teexdwu@ioe.lon.ac.uk (DOMINIK WUJASTYK) (11/04/90)
Just that really. Have these two, and some DVI driver(s) and a previewer, been ported to MINIX? Dominik
pcm@iwarp.intel.com (Phil Miller) (11/04/90)
In article <1990Nov3.204223.28577@ioe.lon.ac.uk>, teexdwu@ioe (DOMINIK WUJASTYK) writes: | Just that really. Have these two, and some DVI driver(s) and | a previewer, been ported to MINIX? | | Dominik The MS-DOS versions of TeX and LaTeX each require about 510k of memory to run. MINIX doesn't have a compiler which can handle that memory model, and you would in any event NOT be able to spare the memory from other processes to run *tex. Phil
awb@uk.ac.ed.aipna (Alan W Black) (11/04/90)
In article <1990Nov4.014404.10422@iwarp.intel.com>, pcm@iwarp.intel.com (Phil Miller) writes: |>In article <1990Nov3.204223.28577@ioe.lon.ac.uk>, teexdwu@ioe (DOMINIK WUJASTYK) writes: |>| Just that really. Have these two, and some DVI driver(s) and |>| a previewer, been ported to MINIX? |>| |>| Dominik |> |>The MS-DOS versions of TeX and LaTeX each require about 510k of memory to |>run. MINIX doesn't have a compiler which can handle that memory |>model, and you would in any event NOT be able to spare the memory from |>other processes to run *tex. |> |>Phil It is not strictly true that MINIX doesn't have a compiler that could compile such a program as TeX. The ST version does have gcc which is more than capable of compiling TeX. As for MINIX-PC you need to have the 386 version before you get over the 64k+64k restriction for processes. But under MINIX-386 there is bcc which might be able to do it and implementations of gcc (mine is in beta test mode at the moment I will release it soon -- bet I shouldn't have said that :-). Basically I see no problem with compiling TeX and Metafont under MINIX ST or MINIX 386. Of course this isn't quite the same as being able to ftp a binary :-) The main problem is the lack of graphics under minix. A dvi previewer, necessary in order to save the worlds trees, would not be easy. Under the ST there are some graphics routines (vdi) ported which might a good place to start at a port. However, as far as I am aware there is nothing for the PC (386 or otherwise). Alan Alan W Black 80 South Bridge, Edinburgh, UK Dept of Artificial Intelligence tel: (+44) -31 225 7774 x228 or x223 University of Edinburgh email: awb@ed.ac.uk
cechew@bruce.cs.monash.OZ.AU (Earl Chew) (11/05/90)
In <1990Nov4.014404.10422@iwarp.intel.com> pcm@iwarp.intel.com (Phil Miller) writes: >The MS-DOS versions of TeX and LaTeX each require about 510k of memory to >run. MINIX doesn't have a compiler which can handle that memory >model, and you would in any event NOT be able to spare the memory from >other processes to run *tex. This is true --- to a certain degree. About two or three months ago, I remember reading that someone had ported gcc (yet again) for 386 Minix and subsequently had TeX up and running. In order to achieve this you will need enough physical memory to support TeX --- until paging is available. Earl -- Earl Chew, Dept of Computer Science, Monash University, Australia 3168 EMAIL: cechew@bruce.cs.monash.edu.au PHONE: 03 5655447 FAX: 03 5655146 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
tim@maths.tcd.ie (Timothy Murphy) (11/05/90)
In <1990Nov4.014404.10422@iwarp.intel.com> pcm@iwarp.intel.com (Phil Miller) writes: >The MS-DOS versions of TeX and LaTeX each require about 510k of memory to >run. MINIX doesn't have a compiler which can handle that memory >model, and you would in any event NOT be able to spare the memory from >other processes to run *tex. While I agree that it would be difficult to implement TeX under MINIX, I don't believe it would be impossible. An implemetation of TeX on a pdp-11 -- where the problems would have been much the same -- was described in an early TUGboat. My recollection is that TeX was divided into 2 processes. TEX.EXE can be under 150k (sbTeX). Admittedly large arrays (particularly the 'mem' array) bring the run-time size to 500k or more. But it might be possible to store these on a RAM disk, or on memory (/dev/???) reserved for this purpose, if that is allowed in MINIX. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: tim@maths.tcd.ie
HBO043%DJUKFA11.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Christoph van Wuellen) (11/06/90)
I have run TeX under MINIX, but only the TEX --> DVI process, not a preview or a printer driver. Two ways possible: C-TeX, a version of TeX written in C. I have modified it to run on machines with 16-bit integers web2c: with this package, you can convert the web files to C programs. Note that I did all the preprocessing on a workstation and compiled the Programs there. C-Tex cannot compile under MINIX (68K,of course) since cpp tables overflow. C.v.W.
tim%maths.tcd.ie@pucc.princeton.edu (Timothy Murphy) (11/06/90)
> I have run TeX under MINIX, but only the TEX --> DVI process, not > a preview or a printer driver. > > Two ways possible: > C-TeX, a version of TeX written in C. I have modified it to run on > machines with 16-bit integers > > web2c: > with this package, you can convert the web files to C programs. Do you mean you compiled ctex in standard MINIX? What was the size of the compiled program? How did you deal with arrays more than 64k in length (mem, fontinfo)? Timothy Murphy e-mail: tim@maths.tcd.ie tel: +353-1-772941 x 1507 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
HBO043%DJUKFA11.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Christoph van Wuellen) (11/08/90)
Well, if you look closely I am an 68K-MINIXer, running C-TeX on my homemade 68000 box under MINIX-ST 1.5 adapted to my hardware. Actually I compiled C-TeX on a workstation using GCC or my compiler C68, simply because the huge include files crashed my MINIX CPP, from which I only have a binary. C.v.W.