sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) (02/03/90)
uzun@pnet01.cts.com (Roger Uzun) writes: |Is there a version of Minix available for the Amiga? I need one for my thesis |project. Failing that, where can I order MINIX for the Atari ST computer, |with source code? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! At least three people have been promising Minix Real Soon Now for almost two years. As far as delivery schedules go, they manage to make Manx look good. Don't hold your breath. Sean -- *** Sean Casey sean@ms.uky.edu, sean@ukma.bitnet, ukma!sean *** "May I take this opportunity of emphasizing that there is no cannibalism *** in the British Navy. Absolutely none, and when I say none, I mean there *** is a certain amount, more than we are prepared to admit." -MP
ja26612@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (02/07/90)
I have heard that Minix is available and complete, but I have not seen it anywhere. Maybe it as just a rumor. Jeff
bn@attcc.UUCP (02/08/90)
I don't see that much use for MINIX on the Amiga other than a learning experience for those who don't have access to a real UNIX(tm) system. I mean what's the point, since our favorite machine already comes with a powerful multitasking operating system with a large software base. I think MINIX is pretty neat, but I think that it's so popular on the other systems, because it actually provides muti-tasking (Something I never want to be without again) on the systems that don't have it readily available. I think that if MINIX for the Ami was actually released, I might get it just to play around with it, however I don't see much use for it beyond that. Bo Najdrovsky UUCP: att!mwood!attcc!bn INET: mwood!attcc!bn@ATT.ATT.COM
dart@cat24.cs.wisc.edu (UPL stuff) (07/24/90)
Hi all, Just wondering if anyone has/is going to do/ a MINIX port for the Amiga. You know, the operating system Tannenbaum(sp?) wrote. It would be kind of neat to have something that takes over Exec's place, but still uses the Amiga hardware (timers) for preemptive task switching. Actually, the AmigaDOG is already pretty close to minix in many re- spects (no memory protection, no swapping, etc.), so I can't imagine it would be *too* difficult to port. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks, -Eric Bazan Please send EMail to the address below if possible: bazan@cae.wisc.edu
paul@athertn.Atherton.COM (Paul Sander) (07/26/90)
In article <4991@daffy.cs.wisc.edu> dart@cat24.cs.wisc.edu (UPL stuff) writes: > > Hi all, > Just wondering if anyone has/is going to do/ a MINIX port >for the Amiga. You know, the operating system Tannenbaum(sp?) wrote. It would >be kind of neat to have something that takes over Exec's place, but still >uses the Amiga hardware (timers) for preemptive task switching. > Actually, the AmigaDOG is already pretty close to minix in many re- >spects (no memory protection, no swapping, etc.), so I can't imagine it >would be *too* difficult to port. Any info would be appreciated. An Amiga port does exist. Two of Tannenbaum's students ported it on their own and it apparently looks quite good to the beta testers. Programs that run under it are binary compatible with ST Minix, and the file system is identical with ST Minix to the point that media can also be exchanged. The bad news is that it is floppy-only. Nobody had a Winchester disk on their system to try writing a driver for. There has been some discussion on this recently in the comp.os.minix newsgroup on Usenet, for those who have access to it. -- Paul Sander (408) 734-9822 | "Passwords are like underwear," she said, paul@Atherton.COM | "Both should be changed often." {decwrl,pyramid,sun}!athertn!paul | -- Bennett Falk in "Mom Meets Unix"
xwm@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Alexei Rodriguez) (09/18/90)
1. WHAT IS MINIX 1.5
MINIX 1.5 is a new version of an operating system that is very similar to
UNIX. MINIX has been written from scratch, and therefore does not contain any
AT&T code--not in the kernel, the compiler, the utilities, or the libraries.
For this reason it can be made available with the complete source code
(on diskette). It runs on the IBM PC, XT, AT, PS/2, 386, and most clones.
Versions are also available for the Atari ST, Macintosh, and Amiga.
This version (1.5) is a major improvement over all previous releases, with
many new features, fewer bugs (hopefully), much better performance, and
proper documentation. The old versions have been in widespread use all over
the world for 3 years. There are probably tens of thousands of users.
2. MINIX 1.5 FEATURES (IBM, Macintosh, Atari, and Amiga versions)
- System call compatible with V7 of the UNIX operating system
- Full multiprogramming (multiple programs can run at once)
- Kernighan and Ritchie compatible C compiler
- Shell that is functionally identical to the Bourne shell
- Five editors (emacs subset, vi clone, ex, ed, and simple screen editor)
- Over 175 utilities (cat, cp, ed, grep, kermit, ls, make, sort, etc.)
- Over 200 library procedures (atoi, fork, malloc, read, stdio, etc.)
- Spelling checker with 40,000 word English dictionary
- Full source code (in C) supplied on diskettes (OS, utilities, libraries)
- Easy-to-read manual telling all about MINIX and how to install and use it
4. HARDWARE REQUIRED
Commodore Amiga 500 or 2000 with at least 1M of RAM. One 720K
diskette drive is sufficient. A hard disk is not neccesary
(or even supported). To use a hard disk with the Amiga,
someone familiar with how this disk works will have to write
a driver for it. If this driver is then posted to the net,
it will be possible to use a hard disk with MINIX on the Amiga.
5. PARTIAL LIST OF UTILITIES INCLUDED IN MINIX 1.5
animals ar ascii at atrun backup badblocks banner basename bawk btoa cal cat
cdiff cgrep chgrp chip chmem chmod chown clr cmp comm compress cp cpdir
crc cron ctags cut date dd de df dhrystone diff diskcheck dosdir dosread
doswrite du echo ed elle ex expand expr factor fgrep file find fold fortune
fsck gather getlf getty grep gres head ic id ifdef indent inodes kill last
leave ln login look lpr ls m4 machine mail make man mined mkdir mkfs mknod
modem more mount mref mv nm nroff od passwd paste patch pr prep pretty
printenv printroot ps pwd readall readfs recover ref rev rm rmdir roff rz
sed shar size sleep sort spell split strings strip stty su sum sync sz tail
tar tee term termcap test time touch tr traverse treecmp true tset tsort ttt
umount unexpand uniq unshar update users uud uue vi vol wc whatsnew whereis
which who whoami width write
6. PARTIAL LIST OF LIBRARY FUNCTIONS INCLUDED IN MINIX 1.5
abort abs access alarm atoi atol bcmp bcopy chmod chown chroot
ctermid ctime ctype curses cuserid doprintf dup dup2 fgetc fgets fopen
fork fpathconf fprintf fputc fputs fread freopen fseek fstat ftell
fwrite getcwd getdents getegid getenv geteuid getgid getutil gtty index
ioctl isatty kill link lock lrand lsearch lseek malloc memccpy
memchr memcmp memcpy memmove memset message mkdir mkfifo mknod mktemp
nlist open opendir pathconf pause peekpoke perror rand read readdir
regexp regsub rename setbuf setgid setjmp setuid signal sleep sprintf
stat strerror strlen strncat strncmp strncpy strpbrk strrchr strspn
system telldir termcap time times tmpnam ttyname umask umount
7. CONTENTS OF MINIX 1.5 REFERENCE MANUAL
Chap. 1 INTRODUCTION
Chap. 2 INSTALLING MINIX ON THE IBM PC, XT, AT, 386, AND PS/2
Chap. 3 INSTALLING MINIX ON THE ATARI S
Chap. 4 INSTALLING MINIX ON THE COMMODORE AMIGA
Chap. 5 INSTALLING MINIX ON THE APPLE MACINTOSH
Chap. 6 USING MINIX
Chap. 7 RECOMPILING MINIX
Chap. 8 MANUAL PAGES
Chap. 9 EXTENDED MAN PAGES
Chap. 10 SYSTEM CALLS
Chap. 11 NETWORKING
App. A MINIX SOURCE CODE LISTING
App. B CROSS REFERENCE MAP
8. MINIX BOOK
The author of MINIX, Andrew S. Tanenbaum, has written a book describing
how operating systems in general and MINIX in particular work internally.
The book describes an earlier version (and includes a source listing), but
it is still useful for understanding how MINIX works inside, even if some
details are now different. The bibliographic information is:
Title: Operating Systems: Design and Implementation
Author: Andrew S. Tanenbaum
Publisher: Prentice-Hall
ISBN: 0-13-637406-9
Paperback versions are also available in English (outside North America only),
French, Spanish, Italian, and Japanese. The books can be ordered from any
bookstore.
9. HOW TO ORDER MINIX 1.5
MINIX 1.5 is being sold by Prentice-Hall. The product numbers and prices
are as follows:
- MINIX 1.5 for the IBM: 5 1/4" (0-13-585076-2) $169
- MINIX 1.5 for the IBM: 3 1/2" (0-13-585068-1) $169
- MINIX 1.5 for the Amiga (0-13-585043-6) $169
- MINIX 1.5 for the Atari (0-13-585035-5) $169
- MINIX 1.5 for the Macintosh (0-13-585050-9) $169 (available Oct. 1)
Sales tax and shipping are extra; Prices are slightly higher outside the U.S.
All versions include the executable binaries, a detailed manual, the complete
source code (on diskettes), and an attractively typeset, cross-referenced
listing of the operating system code.
P-H is making a big effort to get software stores to keep MINIX in stock.
The easiest way to order it is to go to a software store and ask them for
it. If they don't stock it, they can always order it. Alternatively, you
can order directly by email, FAX, phone, or mail from Prentice-Hall as follows.
In North America and the Far East
To order by email: books@prenhall.com
To order by FAX: (201) 767-5625
To order by phone: (800) 624-0023 or (201) 767-5969
To order by mail: Microservice Customer Service
Simon & Schuster
200 Old Tappan Road
Old Tappan, NJ 07675
In UK/Europe
To order by email: books@prenhall.com
To order by FAX: +1 (201) 767-5625 (US number)
To order by phone: +44 (442) 231-555 (UK number)
To order by mail: Order Dept.
Prentice-Hall International
66 Wood Lane End
Hemel Hempstead
Herts. HP2 4RG ENGLAND
For email and FAX orders, please include the product name and number, your
name and address, and your MasterCard or VISA card number and expiration date.
If you wish delivery by Federal Express (costs extra), please indicate so.
MINIX can also be ordered from the following addresses:
In England: The MINIX Center
Forncett End
Norwich
Norfolk NR16 1HT England
0953-89345
In Germany: Steve Steinkrauss
Feldtorweg 24
D3406 Bovenden 1
Germany
In the Benelux: Fred van Kempen
Postbus 184
2100 AD Heemstede
Holland
Tel: +31 23 287935
FAX: +31 23 294229
In Scandinavia: Frank O'Donell
P.O. Box 88
1371 Asker
Norway
In Spain and Deborah Worth
Portugal: Appartado Numero 50672
Madrid
Spain
In Italy: Jim Blaho
Piazza Santo Spirito 17
50125 Florence
Italy
In Greece: Vassilis Zahos
Kritonos 5-7
GR 11634 Athens
Greece
In Turkey: Atilla Gullu
Milli Mudafaa Cad 14/7
Kizilay Ankara
Turkey
If you have previously purchased MINIX from Prentice-Hall, you can get
a discount of $60, but only if you order by mail and include the label from
the original PH boot disk (or the entire disk) with your letter. Not valid for
email, phone or FAX orders since you must enclose the original boot disk label
(not a photocopy). Mail orders can be by credit card or check for $169. You
will be billed for tax and shipping.
10. LEGAL STATUS OF MINIX
Although MINIX is supplied with the complete source code, it is
copyrighted software. It is not public domain. It is also not like GNU.
However, the copyright owner, Prentice-Hall has granted permission to bona
fide universities to copy the software for use in courses and in university
research projects. It is also permitted for MINIX owners to change the
software to suit their needs and to distribute diff listings containing
their changes freely. The shrink-wrap license that comes with MINIX states
that you may legally make two backup copies of the software. Prentice-Hall
is being much less strict than other software vendors. Please do not abuse
this. Companies that wish to embed MINIX in commercial systems or sell
MINIX-based products should call (212) 995-7788 to discuss licensing terms.
11. NEWS ABOUT MINIX
Since its introduction in January 1987, there has been a large an
active USENET newsgroup about MINIX, comp.os.minix. It currently has
about 25,000 members. Over 12,000 messages have been posted to this
group so far. These messages have contained questions, bug reports,
bug fixes, new software, and diff listings to allow current users to
update to new releases for free. It is the intention to continue this
policy into the indefinite future. MINIX users on Bitnet can be put on
a mailing list by sending mail to: info-minix-request@udel.edu. Various
archives store newsgroup traffic for newcomers to the newsgroup.
12. FUTURE PLANS
The major current project is bringing MINIX into conformance with
the IEEE POSIX P1003.1 and P1003.2 standards. This will (hopefully)
occur with V2.0, perhaps in 1992. V2.0 will also be provided with an
ANSI C compiler. Various people are currently working on 32-bit versions
of MINIX for the 386, and numerous other projects. To keep up, subscribe
to the comp.os.minix newsgroup.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, for those of you that do not read comp.newprod, here is the posting
about the 1.5 release of MINIX. Although I deleted some stuff about the IBM
and Mac versions, this is the main of the post. Although nothing was mentioned
about student discounts, I wonder if my 25% (or is that 40%?) discount at local
computer stores is valid? Hmm. There are a few questions that I have about
MINIX as a whole so here goes:
Will it multi-task under amiga? (Boot Amiga and then go Minix or is
it a hog?)
Does MINIX multitask?
I saw a post about GUI for MINIX but the problem was lack of
graphics.lib. Anybody have any suggestions.
Also, how hard would it be to write a hard drive driver for
MINIX?
Please, these are honest questions. If they seem ignorant, sorry. I am anxious
to get my A3000 and be able to work in my room with no hassles or load
problems from the computers here. Thanks to all.
Alexei
xwm@mentor.cc.purdue.eduJKT100@psuvm.psu.edu (JKT) (09/20/90)
>2. MINIX 1.5 FEATURES (IBM, Macintosh, Atari, and Amiga versions) > - Full multiprogramming (multiple programs can run at once) Ok, we've all heard how MultiFinder on the Mac supposedly multi- tasks too, but when you actually inspected it, it actually task switches. Because this posting did not use the term "multi-task" is it possible that the programs do not actually run at once, but task switch, with only one running at a time? >4. HARDWARE REQUIRED > Commodore Amiga 500 or 2000 with at least 1M of RAM. One 720K > diskette drive is sufficient. A hard disk is not neccesary > (or even supported). To use a hard disk with the Amiga, > someone familiar with how this disk works will have to write > a driver for it. If this driver is then posted to the net, > it will be possible to use a hard disk with MINIX on Amiga. Obviously someone thinks the Amiga is an IBM clone, saying that the floppies are 720K... :-( More importantly, is it truly necessary for them to require a HD driver? Is there no way they could make use of existing drivers with a simple interface? Seems silly to re-invent the wheel.... >10. LEGAL STATUS OF MINIX > Although MINIX is supplied with the complete source code, it is >copyrighted software. It is not public domain. It is also not like GNU. >However, the copyright owner, Prentice-Hall has granted permission to bona >fide universities to copy the software for use in courses and in university >research projects. It is also permitted for MINIX owners to change the >software to suit their needs and to distribute diff listings containing >their changes freely. Whoops. This is what has caused many problems in the UNIX world. People making mods is a good idea, but history shows us that a central site to coordinate updates is required if a standard version is to be maintained. Otherwise it won't be long until you get programs that require versions of MINIX you don't necessarily have, because there are dozens of dialects running around. >There are a few questions that I have about >MINIX as a whole so here goes: > > Will it multi-task under amiga? (Boot Amiga and then go Minix or > is it a hog?) Well, it is its own Operating System after all, and for it to multitask with the Amiga OS, then you'd have to have 2 OS's running at once. A headache of a situation at best. My bet would be no. One workaround would be if MINIX allowed you to do most/all of the things you do in AmigaDOS. Then you wouldn't have as much need for it to multi-task with Ami. > I saw a post about GUI for MINIX but the problem was lack of > graphics.lib. Anybody have any suggestions. If it doesn't, then there are going to be problems.... and not just with the Amiga. I mean, more and more people are realizing just how neat GUI's are, and aside from that, are getting into computer graphics. Yes, I know how difficult it would be to have cross- compatibility with MINIX on other machines if graphics had to be included too, but that fact does not make the real-world desire for graphics go away. If MINIX doesn't offer any graphics support, it probably won't last all that long, and will follow CP/M to the grave. I may be wrong, and I don't have any hopes one way or another, but this is how I see it from my view of today's computer market. > > Alexei > xwm@mentor.cc.purdue.edu Kurt -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- || Kurt Tappe (215) 363-9485 || Amigas, Macs, IBM's, C-64's, NeXTs, || || 184 W. Valley Hill Rd. || Apple ]['s.... I use 'em all. || || Malvern, PA 19355-2214 || (and in that order too! ;-) || || jkt100@psuvm.psu.edu --------------------------------------|| || jkt100@psuvm.bitnet jkt100%psuvm.bitnet@psuvax1 QLink: KurtTappe || -----------------------------------------------------------------------
edp367s@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Rik Harris) (09/20/90)
xwm@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Alexei Rodriguez) writes: >Well, for those of you that do not read comp.newprod, here is the posting >about the 1.5 release of MINIX. Although I deleted some stuff about the IBM >and Mac versions, this is the main of the post. Although nothing was mentioned >about student discounts, I wonder if my 25% (or is that 40%?) discount at local >computer stores is valid? Hmm. There are a few questions that I have about >MINIX as a whole so here goes: This was posted here (yes, in this newgroup) about a week and a half ago. (If you use minix as part of your course, you lecturer can buy it and give it out to students - for teaching purposes, for free) > Will it multi-task under amiga? (Boot Amiga and then go Minix or is > it a hog?) No, it takes over the computer. What's the point of running two operating sytems at the same time. It is a REPLACEMENT for amigados. (and about time too). > Does MINIX multitask? yes, of course. > I saw a post about GUI for MINIX but the problem was lack of > graphics.lib. Anybody have any suggestions. sorry, no idea. > Also, how hard would it be to write a hard drive driver for > MINIX? As far as I can tell, not too hard. They have built in the support (I think) and just lack the drivers. rik. -- Rik Harris - edp367s@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au | Build a system that Faculty of Computing and Information Technology, | even a fool can use, Monash University, Caulfield Campus, Australia | and only a fool will (say that with your mouth full!) | want to use it.
mk59200@naurulokki.tut.fi (Kolkka Markku Olavi) (09/20/90)
In article <90262.224308JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu>, JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu (JKT) writes: |> >2. MINIX 1.5 FEATURES (IBM, Macintosh, Atari, and Amiga versions) |> > - Full multiprogramming (multiple programs can run at once) |> |> Ok, we've all heard how MultiFinder on the Mac supposedly multi- |> tasks too, but when you actually inspected it, it actually task |> switches. Because this posting did not use the term "multi-task" |> is it possible that the programs do not actually run at once, but |> task switch, with only one running at a time? You seem to suffer from terminology confusion. MultiFinder uses "non-pre-emptive" or "co-operative" multitasking, UNIX, MINIX, and Amiga Exec use "pre-emptive" multitasking. "Task switching" or "context switching" occurs in both kinds of systems. If you want multiple processes _actually_ running at once, you need also several CPUs, this is called _multiprocessing_. |> >4. HARDWARE REQUIRED |> > Commodore Amiga 500 or 2000 with at least 1M of RAM. One 720K |> > diskette drive is sufficient. A hard disk is not neccesary |> > (or even supported). |> |> Obviously someone thinks the Amiga is an IBM clone, saying that the |> floppies are 720K... :-( MINIX uses its own disk format which is the same on Atari ST and Amiga (and possibly 3.5" IBM), and stores 720K on the disk. |> More importantly, is it truly necessary for them to require a HD |> driver? Is there no way they could make use of existing drivers |> with a simple interface? Seems silly to re-invent the wheel.... Because MINIX fully replaces the Exec, it canot use hddisk.device or other Exec device drivers. The sowtware must be rewritten from ground up. -- Markku Kolkka mk59200@tut.fi
srm@dimacs.rutgers.edu (Scott R. Myers) (09/21/90)
In article <90262.224308JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu> JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu (JKT) writes: > > I saw a post about GUI for MINIX but the problem was lack of > > graphics.lib. Anybody have any suggestions. > > If it doesn't, then there are going to be problems.... and not just > with the Amiga. I mean, more and more people are realizing just > how neat GUI's are, and aside from that, are getting into computer > graphics. Yes, I know how difficult it would be to have cross- > compatibility with MINIX on other machines if graphics had to be > included too, but that fact does not make the real-world desire > for graphics go away. If MINIX doesn't offer any graphics support, > it probably won't last all that long, and will follow CP/M to the > grave. I may be wrong, and I don't have any hopes one way or another, > but this is how I see it from my view of today's computer market. > > > > Alexei > > xwm@mentor.cc.purdue.edu In all fairness to Minix I have to defend it concerning going the **CP/M way** because of a graphic-less future. If you know a little of the the history of Minix (And I do know a little :-0) you would know that its originally charter in life was to provide a unix like engine for educational enlightenment. In other words in the beginning Minix was not intended to dominate the world of Operating Systems. Just a learning tool... Now it's maturing to a point where it may soon be a viable alternative to what we have today but it's still going strong in a world where all we ask for is a good OS and some code to hack on :-)... srm -- Scott R. Myers Snail: 26 Stiles Street Phone:(201)882-3100 Apartment 18 Elizabeth, NJ 07201 Arpa: srm@dimacs.rutgers.edu Uucp: ..!dimacs!srm "... No matter where you go, there you are ..."
barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) (09/21/90)
>xwm@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Alexei Rodriguez) writes: >> Will it multi-task under amiga? In article <1990Sep20.034119.23845@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> edp367s@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Rik Harris) writes: >No, it takes over the computer. What's the point of running two operating >systems at the same time? The same as running two PROGRAMS at the same time: so you don't have to exit one to run the other. An operating system is just a program, you know. Simply put: if you could switch between Amiga OS and MINIX without rebooting, isn't that better than requiring a reboot? Ask any Bridgeboard owner. Dan //////////////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ | Dan Barrett, Department of Computer Science Johns Hopkins University | | INTERNET: barrett@cs.jhu.edu | | | COMPUSERVE: >internet:barrett@cs.jhu.edu | UUCP: barrett@jhunix.UUCP | \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/////////////////////////////////////
edp367s@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Rik Harris) (09/21/90)
JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu (JKT) writes: >>2. MINIX 1.5 FEATURES (IBM, Macintosh, Atari, and Amiga versions) >> - Full multiprogramming (multiple programs can run at once) >Ok, we've all heard how MultiFinder on the Mac supposedly multi- >tasks too, but when you actually inspected it, it actually task >switches. Because this posting did not use the term "multi-task" >is it possible that the programs do not actually run at once, but >task switch, with only one running at a time? arrrrgggghhhhhh. How do you expect more than one program to run at a time with ONLY ONE PROCESSOR?????? The ibm, mac, amiga, and the atari all have ONE processor. What do you think computers are???? magic????? How do you think most unix machines run so many processes? One processor for each process????? and now for some possibly useful info: >>4. HARDWARE REQUIRED >> Commodore Amiga 500 or 2000 with at least 1M of RAM. One 720K >> diskette drive is sufficient. A hard disk is not neccesary >> (or even supported). To use a hard disk with the Amiga, >> someone familiar with how this disk works will have to write >> a driver for it. If this driver is then posted to the net, >> it will be possible to use a hard disk with MINIX on Amiga. >Obviously someone thinks the Amiga is an IBM clone, saying that the >floppies are 720K... :-( To make the different versions of MINIX compatible (binary as well as disk formats) they needed to have the amiga reduced to a disk format that those other computers can handle. No, I don't like reducing the amiga to a 720k disk format, but it's worth it to have the different versions compatible. >More importantly, is it truly necessary for them to require a HD >driver? Is there no way they could make use of existing drivers >with a simple interface? Seems silly to re-invent the wheel.... Drivers are not difficult to write, but they do wait for specific commands from the operating system. My guess is that MINIX would send different commands to its drivers than AmigaDOS (erk!) would, so it is better to re-write the drivers anyway. You could probably get away with using the source code from the AmigaDOS (erk!) drivers, and just modifying it. >>10. LEGAL STATUS OF MINIX >> Although MINIX is supplied with the complete source code, it is >>copyrighted software. It is not public domain. It is also not like GNU. >>However, the copyright owner, Prentice-Hall has granted permission to bona >>fide universities to copy the software for use in courses and in university >>research projects. It is also permitted for MINIX owners to change the >>software to suit their needs and to distribute diff listings containing >>their changes freely. >Whoops. This is what has caused many problems in the UNIX world. >People making mods is a good idea, but history shows us that a central >site to coordinate updates is required if a standard version is to >be maintained. Otherwise it won't be long until you get programs that >require versions of MINIX you don't necessarily have, because there are >dozens of dialects running around. At the moment, that seems to be going ok with the ibm and atari, as patches are sent to the net, and then generally included in the next version. There seems to me more problems with people posting updates to commands (eg grep, or ls), and posting it as a patch to _ibm_ MINIX, rather than all MINIX versions. I agree that it's dangerous, but since MINIX is essentially a teaching tool, it is worth it. >>There are a few questions that I have about >>MINIX as a whole so here goes: >> >> Will it multi-task under amiga? (Boot Amiga and then go Minix or >> is it a hog?) >Well, it is its own Operating System after all, and for it to >multitask with the Amiga OS, then you'd have to have 2 OS's running >at once. A headache of a situation at best. My bet would be no. your bet, is correct, and I agree, that's the way it should be. >One workaround would be if MINIX allowed you to do most/all of the >things you do in AmigaDOS. Then you wouldn't have as much need for >it to multi-task with Ami. It doesn't have the ability to run AmigaDOS programs, but it really depends on what you want to do at the same time. Graphics and sound stuff is likely to be nonexistant for the moment (but possible), but don't expect Sculpt- Animate 4D, or whatever to work at all. Most AmigaDOS programs are also only designed to work on AmigaDOS only, and the windows stuff would have to be completely re-implemented in MINIX. (the other option is to port something like X, the unix windowing environment, to MINIX) Better to stick to unix :-) >> I saw a post about GUI for MINIX but the problem was lack of >> graphics.lib. Anybody have any suggestions. >If it doesn't, then there are going to be problems.... and not just >with the Amiga. I mean, more and more people are realizing just >how neat GUI's are, and aside from that, are getting into computer >graphics. Yes, I know how difficult it would be to have cross- >compatibility with MINIX on other machines if graphics had to be >included too, but that fact does not make the real-world desire >for graphics go away. If MINIX doesn't offer any graphics support, >it probably won't last all that long, and will follow CP/M to the >grave. I may be wrong, and I don't have any hopes one way or another, >but this is how I see it from my view of today's computer market. No GUI standard, and no real need for it at the moment. This is an operating system designed for teaching operating systems. The GUI is someone elses problem. If a third party produces a GUI, then fine, but I don't expect it to be included in the distribution (I hope not, because it would be wasted disks for many people). MINIX is not designed as a commercial OS. >> >> Alexei >> xwm@mentor.cc.purdue.edu >|| Kurt Tappe (215) 363-9485 || Amigas, Macs, IBM's, C-64's, NeXTs, || >|| 184 W. Valley Hill Rd. || Apple ]['s.... I use 'em all. || >|| Malvern, PA 19355-2214 || (and in that order too! ;-) || >|| jkt100@psuvm.psu.edu --------------------------------------|| >|| jkt100@psuvm.bitnet jkt100%psuvm.bitnet@psuvax1 QLink: KurtTappe || rik. -- Rik Harris - edp367s@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au | Build a system that Faculty of Computing and Information Technology, | even a fool can use, Monash University, Caulfield Campus, Australia | and only a fool will (say that with your mouth full!) | want to use it.
pl@news.funet.fi.tut.fi (Lehtinen Pertti) (09/21/90)
From article <1990Sep20.150550.297@funet.fi>, by mk59200@naurulokki.tut.fi (Kolkka Markku Olavi): > > Because MINIX fully replaces the Exec, it canot use hddisk.device or > other Exec device drivers. The sowtware must be rewritten from ground up. > And atleast SUPRA uses AMD 8530 (or was its 8350) SCSI controller chip, so we can use skeleton driver posted on net a little while ago. -- pl@tut.fi ! All opinions expressed above are Pertti Lehtinen ! purely offending and in subject Tampere University of Technology ! to change without any further Software Systems Laboratory ! notice
p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst) (09/22/90)
In article <90262.224308JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu> JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu (JKT) writes: >Ok, we've all heard how MultiFinder on the Mac supposedly multi- >tasks too, but when you actually inspected it, it actually task >switches. Because this posting did not use the term "multi-task" >is it possible that the programs do not actually run at once, but >task switch, with only one running at a time? You'll need multiple processors to run multiple programs at the same time. Neither the Amiga nor the Mac can do this. Nevertheless, the question is wether the multitasking system is preemptive. AmigaDOS and MINIX can force a task to release the cpu so you don't have to do the taskswitching in your application code (by calling a dispatcher routine like in MultiFinder). >>4. HARDWARE REQUIRED >> Commodore Amiga 500 or 2000 with at least 1M of RAM. One 720K >> diskette >Obviously someone thinks the Amiga is an IBM clone, saying that the >floppies are 720K... :-( The Amiga will use 720K formatted disks for Minix since they are written in a format compatible to the Atari and PC versions. >More importantly, is it truly necessary for them to require a HD >driver? Is there no way they could make use of existing drivers >with a simple interface? Seems silly to re-invent the wheel.... Well, Minix is not AmigaDOS and it would be quite difficult to simulate the regular environment to these drivers. If you have source to your Exec harddisk driver (or know how the hardware works) it is possible to write a driver for Minix. >Whoops. This is what has caused many problems in the UNIX world. >People making mods is a good idea, but history shows us that a central >site to coordinate updates is required if a standard version is to >be maintained. Otherwise it won't be long until you get programs that >require versions of MINIX you don't necessarily have, because there are >dozens of dialects running around. Yes, but MINIX isn't (yet) supposed to be an operating system where you actually run applications. It might develop into one but until then it is nice to have many people working on it. Regards, -- Michael van Elst UUCP: universe!local-cluster!milky-way!sol!earth!uunet!unido!mpirbn!p554mve Internet: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."
hill@evax.arl.utexas.edu (Col. Ames and Pixel) (09/22/90)
People, people, people.......
MINIX is primarily designed for TEACHING about Operating Systems. It is often
used in Jr and Senior level classes for projects. For example here at UTA they
had to rewrite the floppy driver to "cache" a track of data at a time.
You would NEVER want to run MINIX as a primary OS, unless you are REALLY into
kernel hacking or are fascinated how OS's work. (It is rather interesting, if I
do say so myself).
As far as patches and mods go... "Where there's PATCH and DIFF there's a way"
Look on a MINIX ftp sites there are lots.
At least now I can use my Amiga for Operating Systems class.
--
adam hill Everybody lies about sex.
hill@evax.arl.utexas.edu BOING!4Ever Rub HER feet!
It's better to copulate than never
AmigaDos2.0 - A VW with $10,000 in options. --Robert A. Heinleinhawk@pnet01.cts.com (John Anderson) (09/22/90)
A bunch of very informative answers about Minix for Amiga deleted.
What type of software is available for the Amiga version of Minix? Will
it run just about all the stuff that will work with others systems Minix
software? Will it work with most unix stuff, and finally, do you know if
there is a way to get it from a dealer or a mail order house, instead of
sending $169 dollars to the company directly? Thank you for any help and
answers you can give.
/seanc@pro-party.cts.com (Sean Cunningham) (09/22/90)
In-Reply-To: message from JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu I know, this has little to do with the entirety of your reply...but I'd like to address your first statement about MultiFinder mtasking (supposedly) and issue a challenge to any MultiFinder user running on any Mac. Just how many programs can you have running concurrently on a Mac under MFinder, a PC under Win3...OS/2...Desqview...GEOS...whatever? Have you ever tried to find the max on your Amiga? Well, I haven't found it yet, but sofar, I and my partner have been able to have FIFTY-FOUR concurrent tasking running at once. This was on an A2500/30 with 4MB 32bit FastRAM/1MB 16bit ChipRAM. We had: .......Fourty-Nine copies of CLOCK. .......DOTS .......SPOTS .......BOXES .......PERFMON .......Dpaint3 doing a bouncing ball animation These were chosen because they all require constant onscreen refreshing, and don't sit idle in the background like a WP or other application. Also, since the Amiga doesn't presently support memory protection, the fourty-nine copies of clock were a real test as well...EXEC handled things flawlessly. Oh, and the DPaint anim ran smoothly as well (surprising, but nice!). And we still have about 1.5MB to play with. I'd like to see a similar test tried on other platforms... Sean //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// UUCP: ...!crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc | ARPA: !crash!pnet01!pro-party!seanc@nosc.mil | " Fanatics have their INET: seanc@pro-party.cts.com | dreams, wherewith they | weave a paradise for RealWorld: Sean Cunningham | a sect. " Voice: (512) 994-1602 PLINK: ce3k* | -Keats | Call C.B.A.U.G. BBS (512) 883-8351 w/SkyPix | B^) VISION GRAPHICS B^) \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
edp367s@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Rik Harris) (09/24/90)
barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) writes: >>xwm@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Alexei Rodriguez) writes: >>> Will it multi-task under amiga? >In article <1990Sep20.034119.23845@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> edp367s@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Rik Harris) writes: >>No, it takes over the computer. What's the point of running two operating >>systems at the same time? > The same as running two PROGRAMS at the same time: so you don't >have to exit one to run the other. An operating system is just a program, >you know. > Simply put: if you could switch between Amiga OS and MINIX without >rebooting, isn't that better than requiring a reboot? Ask any Bridgeboard >owner. Sorry, I would like to live in a kind of utopia, where I can throw Amiga OS away completely, and use only a UNIX variant :-) > Dan rik. -- Rik Harris - edp367s@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au | Build a system that Faculty of Computing and Information Technology, | even a fool can use, Monash University, Caulfield Campus, Australia | and only a fool will (say that with your mouth full!) | want to use it.
mann@watserv1.waterloo.edu (Shannon Mann) (09/24/90)
In article <90262.224308JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu> JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu (JKT) writes: >>2. MINIX 1.5 FEATURES (IBM, Macintosh, Atari, and Amiga versions) >> - Full multiprogramming (multiple programs can run at once) > >Ok, we've all heard how MultiFinder on the Mac supposedly multi- >tasks too, but when you actually inspected it, it actually task >switches. Because this posting did not use the term "multi-task" >is it possible that the programs do not actually run at once, but >task switch, with only one running at a time? Minix uses true pre-emptive multi-tasking, just like the Amiga. >>4. HARDWARE REQUIRED >> Commodore Amiga 500 or 2000 with at least 1M of RAM. One 720K >> diskette drive is sufficient. > >Obviously someone thinks the Amiga is an IBM clone, saying that the >floppies are 720K... :-( No. Minix on the Amiga uses 720k floppies that are compatible with the ones on the ST. The ST programs are binary compatible with the Amiga programs... Minix does not use the AmigaDOS filesystem, but its own UNIX-like filesystem. >More importantly, is it truly necessary for them to require a HD >driver? Is there no way they could make use of existing drivers >with a simple interface? Seems silly to re-invent the wheel.... I believe you have it the other way around. Same interfaces, different drivers (interface=hardware / driver=software) New drivers are needed. The drivers connect the FS portion of the operating system to the hardware. Have absolutely no fear, there are plenty of people out there to write one for a drive just like yours. Experience has shown that things in Minix that are broke get fixed pretty quickly. Modifying existing ST drivers should be relatively trivial... >> It is also permitted for MINIX owners to change the >>software to suit their needs and to distribute diff listings containing >>their changes freely. > >Whoops. This is what has caused many problems in the UNIX world. >People making mods is a good idea, but history shows us that a central >site to coordinate updates is required if a standard version is to >be maintained. This is being done, and is co-ordinated through the newsgroup comp.os.minix Minix is the only operating system world-wide where you get the chance to communicate directly with those writing it! :-) Tannenbaum himself responds to questions, as well as a host of referees To be certain, there are dialects of Minix around, especially for those wanting linear addressing on their '386 machines. (snicker, snicker :-) Most of the changes even from those systems will probably make its way into the standard distribution... Eventually... >> Will it multi-task under amiga? (Boot Amiga and then go Minix or >> is it a hog?) Minix takes over the machine. There is an effort already to make it run under AmigaDOS. Tannenbaum/P-H will not be supporting such a project. >> I saw a post about GUI for MINIX but the problem was lack of >> graphics.lib. Anybody have any suggestions. > > If MINIX doesn't offer any graphics support, >it probably won't last all that long, and will follow CP/M to the grave. Minix is an educational tool. As one it will outlast AmigaDOS, MS-DOS, OS/2, etc... Lest not forget that UNIX, in one form or another, has been around since 1969 (68?) As a multi-tasking computer with a great user interface, there is nothing quite like the Amiga and AmigaDOS. As a educational tool to teach systems level programming and design, there is nothing quite like Minix. >> Alexei > Kurt Personal testimony (:-) Speaking from experience, I have used a Minix system for 9 months. It went from a machine where you had to ask the other user what he was running before editing a file to a machine that was fast, stable, clean, a joy to work on. The hardware went from a 640kB V20 based XT to a 25MHz '386, w/64kB of 25 nanosecond cache. From a flakey version 1.2 (16bit) to a very stable v1.5.10 (32bit), which is the version you would get. Still has problems, but, there are about 15000 hackers out there working on them. Some of them in a major way (like Bruce Evans' 32bit C compiler, and his 32bit, '386 version of the OS) This is not the operating system for the inexperienced user. If you have never bothered/had the chance to compile software for your machine, this is probably not for you. If you like writing programs, and want to know a tremendous amount more about how things are done at the system level, Minix has its merits. I have tremendous admiration for what the Amiga can do, in its native form. I have tremendous admiration for what Minix attempts to do, and manages... Minix is not for everyone... -=- -=- Shannon Mann -=- mann@watserv1.UWaterloo.Ca -=-
guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com (W. John Guineau) (09/24/90)
I've been talking with Andy Tanenbaum about Minix. He says he doubts that it will run on a 68030 based machine (ie A3000, A2500/30). Minix does not set up the MMU. I figure if the power up state if the MMU is "safe mode" it should be irrelevent. Doesn't the Amiga ROM (1.3) set up things like caches/MMU registers before booting? Has anyone gotten Minix running on one of these machines? -- W. John Guineau guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com Digital Equipment Corporation Marlboro MA. 01752
sreiz@cs.vu.nl (Reiz Steven) (09/25/90)
guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com (W. John Guineau) writes: >I've been talking with Andy Tanenbaum about Minix. >He says he doubts that it will run on a 68030 based machine >(ie A3000, A2500/30). Minix does not set up the MMU. >I figure if the power up state if the MMU is "safe mode" it should >be irrelevent. Doesn't the Amiga ROM (1.3) set up things like caches/MMU >registers before booting? >Has anyone gotten Minix running on one of these machines? Not having tried this myself I can only guess at the exact nature of the problems encountered when running Amiga Minix 1.5 on 680x0s where x>1: - The highest 8 bits of some addresses are used for a 'dirty trick' by the minix kernel. This means that you must be able to instruct your 68020/ 68030 board to use 24 bit addressing, like the 68000 and 68010. - Minix can't access memory outside the 16 MB range. This is caused by the way addresses are encoded in the memory manager. I don't know if any 68020/68030 boards really have memory outside the 16 MB range, but this doesn't seem a very serious problem to me anyhow. - Last but certainly not least: minix doesn't take take the different layout /size into account of the exception frames saved by the 68010, 68020 and 68030 for certain exceptions. This will crash your machine as soon as an address error (or other exceptions?) is encountered. Amiga Minix is started from s:startup-sequence, so you can fiddle with the MMU and cache parameters as much as you like before running minix, by calling the utility program that came with your accelerator board from the startup- sequence before minix is started. I think that the same parameters could be used that are used for the normal AmigaOS. > >-- >W. John Guineau guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com >Digital Equipment Corporation >Marlboro MA. 01752 Steven Reiz
ST00482@auvm.auvm.edu (dan drake) (09/25/90)
Read comp.os.minix and someone ported minix on the ST to work with a 68020 and 68851 MMU. dan.
guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com (W. John Guineau) (09/25/90)
In article <7726@star.cs.vu.nl>, sreiz@cs.vu.nl (Reiz Steven) writes: |> From: sreiz@cs.vu.nl (Reiz Steven) |> Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga |> Subject: Re: MINIX on the Amiga... |> |> guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com (W. John Guineau) writes: |> |> >I've been talking with Andy Tanenbaum about Minix. [stuff deleted on possible explinations why it might not work on 030 machines. Surely *someone* has tried booting Minix on a 3000 or 2500/30? Does it boot? Does it only crash on exceptions (which means it may be possible to provide a development environment to fix/recompile it!) |> Amiga Minix is started from s:startup-sequence, so you can fiddle with the |> MMU and cache parameters as much as you like before running minix, by calling |> the utility program that came with your accelerator board from the startup- |> sequence before minix is started. I think that the same parameters could |> be used that are used for the normal AmigaOS. That's interesting Does Minix use any info from AmigaDOS boot? Like the autoconfig device list? The memory lists? Will ADDMEMed memory from the startup-sequence be seen by Minix? (patiently awaiting a possible non-working copy of Minix...) -- W. John Guineau guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com Digital Equipment Corporation Marlboro MA. 01752
raymond@cs.vu.nl (Raymond Michiels) (09/26/90)
guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com (W. John Guineau) writes: >Surely *someone* has tried booting Minix on a 3000 or 2500/30? >Does it boot? Does it only crash on exceptions (which means it may be >possible to provide a development environment to fix/recompile it!) As far as I know AmigaMINIX does not boot on a 3000. Unfortunately I have never even SEEN an Amiga > 2000... If you don't have a 68000 it should be relatively easy to fix (start with the "ammpx.s" file). This would be a nice way to get acquainted with the AmigaMINIX kernel :-) >|> Amiga Minix is started from s:startup-sequence, [...] >That's interesting Does Minix use any info from AmigaDOS boot? Like the >autoconfig device list? The memory lists? Will ADDMEMed memory from the >startup-sequence be seen by Minix? Yes, No, Yes, Yes. -Raymond.
mk59200@korppi.tut.fi (Kolkka Markku Olavi) (09/26/90)
In article <7733@star.cs.vu.nl> raymond@cs.vu.nl (Raymond Michiels) writes: >guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com (W. John Guineau) writes: >>That's interesting Does Minix use any info from AmigaDOS boot? Like the >>autoconfig device list? The memory lists? Will ADDMEMed memory from the >>startup-sequence be seen by Minix? > >Yes, No, Yes, Yes. It doesn't save the autoconfig information??? Then there is no hope that you can use hard disks or extra serial cards with Minix!! Is somebody working on fixing this braindamage? -- Markku Kolkka mk59200@tut.fi
sreiz@cs.vu.nl (Reiz Steven) (09/27/90)
In article <1990Sep26.141624.27304@funet.fi>, mk59200@korppi.tut.fi (Kolkka Markku Olavi) writes: (about Amiga Minix) > > It doesn't save the autoconfig information??? > Then there is no hope that you can use hard disks or extra > serial cards with Minix!! Is somebody working on fixing this > braindamage? You are absolutely right about the problems you named; no harddisks or extra serial cards. BUT ... don't forget what minix is: it is an operating system! When amiga minix is started is saves some information from the old AmigaOS, for example how much ram you have and at which addresses it is located, and then it kicks out DOS, Exec, Intuition and all the other parts of AmigaOS and starts running itself. That means that it can't just call Open("SER:", 1006L) to open a serial port. It has to find out where the uart is in the memory map ($df0xxx in this case) and start poking in the registers, just like those German hackers do in their assembly programs :-) That is the reason why those hacker programs are not popular: soon someone will have a configuration where this 'blind poking' doesn't work and will crash his/her machine. That is also the reason why it is so !@#$% hard to write a good operating system, specially on the amiga where all hardware manufacters supply custom drivers with their harddisks and extra serial cards. These drivers CANNOT be used by minix because they all use Exec message passing or DOS packets etc. etc. This means that for a new operating system, like amiga minix, all those drivers will have to be recreated, using the appropriate minix kernel primitives instead of Exec messages and DOS packets. This means that eventually, just as is the case for ST and PC minix right now, zillions of drivers for various harddisks etc. will have been written, but in the mean time drivers for hardware that is used a lot (e.g. SCSI harddisks) will have priority over drivers for hardware that isn't used a lot (e.g. extra serial cards). We as minix developers can't go out, buy all possible amiga peripherals and start writing drivers for them (much as we would like to!) because there are simply too many different peripherals. So ... we did save the autoconfig information about ram, because we did have ram (wauw!) to test it with, but we didn't save the autoconfig information about harddisks, because we didn't have a harddisk (we crosscompiled on an atari ST running minix 1.1). This made it very hard (read impossible) for us to find out what kind of information to save about harddisks, where we could find this information and what to do with it from within minix once we had saved it. If anyone has information about amiga harddisks on the 'hardware reference manual' level I would sure like to hear from him/her! I imagine that this inhformation would be something like: Well, for harddisk XYZ you have this address, $da0010 where you put the address of the buffer in which you want to read, and this other address, $da0020, where you write a 1 and bang! your harddisk reads the data and puts it in the buffer. Of course a lot more information is needed, about partitions, cylinders, heads, sectors etc etc... I hope this helped to clarify why minix doesn't support extra serial cards, tape drives, cd rom drives, graphical tablets or even harddisks yet. Regards, Steven Reiz
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/01/90)
sreiz@cs.vu.nl (Reiz Steven) writes: >guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com (W. John Guineau) writes: > >>I've been talking with Andy Tanenbaum about Minix. >>He says he doubts that it will run on a 68030 based machine >>(ie A3000, A2500/30). Minix does not set up the MMU. [...] >>Has anyone gotten Minix running on one of these machines? > >Not having tried this myself I can only guess at the exact nature of the >problems encountered when running Amiga Minix 1.5 on 680x0s where x>1: > >- The highest 8 bits of some addresses are used for a 'dirty trick' by the > minix kernel. This means that you must be able to instruct your 68020/ > 68030 board to use 24 bit addressing, like the 68000 and 68010. Whew! We already got bitten by this one with AmigaBASIC. I hope someone guts this with a huge set of "#ifdef SANE_DESIGN"s pretty fast and leaves the full 32-bit memory addressing accessible. This is pretty gross for code written for the 1990's. >- Minix can't access memory outside the 16 MB range. This is caused by > the way addresses are encoded in the memory manager. I don't know if > any 68020/68030 boards really have memory outside the 16 MB range, but this > doesn't seem a very serious problem to me anyhow. It does to me! I'm running a vanilla Amiga 2000 with 9.5 meg of RAM, and I could easily put ten times as much to use on a regular basis. I can promise you, it is going to be a very short time, we may be there already, when the trade press is going to be talking about ways to get around the "Poorly Planned 32 Bit Barrier" for real memory addresses. A 24 bit inherent limitation is a joke in bad taste in today's world, where that much memory costs less than a second, used car, easily within the reach of the dedicated hobbiest, not to mention commercial sites. Noted in another article is that MINIX is a learning tool. One of the first lessons to learn looks like: "Don't assume there is _any_ resource for which the user can't find use for more; leave room for growth beyond your wildest imaginings". That wisdom should be a fundamental part of the design of _any_ OS today, and designs as described above should get failing grades in college "Principles of Operating Systems" classes, much less quasi-commercial products. There is little if any excuse for turning address longwords into records to save a byte here or there in a memory management scheme's overhead when memory is dirt cheap and widely available. Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us> -- Fanning the flames a bit, my hands were cold.
tvf@cci632.UUCP (Tom Frauenhofer) (10/01/90)
I've finally gotten around to building shoelace for my system, but I can't seem to get it to compile, either with Bruce's compiler or ACK. My system is a 286 running Minix PC 1.5.10. I have 1 Meg of RAM, a 240K root file system. The version of Bruce's C compiler is the 16-bit version on plains.nodak.edu dated June 20 (I think that's the latest). When I compile using Bruce's C compiler, shoebfs.c blows up like this: ----- bcc -0 -c -Di8088 shoebfs.c | error: cannot open output | .data .bss .fail 1 errors detected | 1 errors detected ----- When I compile using ACK, things compile okay, but I get a multiply defined error on "_inode" when it tries to link up bootlace. What am I doing wrong? -- Thomas V. Frauenhofer, WA2YYW ccicpg!cci632!tvf@uunet.uu.net tvf1477@ma.isc.rit.edu "Why don't you try acting? It's much easier." - Laurence Olivier to Dustin Hoffman during filming of "Marathon Man"
eesrajm@cc.brunel.ac.uk (Andrew J Michael) (10/03/90)
In article <1990Oct1.000617.3676@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG>, xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: > sreiz@cs.vu.nl (Reiz Steven) writes: > >guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com (W. John Guineau) writes: > > > >>I've been talking with Andy Tanenbaum about Minix. > >>He says he doubts that it will run on a 68030 based machine > >>(ie A3000, A2500/30). Minix does not set up the MMU. > [...] [stuff deleted] > Whew! We already got bitten by this one with AmigaBASIC. I hope > someone guts this with a huge set of "#ifdef SANE_DESIGN"s pretty > fast and leaves the full 32-bit memory addressing accessible. This > is pretty gross for code written for the 1990's. > > >- Minix can't access memory outside the 16 MB range. This is caused by > > the way addresses are encoded in the memory manager. I don't know if > > any 68020/68030 boards really have memory outside the 16 MB range, but this > > doesn't seem a very serious problem to me anyhow. > > It does to me! I'm running a vanilla Amiga 2000 with 9.5 meg of > RAM, and I could easily put ten times as much to use on a regular > basis. [stuff deleted] > There is little if any excuse for > turning address longwords into records to save a byte here or > there in a memory management scheme's overhead when memory is dirt > cheap and widely available. > > Kent, the man from xanth. > <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us> > -- > Fanning the flames a bit, my hands were cold. Andy Tanenbaum is probably correct in saying that out-of-the box MINIX won't run on a 68030. It won't run on a 68020 either. The problem is in the way dummy stack frames are set up in stmpx.s; they are correct for a 68000, but omit the format word for 68020s and above. You only need to change two lines, if my memory serves me correctly. Note that you don't need to set up the 68030 MMU unless you are actually using it for anything. By default the MMU is switched off on a reset, so there isn't any problem there. As regards your other comments, they are, IMHO a bit over the top. Remember that the code from which the Amiga MINIX is derived was originally written to run on an ST, which has a hardware design limitation of 4Mb of memory. I think that the encoding of the vector number into the upper nybble of the PC is actually pretty neat; admittedly not very portable, but then we all have 20-20 hindsight, don't we ? The difficulties of running MINIX on 68020s and the like have been addressed previously in this newsgroup; I have been running a 68020 MINIX engine since April 1989, and I'm not the only one. And remember that memory is not necessarily as cheap elsewhere in the world as it is in the USA ... Andy Michael -- Andy Michael (eesrajm@cc.brunel.ac.uk) " Emulation is the sincerest 85 Hawthorne Crescent form of pottery." West Drayton Middlesex - William Frend De Morgan UB7 9PA
brucee@runxtsa.runx.oz.au (Bruce Evans) (10/03/90)
In article <40414@cci632.UUCP> tvf@cci632.UUCP (Tom Frauenhofer) writes: >When I compile using Bruce's C compiler, shoebfs.c blows up like this: >----- >bcc -0 -c -Di8088 shoebfs.c >| error: cannot open output Probably /tmp is full. >When I compile using ACK, things compile okay, but I get a multiply defined >error on "_inode" when it tries to link up bootlace. That is hard to explain. nm on my shoelace binaries shows no variables _inode*. Since I have changed some things in <minix/types.h>, shoelace no longer compilers here either :-). -- Bruce Evans (evans@syd.dit.csiro.au)
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (10/05/90)
eesrajm@cc.brunel.ac.uk (Andrew J Michael) writes: > xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes: >> sreiz@cs.vu.nl (Reiz Steven) writes: >>> guineau@wjg.enet.dec.com (W. John Guineau) writes: >>>> I've been talking with Andy Tanenbaum about Minix. [...reordered a bit here to read better:] >>> - Minix can't access memory outside the 16 MB range. This is caused by >>> the way addresses are encoded in the memory manager. >> >> Whew! We already got bitten by this one with AmigaBASIC. I hope >> someone [...] leaves the full 32-bit memory addressing accessible. >> This is pretty gross for code written for the 1990's. >> >>> [...] this doesn't seem a very serious problem to me anyhow. >> >> It does to me! I'm running a vanilla Amiga 2000 with 9.5 meg of >> RAM, and I could easily put ten times as much to use on a regular >> basis. [...] >> There is little if any excuse for >> turning address longwords into records to save a byte here or >> there in a memory management scheme's overhead when memory is dirt >> cheap and widely available. [...] > As regards your other comments, they are, IMHO a bit over the top. I'm known for the _passion_ of my writing; it comes built in. That doesn't invalidate the content of the writing, just makes it a little hard to choke down. > Remember that the code from which the Amiga MINIX is derived was > originally written to run on an ST, which has a hardware design > limitation of 4Mb of memory. And will never have a hardware upgrade that removes this limit? Ha! > I think that the encoding of the vector number into the upper > nybble of the PC is actually pretty neat; admittedly not very > portable, but then we all have 20-20 hindsight, don't we? Doesn't take hindsight, just paying attention. The IBM 360 series Operating Systems have gone through the shock trauma ward every time the hardware address space has added a bit or two to real memory addressing, and that's been going on for 20 years that I know about. The problems caused by Microsoft using the high order bytes in their BASIC interpreters for cute tricks have affected the Amiga for five years, and earlier platforms even longer. Part of the result of such trash programming is that they have _never_ delivered a bug free release. There are many other examples of antique vintage to show what a horrible idea this was long before it was ever first done in MINIX. This is _not_ code design to praise as "pretty neat". There can be few clearer examples of "those who will not study history are condemned to repeat it." > And remember that memory is not necessarily as cheap elsewhere in > the world as it is in the USA ... Well, we import all of ours from outside the country, so the opportunity for it to be that cheap surely exists. Citizens who allow their politicians to install tarrifs that keep them poor or deprived of needed goods deserve their fates. That's why we have ballot boxes in Western Civilization(tm). The problems with being unable to cope with the 68020 and 68030 stack frames are comparitively forgiveable; that requires extra code to cope with changed hardware. Glad to hear that folks are factoring in the needed changes; I hope a good update, central maintenance, and change sharing mechanism is in place. Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>