Re: [9fans] vmware

Re: [9fans] vmware

[Russ Cox]

There's a port in progress but it doesn't work yet.
When it does, we'll get it posted to 9fans.

Russ

[9fans] Private Namespaces for Linux

[Matt]

Dr Dobbs has an interesting article

Private Namespaces for Linux
Uses for distributed and cluster computing

By Ronald G. Minnich

http://www.ddj.com/documents/s=1782/ddj0112a/0112a.htm

"Working from publicly available documents, I've built an implementation of
the Plan 9 filesystem protocol and tested its user-mode components on
FreeBSD, Solaris, SunOS, and Linux. I have also written a kernel-mode virtual
filesystem (VFS) that runs on Linux."

Re: [9fans] Private Namespaces for Linux

[Ronald G Minnich]

On Mon, 19 Nov 2001, Matt wrote:

> Dr Dobbs has an interesting article
>
> Private Namespaces for Linux
> Uses for distributed and cluster computing
>
> By Ronald G. Minnich
>
> http://www.ddj.com/documents/s=1782/ddj0112a/0112a.htm
>
> "Working from publicly available documents, I've built an implementation of
> the Plan 9 filesystem protocol and tested its user-mode components on
> FreeBSD, Solaris, SunOS, and Linux. I have also written a kernel-mode virtual
> filesystem (VFS) that runs on Linux."
>

I did the best I could absent the real plan 9 code :-)

source is now at http://www.acl.lanl.gov/~rminnich

I am trying to put this on the sourceforge with a much longer paper (from
which the Dobbs article is derived) that is much more detail-filled.

I hope this code is useful to somebody. The 9p protocol was a real breath
of fresh air after years of hacking NFS and SunRPC.

ron

Re: [9fans] Private Namespaces for Linux

[Thomas Bushnell, BSG]

matt@proweb.co.uk (Matt) writes:

> http://www.ddj.com/documents/s=1782/ddj0112a/0112a.htm
>
> "Working from publicly available documents, I've built an implementation of
> the Plan 9 filesystem protocol and tested its user-mode components on
> FreeBSD, Solaris, SunOS, and Linux. I have also written a kernel-mode virtual
> filesystem (VFS) that runs on Linux."

Is the subject incorrect though?  It's cool to have a port of the Plan
9 FS protocol to Linux (et al), but it seems to me that would be a
different task from private namespaces.

Re: [9fans] Private Namespaces for Linux

[Ronald G Minnich]

On Tuesday 20 November 2001 10:28, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:

> Is the subject incorrect though?  It's cool to have a port of the Plan
> 9 FS protocol to Linux (et al), but it seems to me that would be a
> different task from private namespaces.

I put private namespaces in too. I.e. I put in system call to support Plan-9
style session, attach, mount, and then have the VFS read/write etc. go to a
VFS with plan9-style operations, communicating 9p to a server (I only have
two: a memfs and a ufs). Union mounts work in the plan 9 style. I also have a
library which does the "hijack function calls to libc" so that you have it
from user mode on other OSes.

Test was to have a login with no mounted file systems available. All you got
was a shell called KISS, which let you do the session/attach/mount commands
and build up your name space. The acid test was, of course, running Emacs. It
worked.

So, yes, this is the correct subject.

ron

Re: [9fans] Private Namespaces for Linux

[Alexander Viro]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Ronald G Minnich wrote:

> On Tuesday 20 November 2001 10:28, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>
> > Is the subject incorrect though?  It's cool to have a port of the Plan
> > 9 FS protocol to Linux (et al), but it seems to me that would be a
> > different task from private namespaces.
>
> I put private namespaces in too. I.e. I put in system call to support Plan-9
> style session, attach, mount, and then have the VFS read/write etc. go to a
> VFS with plan9-style operations, communicating 9p to a server (I only have
> two: a memfs and a ufs). Union mounts work in the plan 9 style. I also have a
> library which does the "hijack function calls to libc" so that you have it
> from user mode on other OSes.

Ugh.  To start with, namespaces had been available on 2.4 since at least
March.  See patches on ftp.math.psu.edu/pub/viro/ - namespaces-* is that
+ related VFS cleanups.  Currently most of that is merged into the main tree.
Remaining stuff will go in when I'll somewhat clean the backlog on other
things.  And it's a real thing - it isn't limited to #M combinations, any
fs can be used.

9pfs is definitely very welcome, though.

BTW, could you use the standard meanings of terms?  Filesystem is filesystem,
whether it's disk-based or completely syntetic.  VFS is more or less an
equivalent of chan.c and sysfile.c - what you had described looks rather like
devmnt.c with some strange additions.

Re: [9fans] Private Namespaces for Linux

[Ronald G Minnich]

On Tuesday 20 November 2001 14:08, Alexander Viro wrote:

> > I put private namespaces in too. I.e. I put in system call to support
> > Plan-9 style session, attach, mount, and then have the VFS read/write
> > etc. go to a VFS with plan9-style operations, communicating 9p to a
> > server (I only have two: a memfs and a ufs). Union mounts work in the
> > plan 9 style. I also have a library which does the "hijack function calls
> > to libc" so that you have it from user mode on other OSes.
>
> Ugh.

Ugh? what's ugh? You can create a local name in your private name space that
connects to a remote place, with the remote server being accessed via 9p, and
the remote server being pretty much any 9p server. Which may or may not be
dishing out stuff from a file system or some other place (the
server-of-services list I mentioned in the paper, or other things). I don't
get your point.

> To start with, namespaces had been available on 2.4 since at least
> March.  See patches on ftp.math.psu.edu/pub/viro/ - namespaces-* is that
> + related VFS cleanups.  Currently most of that is merged into the main
> tree. Remaining stuff will go in when I'll somewhat clean the backlog on
> other things.  And it's a real thing - it isn't limited to #M combinations,
> any fs can be used.

Well, which kernel version. I've been playing Kernel-of-the-week here, and
there's still stuff that won't compile if you turn it on. I did try (but
failed) to use your patches. I'll try again, it looked good if I could get it
to work.

Also bear in mind I wrote this code in 1995-6 or so (so long ago I forget the
exact dates), when I still had to argue with people about why private name
spaces are better than 'chroot'. My first port was to 2.0, not 2.4. This
stuff had lain unused for 2.5 years until the Dobbs article appeared. I did
rebuild it and the user-mode stuff all works, which makes my day. Also I had
*zero* access to Plan 9 when I did it -- which is why I did it!

I'll look at your stuff again, if it's better than mine (probably) I'll use
it. I'm more concerned with having something to use, so if your stuff will do
what I want, I'm fine with that.


> BTW, could you use the standard meanings of terms?  Filesystem is
> filesystem, whether it's disk-based or completely syntetic.

I think I used the term 'server', which I prefer. I thought that was the Plan
9 usage anyway. I have found the term "filesystem" is a bad term, since so
many people interpret it so many different ways -- but I slip up and use it
anyway...

> VFS is more or
> less an equivalent of chan.c and sysfile.c - what you had described looks
> rather like devmnt.c with some strange additions.

Well, things get a bit mixed up when we discuss this stuff. There is not an
exact correspondance between bits of Linux and bits of Plan 9. But no, it is
not devmnt.c. I'm not quite sure why you think this is like the devmnt stuff.

ron

Re: [9fans] Private Namespaces for Linux

[Ronald G Minnich]

On Tuesday 20 November 2001 14:48, Ronald G Minnich wrote:
>
> > To start with, namespaces had been available on 2.4 since at least
> > March.  See patches on ftp.math.psu.edu/pub/viro/ - namespaces-* is that
> > + related VFS cleanups.  Currently most of that is merged into the main
> > tree. Remaining stuff will go in when I'll somewhat clean the backlog on
> > other things.  And it's a real thing - it isn't limited to #M
> > combinations, any fs can be used.

So for those of you, like me, who try to follow this up:

The patches:
cftp /pub/viro > ls *name*
U4-rename-S5                           namespaces-a-S8-pre2
namespaces-S2.gz@                      namespaces-a-S8-pre3
namespaces-a-S10-pre2                  namespaces-a-S8-pre4
namespaces-a-S10-pre9                  namespaces-b-S3-pre8.gz
namespaces-a-S11-pre5.gz               namespaces-b-S4-pre6.gz
namespaces-a-S2.gz                     namespaces-c-S4-pre6.gz
namespaces-a-S4.gz                     namespaces-c-S5
namespaces-a-S6-pre2                   namespaces-c-S5-pre6.gz
namespaces-a-S6-pre5                   namespaces-d-S2.gz
namespaces-a-S7-pre3                   namespaces-d-S4-pre6.gz
ncftp /pub/viro >

Hmm, now what. Given the pace of change in 2.4 kernels, I can perhaps be
forgiven for wondering how solid all this will be.

Anyway, once it's really in I'll be happy to give it a shot. Although some
folks I know who are using it aren't quite sure it fits the description of
"private name spaces"

Also, Linux-specific only. My stuff does do the libc hack on several other
OSes, including freebsd.

Just FYI.

Oh, forgot to mention: the libc interface to my stuff also supports exporting
a name space and importing it into another process -- e.g. a child. You
really need that for fork(). But I think this will work in combination with
Erik Hendrik's bproc stuff, so you can get the equivalent of cpu on a
Scyld-based cluster. I have tested exporting name spaces to other processes
on other machines, and it works fine.

Oh, one other thing: Peter Braam and I did an alternate way of doing private
name spaces a few years ago on Linux, see the pnsdev at www.sourceforge.net.

Sorry to pollute this list with a non-plan-9 discussion, however, so I won't
respond to further flames unless they're private. Some messages are not worth
responding to in public.

ron

Re: [9fans] Private Namespaces for Linux

[Alexander Viro]

On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Ronald G Minnich wrote:

> Hmm, now what. Given the pace of change in 2.4 kernels, I can perhaps be
> forgiven for wondering how solid all this will be.

-S<foo> is for 2.4.<foo>.  I'll upload variants against 2.4.14 and
2.4.15-pre7 tonight.  Keep in mind that large parts of that stuff went
into the tree (pretty much all 2.4 changes in fs/super.c and fs/namespace.c
are results of the gradual merge with that).

Apologies for long delay with updates - there was a lot of other work lately.

> Sorry to pollute this list with a non-plan-9 discussion, however, so I won't
> respond to further flames unless they're private. Some messages are not worth
> responding to in public.

???  I definitely had no intention to flame you and I've seen no reasons
whatsoever to start doing that.

However, flames or not, it is, indeed, off-topic here.  If you want to
continue the thread in private - you are certainly welcome.  I'm very
interested in 9pfs and more than willing to discuss the VFS changes that
had happened during 2.3/2.4 and ones that are going to happen in 2.5.<early>.

								Al

[9fans] VMWare

[Skip Tavakkolian]

FYI, after successfully running Plan9 under VMWare 4.0.0.44 for a while,
I had no luck booting with 4.0.2.45 (the latest).   I didn't spend time
on it, before I reverted to an earlier version, but I noticed something about
invalid "SVGA: IOSpace" address in the vmware log (debug on).

Re: [9fans] vmware

[geerten kuiper]

wrt full screen mode: when I select it from the vmware menu nothing seems
to happen, but if I subsequently switch to the next screen (Ctrl-Alt-F8)
it's there just fine.

[9fans] vmware

[Russ Cox]

The VMware saga continues.

I think I've gotten the video driver fixed so that
it will work correctly under XFree86, in depths other
than 16-bit, and in sizes other than the full size of
the screen.

Full screen mode still appears not to work in Linux.
I'm not sure why, but that's not as much of a showstopper
to me.

There's a new mouse test floppy at
http://plan9.bell-labs.com/~rsc/mousetest.gz.

If the people who reported the previous one failing
could try this one and let me know if it works, I'd
greatly appreciate it.

Thanks.
Russ

Re: [9fans] VMware

[Danielo Parisien]

I use a Trial Version of Virtual PC for Windows,
they emulate a tulip ethernet card, a S3 Trio derivate,
a SoundBlaster 16 - so its enough for Plan 9.




--
Posted from pd952af59.dip.t-dialin.net [217.82.175.89]
via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Re: [9fans] VMware

[Paul Taysom]

Virtual PC can be hosted on Windows.  They also have a version the works
on Macs.
Paul Taysom

>>> paurea@dei.inf.uc3m.es 12/18/01 08:14AM >>>
Danielo Parisien writes:
 > No I tried Connectix VirtualPC. I downloaded a bootdisk
 > from the distribution page and rio worked. I did only
 > add an entry like:

VirtualPC doesn't work with Linux or Windows as host does it?

--
                 Saludos,
                         Gorka

"Curiosity sKilled the cat"

Re: [9fans] VMware

[paurea]

Danielo Parisien writes:
 > No I tried Connectix VirtualPC. I downloaded a bootdisk
 > from the distribution page and rio worked. I did only
 > add an entry like:

VirtualPC doesn't work with Linux or Windows as host does it?

--
                 Saludos,
                         Gorka

"Curiosity sKilled the cat"

[9fans] VMware

[Danielo Parisien]

I tried several times to boot Plan 9 on Emulators.
Graphic did nether work on VMware and not on BOCHS.
No I tried Connectix VirtualPC. I downloaded a bootdisk
from the distribution page and rio worked. I did only
add an entry like:

ctlr
 0xC0000=""
 link=vga
 hwgc=s3hwgc
 ctlr=virge

to /lib/vgadb

Hopefully the network and sound will also work. Then I will
never have to cope with my unsupported S3 Virge/MX+ again.

[9fans] vmware

[vic]

More on vmware: I cannot get any plan 9 kernel to boot reliably under
vmware except for the one in 9disk.9fd from the distribution webpage.
This includes the kernel installed with the current distribution and
every kernel I build on my other plan 9 machine (sources are several
months old, no updates).

The boot hangs after these lines:
x free pages
y bytes
z swap

I've had no luck with suggestions made in previous 9fans reports of
similar behavior, including:

- disabling hardware specs (ether, vgasize, monitor, audio) in
  plan9.ini
- extra printing in /sys/src/9/pc/main.c before it calls the
  scheduler.  (north_'s recent solution to similar 486 hangs.)

Sometimes the boot is successful if I press keys while it is booting.
I have not mastered this monkey business.  Sometimes it makes vmware
crash.

I am slowly tracing the boot to the hang.  Processes with pids 1 and 2
are scheduled a couple times each (I think), and then nothing is
scheduled.  I think I have sysexec() rigged to print something on
entry, but I never see it -- is that not inconsistent with the
existence of pid 2?  (The sysexec printing appears when I boot these
kernels on actual computers, though I'm not sure when.)

Anyhoo, suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Vic

Re: [9fans] vmware

[vic]

The host is linux.

Re: [9fans] vmware

[Russ Cox]

The problem isn't anything in your vmware configuration.
Plan 9 just runs slowly under vmware, and I haven't tracked
down all the reasons, although I did find one of them (we
use RDMSR 0x10 instead of RDTSC to read the time stamp
counter, and under vmware the former is virtualized while
the latter can just go through to the processor).

Russ

Re: [9fans] vmware

[paurea]

vic writes:
 > 256MB.  The plan 9 vm is configured for 96MB.  The machine has a
 > 700MHz PIII.  Windows and Linux hum along nicely in vmware.
 >

That seems enough for me. Which is the host operating system?.
Verify you don't have any interrupt problems. Disconnect al (virtual) devices
like parallel ports and such and see if anything goes better.
--
                 Saludos,
                         Gorka

"Curiosity sKilled the cat"

Re: [9fans] vmware

[nigel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 208 bytes --]

I expect rsc might expand on this, but there are some Pentium functions
which are not efficiently emulated by Vmware, which Plan 9 happens to
use a lot. This will make some contribution to the slowdown.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 1749 bytes --]

From: vic <zandy@cs.wisc.edu>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] vmware
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:08:26 GMT
Message-ID: <m38zcn3aex.fsf@localhost.localdomain>

256MB.  The plan 9 vm is configured for 96MB.  The machine has a
700MHz PIII.  Windows and Linux hum along nicely in vmware.

paurea@dei.inf.uc3m.es writes:
> How much memory do you have?. I have found running other os's under
> vmware that there is a high memory threshold under which the system
> is too slow to be usable.

Re: [9fans] vmware

[vic]

256MB.  The plan 9 vm is configured for 96MB.  The machine has a
700MHz PIII.  Windows and Linux hum along nicely in vmware.

paurea@dei.inf.uc3m.es writes:
> How much memory do you have?. I have found running other os's under
> vmware that there is a high memory threshold under which the system
> is too slow to be usable.

Re: [9fans] vmware

[paurea]

vic writes:
 > I've been playing with (rioless) Plan 9 under vmware.  It executes
 > very slowly.  For example, the unpack script echoes about one line per
 > second.  I'm using vmware workstation 3.0, the current Plan 9
 > distribution, and virtual IDE disks.
 >
 > Anyone know what's going on?

How much memory do you have?. I have found running other os's under
vmware that there is a high memory threshold under which the system is too slow
to be usable.
--
                 Saludos,
                         Gorka

"Curiosity sKilled the cat"

[9fans] vmware

[vic]

I've been playing with (rioless) Plan 9 under vmware.  It executes
very slowly.  For example, the unpack script echoes about one line per
second.  I'm using vmware workstation 3.0, the current Plan 9
distribution, and virtual IDE disks.

Anyone know what's going on?

[9fans] vmware

[paurea]

I would like to install plan 9 over vmware. I know there is a port somewhere.
Where can I download it?.
--
                 Saludos,
                         Gorka

"Curiosity sKilled the cat"

Re: [9fans] VMware

[Marco Shaw]

I've tried and failed on a PII with Plan9 3rd Edition, and VMWare 2.0.2.
Can't remember the error.

The Bochs emulator fails as well.

Marco

"Wayne Walker" <wwalker@buzzard.kdi.com> wrote in message
news:20001107202003.A8783@buzzard.kdi.com...
> Has anyone had any new luck getting R3 running under VMware?  I've seen
> comments about the :
>
> VMware Workstation PANIC:
>
> NOT_IMPLEMENTED F(562):1654
>
> I have only seen that on VMware running on K6 processors.  I had
> different problems when running on a Pentium III, a loaner notebook I
> had :) that is now gone :(  In fact, I remember getting much further,
> but don't remember the problem there.  Has anyone tried
> Plan9/VMware/Intel cpu?  I could live without Ethernet (PPP over the
> virtual serial is OK with me...)
>
> --
> Wayne Walker
>
> Unix SysAdmin/Perl Hacker/System Architect

Re: [9fans] VMware

[Digby Tarvin]

> Has anyone had any new luck getting R3 running under VMware?  I've seen
> comments about the :
> 
> VMware Workstation PANIC:
> 
> NOT_IMPLEMENTED F(562):1654
> 
> I have only seen that on VMware running on K6 processors.  I had
> different problems when running on a Pentium III, a loaner notebook I
> had :) that is now gone :(  In fact, I remember getting much further,
> but don't remember the problem there.  Has anyone tried
> Plan9/VMware/Intel cpu?  I could live without Ethernet (PPP over the
> virtual serial is OK with me...)

I havn't tried it yet, but was interested in doing so. The biggest show
stopper as far as I can see (as I think I have mentioned before)
is that in VMware only emulates a VGA hardware with 640x480 and 16
colours - which Plan9 won't be too happy with.

Support for higher resolution is achieved by installing custom
drivers which talk to VMware, rather than emulating any real
hardware. These drivers are only supplied for 'supported'
operating systems. And VMware considers the interface proprietary
and when I asked they indicated that they can not divulge it.

This is not a situation I am happy with, so have not yet felt
inspired to pay for a VMware license. It is a pity, because it
otherwise sounds very appealing.

Perhaps a solution, which might also be useful in many other situations,
would be a Plan 9 'virtual' graphics driver which, instead of supporting
directly connected graphics hardware, spits X protocol packets over
a network to allow a remote display to be used. 

VNC may be another option - I am not sure if it requires real local
hardware to mirror, though.

An X based 'pseudo-device' would provide the same 'system in a window'
capability you get for supported VMware guest operating systems,
with the added bonus of being able to do the same for systems runnning
on physicaly separate hardware. Plus it could provide a fall-back
solution for all those systems with unsupported (by Plan 9)
graphics hardware - if you have an X-term or X equipped Unix workstation
on your network, then you have a display that Plan 9 can use.

I have a bit of experience programming at the Xlib (and below) level,
but none at all in writing Plan 9 display drivers, so I don't know
how practical this would be. I would guess that, as a worst case,
one could just treat the X window as just a large bitmap, and
ignore all the windowing, fonts etc functionality of the X protocol.

Of course there is still the problem of getting VMware's emulated AMD
ethernet device to work with the Plan 9 driver. Last I heard, that
was still problematic due to some emulation flaw that doesn't effect
the supported guest OS's.

Regards,
DigbyT
-- 
Digby R. S. Tarvin                                              digbyt@acm.org
http://www.cthulhu.dircon.co.uk

[9fans] VMware

[Wayne Walker]

Has anyone had any new luck getting R3 running under VMware?  I've seen
comments about the :

VMware Workstation PANIC:

NOT_IMPLEMENTED F(562):1654

I have only seen that on VMware running on K6 processors.  I had
different problems when running on a Pentium III, a loaner notebook I
had :) that is now gone :(  In fact, I remember getting much further,
but don't remember the problem there.  Has anyone tried
Plan9/VMware/Intel cpu?  I could live without Ethernet (PPP over the
virtual serial is OK with me...)

-- 
Wayne Walker

Unix SysAdmin/Perl Hacker/System Architect

[9fans] VMWare

[forsyth]

i can put it on my plan 9 software page if you like.

[9fans] VMWare

[YAMANASHI]

> Yes, I'll e-mail you the source.

Ah, could you send me a copy, please ?
-- 
uncover@beat.cc.titech.ac.jp

[9fans] VMWare

[miller]

Lucio De Re <lucio@proxima.alt.za> said:

> Can I have a copy of vncviewer for Plan 9, then?

Yes, I'll e-mail you the source.

-- Richard

[9fans] VMWare

[Lucio]

On Thu, Apr 06, 2000 at 08:40:02PM +0100, miller@hamnavoe.demon.co.uk wrote:
> 
> Which resources are you concerned about?  Plan 9 VNC viewer runs in about
> 84K of memory, and the Xvnc server is considerably smaller than an X server
> with a real screen.
> 
OK, stop teasing me :-)  I'll be away for a few weeks, but on my return
I'd love to try it out.  Xvnc server is something I have only very 
superficially looked at.

Can I have a copy of vncviewer for Plan 9, then?

++L

[9fans] VMWare

[Lucio]

On Thu, Apr 06, 2000 at 08:40:02PM +0100, miller@hamnavoe.demon.co.uk wrote:
> 
> Which resources are you concerned about?  Plan 9 VNC viewer runs in about
> 84K of memory, and the Xvnc server is considerably smaller than an X server
> with a real screen.
> 
OK, stop teasing me :-)  I'll be away for a few weeks, but on my return
I'd love to try it out.  Xvnc server is something I have only very 
superficially looked at.

Can I have a copy of vncviewer for Plan 9, then?

++L

[9fans] VMWare

[miller]

lucio@proxima.alt.za (Lucio De Re) said:

> VNC is not quite the answer, either, as it and X add up to a formidable
> resource famine :-)

Which resources are you concerned about?  Plan 9 VNC viewer runs in about
84K of memory, and the Xvnc server is considerably smaller than an X server
with a real screen.

-- Richard Miller

[9fans] VMWare

[Lucio]

On Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 09:30:28PM -0400, dhog@plan9.bell-labs.com wrote:
> 
> You might want to consider a hardware solution: there are a variety
> of switcher boxes available for connecting a VGA monitor, mouse and
> keyboard to multiple computers, such that you can switch between them.
> 
Distance and cable tangle are the "con"s in this scenario.

> The cheaper ones contain no active electronics; I've used one of these,
> and it degraded the video signal somewhat, causing annoying artifacts
> on the screen.  I've since switched to the Raritan SwitchMan, and I'm
> quite happy with it.  Cost may be a concern, but remember, it's cheaper
> than getting more monitors (and less space-consuming).
> 
I totally agree.  I have a (literally) switch box, but it's a nightmare.
VNC is not quite the answer, either, as it and X add up to a formidable
resource famine :-)  I also can't bring myself to look at the Plan 9
Xserver (I do have only ix86 boxes to deal with), because my skills and
time availability make this impractical.

I do have a few monitors (and lots of identical keyboard, because I'm
sure their lifespan is limited).  While on topic, it is seldom that
mechanical switch boxes use break-before-make switching, and that has
caused the odd monitor to blow, in my experience.

++L

[9fans] VMWare

[Lucio]

On Wed, Apr 05, 2000 at 09:30:28PM -0400, dhog@plan9.bell-labs.com wrote:
> 
> You might want to consider a hardware solution: there are a variety
> of switcher boxes available for connecting a VGA monitor, mouse and
> keyboard to multiple computers, such that you can switch between them.
> 
Distance and cable tangle are the "con"s in this scenario.

> The cheaper ones contain no active electronics; I've used one of these,
> and it degraded the video signal somewhat, causing annoying artifacts
> on the screen.  I've since switched to the Raritan SwitchMan, and I'm
> quite happy with it.  Cost may be a concern, but remember, it's cheaper
> than getting more monitors (and less space-consuming).
> 
I totally agree.  I have a (literally) switch box, but it's a nightmare.
VNC is not quite the answer, either, as it and X add up to a formidable
resource famine :-)  I also can't bring myself to look at the Plan 9
Xserver (I do have only ix86 boxes to deal with), because my skills and
time availability make this impractical.

I do have a few monitors (and lots of identical keyboard, because I'm
sure their lifespan is limited).  While on topic, it is seldom that
mechanical switch boxes use break-before-make switching, and that has
caused the odd monitor to blow, in my experience.

++L

[9fans] VMWare

[dhog]

lucio@proxima.alt.za (Lucio De Re) writes:
> VMWare is great if you're short of servers, you can run everything on
> one box, but then the performance suffers.  I have lots of redundant
> (read old) equipment, but can only cope with one keyboard and screen
> at the time (the mouse already makes it more difficult :-).

You might want to consider a hardware solution: there are a variety
of switcher boxes available for connecting a VGA monitor, mouse and
keyboard to multiple computers, such that you can switch between them.

The cheaper ones contain no active electronics; I've used one of these,
and it degraded the video signal somewhat, causing annoying artifacts
on the screen.  I've since switched to the Raritan SwitchMan, and I'm
quite happy with it.  Cost may be a concern, but remember, it's cheaper
than getting more monitors (and less space-consuming).

Disclaimer: I speak only for myself.

[9fans] VMWare

[Lucio]

On Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 07:10:55AM -0700, James A. Robinson wrote:
> 
> I don't remember a VNC port, but I did see this post from David Bulkow
> about getting VNC to work with Plan 9.  I don't know if he got the
> network working.
> 
I'm trying to reduce my environment to a single workstation with access
to an unreasonable number of distinct platforms (NetBSD, Linux, Win'95,
Win2K and Plan 9).  I thought VNC would provide the neatest (if not
the snazziest) solution.

Another option may be to port Cytrix to Plan 9 and the Unix platforms,
but that's hardly practical.

VMWare is great if you're short of servers, you can run everything on
one box, but then the performance suffers.  I have lots of redundant
(read old) equipment, but can only cope with one keyboard and screen
at the time (the mouse already makes it more difficult :-).

++L

[9fans] VMWare

[James]

I don't remember a VNC port, but I did see this post from David Bulkow
about getting VNC to work with Plan 9.  I don't know if he got the
network working.

------- Forwarded Message

Date:    Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:54:42 -0500
From:    David Bulkow <dbul@earthlink.net>
To:      9fans <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: [9fans] plan9 on vmware

I have finally managed to boot Plan9 in a VMware configuration.
The problem I ran into was the IDE driver attempting to set "read ahead
mode".  After the command to set the feature, the IDE device status
register indicates an error - the error register indicates Abort.
Once the abort error is posted, the driver can no longer access the
device and the boot fails.

I did not attempt to fix the problem correctly, but instead took
a short cut and commented out the call which sets read ahead mode.
Performance appears acceptable.

In boot/pc/hard.c comment out the call to hardsetbuf().  In 9/pc/devata.c
comment out the call to atafeature().

My next goal is to get ethernet working so I can have the VMware machines
participate in the rest of the Plan9 environment.

dbul@earthlink.net


------- End of Forwarded Message

[9fans] VMWare

[Lucio]

On Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 07:10:55AM -0700, James A. Robinson wrote:
> 
> I don't remember a VNC port, but I did see this post from David Bulkow
> about getting VNC to work with Plan 9.  I don't know if he got the
> network working.
> 
I'm trying to reduce my environment to a single workstation with access
to an unreasonable number of distinct platforms (NetBSD, Linux, Win'95,
Win2K and Plan 9).  I thought VNC would provide the neatest (if not
the snazziest) solution.

Another option may be to port Cytrix to Plan 9 and the Unix platforms,
but that's hardly practical.

VMWare is great if you're short of servers, you can run everything on
one box, but then the performance suffers.  I have lots of redundant
(read old) equipment, but can only cope with one keyboard and screen
at the time (the mouse already makes it more difficult :-).

++L

[9fans] VMWare

[James]

I don't remember a VNC port, but I did see this post from David Bulkow
about getting VNC to work with Plan 9.  I don't know if he got the
network working.

------- Forwarded Message

Date:    Thu, 23 Dec 1999 18:54:42 -0500
From:    David Bulkow <dbul@earthlink.net>
To:      9fans <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: [9fans] plan9 on vmware

I have finally managed to boot Plan9 in a VMware configuration.
The problem I ran into was the IDE driver attempting to set "read ahead
mode".  After the command to set the feature, the IDE device status
register indicates an error - the error register indicates Abort.
Once the abort error is posted, the driver can no longer access the
device and the boot fails.

I did not attempt to fix the problem correctly, but instead took
a short cut and commented out the call which sets read ahead mode.
Performance appears acceptable.

In boot/pc/hard.c comment out the call to hardsetbuf().  In 9/pc/devata.c
comment out the call to atafeature().

My next goal is to get ethernet working so I can have the VMware machines
participate in the rest of the Plan9 environment.

dbul@earthlink.net


------- End of Forwarded Message

[9fans] VMWare

[Wallet]

> Where can I get VMware in Germany ?
>
> What does it cost ?

http://www.vmware.com/

It costs from USD75 - USD199 depending on commercial/private/educational
stuff.  The price goes up to 100-299 after July 14.

Brad

[9fans] VMWare

[Wigbert]

Where can I get VMware in Germany ?

What does it cost ?

wigbert

[9fans] VMWare

[Wallet]

Hey,

I know we had a discussion of Plan 9 and VMWare, but I forget what the
conclusion was.  I was attempting to install Plan 9 using the disk
distribution, and I didn't make it very far.  The system appears to have
gone to the floppy to boot, but then I get the following:

Booting...
Protected-mode bootstrap
hd0:  LDA 1023435 sectors, 523998720 bytes
Boot devices:
boot from:

The system stops there, and nothing else will happen.  I managed to boot a
system without VMWare from the floppy.  Is there a workaround, or does Plan
9 just not work under VMWare?

Brad