Re: [9fans] 9vx as a perfect proto environment

2009-09-25 Thread Lyndon Nerenberg - VE6BBM/VE7TFX
> such as the beagleboard, which > are good enough to be a desktop Ethernet? My kingdom for Ethernet on one of those! Is USB Ethernet really viable? It would be nice to hear from anyone actually doing it (with performance numbers). --lyndon

[9fans] 9vx as a perfect proto environment

2009-09-25 Thread ron minnich
I think 9vx is now the equivalent of software tools from the old days. It's fast. But the big beauty of it for me is that in vx32/src/9vx/a is pretty much a plan 9 kernel in plan 9 C vernacular. I just spent an easy short time prototyping some new stuff that I can now drop into a real plan 9 kerne

Re: [9fans] segattach off-by-one?

2009-09-25 Thread erik quanstrom
the patch i posted yesterday was wrong. i forgot about automatic address assigment with segattach. this works, but perhaps it would be better to round va before checking if va == 0? /n/quanstro//sys/src/9/port/segment.c:642,648 - segment.c:642,648 Segment *s, *os; Physseg *ps;

Re: [9fans] segattach off-by-one?

2009-09-25 Thread erik quanstrom
On Fri Sep 25 14:11:03 EDT 2009, m...@acm.jhu.edu wrote: > So in my example, va = 0x10001001, len = 0x1000. I understood that to > mean [0x10001001, 0x10002001) was the newly-valid interval, which > would mean 0x10002000 was a valid address... i think you're misreading the man page. from the man

Re: [9fans] segattach off-by-one?

2009-09-25 Thread Venkatesh Srinivas
So in my example, va = 0x10001001, len = 0x1000. I understood that to mean [0x10001001, 0x10002001) was the newly-valid interval, which would mean 0x10002000 was a valid address... The segattach manpage says va+len is 'rounded up'; wouldn't that mean the expanded interval was [0x10001000, 0x100030

Re: [9fans] bluetooth

2009-09-25 Thread matt
you could just set the mtime to the time of the last successful operation on that device What do you mean exactly by "sees"? ... all devices that are listening on inquiry scan channels and respond to inquiry requests. It looks like your requirement might be satisfied by one or th

Re: [9fans] bluetooth

2009-09-25 Thread Richard Miller
> Presumably there's still a medium sized asteroid of pain to go through > to get something like, > say, my bluetooth stereo-phones+headset(A2DP/AVRCP/... ... ...) > working sensibly? A2DP will need synchronous connections which aren't implemented yet (sorry). AVRCP itself looks straightforwa

Re: [9fans] bluetooth

2009-09-25 Thread Richard Miller
> it would be neat if the plumber and thus auth/fgui could be pressed > into service for entering the pairing PIN. I don't quite see the connection between plumber and fgui - doesn't fgui just read directly from /mnt/factotum/needkey? At present there's a needkey-like mechanism for PINs - the equ

Re: [9fans] bluetooth

2009-09-25 Thread Richard Miller
>> What do you mean exactly by "sees"? ... > > all devices that are listening on inquiry scan channels and respond to > inquiry requests. It looks like your requirement might be satisfied by one or the other of these things in the /net/bt/devices record: - a discoverable (ie "responded to most r

[9fans] more on the history of recursion

2009-09-25 Thread matt
http://www.paulgraham.com/mcilroy.html

Re: [9fans] zero length arrays in gcc

2009-09-25 Thread Fernan Bolando
Hi all both option did not solve my lost pointer problem. I am still verifying if it is due to something unrelated to zero length arrays option1 unsigned foo[1]; #define startLabel (&foo[1]) option 2 static unsigned startLabel0; static unsigned startLabel[] = &startLabel0 thanks fernan -- h