From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinFW-Enp008Xf09eOEwCdrMx6WamsXFV5osjhmU@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTimstCatcqVgnmdReONbacpH7ZMEo8tCCByDPKgP@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinFW-Enp008Xf09eOEwCdrMx6WamsXFV5osjhmU@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 08:49:25 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTikDYPYw59Dsz-BXeVfCTewvRZG+Su7b0GJVKaZi@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pavel Zholkover <paulzhol@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [9fans] Golang support for Plan 9
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8e4b8904-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

The patch is against mainline tip, it also applies cleanly against
release.2010-12-22 (and probably a few earlier ones).
What version/release are you patching ?

Did you link with -s (stripped symbols) when compiling on linux ?

On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Skip Tavakkolian
<skip.tavakkolian@gmail.com> wrote:
> my hg-fu isn't very good; i'm not sure if this is the right way of
> applying the patch. using patch, one operation fails (it looks like
> the copy isn't done)
>
> fst@hpamd:~/go$ patch -p1 < ../issue3816043_9001.diff
> patching file src/pkg/os/Makefile
> patching file src/pkg/os/dir_plan9.go
> patching file src/pkg/os/env_plan9.go
> patching file src/pkg/os/error.go
> patching file src/pkg/os/error_plan9.go
> patching file src/pkg/os/error_posix.go
> patching file src/pkg/os/exec.go
> patching file src/pkg/os/exec.go
> Hunk #1 FAILED at 146.
> 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/pkg/os/exec.go.rej
> patching file src/pkg/os/file.go
> patching file src/pkg/os/file_plan9.go
> patching file src/pkg/os/file_posix.go
> patching file src/pkg/os/proc.go
> patching file src/pkg/os/stat_plan9.go
> patching file src/pkg/os/sys_plan9.go
> patching file src/pkg/os/time.go
> patching file src/pkg/runtime/plan9/386/rt0.s
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/Makefile
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/asm_plan9_386.s
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/mkall.sh
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/mksyscall_plan9.awk
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/mksyscall_plan9.sh
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/mksysnum_plan9.sh
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/syscall.go
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/syscall_plan9.go
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/syscall_plan9_386.go
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/syscall_unix.go
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/types_plan9.c
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/zerrors_plan9_386.go
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/zsyscall_plan9_386.go
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/zsysnum_plan9_386.go
> patching file src/pkg/syscall/ztypes_plan9_386.go
>
> at any rate building on linux targeting plan9 and 386 arch (some tests
> fail), i can generate an output. running it on plan9 causes a
> protection violation:
>
> cpue% pwd
> /mnt/term/home/fst/test
> cpue% cat hell-o.go
> package main
>
> func main() {
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0println("Hello, =E4=B8=96=E7=95=8C")
> }
> cpue% ./8.hell-o
> 8.hell-o 19698: suicide: sys: trap: general protection violation pc=3D0x0=
0007047
>
> -Skip
>
> On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Pavel Zholkover <paulzhol@gmail.com> wro=
te:
>> Hi all!
>>
>> I've pushed syscall and os package support for Plan 9 on x86 at
>> http://codereview.appspot.com/3816043/ (pending a review).
>> I had to make changes to the core go files, so keep your fingers
>> crossed I didn't break anything along the way and get committed.
>>
>> If you have access to a real Plan 9 machine or inside qemu) please
>> test (9vx does not seem to work, confirmed by Andrey Mirtchovski for
>> early versions of code).
>>
>> (Reminder: -s needs to be passed to 8l, otherwise the binaries fail to r=
un).
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Pavel
>>
>>
>
>