you of course know that the big difference in unix and other
systems of the day was that files did not have type. this allowed
a tools-based approach which was popular for many years.
Not that type of "types." I gave an example (which Charles Forsyth found to
be a bad one) to set the types of
> if i do this:
> cpu -h NODE -c cmd args
> How can i be really sure that the command was performed by that node?
cpu -c 'cat ''#c/sysname''; echo'
- erik
they have funny names for it all.
and they're missing the worm part.
http://lwn.net/Articles/305740/
- erik
Hi all,
I was trying to use cpu(1) command from file server, because from
terminal as you see the post above i still have problems..
As cpu(1) command build the name space by running /usr/$user/lib/
profile with root of the invoking name space binding it to /mnt/term,
if i do this:
cpu -h NODE
> Not that type of "types." I gave an example (which Charles Forsyth found to
> be a bad one) to set the types of "types" apart. I mean "types" as in named
> pipes ("special" files) versus regular files. In my experience which is
> limited to "modern" UNIX clones, i.e. Linux and *BSD, you can di
Hola,
Hiding the details of the underlying resources is one of the functions/features
of the OS, isn't it?
slds.
gabi
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> you of course know that the big difference in unix and other
>> systems of the day was that files did not have type. this allowed
>> a tools-b
> they have funny names for it all.
> and they're missing the worm part.
>
> http://lwn.net/Articles/305740/
There's a reason for the funny names. If
they don't include the word 'object' enough
times, they'll lose their Tier 1 status in
the buzzword hierarchy.
BLS
> I did it and it works, but do you have any idea why i can do it from
> file server as bootes but not from terminal as armando?
there's probablly something wrong in your authentication setup.
> fs name% cpu -h NODE -c 'name=(equal sign)cat ''#c/sysname'';
> echo'
cpu -h node -c 'name=`{cat
Thanks a lot Eric,
I did it and it works, but do you have any idea why i can do it from
file server as bootes but not from terminal as armando?
Furthermore, i would like to put that line into a variable, by doing
(maybe in a wrong way):
fs name% cpu -h NODE -c 'name=(equal sign)cat ''#c/sysna
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 5:33 AM, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> they have funny names for it all.
> and they're missing the worm part.
>
> http://lwn.net/Articles/305740/
>
> - erik
>
>
I found this amusing: 'Every operation on an object must be
accompanied by a "capability," a crypto
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 12:17 PM, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Not that type of "types." I gave an example (which Charles Forsyth found to
>> be a bad one) to set the types of "types" apart. I mean "types" as in named
>> pipes ("special" files) versus regular files. In my experience
> I found this amusing: 'Every operation on an object must be
> accompanied by a "capability," a cryptographically-signed ticket which
> names the object and the access rights possessed by the owner of the
> capability. In the absence of a suitable capability, the drive will
> deny access. ' -- oh,
The OSD stuff has been going on for almost 10 years or more. Started
in 1996 or so at CMU.
Original design was to run the stack in the disk drive. This explains
a lot. I could not get them to look at 9p either.
ron
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 2:13 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> stat(5) specifies exclusive-access files, which we do use for locking.
> In what sense is that not `doing locking'? It's not POSIX byte-range
> read- or write-locking per fcntl, but it's not clear to me how often
> that's actually usef
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:23 PM, Eris Discordia
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> First off, thank you so much, sqweek. When someone on 9fans tries to put
> things in terms of basic abstract ideas instead of technical ones I really
> appreciate it--I actually learn something.
Welcome, but don't mista
Thanks again Eric..
It works, sorry but i'm newbie in shell ;-)
About the authentication problem, i checked /sys/log/auth, and i
noticed that there are some lines with "no speaks for",like this:
fs name nov 13 18:50:09 tr-fail [EMAIL PROTECTED] (NODE ip address) ->
[EMAIL PROTECTED] no speaks for
could it be that the equals sign (=) you typed in /lib/ndb/auth is not
the normal equals sign (ascii 3d) but the equal sign of another
encoding? that could be the reason why your /lib/ndb/auth can't be
pasted properly in an email and can't be parsed correctly by
tokenize().
> It's a matter of approach. Linux takes what I like to call the cookie
> monster approach, which is MORE MORE MORE. More syscalls, more ioctls,
> more program flags, more layers of indirection, a constant enumeration
> of every use case. Rarely is there a pause to check whether several
> use case
> could it be that the equals sign (=) you typed in /lib/ndb/auth is not
> the normal equals sign (ascii 3d) but the equal sign of another
> encoding? that could be the reason why your /lib/ndb/auth can't be
> pasted properly in an email and can't be parsed correctly by
> tokenize().
easy test.
Hello!
is there 'tra' available for plan9?
is there any reason to use 'unison' instead (e.g. on linux, where both
programs are available)?
is there mercurial in a good shape?
Thanks
Ruda
> I thought I read they were using Xen? What's the relationship between
> kexec and Xen?
Kexec is a system call which linux uses to load and execute another
kernel. Kexec has to be work differently under xen, because it's
loading into xen virtual memory not physical memory; but this is
supported
> is there 'tra' available for plan9?
No.
> is there any reason to use 'unison' instead (e.g. on linux, where both
> programs are available)?
Unison is less full-featured but more robust than tra.
I am not convinced that tra is 100% right.
Put another way, Unison has never accidentally
deleted m
On Nov 13, 2008, at 8:37 AM, Dan Cross wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 2:13 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
stat(5) specifies exclusive-access files, which we do use for
locking.
In what sense is that not `doing locking'? It's not POSIX byte-range
read- or write-locking per fcntl, but it's not
23 matches
Mail list logo
