From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 19:37:37 -0700 From: Roman Shaposhnik Subject: Re: [9fans] OT: plan9port compilation failure In-reply-to: <200607101526.k6AFQRc00844@zamenhof.cs.utwente.nl> To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Message-id: <1152585457.7683.49.camel@linux.site> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <676c3c4f0607061319r25765e59pc566320f1b2d4e69@mail.gmail.com> <20060707033054.GB41711@mero.morphisms.net> <200607101526.k6AFQRc00844@zamenhof.cs.utwente.nl> Topicbox-Message-UUID: 7c49808a-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 17:26 +0200, Axel Belinfante wrote: > just curious what solaris versions and/or compilers > people are (trying to) build/use(ing) plan9port on/with, > and which experiences they have. Sun Studio 11/Solaris 9. > For example, in the past we have noticed differences between > sunos 5.8 and (I think) 5.10 regarding thread stuff. The differences are glaring NxM model vs. 1-1 for one. > I run it on sunos 5.8 and build it with sun cc (Sun WorkShop 6 C 5.1). Now, that is a pretty old piece of software. Is there any reason you don't want to upgrade ? > For the last year and a half I've been using (daily, including 9term) > a plan9port that I built early january 2005. > > I've just rebuild plan9port from cvs (sunos 5.8, sun cc). > I needed minor tweaks (like the threadimpl.h thing reported here, thx) > I've not used much of it yet, some things (e.g. acme) do work, some not. Hm. It kinda works for me. At least things I care about. Thanks, Roman.