From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]) by ur; Tue May 16 09:49:59 EDT 2017 Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 964C920B35 for <9front@9front.org>; Tue, 16 May 2017 09:49:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from web1 ([10.202.2.211]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 16 May 2017 09:49:55 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:message-id :mime-version:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=2Ikvsr4Bcvi695KwTr8dJwEjNydKQumqFYIGK90qqKk=; b=tsKqRYJ5 NZhb0T/IdUdP9E3569QGlNM4Xpqmjz3DIWxLqIzZ1c2XAs2q0sdIMY/71caIndlK +hOiU9h6QfIMhg2iWbguraDWRo1OdrJ3ey0AE0tj5oYyvbbZT/yz3CcBZuNAcYma RJsRHbvWQj8CCfQfUmtVR/cHovKeCBzodHwoB4Z7oQ667mO4l+kyUbrGDBMQuUfd oMSspQftdaFvU/aO6DFSlmlB8Em9f51996ADcenfkpz3LNdQfYzD20xRomQRYqVg 0GLzoD78bQqE2f7cXUwIbFAwjdPQFx/njLP7fVmvAfiZdoPXI9x7NI9GIsoJK3uC twr10i7XdRq0hQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=2Ikvsr4Bcvi695KwTr8dJwEjNydKQ umqFYIGK90qqKk=; b=FCuzLELrzCcnrXKqpqKerNjKVkA9vs7gb+Wg1rcCw3xZ9 Ot37yOiGFiQLSL+uSc4IQxUountFnA668JdjL8SgmI/jWasltCj2MJY/I2F41tTe kW9f7jI4/haSteH2amUxQEZmx79jHkkmrNhDEGZcT7T4VgqEsYXx4fLH6lx0C89h h97EkldSB0thALmbIbbjaB0/d3tBrNapCQUADzfpF3OW2Z4qj1WT3Xv/vvSN0EN0 z8+Knn02gtRHJlcSSTv3/GPC5k8oT57OB9oTd05NVF3qBmob3BK2JOV2AAjD7MlP TkJla0S+01V7S+Zpc0cRh0Vz8NMByyMUt6eEMmZhw== X-ME-Sender: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id 695F99465A; Tue, 16 May 2017 09:49:55 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <1494942595.3100264.978272632.4EE8D161@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Ethan Grammatikidis To: 9front@9front.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-a5162694 Subject: to mk nuke or not mk nuke? Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 14:49:55 +0100 List-ID: <9front.9front.org> List-Help: X-Glyph: ➈ X-Bullshit: hardware SVG over JSON browser interface cinap: i'm sorry for the fuss in irc yesterday. i was trying to keep in mind the symptoms of my problem and what i'd done while following along with what you were saying, and it was all too much for my little brain. i've checked my logs, and found a few extra lines in the ircrc session i forgot to quit on my 9front machine which i forgot to shut down -- told you it was too much for my brain, lol. yesterday i totally missed that you'd stopped talking about linker internals, i was trying to hold that in my brain too! perhaps i should stop trying to get help over irc. today i looked at mkfiles, and tried to edit them to see if i could fix the problem myself, but then i realised: cc.a6 is a library, do we want mk clean to clean it up, or just continue relying on mk nuke? have i misinterpreted the hate for mk nuke that i remember? i have a couple of other questions/problems too. why is there a library in the source tree? if we had /sys/src/libcc/ instead, it would get cleaned up by 'mk install' or 'mk libs'. i added CLEANFILES=cc.a[0568qv] to /sys/src/cmd/cc/mkfile (see /sys/src/cmd/mklibs:/clean). mk correctly passed this to rm -f, but then rm did not remove cc.a6. i ran 'rm cc.a[0568qv]' (no -f) manually, hoping to see an error, but there was no error and it correctly removed cc.a6. at this point i'm just "what is this i don't even", and i'm sending the email now before i get any more confused. :) -- Linux? I used ext4 for a few years. In proportion to the time spent using it, I lost as much data to it as I lost to the very worst released version of reiserfs.