SQ79%liverpool.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk (Mark Powell) (09/13/89)
We ST Minix users have been left out in the cold, as far as upgrades. The PC has 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 & 1.4a, with talk of 1.4b and 2.0, but where is the ST update. We all know the advantages of having everyone working from the same version, so where's the official ST upgrade? The alltar kernel, compiled by Howard Johnson, seems to be the unofficial standard, but there must be alot of people out there still running 1.1. I've added most of PC1.4 libraries, commands etc. to my alltar minix and am now running a pretty nice version, but I'd like to see an upgrade. HCJ's alltar has a nice HAVE feature which would be nice in an official upgrade, but I suppose that AST wouldn't like that much (people running assembly language copy68k's etc.) There has been talk in the past about the future of Minix and the two directions people seem to be taking it into; teaching OS and hacking OS, but I don't want to start the "Future of Minix" messages up again any more than I would want to start the "yes(1)" messages again (although I think the latter were more interesting.) Anyway, from what I can gather people who run minix at home on their own micros tend to use minix for learning about OS's in general, but don't mind the odd hack to speed the kernel up etc. (well I know I don't.) Whereas people using minix at Uni. etc. use it purely (in a general sense) for learning about OS's. It'd be interesting to find out how many people do use minix for what purists would call "hacking", but I suppose USENET is made up of mainly hackers anyway (slander!) so we'd get 99.9% hackers 0.1% "serious use." Anyway, I diversify... I can't remember what I was going on about now. Oh yeah, someone get something out for the ST, please. Also, could someone with the POSIX standards post a summary to the net. (if it's legal) as this much rumored beast seems to have been little dicussed in detail. Mark Powell ARPA : sq79%liv.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk UUCP : ...!mcvax!ukc!liv.ac.uk!sq79
ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) (09/14/89)
In article <23780@louie.udel.EDU> SQ79%liverpool.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk (Mark Powell) writes: > > We ST Minix users have been left out in the cold, as far as upgrades. The >PC has 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 & 1.4a, with talk of 1.4b and 2.0, but where is the >ST update. You are basically right, unfortunately. Since my own machine is an AT clone, I tend to emphasize this. I would be more than happy (not to say delighted) if some Atari owners would port the upcoming 1.4b version to the Atari and give me feedback about any changes needed. I could then incorporate these in my "master" version. I think there is a good chance this can be done for FS and MM. The kernel is impossible. If this is done quickly, the POSIX changes that I make will be applicable to the Atari as well. My basic problem is lack of time, and Johan is just as bad. Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl)
F35KER%DHHDESY3.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Kerst van Raden) (09/14/89)
> From: Andy Tanenbaum <ast@CS.VU.NL> > Subject: Re: Official ST upgrade? (no chance...) > > In article <23780@louie.udel.EDU> SQ79%liverpool.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk (Mar > Powell) writes: > > > > We ST Minix users have been left out in the cold, as far as upgrades. The > >PC has 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 & 1.4a, with talk of 1.4b and 2.0, but where is the > >ST update. > > ... I would be more than happy (not to say > delighted) if some Atari owners would port the upcoming 1.4b version to > the Atari and give me feedback about any changes needed. I could then > incorporate these in my "master" version. nce > ... > Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl) I think it would be a good idea to use more general #ifdef's in the code, i.e. not #ifdef ATARI, #ifdef IBM_COMPATIBLE, #ifdef AMIGA but #ifdef M68K, #ifdef I8086, #ifdef NEC_765, #ifdef 16BIT etc. There is hardly any use for an #ifdef ATARI in most commands. Why not say #ifdef LONG_POINTER when you add code that is using 32bit adresses? It would make the code more transparent (education) and easier to port (hacking). Kerst van Raden
grahamt@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Graham Thomas) (09/15/89)
From article <3251@ast.cs.vu.nl>, by ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum): > clone, I tend to emphasize this. I would be more than happy (not to say > delighted) if some Atari owners would port the upcoming 1.4b version to > the Atari and give me feedback about any changes needed. I could then > incorporate these in my "master" version. I think there is a good chance There is a 'Minix Centre' in Nottingham, UK, which has been advertising in several magazines for a few months now. Does anyone know about them? If they're a) enthusiastic b) competent and c) support the ST, they might be a good group to co-ordinate Minix upgrades on the ST, at least for Europe. They wouldn't have to write everything themselves, just take people's fixes & upgrades, test them, liaise with Andy, and distribute (P-H allowing) the 'official' new versions. Did I say 'just'? Sounds like a lot of work. Graham -- Graham Thomas, SPRU, Mantell Building, U of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9RF, UK JANET: grahamt@uk.ac.sussex.syma EARN/BITNET: grahamt@syma.sussex.ac.uk ARPA: grahamt%syma.sussex.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk UUCP: grahamt@syma.uucp Phone: +44 273 686758
ncoverby@ndsuvax.UUCP (Glen Overby) (09/22/89)
In article <1367@syma.sussex.ac.uk> grahamt@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Graham Thomas) writes: > ... about the 'Minix Centre' coordinating Minix-ST updates It might also be possible to find an enthusiastic and competent Minix-ST user who is willing to coordinate (i.e. do all the grunt work for) an unofficial Minix-ST upgrade kit (I expect a lot of users will be doing pretty much this anyway, so all that is needed is somebody to package it nicely). There was a lot of talk not too long ago about an unofficial Minix-ST update, but I never saw it. If anybody is doing this, I am willing to make space available on the archive site vm1.nodak.edu to make distribution easier. -- Glen Overby <ncoverby@plains.nodak.edu> uunet!ndsuvax!ncoverby (UUCP) ncoverby@ndsuvax (Bitnet)