From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <4ECA333A.2010600@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 21:09:25 +0400 Message-ID: From: Anton To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04155418b9100204b241bfed Subject: Re: [9fans] 9vx instability Topicbox-Message-UUID: 427190b8-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --f46d04155418b9100204b241bfed Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > If you're on linux, you should consider kvm + kvmtool + plan 9 AFAIK, kvmtool wasn't integrated into 3.1. Is it stable/mature enough to run plan 9? > i have to say my experience is quite different Hm, that's odd. 9vx runs ok in ubuntu in tinycore, but not in arch. Maybe the thing is in Arch's kernel config or patches (although, stock kernel is quite vanilla...)? Are there Arch users to confirm? --f46d04155418b9100204b241bfed Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >=A0 If you're on linux, you should consider kv= m + kvmtool + plan 9=A0
AFAIK, kvmtool wasn't integrated into= 3.1. Is it stable/mature enough to run plan 9?

>=A0i have to say my experie= nce is quite different
Hm, th= at's odd. 9vx runs ok in ubuntu in tinycore, but not in arch. Maybe the= thing is in Arch's kernel config or patches (although, stock kernel is= quite vanilla...)?
Are there Arch users to confirm? --f46d04155418b9100204b241bfed--