[9fans] Should the original Plan9.iso be disregarded?

[9fans] Should the original Plan9.iso be disregarded?

[drownthepoor]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1075 bytes --]

I have many copies of Plan 9 from various places over the years that I've tried out.
In the case of the original plan9.iso I was able to get it to boot into Glenda as a live-user, and I am able to complete the installation. However, there is always a corrupt MBR when I try to boot it up.

I've successfully booted 9-front on VMware as well, and noticed that the Glenda logo window is missing. I honestly don't know the purpose of this window, but it displays the time/date and shows the Glenda character. That bothered me because to me, I wanted to demonstrate/experience the real Plan 9.

I now have 9 Legacy images, and I'm going to give them a go as I THINK these are now the "vanilla" Plan 9 post Vita-Nuova ownership. Is that correct? Is it safe to assume 9-Legacy essentially replaces what I assume are the 4th edition Plan 9 images?

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T3466290644f9d46b-Ma595f0e74f90df7992a575ae
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1619 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] Should the original Plan9.iso be disregarded?

[Thaddeus Woskowiak]

On Wed, Jan 7, 2026 at 8:46 AM <drownthepoor@gmail.com> wrote:

> I've successfully booted 9-front on VMware as well, and noticed that the Glenda logo window is missing. I honestly don't know the purpose of this window, but it displays the time/date and shows the Glenda character. That bothered me because to me, I wanted to demonstrate/experience the real Plan 9.

You can easily modify /usr/$user/bin/rc/riostart to add this
functionality. There is a neofetch like script that displays basic
system info when ran: https://github.com/arwn/gfetch

> I now have 9 Legacy images, and I'm going to give them a go as I THINK these are now the "vanilla" Plan 9 post Vita-Nuova ownership. Is that correct?

Vita-Nuova obtained the rights to Inferno, not Plan 9.

> Is it safe to assume 9-Legacy essentially replaces what I assume are the 4th edition Plan 9 images?

I beleive so. 9legacy is 4th edition with community patches.

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T3466290644f9d46b-M269b8bc411d9f5dfe758c9f0
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

Re: [9fans] Should the original Plan9.iso be disregarded?

[hahahahacker2009]

Quote:
> I have many copies of Plan 9 from various places over the years that I've tried out.
> In the case of the original plan9.iso I was able to get it to boot into Glenda as a live-user, and I am able to complete the installation. However, there is always a corrupt MBR when I try to boot it up.
> 

Plan 9 4th edition is not expected to boot on x86...
I can pxe boot it on my HP 8300 elite (core i5).

> I've successfully booted 9-front on VMware as well, and noticed that the Glenda logo window is missing. I honestly don't know the purpose of this window, but it displays the time/date and shows the Glenda character. That bothered me because to me, I wanted to demonstrate/experience the real Plan 9.
> 

That window is running faces -i, which read the mail box and show the
faces of people.  Right clicking a face will open the email!
If you have subscribed for 9fans emails and connect to gmail's imap
server, you will see the faces of everyone here (except me).

9front might have modified the installer

> I now have 9 Legacy images, and I'm going to give them a go as I THINK these are now the "vanilla" Plan 9 post Vita-Nuova ownership. Is that correct? Is it safe to assume 9-Legacy essentially replaces what I assume are the 4th edition Plan 9 images?
> 

Vita Nuova owns Inferno
Just use 9legacy, it is stable.
There is another iso image which contain Geoff's tree - perhaps less
stable, moving faster, does not include git and all the bug fixes, and
have refused changes to be usable in openbsd vmm.

Also - for the more experienced, how to get rid of the doasm notfound
and unbalanced PUSH/POP errors when the list of opcodes changes?  Even
compiling 6[acl] on another architecture does not work for me now.

> ------------------------------------------
> 9fans: 9fans
> Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T3466290644f9d46b-Ma595f0e74f90df7992a575ae
> Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Te9ac761ea9ccc91c-M785fafffa2a5c20e3e212bef
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

Re: [9fans] Should the original Plan9.iso be disregarded?

[hahahahacker2009]

> Also - for the more experienced, how to get rid of the doasm notfound
> and unbalanced PUSH/POP errors when the list of opcodes changes?  Even
> compiling 6[acl] on another architecture does not work for me now.
> 

Maybe I have found the solution.  mk new 6[acl], copy them to /bin,
nuke old libraries and mk them again.  I have only tested it on arm
tonight, not sure about amd64.

>> ------------------------------------------
>> 9fans: 9fans
>> Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T3466290644f9d46b-Ma595f0e74f90df7992a575ae
>> Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tdaa027409a3cda34-M4b53fea19155d126a4de49db
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription