Plan9/Inferno and Glendix questions

[EBo]

While trying to wrap my head around the Glendix want list, I
remembered that there is already a gentoo ebuild of Inferno. Is
there, or will there be, any cross development happening between
Inferno and Glendix? I'm curious why we may be duplicating efforts.
Is this a licensing issue?

Sorry for the naive questions...

EBo --

[Anant Narayanan]

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 3:36 PM, EBo <e...@sandien.com> wrote:
> While trying to wrap my head around the Glendix want list, I
> remembered that there is already a gentoo ebuild of Inferno.  Is
> there, or will there be, any cross development happening between
> Inferno and Glendix?  I'm curious why we may be duplicating efforts.
> Is this a licensing issue?

Inferno and Plan 9 are *related*, but not the *same*. The aim of
Glendix is to make Plan 9 binaries run natively on Linux. With inferno
it is already possible to do this because of the Dis virtual machine,
which allows inferno to run in "hosted" mode.

The Glendix project does not have any plans for cross-development with
inferno at the moment, though if someone comes up with a cool idea I'm
sure we're all ears!

Cheers,
Anant

[EBo]

Anant Narayanan <an...@kix.in> said:

> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 3:36 PM, EBo <e...@sandien.com> wrote:
> > While trying to wrap my head around the Glendix want list, I
> > remembered that there is already a gentoo ebuild of Inferno. �Is
> > there, or will there be, any cross development happening between
> > Inferno and Glendix? �I'm curious why we may be duplicating efforts.
> > Is this a licensing issue?
>
> Inferno and Plan 9 are *related*, but not the *same*. The aim of
> Glendix is to make Plan 9 binaries run natively on Linux. With inferno
> it is already possible to do this because of the Dis virtual machine,
> which allows inferno to run in "hosted" mode.

I noticed that (but have not had time to play with it yet).

Can Plan9 do Limbo?

> The Glendix project does not have any plans for cross-development with
> inferno at the moment, though if someone comes up with a cool idea I'm
> sure we're all ears!

Well... The topic of theses (both in Plant Bio and Computer Science) is
multispatiotemporal modeling. The built-in concurrency and distributed
computing aspects make doing this kind of work trivial by comparison. Some of
the work I have done in the past was to interface glyph/GUI-type visual
programming/modeling tools (think SciCos, Stella, Simile here) to my work with
full runtime polymorphic meta-modeling. I've been wanting to extend these
ideas to something like Boinc. For my first thesis (in Plant Bio) I coded up
SIMD, MIMD, and SISD parallel machines to run all this, but wanted to
investigate redoing this using some of the state of the art distributed
techniques.

When I can break away 2 moments, I'll see if I can come up with something
worth trying to integrate the two efforts. Regardless, this all sounds cool.

Laters,

EBo --

> Cheers,
> Anant
>
> --
> To post to this group, send email to gle...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
glendix+u...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/glendix?hl=en
>



--

[EBo]

Just got in and decided to take a little time and poke around...

One of the first things we need to deal with is that there are three,
basically separate, portage trees/overlays for plan9port.

*) gentoo: dev-util/plan9port -- 20070522, and 20080130 snapshots,
and is listed as maintainer-needed

*) ???: dev-util/plan9port -- 20080130 and 20091028 apparently by
Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto updating Anant's old work

*) dev-plan9/* -- 20070308 Anant's old work (?)

Personally, I think I prefer Anant's dev-plan9 layout as opposed to scattering
the ebuilds throughout the conventional gentoo portage categories, but I am
not sure what the best overall layout is. If we develop ebuilds for each of
the tools/libs (dev-plan9's layout), then we can manage each of the tools
separately and still have a plan9-meta, etc., similar to the way kde is managed.

If it is OK with everyone, I'll contact Jorge Vicetto and gentoo regarding
integrating the different efforts, or at least make sure I'm not stepping on
anyone's toes.


Best regards,

EBo --

[Anant Narayanan]

On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 7:44 PM, EBo <e...@sandien.com> wrote:
> Personally, I think I prefer Anant's dev-plan9 layout as opposed to scattering
> the ebuilds throughout the conventional gentoo portage categories, but I am
> not sure what the best overall layout is.  If we develop ebuilds for each of
> the tools/libs (dev-plan9's layout), then we can manage each of the tools
> separately and still have a plan9-meta, etc., similar to the way kde is managed.

I'd go with putting all the ebuilds in dev-plan9 first, and as they
mature think about meta-ebuilds like kde at a later point.

> If it is OK with everyone, I'll contact Jorge Vicetto and gentoo regarding
> integrating the different efforts, or at least make sure I'm not stepping on
> anyone's toes.

Please go ahead, and also ask for access to the overlay :-)

Cheers,
Anant

[EBo]

Anant Narayanan <an...@kix.in> said:

> I'd go with putting all the ebuilds in dev-plan9 first, and as they
> mature think about meta-ebuilds like kde at a later point.

OK. sounds good.

> > If it is OK with everyone, I'll contact Jorge Vicetto and gentoo regarding
> > integrating the different efforts, or at least make sure I'm not stepping on
> > anyone's toes.
>
> Please go ahead, and also ask for access to the overlay :-)

will do. Whom should I contact about dev-plan9 access? overlays.gentoo.org?
Since I am not yet an official gentoo developer I doubt that they will give
me immediate access.

Thanks and best regards,

EBo --

[EBo]

Well, the semester is over and I'm nearly done with my obligations...

I've started looking at the old plan9/glendix ebuilds, and noticed that there
are a couple of plan9 eclass'es in the plan9 overlay. These are pretty old,
but maybe it is worth keeping. I'm just not sure if this is the best way to
go, if if they should be abandoned and just use the basic eclasses. Does
anyone have an opinion regarding this?

No one has responded to my email regarding looking for a Gentoo mentor, so for
now I'll look at working on this on the Sunrise overlay. To start, I'll keep
everything under dev-plan9 as Anant suggested unless there are serious objections.

Looking forward to working with you all, and Cheers!

EBo --

EBo <e...@sandien.com> said: