[9fans] bootsetup problem

[9fans] bootsetup problem

[bblochl]

I installed plan 9 standalone on my hard disk and would like to boot it
from there. The probably last step of the setup process of plan 9 makes
some trouble. the task bootsetup give me the messages:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initializing Plan 9 FAT configuration partition (9fat)

add 9load at clust 2
Initializing FAT file system
type hard, 12 tracks, 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 512 bytes/sec
Adding file /n/newfs/386/9load, length 338424
add 9load at clust 2
used 342016 bytes
/bin/mount: can't open srv/dos: '/srv/dos' file does not exist
cp: can't create /n/9fat/9load: '/n/9fat/9load' clone failed
cp: can't create /n/9fat/9pcf '/n/9fat/9pcf' clone failed
/n/9fat/plan9.ini: rc (bootsetup): can't open: '/n/9fat/plan9.ini' clone
failed
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I tried it not only once, but a couple of times. How can I start plan 9
from my harddisk?

btw, I could not find the archive file. Does anyone know where it is
hidden?

Regards
Bernhard

Re: [9fans] bootsetup problem

[erik quanstrom]

> Initializing Plan 9 FAT configuration partition (9fat)
>
> add 9load at clust 2
> Initializing FAT file system
> type hard, 12 tracks, 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 512 bytes/sec
> Adding file /n/newfs/386/9load, length 338424
> add 9load at clust 2
> used 342016 bytes
> /bin/mount: can't open srv/dos: '/srv/dos' file does not exist
> cp: can't create /n/9fat/9load: '/n/9fat/9load' clone failed
> cp: can't create /n/9fat/9pcf '/n/9fat/9pcf' clone failed
> /n/9fat/plan9.ini: rc (bootsetup): can't open: '/n/9fat/plan9.ini' clone
> failed

that's odd.  it sounds like dossrv is not running.
otherwise /srv/dos would exist. if you're doing this
from the installer, you can trystarting it by hand
by typing "dossrv" at the prompt.

it may be that your iso is missing dossrv.

- erik

Re: [9fans] bootsetup problem

[bblochl]

erik quanstrom schrieb:
>> Initializing Plan 9 FAT configuration partition (9fat)
>>
>> add 9load at clust 2
>> Initializing FAT file system
>> type hard, 12 tracks, 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 512 bytes/sec
>> Adding file /n/newfs/386/9load, length 338424
>> add 9load at clust 2
>> used 342016 bytes
>> /bin/mount: can't open srv/dos: '/srv/dos' file does not exist
>> cp: can't create /n/9fat/9load: '/n/9fat/9load' clone failed
>> cp: can't create /n/9fat/9pcf '/n/9fat/9pcf' clone failed
>> /n/9fat/plan9.ini: rc (bootsetup): can't open: '/n/9fat/plan9.ini' clone
>> failed
>>
>
> that's odd.  it sounds like dossrv is not running.
> otherwise /srv/dos would exist. if you're doing this
> from the installer, you can trystarting it by hand
> by typing "dossrv" at the prompt.
>
> it may be that your iso is missing dossrv.
>
> - erik
>
>
>
>
Thank you for your answer!

First I checked your suspicion and analyzed the iso for dossrv* and
found two files with name dossrv at 386/bin/ and at sys/man/4/ and a
directory named dossrv with some c-sources but without a dossrv-file.

Second I searched for the directory /srv/dos you mentioned in your mail
on the iso - it is not present there.

Third, I had the (somewhat late) idea to check the subdirectory n/9fat
and found it empty!! So one should not wonder about the error messages
given above.

Obviously there happened an error in the packaging of the iso. I think I
have to send a bug report to plan 9 and hope to find an appropriate
address for this. Because of that spam-pest such is growing harder and
harder!

Do you think that that empty directory is the real cause of my problem
or is that only one of many and I have to track the dossrv-problem
eventually as well? Beside there changed some directories with the new
version as I found in the history. So may be the home of dossrv has
chemged as well?

I found a bootdisk.img with 2.8 MB on the iso and I argue that I may
boot plan 9 from disk for the short term. ( If I get that disk prepared
without windows.) But I certainly prefer a boot from harddisk in the
long term.

Thanks again and regards

Bernhard

Re: [9fans] bootsetup problem

[erik quanstrom]

> Second I searched for the directory /srv/dos you mentioned in your mail
> on the iso - it is not present there.

this file isn't present on the iso.  dossrv posts this srv entry when it runs.
one dossrv makes the dos entry in /srv.

> Third, I had the (somewhat late) idea to check the subdirectory n/9fat
> and found it empty!! So one should not wonder about the error messages
> given above.

this directory is served by dossrv.  if you haven't expressly mounted something
on /n/9fat, nothing will be there.

this is probablly hard to follow in the abstract, so here's an example:

	ladd# lc /srv
	boot		cs		dns		factotum		slashn
	consoles		cs_net.alt	dns_net.alt	ratify

no /srv/dos there.

	ladd# dossrv
	dossrv: serving #s/dos
	ladd# lc /srv/dos
	boot		cs		dns		dos		ratify
	consoles		cs_net.alt	dns_net.alt	factotum		slashn

now we have dossrv running. but /n/9fat doesn't appear automaticly, we have
to mount it:

	ladd# mount /srv/dos /n/9fat /dev/sdE0/9fat
	ladd# lc /n/9fat
	4e		9LOAD		9pccpu.gz	plan9.ini


- erik

Re: [9fans] bootsetup problem

[bblochl]

Eric, thank you for explaining the facts with dossrv!

Well. I can understand now that /n/9fat/.... will be populated by dossrv
and not part of the inatalled files and that cannnot be the source of
the bug, but is a follow up. There must be something wrong before that
step of "bootsetup".

I did some more installation trials in the meantime following the
"installation instructions" from
http://cm.bell-labs.com/wiki/plan9/installation_instructions.
I followed that recipe just before, but in a more mechanical and
brainless  way.)

The chapter "Locate and Mount the Distribution Archive" with the task
"mountdisk" is very obscure (especially for me as a non-english
speaker). First of all the value of the "Distribution disk" ist not (and
cannot be) "/dev/sdD0/data" because such a directory is NOT on the
distribution disk (sdD0)! (May be I am wrong again?) But that entry of
"/dev/sdD0/data" will only be accepted! Very strange! There is a
directory /dev/sdD0/distro on /dev/sdD0, but that will not be accepted
as an entry. (In the description is mentioned  "a CD image named
plan9.iso" but where should that be in the installation process?) I also
tried a download of the archive via ethernet, but without success. I
argue that at this point there is the bug in the description or
something wrong with my trials. I argue that this will cause the problem
with the task "bootsetup" at the end of the installatin trials. At this
point the installation-description is very nebulous (for me). I also
wonder that there is no task "copydist" offered in the installation
process, so I am absolutely shure that  I do something fundamental wrong.

Is there any solution?

By the way, I do not think that plan 9 can convince and interest new
users with such fundamental problems. Nowadays everything must work
flush libidinous from the start, otherwise it will be denied! May be
such a system is only of interest for fossils like me.

Thanks and regards

Bernhard

Re: [9fans] bootsetup problem

[Martin Neubauer]

* bblochl (bblochl@fh-lausitz.de) wrote:
> The chapter "Locate and Mount the Distribution Archive" with the task
> "mountdisk" is very obscure (especially for me as a non-english
> speaker). First of all the value of the "Distribution disk" ist not (and
> cannot be) "/dev/sdD0/data" because such a directory is NOT on the
> distribution disk (sdD0)! (May be I am wrong again?) But that entry of
> "/dev/sdD0/data" will only be accepted! Very strange! There is a
> directory /dev/sdD0/distro on /dev/sdD0, but that will not be accepted
> as an entry.

In Plan 9 the disc driver creates a directory in /dev for each drive (sdC0,
sdC1, sdD0, etc.) In each of those directories you'll find (among others) a
file named data which gives you access to the raw data of that drive. To
access the file system hierarchy of a cd you have to mount /dev/sdD0/data
somewhere.

> (In the description is mentioned  "a CD image named
> plan9.iso" but where should that be in the installation process?) I also
> tried a download of the archive via ethernet, but without success. I
> argue that at this point there is the bug in the description or
> something wrong with my trials.

If you don't boot from cd you still need to have access to the data that is
getting installed. So you can either put the cd image somewhere on the
system (this can be a problem if you want to install Plan 9 on the whole
hard disc) or download it during installation. I also couldn't quite get the
network going from the installer, but I didn't depend on that, anyway. If
you boot from cd, just say /dev/sdD0/data.

> I argue that this will cause the problem
> with the task "bootsetup" at the end of the installatin trials. At this
> point the installation-description is very nebulous (for me). I also
> wonder that there is no task "copydist" offered in the installation
> process, so I am absolutely shure that  I do something fundamental wrong.

If you didn't provide a valid location of the distribution archive I would
think the result would be the missing copydist stage. For the boot setup,
plan9 usually is right for you. (If have another system installed on the
same computer you should be careful not letting the installer overwrite the
disc's mbr.)

I hope that's somewhat useful for you,
	Martin

Re: [9fans] bootsetup problem

[bblochl]

Martin Neubauer schrieb:
> If you don't boot from cd you still need to have access to the data that is
> getting installed. So you can either put the cd image somewhere on the
> system (this can be a problem if you want to install Plan 9 on the whole
> hard disc) or download it during installation. I also couldn't quite get the
> network going from the installer, but I didn't depend on that, anyway. If
> you boot from cd, just say /dev/sdD0/data.
>
>
Martin, thank you very much for your helpful answer! Indeed it might be
somewhat strange to install plan 9 as a standalone system and I am sure
that this is seldom done. At least I have plan 9 on the laptop happily
now. Let me describe the problem solution for other users eventually
fighting with a similar problem.

As you pointed out in your mail, the data must be somewhere in the
installation process. That clearly is the CD that one has to mount as
/dev/sdD0/data at the installation step "mountdist". But the
Installation Manual is wrong as it is saying:
"When prompted for "distribution disk" the usual value is /dev/sdD0/data
- it is not, that never does work. The usual value must be simply "/"
for that case of installation from this mounted CD, say sdD0! But there
is another very strange problem I could not believe until I had checked
it for reproducibility a couple of times: That "/" at the prompt
"distribution disk" does not work the first time!! The first time the
familiar sequence

    ....................
    /bin/mount: can't open srv/dos: '/srv/dos' file does not exist
    cp: can't create /n/9fat/9load: '/n/9fat/9load' clone failed
    cp: can't create /n/9fat/9pcf '/n/9fat/9pcf' clone failed
    /n/9fat/plan9.ini: rc (bootsetup): can't open: '/n/9fat/plan9.ini'
    clone failed


as described in a former mail will appear again. One has to kill the
installation, reboot and run the process a second time, then the input
"/" will be accepted and the last task "bootsetup" will come to a happy
end. (I always wiped the disk befor starting a new test to make shure
that there are no rest of a former installation that will adulterate the
result of the experiment.)  I do not know what kind of moronic error I
did make this time on that point? (As I read out of the mails there are
no other users installing/using plan 9 as a stand alone system, so it
may be that such a problem does not occur with other setup combinations
with plan 9 on a separate partition with windows or linux.)

There are some more obscurities I would like to add here:

1. With all that trouble in mind I ask myself if it is not very logic to
assume that the source of the actual installation will be the source of
the distribution? One of the first messages tells me that plan9 is
booting from sdD0, so it is clear that this is known to the system. So I
ask myself if such a step of mounting an already for the installation
necessarily mounted media is not bare of elementary logic? I would
expect that that that installation step mostly might be automated. I
think only to question the user for an eventually other source of
distribution would make sense, as one may  install a new source via
internet.

2. Why does the install process offer an XGA monitor as default? VESA is
save with nearly all hardware nowadays. VESA as adefault would move away
another banana skin of the installation process for non-professionals,
especially as VESA is not offered to the user so one must know that
possibility.  (And it is not described in the "Installation Manual".) So
I think VESA should be default with an offer of XGA as an option.

3. The task "formatventi" and the task "copydist" will not be prompted
as described in the "Installation Manual" but run automatically and that
is a good idea. But the  point is that the description is wrong and
confusing. (In the case of "formatventi" certainly that will only happen
if you chose fossli+venti at the prompt "configfs" and copydist will
certainly only run if the process described above was successful.)


I am not familiar enough with plan 9 to change that installation
processes and do not even know where that boot-script is. But I am bored
with all that tawdry/clicky Systems and I am interested in the internals
of plan 9. Is there any detailed description to compile plan 9 from
source? I think that is a good starting point to understand a system to
do some useful.


Thanks and regards

Bernhard

Re: [9fans] bootsetup problem

[Martin Neubauer]

* bblochl (bblochl@fh-lausitz.de) wrote:
> Martin, thank you very much for your helpful answer! Indeed it might be
> somewhat strange to install plan 9 as a standalone system and I am sure
> that this is seldom done. At least I have plan 9 on the laptop happily
> now. Let me describe the problem solution for other users eventually
> fighting with a similar problem.

I started out with a small installation on a spare partition of a laptop to
get the hang of the system. Later I set up a standalone file server I can
boot a terminal from (usually said laptop.) This can be regarded as the
normal mode of operation. The installation never gave me trouble in either
case.

> As you pointed out in your mail, the data must be somewhere in the
> installation process. That clearly is the CD that one has to mount as
> /dev/sdD0/data at the installation step "mountdist". But the
> Installation Manual is wrong as it is saying:
> "When prompted for "distribution disk" the usual value is /dev/sdD0/data
> - it is not, that never does work. The usual value must be simply "/"
> for that case of installation from this mounted CD, say sdD0!

Using /dev/sdD0/data worked for me. Did you actually try it?

> There are some more obscurities I would like to add here:
>
> 1. With all that trouble in mind I ask myself if it is not very logic to
> assume that the source of the actual installation will be the source of
> the distribution? One of the first messages tells me that plan9 is
> booting from sdD0, so it is clear that this is known to the system.

All that is known to the system at that point is that there is a drive sdD0
with a boot image you are using to start the system.

> So I
> ask myself if such a step of mounting an already for the installation
> necessarily mounted media is not bare of elementary logic?

The distribution media isn't already mounted.

> I would
> expect that that that installation step mostly might be automated. I
> think only to question the user for an eventually other source of
> distribution would make sense, as one may  install a new source via
> internet.

You could also start the installer from a boot floppy. In that case you have
to provide some access to the distribution. (And to the system booting from
cd looks essentially the same as booting from floppy.) You also might want
to reuse a cd for booting and get the current distribution by other means.
(Blank cd-r's are damn cheap nowadays, though.)

> 2. Why does the install process offer an XGA monitor as default? VESA is
> save with nearly all hardware nowadays. VESA as adefault would move away
> another banana skin of the installation process for non-professionals,
> especially as VESA is not offered to the user so one must know that
> possibility.  (And it is not described in the "Installation Manual".) So
> I think VESA should be default with an offer of XGA as an option.

That's partially a historic development as I think the vesa driver is a
fairly late addition. Also if I recall correctly, it will turn off all
hardware acceleration for the graphics. (I'm not sure about the details as I
didn't use it.)

> 3. The task "formatventi" and the task "copydist" will not be prompted
> as described in the "Installation Manual" but run automatically and that
> is a good idea. But the  point is that the description is wrong and
> confusing. (In the case of "formatventi" certainly that will only happen
> if you chose fossli+venti at the prompt "configfs" and copydist will
> certainly only run if the process described above was successful.)

That's somewhat strange. The last time I installed a system the prompt was
there in both cases. (As they should. The opportunity to revisit previous
steps at any stage is a big win.) Are you sure the distribution is actually
copied?

	Martin

Re: [9fans] bootsetup problem

[bblochl]

Martin Neubauer schrieb:
> I started out with a small installation on a spare partition of a laptop to
> get the hang of the system. Later I set up a standalone file server I can
> boot a terminal from (usually said laptop.) This can be regarded as the
> normal mode of operation. The installation never gave me trouble in either
> case.
>
"My" trouble just begins at the task "Locate and mount the distribution
archive" or to be correct at the prompt for the "distribution disk".
Before that point everything is running "flush".
> Using /dev/sdD0/data worked for me. Did you actually try it?
>
One must decide between the prompt "mountdisk", where the input
"/dev/sdD0/data" is correct and the prompt "distribution disk" that
follows up, where the input "/dev/sdD0/data" will never be accepted (at
least in my configuration). I tried that many times for hours over hours
with many different test assemblies, bacause I blindly trusted the
"Installation Instructions". Well, I have explained in detail that I did
more than one trials to make shure that this is reproducible. Let me
repeat that the only successful and by the system accepted input (in my
case) is simply "/". May be that there is a difference between
installing on a separate partition and the one I did on a complete
Harddrive. I really do not understand what is wrong and I cannot fix the
source of "my" problem. (I use an old acer travelmate 220 with a Mobile
Intel Celeron 1.33 GHz with a 20 GB harddisk - I forgot the manufacturer
in the installation process it will be printed on the screen. And as a
historical curiosity it really has a floppy drive!)

Not to forget that the input to "distribution disk" did not work the
first time at all and always needs a second run (in my case!).

May be the problem I described here is very unique for my case of a
stand alone installation of plan 9. If you do not believe me give me
advices for test assemblies and experiments if you plan to fix the
source of the problem. It is not a problem to install plan 9 again,
because in the meantime after hours I can do that blindly.
> All that is known to the system at that point is that there is a drive sdD0
> with a boot image you are using to start the system.
>
I agree that this is the only thing the system knows at that state of
installation, but that is very many. If I trust the "Installation
Instructions" ( I have not tried) the installer assumes that the
CD-Drive is on the second IDE master and also assumes that this is the
boot device. (That usually is the case by default settings of todays
Bios.) In any other case (so the "Installation Ins'tructions") you will
see the following error:
Unknown boot device: sdD0!cdboot!9pcflop.gz
Boot device: fd0
boot from:

Than there is given a recipe for the case the CD is not the second IDE
master...... And than there is given more text:

If you find yourself at a "boot from:" prompt or a "root is from:"
prompt, it is likely that the bootstrap program has not detected your
floppy drive. See installation Troubleshooting (a link).

I repeat this in this extension to point out explicitely that in any
case the system knows where it is booting from! It is very, very likely
that that device is the distribution disk with the archive as well.
> The distribution media isn't already mounted.
>
That is absolutely true. But as I (or say the "Installation
Instructions") explained that the system knows from where it was booted
(see above) it can mount that drive automatically by a simple script.
That is what I have in mind. (In the case your archive is on another
device you may tell this the system by an option.) Just now there is
made a rule aout of an exception.
> You could also start the installer from a boot floppy. In that case you have
> to provide some access to the distribution. (And to the system booting from
> cd looks essentially the same as booting from floppy.) You also might want
> to reuse a cd for booting and get the current distribution by other means.
> (Blank cd-r's are damn cheap nowadays, though.)
>
>
As I (or say "Installation Instructions") explained above, that the
system always know the device it is booted from! Booting from floppy
cannot happen "incognito", even if the Bios has the floppy set as a boot
device. I would say that getting the archive from another place is an
exeption that must be made possible by an option. The rule is the
archive on the boot device . (May be I am wrong.)
>> 2. Why does the install process offer an XGA monitor as default? VESA is
>> save with nearly all hardware nowadays. VESA as adefault would move away
>> another banana skin of the installation process for non-professionals,
>> especially as VESA is not offered to the user so one must know that
>> possibility.  (And it is not described in the "Installation Manual".) So
>> I think VESA should be default with an offer of XGA as an option.
>>
>
> That's partially a historic development as I think the vesa driver is a
> fairly late addition. Also if I recall correctly, it will turn off all
> hardware acceleration for the graphics. (I'm not sure about the details as I
> didn't use it.)
>
>
A zitat from Wikipedia:
The Video Electronics Standards Association (VESA) is an international
body, founded in the late 1980s by NEC Home Electronics and eight other
video display adapter manufacturers. The initial goal was to produce a
standard for 800x600 SVGA resolution video displays. Since then VESA has
issued a number of standards, mostly relating to the function of video
peripherals in IBM PC compatible computers.
(Remark: Please see also the Criticisms in the wikipedia original. )

So one can say that VESA is not an exotic thing, but a well proven and
widely accepted standart. XGA, the Extended Graphics Array, is
introduced in 1990 by IBM. (So it is more or less the standard of a
company, the market did not follow.) As it is sayd that plan 9 was
developed between the mid-1980s and 2002, there is not such a large time
gap between plan 9 and the VESA standard. (But I can live without as
well, I know to type VESA at the proper place. That was only an
improvement suggestion, as well as the other recommendations. )

>> 3. The task "formatventi" and the task "copydist" will not be prompted
>> as described in the "Installation Manual" but run automatically and that
>> is a good idea. But the  point is that the description is wrong and
>> confusing. (In the case of "formatventi" certainly that will only happen
>> if you chose fossli+venti at the prompt "configfs" and copydist will
>> certainly only run if the process described above was successful.)
>>
>
> That's somewhat strange. The last time I installed a system the prompt was
> there in both cases. (As they should. The opportunity to revisit previous
> steps at any stage is a big win.) Are you sure the distribution is actually
> copied?
>
> 	Martin

I used the Fourth Edition of Plan 9. Concerning to the release notes
that is: "Plan 9 From Bell Labs, Fourth Release April, 2002, updated
June, 2003". The task "formatventi" and the task "copydist" will not be
prompted and do not need any user action. But they will be logged on the
screen (when automatically done).

The "Installation Instructions" gives as a time stamp: "Last modified
Tue Sep 11 19:44:04 EDT 2007". May be there has something changed that
was not dedected by the updater of the document. I cannot and will not
insist on any execution of my improvement suggestion, especially as a
setup on a complete harddisk is very seldom done, but I hope that my
mails may help other new coming plan 9 fans.

Regards

Bernhard


PS: Is there any extensive description to compile the kernel?

Re: [9fans] bootsetup problem

[bblochl]

Martin Neubauer schrieb:
> Using /dev/sdD0/data worked for me. Did you actually try it?
>
I am sorry I made a mistake in the last posting. i used the word decide
instead of distinguish! So the text could be misinterpreted. Please read

One must decide distinguish between the prompt "mountdisk", where the
input "/dev/sdD0/data" is correct and the prompt "distribution disk"
that follows up, where the input "/dev/sdD0/data" will never be accepted
(at least in my configuration)..........

Some additional infos to the VESA-Standard, I think is good to know:

The reason for the failure save function of the VESA standard is the
VESA BIOS extension (VBE), so most PCs have the VESA on board. VBE may
be implemented in hardware or in software. Some video cards that do not
support VESA natively carriy a particular additional hardware for VESA.
With some software even proprietary hardware will work in standard
software. So I am convinced that VESA as a standard (and others a s
options) is an absolutely safe bet.

Sorry for my strange English!

Bernhard

Re: [9fans] bootsetup problem

[bblochl]

Martin Neubauer schrieb:
>
> I started out with a small installation on a spare partition of a laptop to
> get the hang of the system. Later I set up a standalone file server I can
> boot a terminal from (usually said laptop.) This can be regarded as the
> normal mode of operation. The installation never gave me trouble in either
> case.
>
>
I repeated the installation of plan 9 on another machine with a
NTFS-partition on a harddisk. I freed diskspace of about 3.9 MB and
installed plan9. I get the same errors as in the case of installation on
a completely empty harddisk. (I described the symptoms in some earlier
mails.) And I also had to run the installation process a second time to
get a bootable installation of Plan9. I again had to type a simple "/"
at the prompt "distribution disk" (instaed of the "/dev/sdD0/data" as
written in the manual. There was a minor difference that the prompt
"copydisk" appeared this time that I had to acknowledge.

Have you tried an installation (not an update!) with the actual
CD-edition ( I think it is the third edition) of plan9?

Sorry for annoyance, but such are the facts.

Bernhard

Re: [9fans] bootsetup problem

[Charles Forsyth]

> Have you tried an installation (not an update!) with the actual
> CD-edition ( I think it is the third edition) of plan9?

a third edition CD would be quite old and quite different as
regards both the file system implementation (kfs instead of fossil/venti)
and more important disk/fdisk and friends, which partition the disk.
the current plan 9 is fourth edition.

Re: [9fans] bootsetup problem

[bblochl]

Charles Forsyth schrieb:
>> Have you tried an installation (not an update!) with the actual
>> CD-edition ( I think it is the third edition) of plan9?
>>
>
> a third edition CD would be quite old and quite different as
> regards both the file system implementation (kfs instead of fossil/venti)
> and more important disk/fdisk and friends, which partition the disk.
> the current plan 9 is fourth edition.
>
>
>
>

I downloaded the CD last week from
http://cm.bell-labs.com/plan9/download.html. The text on the page tells:
"This is the distribution for the Fourth Edition of Plan 9. It contains
source of the kernel, libraries, and commands for all supported
architectures. It also contains complete binaries for the x86
architecture. See the release notes for information about what’s new in
this release."

So it is clear I experimented with the fourth edition and fossil/venti

Sorry for my mistake!