- l4-hackers - example.com Site

Re: Fiasco Status
by Michael Hohmuth 18 Jun '01

18 Jun '01

COFFMAN Steven <SCoffman(a)COVANSYS.com> writes: > Sorry if this was mentioned previously, but the status page for Fiasco > (October 2000) mentions that Fiasco still doesn't have Flex I/O pages. Is > this still the case with CVS? I/O flexpages still are not implemented. Unfortunately, implementing it is not a top priority for us right now (as Fiasco and L4 mostly are used in research contexts), but it still would be nice to have. The priorities could change if an external user shows significant interest. We are currently looking for a student or a contributor to implement this feature. I believe it's not that difficult to do. Michael -- hohmuth(a)innocent.com, hohmuth(a)inf.tu-dresden.de http://home.pages.de/~hohmuth/

3 2

Re: Fiasco Status
by Michael Hohmuth 18 Jun '01

18 Jun '01

Christian Stueble <stueble(a)cs.uni-sb.de> writes: > I am very interested in I/O flexpages and a working clans & chiefs > concept to be able to improve the Perseus secure operating system > project. (http://www.krypt.cs.uni-sb.de/~perseus) And I have some > students here which are interested in practical jobs. But of course > they are more interested in security than in operating systems. Do > you think that it would be possible to implement this features at > the time of a software practical (about 6 month 6 h/week)? Yes, I think so. However, if your student does not have an operating-systems background, she or he needs to be willing to dive into all of the IA32 reference manual, the L4 reference manual, and the Fiasco source code, or at least keep in touch with someone who has experience with these things. There are three areas of work for Fiasco: - Memory representation of the I/O-port--access bitmap - I/O-flexpage--mapping IPC - Mapping-database support for I/O addresses On user level, at least these programs need to be adapted to use I/O flexpages: - L4Linux - RMGR > Another (maybe simpler) approach to prevent hardware access would be > to allow the RMGR to completely decide whether subtasks are allowed to > access I/O ports or not (e.g. configured in the config-file). This allows us > to implement a trusted server task which executes these operations while > enforcing a security policy. Of course this would be slower etc..... For such a protocol, simple controlled inheritance of the I/O- privilege level would suffice. However, with it it's impossible to allow privileged, unmodified Linux programs (such as the X server) to access ports. Michael -- hohmuth(a)innocent.com, hohmuth(a)inf.tu-dresden.de http://home.pages.de/~hohmuth/

1 0

Re: Questions: porting, L4Linux status and performance.
by Michael Hohmuth 17 Jun '01

17 Jun '01

Martin Young <my(a)siroyan.com> writes: > I'm interested in putting L4 on a 'new' processor core [...]. Cool! Can you elaborate on why you're interested in doing this? > Is there a recommended route for doing this? I suppose that I could > either write a new implementation from scratch or port an existing one. > L4Ka looks quite attactive as it already exists for more than one > platform and it's available under the GPL. OTOH the L4/x86 reference > manual is so short that a new implementation doesn't look too daunting. > Would anybody like to guess how long either route would take? (Take the following with a grain of salt: I am the main designer and implementor of the Fiasco microkernel.) In the past, no L4 implementation has ever been reused and ported to a different architecture by a group other than the originator's. It has been the L4 gospel that it is cheaper to just do a new implementation. This has worked well so far. I estimate the cost to be somewhere between .5 and 1.5 man years, depending on the level of sophistication you want to achieve (real-time? SMP?) and the tests you have (on the x86 we have L4Linux; when L4Linux stops crashing, you're done ;-). AFAICT, one of the goals of the L4KA project is to prove that a portable L4 implementation is both possible and feasible. I believe that the L4KA hackers can put their kernel on a new architecture in a matter of weeks. However, I have no idea how approachable their source code is or whether they have any design documentation or implementation notes available. If they have something, though, I'm certain they'd be happy to share it with you. (They are actively researching microkernel portability. Maybe they'd even like to hire you!) Strictly speaking, Fiasco has been developed for x86 CPUs without special regard to portability. However, Fiasco's object-oriented design encapsulates hardware specifics as much as other subsystems. I believe that it can be refactored quite easily to support more than one architecture. Therefore, I personally would look into porting Fiasco. Of course, I'm in a better position that you are, because I am well accustomed with this beast, but I believe that Fiasco's structure is quite intelligible if you are a bit into OO design. I also have some design documentation available for the asking. I and my group would be happy to help out with our experience. That said, I believe that both options for porting an existing kernel do not take significantly shorter than just doing it yourself, given you don't know the source base. Just like developing a new system, porting a kernel requires understanding it, and that can take time. > I'm also wondering how stable L4Linux (particularly the 2.2.x kernel > version) actually is. I see on the mailing list that some simple > commands can crash the kernel, but is this typical? I don't want to run > anything large like a RH distribution but a stable kernel+bash would be > great. No, this is not typical. L4Linux is quite stable and happily boots Linux to multiuser mode and runs XFree86, Netscape, XPilot and the likes. > If I were to write or port an L4 MK I expect that initial versions > wouldn't be well optimised for my CPU architecture. In this situation > how would it's performace compare to (for example) mach?

3 2

L4-Linux as a real-time OS
by Jun-ichi Odagiri 16 Jun '01

16 Jun '01

Hello, I've been trying to use L4-Linux as a real-time platform for a control application. The application was developed based on VxWorks, but ported to Linux lately. Unfortunately, as you know, Linux allows usual processes to block a real-time process for durations of 100 ms or more. I found that a process of L4-Linux can preempt the Linux server if the process is given a priority higher than that of Linux, and can continue with its work as far as it does not call Linux for services. I actually tested it on a PC-compliant VME CPU board. Interrupt latency in the worst case was less than 1 ms, even with a disk I/O background. I'm wondering if this mailing-list accepts application related issues as well. If so, I'd like to ask you : 1) Is that kind of idea crazy? 2) Is there anyone who tried (or is going to try) something like that? 3) Is L4-Linux going to keep up with the revisions of Linux in the future? I'll appreciate any suggestion, comment and criticism. Thanks in advance. J. Odagiri

2 2

RE: L4-Linux as a real-time OS
by Sebastian Schoenberg 15 Jun '01

15 Jun '01

> > You should not expect any real-time behavior if you use a L4Linux task > to serve interrupts. Instead of this, implement the time-critical code > (e.g. I/O to VME board, computations of output values) in an L4 task. > Then let this task communicate with L4Linux by IPC (usually by using > an own thread). > > Then you will get worst-case latencies of about 85 > microseconds (P800). A quick note: This relatively high number is not due to a bad implementation of the kernel itself. It is the result of a bunch of impacts such as TLB misses, cache misses for data, code and cache misses on parsing page tables, etc... Sebastian

1 0

Fiasco Status
by COFFMAN Steven 15 Jun '01

15 Jun '01

Sorry if this was mentioned previously, but the status page for Fiasco (October 2000) mentions that Fiasco still doesn't have Flex I/O pages. Is this still the case with CVS? -Steve

2 1

Questions: porting, L4Linux status and performance.
by Martin Young 13 Jun '01

13 Jun '01

Hi Folks, I've had a look around the L4 web site and I've got a few questions... I'm interested in putting L4 on a 'new' processor core (although strictly as an unofficial spare-time activity). I have experience of porting Chorus to two different cores and I've done various other mk-related stuff so I wouldn't be going in entirely cold. Is there a recommended route for doing this? I suppose that I could either write a new implementation from scratch or port an existing one. L4Ka looks quite attactive as it already exists for more than one platform and it's available under the GPL. OTOH the L4/x86 reference manual is so short that a new implementation doesn't look too daunting. Would anybody like to guess how long either route would take? I'm also wondering how stable L4Linux (particularly the 2.2.x kernel version) actually is. I see on the mailing list that some simple commands can crash the kernel, but is this typical? I don't want to run anything large like a RH distribution but a stable kernel+bash would be great. If I were to write or port an L4 MK I expect that initial versions wouldn't be well optimised for my CPU architecture. In this situation how would it's performace compare to (for example) mach? Does L4's performane advantage come from optimisation of the implementation or from its architecture? The literature suggests the latter however I note that many L4 implementations are written in assembler and that there are performance concerns about Hazelnut. Thanks. -- Martin Young, working for: | Phone: +44(0) 1454 615151 Siroyan Limited, Bristol Design Centre, | Mobile: +44(0) 7855 758771 West Point Court, Great Park Road, | web: www.siroyan.com Bradley Stoke, Bristol BS32 4QG. UK | email: my(a)siroyan.com ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com **********************************************************************

1 0

Re: Multiple linux servers
by Michael Hohmuth 20 Apr '01

20 Apr '01

"Vincent Legoll" <vlegoll(a)apsydev.com> writes: > Just a simple question : have you ever tried to launch multiple > copies of the linux server on the same l4 kernel ? No. Currently, L4Linux depends on standard Linux device drivers that run inside the L4Linux server task, and you cannot run two sets of drivers for the same hardware on a single machine. If you would have the two server instances use different devices and interrupts, or if you would externalize drivers (let them run in their own tasks) and make them shareable, there should be nothing in general that prevents two L4Linux servers on the same machine. Michael -- hohmuth(a)innocent.com, hohmuth(a)inf.tu-dresden.de http://home.pages.de/~hohmuth/

1 0

Multiple linux servers
by Vincent Legoll 19 Apr '01

19 Apr '01

Hello, Just a simple question : have you ever tried to launch multiple copies of the linux server on the same l4 kernel ? -- Vince

1 0

SMP L4 released for Alpha
by Gernot Heiser 11 Apr '01

11 Apr '01

A version of L4 for Alpha processors has been released in source form under the GNU GPL. The kernel is provides full, scalable and low-overhead support for SMP systems. It has been tested on 21064, 21164 and dual CPU 21264 systems. This is the first release of a multiprocessor version of L4, and the second 64-bit version (after MIPS, also from UNSW). The source is available from http://l4alpha.sourceforge.net. We hope that this release will stimulate external interest (and participation) in L4 development and use. UNSW Operating Systems Group disy(a)cse.unsw.edu.au http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~disy/

1 0

RE: l4-Linux and gasp
by Sebastian Schoenberg 27 Mar '01

27 Mar '01

The gasp .align directive should be written directly to the outfile. The warning is misleading, since some gas-versions (for alpha) use .align x as alignment to the power of two, other use the value given as argument. Sebastian --- PLEASE USE PGP !! http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/~schoenbg/pgp-key.asc Dipl.-Inform. Sebastian Schoenberg University of Technology, Dresden Dept. of Computer Science Operating Systems Research Group Phone: +49 (351) 463 8401 Fax: +49 (351) 463 8284 > -----Original Message----- > From: Christian Stueble [mailto:stueble@cs.uni-sb.de] > Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 3:11 PM > To: l4-hackers(a)kurt.inf.tu-dresden.de > Subject: l4-Linux and gasp > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hello, > > due to problems with L4Linux/Fiasco I noticed that gasp > reports the warning: > > l4_idle.pre:1836 alignment must be one of 1, 2 or 4. > l4_idle.pre:1988 alignment must be one of 1, 2 or 4. > > when compiling l4_idle.pre. Could this cause trouble? > I use gcc 2.95.2, gasp 1.2 and as 2.9.5 > > Chris > - -- > - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Christian Stueble......................stueble(a)cs.uni-sb.de > PubKey[BF7104F5].......fp=8678C5D3CAD9CD8C F1DDB8EC202F116A > > To be or not to be is true... (apocrypha of George Boole) > - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use > MessageID: uLWl6hG54Oh3oORs/VtBb5H+uikJFgkW > > iQCVAwUBOsCRefyJjJy/cQT1AQFTdgP+PdRya487EahMX7KzDYa/JQmLLT9gguJP > vQpd6sU6GpxmWpPr7bg4pNTN4L1QNj9WVCX6/IqW/2fJZKyeGMTfZiITLt6efnGm > PnZFH8RcOith2iROi8nyprSzv1GULEqJyrr1D7kQxVUodYmA3sxON4ToSxRi/AiU > 3k1XOab1N+o= > =MeHo > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > l4-hackers mailing list > l4-hackers(a)os.inf.tu-dresden.de > http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/mailman/listinfo/l4-hackers >

1 0

l4-Linux and gasp
by Christian Stueble 27 Mar '01

27 Mar '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hello, due to problems with L4Linux/Fiasco I noticed that gasp reports the warning: l4_idle.pre:1836 alignment must be one of 1, 2 or 4. l4_idle.pre:1988 alignment must be one of 1, 2 or 4. when compiling l4_idle.pre. Could this cause trouble? I use gcc 2.95.2, gasp 1.2 and as 2.9.5 Chris - -- - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Christian Stueble......................stueble(a)cs.uni-sb.de PubKey[BF7104F5].......fp=8678C5D3CAD9CD8C F1DDB8EC202F116A To be or not to be is true... (apocrypha of George Boole) - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use MessageID: uLWl6hG54Oh3oORs/VtBb5H+uikJFgkW iQCVAwUBOsCRefyJjJy/cQT1AQFTdgP+PdRya487EahMX7KzDYa/JQmLLT9gguJP vQpd6sU6GpxmWpPr7bg4pNTN4L1QNj9WVCX6/IqW/2fJZKyeGMTfZiITLt6efnGm PnZFH8RcOith2iROi8nyprSzv1GULEqJyrr1D7kQxVUodYmA3sxON4ToSxRi/AiU 3k1XOab1N+o= =MeHo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Little bug in L4-Linux?
by Christian Stueble 21 Feb '01

21 Feb '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hello, When I compile linux22, I get the follwing error message in linux22/arch/l4/x86/emulib: ------------------------- ld -m elf_i386 -N -Ttext 0xa0008000 -o emulib int_entry.o user.o ld: warning: cannot find entry symbol _start; defaulting to a0008000 cp emulib emulib-s strip emulib-s ld -m elf_i386 -r \ -defsym _user_task_init=0x`nm emulib | grep user_task_init | cut -f1 -d' '` \ -defsym user_level_pager=0x`nm emulib | grep user_level_pager | cut -f1 -d' '` \ -defsym emulib_start=0x`nm emulib | grep -w real_sys_call | cut -f1 -d' '` \ -defsym emulib_end=0x`nm emulib | grep [_L]etext | cut -f1 -d' '` \ -defsym idt_table=0x`nm emulib | grep -w idt_table | cut -f1 -d' '` \ -defsym debug_idt_table=0x`nm emulib | grep -w debug_idt_table | cut -f1 -d' '` \ -defsym emulib_idt_descr=0x`nm emulib | grep emulib_idt_descr | cut -f1 -d' '` \ -defsym emulib_debug_idt_descr=0x`nm emulib | grep emulib_debug_idt_descr | cut -f1 -d' '` \ -T link-r.ld -o emulib.o emulib-s ld: cannot open a00087c2: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden ------------------------- The problem seems to be the command "nm emulib | grep [_L]etext | cut -f1 ..." which returns two lines instead of one: ------------- a00087c2 a00087c2 ------------- Replacing "[_L]etext" by "_etext" works fine... Is this a bug or a feature? Ciao, Chris -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Christian Stueble......................stueble(a)cs.uni-sb.de PubKey[BF7104F5].......fp=8678C5D3CAD9CD8C F1DDB8EC202F116A To be or not to be is true... (apocrypha of George Boole) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

2 1

Problems compiling CVS Version 02/20/2001
by Christian Stueble 20 Feb '01

20 Feb '01

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hello, I tried to compile the l4 CVS version from today, but I have some oskit/oskit10 problems: 1) l4/Makeconf seems to add oskit10 includes even if OSKIT10 is not set. Maybe the line "ifeq ($(OSKIT10),) " is wrong? 2) When I fixed that, l4/pkg/log/lib/src/doprnt.c produces an error, because oskit/boolean.h is not there. Do you mean flux/boolean.h, or should oskit10 be used instead of oskit? 3) I also tried to use oskit10, which produces errors in oskit_support and some services because of missing headers, e.g., lmm/lmm.h or flux/machine/pc/reset.h Some files seem to require oskit and some oskit10?? Ciao, Chris -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Christian Stueble......................stueble(a)cs.uni-sb.de PubKey[BF7104F5].......fp=8678C5D3CAD9CD8C F1DDB8EC202F116A To be or not to be is true... (apocrypha of George Boole) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

2 1

do i need oskit for working with L4?
by Subbaraj, Thirumurugan 22 Jan '01

22 Jan '01

Hello, I have downloaded the GRUB and OSkit. How do i load the kernel/build the image with L4? Any suggestions? regards -thiru

1 0

problem starting the hello server
by Christian Rehn 11 Jan '01

11 Jan '01

Hi, I,ve got a problem starting the hello server on top of fiasco. I checked out l4-fiasco from the cvs repository and compiled it. My menu.lst looks as follows: kernel=(nd)/boot/tftpboot/rehn/rmgr -sigma0 module=(nd)/boot/tftpboot/rehn/main -nojdb module=(nd)/boot/tftpboot/rehn/sigma0 module=(nd)/boot/tftpboot/rehn/hello When I try to boot l4 rmgr starts, loads the l4 kernel and the sigma0 server but does not load the hello server (I'm not sure if it is loaded but not executed or if it is not loaded but I can not find the code that should load the hello server). Where should the hello server be loaded? Why does the rmgr "exec_load" main and the sigma0 server but not the hello server in function startup() in startup.c? Thanks, Christian

1 0

IPC
by Jordan Curzon 03 Jan '01

03 Jan '01

Hello, What is the most common way for apps(or libs) to find the task id for a service(networking for example)? _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

1 0

L4 benchmarks
by Greg Law 12 Dec '00

12 Dec '00

Hi, I would like to get some benchmarks for L4 on Pentium. Specifically, I am after the times to create a process and execute a getpid (preferably in cycles). Does anyone know where I can get such info before I try and go through the pain of measuring it myself? Cheers, Greg -- Greg Law, email: gel(a)soi.city.ac.uk Dept. Of Computing, web: http://www.soi.city.ac.uk/~gel/ City University, phone: +44 20 7477 8341 London, UK. EC1V 0HB. fax: +44 20 7477 8587

1 0

Missing files in recent cvs versions
by David Welch 16 Nov '00

16 Nov '00

Hi, Some of the Makefiles in fiasco want to use Makeconf.lib.targets and Makeconf.lib.rules which don't seem to be in the cvs repository. Also the Fiasco bug tracking link gives a 404.

2 2

Ideas for some sample L4 root_task(s) [Learning L4].
by Farid Hajji 25 Oct '00

25 Oct '00

Hi Brent, this is what I'm planning to do next to get used to the L4-Ka interface. If you are interested, let's do this together. Basically it's about exercising misc. L4 syscalls in the root_task itself. Once we understand this, we can grab libmom and add L4 sysdeps to glibc and the Hurd. 01. map from sigma0 the kernel info page into the address space of the root_task. printf() its contents, especially its 'clock' field which is updated by the ukernel. sleep some useconds and printf clock again. [-> learn more about sigma0 rpc protocol, how to send/receive a message to/from sigma0, some memory managment issues in general and l4_sleep(). ] 02. activate some threads in root_task, and let each thread continouusly putc() a unique identifying character to the screen. look at the resulting pattern. A control thread could getc() chars from keyboard and use this char to start/stop the thread that prints this char. [-> learn about threads and scheduling.] Add a pager to a thread which just printf()s each page request, before forwarding it to sigma0. Alternatively, trap the request and handle it by mapping an own page to the requester. Finally, reclaim pages that are not needed anymore (how? and how to get notified about this condition?). [-> learn about pagers and the L4 application/pager protocol.] 03. create new (child) tasks and: * map/grant some pages * send/receive messages: short message, long message, with and without string dopes etc.. * synchronize threads via blocking l4-receive syscalls. [-> learn about messages, ipc calls.] 04. understand what rmgr really does, what its interfaces to the root_task and other tasks are (a.k.a. how to request/receive ressources from rmgr) and try to implement Okuji's idea about relocation of modules (glinux) so that we can boot glinux with vanilla GNU Grub (no modaddr). 05. Attach a root_task thread to one interrupt number (say com1, clock, keyboard or whatever) and printf/acknowledge each received interrupt. [-> Handling interrupts. Is it possible to get an interrupt that is already bound by rmgr? Hmmm... ] [-> What about chaining interrupts/events? ] Write a trivial device driver server (like sorta translator), e.g. a clock device, that gets clock interrupts and reads the clock page in the kernel to update its internal notion of time. Add protocol so that other threads/tasks can ask the time via RPC (simple message) from this clock server. [-> generalize this to device driver servers in general. Think about a Hurd abstraction to access such servers. Driver-Translators? Driver-IPC? ] 06. Grab the code of a real device driver from OSKit and try to turn it into a device driver server as in 05. 07. [...] Real world examples are located in RMGR source code, and in the sources of L4-Fiasco apps and L4Linux. I'll continue to use L4Ka right now though, simply because I can compile it without problems on my FreeBSD box ;-). Any suggestions? -Farid. -- Farid Hajji -- Unix Systems and Network Admin | Phone: +49-2131-67-555 Broicherdorfstr. 83, D-41564 Kaarst, Germany | farid.hajji(a)ob.kamp.net - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - - - - Murphy's Law fails only when you try to demonstrate it, and thus succeeds.

1 0

Re: RH6.2 and Fiasco
by Michael Hohmuth 24 Oct '00

24 Oct '00

James, are you still having problems with Fiasco? Ißm just now catching up with my email... James Riordan <rij(a)zurich.ibm.com> writes: > Now that it is built, it crashes at boot time: > > RMGR: loading (hd1,1)/fiasco/sigma0 > RMGR: detected new-style DD-L4 > RMGR: starting (hd1,1)/fiasco/main -nokdb proto=0x10128c > > Welcome to Fiasco! > DD-L4/x86 microkernel (c) 1998 TU Dresden - Jul 13 2000 > KDB: init > L4KD -BP----------------------------------------------EIP: f00011c9 > > (hang) > > Any further suggestions? This is the kernel-debugger prompt. Have you tried typing "g" (mnemonic: Go) here? Michael -- hohmuth(a)innocent.com, hohmuth(a)inf.tu-dresden.de http://home.pages.de/~hohmuth/

1 0

Re: CVS server problems?
by Michael Hohmuth 24 Oct '00

24 Oct '00

suzukis(a)flavor1.ipc.hiroshima-u.ac.jp writes: > >did anyone tried to use flux' oskit instead of oskit10 with l4? > > I think Fiasco is (although slowly) moving from oskit to oskit10. Towards > to the newest Flux OSkit will be after it. In my previous building of Fiasco, > it was still dependent on both of oskit & oskit10. So, replacing oskit by > oskit10 seems to be long way. Is it so difficult work? No, it is not that difficult, but we haven't switched to oskit10 because of two reasons: First, the newer OSKit is GPL'd, and we have to maintain a version of Fiasco that is not under the GPL to be able to sell commercial licenses. Such licenses are one way for us to continue financing Fiasco development. That said, however, I agree that a port of Fiasco to the newer OSKit would be worthwile; the old OSKit has compilation problems with newer compilers and binutils. It just isn't an option to completely depend on it; it must be possible to compile Fiasco with older OSKit's as well. So I would like to see everything that's needed from the OSKit hidden in behind a module interface that can be implemented by either the old or the new OSKit. We just haven't got around to implement this kind of abstraction. Maybe one of you can contribute? Regards, Michael -- hohmuth(a)innocent.com, hohmuth(a)inf.tu-dresden.de http://home.pages.de/~hohmuth/

1 0

Re: CVS server problems?
by Michael Hohmuth 24 Oct '00

24 Oct '00

L4 hackers, I'm slowly working my way up through my email archive... Sorry for not responding for so long -- I've been quite busy and had trouble keeping up with my email. Farid Hajji <farid.hajji(a)ob.kamp.net> writes: > I was able to compile flux' oskit on FreeBSD-5.X out of the box without > any problems (using gmake, gcc-2.95.2 and binutils-2.9.1). So there is > definitely something wrong with the CVS server at Dresden :-( The CVS-server problems have finally been fixed two weeks or so ago. (Our bug-tracking database is still in trouble... The problems are due to a change in our server architectue because of stability problems with our Linux SMP server.) Michael -- hohmuth(a)innocent.com, hohmuth(a)sax.de http://www.sax.de/~hohmuth/

1 0

RE: first experiences with l4ka on a real pentium
by Brent Fulgham 20 Oct '00

20 Oct '00

Farid, Nice work on the BOCHS write-up. I'll have to give it a try at some point. Anyway -- I also get the endless loop when booting from GRUB. I'll have to try the Dresden binary to see if this corrects the problem. If so, we'll have to see if Okuji or Gord would be willing to add whatever changes were necessary to the main GRUB tree. Since Okuji reads this mailing list, I'm hoping he'll do so (hint, hint ;-) Thanks, -Brent

2 1

L4KA mailing list
by Uwe Dannowski 20 Oct '00

20 Oct '00

Hi L4KA users! To take L4KA-specific discussions off l4-hackers, we've set up a dedicated mailing list for L4KA. To subscribe to the list, send mail containing only the word "subscribe" (without the qoutes) in the body to l4ka-request(a)ira.uka.de . To unsubscribe send the word "unsubscribe". Posting to the list is restricted to list members. Cheers, Uwe

1 0