[comp.os.minix] Minix 1.3

jeff@questar.QUESTAR.MN.ORG (Jeff Holmes) (10/20/88)

	I'm currently (anxiously :-) waiting for Minix 1.2 from 
	Prentice-Hall, and have been following this group since
	I first heard about minix. With the large volume of postings
	going through here, and alot of Minix-specific terms being
	used I have a couple of questions.

		o What would be the simplest (best?) way to
		  upgrade to 1.3 ?

		      -	Wait until Prentice-Hall is ready to 
			distribute the upgrade package? (and
			does anyone know approx. cost of package?)

		      - Get all cdiffs from the net and upgrade
			that way. (I must say I've been a little
			overwhelmed by all the diffs being posted,
			not having been exposed to Minix yet I've 
			gotten a little confused. I was saving
			everything but there was so much, and I
			wasn't quite sure what it all was, so I
			couldn't organize it for identification
			later when I finally get Minix).

		      -	And what the heck is a cdiff anyway?

	I hope these questions aren't to ignorant, and thanks
	in advance for any replies.
				
					Jeff
-- 
Jeff Holmes	                  DOMAIN: jeff@questar.mn.org 
Questar Data Systems                UUCP: amdahl!bungia!questar!jeff

jeff@questar.QUESTAR.MN.ORG (Jeff Holmes) (03/28/89)

	Hi,

	I was compiling Monty Wall's 'ps' and found EOF to be #defined
	as (-1) in stdio.h and (-104) in minix/error.h (used by device
	drivers).  I have a conflict here...could someone tell me how
	they handled this?

	P.S. Did anyone have problems getting 1.3 compress to work? It 
	     compiled with a few incompatible pointer warnings but
	     gives unexpected interrupt errors when run. Any help?
	     (Is there a patch out there that I don't happen to have?)

	Thanks
	-jeff-
-- 
Jeff Holmes	                  DOMAIN: jeff@questar.mn.org 
Questar Data Systems                UUCP: amdahl!bungia!questar!jeff

HELMER%SDNET.BITNET@vm1.nodak.edu (Guy Helmer) (05/23/89)

I have Minix 1.3 running great on my 386 except I don't have a termcap
file and it's really driving me nuts.  I can't edit a file and 'more'
is really causing me stress.  Thanks in advance for any help.

-- Guy Helmer

cracraft@ai.mit.edu (Stuart Cracraft) (09/17/90)

[ A repost of a message posted last night that had mysteriously vanished
by this morning. If censored because in the message the view is that
Minix has some serious, basic faults, then I'd be even doubly wary of
it!]

It was disappointing bringing up Minix 1.3. Its seeming total
reliance on floppies and lack of well-documented hard disk support
made bringing up the hard disk a real chore. 

fdisk couldn't seem to display any hexadecimal value over FF in the
output to the "p" command. When using a hard disk with more than FF
sectors I had to guess than the "6" displayed was really FE+6 hex
for the end of the partition and subtract from it the starting value
of the partition, guesswork at best.

Picking the right 2nd parameter for mkfs for /dev/hd2 was hard and I
wasn't even sure I got it right since the resulting /usr seemed too
small. I run a 100mb ARRL technology Conner disk. I partitioned into
two partitions of 50mb each.

Eventually I got everything copied over from the floppies to the hard
disk, but this too was a disappointment, because there are no clear
instructions on exactly what directories on the floppies go to which
directories on the hard disk.

Another problem was the indication that on an AT "cp /dev/at0 /dev/hd3"
would copy the root over. But no mention was made of whether /dev/hd3
would have to be mkfs'd and how that was to be done. This is especially
vexing because one would normally make /dev/hd1 or /dev/hd2 the entire
partition and only THEN would you find out you need to build a /dev/hd3
also for storing the root. What do you end up doing? Zapping the
entire build of hd2 and then making hd3 followed by remaking hd2?

And of course the lack of a bootable hard drive is the most notable
problem of Minix 1.3

I can only hope that future Minix's correct these problems. Perhaps
some of the people running 1.5.xx will comment on them.

Eventually I deinstalled Minix and put DOS back up as the sole OS.

Stuart

cechew@bruce.cs.monash.OZ.AU (Earl Chew) (09/18/90)

In <10758@life.ai.mit.edu> cracraft@ai.mit.edu (Stuart Cracraft) writes:

>It was disappointing bringing up Minix 1.3. Its seeming total
>reliance on floppies and lack of well-documented hard disk support
>made bringing up the hard disk a real chore. 

This is true. There is, at present, no bullet proof way to bring up a hard
disk. Most people usually make at least one mistake. The method described in
the documentation for Minix 1.3 still basically relies on a floppy based boot.
Hard disk support is there --- but you have to invest time and effort into
understanding how it all fits together.

>fdisk couldn't seem to display any hexadecimal value over FF in the

Hmm.. I think that the new fdisk (1.5.10) works much better than that in Minix
1.3. You're comments probably do not apply to the new version.

>Picking the right 2nd parameter for mkfs for /dev/hd2 was hard and I

Why is it hard? It's the just size of the partition in kb. I suppose it could
have been hard since you had trouble with the old fdisk.

>Eventually I got everything copied over from the floppies to the hard
>disk, but this too was a disappointment, because there are no clear
>instructions on exactly what directories on the floppies go to which
>directories on the hard disk.

Hmmm... the way the hard disk is used in 1.3, you have to treat it each
partition like a big floppy. Thus instead of mounting a /usr floppy (or a /user
floppy) you will mount a /usr hard disk partition, etc.

>Another problem was the indication that on an AT "cp /dev/at0 /dev/hd3"
>would copy the root over. But no mention was made of whether /dev/hd3
>would have to be mkfs'd and how that was to be done. This is especially

Obviously /dev/hd3 needs to be a real partition (ie non zero size). There is no
need to mkfs /dev/hd3 because `cp /dev/at0 /dev/hd3' takes an image of the
entire floppy and dumps it on /dev/hd3. Thus you will end up with a mirror
image of the floppy. This of course means that it is useless allocating much
more than 1.2Mb for /dev/hd3. But I agree that this form of hard disk support
is a kludge.

>And of course the lack of a bootable hard drive is the most notable
>problem of Minix 1.3

>I can only hope that future Minix's correct these problems. Perhaps
>some of the people running 1.5.xx will comment on them.

Shoelace addresses all these problems. It will work on 1.3 and 1.5.10. However,
as some people have found out, it is not bullet proof. Minix gives you free
and easy access to the entire hard disk. There is more than enough rope to hang
yourself.

>Eventually I deinstalled Minix and put DOS back up as the sole OS.

With such a large hard disk --- you can install Minix and DOS on the same disk
:-)

Earl
-- 
Earl Chew, Dept of Computer Science, Monash University, Australia 3168
EMAIL: cechew@bruce.cs.monash.edu.au PHONE: 03 5655447 FAX: 03 5655146
----------------------------------------------------------------------

tvf@cci632.UUCP (Tom Frauenhofer) (09/18/90)

In article <10758@life.ai.mit.edu> cracraft@ai.mit.edu (Stuart Cracraft) writes:
>[ A repost of a message posted last night that had mysteriously vanished
>by this morning. If censored because in the message the view is that
>Minix has some serious, basic faults, then I'd be even doubly wary of
>it!]

This is a wild assumption, totally unfounded (I read your original posting
of this earlier).  When you make a statement like the above, you had better
offer up some tangible proof, my friend.

Anyway,

>It was disappointing bringing up Minix 1.3. Its seeming total
>reliance on floppies and lack of well-documented hard disk support
>made bringing up the hard disk a real chore. 

I could argue that Minix was designed to be a teaching OS (well, version
1.3 was).  It was a vast improvement over 1.2.  1.3 was still not good enough
for the "appliance" user (plug it in and it works).  1.5 is pretty close
(not quite close enough, but much better for naive users than 1.3 ever was).
You still have to be more careful with floppy fs's than I'd like, but nothings
perfect.

BTW, I recently made the switch to Minix from Microport V/AT, mainly because
I am going to upgrade my system to a 386sx, and I could upgrade Minix (at a
minimal cost to myself) to run in 32 bit mode.  I also like playing with
system-level stuff, and I like having the source around to play with.

>Picking the right 2nd parameter for mkfs for /dev/hd2 was hard and I
>wasn't even sure I got it right since the resulting /usr seemed too
>small. I run a 100mb ARRL technology Conner disk. I partitioned into
>two partitions of 50mb each.

It's no harder than any other PC-based Unix (or Unix on any other system
that I've used, for that matter).  Unix (and Minix) assumes a higher level
of sophistication (yeah, that's the word) from the person doing system
set-up than DOS does, but I feel it's worth it for the extra power you get.
I am a software developer, and I think in a multi-tasking mode.  DOS was
uncomfortable for me.  I think it's great that it's provided a platform for
a lot of people to get a lot of work done.  It just wasn't for me.

>Eventually I got everything copied over from the floppies to the hard
>disk, but this too was a disappointment, because there are no clear
>instructions on exactly what directories on the floppies go to which
>directories on the hard disk.

I thought it was pretty clear, actually.

>Another problem was the indication that on an AT "cp /dev/at0 /dev/hd3"
>would copy the root over. But no mention was made of whether /dev/hd3
>would have to be mkfs'd and how that was to be done. This is especially

This is not clear, you are right.

>And of course the lack of a bootable hard drive is the most notable
>problem of Minix 1.3

Was not a design goal of Minix 1.3 (or 1.5).  You can get shoelace to
do bootable hard drives for Minix 1.5 (I think it also ran under 1.3,
but I'm not sure).

>I can only hope that future Minix's correct these problems. Perhaps
>some of the people running 1.5.xx will comment on them.

I just have.  Sorry you were disappointed.

>Eventually I deinstalled Minix and put DOS back up as the sole OS.

I do hope you don't give up, but are able to give 1.5 a try.  I do think
it's much more solid (that I'm now running my machine using Minix is
my vote, anyway).
-- 
Thomas V. Frauenhofer, WA2YYW		cci632!ccird2!tvf@uunet.uu.net
	tvf1477@ma.isc.rit.edu      atexnet!kodak!swamps!frau!tvf@uunet.uu.net
"Why don't you try acting?  It's much easier."
	- Laurence Olivier to Dustin Hoffman during filming of "Marathon Man"

nall@sun8.scri.fsu.edu (John Nall) (09/18/90)

In article <10758@life.ai.mit.edu> cracraft@ai.mit.edu (Stuart Cracraft) writes:
>[ A repost of a message posted last night that had mysteriously vanished
>by this morning. If censored because in the message the view is that
>Minix has some serious, basic faults, then I'd be even doubly wary of
>it!]

I wouldn't.  The earlier message got through ok.  Minix is not a moderated
newsgroup, and all kinds of junk gets in here, unfortunately.

[...a lot of whining deleted about Minix 1.3 deleted...]

The primary point made is that Minix 1.3 is on its face floppy based rather
than harddisk based.  Well, of course it was.  That was Andy's initial
philosophy for an instructional OS which could be used on the most basic
pc.

Actually, there was quite a bit of harddisk support there, but one had to
read the documentation to pick up on it - it was not in the textbook.  And I
have to admit that like all good computer documentation, it was often much
clearer once you knew how to do it, than before.  :-)

Anyway, quicherbiching and go to 1.5.  




--
John W. Nall		| Supercomputation Computations Research Institute
nall@sun8.scri.fsu.edu  | Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306
 "Real programmers can write assembly code in any language." - Larry Wall