Re: [9fans] 9vx and local file systems - Plan9

This is a discussion on Re: [9fans] 9vx and local file systems - Plan9 ; > - The messiest bit, though, is venti and networking. > boot/boot figures it needs to set up the loopback > interface for venti. But /net/ipifc doesn't exit > and boot/boot considers this fatal. I suppose > the Right Way(tm) ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Re: [9fans] 9vx and local file systems

  1. Re: [9fans] 9vx and local file systems

    > - The messiest bit, though, is venti and networking.
    > boot/boot figures it needs to set up the loopback
    > interface for venti. But /net/ipifc doesn't exit
    > and boot/boot considers this fatal. I suppose
    > the Right Way(tm) to is to implement /net/ipifc
    > and have it translate operations to the underlying
    > network stack, but that seems an awful lot of
    > work, for rather few applications. The not so
    > right way would be to fake it, providing the
    > interface, but just pretend all the messages
    > succeed. But I copped out. I made one change
    > to boot/boot. Now if it fails to open /net/ipifc/clone,
    > it's not fatal.


    the fact that the networking works differently is
    a problem for a number of other applications, too.
    dns, snoopy, aoe, cec come immediately to mind
    as useful stuff that won't work with 9vx.

    my inclination would be to give 9vx a proper
    ethernet device, but that idea has been discussed
    already.

    i just wonder if all the coding around the fact
    that the 9vx network is different is going to pay off.

    - erik


  2. Re: [9fans] 9vx and local file systems

    On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 15:00 -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
    > my inclination would be to give 9vx a proper
    > ethernet device, but that idea has been discussed
    > already.


    I was about to ask this very question (and say THANK YOU
    to Russ for another awesome piece of software), but now
    that you've mentioned it could you, please, elaborate
    on why implementing proper ethernet was rejected?

    Thanks,
    Roman.

    P.S. Either that or just a pointer to the existing
    discussion ;-)



  3. Re: [9fans] 9vx and local file systems

    >> my inclination would be to give 9vx a proper
    >> ethernet device, but that idea has been discussed
    >> already.

    >
    > I was about to ask this very question (and say THANK YOU
    > to Russ for another awesome piece of software), but now
    > that you've mentioned it could you, please, elaborate
    > on why implementing proper ethernet was rejected?


    http://9fans.net/archive/2008/07/310

    to paraphrase with my understanding, the feeling is that
    9vx will be easier to admin if the host takes care of the
    networking, dns, etc. that makes sense for many applications.

    but what i'd really like is a drawterm replacement with its own
    local devices. without local devices, there isn't much of an
    advantage over drawterm — unless your cpu server many
    ms away. graphics over the internet can be a bummer.

    - erik



  4. Re: [9fans] 9vx and local file systems

    On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 1:20 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:

    > but what i'd really like is a drawterm replacement with its own
    > local devices. without local devices, there isn't much of an
    > advantage over drawterm unless your cpu server many
    > ms away. graphics over the internet can be a bummer.
    >


    Well, I use vx32 as a terminal for both lguest and remote machines. No
    real need for venfi/fossil. For edit, I import; to build etc. I cpu in
    an acme window so i get the error stuff.

    don't really want fossil/venti on vx32 yet, too slow (I tried it some
    time last week). But it's a great terminal, much nicer than drawterm
    for me.

    ron


  5. Re: [9fans] 9vx and local file systems

    > but what i'd really like is a drawterm replacement with its own
    > local devices. without local devices, there isn't much of an
    > advantage over drawterm — unless your cpu server many
    > ms away. graphics over the internet can be a bummer.


    Like I said before, please add the local devices you want.
    Just don't make them mandatory.

    Russ



  6. Re: [9fans] 9vx and local file systems

    > i just wonder if all the coding around the fact
    > that the 9vx network is different is going to pay off.


    You've spent more time talking about this than
    it would have taken to just implement the extra
    pieces you want or need, like /net/ipifc and /net/ether.
    The low-level OS grunge work is already done thanks
    to p9p. It's just a few lines of code.

    Or, if you are so inclined, you can port the entire
    existing Plan 9 IP stack. That's more than just a
    few lines of code.

    Either way, complaining isn't nearly as effective as doing.

    Russ



  7. Re: [9fans] 9vx and local file systems

    I have used octopus to access my plan 9 system over links
    with 150ms of RTT I admit "graphics" are mostly faces and simple
    vector graphics. Considering that for file viewers you copy
    the files to a viewer device in the terminal, it all behaves reasonably.

    The drawback is that you get very nervous regarding losing your
    system due to power outages at the university

    > advantage over drawterm — unless your cpu server many
    > ms away. graphics over the internet can be a bummer.
    >
    > - erik
    >
    >
    >


  8. Re: [9fans] 9vx and local file systems

    >> but what i'd really like is a drawterm replacement with its own
    >> local devices. without local devices, there isn't much of an
    >> advantage over drawterm — unless your cpu server many
    >> ms away. graphics over the internet can be a bummer.
    >>

    >
    > Well, I use vx32 as a terminal for both lguest and remote machines. No
    > real need for venfi/fossil. For edit, I import; to build etc. I cpu in
    > an acme window so i get the error stuff.


    what's the advantage over drawterm in this configuration?

    - erik



  9. Re: [9fans] 9vx and local file systems

    On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 6:31 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:

    > what's the advantage over drawterm in this configuration?
    >


    latency. The interactive program (e.g. acme) is on my machine, not on
    a remote machine. Rio is local. And so on.

    ron


  10. Re: [9fans] 9vx and local file systems

    >> Well, I use vx32 as a terminal for both lguest and remote machines. No
    >> real need for venfi/fossil. For edit, I import; to build etc. I cpu in
    >> an acme window so i get the error stuff.

    >
    > what's the advantage over drawterm in this configuration?


    In the case you quote, you'd have many of the advantages
    of a standalone Plan 9 terminal, like local handling of graphics
    and the mouse, the ability to connect to many machines
    simultaneously, the ability to withstand those machines
    rebooting, and so on. It depends a lot on what you're doing.

    Here's another example.

    For about seven years I had the luxury of running Plan 9
    as my day-to-day system, but I couldn't easily keep doing
    that and work with the people around me at MIT; around
    2003, I gave it up and switched to FreeBSD and Linux.
    (You'll note that's when the p9p CVS logs begin.)
    I haven't booted an actual Plan 9 terminal in a couple of years.

    Since then, I've had the smaller luxury of running Plan 9
    as a venti server, now atop some nice hardware we bought
    from Coraid. The Coraid box has a tiny, slow IDE flash disk
    for a root file system, fine for holding a few binaries but
    not really usable as a general file system. To build the binaries,
    I have a second Plan 9 server with a bigger, faster root disk.
    I've used drawterm to connect to it, edit and compile venti,
    and submit patches. As I look forward to finishing at MIT,
    I can't leave Plan 9 boxes for others to deal with. A few months
    ago, I converted the main venti server (the Coraid hw) to run
    FreeBSD, which is what all our other servers run. That leaves
    the second Plan 9 server, which I still use for the occasional
    drawterm session to submit a patch to sources. But when I
    leave MIT, I can't reasonably keep using that machine as my
    own personal server. It'll have to be a group server running
    FreeBSD.

    The advantage of 9vx over drawterm, for me, is that 9vx
    doesn't require a cpu server.

    9vx is how I'm going to deal with not having my own
    personal Plan 9 cpu server to drawterm into. Having a local
    Plan 9 install, stored right in my non-Plan 9 home directory,
    lets me keep using and occasionally contributing to Plan 9
    without having to maintain and house a server.
    I haven't spent quite enough time setting up a comfortable
    9vx that I could stop using drawterm today, but maybe
    tomorrow.

    Russ



  11. [9fans] (no subject)

    > The advantage of 9vx over drawterm, for me, is that 9vx
    > doesn't require a cpu server.


    You are not using Plan 9 anymore then, rather you are using something
    similar to Plan 9.

    I felt that Plan 9 is abused by 9vx, which I felt at first glance, but
    at that time I didn't want to say this...

    I prefer drawterm because it stands in the Plan 9 world.

    Kenji --just my opinion--



  12. Re: [9fans] (no subject)

    // You are not using Plan 9 anymore then, rather you are
    // using something similar to Plan 9.

    I don't think it's that simple. I understand the value of running a
    native Plan 9 installation (self-sufficiency is an almost universal
    value), but we don't hear the same complaints when we look at
    Inferno: stuff built from /emu is just as much "real" Inferno as
    stuff built from /os. We don't think of using the other hardware
    virtualizers as not being "real" Plan 9, even the ones that take
    kernel modifications.

    9vx just feels like cheating because it's so much easier.

    Anthony



  13. Re: [9fans] 9vx vs drawterm

    >> The advantage of 9vx over drawterm, for me, is that 9vx
    >> doesn't require a cpu server.

    >
    > You are not using Plan 9 anymore then, rather you are using something
    > similar to Plan 9.
    >
    > I felt that Plan 9 is abused by 9vx, which I felt at first glance, but
    > at that time I didn't want to say this...
    >
    > I prefer drawterm because it stands in the Plan 9 world.


    While I haven't yet gotten the chance to play with it, personally I
    felt 9vx is really a normal P9 terminal, whereas drawterm is not.
    Because it doesn't run natively makes no difference.



+ Reply to Thread