From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 06:02:21 +1000 Message-ID: From: Prof Brucee To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b414292006cf2051bccb7e5 Subject: Re: [9fans] Harvey OS: A new OS inspired heavily by Plan 9 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 638d3a3e-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --047d7b414292006cf2051bccb7e5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I've never understood the fascination with gdb. To me it's just turgid. I like saying "acid has always worked for me" because it's a fun thing to say but not only is it painlessly useful it is programmable. stk and leak are pretty neat. brucee On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 5:52 AM, erik quanstrom wrote: > hmm. neither db nor acid work for you? I've found acid to be much easie= r > to use than gdb, but on my plan 9 projects a few prints are quicker for m= e > than messing with a debugger. > > unless harvey has added core dumps to plan 9, then post trap debugging > would be via broken processes not core dumps. > > why are you forced into core dump driven development. that makes it > should like the environment isn't an effective on for development. > > - erik > > > On Jul 26, 2015 10:54 AM, hiro <23hiro@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Who claimed fast compilation was a motive? > > From what I understand this is all about being able to use gdb for > debugging. > > > > It makes sense to me, but it might still be subjective. > > If you care I will explain my experience: > > > > Some longer time ago I tried gdb for disassembling some secret binary, > > but quickly gave up cause of the complex interface and reverted to > > objdump instead. I wasted a lot of time and that made me hate gdb a > > lot. > > > > Now, much later I started using gdb again, cause as long as it has > > access to the source analyzing coredumps is very easy. It's a better > > workflow than my printf() debugging, because the Makefiles of the > > project I'm working on are so complex and broken that everybody avoids > > compiling (takes too long). > > I have seen many complaints in Ron's commit logs about makefiles, too. > > I'm fairly certain that for Harvey and Akaros they're pretty much > > forced just like me into a coredump-driven development workflow. > > > > tldr: gcc is needed so that we can use gdb so that we don't have to > > compile as often so that we can fix bugs faster. > > > > On 7/26/15, erik quanstrom wrote: > > > just speaking for myself, I found the fact that plan 9 was a self > contained > > > thing to be a must have. i don't consider the gcc toolchain to be a > > > feature. > > > > > > if "fast compilation" is a feature over plan 9, I'd like to see some > > > numbers. > > > > > > - erik > > > > > > On Jul 25, 2015 3:15 PM, Axel Belinfante > > > <[?&cs=3Dwh&v=3Db&to=3Daxel.belinfante@utwente.nl]axel.belinfante@utw= ente.nl > > > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> I couldn=E2=80=99t resist looking, and found > > >> in [ > http://www.google.com/url?q=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.osnews.com%2Fcomments%2F28= 699&sa=3DD&sntz=3D1&usg=3DAFQjCNGHKFWanYoFNYbSy6In7LAXtMi-tg]http://www.osn= ews.com/comments/28699 > > >> > > >> "Harvey is an effort to get the Plan 9 code working with gcc and > clang=E2=80=9D. > > >> > > >> So, in a way it seems to be a port of Plan 9. > > >> > > >> More details, including the feature list below, are > > >> at [ > http://www.google.com/url?q=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fharvey-os.org&sa=3DD&sntz=3D1&= usg=3DAFQjCNErZ4XfGFvsgbhV-uqEiG8K2pSdYQ]http://harvey-os.org > > >> > > >> Features > > >> > > >> =E2=80=A2 AMD 64 bit > > >> =E2=80=A2 Modern, simplified syscall system > > >> =E2=80=A2 GCC toolchain means you can use gdb(!) > > >> =E2=80=A2 Compile in Linux or OSX using Harvey's headers and libs, n= o need to > > >> change anything else > > >> =E2=80=A2 Fast compilation of the whole system > > >> =E2=80=A2 All Plan9 userland apps available > > >> =E2=80=A2 Plans to add X11 with rio-like multiplexing, tty driver, n= ew > fileserver, > > >> native toolchain and more > > >> > > >> I=E2=80=99m intrigued by the =E2=80=9Ccompile =E2=80=A6 using Harvey= 's headers and libs, no > need > > >> to change anything else=E2=80=9D =E2=80=94 > > >> I guess that means that it will be easy to =E2=80=9Cport=E2=80=9D st= uff to Harvey? > > >> > > >> The team list contains names well-known on this list... > > >> > > >> I must say, it looks quite interesting, worth checking out. > > >> > > >> Axel. > > >> > > >>> On 25 Jul 2015, at 17:58, Ryan Gonzalez > > >>> <[?&cs=3Dwh&v=3Db&to=3Drymg19@gmail.com]rymg19@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> > > >> No clue. I'm guessing it's heavily inspired by Plan 9. > > >> > > >> On July 25, 2015 3:34:13 AM CDT, > > >> "[?&cs=3Dwh&v=3Db&to=3Dsteve@quintile.net]steve@quintile.net" > > >> <[?&cs=3Dwh&v=3Db&to=3Dsteve@quintile.net]steve@quintile.net> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> not sure what Harvey is... is it just plan9 ported to build on gcc? > > >>> > > >>> if so does gcc run under Harvey? > > >>> > > >>> does gcc run under plan9 now? > > >>> > > >>> Steve > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On 25 Jul 2015, at 01:43, Ryan Gonzalez > > >>> <[?&cs=3Dwh&v=3Db&to=3Drymg19@gmail.com]rymg19@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> [ > https://www.google.com/url?q=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fmedium.com%2Fthis-is-not-a-m= onad-tutorial%2Fharvey-an-operating-system-with-plan-9-s-shadow-3081414e5f0= b&sa=3DD&sntz=3D1&usg=3DAFQjCNFKZSymwu8nNoZ6I7kp6PyVvp9A1g]https://medium.c= om/this-is-not-a-monad-tutorial/harvey-an-operating-system-with-plan-9-s-sh= adow-3081414e5f0b > > >>>> > > >>>> I'm not affiliated with this whatsoever; I just saw it on Reddit a= nd > > >>>> found it interesting. > > >>>> > > >>>> I found this part particularly neat: > > >>>> > > >>>> > We are working in ANSI POSIX environment to have most of well > known > > >>>> > tools and programs that programmers or end users expects to have > in a > > >>>> > modern operating system. Things that for traditional Plan 9 woul= d > be > > >>>> > very difficult to have. > > >>>> > > >>>> -- > > >>>> Sent from my Nexus 5 with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Sent from my Nexus 5 with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > > >> > > > > > > > > --047d7b414292006cf2051bccb7e5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I've never understood the fascination with gdb. To me = it's just turgid.

I like saying "acid has alway= s worked for me" because it's a fun thing to say but not only is i= t painlessly useful it is programmable. stk and leak are pretty neat.
=

brucee

On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 5:52 AM, erik quanstrom <= quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
hmm.=C2=A0 neither db nor acid work for you?=C2=A0 I've found acid t= o be much easier to use than gdb, but on my plan 9 projects a few prints ar= e quicker for me than messing with a debugger.

unless harvey has added core dumps to plan 9, then post trap debugging woul= d be via broken processes not core dumps.

why are you forced into core dump driven development.=C2=A0 that makes it s= hould like the environment isn't an effective on for development.

- erik


On Jul 26, 2015 10:54 AM, hiro <23hi= ro@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Who claimed fast compilation was a motive?
> From what I understand this is all about being able to use gdb for deb= ugging.
>
> It makes sense to me, but it might still be subjective.
> If you care I will explain my experience:
>
> Some longer time ago I tried gdb for disassembling some secret binary,=
> but quickly gave up cause of the complex interface and reverted to
> objdump instead. I wasted a lot of time and that made me hate gdb a > lot.
>
> Now, much later I started using gdb again, cause as long as it has
> access to the source analyzing coredumps is very easy. It's a bett= er
> workflow than my printf() debugging, because the Makefiles of the
> project I'm working on are so complex and broken that everybody av= oids
> compiling (takes too long).
> I have seen many complaints in Ron's commit logs about makefiles, = too.
> I'm fairly certain that for Harvey and Akaros they're pretty m= uch
> forced just like me into a coredump-driven development workflow.
>
> tldr: gcc is needed so that we can use gdb so that we don't have t= o
> compile as often so that we can fix bugs faster.
>
> On 7/26/15, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:
> > just speaking for myself, I found the fact that plan 9 was a self= contained
> > thing to be a must have.=C2=A0 i don't consider the gcc toolc= hain to be a
> > feature.
> >
> > if "fast compilation" is a feature over plan 9, I'd= like to see some
> > numbers.
> >
> > - erik
> >
> > On Jul 25, 2015 3:15 PM, Axel Belinfante
> > <[?&cs=3Dwh&v=3Db&to=3Daxel.belinfante@utwente.nl]axel.belinfante@utwente.nl>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> I couldn=E2=80=99t resist looking, and found
> >> in=C2=A0[http://www.google.com/url?q=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fww= w.osnews.com%2Fcomments%2F28699&sa=3DD&sntz=3D1&usg=3DAFQjCNGHK= FWanYoFNYbSy6In7LAXtMi-tg]http://www.osnews.com/comments/28699
> >>
> >> "Harvey is an effort to get the Plan 9 code working with= gcc and clang=E2=80=9D.
> >>
> >> So, in a way it seems to be a port of Plan 9.
> >>
> >> More details, including the feature list below, are
> >> at=C2=A0[http:/= /www.google.com/url?q=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fharvey-os.org&sa=3DD&sntz=3D1&= amp;usg=3DAFQjCNErZ4XfGFvsgbhV-uqEiG8K2pSdYQ]http://harvey-os.org
> >>
> >> Features
> >>
> >> =E2=80=A2 AMD 64 bit
> >> =E2=80=A2 Modern, simplified syscall system
> >> =E2=80=A2 GCC toolchain means you can use gdb(!)
> >> =E2=80=A2 Compile in Linux or OSX using Harvey's headers = and libs, no need to
> >> change anything else
> >> =E2=80=A2 Fast compilation of the whole system
> >> =E2=80=A2 All Plan9 userland apps available
> >> =E2=80=A2 Plans to add X11 with rio-like multiplexing, tty dr= iver, new fileserver,
> >> native toolchain and more
> >>
> >> I=E2=80=99m intrigued by the =E2=80=9Ccompile =E2=80=A6 using= Harvey's headers and libs, no need
> >> to change anything else=E2=80=9D =E2=80=94
> >> I guess that means that it will be easy to =E2=80=9Cport=E2= =80=9D stuff to Harvey?
> >>
> >> The team list contains names well-known on this list...
> >>
> >> I must say, it looks quite interesting, worth checking out. > >>
> >> Axel.
> >>
> >>> On 25 Jul 2015, at 17:58, Ryan Gonzalez
> >>> <[?&cs=3Dwh&v=3Db&to=3Drymg19@gmail.com]r= ymg19@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >> No clue. I'm guessing it's heavily inspired by Plan 9= .
> >>
> >> On July 25, 2015 3:34:13 AM CDT,
> >> "[?&cs=3Dwh&v=3Db&to=3Dsteve@quintile.net]steve@quintile.net"
> >> <[?&cs=3Dwh&v=3Db&to=3Dsteve@quintile.net]steve@quintile.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> not sure what Harvey is... is it just plan9 ported to bui= ld on gcc?
> >>>
> >>> if so does gcc run under Harvey?
> >>>
> >>> does gcc run under plan9 now?
> >>>
> >>> Steve
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 25 Jul 2015, at 01:43, Ryan Gonzalez
> >>> <[?&cs=3Dwh&v=3Db&to=3Drymg19@gmail.com]r= ymg19@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> [https://www.google.com/url?q=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fmediu= m.com%2Fthis-is-not-a-monad-tutorial%2Fharvey-an-operating-system-with-plan= -9-s-shadow-3081414e5f0b&sa=3DD&sntz=3D1&usg=3DAFQjCNFKZSymwu8n= NoZ6I7kp6PyVvp9A1g]https://medium.com/this-is-not-a-monad-tutorial/harvey-a= n-operating-system-with-plan-9-s-shadow-3081414e5f0b
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm not affiliated with this whatsoever; I just s= aw it on Reddit and
> >>>> found it interesting.
> >>>>
> >>>> I found this part particularly neat:
> >>>>
> >>>> > We are working in ANSI POSIX environment to have= most of well known
> >>>> > tools and programs that programmers or end users= expects to have in a
> >>>> > modern operating system. Things that for traditi= onal Plan 9 would be
> >>>> > very difficult to have.
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Sent from my Nexus 5 with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my = brevity.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Sent from my Nexus 5 with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.=
> >>
> >
>
>

--047d7b414292006cf2051bccb7e5--