From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Wed,  7 May 2014 05:25:43 -0400
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <f698e4bd2529266e563ea5677ff97d50@brasstown.quanstro.net>
In-Reply-To: <CANUoZoF5jvkBMw-z-Zj1hkvocVFpovhKcau7gOe8zm2s=L+saw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOw7k5jU-_PSttSOOmgEUrWnaYHnagchigqrfZrReobks6TiJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<c6a29f141ead4f91a54ab47ec4fcd1ce@proxima.alt.za>
	<20140507073809.62e1138e@zinc.9fans.fr>
	<c6337543c7b598cd5872f236d725fa3d@brasstown.quanstro.net>
	<CANUoZoF5jvkBMw-z-Zj1hkvocVFpovhKcau7gOe8zm2s=L+saw@mail.gmail.com>
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: e0733842-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Wed May  7 05:24:00 EDT 2014, 0intro@gmail.com wrote:
> > also why have atom.s in ape?
>
> This is what was done on 386.
>
> /n/sources/plan9/sys/src/ape/lib/ap/386/atom.s

that begs the question.  why put the atom functions in ape
for any architecture?

- erik