As far as I know, the reason for drivers being different in fs and cpu
kernels is divergent, or at least independent, evolution. The fs
kernel started as an old cpu kernel. My impression is that Ken wanted
to keep fs kernel changes to a minimum to maximise stability of the
file servers.
The majo
subscribe
2006/3/1, Ronald G Minnich :
> Brantley Coile wrote:
> >>now means
> >>
> >> { int i; for(i=0; i<10; i++); }
> >
> >
> > Does that mean the following will compile?
> >
> > void
> > f(void)
> > {
> > i = 3;
> > put(i);
> > for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++)
> > put(i);
On Wed, 1 Mar 2006, David Leimbach wrote:
:On 3/1/06, Skip Tavakkolian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> >> when it was added to C++, i "felt" that the scope
:> >> of 'i' wasn't natural; it goes beyond 'for's closure.
:> >> i like a behavior like this:
:> >>
:> >> { int i; for (i = 0, ...) ...;
On 3/1/06, Skip Tavakkolian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> when it was added to C++, i "felt" that the scope
> >> of 'i' wasn't natural; it goes beyond 'for's closure.
> >> i like a behavior like this:
> >>
> >> { int i; for (i = 0, ...) ...; }
> >
> > so did the c++ standards committee and t
the great thing about standards is there are so many to ignore.
- erik
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
|
| > Paul Lalonde wrote:
| >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
| >> Hash: SHA1
| >>
| >> You absolutely need 8k URLS - then you can encode your data, stick it
| >> in the URL, and pass it to ti
> (but the hwcursor doesn't work so I have
> make it die before vga mode and use aux/vga -c
New kernels on sources. Will fix your problem.
Russ
On Wed, 1 Mar 2006 18:45:47 -0500
"Russ Cox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What kind of video card do you have?
> What does the kernel panic say (panic: ___)?
>
> Russ
bad address : px 0xf0171941 addr 0xe8fe0
my vga card is an Nvidia GeForce4 Ti 4600
did you get that it boots happily into vga m
on a second thought, i didn't get a panic, so most likely i'm wrong
and i lose the bet.
On 3/1/06, andrey mirtchovski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i had that same problem with a CD burnt in November. that cd had
> /dev/realtime compiled only on the cd boot kernel but not the 9pcf
> kernel that was
i had that same problem with a CD burnt in November. that cd had
/dev/realtime compiled only on the cd boot kernel but not the 9pcf
kernel that was installed on 9fat.
recent CD's from february don't have this problem.
take the monitor and vga definitions off plan9.ini and recompile the
kernel, i
What kind of video card do you have?
What does the kernel panic say (panic: ___)?
Russ
Hi,
I downlaoed the CD the other day
It will work happily if I boot from the CD (except I can't work out how to make
it invoke aux/vga with -c)
But after installation I get a kernel panic when switching into VGA mode
I've no investigated copying the kernel from the CD to the installation in te
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There isn't a "Tensure-all-bits-are-stable", right?
from stat(5):
As a special case, if all the elements of the directory entry in a
Twstat message are ``don't touch'' values, the server may interpret it
as a request to guarantee that the conten
> There isn't a "Tensure-all-bits-are-stable", right?
from stat(5):
As a special case, if all the elements of the directory entry in a
Twstat message are ``don't touch'' values, the server may interpret it
as a request to guarantee that the contents of the associated file a
Ok, another suggestion for the "9P Dubious Protocol Enhancement Committee":
> Tclunk can't fail (and close(2) doesn't return -1 on real fds).
I agree that it doesn't make sense for Tclunk to fail in the
"no, you must continue making I/O requests against this object"
sense.
But any time there's a
On 3/1/06, Russ Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > thx, but I can't even get passed that stage.
> > When I enter this, nothing happens, it's as if it didn't see my sdC0
> > drive. Actually just before this prompt is:
> > Boot devices: fd0
> > and that's all. Shouldn't sdC0 be listed here too?
>
> T
> thx, but I can't even get passed that stage.
> When I enter this, nothing happens, it's as if it didn't see my sdC0
> drive. Actually just before this prompt is:
> Boot devices: fd0
> and that's all. Shouldn't sdC0 be listed here too?
Try copying /386/9pcf.gz from the CD image onto
the floppy an
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 01:11:25PM -0500, Russ Cox wrote:
> > Now my problem is that just after the bios stage, I just get some
> > random colored caracters all around the screen and it just hangs there.
> >
> > Can anyone help with that?
>
> Somehow your BIOS doesn't want to boot from the hard d
> Paul Lalonde wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> You absolutely need 8k URLS - then you can encode your data, stick it
>> in the URL, and pass it to tinyURL.com for remote storage.
>
> you know, I can't tell if you're joking. Thats' how bad it's gotten on
> the n
> I can't think of a single good thing about using Tclunk to drive the ctl
> state machine.
i can. it's the simplest way of doing things, works smoothly with
existing stuff (e.g. echo blah > ctl), and would be just fine if the
control request is never likely to fail, and performance isn't an
is
Brantley Coile wrote:
now means
{ int i; for(i=0; i<10; i++); }
Does that mean the following will compile?
void
f(void)
{
i = 3;
put(i);
for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++)
put(i);
if (i == 4) put(4);
}
cat > t.c
void
f(void)
{
i =
Ronald G Minnich wrote:
Paul Lalonde wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
You absolutely need 8k URLS - then you can encode your data, stick it
in the URL, and pass it to tinyURL.com for remote storage.
you know, I can't tell if you're joking. Thats' how bad it's gotten on
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW, the "perform action on clunk" choice has another potential
problem (besides lack of diagnostic feedback)
I can't think of a single good thing about using Tclunk to drive the ctl
state machine. Let's give that idea an indecent burial.
ron
Paul Lalonde wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
You absolutely need 8k URLS - then you can encode your data, stick it
in the URL, and pass it to tinyURL.com for remote storage.
you know, I can't tell if you're joking. Thats' how bad it's gotten on
the net :)
ron
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 06:21:00PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>> Maybe the bottom of clunk(5) should clarify that close() only
>> generates a Tclunk when it's the last reference to the fd is closed?
>
> Why should clunk(5) describe how an object defined outside of 9P protocol
> use Tclunk?
>
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 06:21:00PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Maybe the bottom of clunk(5) should clarify that close() only
> generates a Tclunk when it's the last reference to the fd is closed?
Why should clunk(5) describe how an object defined outside of 9P protocol
use Tclunk?
Lu
The C Rationale (6.8.5.3) says:
int i = 42;
for (int i = 5, j = 15; i < 10; i++, j--)
printf("Loop %d %d\n",, i, j);
printf("I = %d\n", i); // there is no j in scope
will output
Loop 5 15
Loop 6 14
Loop 7 13
Loop 8 12
> Does that mean the following will compile?
>
> 1 void
> 2 f(void)
> 3 {
> 4 i = 3;
> 5 put(i);
> 6 for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++)
> 7 put(i);
> 8 if (i == 4) put(4);
> 9 }
No, because i is undeclared at line 4.
It'
>> when it was added to C++, i "felt" that the scope
>> of 'i' wasn't natural; it goes beyond 'for's closure.
>> i like a behavior like this:
>>
>> { int i; for (i = 0, ...) ...; }
>
> so did the c++ standards committee and the c99 committee.
> both have declared that
>
> for (int i =
> now means
>
> { int i; for(i=0; i<10; i++); }
Does that mean the following will compile?
void
f(void)
{
i = 3;
put(i);
for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++)
put(i);
if (i == 4) put(4);
}
On 3/1/06, Skip Tavakkolian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> when it was added to C++, i "felt" that the scope
> of 'i' wasn't natural; it goes beyond 'for's closure.
> i like a behavior like this:
>
> { int i; for (i = 0, ...) ...; }
This (the way you like it) is the way it was eventually sta
> when it was added to C++, i "felt" that the scope
> of 'i' wasn't natural; it goes beyond 'for's closure.
> i like a behavior like this:
>
> { int i; for (i = 0, ...) ...; }
so did the c++ standards committee and the c99 committee.
both have declared that
for (int i = 0; i < 10;
> when it was added to C++, i "felt" that the scope
> of 'i' wasn't natural; it goes beyond 'for's closure.
> i like a behavior like this:
>
> { int i; for (i = 0, ...) ...; }
when i first started to use Limbo, which has a similar looking
idiom, i thought the same.
for(i := 0; i <
> when it was added to C++, i "felt" that the scope
> of 'i' wasn't natural; it goes beyond 'for's closure.
> i like a behavior like this:
I think the scope shouldn't extend past the first semicolon. :)
/* Boyd Roberts Memorial Obnoxious Comment Society member */
> Now my problem is that just after the bios stage, I just get some
> random colored caracters all around the screen and it just hangs there.
>
> Can anyone help with that?
Somehow your BIOS doesn't want to boot from the hard drive.
One alternative is to download the boot floppy image and boot it
when it was added to C++, i "felt" that the scope
of 'i' wasn't natural; it goes beyond 'for's closure.
i like a behavior like this:
{ int i; for (i = 0, ...) ...; }
> Here's a request for my favorite C feature from C99, which isn't yet in
> Plan 9 C. I'd really like it if one could writ
> If you're worried about conflicting writes from different writers, maybe
> you can set the '1' attribute and then only one person gets to open it
> and write to it?
it doesn't matter as long as every writer opens the file independently.
(the server then buffers on a per-fid basis).
BTW, the "
> The options people are saying are: wait for Tclunk or do special
> write request like wikifs, or have a buffer that is managed with that
> ctl.
>
> and what i ask about is how the people handle this :)
>
> Reading the responses i think i will try first buffering and parsing
> when Tclunk.
woul
Here's a request for my favorite C feature from C99, which isn't yet in
Plan 9 C. I'd really like it if one could write statements of the form,
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++);
or
for (char *p = s; *p != '\0'; p++);
That is, declare variables in the first part of a for loop. That
Hi all,
I had been hearing about plan9 for a few months now (from the wmi
people) and I finally got the occasion to install it since I've just got
my hands on a few pieces of old hardware.
I booted with the iso and the whole installation went fine (except that
the distcopy stage took more than an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
You absolutely need 8k URLS - then you can encode your data, stick it
in the URL, and pass it to tinyURL.com for remote storage.
:-)
On 1-Mar-06, at 9:29 AM, Russ Cox wrote:
iounit also can be quite small, webfs for example is broken for even
> iounit also can be quite small, webfs for example is broken for even
> slightly long URLs because it assumes they fit in a single Twrite, and
> quite often they don't.
You have 8k URLs? Quite often? No wonder you're always so angry.
Russ
Gabriel Diaz wrote:
Hello
Using "normal" files is quite easy to do like ramfs does,
but if you write commands to a file that should be parsed,
you should choose when will your parser run, just
in the fswrite call? if you receive multiple writes, may be
you end with a split command and your parse
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is wrong with gpsfs(8)?
damn, another thing I missed. I will look at it, sigh. I should RTFM more.
Although, I may want my gpsfs to produce s-expressions.
w.r.t. the Twrite issue, I missed that point max size point. Oops.
ron
Hello
Using "normal" files is quite easy to do like ramfs does,
but if you write commands to a file that should be parsed,
you should choose when will your parser run, just
in the fswrite call? if you receive multiple writes, may be
you end with a split command and your parser returning error.
Th
> you guys are all confusing me. AFAIK, if you have written a plan 9
> server, you have the standard Ye Olde Server Dispatche Functionne.
>
> Said function, when it gets a Req with an op type of Twrite, calls the
> appropriate server function, and replies.
That is not the issue, the issue is tha
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 03:29:58PM +0100, Gabriel Diaz wrote:
As far as I understood, you wait until Tclunk.
Wrong, the Tclunk is not warranteed to arrive any time soon.
Tclunk != close()
you guys are all confusing me. AFAIK, if you have written a plan 9
server,
> I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding this but,
> i need to write to a ctl file some commands,
> so to parse them correctly i need the complete
> command (commands file should be 10k or so, but
> may be more).
Each write message looks logically separate, even if they are
all coming from a single
On Wed Mar 1 10:57:01 EST 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>Wrong, the Tclunk is not warranteed to arrive any time soon.
> >>Tclunk != close()
>
> > In the end you are on the safe side when waiting for Tclunk.
>
> i think it's sad not to implement close [or equivalent] -> Tclunk in a timely
>
>>Wrong, the Tclunk is not warranteed to arrive any time soon.
>>Tclunk != close()
> In the end you are on the safe side when waiting for Tclunk.
i think it's sad not to implement close [or equivalent] -> Tclunk in a timely
way,
and indeed in an orderly manner (wrt the same client process),
at l
Hello
what i see now, is that i should not expect
an end. i will use a control structure to be
able to "edit" the file and allow the file
behave as a normal file.
the functionality i want is somethin like:
% echo command > ctl
% ls
commandfile
% cat ctl
command
% rm commandfile
% cat ctl
% touch
Riza Dindir wrote:
Hi All,
I was wondering if there is a grammar definition for
the
Plan9 C compiler (lex and yacc/flex and bison)? Any
documents for the compiler grammar, anywhere?
http://cm.bell-labs.com/sources/plan9/sys/src/cmd/cc/cc.y
/sys/src/cmd/cc/cc.y, cc.h, etc. No lex used.
/sys/doc/compiler.ps describes it.
--- Begin Message ---
Hi All,
I was wondering if there is a grammar definition for
the
Plan9 C compiler (lex and yacc/flex and bison)? Any
documents for the compiler grammar, anywhere?
rd
/sys/src/cmd/cc/cc.y (you might need the Plan 9 yacc)
the lexical analyser is hand written.
/sys/src/cmd/cc/lex.c
/sys/src/cmd/cc/mac.c (includes /sys/src/cmd/cc/macbody) for the built-in
preprocessor
in fact, lex.c includes the compiler main program and some other little
functions,
so the lex
Hi All,
I was wondering if there is a grammar definition for
the
Plan9 C compiler (lex and yacc/flex and bison)? Any
documents for the compiler grammar, anywhere?
rd
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection aroun
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 04:20:27PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 03:29:58PM +0100, Gabriel Diaz wrote:
> >> Twrite tag[2] fid[4] offset[8] count[4] data[count]
> >>
> >> Is there any special mark on those fields? what is
> >> the man page i am missing?
> >
> > As fa
Hello
i see now, forgot what i said as i posted
too early.
thanks
gabi
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 03:29:58PM +0100, Gabriel Diaz wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding this but,
>> i need to write to a ctl file some commands,
>> so to parse them correctly i need the complete
>> command (commands file should be 10k or so, but
>> may be more).
>>
>
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 03:29:58PM +0100, Gabriel Diaz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding this but,
> i need to write to a ctl file some commands,
> so to parse them correctly i need the complete
> command (commands file should be 10k or so, but
> may be more).
>
> How can I
> Hello,
>
> I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding this but,
> i need to write to a ctl file some commands,
> so to parse them correctly i need the complete
> command (commands file should be 10k or so, but
> may be more).
>
> How can I know when a write is finished to start
> parsing the commands
Hello,
I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding this but,
i need to write to a ctl file some commands,
so to parse them correctly i need the complete
command (commands file should be 10k or so, but
may be more).
How can I know when a write is finished to start
parsing the commands? (i mean, if occurs
I'm sure there is a good reason for this, but I was wondering what would
it take for the fs kernel and the standard kernel to shared the drivers source.
Also would be nice if Inferno and standard Plan 9 kernel drivers lived in a
single
source tree.
uriel
> I just put up a second file server for
I've just updated the fs igbe driver after verifying that the new one
works.
I discovered that the dp83820 driver didn't recognise the linksys
eg1032, which surprised me, and upon modifying the driver to recognise
the pci vid and did, the driver wedges the machine such that only a
front-panel rese
Right, both the cpu and fs drivers dig the mac address out of rom. I
haven't gone to the trouble yet in the boot driver.
> It doesn't need it with the current *boot* driver
> (/sys/src/boot/pc/ether838315.c)? Mine definitely needs it.
>
>
sorry, I was talking about /sys/src/9/pc/ether83815.c.
--
Federico G. Benavento
> hmmm, my SiS 900 rev 630s doesn't need ea= in plan9.ini with the
> current driver.
It doesn't need it with the current *boot* driver
(/sys/src/boot/pc/ether838315.c)? Mine definitely needs it.
> as a patch, and still require one to specify ea= in plan9.ini for SiS
> interfaces.)
>
hmmm, my SiS 900 rev 630s doesn't need ea= in plan9.ini with the current driver.
> There are more driver updates coming as I get the chance to verify
> that the new drivers work correctly.
great!
--
Federic
I just put up a second file server for testing. This one has a
built-in SiS ethernet and I was able to exercise it; it seems to be
fine with the current driver. (I did have to change the boot programs
to recognise the SiS interface, and those changes have been submitted
as a patch, and still requ
68 matches
Mail list logo
