irani@cs.umn.edu (Erach Irani) (10/30/90)
How complete / BSD 4.3ish / System Vish is MINIX? Has anyone ported a large package esp. GNUEmacs and X-Windows to it? I'm interested in those packages and they form a good test. Also, how does it co-exist/interact with DOS programs including Microsoft Windows. Thanks, erach (irani@cs.umn.edu) -- Phone : (Home) (612) 378-2336 Work : (612) 627-4850 InterNet : irani@cs.umn.edu UUCP: uunet!umn-cs!irani Postal Address: Erach A.Irani; 1717, Rollins Ave.; Minneapolis, MN 55414.
windy@strange.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Andrew John Stuart Miller) (10/30/90)
irani@cs.umn.edu (Erach Irani) writes: >How complete / BSD 4.3ish / System Vish is MINIX? >Has anyone ported a large package esp. GNUEmacs and X-Windows to it? >I'm interested in those packages and they form a good test. >Also, how does it co-exist/interact with DOS programs including Microsoft >Windows. .flame on 1) On which machine/architecture? 8086 forget it --- GNU is too big for 64K data +64K instructions, we just about got Flex (gnu lex) compiled, but it BARFFED badly when we tried to run it. X or emacs are miles too big. 80[345..]86 With a proper compiler/kernel that uses the native mode rather than "Stupid dos system emulation" mode (sorry virtual 8086 mode or 'real' mode) then this will not be a problem..... 680x0 No problem with arbitrary architectural limits, just the size of your pocket! 2) Why would you want MINIX (a wonderful operating system) to interact with DOS (a very silly linker loader masquerading as an operating system.)???? MS-windows is a good way to ruin your productivity, as it creates thousands of problems with the user interface. You spend half an hour clicking with your mouse when a little thought and a UNIX pipe could have solved the problem in two minutes. MSwindows is for people who are not prepared to learn a little to use a computer Most people are prepared to take lessons to learn to drive: Here in Europe, most people are prepared to go to the trouble to learn to drive with 'Stick shift' rather than automatic to get more enjoyment out of their driving --- more fuel economy, and more acceleration etc. (not to mention more safety...) The people I meet here who like GEM MS-windows or such generally are a) new to computers and kick the habit or b) drive an automatic (badly!) .flame off I have deleted DOS from my PC and run minix. I do not miss any of my dos applications If yo must, minix can read DOS floppies; this is needed as mous ftp/kermit PCs in universities & colleges run DOS or OS1/2, and write such diskettes. Minix reads and writes DOS floppies faster than DOS...... happy hacking Andrew Miller -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- email: windy@strange.informatik.rwth-aachen.de snail: Ruetscherstr 165 D-5100 Aachen voice: 0049 (0)241 894-355
hall@pnet01.cts.com (Robert R. Hall) (11/01/90)
windy@strange.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Andrew John Stuart Miller) writes >.flame on >1) On which machine/architecture? > >8086 forget it --- GNU is too big for 64K data +64K instructions, > we just about got Flex (gnu lex) compiled, but it BARFFED badly > when we tried to run it. > Aren't you exaggerating a bit? It did not BARF badly. I thought Ronald Lambert did an excellent job in selecting the initial array sizes to have Flex run on the IBM-PC and it did process his example file he included with his posting of Flex. True it would not process the data file used by Flex itself uses but Flex does run on the IBM-PC and I fail to see why it has not been accepted. UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc}!crash!pnet01!hall ARPA: crash!pnet01!hall@nosc.mil INET: hall@pnet01.cts.com
tim%maths.tcd.ie@pucc.princeton.edu (Timothy Murphy) (11/02/90)
> 8086 forget it --- GNU is too big for 64K data +64K instructions, > we just about got Flex (gnu lex) compiled, but it BARFFED badly > when we tried to run it. X or emacs are miles too big. flex (and lex) run ok for me on a PC/XT, compiled with Turbo-C. Large arrays have to be defined dynamically, using malloc(), but otherwise little needs changing, as I recall. memacs (micro-emacs) compiles ok on the PC, using Turbo-C. I haven't tried using it, as I'm not an emacs fan, but I can't see why there should be any problem. Timothy Murphy e-mail: tim@maths.tcd.ie tel: +353-1-772941 x 1507 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland