>> he wrote *AMD*64 not *ARM*64 ;-)
>
> Does plan9 on the rpi run armv8? I thought it was armv7 even on the rpi3.
it was a joke...
--
cinap
2016-09-11 19:50 GMT+02:00 :
> he wrote *AMD*64 not *ARM*64 ;-)
Does plan9 on the rpi run armv8? I thought it was armv7 even on the rpi3.
Andrés
2016-09-11 19:48 GMT+02:00 Kurt H Maier :
> On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 07:39:31PM +0200, Andrés Domínguez wrote:
>> 2016-09-11 18:40 GMT+02:00 Benjamin Huntsman
>> :
>> > with amd64 support?
>>
>> the rpi image
>
> I predict suffering.
I understood that he wanted to start with a distribution with am
he wrote *AMD*64 not *ARM*64 ;-)
--
cinap
On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 07:39:31PM +0200, Andrés Domínguez wrote:
> 2016-09-11 18:40 GMT+02:00 Benjamin Huntsman
> :
> > with amd64 support?
>
> the rpi image
>
I predict suffering.
Benjamin: I wouldn't get too hung up on amd64 specifically. Labs,
9atom, and 9front should all work fine ou
2016-09-11 18:40 GMT+02:00 Benjamin Huntsman :
> Hi!
>
>What would be the best place to start in, looking for the most
> current/widely-used distribution with amd64 support? 9front? 9atom?
> Other?
I would bet that the best distribution to start working with out of
the box is the rpi image b
Hi!
Since a similar line of conversation came up recently, I thought I'd ask...
Maybe this was just my perception, but I remember that years ago, there
seemed to be a pretty strong aversion to forking the official distribution from
Bell Labs. These days I'm not certain where the majority
