From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <200310261832.h9QIWJl21300@augusta.math.psu.edu> To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] pcf config file ... In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 26 Oct 2003 13:26:09 EST." From: Dan Cross Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 13:32:18 -0500 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 79879a30-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 "Russ Cox" writes: > pull is hard-coded to run "9fs kfs". really you should be using > dan cross's /dist/replica/dist, but i never remember how to do that. > instead you can just create a /srv/kfs that pull will be able > to mount (it doesn't see one so it starts kfs). > > echo 1 >/srv/kfs > should do the trick. It's called `inst', and while it's on sources, it never made it to the base distribution. It is, however, pretty easy to use: term% mount -c /srv/boot /n/inst term% 9fs sources term% cp /n/sources/plan9/dist/replica/inst /dist/replica term% bind /n/sources/plan9 /n/dist term% replica/pull -v /dist/replica/inst After my thinkpad died a horrible, gurgling death, I bought an iBook running MacOS X. When jmk updated the ethernet drivers such that VirtualPC for the Mac worked (well, it already worked, but now the network worked, too), I bought and installed VirtualPC. It's quite nice, if a little slow, and gave me an opportunity to jump from KFS to fossil (which I did). After doing so, however, I'm a little dismayed about how much still depends on kfs, particularly the replica scripts under /dist/replica (and in individual package replica scripts). It seems to me that if fossil is the way to go moving forward, it would behoove us to update the other parts of the system to treat it with a little more respect. To that end, I like Andrey's modification that Ron just posted; it'll also work on fileservers and the like. In short, we should be updating the system to be more general, not trying to fool things into looking vaguely like kfs so old tools will continue working. As an aside, I also had an idea for /dist/replica/site, or /dist/relica/site.local, which could be customized with a particular site's localizations (applyopts and the like). Then replica scripts could `.' it, effectively customizing themselves for given site configurations (the most obvious example would be doing things like overriding default clientroot's). I still think it's a good idea, but it never took off. - Dan C.