From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Mon,  6 Aug 2007 16:17:40 -0700
From: Geoffrey Avila <avlg@sdsc.edu>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Sparc
In-Reply-To: <ae9f937a18a4dca14c161bd0f80f5c74@csplan9.rit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0708061539150.3575@yakkul.sdsc.edu>
References: <ae9f937a18a4dca14c161bd0f80f5c74@csplan9.rit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 9f7912d6-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025


Does this imply a 64-bit sparcV9 kernel? I didn't know there was a 64-bit 
*c for such things...

-GBA




> <snip>
>> And to be honest, you'd be better off with an i386 or sparcv9, in which
>> case you'd be trying to use Newsham's sparc64 port, not sparc32.
> <snip>
>
> So what's the status on Newsham's sparc64 port? I've got an Ultra 1 lying
> around, but if the wiki is still up to date, the port only supports Ultra 2's.
> Has there been more progress made since the wiki was last updated?
> Thanks
>
>
> John
>