[9fans] GPLv2
http://akaros.cs.berkeley.edu/files/Plan9License H .. -- С наилучшими пожеланиями Жилкин Сергей With best regards Zhilkin Sergey
Re: [9fans] GPLv2
There is a big discussion on this over at Hacker News which I don’t really understand but I think the main point was that this isn’t as big a change as it seems. On the other hand, I’ve never heard of akaros. How similar is it to Plan9? Pete On 13 Feb 2014, at 20:53, Sergey Zhilkin wrote: > http://akaros.cs.berkeley.edu/files/Plan9License > > H .. > > -- > С наилучшими пожеланиями > Жилкин Сергей > With best regards > Zhilkin Sergey
Re: [9fans] GPLv2
Acaros more close to nix, that is based on plan9 пятница, 14 февраля 2014 г. пользователь Peter Hull написал: > There is a big discussion on this over at Hacker News which I don’t really > understand but I think the main point was that this isn’t as big a change > as it seems. > On the other hand, I’ve never heard of akaros. How similar is it to Plan9? > Pete > > On 13 Feb 2014, at 20:53, Sergey Zhilkin > > wrote: > > > http://akaros.cs.berkeley.edu/files/Plan9License > > > > H .. > > > > -- > > С наилучшими пожеланиями > > Жилкин Сергей > > With best regards > > Zhilkin Sergey > > > -- Sent from Gmail Mobile
[9fans] Kontron industrial PCs
Hi, all I have several KONTRON powered industrial PCs running since 2011 under Atom. Now I would like to install a more recent version of the 386 (not pae) kernel. Where can I find a CD (and possibli the USB) image ? Will that old kernel available in the future ? adriano
Re: [9fans] Kontron industrial PCs
On Thu Feb 13 16:48:36 EST 2014, adriano.vera...@mail.com wrote: > I have several KONTRON powered industrial PCs running since 2011 under Atom. > Now I would like to install a more recent version of the 386 (not pae) > kernel. > Where can I find a CD (and possibli the USB) image ? > Will that old kernel available in the future ? cool! the usb install image for amd64 is http://ftp.9atom.org/other/usbinstamd64.bz2 # installs amd64. the source can be accessed directly. the snippit from 9fs is case atom # import -E ssl atom.9atom.org /n/atom /n/atom srv $nflag -q tcp!atom.9atom.org atom && mount $nflag /srv/atom /n/atom atom for example, ; ls -l /n/atom/plan9/386/9pccpu --rwxrwxr-x M 2588 sys sys 2623888 Dec 27 14:40 /n/atom/plan9/386/9pccpu the pc kernel is still available. unfortunately the usb installer will install only amd64. i have a couple of requests to install 386, so i'll take a look at that. make sure you have a backup if you start installing. i'll sleep better. ☺ - erik
Re: [9fans] Kontron industrial PCs
erik quanstrom ha scritto: the pc kernel is still available. unfortunately the usb installer will install only amd64. i have a couple of requests to install 386, so i'll take a look at that. The machines are Tecnint HTE (italian hw manufacturer/integrator) industrial-rugged-fanless etc etc DIN mounted PCs powered by a KONTRON ETX module (Intel Atom N270 1.6 GHz, 1GB ram). The mass storage is a 4GB CFlash (sdD0), the bios support usb boot. This Tecnint product is expected to be available for 5+ years, so I'm going to buy some spare units ... The system I use to create target CFs is quite dated. Where can I find an up-to-date (but for x86 only) 9Atom.iso.bz2 ? adriano
Re: [9fans] GPLv2
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Peter Hull wrote: > On the other hand, I’ve never heard of akaros. How similar is it to Plan9? Let's see... GNU libc, POSIX threads, asynchronous I/O, bash, makefiles, #ifdefs. I'd say it has nothing to do with Plan 9. -- Aram Hăvărneanu
[9fans] misinformation in the discussion about the GPL release of Plan 9
Just thought I'd toss out a correction, because lots of statements are being made by people who don't know much about the whys and wherefores of the recent UCB announcement of a GPL'ed release or how we got here. The license, and the manner in which the distro is being managed, were specified by Alcatel-Lucent. UCB graciously agreed to take on the role they have taken on. This was not a small effort on either side. Folks at Bell Labs (and me) put in a lot of time over the last 2 quarters to try to find a way to fix a problem, namely, that the LPL has been off-putting for many potential users, only in part because it is incompatible with the GPL. We sought a more standard license. It was not easy. The LPL could not be made compatible with the GPL in finite time. Yes, the web pages all mention one clause; I found out the hard way that was only *one* issue. There are many more. I would certainly hope that people can use this distro as a basis for further work. I think Alcatel-Lucent, UC Berkeley, and Jim McKie are owed much thanks for their willingness to revisit this issue, and their persistence in achieving the outcome. ron
Re: [9fans] Strings in acid, what am I missing?
> the reason that the () are required > is that * binds tighter than \s in acid. one thing that's confusing about > acid is main:ca is an *address* of main:ca, not its value. so *main:ca > is the pointer into the bss, and main:ca is the address of that pointer. So if I understand you correctly, in acid main:ca is the equivalent to char ** in C? And furthermore that the \s expression operates on acid addresses rather than normal char * in C? From trying things out in acid a little bit, it seems like this is the case, but I'm not positive. > the reason cp gives you garbage is it's not initialized. in fact when > i compile this for am64, you can see everthing quite clearly. it is > optimized away! (it's a good question why a char* is treated differently > than a char[]. perhaps there is some dark corner of the standard that > implies things.) I see what you're saying about cp not being initialized, but I compiled with the -N option and I assumed that this would rectify the situation of things being optimized away. Interestingly enough if I do **main:cp\c in acid it gives me 'W', but *(main:cp\s) gives me garbage, whereas *(main:ca\s) gives me "Hello". Thanks for the response, any other help would be appreciated!
Re: [9fans] Strings in acid, what am I missing?
> > the reason that the () are required > > is that * binds tighter than \s in acid. one thing that's confusing about > > acid is main:ca is an *address* of main:ca, not its value. so *main:ca > > is the pointer into the bss, and main:ca is the address of that pointer. > > So if I understand you correctly, in acid main:ca is the equivalent to > char ** in C? And furthermore that the \s expression operates on acid > addresses rather than normal char * in C? From trying things out in > acid a little bit, it seems like this is the case, but I'm not > positive. almost, the \ expressions define the type of the object. you have to define the type before indirection is sensible. so you can say x\X (print a 4-byte integer), but *(x\s). > > the reason cp gives you garbage is it's not initialized. in fact when > > i compile this for am64, you can see everthing quite clearly. it is > > optimized away! (it's a good question why a char* is treated differently > > than a char[]. perhaps there is some dark corner of the standard that > > implies things.) > > I see what you're saying about cp not being initialized, but I > compiled with the -N option and I assumed that this would rectify the > situation of things being optimized away. Interestingly enough if I > do **main:cp\c in acid it gives me 'W', but *(main:cp\s) gives me > garbage, whereas *(main:ca\s) gives me "Hello". > > Thanks for the response, any other help would be appreciated! perhaps that's an arguable flaw in the compiler. in any event, the correct way to declare something used is USED(x, y, z) this is not a macro, but implemented by the compiler directly. SET() is analogous. - erik
Re: [9fans] misinformation in the discussion about the GPL release of Plan 9
Quoting ron minnich : Just thought I'd toss out a correction, because lots of statements are being made by people who don't know much about the whys and wherefores of the recent UCB announcement of a GPL'ed release or how we got here. I'm not sure what you set out to clarify here. Will the Labs continue to release code under the LPL or not? I don't particularly care about the GPL. khm
Re: [9fans] GPLv2
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 12:28:30AM +0100, Aram H??v??rneanu wrote: > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Peter Hull wrote: > > On the other hand, I???ve never heard of akaros. How similar is it to Plan9? > > Let's see... GNU libc, POSIX threads, asynchronous I/O, bash, > makefiles, #ifdefs. I'd say it has nothing to do with Plan 9. This is not surprising. Berkeley has a long story of unix non-understading. Well, now it came to plan9 :-).
