Hi all
I was wondering what are the differences between the upas p9p in contrib?
I would like to setup my gmail account through p9p. I read a few email
back that upas in p9p was "buggered" is it ok now?
Without my cpu server I am forced to use my linux laptop for some of my
work. I am trying t
> I have fixed the sync livelock bug that anothy and others reported.
I too had the "hangs at conf..." problem but it seemed to go
away when I disabled a cpu.
The latest change to venti has solved my problems and I
am back on two cpus.
Thanks,
-Steve
That was the idea. Jochen Liedtke suggested that ukernels should not
be portable, just their interface. His ukernel was hand tuned for a particular
hw/compiler, afaik.
On 10/7/07, David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On 10/7/07, ron minnich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 10/7/07, Dav
On 10/7/07, ron minnich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/7/07, David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > It's "open sourced" now, as of a few weeks ago.
> >
> > Ever looked at the L4 family of microkernels?
> >
> yep, I could never get them to build on red hat. My mistake, using red
> hat
On 10/7/07, Andrew Wingorodov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 10/6/07, Charles Forsyth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> qnx is probably the most reasonable so-called microkernel
> >> i've seen described
> >> (but i haven't seen their code).
> >
> > It'
L4 != Linux (although there is L4Linux)
On 10/7/07, Andrew Wingorodov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 10/6/07, Charles Forsyth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> qnx is probably the most reasonable so-called microkernel
> >> i've seen described
> >> (b
David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/6/07, Charles Forsyth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> qnx is probably the most reasonable so-called microkernel
>> i've seen described
>> (but i haven't seen their code).
>
> It's "open sourced" now, as of a few weeks ago.
its was realy great news o
>> It's "open sourced" now, as of a few weeks ago.
>>
>> Ever looked at the L4 family of microkernels?
>>
> yep, I could never get them to build on red hat. My mistake, using red
> hat, but ... long story.
after looking at the code, i didn't try to compile it.
the version i looked at was c++ and s
freq is a ken original, an old program that sat in his personal bin
for a long time.
i don't remember what caused it to become public.
the -r option was a late addition.
it's an odd tool in the old unix tradition. its output is rarely the
final answer
but somehow encodes what you're looking for:
TUD:OS is pretty neat. I'd like to take Nemesis out for a spin as well, but
I've not the time now.
On 10/7/07, David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/6/07, Charles Forsyth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > you mean, the all 9 subsystems works through 9P and filesystems,
> > > that safe
On 10/7/07, David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's "open sourced" now, as of a few weeks ago.
>
> Ever looked at the L4 family of microkernels?
>
yep, I could never get them to build on red hat. My mistake, using red
hat, but ... long story.
ron
On 10/6/07, Charles Forsyth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > you mean, the all 9 subsystems works through 9P and filesystems,
> > that safe for kernel?
>
> the kernel doesn't actually implement all that much, and most complex things
> are outside the kernel. the biggest exceptions are networking
> a
12 matches
Mail list logo
