From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <c514214fead7faeb934e53c945316814@proxima.alt.za>
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Date: Thu,  8 May 2014 07:56:23 +0200
From: lucio@proxima.alt.za
In-Reply-To: <631a67d68fe5ca99316efb4af2c21156@ladd.quanstro.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] [GSOC] plan9 which arch code to use?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: e2b0e5c8-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> would be nice to put all the hardware support together.

That would be wonderful.  But it does require resources to deal with
incompatibilities as well as different perception of value.  My angle
her is that I'm mostly working with obsolete equiopment and I am
extremely reluctant to watch Plan 9 drop support for the hardware I
have in favour of hardware I cannot afford.

I can see how one would approach this problem in a fair manner, but I
appreciate that the cost would be higher.  For example, I'm using AC97
audio on this workstation, after putting some trouble into fitting it
into the Bell Labs distribution (nothing much, in fact, still...).
Now, this is incompatible with the original Soundblaster stuff and no
one seems to care to deal with the incompatibilities.  That's where
the community needs to be encouraged to take on low-benefit projects.

++L