http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lack_of_aesthetical_refinement
Bruce Ellis and Noah Evans, please populate the above stub.
By the way, Bruce Ellis, do never ever recommend medication to anyone _even
in jest_ without providing a visible
http://www.apa.org/journals/features/psp7761121.pdf
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 8:53 AM, Eris Discordia [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lack_of_aesthetical_refinement
Bruce Ellis and Noah Evans, please populate the above
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Bruce Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...] poor old Mr Peter Enis [...]
Wow, this is really sad, but I *just* got that.
- Dan C.
I think ericvh has a P.Enis, I know I do.
Actually maybe it was Ennis (that one's at home), but it's funny enough.
brucee
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:37 AM, Dan Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Bruce Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...] poor old Mr Peter Enis
Sharp, Noah. Shame you and all the 9fans had to get back to real work.
I'm trying to avoid it but I have to face reality (again) one day.
I'm actually starting to really appreciate Football (Soccer). Though
it seems inevitable if you like bars here.
I can't but think of poor old Mr Peter Enis
Little troll, thy baiting f'r fray--
My thoughtless passage has flushed away
Am not _I_ a troll like thee,
Or art not _thou_ a Goddess like me?
Practice your technique, little troll, while you have time to do mischief
under the Goddess' nose!
--On Friday, November 07, 2008 6:07 PM -0800
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 9:21 AM, Eris Discordia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Little troll, thy baiting f'r fray--
My thoughtless passage has flushed away
Am not _I_ a troll like thee,
Or art not _thou_ a Goddess like me?
Practice your
Noah is dangerously wise. Have you got rid of the smell of mackerel
yet? Seriously Eris, you need a good hobby.
And if I was your physician I would recommend medication. A SSRI or
maybe a simple Benzo. Maybe twice a day, or when required.
brucee
On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 11:37 PM, Noah Evans
I know one thing: every major operating system I have ever heard of
leverages shared libraries. Can all those people be wrong? I don't think so.
Eight billion Windows users can't be wrong. (Can they?)
Wow what a lively thread. Lots of good information (thanks Ron, Rob et
al) and behavioural commentary (thanks Skip) but it seems to be of no
avail.
As I'm the only one awake in Volos at 10:30am and I have 40 cafes with
WiFi to myself I'll waste bandwidth and tell a little story with no
stated
grep whining /sys/games/lib/fortunes
Why do I have to send this mail every year or so? And who is this Eris dick?
brucee
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 5:59 PM, ron minnich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 7:06 AM, Eris Discordia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Attempts to live boot Plan 9
And what is a 9whacko? I didn't see any at IWP9 but I didn't have a mirror.
brucee
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Lyndon Nerenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And who is this Eris dick?
Just a simple first year regexp assignment.
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Eris Discordia
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Man's got to know his limitations.
Yes, _man_ has got to. That doesn't apply to deities :-P
Why do gods that walk the earth invariably act like spoilt brats? Ah,
hang on ...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~/clms]# ls -l `which vim`
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 1221212 Oct 15 2006 /usr/local/bin/vim
C:\Program Files (x86)\Vim\vim71dir gvim.exe
Volume in drive C has no label.
Volume Serial Number is
Why do gods that walk the earth invariably act like spoilt brats? Ah,
hang on ...
Prolly because a god is only a human's conceited ego. Oh, wait...
--On Wednesday, November 05, 2008 10:55 AM + Robert Raschke
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Eris Discordia
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 4:34 PM, Abhishek Kulkarni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
term% cat pipeto.eris
/bin/upas/filter -h $1 $2 'From: Eris Discordia' /dev/null
personally, i think eris makes a lot of reasonable points.
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 2:57 AM, Eris Discordia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~/clms]# ls -l `which vim`
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 1221212 Oct 15 2006 /usr/local/bin/vim
C:\Program Files
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 10:15 AM, ron minnich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 2:57 AM, Eris Discordia [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~/clms]# ls -l `which vim`
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 1221212 Oct 15 2006 /usr/local/bin/vim
don't forgot that plan 9 binaries are fully linked while most other
systems pull in more code through dynamic linking when the binary is
executed.
-rob
yes, I agree, I was being terribly unfair to plan 9. Acme on plan 9 is
about 1/2 M. Vim on DOS is 3x larger? impressive.
My intent was, of course, to show your comparison is baseless. It seems you
still haven't realized that. You think Plan 9 is great? Sure you know a lot
more about it than I
Eris, did you just post the following to slashdot? s/OpenBSD/Plan
9/;s/Theo/9whacko/ and we've got your entire posting history on this
mailing list. the similarity is uncanny.
Yeah. I'd really like to like OpenBSD. Technically, it's superb. It's
smooth, polished, well documented --- it's got a
less is more.
-rob
less is more.
If you say so, sir, it must be true. Is it also true that the less I
understand of your comment the more meaningful it becomes?
--On Wednesday, November 05, 2008 1:12 PM -0800 Rob Pike
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
less is more.
-rob
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Eris Discordia
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
yes, I agree, I was being terribly unfair to plan 9. Acme on plan 9 is
about 1/2 M. Vim on DOS is 3x larger? impressive.
My intent was, of course, to show your comparison is baseless. It seems you
still haven't realized
Is it also true that the less I
understand
it's as if Choate's twin has come to visit.
less is more.
If you say so, sir, it must be true. Is it also true that the less I
understand of your comment the more meaningful it becomes?
Judging by your posts, the less you know, the more meaningful you
consider your opinion, so I'd agree with you here.
John
Sadly, the picture changes at run time: clock on plan 9 is 128k in
memory, xclock is 4.2M RSS and 10M VSZ.
Sic transit gloria .so. Of course, then we hear that well, all that
is shared. Hmm. Prove it.
I know one thing: shared libraries are employed on every major operating
system I have ever
Sadly, the picture changes at run time: clock on plan 9 is 128k in
memory, xclock is 4.2M RSS and 10M VSZ.
Sic transit gloria .so. Of course, then we hear that well, all that
is shared. Hmm. Prove it.
I know one thing: every major operating system I have ever heard of
leverages shared
Please forgive the repeated messages. It didn't appear in my mail client's
Sent view after I hit send. Thought it might have been lost so I re-wrote
it.
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 5:53 PM, Eris Discordia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please forgive the repeated messages. It didn't appear in my mail client's
Sent view after I hit send. Thought it might have been lost so I re-wrote
it.
i expect you to start littering the web forums and mailing lists
When Sun reported on their first implementation of shared libraries,
the paper they presented (I think it was at Usenix) concluded that
shared libraries made things bigger and slower, that they were a net
loss, and in fact that they didn't save much disk space either. The
test case was Xlib, the
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Eris Discordia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know one thing: every major operating system I have ever heard of
leverages shared libraries. Can all those people be wrong? I don't think so.
I know one thing. Every major operating system in the late 1960s
knew that
I know one thing. Every major operating system in the late 1960s
knew that card image files were the way to go. Could all those
people be wrong?
Yes.
Sorry, but everyone does it just doesn't hack it.
it's the chewbacca proof.
- erik
File size can be less than memory size when you have data reserved but not
initialized. That happens in many cases, e.g. when you reserve a buffer.
One benefit to declaring data in the bss section is that the data is not
included in the executable program. When data is defined in the data
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 6:48 PM, Eris Discordia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know one thing: every major operating system I have ever heard of
leverages shared libraries. Can all those people be wrong? I don't think so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
On Nov 5, 2008, at 2:13 PM, ron minnich wrote:
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Eris Discordia
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
yes, I agree, I was being terribly unfair to plan 9. Acme on plan
9 is
about 1/2 M. Vim on DOS is 3x larger? impressive.
My intent was, of course, to show your comparison
Eris Discordia wrote:
I know one thing
I doubt that.
Thanks for the information.
--On Wednesday, November 05, 2008 5:23 PM -0800 Rob Pike
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When Sun reported on their first implementation of shared libraries,
the paper they presented (I think it was at Usenix) concluded that
shared libraries made things bigger and
Sorry, but everyone does it just doesn't hack it.
also, everyone does it is an excuse that no one over the age 7
should use. imitating blindly -- a.k.a monkey-see-monkey-do
(apologies to monkeys) -- seems to happen when we are unaware,
undisciplined, lazy or panicked. it is how stampedes
Sorry, but everyone does it just doesn't hack it.
Common-sensically it does, but if you say it doesn't I concede.
not what I asked.
It seems to answer your question by implying there's no question regarding
the use or disuse of shared libraries only regarding the strategy (and that
back
time travel plots reminds me of an obscure but splendid czech film that i've
only seen once
http://filmjournal.net/czech/2006/09/18/tomorrow-ill-wake-up-and-scald-myself-with-tea/
but have yet to find on DVD. it is very funny.
I can run Plan 9 quite nicely in 128 MB of RAM. In the same amount of
memory FreeBSD is paging nightmare, despite it's wonderfully complex
shared library environment.
You're wrong. Case in point: my FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE installation on a 233
MHz PII (one of those Slot 1 processors) with 128 MB
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 11:15 PM, Andrew Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't want to imply that Ron is quite such an old fart as me, but
somehow I don't get the impression that he was a kid in 1981, when
Time Bandits came out. Ron, if you could give some clue as to when
you saw the movie,
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 7:06 AM, Eris Discordia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Attempts to live boot Plan 9 on the same machine fail because
some 9wacko believes CD-ROM drives must be secondary master or
something--and I won't move a jumper to suit a 9wacko's whim; not that I've
ever been asked to
On Nov 4, 2008, at 9:02 AM, ron minnich wrote:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 11:15 PM, Andrew Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I don't want to imply that Ron is quite such an old fart as me, but
somehow I don't get the impression that he was a kid in 1981, when
Time Bandits came out. Ron, if you
On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 20:15:04 +1300 Andrew Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't want to imply that Ron is quite such an old fart as me, but
somehow I don't get the impression that he was a kid in 1981, when
Time Bandits came out. Ron, if you could give some clue as to when
you saw the
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 8:43 PM, Enrico Weigelt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* ron minnich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wish I could remember. It had the usual guys in silvery suits. They
walk through a frame and are back in time. Key point was, at the end,
that they ended up escaping but for
On Nov 3, 2008, at 5:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A thought ...
Shared libraries do 2 possibly useful things:
1) save space
2) stop you having to re-link when a new library is released.
Now 2) doesn't really happen anyway, due to .so versioning hell,
so we're left with 1) ...
I know it's
A standalone statically linked binary is going to be considerable larger
while
in flight over data links.
But that static binary only flies once, geting sucked into memory
with a (mostly) simple bcopy equiv at process launch time. Shared
memory regimes thrash the living daylights out of MMUs
A thought ...
Shared libraries do 2 possibly useful things:
1) save space
2) stop you having to re-link when a new library is released.
Now 2) doesn't really happen anyway, due to .so versioning hell,
so we're left with 1) ...
I know it's kind-of hacky and unstructured (how do you know the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A thought ...
Shared libraries do 2 possibly useful things:
1) save space
2) stop you having to re-link when a new library is released.
Now 2) doesn't really happen anyway, due to .so versioning hell,
so we're left with 1) ...
I know it's kind-of hacky and
A thought ...
Shared libraries do 2 possibly useful things:
1) save space
2) stop you having to re-link when a new library is released.
Now 2) doesn't really happen anyway, due to .so versioning hell,
so we're left with 1) ...
I can run Plan 9 quite nicely in 128 MB of RAM. In the same amount
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 07:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A thought ...
Shared libraries do 2 possibly useful things:
1) save space
2) stop you having to re-link when a new library is released.
i can see how relinks are painful with gnu-style build systems where
you need to run ./configure and
* ron minnich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wish I could remember. It had the usual guys in silvery suits. They
walk through a frame and are back in time. Key point was, at the end,
that they ended up escaping but for reasons unknown, walking back
through the frame -- bad idea.
Time bandits ?
I don't want to imply that Ron is quite such an old fart as me, but
somehow I don't get the impression that he was a kid in 1981, when
Time Bandits came out. Ron, if you could give some clue as to when
you saw the movie, I'm pretty sure that the group could mount a
co-ordinated effort to identify
* Roman V. Shaposhnik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 17:29 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Convenience is one point (sometimes be a big point), but another
important one is sharing. Without mmap(), an (real) shared library
support most likely will require special kernel
* Roman V. Shaposhnik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 17:29 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Convenience is one point (sometimes be a big point), but another
important one is sharing. Without mmap(), an (real) shared library
support most likely will require special kernel
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 5:50 PM, erik quanstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Roman V. Shaposhnik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 17:29 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Convenience is one point (sometimes be a big point), but another
important one is sharing. Without mmap(), an
* erik quanstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Roman V. Shaposhnik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 17:29 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Convenience is one point (sometimes be a big point), but another
important one is sharing. Without mmap(), an (real) shared library
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 8:18 PM, Enrico Weigelt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But now I'm curious how executables and shared libraries are
actually handled on plan9.
what's a shared library?
Executables:
/sys/src/9/
Check it out, it's short and sweet.
ron
I still remember this science fiction movie from when I was a kid.
which one was that? it sounds more interesting than mmap.
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 11:29 PM, Charles Forsyth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I still remember this science fiction movie from when I was a kid.
which one was that? it sounds more interesting than mmap.
I wish I could remember. It had the usual guys in silvery suits. They
walk through a frame and
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 6:22 AM, Richard Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
has hardware channels. And you can
call from channel
and execute code being sent down a channel to you from another cpu.
...
it's a very interesting architecture, to say the least. For me anyway
the most novel thing I've
Ambric is
pretty well aware of what the transputer did.
Glad to hear it - there were some good ideas behind the transputer which
are worth recycling. From your description it sounds like the ambric has
some interesting new refinements as well.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 18:36, Roman V. Shaposhnik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As Russ, quite rightfully, pointed out: mmap() means different things
to different people. The tragic part is, that it tries to do lots of
things but it doesn't do anything particularly well. Personally, my
experience
here is a thought:
the kernel does mmap for code/data. This is because we think of a file
as a segment of data that somehow maps well to a segment of memory.
You wouldn't execute code from a stream, now, would you?
Well, this: http://www.ambric.com/
has hardware channels. And you can
call from
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 5:32 PM, ron minnich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
here is a thought:
the kernel does mmap for code/data. This is because we think of a file
as a segment of data that somehow maps well to a segment of memory.
You wouldn't execute code from a stream, now, would you?
* Venkatesh Srinivas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... redirecting back to 9fans ;-P
As far as interfaces go, mmap() is pretty tragic - the underlying
translation structures can express more interesting things, some of
which are even worth doing.
Well, the biggest problem, IMHO are the
On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 17:29 +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Convenience is one point (sometimes be a big point), but another
important one is sharing. Without mmap(), an (real) shared library
support most likely will require special kernel support.
What aspect of shared libraries are you aching
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Enrico Weigelt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Convenience is one point (sometimes be a big point), but another
important one is sharing. Without mmap(), an (real) shared library
support most likely will require special kernel support.
Actually, almost any kernel
On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 12:28 -0400, Venkatesh Srinivas wrote:
As far as interfaces go, mmap() is pretty tragic - the underlying
translation structures can express more interesting things, some of
which are even worth doing.
I can't agree more. The way I look at it is that mmap() seems to
be the
Roman V. Shaposhnik wrote:
Personally, my
experience of trying to use mmap() as a useful abstraction for the
CPU's MMU was the last straw. It can't do even that reliably
and in a portable fashion. Not to digress, but I was even more surprised
to learn that there's not a single API on UNIX that
Joel C. Salomon wrote:
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Enrico Weigelt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Convenience is one point (sometimes be a big point), but another
important one is sharing. Without mmap(), an (real) shared library
support most likely will require special kernel support.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Joel C. Salomon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I forget who said it,
Found it in http://9fans.net/archive/2002/08/130:
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002 07:43:45 -0400, David Gordon Hogan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On freebsd and Linux, exec happens via an mmap (more or less).
* Russ Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
big_snip /
I don't know much of native plan9 (only using plan9port), but IMHO
an full mmap() is a really nice thing. It can make a lot things
easier if you just map the whole file into the process' memory and
let the kernel handle the actual IO.
Some
It can make a lot things
easier if you just map the whole file into the process' memory and
let the kernel handle the actual IO.
the word superficially should be in there somewhere.
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 12:52:14 +0400, Enrico Weigelt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi!
an full mmap() is a really nice thing. It can make a lot things
easier if you just map the whole file into the process' memory and
let the kernel handle the actual IO.
Yes, it is comfortable. But just think a
Yes, it is comfortable.
where's jim when you need him?
But just think a bit - what will you do in the
mmap implementation when you had mapped a remote file (in Plan9 you can't
be sure some file is local or it is really just a file), and the
connection has just been broken? Surprise!
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 8:19 AM, erik quanstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you can't make the assumption that a file is local in *ix, either.
in fact, for the last 20 years, every program run on a sunos/solaris
machine has used mmap for the exec.
ron
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 8:04 AM, Alexander Sychev [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 12:52:14 +0400, Enrico Weigelt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi!
an full mmap() is a really nice thing. It can make a lot things
easier if you just map the whole file into the process' memory and
let
ron minnich wrote:
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 8:19 AM, erik quanstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you can't make the assumption that a file is local in *ix, either.
in fact, for the last 20 years, every program run on a sunos/solaris
machine has used mmap for the exec.
mmap() is
As far as interfaces go, mmap() is pretty tragic - the underlying
translation structures can express more interesting things, some of
which are even worth doing.
There have even been OSes that let userland apps play with their address
spaces in far more interesting ways - KeyKOS and EROS come to
As far as interfaces go, mmap() is pretty tragic - the underlying
translation structures can express more interesting things, some of
which are even worth doing.
There have even been OSes that let userland apps play with their address
spaces in far more interesting ways
i think that's
i think that's right, and that's the interesting case to investigate
provided, of course, that you're interested in the applications that might use
it.
otherwise it will just complicate things to no good effect.
Mmap means many things to many people.
Using mmap is most often not a matter of
performance as much as it is a matter of
flexibility: being able to mmap files is about
as close as most operating systems get to
exposing the underlying page table hardware,
which lets applications that aren't
in a traditional full-featured mmap
i've noticed that some combinations of words
are scarier than others.
☺
- erik
86 matches
Mail list logo
