9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9
@ 2016-07-18 11:55 Peter Hull
  2016-07-27 23:59 ` cinap_lenrek
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Peter Hull @ 2016-07-18 11:55 UTC (permalink / raw)


I've been using plan 9 on Virtual Box 5.0.x for a while and it's been
running fine. However the latest update to 5.1 seems not to work.

I want to try and sort this out but I need a bit of help on figuring out
what's going during boot.

On both Labs and 9front the booting just hangs somewhere after login (see
http://i.imgur.com/6hXLbbq.png) presumably while running some rc scripts.
On 9front I was running the most recent installer CD.

Is there anyway to make this more verbose so I can tell what's going on?

Thanks.
Peter
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.9fans.net/private/9fans/attachments/20160718/2d932929/attachment.html>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9
  2016-07-18 11:55 [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9 Peter Hull
@ 2016-07-27 23:59 ` cinap_lenrek
  2016-07-28  1:08   ` [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port? Andrew Simmons
  2016-07-28  6:34   ` [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9 Matthew Veety
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: cinap_lenrek @ 2016-07-27 23:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

dont use vbox. each new vbox version breaks something. when i tried to
update to the latest one on windows 7 vbox didnt start anymore after
the installation. in the trash it goes. i will not test 9front
under vbox anymore and not support it. use vmware or kvm/qemu.

--
cinap



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?
  2016-07-27 23:59 ` cinap_lenrek
@ 2016-07-28  1:08   ` Andrew Simmons
  2016-07-28  1:27     ` Chris McGee
  2016-07-28 10:49     ` Steve Simon
  2016-07-28  6:34   ` [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9 Matthew Veety
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Simmons @ 2016-07-28  1:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs

What the subject line says.

This is not remotely intended to disrespect Sean Quinlan’s 9pm, or the guys who did pf9. I’m just asking because there are still chunks of p9p that I’d like to have under Windows. Some of the chunks I want (mostly the command line utilities, also sam, not so much acme) I’ve managed to build under Microsoft Visual Studio (note to self - wash mouth out and learn to eschew IDEs and love mk ((also, sub-note to self, don’t use syntax highlighting)))

But, and this is a large but, there are parts of p9port that seem to be dependent on the Unix world - unix pipes for one, the stuff about sigjmp for another.

So, what the subject line says, but also - how much of the Unix-specific stuff in the current p9p is essential to a port to Windows?

Go in peace
James V Choate XXXVI





^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?
  2016-07-28  1:08   ` [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port? Andrew Simmons
@ 2016-07-28  1:27     ` Chris McGee
  2016-07-28  1:41       ` Winston Kodogo
  2016-07-28 10:49     ` Steve Simon
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Chris McGee @ 2016-07-28  1:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs

I was thinking of using Cygwin to see would be capable of compiling p9p.

Chris

> On Jul 27, 2016, at 9:08 PM, Andrew Simmons <kodogo@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> What the subject line says.
> 
> This is not remotely intended to disrespect Sean Quinlan’s 9pm, or the guys who did pf9. I’m just asking because there are still chunks of p9p that I’d like to have under Windows. Some of the chunks I want (mostly the command line utilities, also sam, not so much acme) I’ve managed to build under Microsoft Visual Studio (note to self - wash mouth out and learn to eschew IDEs and love mk ((also, sub-note to self, don’t use syntax highlighting)))
> 
> But, and this is a large but, there are parts of p9port that seem to be dependent on the Unix world - unix pipes for one, the stuff about sigjmp for another.
> 
> So, what the subject line says, but also - how much of the Unix-specific stuff in the current p9p is essential to a port to Windows?
> 
> Go in peace
> James V Choate XXXVI
> 
> 
> 




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?
  2016-07-28  1:27     ` Chris McGee
@ 2016-07-28  1:41       ` Winston Kodogo
  2016-07-28  5:09         ` Joseph Stewart
  2016-07-28  9:15         ` Staven
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Winston Kodogo @ 2016-07-28  1:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs

Hey Chris

Cygwin is an option. Albeit one I wouldn’t use. The guys who did pf9 used mingw. Which I also wouldn’t use. I like MS Visual Studio with access to the native libraries on the platform of my choice - so colour me bigoted.

I was kind of wondering if there was an option for people who like Microsoft development tools to build Plan9 tools, which are admittedly a minority taste in the Windows world, without spending several weeks installing 3rd party tools and then being told how stupid they are.
> On 28/07/2016, at 1:27 PM, Chris McGee <sirnewton_01@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> 
> I was thinking of using Cygwin to see would be capable of compiling p9p.
> 
> Chris
> 
>> On Jul 27, 2016, at 9:08 PM, Andrew Simmons <kodogo@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> What the subject line says.
>> 
>> This is not remotely intended to disrespect Sean Quinlan’s 9pm, or the guys who did pf9. I’m just asking because there are still chunks of p9p that I’d like to have under Windows. Some of the chunks I want (mostly the command line utilities, also sam, not so much acme) I’ve managed to build under Microsoft Visual Studio (note to self - wash mouth out and learn to eschew IDEs and love mk ((also, sub-note to self, don’t use syntax highlighting)))
>> 
>> But, and this is a large but, there are parts of p9port that seem to be dependent on the Unix world - unix pipes for one, the stuff about sigjmp for another.
>> 
>> So, what the subject line says, but also - how much of the Unix-specific stuff in the current p9p is essential to a port to Windows?
>> 
>> Go in peace
>> James V Choate XXXVI
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?
  2016-07-28  1:41       ` Winston Kodogo
@ 2016-07-28  5:09         ` Joseph Stewart
  2016-07-28  5:34           ` Andrew Simmons
  2016-07-28  9:15         ` Staven
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Joseph Stewart @ 2016-07-28  5:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1866 bytes --]

Which version of MS Visual Studio would you use?

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 6:41 PM, Winston Kodogo <kodogo@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey Chris
>
> Cygwin is an option. Albeit one I wouldn’t use. The guys who did pf9 used
> mingw. Which I also wouldn’t use. I like MS Visual Studio with access to
> the native libraries on the platform of my choice - so colour me bigoted.
>
> I was kind of wondering if there was an option for people who like
> Microsoft development tools to build Plan9 tools, which are admittedly a
> minority taste in the Windows world, without spending several weeks
> installing 3rd party tools and then being told how stupid they are.
> > On 28/07/2016, at 1:27 PM, Chris McGee <sirnewton_01@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> >
> > I was thinking of using Cygwin to see would be capable of compiling p9p.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >> On Jul 27, 2016, at 9:08 PM, Andrew Simmons <kodogo@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> What the subject line says.
> >>
> >> This is not remotely intended to disrespect Sean Quinlan’s 9pm, or the
> guys who did pf9. I’m just asking because there are still chunks of p9p
> that I’d like to have under Windows. Some of the chunks I want (mostly the
> command line utilities, also sam, not so much acme) I’ve managed to build
> under Microsoft Visual Studio (note to self - wash mouth out and learn to
> eschew IDEs and love mk ((also, sub-note to self, don’t use syntax
> highlighting)))
> >>
> >> But, and this is a large but, there are parts of p9port that seem to be
> dependent on the Unix world - unix pipes for one, the stuff about sigjmp
> for another.
> >>
> >> So, what the subject line says, but also - how much of the
> Unix-specific stuff in the current p9p is essential to a port to Windows?
> >>
> >> Go in peace
> >> James V Choate XXXVI
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2427 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?
  2016-07-28  5:09         ` Joseph Stewart
@ 2016-07-28  5:34           ` Andrew Simmons
  2016-07-28  8:39             ` hiro
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Simmons @ 2016-07-28  5:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2137 bytes --]

I'd use whichever version is the latest free one. VS2015 community edition is the one I use, but MS are still pretty good about backward compatibility, so any previous version should do.

> On 28/07/2016, at 5:09 PM, Joseph Stewart <joseph.stewart@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Which version of MS Visual Studio would you use?
> 
>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 6:41 PM, Winston Kodogo <kodogo@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hey Chris
>> 
>> Cygwin is an option. Albeit one I wouldn’t use. The guys who did pf9 used mingw. Which I also wouldn’t use. I like MS Visual Studio with access to the native libraries on the platform of my choice - so colour me bigoted.
>> 
>> I was kind of wondering if there was an option for people who like Microsoft development tools to build Plan9 tools, which are admittedly a minority taste in the Windows world, without spending several weeks installing 3rd party tools and then being told how stupid they are.
>> > On 28/07/2016, at 1:27 PM, Chris McGee <sirnewton_01@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>> >
>> > I was thinking of using Cygwin to see would be capable of compiling p9p.
>> >
>> > Chris
>> >
>> >> On Jul 27, 2016, at 9:08 PM, Andrew Simmons <kodogo@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> What the subject line says.
>> >>
>> >> This is not remotely intended to disrespect Sean Quinlan’s 9pm, or the guys who did pf9. I’m just asking because there are still chunks of p9p that I’d like to have under Windows. Some of the chunks I want (mostly the command line utilities, also sam, not so much acme) I’ve managed to build under Microsoft Visual Studio (note to self - wash mouth out and learn to eschew IDEs and love mk ((also, sub-note to self, don’t use syntax highlighting)))
>> >>
>> >> But, and this is a large but, there are parts of p9port that seem to be dependent on the Unix world - unix pipes for one, the stuff about sigjmp for another.
>> >>
>> >> So, what the subject line says, but also - how much of the Unix-specific stuff in the current p9p is essential to a port to Windows?
>> >>
>> >> Go in peace
>> >> James V Choate XXXVI
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> 
>> 
> 

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2950 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9
  2016-07-27 23:59 ` cinap_lenrek
  2016-07-28  1:08   ` [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port? Andrew Simmons
@ 2016-07-28  6:34   ` Matthew Veety
  2016-07-28  8:36     ` hiro
  2016-07-28 10:38     ` Peter Hull
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Veety @ 2016-07-28  6:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs

I run 9front in virtualbox, and, while I totally agree that its a
waste of time to test it because they *always* break something in
vbox, you're pretty safe if you stay on the 4.3 series and 5.0 series
(on my end: 4.3 on freebsd is tested and 5.0 on windows is tested). I
know you don't get the latest and greatest features, but it works and
you can get your work done which is more important than features.
If you want to try fixing things, I'm sure the patches would be
accepted, but I don't think you should unless you have *very* good
reasons to because of how terrible virtualbox is.

--
Veety



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9
  2016-07-28  6:34   ` [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9 Matthew Veety
@ 2016-07-28  8:36     ` hiro
  2016-07-28 10:38     ` Peter Hull
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2016-07-28  8:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs

peter: don't listen to mveety, one of his hobbies is setting himself on fire.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?
  2016-07-28  5:34           ` Andrew Simmons
@ 2016-07-28  8:39             ` hiro
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2016-07-28  8:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs

just use drawterm on windows and connect to some 9front instance (for
example inside vmware, on the same machine).

i don't think the alternative is worth it.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?
  2016-07-28  1:41       ` Winston Kodogo
  2016-07-28  5:09         ` Joseph Stewart
@ 2016-07-28  9:15         ` Staven
  2016-07-28 23:53           ` Andrew Simmons
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Staven @ 2016-07-28  9:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 01:41:43PM +1200, Winston Kodogo wrote:
> I was kind of wondering if there was an option for people who like Microsoft development tools to build Plan9 tools, which are admittedly a minority taste in the Windows world, without spending several weeks installing 3rd party tools and then being told how stupid they are.

If I bought Microsoft development tools, I'd at least expect to be told
how stupid I am in a timely manner.




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9
  2016-07-28  6:34   ` [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9 Matthew Veety
  2016-07-28  8:36     ` hiro
@ 2016-07-28 10:38     ` Peter Hull
  2016-07-28 13:37       ` cinap_lenrek
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Peter Hull @ 2016-07-28 10:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1302 bytes --]

Thanks, both. I use VB because it works well for what I need it for
(running Linux on Win and Mac) and for me it works better than qemu in that
respect. I'd rather stick to one virtualisation solution if possible.

I've narrowed the problem down to the emulated ethernet card - the Intel MT
PRO/1000 Server was the only card that worked with Plan9 and now it does
not.

So if anyone has any advice on how to debug this I'd be grateful.

Ironically 9front is the only variant that does work, because it has a
driver for virtio-net. Well done cinap and thank you.

Pete




On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 at 08:16 Matthew Veety <mveety@gmail.com> wrote:

> I run 9front in virtualbox, and, while I totally agree that its a
> waste of time to test it because they *always* break something in
> vbox, you're pretty safe if you stay on the 4.3 series and 5.0 series
> (on my end: 4.3 on freebsd is tested and 5.0 on windows is tested). I
> know you don't get the latest and greatest features, but it works and
> you can get your work done which is more important than features.
> If you want to try fixing things, I'm sure the patches would be
> accepted, but I don't think you should unless you have *very* good
> reasons to because of how terrible virtualbox is.
>
> --
> Veety
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1699 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?
  2016-07-28  1:08   ` [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port? Andrew Simmons
  2016-07-28  1:27     ` Chris McGee
@ 2016-07-28 10:49     ` Steve Simon
  2016-07-29  0:03       ` Andrew Simmons
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Steve Simon @ 2016-07-28 10:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

I have a different approach.

Personally I have only command line utilities as I keep Plan9 as my desktop (raspberry PI).

I need to cross compile on windows so I have a tool to cpu into a windows box (called dos).
This allows me to have a rio window onto a a dos shell.

It does the trick like cpu(1) to allow me to hop from a plan9 rc(1) session (in a cifs
mounted directory on the windows box), into an rc(1) session on windows and arrive at the same
directory.

I use 'local 9fs billy' at startup to make sure sam, rio, and all windows can see my windows box,
thus plumb on windows "just works" to edit files.

e.g.

My windows box is called billy (after mr gates) and my plan9 one is custard (nice with raspberry pies).

	custard%
	custard% cat /dev/osversion ; echo
	2000
	custard% pwd
	/n/billy/c/New/Application
	custard% dos
	billy%  mswin/osversion
	Windows 7
	billy% pwd
	c:/New/Application
	billy%
	billy% make
	mingw32-make -s - -C Debug Application.elf
	billy%

I could port gmake and the gcc cross compiler to plan9 to do this but there would always be
bits missing and I need to be sure that what I check in can be built by other people working
on windows.

It compiles under mingw32 - I started a mingw64 version but never finished the work (sorry).
The port predates 9pf, I would probably have used that if I had existed. It also contains none
of the graphics code that 9pf has, so no native windows sam; though I have no need of it in my
environment.

This is all available if anyone wants it.

-Steve



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9
  2016-07-28 10:38     ` Peter Hull
@ 2016-07-28 13:37       ` cinap_lenrek
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: cinap_lenrek @ 2016-07-28 13:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

> Ironically 9front is the only variant that does work, because it has a
> driver for virtio-net. Well done cinap and thank you.

nick owens (mischief) deserves the credit for it, i just
reviewed code, suggested changes and helped fixing the
bugs.

--
cinap



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?
  2016-07-28  9:15         ` Staven
@ 2016-07-28 23:53           ` Andrew Simmons
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Simmons @ 2016-07-28 23:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs

And even though they’re free, you’d presumably say that the price is still too high.

> On Jul 28, 2016, at 9:15 PM, Staven <staven@staven.pl> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 01:41:43PM +1200, Winston Kodogo wrote:
>> I was kind of wondering if there was an option for people who like Microsoft development tools to build Plan9 tools, which are admittedly a minority taste in the Windows world, without spending several weeks installing 3rd party tools and then being told how stupid they are.
> 
> If I bought Microsoft development tools, I'd at least expect to be told
> how stupid I am in a timely manner.
> 
> 




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port?
  2016-07-28 10:49     ` Steve Simon
@ 2016-07-29  0:03       ` Andrew Simmons
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Simmons @ 2016-07-29  0:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs

Steve, thanks for the thoughtful reply. Your solution wouldn’t work for me, but it obviously does for you, so go in peace. And the answer to the question in my subject line is obviously “No”.

> On Jul 28, 2016, at 10:49 PM, Steve Simon <steve@quintile.net> wrote:
> 
> I have a different approach.
> 
> Personally I have only command line utilities as I keep Plan9 as my desktop (raspberry PI).
> 
> I need to cross compile on windows so I have a tool to cpu into a windows box (called dos).
> This allows me to have a rio window onto a a dos shell.
> 
> It does the trick like cpu(1) to allow me to hop from a plan9 rc(1) session (in a cifs
> mounted directory on the windows box), into an rc(1) session on windows and arrive at the same
> directory. 
> 
> I use 'local 9fs billy' at startup to make sure sam, rio, and all windows can see my windows box,
> thus plumb on windows "just works" to edit files.
> 
> e.g.
> 
> My windows box is called billy (after mr gates) and my plan9 one is custard (nice with raspberry pies).
> 
> 	custard% 
> 	custard% cat /dev/osversion ; echo
> 	2000
> 	custard% pwd
> 	/n/billy/c/New/Application
> 	custard% dos
> 	billy%  mswin/osversion
> 	Windows 7
> 	billy% pwd
> 	c:/New/Application
> 	billy% 
> 	billy% make
> 	mingw32-make -s - -C Debug Application.elf 
> 	billy% 
> 
> I could port gmake and the gcc cross compiler to plan9 to do this but there would always be
> bits missing and I need to be sure that what I check in can be built by other people working
> on windows.
> 
> It compiles under mingw32 - I started a mingw64 version but never finished the work (sorry).
> The port predates 9pf, I would probably have used that if I had existed. It also contains none
> of the graphics code that 9pf has, so no native windows sam; though I have no need of it in my
> environment.
> 
> This is all available if anyone wants it.
> 
> -Steve
> 




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2016-07-29  0:03 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-07-18 11:55 [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9 Peter Hull
2016-07-27 23:59 ` cinap_lenrek
2016-07-28  1:08   ` [9fans] Any demand for a supported Windows version of p9port? Andrew Simmons
2016-07-28  1:27     ` Chris McGee
2016-07-28  1:41       ` Winston Kodogo
2016-07-28  5:09         ` Joseph Stewart
2016-07-28  5:34           ` Andrew Simmons
2016-07-28  8:39             ` hiro
2016-07-28  9:15         ` Staven
2016-07-28 23:53           ` Andrew Simmons
2016-07-28 10:49     ` Steve Simon
2016-07-29  0:03       ` Andrew Simmons
2016-07-28  6:34   ` [9fans] Virtual Box 5.1 and Plan 9 Matthew Veety
2016-07-28  8:36     ` hiro
2016-07-28 10:38     ` Peter Hull
2016-07-28 13:37       ` cinap_lenrek

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).