Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

On 1/19/06, Eirik Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There is something to be said for microkernelsthey allow for a lot less headaches with kerneldevelopment, and it could drastically improve plan 9'sportability, a key feature.Disagree, to some extent.  Microkernels tie you down to a particular set

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

Eirik Johnson wrote: There is something to be said for microkernels they allow for a lot less headaches with kernel development, and it could drastically improve plan 9's portability, a key feature. it's not april fool's ron

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

there is nothing innovative about hurd, not even the fact that it doesn't work and has taken years to get so unstable. brucee On 1/19/06, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Eirik Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes > > | > | There is something to be said for microkernels > | they allow

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

Eirik Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes | | There is something to be said for microkernels | they allow for a lot less headaches with kernel | development, and it could drastically improve plan 9's | portability, a key feature. "microkernels" cover a broad range. mach is bigger than the plan 9

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

can i put this in m book? --- forsyth the way to get good portability is to have clear, well-designed interfaces that abstract away from hardware peculiarities, and map those to the hardware (rather than, say, reflecting in the interfaces the union of every peculiarity of all hardware known to you

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

> There is something to be said for microkernels > they allow for a lot less headaches with kernel > development, and it could drastically improve plan 9's > portability, a key feature. term% pwd /usr/forsyth/src/xen3/xen-unstable/xen/arch/x86 term% wc -l mm.c shadow32.c shadow_guest32.c 3519

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

There is something to be said for microkernels they allow for a lot less headaches with kernel development, and it could drastically improve plan 9's portability, a key feature. Also, the multi-server approach taken by the GNU/Hurd is innovative and well suited to SMP and distributed environments.

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

david, that's a useful web page but the issues come in with afterburner, but I'll keep trying. in spare time. ron

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

well said. is this better than a town hall meeting? yes. rev brucee On 1/19/06, alexandr babic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > programer's life could be easier and happier if he stays within plan9. > i think that i became reducionist thanx to plan9 :-) > > * no horrible graphic desktops (kde, gnom

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

On 1/18/06, Ronald G Minnich wrote: alexandr babic wrote:> i think 9fans should write plan9 native programs not trying other waste> to import.right, but I was not trying to do that.I'm trying to see- if I can get L4KA to build (fails) Never had a problem here... I even cross com

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

programer's life could be easier and happier if he stays within plan9. i think that i became reducionist thanx to plan9 :-) * no horrible graphic desktops (kde, gnome, windows) only pure and nice rio. * no giant graphic libraries (gtk, qt, motif) only libdraw AND LIFE IS SO EASY :-) alexandr B

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

beck wrote a song "gcc makes me wanta do crack" - well at least that what it is after i edited it. brucee On 1/19/06, Ronald G Minnich wrote: > alexandr babic wrote: > > i think 9fans should write plan9 native programs not trying other waste > > to import. > > right, but I was not trying to do t

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

alexandr babic wrote: i think 9fans should write plan9 native programs not trying other waste to import. right, but I was not trying to do that. I'm trying to see - if I can get L4KA to build (fails) - get L4KA to boot linux (predicated on previous step) - run Plan 9 as an L4KA guest (predicat

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

i think 9fans should write plan9 native programs not trying other waste to import. alexandr. Bruce Ellis píše v Čt 19. 01. 2006 v 00:45 +1100: > anyone who is serious trying anything starting with "g" with > kenc (apart from "grep") is barking up the wrong > mountain ave. > > brucee >

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

anyone who is serious trying anything starting with "g" with kenc (apart from "grep") is barking up the wrong mountain ave. brucee On 1/18/06, Eirik Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It does seem odd to use the GNU extensions there, > especially as L4Ka people can't be too cozy with FSF > peop

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

It does seem odd to use the GNU extensions there, especially as L4Ka people can't be too cozy with FSF people, the whole L4Ka::Pistachio is released under the BSD license. Quinn --- David Leimbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1/15/06, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > l4 depends

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

al is a wise man, so is charles. brucee On 1/17/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Al Aho was enamoured enough by this comment to > consider using it in his new edition of the 'dragon book': > >% grep 'holy cow' /sys/games/lib/fortunes >gcc is the holy cow of com

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

Al Aho was enamoured enough by this comment to consider using it in his new edition of the 'dragon book': % grep 'holy cow' /sys/games/lib/fortunes gcc is the holy cow of compilers, not the holy grail. - forsyth % --jim

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

Burn it! brucee On 1/17/06, Ronald G Minnich wrote: > David Leimbach wrote: > > > Using Pistachio as a hypervisor are we? Trying to afterburn? What > > are you going for. I've some experience with L4 and L4-linux. > > > > Pistachio seems to only work with a particular version of gcc too... >

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

David Leimbach wrote: Using Pistachio as a hypervisor are we? Trying to afterburn? What are you going for. I've some experience with L4 and L4-linux. Pistachio seems to only work with a particular version of gcc too... oh hell. yeah, I wanted to try to afterburn. ron

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

erik quanstrom wrote: l4 depends on all that gnu stuff? the afterburner stuff comes with a full binutils &tc. gcc 4.0 can not build the version of binutils that comes with afterburner. ron

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

clueless reckless network behaviour is how it is described on the network violation tickets. boydo and ranum would have issued one without hesitation. check the size of anything but get it right. brucee On 1/16/06, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > you gotta love it when you see: > >

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

you gotta love it when you see: checking sizeof(char) they built a unix compatability system. but didn't know when to stop. and it still doesn't work for many things on AIX. - erik Andy Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes | | Ronald G Minnich wrote: | > Andy Newman wrote: | > > But luckily the

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

you can fight all you like getting a g* something to work . have fun. i can find more absurd examples than ron's if i am willing to look at the zillions of lines of code. i agree with andy, but the thunderstorms are making my UPS's beep too much. brucee On 1/16/06, Andy Newman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

Ronald G Minnich wrote: > Andy Newman wrote: > > But luckily there's only one array parameter > >so the error is not that much of a challenge. > > > um. you have not waded through the GNU ifdef hell, I'm guessing. Oh yes. Fun stuff. I just love autoconf et al. Nightmare time. It's easier witho

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

On 1/15/06, erik quanstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > l4 depends on all that gnu stuff? > > it's hard to imagine something that bills itself as the ultimate > microkernel depending on the ultimate macro environment. > > - erik > Depends on the implementation... L4 Pistachio requires C++ and a pa

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

On 1/15/06, Ronald G Minnich wrote: > Andy Newman wrote: > > But luckily there's only one array parameter > > so the error is not that much of a challenge. > > > um. you have not waded through the GNU ifdef hell, I'm guessing. > > I have an even better one, in which a struct is forward declared,

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

l4 depends on all that gnu stuff? it's hard to imagine something that bills itself as the ultimate microkernel depending on the ultimate macro environment. - erik Ronald G Minnich writes | | Andy Newman wrote: | > But luckily there's only one array parameter | > so the error is not that much

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

Andy Newman wrote: But luckily there's only one array parameter so the error is not that much of a challenge. um. you have not waded through the GNU ifdef hell, I'm guessing. I have an even better one, in which a struct is forward declared, and included, and so on and it's still not fo

Re: [9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

Ronald G Minnich wrote: > > extern int regexec _RE_ARGS ((const regex_t *__restrict __preg, > const char *__restrict __string, > size_t __nmatch, > regmatch_t __pmatch[__restrict_arr], >

[9fans] GNU binutils: you can't make this shit up

extern int regexec _RE_ARGS ((const regex_t *__restrict __preg, const char *__restrict __string, size_t __nmatch, regmatch_t __pmatch[__restrict_arr], int __eflags)); dang, a