[johnnym]

I admire this project because I know from experience how trying to support a single architecture in a niche project can be a challenge.

Thanks again, for me it's like learning on the job actually. That it really works was crucial for keeping me on the project.

I have my own pet OS that I am working on, off and on.

Nice! Having your own OS allows you to avoid the constant windmill fight against important software products dropping support for your beloved architecture because of constant - not necessarily careless - changes. I saw and see that a lot in Debian GNU/Linux, e.g. a few years ago they dropped userland support for older iconic MIPS machines like Qube(2) and RaQ(2) because a newer ISA promised "loads of performance improvements". Well, I couldn't reproduce these, as I couldn't find a cheap enough MIPS board to test that - and what would such a board be compared to my Qube2 or MIPS RaQs? For the same reason I find most ppc64le ports in - let's call it community - distributions rather useless as POWER8 machinery is still not a hobbyist friendly thing in regard to price. Even worse if supporting ppc64le includes dropping support for ppc64 and powerpc...

Honestly if the OpenBSD guys aren't willing to help at all I think the best opportunity would be to join forces with another project that has interest in maintaining an openbsd port and sharing resources between the two.

Don't know of any, unfortunately. VAX guys will by now have moved on to NetBSD (don't have one unfortunately, but SIMH is there, I wonder what it could do with a 5 to 6 GHz AMD64 processor), as will the SPARC guys (me including, also because of the missing MP support).

A tezro running an IP27 kernel? Interesting.

Yeah, I believe the OpenBSD devs (or most likely Miod himself) tried to get as many machines covered with a kernel as possible. Because for other architectures usually there is only one SP (and one MP kernel if existing) and a singular RAMdisk kernel (SP kernel with integrated RAMdisk for installations and recovery). SGI machines seem to be just too different to each other to cover them all with a singular kernel, or it would be too big then.

If you're interested, the OpenBSD/sgi 6.9 installation manual shows what kernels support what machine in detail.