From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 16:28:52 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=uR06MsL42=i9b3MALMm-6h+2QnEaCr_3VrP9q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tharaneedharan Vilwanathan <vdharani@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: [9fans] amd64 port
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 63f49100-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

hi all,

i am just posting a question that has been in my mind for a while.

to me, it looks like 64-bit computing has caught up very well. even
smaller processors like atom supports 64-bit instruction set.

on the contrary, while plan9 supported 32-bit processors ahead of
other OSes, it is yet to support 64-bit.

i am happy to see the plan9 port to many platforms (sheevaplug,
beagleboard, etc) but i am also wondering if they are really as
practical and widely usable as, say amd64 platform. (for e.g. i bought
a sheevaplug long back, ran plan9 then kept aside waiting for more
support).

so i am wondering if we should make plan9/inferno support 64-bit at a
higher priority. to me, it looks like 64-bit and VM support (vmware,
parallels, etc) will be key for plan9/inferno to go a long way. am i
right?

please pass your opinion.

thanks
dharani