From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <4620F977.1060005@conducive.org>
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 23:55:35 +0800
From: W B Hacker <wbh@conducive.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US;
	rv:1.8.0.8) Gecko/20061030 SeaMonkey/1.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Porting to plan9 / PF_UNIX
References: <45219fb00704140834u155a34d6gf757105eab8ce4e0@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <45219fb00704140834u155a34d6gf757105eab8ce4e0@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 47d9e190-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

Llu=EDs Batlle wrote:
> I'm the developer of a Unix program that may be useful in plan9, and
> as an exercise, I'd like it to build in plan9 native.
>=20
> Now, I've written it assuming POSIX (int signals, PF_UNIX available,
> BSD sockets API, ...). I know more or less some details on plan9 (per
> process namespaces, network not in a library to link with, notes,
> ...), but I barely know the 'common' use of the environment.
>=20
> My concern is that I need some local processes to communicate to a
> local server. Now I use a SOCK_STREAM PF_UNIX in a path in /tmp, where
> I suppose I can write. I think it's something I can suppose in a POSIX
> system, but not in plan9.
> How would you connect local processes (which can be launched at any
> time) with a central server in plan9? Making that central server serve
> a filesystem, where the clients write/read?
> If I knew what's the path I should follow, I could think more easily
> on a proper API for POSIX and Plan9 for my program.
>=20
> I may not have not worked in plan9 enough to deserve your attention,
> but I hope a quick answer (even in the form of "man ___") will not
> take much time.
>=20
> btw, the program I'd like to be able to run in plan9 is
> http://vicerveza.homeunix.net/~viric/soft/ts/ . I wrote it because I
> couldn't find anything similar to fit my needs, and maybe in plan9 you
> already have something quick-and-useful for that purpose, and 'ts'
> would not make any sense in p9 now. That's also something I'd be glad
> to know.
>=20
> Thanks in advance,
> Llu=EDs.
>=20

LLuis,

Read the description.  Am confused.

You connect to s server with a 'terminal' (the client?)

The 'client' awaits permission from the server to run the task.

- But the task actually runs on the *client*?

Shall we presume it is the equivalent of a Plan9 'CPU' then? Or?

(i.e. plenty of RAM and CPU-cycles, but short on storage space.)

- using the server for scheduling control & spooling the output?

AFAIK Plan9 can do many "similar" things already.

But I am missing an example or three of what you would actually use this =
for..
370-155's aside, there may be sound reason why there is nothing similar..=
.

;-)

Bill