[9fans] Is there a reason for the existence of 9atom?

[9fans] Is there a reason for the existence of 9atom?

[Eugene Gorodinsky]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 223 bytes --]

This question has been bugging me for some time and I haven't found any
discussions on the matter. It seems that at least the devices support could
go into the original plan9 kernel. What's the reason for having a fork?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 231 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] Is there a reason for the existence of 9atom?

[Sergey Zhilkin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 537 bytes --]

Hello ! :)

Go to the http://www.quanstro.net/plan9/9atom/ and read the few lines of
text.


On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Eugene Gorodinsky
<e.gorodinsky@gmail.com>wrote:

> This question has been bugging me for some time and I haven't found any
> discussions on the matter. It seems that at least the devices support could
> go into the original plan9 kernel. What's the reason for having a fork?




-- 
С наилучшими пожеланиями
Жилкин Сергей
With best regards
Zhilkin Sergey

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 877 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] Is there a reason for the existence of 9atom?

[Eugene Gorodinsky]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 748 bytes --]

Been there, done that. Not a line of text saying why 9atom appeared nor why
the changes are not merged back into plan9.

2011/2/13 Sergey Zhilkin <szhilkin@gmail.com>

> Hello ! :)
>
> Go to the http://www.quanstro.net/plan9/9atom/ and read the few lines of
> text.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Eugene Gorodinsky <e.gorodinsky@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> This question has been bugging me for some time and I haven't found any
>> discussions on the matter. It seems that at least the devices support could
>> go into the original plan9 kernel. What's the reason for having a fork?
>
>
>
>
> --
> С наилучшими пожеланиями
> Жилкин Сергей
> With best regards
> Zhilkin Sergey
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1356 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] Is there a reason for the existence of 9atom?

[Anthony Sorace]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 119 bytes --]

No big mystery: the Bell Labs folks are more
conservative about folding in certain kinds
of changes than Erik is.


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 210 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] Is there a reason for the existence of 9atom?

[Eugene Gorodinsky]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 257 bytes --]

Any specific rules as to which changes are going to be accepted and which
are not?

2011/2/14 Anthony Sorace <a@9srv.net>

> No big mystery: the Bell Labs folks are more
> conservative about folding in certain kinds
> of changes than Erik is.
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 482 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] Is there a reason for the existence of 9atom?

[Sergey Zhilkin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 541 bytes --]

Ask Geoff :)

I think, that plan9 code-base is used somewhere else at Alcatel-Lucent. :)

2011/2/14 Eugene Gorodinsky <e.gorodinsky@gmail.com>

> Any specific rules as to which changes are going to be accepted and which
> are not?
>
> 2011/2/14 Anthony Sorace <a@9srv.net>
>
> No big mystery: the Bell Labs folks are more
>> conservative about folding in certain kinds
>> of changes than Erik is.
>>
>>
>


-- 
С наилучшими пожеланиями
Жилкин Сергей
With best regards
Zhilkin Sergey

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1114 bytes --]

Re: [9fans] Is there a reason for the existence of 9atom?

[erik quanstrom]

On Mon Feb 14 02:01:04 EST 2011, e.gorodinsky@gmail.com wrote:

> Been there, done that.  Not a line of text saying why 9atom appeared
> nor why the changes are not merged back into plan9.

there was at least one person i told that a certain bit of
atom hardware "works great," only to find out that it did
not work great with the distribution iso.  i created 9atom
as a stopgap but it has continued to be useful since the
standard distribution doesn't support ken's file server and
not everything has been merged back in.  it will be great
to get everything merged back in at some point.

i see its ongoing utility for me as a way to get some things
i'm working on packaged up so people can use them.  for example,
one big change in 9atom is unicode 6.0 support.  (that is,
32-bit runes.)  i've used it to do a bit with cuniform.

i hope 9atom doesn't offend anyone.  gripe at me off
like if you want to.

i hope to get the cannonical sources online in the near
future.

- erik

Re: [9fans] Is there a reason for the existence of 9atom?

[Fernan Bolando]

On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Eugene Gorodinsky
<e.gorodinsky@gmail.com> wrote:
> This question has been bugging me for some time and I haven't found any
> discussions on the matter. It seems that at least the devices support could
> go into the original plan9 kernel. What's the reason for having a fork?

--This is just how I see this, you can choose to ignore the rest of the message.

i have always considered 9atom and a few other independent plan9 stuff
as something similar to the openbsd release strategy. Theres a stable
release and a current. 9atom is more like openbsd-current it's
bleeding edge, but it should be _more_ stable and has _more_ hardware
support. The official iso is more like openbsd-stable unless something
is broken you will only see bug fixes, until bell-labs considers the
new stuff as stable.

Re: [9fans] Is there a reason for the existence of 9atom?

[Jacek Masiulaniec]

On 15 February 2011 08:08, Fernan Bolando <fernanbolando@mailc.net> wrote:
> i have always considered 9atom and a few other independent plan9 stuff
> as something similar to the openbsd release strategy. Theres a stable
> release and a current. 9atom is more like openbsd-current it's
> bleeding edge, but it should be _more_ stable and has _more_ hardware
> support. The official iso is more like openbsd-stable unless something
> is broken you will only see bug fixes, until bell-labs considers the
> new stuff as stable.

This is near total misrepresentation of the OpenBSD release process.