marcb@eyrie.img.com.au (Marc A. Boschma) (05/28/91)
Well after abit of work, and a new hard disk we have 1.5h up and running on my machine. Thanks to Dave, George, Bruce and Steve for all the help. Special thanks to Simon who rushed home from work faster than I to get this version of the OS running. The problem with the other drive is a real pitty since it is a replacement one for another that died (the fates are at it again). Anyway, now all that needs to be done is to patch in symbolic links, named pipes and port UUCP (doesn't sound like too much of a task :) marcb
culberts@hplwbc.hpl.hp.com (Bruce Culbertson) (05/28/91)
>From: marcb@eyrie.img.com.au (Marc A. Boschma) > Anyway, now all that needs to be done is to patch in symbolic links, > named pipes and port UUCP (doesn't sound like too much of a task :) 1.5h already has named pipes. (How you are supposed to know that, given we don't have an adequate man(ual), is a good question.) Karl Swartz has already ported a UUCP which you may want to look at. Bruce Culbertson
phil@cs.wwu.edu (Phil Nelson) (05/29/91)
From: marcb@eyrie.img.com.au (Marc A. Boschma) .... Anyway, now all that needs to be done is to patch in symbolic links, named pipes and port UUCP (doesn't sound like too much of a task :) There is also a patch kit for symbolic links for minix 1.5 available on plains.nodak.edu in the directory structure pub/Minix. (There is also many other things there, including at least one UUCP port.) I don't remember exactly where it is located in the structure. There are many interesting things in that archive. --Phil
s861298@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Marc A. Boschma) (05/29/91)
culberts@hplwbc.hpl.hp.com (Bruce Culbertson) writes: >>From: marcb@eyrie.img.com.au (Marc A. Boschma) >> Anyway, now all that needs to be done is to patch in symbolic links, >> named pipes and port UUCP (doesn't sound like too much of a task :) >1.5h already has named pipes. (How you are supposed to know that, given >we don't have an adequate man(ual), is a good question.) Karl Swartz >has already ported a UUCP which you may want to look at. What I ment to say was to patch mknod... ie. mknod name p/b/c [major minor [size]] With respect to symbolic links (the package on plains), what would be the best way to patch so that any updates that you produce can still be applied with the minimal amount of fuss ? And on yet another note, where is Karl's UUCP hiding out ? >Bruce Culbertson marcb
evans@syd.dit.CSIRO.AU (Bruce.Evans) (05/29/91)
In article <1991May29.005403.14215@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au> s861298@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Marc A. Boschma) writes: >What I ment to say was to patch mknod... >ie. mknod name p/b/c [major minor [size]] That has sort of already been done many times too. 1) The original implementation of named pipes for Minix had mkfifo. Sorry I forgot to get it into 1.5. 2) Gnu fileutils has mkfifo. This is what I use. 3) 1.6.15 has mkfifo. Posix specifies mkfifo but not mknod. >With respect to symbolic links (the package on plains), what would be the >best way to patch so that any updates that you produce can still be applied >with the minimal amount of fuss ? There is no good way. I think the version on plains is quite out of date. A later version was posted to the 1.6.15 mailing list by Earl Chew. I took it out of my version once to test and debug 1.6. This was too much work. Bruce -- Bruce Evans evans@syd.dit.csiro.au
s861298@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Marc A. Boschma) (05/30/91)
evans@syd.dit.CSIRO.AU (Bruce.Evans) writes: >In article <1991May29.005403.14215@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au> s861298@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Marc A. Boschma) writes: >>What I ment to say was to patch mknod... >>ie. mknod name p/b/c [major minor [size]] >That has sort of already been done many times too. >1) The original implementation of named pipes for Minix had mkfifo. Sorry I >forgot to get it into 1.5. It gets there due to being in the PC 1.5 sources... guess I now have both. >>With respect to symbolic links (the package on plains), what would be the >>best way to patch so that any updates that you produce can still be applied >>with the minimal amount of fuss ? >There is no good way. I think the version on plains is quite out of date. >A later version was posted to the 1.6.15 mailing list by Earl Chew. I took >it out of my version once to test and debug 1.6. This was too much work. That seems to be the general opinion... How goes 1.6 ? Will there be a '532 release when its stable ? (Lives in hope :) Although its not the right place to ask, will 1.6 have job control ? >Bruce
phil@cs.wwu.EDU (Phil Nelson) (05/31/91)
From: s861298@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Marc A. Boschma) ... That seems to be the general opinion... How goes 1.6 ? Will there be a '532 release when its stable ? (Lives in hope :) I expect that there will be a pc532 release. When? I don't know Although its not the right place to ask, will 1.6 have job control ? This one has been a "hot" topic on comp.os.minix. The official word from AST is that Minix will NEVER, NEVER, NEVER* have job control. For job control, you will need BSD4.4 (ported to the pc532) or Hurd (GNU's os) on top of the Mach 3.0 port. What fun! --Phil