From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <a4e6962a05071113056d3720e7@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:05:00 -0500
From: Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com>
To: "Ronald G. Minnich" <rminnich@lanl.gov>
Subject: Re: [9fans] 8c question
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507111355220.14780@enigma.lanl.gov>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <eaf7ffeb94093a1af9c5b04c2c0aa4f9@terzarima.net>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0507101853241.12286@enigma.lanl.gov>
	<a4e6962a050711122327252f90@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0507111355220.14780@enigma.lanl.gov>
Cc: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 640925e4-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On 7/11/05, Ronald G. Minnich <rminnich@lanl.gov> wrote:
>=20
>=20
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Eric Van Hensbergen wrote:
>=20
> > Now that he has recover more or less working, Gorka is going to take a
> > look at this.  Burning a Xen CD for him right now.  A question for you
> > Ron - would it be bad to prototype on the more stable Xen 2.0?  I'd hat=
e
> > to waste time if too much of the device channel interface is chaning fo=
r
> > 3.0...
>=20
> newsham can tell us more. But my inclination, given the spin rate of 3.0,
> is to go for 2.0 for proof-of-concept. After all, to get it working on
> 3.0, you have to first finish the port of plan 9 to 3.0 ...
>

Well, we're going to prototype stuff with v9fs on Linux to get stuff
working quickly, then move to Plan 9 native.
=20
>=20
> it's be nice to have a '#X' or something so:
>=20
> bind '#X' /dev/xen
> and then see /dev/xen/net0, /dev/xen/disk0, and so on, and then
>=20

Oi - my gut is that this sounds wrong.  What would make more sense is
for #X to look more like devsrv, with the virtual channels
representing.  Then you could mount /dev/xen/dom0 /n/dom0 and then
bind as you like.

        -eric