[9fans] apropos of the glendix post

I just stumbled across a talk I gave in 2002:

Here's one slide:

How to fix this (2): 9sys
We are building a Plan 9 system call set into Linux
It is only 38 calls
Three steps
Initial support as ioctl's from a device (/dev/9sys)
Direct integration into Linux system call table
Remove non-Plan 9 system calls (ca. 235 of them)
Result should be Linux portability with Plan 9 architecture
Greatly pared-down footprint
Early code is working now

Note that the system calls back then were 235 in number, are 300 now.
Note that one of the steps was "remove

good luck with glendix, it will be fun if it works. I stopped work on
9sys when lucent fixed the license.

ron

Interesting. Where is the source for 9sys?

Peace

uriel


On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 1:09 AM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> I just stumbled across a talk I gave in 2002:
>
> Here's one slide:
>
> How to fix this (2): 9sys
> We are building a Plan 9 system call set into Linux
> It is only 38 calls
> Three steps
> Initial support as ioctl's from a device (/dev/9sys)
> Direct integration into Linux system call table
> Remove non-Plan 9 system calls (ca. 235 of them)
> Result should be Linux portability with Plan 9 architecture
> Greatly pared-down footprint
> Early code is working now
>
> Note that the system calls back then were 235 in number, are 300 now.
> Note that one of the steps was "remove
>
> good luck with glendix, it will be fun if it works. I stopped work on
> 9sys when lucent fixed the license.
>
> ron
>
>[/color]

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 4:22 PM, Uriel <uriel99@gmail.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> Interesting. Where is the source for 9sys?
>[/color]

It's not worth much.

I've got it if anyone wants it but I would bet glendix is further
along and much better.

ron

other than trying every itiration possible (sum over histories of
software?), i'm not getting the reason why glendix is a good idea.

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Skip Tavakkolian <9nut@9netics.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> other than trying every itiration possible (sum over histories of
> software?), i'm not getting the reason why glendix is a good idea.
>[/color]

for me, it's the same thing over and over again. drivers.

ron

> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Skip Tavakkolian <9nut@9netics.com> wrote:[color=blue][color=green]
> > other than trying every itiration possible (sum over histories of
> > software?), i'm not getting the reason why glendix is a good idea.
> >[/color]
>
> for me, it's the same thing over and over again. drivers.[/color]

what drivers are the problem?

- erik

On 03-Sep-08, at 3:02 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:[color=blue][color=green]
>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Skip Tavakkolian <9nut@9netics.com>
>> wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> other than trying every itiration possible (sum over histories of
>>> software?), i'm not getting the reason why glendix is a good idea.
>>>[/color]
>>
>> for me, it's the same thing over and over again. drivers.[/color]
>
> what drivers are the problem?[/color]

Any ethernet or video card that Plan 9 doesn't support (there are
plenty).

--
Anant

>>> for me, it's the same thing over and over again. drivers.[color=blue][color=green]
>>
>> what drivers are the problem?[/color]
>
> Any ethernet or video card that Plan 9 doesn't support (there are
> plenty).[/color]

surely you don't own *all* the unsupported cards?

- erik

On 03-Sep-08, at 7:45 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>>> for me, it's the same thing over and over again. drivers.
>>>
>>> what drivers are the problem?[/color]
>>
>> Any ethernet or video card that Plan 9 doesn't support (there are
>> plenty).[/color]
>
> surely you don't own *all* the unsupported cards?[/color]

No, but I use a Macbook Pro, and I have friends who would like to run
Plan 9 but can't because of the hardware they own. Think of Glendix as
a stop-gap solution until they get new hardware or until more drivers
are written for Plan 9 :-)

--
Anant

> surely you don't own *all* the unsupported cards?

The growing integration makes you own at least one of each :-(

I got the impression that Ron's particular bugbear was the integrated
wireless adapter.

++L

there are more people working on stop-gap solutions than drivers so I
wonder how long we'll have to wait for the drivers to be written :)

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Anant Narayanan <anant@kix.in> wrote:[color=blue]
> On 03-Sep-08, at 7:45 PM, erik quanstrom wrote:[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>>>
>>>>> for me, it's the same thing over and over again. drivers.
>>>>
>>>> what drivers are the problem?
>>>
>>> Any ethernet or video card that Plan 9 doesn't support (there are
>>> plenty).[/color]
>>
>> surely you don't own *all* the unsupported cards?[/color]
>
> No, but I use a Macbook Pro, and I have friends who would like to run Plan 9
> but can't because of the hardware they own. Think of Glendix as a stop-gap
> solution until they get new hardware or until more drivers are written for
> Plan 9 :-)
>
> --
> Anant
>
>
>[/color]

wireless network cards.

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 7:02 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@coraid.com> wrote:[color=blue][color=green]
>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Skip Tavakkolian <9nut@9netics.com> wrote:[color=darkred]
>> > other than trying every itiration possible (sum over histories of
>> > software?), i'm not getting the reason why glendix is a good idea.
>> >[/color]
>>
>> for me, it's the same thing over and over again. drivers.[/color]
>
> what drivers are the problem?
>
> - erik
>
>[/color]

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@ionkov.net> wrote:[color=blue]
> there are more people working on stop-gap solutions than drivers so I
> wonder how long we'll have to wait for the drivers to be written :)[/color]

given the increasing use of binary blobs, maybe forever.

ron

[color=blue]
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@ionkov.net> wrote:[color=green]
>> there are more people working on stop-gap solutions than drivers so I
>> wonder how long we'll have to wait for the drivers to be written :)[/color]
>
> given the increasing use of binary blobs, maybe forever.
>
> ron
>[/color]

Perhaps integrating support for vendor binary-only drivers would be
worthwhile...woulden't this also provide a good excuse to do ioctl as
well?*


*(kidding...kidding...)

if linux can use binary blobs, why can't plan9 do it too?

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:03 PM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@ionkov.net> wrote:[color=green]
>> there are more people working on stop-gap solutions than drivers so I
>> wonder how long we'll have to wait for the drivers to be written :)[/color]
>
> given the increasing use of binary blobs, maybe forever.
>
> ron
>
>[/color]