On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 08:59:30 +0200
Jens Staal wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> From yesterday upstream mksh (cvs and future R48 and onwards) builds
> out of the box on Plan9 simply by:
>
> ape/psh
> ./Build.sh
>
> One issue remains and that is that the shell will get "stuck" after
> executing an externa
> SIGCHLD is not defined for plan 9, except in ape. that's what i
> would call ape-specific.
This is degenerating into politics (or religion, same thing) quite
unnecessarily.
In my opinion, Go is a "better" APE (I'm convinced that Rob agrees
with me :-). The way I see it and the reason I like G
On Sat Jul 27 18:41:08 EDT 2013, ara...@mgk.ro wrote:
> > SIGCHLD is not defined for plan 9, except in ape. that's what i
> > would call ape-specific.
>
> You're intentionally missing the point.
i don't think so. ape must solve the sigchld problem since that
is a posix interface, and ape's rais
> SIGCHLD is not defined for plan 9, except in ape. that's what i
> would call ape-specific.
You're intentionally missing the point.
--
Aram Hăvărneanu
> it's an ape-specific question because the go maintainers chose to route
> around the problem. his point was that mksh is not the only program
> that has run into SIGCHLD. his point had nothing to do with whether go
> uses ape, which is a question nobody has ever asked.
SIGCHLD is not defined f
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 11:23:03AM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
> On Sat Jul 27 11:12:59 EDT 2013, ara...@mgk.ro wrote:
> > > go does not use ape.
> >
> > That is irrelevant to what he said.
>
> the question at hand was the emulation of SIGCLD,
> which on plan 9 is an ape-specific question.
>
i
On Sat Jul 27 11:12:59 EDT 2013, ara...@mgk.ro wrote:
> > go does not use ape.
>
> That is irrelevant to what he said.
the question at hand was the emulation of SIGCLD,
which on plan 9 is an ape-specific question.
go can't have it both ways. either it needs to have a
solution that doesn't rely
> go does not use ape.
That is irrelevant to what he said.
--
Aram Hăvărneanu
> Would it be interesting to know how the other mksh ports (I think
> Syllable and Win32) implemented SIGCHLD emulation? I also saw after
> some googling that some tests in Go had to be ignored due to SIGCHLD
> issues on Plan9, so I guess there are more use-cases than this one.
> Unfortunately I kn
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:01:16 -0400
erik quanstrom wrote:
> On Fri Jul 26 12:30:20 EDT 2013, cinap_len...@gmx.de wrote:
> > plan9 kernel doesnt send notes on process exit to the parent. i do
> > not see any trivial way to emulate SIGCHLD as ape might spawn also
> > native processes so we cannot ju
On Fri Jul 26 12:30:20 EDT 2013, cinap_len...@gmx.de wrote:
> plan9 kernel doesnt send notes on process exit to the parent. i do
> not see any trivial way to emulate SIGCHLD as ape might spawn also
> native processes so we cannot just add code to ape to emit the signal
> on exit.
>
> we might hand
plan9 kernel doesnt send notes on process exit to the parent. i do
not see any trivial way to emulate SIGCHLD as ape might spawn also
native processes so we cannot just add code to ape to emit the signal
on exit.
we might handle wait records in a separate process tho using the devproc's
wait file
Dear all,
From yesterday upstream mksh (cvs and future R48 and onwards) builds out
of the box on Plan9 simply by:
ape/psh
./Build.sh
One issue remains and that is that the shell will get "stuck" after
executing an external command. To build a working shell, there is a
temporary work-around by is
13 matches
Mail list logo
