[9fans] parallels

[9fans] parallels

[Francisco J Ballesteros]

Anyone tried Plan 9 on Parallels 4?

It seems it has full acpi support and I was
thinking on using it for debugging, but I wouldn´t
like to buy it if Plan 9 does not work on it.

thanks

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Francisco J Ballesteros]

sorry, I meant Parallels 5.

On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Francisco J Ballesteros <nemo@lsub.org> wrote:
> Anyone tried Plan 9 on Parallels 4?
>
> It seems it has full acpi support and I was
> thinking on using it for debugging, but I wouldn´t
> like to buy it if Plan 9 does not work on it.
>
> thanks
>

Re: [9fans] parallels

[geoff]

Yes, Plan 9 runs on Parallels 4 and 5, with or without video.

Re: [9fans] parallels

[David Leimbach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 332 bytes --]

Do you think you'd recommend Parallels over VirtualBox?  I've not tried plan
9 on VirtualBox as I usually opt to run it on real hardware where I can, and
9vx or drawterm to connect.

On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 10:58 AM, <geoff@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote:

> Yes, Plan 9 runs on Parallels 4 and 5, with or without video.
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 581 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Patrick Kelly]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 526 bytes --]



On Jan 8, 2010, at 2:00 PM, David Leimbach <leimy2k@gmail.com> wrote:

> Do you think you'd recommend Parallels over VirtualBox?  I've not
> tried plan 9 on VirtualBox as I usually opt to run it on real
> hardware where I can, and 9vx or drawterm to connect.
It might just be me, but I cant get plan 9 to run well on VirtualBox.
Id check into VirtualBox first though.

> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 10:58 AM, <geoff@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote:
> Yes, Plan 9 runs on Parallels 4 and 5, with or without video.
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1047 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] parallels

[geoff]

I don't have enough experience with VirtualBox to make a sensible
comparison.

The thing that none of the VM monitors seem to offer (though I'd love
to be proven wrong) is debugging tools for the guest operating
systems.  This is odd, as it was one of the major uses of VM/370.  So
if a guest kernel goes off into space, the VM monitor shuts down the
virtual machine or resets it, but provides no means to find out what
happened, though it's in a perfect position to easily do so.

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Patrick Kelly]

As far as I know you would need an emulator not a virtualizer.

On Jan 8, 2010, at 2:12 PM, geoff@plan9.bell-labs.com wrote:

> I don't have enough experience with VirtualBox to make a sensible
> comparison.
>
> The thing that none of the VM monitors seem to offer (though I'd love
> to be proven wrong) is debugging tools for the guest operating
> systems.  This is odd, as it was one of the major uses of VM/370.  So
> if a guest kernel goes off into space, the VM monitor shuts down the
> virtual machine or resets it, but provides no means to find out what
> happened, though it's in a perfect position to easily do so.
>
>

Re: [9fans] parallels

[ron minnich]

On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:12 AM,  <geoff@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote:
> I don't have enough experience with VirtualBox to make a sensible
> comparison.

I had a horrible time with virtual box and Plan 9.

Did not work at all well. I would avoid it.

>
> The thing that none of the VM monitors seem to offer (though I'd love
> to be proven wrong) is debugging tools for the guest operating
> systems.

Ah, but i wonder if the commercial guys have been "requested" by
microsoft not to make such debugging easy. Seems like it would be an
ideal way to learn things they don't want you to know...

ron

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Patrick Kelly]

On Jan 8, 2010, at 2:18 PM, ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 11:12 AM,  <geoff@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote:
>> I don't have enough experience with VirtualBox to make a sensible
>> comparison.
>
> I had a horrible time with virtual box and Plan 9.
>
> Did not work at all well. I would avoid it.
>
>>
>> The thing that none of the VM monitors seem to offer (though I'd love
>> to be proven wrong) is debugging tools for the guest operating
>> systems.
>
> Ah, but i wonder if the commercial guys have been "requested" by
> microsoft not to make such debugging easy. Seems like it would be an
> ideal way to learn things they don't want you to know...

Visual studios debugger gives a decent amount of information, although
its obfuscated...

> ron
>

Re: [9fans] parallels

[François Revol]

> > The thing that none of the VM monitors seem to offer (though I'd
> > love
> > to be proven wrong) is debugging tools for the guest operating
> > systems.
>
> Ah, but i wonder if the commercial guys have been "requested" by
> microsoft not to make such debugging easy. Seems like it would be an
> ideal way to learn things they don't want you to know...

QEMU has an internal gdb stub... while gdb doesn't really handle
multiple address space (and thus neither the guest processes), it could
still be of some use.

At least what I tried with the Haiku bootloader on qemu-system-arm
wasn't too bad, including reading the elf file to get the symbols.

http://www.freelists.org/post/haiku-development/testing-the-ARM-port-was-Re-Haikucommits-r32408-haikutrunksrcsystembootplatformuboot

François.

Re: [9fans] parallels

[erik quanstrom]

> The thing that none of the VM monitors seem to offer (though I'd love
> to be proven wrong) is debugging tools for the guest operating
> systems.  This is odd, as it was one of the major uses of VM/370.  So
> if a guest kernel goes off into space, the VM monitor shuts down the
> virtual machine or resets it, but provides no means to find out what
> happened, though it's in a perfect position to easily do so.

it's unfortunate that computer history isn't a bigger
component of a computer science degree.  in the
case of vm, it's not even history; still alive and doing
quite well as z/(vm|os) on slightly modified power arch
hardware.

- erik

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Corey Thomasson]

> it's unfortunate that computer history isn't a bigger
> component of a computer science degree.  in the
> case of vm, it's not even history; still alive and doing
> quite well as z/(vm|os) on slightly modified power arch
> hardware.
>
> - erik
>
>
In my first semester of CS my textbook had a chapter dedicated to
computer history, as well as mentions in other places.

We skipped it.

Re: [9fans] parallels

[lucio]

> it's unfortunate that computer history isn't a bigger
> component of a computer science degree.

History and Philosophy of Science was slow in becoming a legitimate
academic pursuit of great practical value.  It will probably not be
quite as long before the analogous subject will materialise for
electronic computing.  It is an answered question how much influence
financial interests will have on it.

++L

Re: [9fans] parallels

[erik quanstrom]

> > it's unfortunate that computer history isn't a bigger
> > component of a computer science degree.
>
> History and Philosophy of Science was slow in becoming a legitimate
> academic pursuit of great practical value.  It will probably not be
> quite as long before the analogous subject will materialise for
> electronic computing.  It is an answered question how much influence
> financial interests will have on it.

the history and philosophy of $subject would be a broader, and
less applicable topic than what i'm getting at.  in dict(1), /history/
1.1 or 2 is what i'm talking about.

no (serious) physicist since newton or since maxwell has ignored their
work.  no mathematician since newton or hilbert has ignored their
work.  computer science seems exceptional to me in this regard;
we have learned many things that don't work, but seldom seem to
recall the lessons learned.

- erik

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Patrick Kelly]

On Jan 8, 2010, at 2:46 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@coraid.com> wrote:

>>> it's unfortunate that computer history isn't a bigger
>>> component of a computer science degree.
>>
>> History and Philosophy of Science was slow in becoming a legitimate
>> academic pursuit of great practical value.  It will probably not be
>> quite as long before the analogous subject will materialise for
>> electronic computing.  It is an answered question how much influence
>> financial interests will have on it.
>
> the history and philosophy of $subject would be a broader, and
> less applicable topic than what i'm getting at.  in dict(1), /history/
> 1.1 or 2 is what i'm talking about.
>
> no (serious) physicist since newton or since maxwell has ignored their
> work.  no mathematician since newton or hilbert has ignored their
> work.  computer science seems exceptional to me in this regard;
> we have learned many things that don't work, but seldom seem to
> recall the lessons learned.
History should be a part of everything. Alas this isn't the case. I
tend to read up on everything, past and present, before starting a
project, people think it's stupid. I'm more successful, but it's still
stupid...
>
> - erik
>

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Robert Raschke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 785 bytes --]

On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 7:46 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@coraid.com> wrote:

> no (serious) physicist since newton or since maxwell has ignored their
> work.  no mathematician since newton or hilbert has ignored their
> work.  computer science seems exceptional to me in this regard;
> we have learned many things that don't work, but seldom seem to
> recall the lessons learned.
>
>
Hmm, not so sure about that. Especially in maths it took centuries for
people to get to a notation that appears to have settled into something
close to standard.

But I also think that the "acceleration of the world" means that a week in
the lab is now generally accepted to always be better that a day in the
library. No thinking allowed, just get it done.

Cynically yours,
Robby

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1122 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] parallels

[lucio]

> History and Philosophy of Science was slow in becoming a legitimate
> academic pursuit of great practical value.  It will probably not be
> quite as long before the analogous subject will materialise for
> electronic computing.  It is an answered question how much influence
> financial interests will have on it.
>
s/answered/unanswered/

It's late...

++L

Re: [9fans] parallels

[William Cowan]

erik quanstrom <quanstro@coraid.com> wrote:

> it's unfortunate that computer history isn't a bigger
> component of a computer science degree.  in the
> case of vm, it's not even history; still alive and doing
> quite well as z/(vm|os) on slightly modified power arch
> hardware.

> - erik

Not very mysterious to me. There's not very much science in computer
science. If we didn't forget it we wouldn't be able to re-invent it, and
there would go most of the interesting work, not to mention a lot of
high salary jobs.

s

Re: [9fans] parallels

[erik quanstrom]

> Not very mysterious to me. There's not very much science in computer
> science. If we didn't forget it we wouldn't be able to re-invent it, and
> there would go most of the interesting work, not to mention a lot of
> high salary jobs.

s/interesting //

there, fixed that for ya.

- erik

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Patrick Kelly]

On Jan 15, 2010, at 4:51 PM, William Cowan <wmcowan@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:

> erik quanstrom <quanstro@coraid.com> wrote:
>
>> it's unfortunate that computer history isn't a bigger
>> component of a computer science degree.  in the
>> case of vm, it's not even history; still alive and doing
>> quite well as z/(vm|os) on slightly modified power arch
>> hardware.
>
>> - erik
>
> Not very mysterious to me. There's not very much science in computer
> science. If we didn't forget it we wouldn't be able to re-invent it,
> and
> there would go most of the interesting work, not to mention a lot of
> high salary jobs.
But how much of this work is actually redundant?

>
> s
>

Re: [9fans] parallels

[erik quanstrom]

> > Not very mysterious to me. There's not very much science in computer
> > science. If we didn't forget it we wouldn't be able to re-invent it,
> > and
> > there would go most of the interesting work, not to mention a lot of
> > high salary jobs.
> But how much of this work is actually redundant?

80% is three-quarters redundant.

aplogizes to yogi berra.

- erik

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Iruata Souza]

On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 5:12 PM,  <geoff@plan9.bell-labs.com> wrote:
> I don't have enough experience with VirtualBox to make a sensible
> comparison.
>
> The thing that none of the VM monitors seem to offer (though I'd love
> to be proven wrong) is debugging tools for the guest operating
> systems.  This is odd, as it was one of the major uses of VM/370.  So
> if a guest kernel goes off into space, the VM monitor shuts down the
> virtual machine or resets it, but provides no means to find out what
> happened, though it's in a perfect position to easily do so.
>
>
>

bochs offers you that to some extent.

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Tim Newsham]

> bochs offers you that to some extent.

Bochs not only has a built in debugger, but it has a mechanism
to define new CPU instrumentations (via bochs source code,
recompile required) that you can enable and disable from the
debugger.  Very cool feature if you need to investigate some
code or some performance issue.  Hoewever bochs is quite slow
and supports some old ia32 system.

Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | thenewsh.blogspot.com

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Bakul Shah]

On Fri, 08 Jan 2010 14:12:39 EST geoff@plan9.bell-labs.com  wrote:
> I don't have enough experience with VirtualBox to make a sensible
> comparison.

Plan9 on virtualBox is unusably slow.

> The thing that none of the VM monitors seem to offer (though I'd love
> to be proven wrong) is debugging tools for the guest operating
> systems.  This is odd, as it was one of the major uses of VM/370.  So
> if a guest kernel goes off into space, the VM monitor shuts down the
> virtual machine or resets it, but provides no means to find out what
> happened, though it's in a perfect position to easily do so.

I have used qemu + host gdb to debug a guest FreeBSD kernel.
FreeBSD does have remote gdb support.

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Tim Newsham]

> The thing that none of the VM monitors seem to offer (though I'd love
> to be proven wrong) is debugging tools for the guest operating
> systems.  This is odd, as it was one of the major uses of VM/370.  So
> if a guest kernel goes off into space, the VM monitor shuts down the
> virtual machine or resets it, but provides no means to find out what
> happened, though it's in a perfect position to easily do so.

There's a debugger built into qemu.  VMWare lets you attach to
it using the gdb protocol to debug the system.  Is this what
you had in mind?  Or something more integrated and possibly
intrusive to the guest?

Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | thenewsh.blogspot.com

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Lyndon Nerenberg (VE6BBM/VE7TFX)]

> Do you think you'd recommend Parallels over VirtualBox?  I've not tried plan
> 9 on VirtualBox as I usually opt to run it on real hardware where I can, and
> 9vx or drawterm to connect.

Forget about VirtualBox. It's nowhere near ready for prime time on
MacOS or Solaris.  The only thing I've ever succeeded in getting it
to run is XP/SP2 (on either platform). (The same applies to xVM on
Solaris.)

--lyndon

Re: [9fans] parallels

[François Revol]

> > Do you think you'd recommend Parallels over VirtualBox?  I've not
> > tried
> > plan
> > 9 on VirtualBox as I usually opt to run it on real hardware where I
> > can,
> >  and
> > 9vx or drawterm to connect.
>
> Forget about VirtualBox. It's nowhere near ready for prime time on
> MacOS or Solaris.  The only thing I've ever succeeded in getting it
> to run is XP/SP2 (on either platform). (The same applies to xVM on
> Solaris.)

Actually ZETA and Haiku run pretty well on it (on OSX), I just had to
downgrade the last version as it had some regressions on DHCP and
mouse.

I still use my ZETA install in VirtualBox to read my mail :p

François.

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Anthony Sorace]

It happens that I bought Parallels 5 two or three days ago. Upon
upgrading my
Plan 9 VM from Parallels 3 (skipped a version), it stopped working.
I've not had
time to dig in, nor to try a fresh install. The Plan 9 version on
there had not been
kept up to date, so Geoff's info is likely more reliable.

This was on OS X with Parallels Desktop.

I've heard nothing but bad things about VirtualBox. Mostly from Plan 9
people
(where the results have been uniformly bad), but also from folks
trying to use
other OSes. It seems the worst of the breed across the board.
Anthony

Re: [9fans] parallels

[erik quanstrom]

> I've heard nothing but bad things about VirtualBox. Mostly from Plan 9
> people(where the results have been uniformly bad), but also from folks
> trying to useother OSes. It seems the worst of the breed across the board.

has anyone tried 9atom on virtualbox?  i think there's a good chance
virtualbox has some of the same issues i had with the ich7r.

- erik

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Francisco J Ballesteros]

Just to confirm what Geoff said.

Parallels 5 works like a charm with Plan 9.
Also, it seems to have full ACPI support, not that this is
important for Plan 9 yet.

Thanks

On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 3:53 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
>> I've heard nothing but bad things about VirtualBox. Mostly from Plan 9
>> people(where the results have been uniformly bad), but also from folks
>> trying to useother OSes. It seems the worst of the breed across the board.
>
> has anyone tried 9atom on virtualbox?  i think there's a good chance
> virtualbox has some of the same issues i had with the ich7r.
>
> - erik
>
>

Re: [9fans] parallels

[erik quanstrom]

> Just to confirm what Geoff said.
>
> Parallels 5 works like a charm with Plan 9.
> Also, it seems to have full ACPI support, not that this is
> important for Plan 9 yet.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 3:53 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
> >> I've heard nothing but bad things about VirtualBox. Mostly from Plan 9
> >> people(where the results have been uniformly bad), but also from folks
> >> trying to useother OSes. It seems the worst of the breed across the board.
> >
> > has anyone tried 9atom on virtualbox?  i think there's a good chance
> > virtualbox has some of the same issues i had with the ich7r.

parallels requires a mac.

- erik

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Joseph Stewart]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1030 bytes --]

Just to clarify... Parallels 5 requires a Mac. There are howerver, older
versions for M$ and Linux as well as their Server Virtualization products.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallels,_Inc.

-joe

On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 11:14 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>wrote:

> > Just to confirm what Geoff said.
> >
> > Parallels 5 works like a charm with Plan 9.
> > Also, it seems to have full ACPI support, not that this is
> > important for Plan 9 yet.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 3:53 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
> wrote:
> > >> I've heard nothing but bad things about VirtualBox. Mostly from Plan 9
> > >> people(where the results have been uniformly bad), but also from folks
> > >> trying to useother OSes. It seems the worst of the breed across the
> board.
> > >
> > > has anyone tried 9atom on virtualbox?  i think there's a good chance
> > > virtualbox has some of the same issues i had with the ich7r.
>
> parallels requires a mac.
>
> - erik
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1601 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Francisco J Ballesteros]

Yep. I just wanted a version with full acpi support, and it
seems that version 5 was what I wanted.
that's handy to debug acpi code.

but yes, it requires a mac.


On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Joseph Stewart <joseph.stewart@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just to clarify... Parallels 5 requires a Mac. There are howerver, older
> versions for M$ and Linux as well as their Server Virtualization products.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallels,_Inc.
> -joe
>
> On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 11:14 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> > Just to confirm what Geoff said.
>> >
>> > Parallels 5 works like a charm with Plan 9.
>> > Also, it seems to have full ACPI support, not that this is
>> > important for Plan 9 yet.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 3:53 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
>> > wrote:
>> > >> I've heard nothing but bad things about VirtualBox. Mostly from Plan
>> > >> 9
>> > >> people(where the results have been uniformly bad), but also from
>> > >> folks
>> > >> trying to useother OSes. It seems the worst of the breed across the
>> > >> board.
>> > >
>> > > has anyone tried 9atom on virtualbox?  i think there's a good chance
>> > > virtualbox has some of the same issues i had with the ich7r.
>>
>> parallels requires a mac.
>>
>> - erik
>>
>
>

Re: [9fans] parallels

[Federico G. Benavento]

no apple-pcs here, but vmware seems to be the faster

On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Francisco J Ballesteros <nemo@lsub.org> wrote:
> Yep. I just wanted a version with full acpi support, and it
> seems that version 5 was what I wanted.
> that's handy to debug acpi code.
>
> but yes, it requires a mac.
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Joseph Stewart <joseph.stewart@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Just to clarify... Parallels 5 requires a Mac. There are howerver, older
>> versions for M$ and Linux as well as their Server Virtualization products.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallels,_Inc.
>> -joe
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 11:14 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Just to confirm what Geoff said.
>>> >
>>> > Parallels 5 works like a charm with Plan 9.
>>> > Also, it seems to have full ACPI support, not that this is
>>> > important for Plan 9 yet.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks
>>> >
>>> > On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 3:53 PM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > >> I've heard nothing but bad things about VirtualBox. Mostly from Plan
>>> > >> 9
>>> > >> people(where the results have been uniformly bad), but also from
>>> > >> folks
>>> > >> trying to useother OSes. It seems the worst of the breed across the
>>> > >> board.
>>> > >
>>> > > has anyone tried 9atom on virtualbox?  i think there's a good chance
>>> > > virtualbox has some of the same issues i had with the ich7r.
>>>
>>> parallels requires a mac.
>>>
>>> - erik
>>>
>>
>>
>
>



-- 
Federico G. Benavento

Re: [9fans] parallels

[akss]

On Jan 9, 10:13 pm, n...@lsub.org (Francisco J Ballesteros) wrote:
> Just to confirm what Geoff said.
>
> Parallels 5 works like a charm with Plan 9.
> Also, it seems to have full ACPI support, not that this is
> important for Plan 9 yet.

Hi Francisco,

You told that Plan9 works fine on Parallels. I couldn't install it due
to crash during installation, though. Would you like to tell what
configuration have you set up on Parallels?

I read on Plan9 site that in order to have Plan9 installed on
Parallels it needs to turn off VT-x. I hope it can help, but I haven't
been able to find the option in Parallels. Did you disable the VT-x
option? If you did how you turned it off?

Thank you in advance,
Anton