefiles for any GNU specific features and then make the necessary changes or even modify ape/make. Go makefile use file inclusion and command execution in macro assignments. I doubt APE make supports this as this isn't Posix functionality. mk does. Converting from GNUmakefile to mk isn't that hard. If you look at the existing Go makefiles you'll notice they are transliterations of the Plan 9 mk idioms to gmake.
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
> IMO using anything other than Make to build > the Go distribution is a fool's errand and > simply too much of a maintenance burden. > We would have to carefully watch upstream > changes to any of the many Makefiles. > > Using make isn't as bad as some make it out > to be and, to be clear, I'm only advocating > the use of make to build the distribution; > we can still add rules for building tools > or libraries written in Go to the standard > mkfiles in /sys/src. the camel has his nose in the tent. - erik
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
Pavel Zholkover once said: > Is the builder going to be based on the native > build or will it be cross-compiled ? It will be native. Anthony
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
Is the builder going to be based on the native build or will it be cross-compiled ? Thanks! On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Anthony Martin wrote: # In other news, I'm working on setting up an # an automated builder so we can include Plan 9 # in the Go Dashboard.
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
Lucio De Re once said: > > Have you tried? It's a non-invasive change, and once they are set > > up it's unlikely they will need to be updated often. > > I think Anthony is on the right path on this point, in that I've had > to update a couple of mkfiles in the recent past because I had > overlooked changes to the coresponding Makefiles. Not many, but they > do trigger additional maintenance problems. > > The only alternative option I would pick is to merge the Go release > into the Plan 9 (and nix) distribution - mkfiles and all - then use a > mechanism analogous to mine to keep them in sync. The unsuspecting > public would never see the hard backroom effort. IMO using anything other than Make to build the Go distribution is a fool's errand and simply too much of a maintenance burden. We would have to carefully watch upstream changes to any of the many Makefiles. Using make isn't as bad as some make it out to be and, to be clear, I'm only advocating the use of make to build the distribution; we can still add rules for building tools or libraries written in Go to the standard mkfiles in /sys/src. Anthony P.S. I plan to switch from GNU Make to APE make once I have the time to look closely at the Go Makefiles for any GNU specific features and then make the necessary changes or even modify ape/make.
Re: [9fans] How to mange cwfs on 9front?
On Fri Dec 2 06:05:23 EST 2011, kokam...@hera.eonet.ne.jp wrote: > Hi > > I just installed 9front on a Celeron 2.8GHz with 1GB mashine > on a 40GB hard drive. :-) Yes, I just tried it for test. > (When I used 528MB memory, I was rejected by insufficient memory). i think that cinap's right. some of it's gone missing. if this machine is pxebootable, you can dowload hget http://ftp.quanstro.net/other/9pxeload > /386/9pxeloadxx and run with *e820print=1 in your /cfg/pxe/$ether set. this will print out the map that acpi gives us. if this looks good, then there's a good chance of getting your machine working. if you can't pxeload, just change the url to get 9load, and install that in your boot partition. the 9atom cd will give you the same tools. hget http://ftp.quanstro.net/other/9atom.iso.bz2 hope that helps. - erik
Re: [9fans] Fortran growing in absolute number of users
Only the cheese stands alone, Unix sup TM. I wish I had the poster. On 3 December 2011 00:46, Noah Evans wrote: > From PJ Plauger when asked about Ratfor: > > Q: What's Ratfor? > PJ: To eat cheese. > > Noah > > > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Bruce Ellis wrote: >> ratfor++ to the rescue! >> >> On 2 December 2011 17:39, ron minnich wrote: >>> A guy I know at LANL just mandated C++ for all codes, no more Fortran. >>> >>> There are no hard and fast rules. >>> >>> That article is an advertisement, so treat it as such :) >>> >>> ron >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Don't meddle in the mouth -- MVS (0416935147, +1-513-3BRUCEE) >> > -- Don't meddle in the mouth -- MVS (0416935147, +1-513-3BRUCEE)
Re: [9fans] Fortran growing in absolute number of users
>From PJ Plauger when asked about Ratfor: Q: What's Ratfor? PJ: To eat cheese. Noah On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Bruce Ellis wrote: > ratfor++ to the rescue! > > On 2 December 2011 17:39, ron minnich wrote: >> A guy I know at LANL just mandated C++ for all codes, no more Fortran. >> >> There are no hard and fast rules. >> >> That article is an advertisement, so treat it as such :) >> >> ron >> > > > > -- > Don't meddle in the mouth -- MVS (0416935147, +1-513-3BRUCEE) >
Re: [9fans] Fortran growing in absolute number of users
ratfor++ to the rescue! On 2 December 2011 17:39, ron minnich wrote: > A guy I know at LANL just mandated C++ for all codes, no more Fortran. > > There are no hard and fast rules. > > That article is an advertisement, so treat it as such :) > > ron > -- Don't meddle in the mouth -- MVS (0416935147, +1-513-3BRUCEE)
Re: [9fans] troff book
By far the best books on troff (IMHO) are the pair by Gehani and Lally, Document Formatting and Typesetting on the Unix system, volume 1 and 2. They are out of print but available from alibris.com and somtimes on amazon new & used. -Steve
Re: [9fans] troff book
Hello This one could be a bit basic for what you want: http://oreilly.com/openbook/utp/ But a groff version source is public, so you might find it useful. slds. gabi 2011/12/2 Aharon Robbins : >> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 14:02:29 +0100 >> From: hugo rivera >> To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> >> Subject: [9fans] troff book >> >> Hi, >> soon I'll begin to write my thesis and I am planing to use troff. I >> previously wrote some documents with it, mostly with the ms macro, >> which I think I'll use for the thesis. Can you advice some book about >> troff with some introduction on how to write troff macros? >> Saludos y gracias, >> -- >> Hugo > > See http://www.troff.org for a list of books on troff and lots of other > related material. Good luck with your thesis! > > Arnold >
Re: [9fans] troff book
> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 14:02:29 +0100 > From: hugo rivera > To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> > Subject: [9fans] troff book > > Hi, > soon I'll begin to write my thesis and I am planing to use troff. I > previously wrote some documents with it, mostly with the ms macro, > which I think I'll use for the thesis. Can you advice some book about > troff with some introduction on how to write troff macros? > Saludos y gracias, > -- > Hugo See http://www.troff.org for a list of books on troff and lots of other related material. Good luck with your thesis! Arnold
Re: [9fans] troff book
Hi, I would suggest the -mpm macros: https://131.106.3.253/publications/compsystems/1989/spr_kernighan.pdf It is basically the same as -ms. You can build it in plan 9 troff and you can actually use the resulting binary with heirloom troff as well. Best of luck, Simon. On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 2:02 PM, hugo rivera wrote: > Hi, > soon I'll begin to write my thesis and I am planing to use troff. I > previously wrote some documents with it, mostly with the ms macro, > which I think I'll use for the thesis. Can you advice some book about > troff with some introduction on how to write troff macros? > Saludos y gracias, > > -- > Hugo >
[9fans] troff book
Hi, soon I'll begin to write my thesis and I am planing to use troff. I previously wrote some documents with it, mostly with the ms macro, which I think I'll use for the thesis. Can you advice some book about troff with some introduction on how to write troff macros? Saludos y gracias, -- Hugo
Re: [9fans] How to mange cwfs on 9front?
528MB is enougth memory to even compile python and ghostscript without a swap partition :) looks like there is some problem with the memory detection. there was some bug in the e820 code of the bootloader. if the current iso detects your memory, updating the bootloader on the 9fat might fix it. the cwfs "console" is put in devsrv as /srv/cwfs.cmd in 9front. we also added factotum support, the ability to use files directly in the configuration string without having to use a device map file, temp-bit to exclude files from being dumped to worm, made it kfs compatible so it can be used as root filesystem, record the cache layout in the configuration block... a lot of lines of code where deleted :) -- cinap
[9fans] devfs mirroring
I have a mirrored pair of disks under devfs. I have a series of 512 byte partitions which hold different /dev/fs configs, one for mirrored, one for disk1 only and one for disk2 only. This means the fossil and venti configs all refer to /dev/fs/XXX and will work in any mode. These configs liik like this: so for normal, mirrored operation mirror fossil /dev/sdE0/fossil /dev/sdF0/fossil but for disk 1 only mode inter fossil /dev/sdE0/fossil The problem comes with /dev/fs/nvram for my keyfs which is also 512 bytes. This appears to be empty in the single disk mode of operation; it works fine in mirrored operation I have a suspicion that the problem is the nvram partition is smaller than the interleave block size (defined in /sys/src/9/port/devfs.c as 8kbytes.). Though I haven't walked through the code to prove it. Anyone noticed this? what do other prople do - do you use mirroring or is everyone using coraid raid servers now? -Steve
Re: [9fans] How to mange cwfs on 9front?
> How I can control the cwfs (on the terminal above)? In the Ken's fileserver > we have a special console to control the fileserver. However, I could not > find such a console on 9front... Say, how to make /usr/okamoto directory with uid okamoto, gid okamoto etc, or /n/abc? Kenji
Re: [9fans] How to mange cwfs on 9front?
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 9:04 AM, wrote: > Hi > > I just installed 9front on a Celeron 2.8GHz with 1GB mashine > on a 40GB hard drive. :-) Yes, I just tried it for test. > (When I used 528MB memory, I was rejected by insufficient memory). > > I know 9front doesn't add anything new to Plan 9. However, I'm interested > how they implemented Ken's fs to a user space where any user process can run. > > How I can control the cwfs (on the terminal above)? In the Ken's fileserver > we have a special console to control the fileserver. However, I could not > find such a console on 9front... > 9front adds new stuff, see http://code.google.com/p/plan9front/wiki/features. Cwfs(4) (the user space Ken fs) was not written by 9front, and is available on Plan 9 as well. To use it, please read cwfs(4) and fs(8).
[9fans] How to mange cwfs on 9front?
Hi I just installed 9front on a Celeron 2.8GHz with 1GB mashine on a 40GB hard drive. :-) Yes, I just tried it for test. (When I used 528MB memory, I was rejected by insufficient memory). I know 9front doesn't add anything new to Plan 9. However, I'm interested how they implemented Ken's fs to a user space where any user process can run. How I can control the cwfs (on the terminal above)? In the Ken's fileserver we have a special console to control the fileserver. However, I could not find such a console on 9front... Kenji
Re: [9fans] Building Go on Plan 9
Well, that's actually the approach Ron would choose for nix. IIRC, there were a bunch of mkfiles added to the std. go tree to make it compile, but I may be mistaken. Ron knows better. On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Lucio De Re wrote: > I would be interested > in the approach Nemo might choose for nix.
