From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <840e3368a6f50adddbfef7e3f97baccf@proxima.alt.za>
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Date: Tue,  3 Dec 2013 08:34:09 +0200
From: lucio@proxima.alt.za
In-Reply-To: <24033ec46b71227ba1f102a63814b5df@coraid.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] Go and 21-bit runes (and a bit of Go status)
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 8f890628-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> i'm committed
> to supporting go in 9atom to the extent that it does not compromise
> or corrupt the system substantially.

I can't assist with the details of kernel requirements, but we all
know that Russ, Rob and Ken will know better and be somewhat committed
so that at least Plan 9 release is not going to be "compromised" by
anything Go is going to need.  You're also overlooking the fact that
OSX, the *BSDs and even some Windows flavours are actively supported
(and Solaris is threatening) so if anything compromises will be
towards generality not specialisation (in other words, no one will try
to turn Plan 9 into Linux).

But (a) your concerns are reasonable and need to be kept sight of and
(b) your idea of listing the necessary changes to Plan 9 dovetails
very much with my idea on how to move forwards from here.  I do wish
we could get Bakul Shah and Anthony Martin to document what they are
working on; and Gorka to document or at least describe to me, so I can
try to document what his focus was when he was still working on the
plan9/arm port.

All of the above would be immensely helpful, in my opinion.

++L