[9fans] linux and plan 9 ports.

[9fans] linux and plan 9 ports.

[Noah Evans]

What is up with linux/gnu lately? glibc version 2.3.4.20040808-r1
caused the new version of plan 9 ports to segfault on every threaded
application. The same thing supposed happens with opera. I upgraded to
2.3.4.20041102 and everything worked fine.

Not to mention burning something like 12 coasters on linux 2.6.8.1
before finding out about the burning bug (`-')

Re: [9fans] linux and plan 9 ports.

[Bruce Ellis]

it's so large and has had so many hands in it that
it is basically unmaintainable.  i worked with someone
a few years ago who would literally update his linux
distribution *daily*.  it would "work" some days.

brucee

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 02:07:48 +0900, Noah Evans <noah.evans@gmail.com> wrote:
> What is up with linux/gnu lately? glibc version 2.3.4.20040808-r1
> caused the new version of plan 9 ports to segfault on every threaded
> application. The same thing supposed happens with opera. I upgraded to
> 2.3.4.20041102 and everything worked fine.
> 
> Not to mention burning something like 12 coasters on linux 2.6.8.1
> before finding out about the burning bug (`-')

Re: [9fans] linux and plan 9 ports.

[Ronald G. Minnich]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Bruce Ellis wrote:

> it's so large and has had so many hands in it that it is basically
> unmaintainable.  i worked with someone a few years ago who would
> literally update his linux distribution *daily*.  it would "work" some
> days.


yeah, I'm seeing this here. Linux is into "fail because it fails" mode. 

Funny: I have an old X24 and a new T41. Last set of upgrades to SuSE, it
turns out the old X24 can only run new kernels, since 2.4.xyz busted
somehere; 2.6.10 is fine on the X24. The new T41, however, can only run
old kernels. So for the newest kernels I use my older laptop.

Of course, a lot of this is the fact that PC hardware sucks so bad, but 
Linux is still getting pretty complex pretty fast. I think it passed 
Solaris a while ago. 

ron

Re: [9fans] linux and plan 9 ports.

[Kenji Okamoto]

> yeah, I'm seeing this here. Linux is into "fail because it fails" mode. 
> 
> Of course, a lot of this is the fact that PC hardware sucks so bad, but 
> Linux is still getting pretty complex pretty fast. I think it passed 
> Solaris a while ago. 

I'm running 2.4.28 all our machines, older models, here.
I'm trusting "you don't change it if it works well." things.☺

By the way what is the major motivation when you all updated from 
2.4.xyz to 2.6.xyz?   Sorry, off topic!

Kenji

Re: [9fans] linux and plan 9 ports.

[Charles Forsyth]

>>By the way what is the major motivation when you all updated from 
>>2.4.xyz to 2.6.xyz?   Sorry, off topic!

- trying to get the libraries to be compatible with some newer applications
- hoping some bugs might be fixed without breaking too much
- setting up a build system to build inferno binaries that would work with 2.6.x without LD_KERNEL_...=
- manual/automatic updates to `commercially supported' systems (eg, Suse)
- a desire to live life in the fast lane
- ecology: i wanted to help conserve more tlb entries

Re: [9fans] linux and plan 9 ports.

[Charles Forsyth]

>>By the way what is the major motivation when you all updated from 
>>2.4.xyz to 2.6.xyz?   Sorry, off topic!

oh no! i forgot one of the more compelling ones:
- a scheduler that might not be completely hopeless

Re: [9fans] linux and plan 9 ports.

[Ronald G. Minnich]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Charles Forsyth wrote:

> - a scheduler that might not be completely hopeless

hell yeah, now you got at least 3. Just what I wanted.

ron

Re: [9fans] linux and plan 9 ports.

[William Josephson]

On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 01:47:31AM +0000, Charles Forsyth wrote:
> >>By the way what is the major motivation when you all updated from 
> >>2.4.xyz to 2.6.xyz?   Sorry, off topic!
> 
> oh no! i forgot one of the more compelling ones:
> - a scheduler that might not be completely hopeless

Have they finally fixed it a bit?  Last I tried
to run any number of threads on a Linux box it
nearly died on me.

Re: [9fans] linux and plan 9 ports.

[Ronald G. Minnich]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Kenji Okamoto wrote:

> By the way what is the major motivation when you all updated from 
> 2.4.xyz to 2.6.xyz?   Sorry, off topic!

drivers.

ron

Re: [9fans] linux and plan 9 ports.

[William Josephson]

On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 12:25:15PM -0700, Ronald G. Minnich wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Bruce Ellis wrote:
> > it's so large and has had so many hands in it that it is basically
> > unmaintainable.  i worked with someone a few years ago who would
> > literally update his linux distribution *daily*.  it would "work" some
> > days.
> 
> yeah, I'm seeing this here. Linux is into "fail because it fails" mode. 
 
> Of course, a lot of this is the fact that PC hardware sucks so bad, but 
> Linux is still getting pretty complex pretty fast. I think it passed 
> Solaris a while ago. 

FreeBSD has its share of problems -- mostly it lags in hardware
suport -- but it does boot everytime.  Well, except when my video
card is totaly hosed; dunno what's up with that.  Either lots of
random noise or big flashing blocks on the screen, but never the
BIOS.

Re: [9fans] linux and plan 9 ports.

[William Josephson]

On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 02:07:48AM +0900, Noah Evans wrote:
> What is up with linux/gnu lately? glibc version 2.3.4.20040808-r1

``Lately''?  If anyone finds Russ his Tux punching bag, I want
one, too.

> caused the new version of plan 9 ports to segfault on every threaded
> application. The same thing supposed happens with opera. I upgraded to
> 2.3.4.20041102 and everything worked fine.