From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <14ec7b180711062148w74f3236elb7c0529287f28002@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 22:48:36 -0700 From: "andrey mirtchovski" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] consterm In-Reply-To: <13426df10711062129v12fc7afcgfd7da14060288f79@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <719bc0fd763d14adf5d99d93e6a9b2f0@quanstro.net> <13426df10711062129v12fc7afcgfd7da14060288f79@mail.gmail.com> Topicbox-Message-UUID: edaa6ae0-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > (gets me 4 parallel interactive fdisk's on the four nodes md,d1,d2,d3 > -- it seems weird but worked wonderfully well. cpu is just not set up > to do this type of thing, and neither would your consterm be). we had a cpu that could talk to multiple nodes at the same time (multiplex i/o) in 2002, i believe. as well as an 'rx' that did the same thing. i'll dig through my fs, but chances are slim that i still have it. no idea why it didn't get much use. oh, wait, it was plan9-only :)