From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5d375e920907081304y72741f00of20a7abf6d695d4b@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090708084855.GA1371@polynum.com> <8ea4f24e3b6cd8f73321c0d62b295ccb@hamnavoe.com> <439ce9144800e42fe15a33950bcb15e6@coraid.com> <9ab217670907080956o49460690hf8e33bf42bb59f82@mail.gmail.com> <5d375e920907081250h46a4f2caw427b2c720dc70680@mail.gmail.com> <9ab217670907081256i55d08aa7v86d4eb7348a080f4@mail.gmail.com> <5d375e920907081304y72741f00of20a7abf6d695d4b@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 13:32:49 -0700 Message-ID: <7d3530220907081332o72502abfk5f82d849adb691ad@mail.gmail.com> From: John Floren To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] Google finally announces their lightweight OS Topicbox-Message-UUID: 178d7490-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Uriel wrote: > On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Devon H. O'Dell wrote: >> 2009/7/8 Uriel : >>> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 6:56 PM, Devon H. O'Dell wrote: >>>> I don't think so. We already have IPv6 support and it's not that bad. >>>> Having more drivers and supported commodity architectures would be a >>>> good thing. I'd love to do this, but I don't think anybody's going to >>>> match my salary to port drivers, do ACPI, add amd64 support for >>>> workstations, etc. >>> >>> ACPI will never, ever, ever happen, so people better get over it (and >>> if anyone is naive enough to waste their time trying, it will end up >>> as a useless atrocious mess that wont boot even in a 100th of the >>> systems out there, much less suspend or do anything useful). >> >> ACPI support doesn't need to suspend or do thermal zones. It just >> needs to be able to read the ADT and get MP / interrupt routing table >> information. This is doable. Have you ever read any of the ACPI spec? >> I have. > > The spec doesn't matter much, given that most BIOS out there totally ignore it. > >>> As for amd64, it is already done, we are just not worthy to have access to it. >> >> Without this getting into a holy war, what Geoff told me was that the >> amd64 work was for headless CPU servers, which is only mildly useful >> to me anyway. > > If it was released perhaps somebody would add the missing drivers, who knows... > > As things stand, we will never know. > > uriel Yeah, it's too bad nobody else on this planet could conceivably ever write a port. Since you're so hot on the idea, why not port it yourself? I expect to see code immediately, by the way, finished or not, and you better be around to answer my questions. Or are you too busy perfecting your /sys/doc mirror and bitching on irc? John -- "I've tried programming Ruby on Rails, following TechCrunch in my RSS reader, and drinking absinthe. It doesn't work. I'm going back to C, Hunter S. Thompson, and cheap whiskey." -- Ted Dziuba