nall@loligo (John Nall) (07/11/89)
Andy writes (paraphrased, of course....) > I expect Minix 2.0 to be out around 1991....by then hard disks > will be cheap and everyone will have one... I suppose in general that is a good decision. I'm running Bruce Evans' protected mode Minix on my Jameco AT-clone, and it is a joy to use. I'm not at all sure that I'm going to be able to talk my administration into swapping out the pc's in the lab for at's, but then I don't have to throw away the version 1.3 that I have, either. A couple of comments, however. Bruce points out that the Amoeba networking code does NOT run on Minix286. Will official Minix286 have some form of networking? I suspect that by 1991 ethernet boards will also be cheap, and everyone will have one (at least within universities). Also, although many fortunes have been lost on trying to predict where technology is going, it is probably safe to say that not only will hard disks be cheap and everyone will have one, but that large capacity disks will be more prevalent. I doubt that it is beyond the realm of possibility that a 386 system, with 16 mb's of memory will be able to use something like a Control Data Sabre V disk (1 gigabyte -- we can buy them at $7500 per drive today). Will Minix286 support arbitrarily large disk farms? Of course, by making such a decision, Andy is conciously saying that Minix is going to be a real operating system, instead of a teaching tool. So it should be a lot of fun to watch it compete with the big guys..... On the textbook, by the way, let me suggest that the source code listing, user guide, implementor's guide, etc., be issued as a separate, optional, document. It could even be paperback. Trying to get through just the theory in one semester is tough, and I just use the second half of the book as a reference manual anyway. And people who don't dig the theory can just buy the reference manual and (dare I say it?) get the password. John Nall Computer Science Department Florida State University Tallahassee, FL 32306 (nall@nu.cs.fsu.edu Arpa/Internet)
ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum) (07/15/89)
In article <194@loligo.cc.fsu.edu> nall@nu.cs.fsu.edu (John Nall) writes: >I'm not at all sure that I'm going to be able to talk my administration into >swapping out the pc's in the lab for at's, but then I don't have to throw >away the version 1.3 that I have, either. Misconception. V2.0 will absolutely, definitely, unequivocably run on 4.77 MHz 8088-based PCs. It's just that to recompile the system, I will probably assume the presence of a hard disk. You will be able to run the system with an 8088, 640K and one floppy. Bruce did a good job of maintaining compatibility with the 8088. He and I have discussed some minor changes, such as dynamically determining the CPU and system type when the system starts (partly based on the character you type in, and partly by dynamic tests). If it discovers it is on an 8088, it will just set a variable to 88 and continue. There are only 6 or 7 places where that matters incidently. Bruce did a really clean job of keeping the 286 and 8088 separate. Look at the code. >A couple of comments, however. Bruce points out that the Amoeba networking >code does NOT run on Minix286. Will official Minix286 have some form of >networking? Hopefully yes. The problems are (1) some bugs, and (2) need to change the driver to run in protected mode. I'll probably do this, as we have a lot of Ethernet machines at the VU. >Will Minix286 support arbitrarily large disk farms? I think most PCs are limited to two drives. As far as I can tell, there is nothing in MINIX that is different on big drives than on little drives. I guess the real limit is the use of 16-bit numbers for block numbers. That could be changed, or one could use, say, 4K blocks, allowing up to 256M per partition. >Of course, by making such a decision, Andy is conciously saying that Minix >is going to be a real operating system, instead of a teaching tool. No. I think I may not list everything in the book, just the parts relevant to teaching. People who want to see the rest will have to print their own listings. >On the textbook, by the way, let me suggest that the source code listing, >user guide, implementor's guide, etc., be issued as a separate, optional, >document. It makes it more expensive, so we have been hesitant to do this. I have a new editor at P-H now, so maybe we will examine this question again. Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl)
jnall%FSU.BITNET@cornellc.cit.cornell.edu (John Nall 904-644-5241) (07/19/89)
(An argument might be made that this particular subject has been discussed to death, but an equally good argument might be made that it has rejuvenated a flagging group...) One problem that I see with Andy having enlisted Bruce Evans in the production of Minix 2 (presumably on the theory that if you can't beat em, then join em) is that Bruce had spoken previously regarding his development of Minix386, using a chip which WOULD support many of the things that are griped about in the 16-bit version. I sure hate to see this development stop. Especially since I think that Andy's timetable of 1991 for delivery of Version 2 may well see widely available 386 systems. I can buy a 386 system from Jameco Electronics today for less that I paid for my AT clone a few years ago, and prices are still coming down. So...since the Minix group seems to always be on the bleeding edge of things, any support for trying to keep something going on 386 development??? John Nall (nall@nu.cs.fsu.edu)
HELMER%SDNET.BITNET@vm1.nodak.edu (Guy Helmer) (07/20/89)
> ... discussion of 386 availability deleted ... > >So...since the Minix group seems to always be on the bleeding >edge of things, any support for trying to keep something going >on 386 development??? > >John Nall >(nall@nu.cs.fsu.edu) Definitely!!! One thing I plan on starting if no one else has is 'as' and 'ld' for the 80386 under Minix. I just finally got Intel's 80386 Programmer's Reference Manual, so I've started looking at the somewhat warped instruction set. -- Guy Helmer BITNET: HELMER@SDNET Dakota State University Computing Services Madison, SD 57042
paula@bcsaic.UUCP (Paul Allen) (07/21/89)
In article <20059@louie.udel.EDU> HELMER%SDNET.BITNET@vm1.nodak.edu (Guy Helmer) writes: [Guy quoted John Nall asking if there's any interest in Minix 386 development.] > >Definitely!!! One thing I plan on starting if no one >else has is 'as' and 'ld' for the 80386 under Minix. I just finally got >Intel's 80386 Programmer's Reference Manual, so I've started looking at >the somewhat warped instruction set. Let's not forget about the GNU stuff: gcc, gas, ld, etc. I've got a copy of gas configured to assemble 386 code on my Sun. Here's how big it is: stehekin% size a386 text data bss dec hex 73728 40960 36400 151088 24e30 This is a tad big for the Minix compiler, but might provide a workable starting point. The gnu loader looks like this: stehekin% size ld text data bss dec hex 40960 8192 11504 60656 ecf0 This might be useable under Minix unless it assumes the presence of huge amounts of memory at runtime. The GNU C compiler is *huge* and uses a meg or two at runtime. All the the GNU stuff assumes 32-bit ints. Due to the extreme limits Minix imposes, cross-developing a 32-bit Minix on some more reasonable machine may be the only way to go. Has anybody tried cross-compiling Minix code using one of the DOS-based 386 environments? They're all quite expensive, but they are considerably less than buying a Sun! :-) Paul -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Paul L. Allen | pallen@atc.boeing.com Boeing Advanced Technology Center | ...!uw-beaver!bcsaic!pallen
wayne@engage.dec.com (Wayne Lattery) (07/25/89)
Hi, Does anyone know if there is a Minix version for the Mac II. I am getting a Mac IIcx and I would not mind having a command line version of Minix to keep me company. Wayne N. Lattery.