From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <775b8d190601151800m72363e60t89eecc5f0773e49b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:00:19 +1100
From: Bruce Ellis <bruce.ellis@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] WRT54G Port?
In-Reply-To: <43CAFA84.7050504@lanl.gov>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <43CAE459.2080205@lanl.gov>
	<4ac314f12fc14d10ba6919dafd73392c@terzarima.net>
	<775b8d190601151733t72fb1b3apf2ca2bd64cf5de84@mail.gmail.com>
	<43CAFA84.7050504@lanl.gov>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: d859037e-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

burning?  never thought of that.  mr shredder had trouble.

brucee

On 1/16/06, Ronald G Minnich <rminnich@lanl.gov> wrote:
> Bruce Ellis wrote:
> > I do recall that you had to have the *right* linux wrt but newer ones c=
ould
> > be *downgraded*.  vxworks?  yuck.  no chance of getting emu to run on
> > that crap. linux/pthreads is icky enough.
> >
>
>
> vxworks? Not the last time I looked. :-)
>
> vx-doesn't-work
>
> I once had to work on a 64-node multiprocessor running this os. (did I
> call it an OS? really? WHAT was I thinking?)
>
> The major effort was to get a computation to return the same result
> twice, without rebooting the whole system.
>
> We never did.
>
> Chuck Cranor ported NetBSD to this system; then life got bearable.
> Burning the vxworks manuals was fun.
>
> ron
>