[9fans] About Plan9 on small systems

[9fans] About Plan9 on small systems

[Adriano Verardo]

Hi, all

Some time go I read about Plan9 on microcontrollers.

Is this an interesting argument for the 9fans community ?

adriano

Re: [9fans] About Plan9 on small systems

[John Floren]

On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Adriano Verardo<a.verardo@tecmav.com> wrote:
> Hi, all
>
> Some time go I read about Plan9 on microcontrollers.
>
> Is this an interesting argument for the 9fans community ?
>
> adriano
>
>

The closest you'll come with Plan 9 is the ARM port.

As for microcontrollers like the Atmels, you might have better luck
with native Inferno--that can run in as little as 1 MB of RAM.

John
--
"I've tried programming Ruby on Rails, following TechCrunch in my RSS
reader, and drinking absinthe. It doesn't work. I'm going back to C,
Hunter S. Thompson, and cheap whiskey." -- Ted Dziuba

Re: [9fans] About Plan9 on small systems

[Anthony Sorace]

inferno's got lighter requirements in some ways, but has
the same class of CPU requirements (more or less). if you
have something lighter than that in mind, you might not get
plan 9 but the ideas could still be useful. ask google about
"styx on a brick" for an example of using styx (9p by
another name) on a really small embedded device to
export underlying capabilities.

Re: [9fans] About Plan9 on small systems

[erik quanstrom]

On Sat Jul 18 19:24:31 EDT 2009, anothy@gmail.com wrote:
> inferno's got lighter requirements in some ways, but has
> the same class of CPU requirements (more or less). if you
> have something lighter than that in mind, you might not get
> plan 9 but the ideas could still be useful. ask google about
> "styx on a brick" for an example of using styx (9p by
> another name) on a really small embedded device to
> export underlying capabilities.

the big difference is that inferno requires no mmu.

these days i think the bright line would be 32-bit cpus.
it would be quite difficult to get either one of them
working well on a 8- or 16-bit cpu.

- erik