On Saturday 24 April 2010 21:20:35 Rahul Murmuria wrote:
> I would like to point out that the Glendix project has been doing
> something quite the opposite of what Corey wants,
>
... that's not a strictly accurate statement.
It infers that "what Corey wants" is to bring GNU and Linux into
Plan
This thread is mighty old now.. but I would like to point out that the
Glendix project has been doing something quite the opposite of what
Corey wants, but solves the same problem.
http://www.glendix.org/
Imagine running the Linux kernel and all of regular GNU, with all the
Plan 9's sweetness pat
erik quanstrom said:
> i'm not sure i understand the rationale behind this file.
> shouldn't these defines be in /$objtype/include/u.h?
> seems a mistake to make a u.h machine independent.
> what am i missing?
I have no idea what you are referring to -- I did not create any files I
mentioned...
i'm not sure i understand the rationale behind this file.
shouldn't these defines be in /$objtype/include/u.h?
seems a mistake to make a u.h machine independent.
what am i missing?
- erik
I am doing some work on webfs - if anyone has any patches
that they have generated locally but not submitted or have not
yet been accepted please send me them (off list).
Thanks
-Steve
> Is this behaviour really useful for anything? Is there
> anything in plan9 code that relies on this behaviour in a
> critical way? I suspect this rule can be changed without
> impacting plan 9 code much (which as a rule is of much higher
> quality than most open source code) and we already know
>
On Sat Apr 24 18:44:17 EDT 2010, aku...@mail.nanosouffle.net wrote:
> Just for the record: I'm able to boot into
> Plan 9 on my Thinkpad X200s with
> Ken FS as my filesystem.
>
> Erik: apparently ftp.quanstro.net/other/9pc
> supports IL? Awesome!
yes. i use ken's fs. so does coraid.
- erik
Just for the record: I'm able to boot into
Plan 9 on my Thinkpad X200s with
Ken FS as my filesystem.
Erik: apparently ftp.quanstro.net/other/9pc
supports IL? Awesome!
Thanks,
ak
On 4/24/10, Iruata Souza wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Akshat Kumar
> wrote:
>> I think 9pxeload.
>>
>
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Akshat Kumar
wrote:
> I think 9pxeload.
>
> The computer went on about its PXE boot
> procedure, and got 9pxeload, which tried
> to find the kernel from the CPU, but since
> there is no support for this ethernet card,
> the process failed there and returned to me
>
I just tried the 9atom 9pxeload with my
Thinkpad X200s, and indeed the
ethernet card works enough for the loader
to pull the kernel.
The kernel, then, is a 9pc terminal,
compiled with IL support so that I can
communicate with Ken FS.
I get to the "root is from (tcp, il)[il]:" prompt,
with a messa
On Sat Apr 24 15:45:37 EDT 2010, aku...@mail.nanosouffle.net wrote:
> Is there any work going on to drive
> the Intel 82567LM ethernet cards
> from Plan 9?
as far as i know the 82567lm does work.
while i don't have the hardware (i haven't
had more than half of the chips reported
supported), i didn
I think 9pxeload.
The computer went on about its PXE boot
procedure, and got 9pxeload, which tried
to find the kernel from the CPU, but since
there is no support for this ethernet card,
the process failed there and returned to me
the "boot from:" prompt.
ak
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 1:24 PM, Irua
>but c89 rules do seem a bit more sensible to me as they avoid surprises
have you read the rules?
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Akshat Kumar
wrote:
> Is there any work going on to drive
> the Intel 82567LM ethernet cards
> from Plan 9?
>
> I was trying to PXE boot my Thinkpad
> X200s laptop, when Plan 9 aborted,
> as there are no drivers for this card, so
> it couldn't pull the kernel, post
Is there any work going on to drive
the Intel 82567LM ethernet cards
from Plan 9?
I was trying to PXE boot my Thinkpad
X200s laptop, when Plan 9 aborted,
as there are no drivers for this card, so
it couldn't pull the kernel, post 9pxeload.
Thanks,
ak
On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 18:34:56 EDT erik quanstrom
wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Bakul Shah wro
> te:
> >
> > >
> > > If so, I consider it a bug; particularly as there is no
> > > overflow involved anywhere.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > r1 2147482110 r2 -1537
>
> on arm the difference is i
16 matches
Mail list logo
