jrw@bpdsun1.UUCP (Jon Wahlmann) (07/11/89)
I am interested in knowing if anyone has got the MINIX operating system up and running on an Amiga (specifically 2000). I have heard of some one having limited success on a 1000. I would like to do some experimentation on the implementation of such an operating system and since it may be a while before UNIX is available to the general amiga public, I think that MINIX would be the way to go for now. Any information would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Jon Wahlmann jrw@bpdsun1.uucp jrw10536@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
fetrow@bones.stat.washington.edu (Dave Fetrow) (07/13/89)
According to 3rd hand sources: Alpha version is up and running somewhere
in Europe and an official release should be out in a couple months.
-dave fetrow- fetrow@bones.biostat.washington.edu
dfetrow@uwalocke (bitnet) {uunet}!uw-beaver!uw-entropy!fetrow
"It's 1989! I'm supposed to take a language with `cards' in it seriously?" jk0@image.soe.clarkson.edu (Jason Coughlin) (07/13/89)
What are the specs on the Amiga? Like, does it have a real MMU, which 68k chip does it use? Is Amiga Minix going to have the same process switch kludge that Atari Minix has to have? How much mem can the thing handle? Does Commodore produce a REAL hard-disk yet or do Amiga users still suffer from Commodore peripheral kludges? Please email responces. If there is enough interest then I'll post a summary to these newsgroupS. No need to start an entire discussion :-). -- Jason Coughlin ( jk0@sun.soe.clarkson.edu , jk0@clutx.BITNET ) -- -- Jason Coughlin ( jk0@sun.soe.clarkson.edu , jk0@clutx )
ecphssrw@io.csun.edu (Stephen Walton) (07/14/89)
Maybe we should add the following statement to the monthly Intro to the Amiga Groups postings: Every so often, someone wonders if Minix is on the Amiga yet. I'm sure people are working on it, and am equally sure that it will see limited use and utility for a long time; after all, the Amiga comes out of the box with a small, message-passing, true multi-tasking OS which takes advantage of all the Amiga's special hardware. The Amiga C compilers contain workalikes for many of the Unix system calls, and a great deal of Unix software has been ported to the Amiga, including but not limited to diff (with contexts), patch, GNU grep, GNU sed, several varieties of Make; there is also a csh-like shell in the public domain and a very good version of Lint which lists for $99. And with ARexx (Amiga REXX) and a decent hard disk, my Amiga is a better software development environment than most Unix boxes I've used. -- Stephen Walton, Dept. of Physics & Astronomy, Cal State Univ. Northridge RCKG01M@CALSTATE.BITNET ecphssrw@afws.csun.edu swalton@solar.stanford.edu ...!csun!afws.csun.edu!ecphssrw
balzer@frambo.dec.com (Christian Balzer) (07/14/89)
In article <1989Jul13.124053.27543@sun.soe.clarkson.edu>, jk0@image.soe.clarkson.edu (Jason Coughlin) writes... >What are the specs on the Amiga? This, Jason, is exactly were you should have stopped. Knowing nothing about the Amiga isn't a major crime, nor should it be. But going on happily with unsubstantiated (sp?) drivel and rumors is at least a minor one. >Like, does it have a real MMU, which 68k chip does it use? ^^^^ I wasn't aware of anything like a "false" MMU, would you care to enlightem me? :-) Base Amigas (A1000, A500, A2000) come with a plain 68000 CPU and no MMU or FPU. There are boards available for a specially designed CPU slot on the A2000 by Commodore and third party developers, which feature anything from a 68020/68881 combo to a 68030/68882 board with 4 MB of onboard 32 bit wide RAM like the CBM A2630. An Amiga 2000 with this board beats a Mac-IIx using the Dhrystone test by about 40% (very conservative figure). >Is Amiga Minix going to have the same process switch kludge that Atari >Minix has to have? I don't know nothing on Minix or the ST implementation, so I keep my mouth shut. It might be however of interest to you and the audience in comp.os.minix, that the Amiga comes with a very powerfull native multitasking OS, whose kernal functions might be helpful in the implementation of Minix. Since the basic Amigas (see above) don't have a MMU, I can foresee certain limitations on the elegance of such an implementation, though. >How much mem can the thing handle? A basic Amiga (see above) allows for up to 9.5 MB of 16 bit memory, systems with the "right" CPU-cards can address whatever the CPU will handle, ie. 4 GB - 16 MB of 32 bit memory plus 9.5 MB of 16 bit memory. >Does Commodore produce a REAL hard-disk yet or do Amiga users still ^^^^---- Not again! :-) >suffer from Commodore peripheral kludges? This really drove me mad. First you claim to know nothing about the Amiga (FYI, it wasn't even developed by CBM), but feel free to make "educated" guesses judging on old CBM hardware. I _assume_ that you had things like the C64 in mind when you wrote that statement above. And yes, Commodore and a large number of third party developers produce _REAL_ HD controllers, but I don't think that anyone of them manufactures hard disks.:-) The best of those controllers with onboard DMA deliver with drives like the CDC Wren, Maxtor XT-3380S or similar SCSI units sustained transfer rates of 1.2 MB/s and higher. Fast enough? For comparison, most of the UNIX systems I used delivered data in the 500-600 KB/s range. >Please email responces. If there is enough interest then I'll post a >summary to these newsgroupS. No need to start an entire discussion :-). I was thinking about being sensible and sending Email, etc. for some time, but if there's one such uneducated being out there, chances are there are more where that came from. But I agree, further discussion should happen in EMail, alt.flame or comp.sys.amiga.tech, depending on it's contents. There's really nothing I want to see less than another stoopid(tm) flamewar. Regards, - <CB> -- _ _ / / | \ \ <CB> aka Christian Balzer - The Software Brewery - < < |-< > UUCP : decwrl!frambo.dec.com!CB | E-Net: FRAMBO::BALZER \ \_ |_/ / I-Net: CB@frambo.dec.com -OR- CB@frambo.enet.dec.com ------------ PMail: Im Wingertsberg 45, D-6108 Weiterstadt, F.R.G.
news@crash.cts.com (Usenet News) (07/15/89)
Network Comment: to #1152 by jk0@image.soe.clarkson.edu
Amiga 500/1000/2000 run with 68000's no MMU. 68010/020/030 add ons are
available. Commodore sells a 020 board for the 2000 w/ 68881 and MMU.
8.5 megs curently accessable w/ AmigaDOS, more to come with later OS
releases.
The Amiga 2500 is a 2000 w/ 40 meg hard drive and 020 board (w/ 68881 and
MMU). There are a plethora of third party SCSI and IBM hard drive interfaces,
as well as Commodore's interface which handles both SCSI and IBM drives.
-Dan
_______________________________________________________________________________
ProLine: pro-generic!pro-graphics!dzenc | Pro-Graphics 24hrs
UUCP: crash!pnet01!pro-generic!pro-graphics!dzenc | 201/469-0049 3/12/24
ARPA/DDN: crash!pnet01!pro-generic!pro-graphics!dzenc@nosc.mil
_______________________________________________________________________________ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) (07/15/89)
In article <1610@uw-entropy.ms.washington.edu> fetrow@bones.UUCP () writes: > > According to 3rd hand sources: Alpha version is up and running somewhere >in Europe and an official release should be out in a couple months. Two of my students did the port to the Amiga. They seem to have done an excellent job, and it is now being tested. If and when there will be an official release is another story. Neither P-H nor Commodore is interested. I am working on that one, however. Andy Tanenbaum
ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) (07/15/89)
In article <1989Jul13.124053.27543@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> jk0@image.soe.clarkson.edu (Jason Coughlin) writes: >What are the specs on the Amiga? Like, does it have a real MMU, Nope. >which 68k chip does it use? Is Amiga Minix going to have the same process >switch kludge that Atari Minix has to have? Yes. Without an MMU there isn't much choice. It really isn't so bad though. >How much mem can the thing handle? As much as you have. >Does Commodore produce a REAL hard-disk yet or do Amiga >users still suffer from Commodore peripheral kludges? We don't have hard disk support. Nobody here has a hard disk. You forgot to ask the real question: "How do you write an operating system for a computer that doesn't have a disk controller, but watches the bits come off the drive one at a time, in software?" Answer: You watch the bits come off the drive one at a time, in software. Three guesses whether the CRC is done in hardware or software. This doesn't make it go real fast. On the other hand, it is no worse than the normal Amiga OS, and the Amiga has other features that compensate to some degree. Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl)
rokicki@polya.Stanford.EDU (Tomas G. Rokicki) (07/16/89)
This is just a clarification for those who maybe don't know too much about the Amiga, lest further misinformation spread . . . > You forgot to ask the real question: "How do you write an operating system > for a computer that doesn't have a disk controller, but watches the bits > come off the drive one at a time, in software?" First of all, Andy's referring to the floppies only, not hard disks. Secondly, the Amiga does indeed have a DMA channel associated with the floppy drives, so the processor does not watch the bits come off the drive one at a time; the processor goes off and works on another task. On the other hand, the bits which are loaded by DMA are pretty raw, consisting of clock and data bits interspersed. Luckily, the blitter can decode the MFM data quite rapidly. The Amiga floppy drives are not slow. The organization of the file system makes listing directories slower than other operating systems, but makes locating and opening files somewhat faster. And were Andy and his students to become familiar with the hard drive controllers for the Amiga, they would be pleasantly surprised with the speed. This is not a flame; I have a lot of respect for Andy Tanenbaum and his work, of which Minix is a very fine example. -tom
root@dialog.UUCP (Christian Motz) (07/18/89)
In article <2882@ast.cs.vu.nl> ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) writes: >We don't have hard disk support. Nobody here has a hard disk. I would be interested in getting that fixed :-). Anyway, any chance of getting my greedy little hands on the modified sources for the Amiga? I do have an A2090A, and could probably hack up a harddisk driver. -- Christian Motz uucp: ...!uunet!mcvax!unido!pfm!nadia!dialog!root "Trust me, I know what I'm doing!" -- Sledge Hammer Bix: cmotz
jesup@cbmvax.UUCP (Randell Jesup) (07/18/89)
In article <2882@ast.cs.vu.nl> ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) writes: >In article <1989Jul13.124053.27543@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> jk0@image.soe.clarkson.edu (Jason Coughlin) writes: >>How much mem can the thing handle? >As much as you have. Good, then it supports the expansion auto-config? (Assigning addresses to baords according to their requirements). >We don't have hard disk support. Nobody here has a hard disk. With lots of A590's being shipped to Europe, hopefully that should change. Maybe you should get in touch with one of the European Commdore Sales companies. They might give you a loaner, or some such (Minix being a Good Thing :-). Disclaimer: I don't know much about how the European parts of commodore work. >You forgot to ask the real question: "How do you write an operating system >for a computer that doesn't have a disk controller, but watches the bits >come off the drive one at a time, in software?" >Answer: You watch the bits come off the drive one at a time, in software. >Three guesses whether the CRC is done in hardware or software. This doesn't >make it go real fast. On the other hand, it is no worse than the normal >Amiga OS, and the Amiga has other features that compensate to some degree. True, but only if you want to use IBM/ST format. Amiga format is supported directly by the hardware, and unburdens the processor from most of the encoding/decoding work. It also stores about 20% more per disk. Then again, the IBM/ST format means Amiga/Minix can exchange disks with ST/Minix and IBM/Minix. From what Dr. Tanenbaum's students told me, their disk routines (from a cat /bin/* >/dev/null) are almost as fast as the ST (floppies spin SO slowly). >Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl) I hope you find a publisher. -- Randell Jesup, Keeper of AmigaDos, Commodore Engineering. {uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!jesup, jesup@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com BIX: rjesup Common phrase heard at Amiga Devcon '89: "It's in there!"
douglee@becker.UUCP (Doug Lee) (07/18/89)
In article <2881@ast.cs.vu.nl> ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) writes: > >If and when there will be an >official release is another story. Neither P-H nor Commodore is interested. How about a release to usenet and Fred Fish. <<<Doug Lee>>> >Andy Tanenbaum
nick@qtnet.uucp (Nick Lawes) (07/24/89)
In article <7336@cbmvax.UUCP> jesup@cbmvax.UUCP (Randell Jesup) writes:
From what Dr. Tanenbaum's students told me, their disk routines
(from a cat /bin/* >/dev/null) are almost as fast as the ST (floppies spin
SO slowly).
But surely /bin is on the RAM disk, so that makes the routines rather
slow :-) Besides the ST disk drives spin at the same speed as all other
disk drives, there's nothing special about them. The slow speed is due
to the poor implementation of the BIOS. (It doesn't buffer the FATs
properly). TOS 1.4 fixes this.
A friend of mine has an Amiga... Now THERE's a strange disk system...
no real directories etc... YUCK. (No flames please, I remember the wars
of a few years back... :-) Nice hardware, shame about the firmware...
-- Nick
--
[ Nick Lawes, Systems Programmer | voice: +44 1 353 6723 ]
[ Technical Marketing, Quotnet (UK) Ltd. | email: nick@quotnet.co.uk ]
[ 12 Norwich Street, London. EC4a 1BP | email: ..!mcvax!ukc!qtnet!nick ]
[ | ham : G8ZHR @ GB7UWS ]lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (07/25/89)
In <1989Jul24.120703.15722@qtnet.uucp>, nick@qtnet.uucp (Nick Lawes) writes: >A friend of mine has an Amiga... Now THERE's a strange disk system... >no real directories etc... YUCK. (No flames please, I remember the wars >of a few years back... :-) Nice hardware, shame about the firmware... A mind is such a wonderful thing to acquire. Try it. You'll like it. -larry -- "So what the hell are we going to do with a Sun?" - Darlene Phillips - +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
doug@xdos.UUCP (Doug Merritt) (07/25/89)
In article <1989Jul24.120703.15722@qtnet.uucp> nick@qtnet.uucp (Nick Lawes) writes: >A friend of mine has an Amiga... Now THERE's a strange disk system... >no real directories etc... YUCK. (No flames please, I remember the wars >of a few years back... :-) Nice hardware, shame about the firmware... No flames, he says. He remembers the wars, he says. But he starts a war by posting untrue slander. "No real directories"??? Regardless of what he thought he meant by that, it's untrue. The Amiga has a hierarchical file system based on "real" files and "real" directories. Perhaps he's thinking of the "40 folder limit" bug on Atari ST's, but there's no such problem with Amiga's. The Amiga file system is very much like that of Unix in overall characteristics. Or maybe he heard a distorted version of the fact that the older file system (there's a newer, functionally compatible but optimized "fast file system" also) was optimized for file opens, at the expense of somewhat slow directory scans. If so, there's a huge difference between "slow directory scans" (but extremely fast file opens) and "no real directories". Anyone who's been through some flame wars and still doesn't have sense enough to check their facts before slandering someone's favorite system deserves to have their mailbox charred by white heat. Repeating bad-mouthing rumors is bad manners and bad sense. Doug -- Doug Merritt {pyramid,apple}!xdos!doug Member, Crusaders for a Better Tomorrow Professional Wildeyed Visionary
gl8f@astsun8.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) (07/26/89)
In article <435@xdos.UUCP> doug@xdos.UUCP (Doug Merritt) writes: >> [stupid comments by someone else deleted] > No flames, he says. He remembers the wars, he says. Good. So please flame him back by mail, and NOT in comp.os.minix, which isn't interested in this. PLEASE STOP CROSS-POSTING. >Anyone who's been through some flame wars and still doesn't have sense >enough to check their facts before slandering someone's favorite >system deserves to have their mailbox charred by white heat. Be my guest -- IN EMAIL. Thank you for your support. We now return to your regular programming. ------ Greg Lindahl gl8f@virginia.edu I'm not the NRA.