From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <15c12bbcce92d2cf7367991f8544bee5@plan9.bell-labs.com> From: jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] why do we need 9load? In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:52:40 -0400 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 41706d3e-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 On Mon Sep 22 01:26:56 EDT 2003, rminnich@lanl.gov wrote: > On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, Russ Cox wrote: > > > that was the plan. like many projects, it got stalled for lack of manpower. > > ok, so there's nothing insane about it. I'm going to give it a try and see > how it goes. It's easier to fix Plan 9 for linuxbios, then to fix both > 9load and Plan 9 for linuxbios -- my calculator claims it is twice as easy > to fix half the number of things. > > ron I still tinker with it from time to time. There are some things about the current /dev/reboot which I don't like. It still doesn't solve the problem (for us great unwashed) of getting the first kernel into memory from somewhere other than flash without writing more 16-bit code without a real assembler.