From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:22:33 -0500
From: William Josephson <jkw@eecs.harvard.edu>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] linux and plan 9 ports.
Message-ID: <20050120012233.GF59585@mero.morphisms.net>
References: <d4828f1c2fdabf071255c9087e443859@terzarima.net>
	<3122eaf9ac0e6310ce949954e38a2456@terzarima.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3122eaf9ac0e6310ce949954e38a2456@terzarima.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 339b055a-eace-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 01:47:31AM +0000, Charles Forsyth wrote:
> >>By the way what is the major motivation when you all updated from 
> >>2.4.xyz to 2.6.xyz?   Sorry, off topic!
> 
> oh no! i forgot one of the more compelling ones:
> - a scheduler that might not be completely hopeless

Have they finally fixed it a bit?  Last I tried
to run any number of threads on a Linux box it
nearly died on me.