From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20140507073809.62e1138e@zinc.9fans.fr> <621fee0ec5c5de3d0ea868f7626f3e8a@proxima.alt.za> Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 09:59:59 +0100 Message-ID: From: Charles Forsyth To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1130cc46d9840c04f8cb96ba Subject: Re: [9fans] [GSOC] plan9 which arch code to use? Topicbox-Message-UUID: e03b5774-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --001a1130cc46d9840c04f8cb96ba Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 7 May 2014 09:38, Riddler wrote: > Out of curiosity is there a reason that the patches for a 64bit install > never ended up in the main plan9 codebase? The full story is much more complicated, but briefly, the switch to 64 bits offered a chance to revisit the kernel implementation, but the version that was closest to plan 9 was incomplete on amd64, and never released except for powerpc where most of the work was done, and the other forks that were released for amd64 were more experimental (eg, Nix). A year or two back a further attempt was made to retrace and set out again, because so much old crud had got added back in, but that stalled when several of us ran out of time or got too busy. At the time, none of us was interested in adding yet more unfinished or unpolished software to the big cloudy bitbuckets. I'm sure at least one of those will be back soon. There was, however, a parallel effort to allow a more conventional licence, which did finally prosper. --001a1130cc46d9840c04f8cb96ba Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On 7 May 2014 09:38, Riddler <riddler876@gmail.com> wrote= :
Out of curiosity is there a reason that the patches for a 64bit install nev= er ended up in the main plan9 codebase?

The full stor= y is much more complicated, but briefly, the switch to 64 bits offered a ch= ance to revisit the kernel implementation,
but the version that was closest to plan 9 was i= ncomplete on amd64, and never released except for powerpc where most of the= work was done,
and the other forks that we= re released for amd64 were more experimental (eg, Nix). A year or two back = a further attempt was made
to retrace and set out again, because so much ol= d crud had got added back in,
but that stal= led when several of us ran out of time or got too busy. At the time, none o= f us was interested in adding yet more unfinished
or unpolished software to the big cloudy bitbuck= ets.
I'm sure at least one of those wil= l be back soon.

There was, however, a parallel effort to allow a more conventional licence,= which did finally prosper.
--001a1130cc46d9840c04f8cb96ba--