| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 152.1 | Why Minix? | RDGENG::KEANE | | Mon Jul 04 1988 09:26 | 10 |
| Hi Bill,
Can you give us a brief run down on MINIX, what and why is it,
what are the features. ???
I think there is a MINIX newsgroup, but I dont subscribe,
Cheers
Pat K.
|
| 152.2 | random thoughts on Minix | CIMBAD::POWERS | I Dream Of Wires - G. Numan | Tue Jul 05 1988 16:04 | 32 |
|
Minix is a multitasking OS replacement for the braindamaged TOS. It
is a clone of UNIX version 7 (functionally). The cost is $79 from
the publisher Prentice Hall. With Minix, you get the source code to
the kernel, so you can modify it to your hearts content. Now mind you,
I am not a UNIX lover, but it beats TOS. You also get a C compiler
albeit, not a great one with Minix. You do not get the source code to
the C compiler, that you must purchase separately. Minix is written
by Andy Tanenbaum, and there is a book on OS's written by him which
goes into the specifics of Minix. The book can be had at an additional
cost. I think I paid $42 for my copy. Pretty steep, but about average
for a hardcover textbook. Minix was originally released for the PC's,
and has experienced a loyal following. The PC version only supports
executable images which are 64k or smaller. This is due to the Intel
segmented memory architecture. We in the ST world, use motorolla's
M68000, and will not have this limitation. There is a usenet newsgroup
comp.os.minix which you can follow, and I have been for several months.
There are many postings of new code, and bugfixes posted to this news
group. There even has been some talk about a second newsgroup for
minix devoted to the ST. One big drawback to minix, is it has no support
for any current ST software. So MWC will not run under it, etc. This
is not really such a big problem, I believe that you can have one partition
on your hard disk setup for TOS et al, and another setup for Minix. At
least thats the way it works on the PC's. If I think of anything more
I'll post another reply. Sorry about the layout of this note, it is
just random points I thought about which seemed relevant. But I guess you
get the picture. Any specific questions in regard to Minix, I might be
able to answer???
Bill Powers
|
| 152.3 | Better ways to spend $79?? | PHDVAX::FANELLI | | Tue Jul 05 1988 19:20 | 8 |
|
Minix might be a nice OS, but will it ever be more than just
a curiosity? Even if you get that "so-so" c compiler, is there really
enough PD software to make it useful? TOS may have problems, but
the better ST products work around them. End-users are probably
better off skipping Minix.
mwf
|
| 152.4 | No windows menas no utility | PRNSYS::LOMICKAJ | Jeff Lomicka | Tue Jul 05 1988 19:50 | 5 |
| Unless it lets you run your separate processes in separate windows, what
good is it? I bought the ST because it's a multi-window workstation.
I'll be interested in Minix when X-Windows runs on it.
|
| 152.5 | random comments | LEDS::ACCIARDI | I Blit, therefore I am... | Tue Jul 05 1988 20:07 | 14 |
|
I believe that A/UX for the Mac II lets you run a real multitasking
Unix using the traditional Mac interface, (or reworked variant thereof)
which runs on top of everything. Something like that seems incredibly
useful.
Oh, it's rather expensive and memory hungry... something like 40+
MBytes of Unix utilities and a minimum of 4 MBytes of system memory.
But, it shows that Unix can be run underneath a native user interface.
I thought X-Windows WAS being developed for the ST and Amiga?
Ed.
|
| 152.6 | Re: Better ways to spend $79 | CIMBAD::POWERS | I Dream Of Wires - G. Numan | Wed Jul 06 1988 16:22 | 56 |
|
re .3
> Minix might be a nice OS, but will it ever be more than just
> a curiosity?
probably not.
> Even if you get that "so-so" c compiler, is there really
> enough PD software to make it useful?
depends - It says it is compliant with source code for unix
version 7. Though the underlying structure is completely
different. It could probably run a lot of unix code. I have
been getting the newsgroup unix.sources from usenet, I thought
that would be a good place to start. I would imagine there are
spread sheets available, etc. But I doubt much will be written
for it specifically.
> TOS may have problems, but the better ST products work around them.
This is quite true, except every developer has their own idea on
how to work around them. For example. The three main compilers
I use are MWC, Personal Pascal, and Absoft Fortran 77. I use
MWC shell as an environment.
1) The Pascal compiler seems to work under the shell
2) The Pascal linker does not work under the shell
3) The Fortran compiler works under the shell, but creates
an odly named file of 0 length in whatever directory
you run your program in. This does not happen from the
desktop, just MWC shell
4) The object format for these 3 languages is not interchangeable
i can't link a fortran subroutine, with my c, etc.
5) Uniterm crashes when run from MWC.
I can continue with this list for several pages, if you like,
but I guess you get the point. Things don't work with other
things on the ST.
> End-users are probably better off skipping Minix.
could be, but at least things like standards will be defined
so all software runs. And bugs get fixed.
I am not meaning this note to pick on you, or be rude, or anything
like that, I am not that type of person. If the ST does what you
want, then thats good for you, but it my mind, I bought a machine
that doesn't work properly, and if changin the O/S is what needs
to be done, then I guess thats what I'll have to do.
Bill Powers
|
| 152.7 | I hope not | FRACTL::HEERMANCE | In Stereo Where Available | Wed Jul 06 1988 17:55 | 9 |
| I have not used MINIX but I have heard good things about it. I
have also heard (and said) quite a number of bad things about TOS.
Nobody seems to like TOS's speed or it's various glitches (the 40
folder bug and malloc problem).
Personally I hope MINIX becomes more than just a curiosity. MINIX
could serve as a platform to port real UNIX to the ST.
Martin H.
|
| 152.8 | | PNO::SANDERSB | a belagana | Wed Jul 06 1988 20:55 | 55 |
|
Why would you want to port UNIX to the ST? I've worked with UNIX
and several DEC operating systems (not just VMS). I have not
found UNIX to be of any particular advantage over what we (DEC)
currently have and on the ST I see no advantage at all, unless
you happen to like lots of system crashes explained with cryptic
messages (if at all).
If you want an operating system that has a consistent development
environment, than your needs can already be fulfilled with the ST.
Both Xenix and OS-9 are available for the ST starting at $150 and
ending around $700. This is complete with compilers (C, FORTRAN,
PASCAL), etc. None of the current ST packages run on these, but
so what? Both of these Operating Systems are UNIX look-alikes
and are even somewhat compatible with code written in the UNIX
environment. Finally both of these environments are true
multi-tasking, which is more than I can say for the available ST
hardware.
As for support, OS-9 has been around for a long time. It was the
first multi-tasking operating system that ran on 8-bit systems
(Tandy CoCo's). There is lots of PD software available via
Usenet and other sources as well as Users groups. No windows as
of this date however.
Additionally, the ST is a lot like a PRO-3xx without a bus. One
RS-232 port, printer port, disk channels, network channel (midi),
video, keyboard, and DMA. If you have a spooler for the printer,
some kind of simple batch processor, and a background file
transfer utility most needs have been met with out the overhead
of true multi-tasking.
Until there is some real hardware available for the ST (multiple
RS-232 ports, MMU with modes, FPU chip support) and a consistent
Operating System interface from Atari, I doubt that you will see
any kind of real multi-tasking environment that will be
compatible with the current software already running under TOS
today.
If your interested in developing software in multiple languages
that can be called from one another, I suggest that you
investigate True Basic. It is quite simple and well documented
on how to call "C", Assembly Language, and True Basic routines
from a True Basic program. Other languages could be called also
with some work on the developers part. If you don't particularly
care for Basic, that's not a problem, just use True Basic for the
mainline program and call everything else from within it. It is
after all, just a matter of structuring you program.
Finally just a statement to the portablility and reliability of
UNIX. Both are myths in the commercial world. They both will
remain myths until a standard is set and companies meet that
standard.
Bob
|
| 152.9 | I disagree. Multitasking IS needed on a PC! | PRNSYS::LOMICKAJ | Jeff Lomicka | Wed Jul 06 1988 21:04 | 18 |
| Give me break. A multi-window workstaiton MUST have true multitasking
to be fully useful. You want to be able to create a new process in a new
window on a whim whenever your other windows are busy compiling,
ray-tracing, file-transfering, or whatever. This background task, print
spooler, desk accessory stuff is all a kludge to get the most important
uses of multitasking to the user. They JUST DON'T CUT THE MUSTARD.
(Nobody mentioned PDOS, a $98 multitasking O/S for the Atari and other
68000 systems. I haven't tried it, but it seems pretty useless also.)
Of course, as far as I know, none of the multitasking operating systems
mentioned in this topic have a windowing system to go with them, which
for me puts TOS/GEM above all of them, but I have no doubt whatsoever
that I need a full multitasking operating system with a reasonable
windowing system in order to hack efficiently.
Now, let me know when X11 runs on MINIX.
|
| 152.10 | | PNO::SANDERSB | a belagana | Wed Jul 06 1988 22:08 | 11 |
|
Ok, ok, I can agree with your points. Multi-tasking does provide
the advantage of being able to use both the cpu and memory more
efficiently at the expense of additional overhead in each program
and the operating system.
I expect that you will see windows on OS-9 before you see them on
Minix or any other Unix clone.
Bob
|
| 152.11 | Some thoughts about PC Minix | AQUA::OCONNOR | The law dont want no gear-gammer | Thu Jul 07 1988 12:49 | 14 |
| Hi,
At the last company I worked before DEC there was a guy who swore
by MINIX on his PC-AT. This guy did a lot of contract software
developement on the side. The version of minix which he had allowed
you to come back into MS-DOS and run just about anything. He also
mentioned that the support he got was fantastic. I used to use
OS-9 on my Co-Co and the support Microware gave was a digrace.
Regarding windows, I don't know if GEM is re-entrant but it would
seem possible to use the mutli-tasking ability of Minix to run more
than one GEM session at a time. BTW, be warned the boot disk of
PC Minix was copy-protected, a strange thing to do with an OS.
Joe
|
| 152.12 | minix is *NOT* copyprotected | CIMBAD::POWERS | I Dream Of Wires - G. Numan | Thu Jul 07 1988 12:57 | 13 |
|
> BTW, be warned the boot disk of PC Minix was copy-protected, a
> strange thing to do with an OS.
This statement doesn't make sense, since you get the source code
to minix. What I believe you probably encountered, was trying to
do a diskcopy from dos of the minix disks. This will not work since
minix has a different disk format, which is not understandable to
DOS. In fact I believe the book tells you to make a copy of minix,
and can make as many copies as you like for your own use.
Bill Powers
|
| 152.13 | Other multi-tasking os' | PNO::SANDERSB | a belagana | Thu Jul 07 1988 19:40 | 52 |
|
The following from various ads or articles in STart:
Beckmeyer Development Tools
478 Santa Clara Ave., Suite 300
Oakland, CA 94610
(415)452-1129
(415)452-4792 BBS
VSH Manager, $34.95 - Visual Shell interface to the multi
tasking C-shell. A Virtual
terminal window with a GEM desk
accessory.
MT C-Shell, $129.95 - Multi Tasking C-Shell system.
Gives access to electronic mail,
print spooling, and over 70
commands and utilities. (From ad in
Fall, 1987, issue STart, page 65)
Micro-RTX, $250.00 - Developers kit, TOS compatible multi
tasking kernel.
(STart, Special Issue Three, 1988,
page 106)
Microware Systems Corporation
1900 N.W. 114th Street
DesMonies, Iowa 50322
(515)224-1929
Personal OS-9/ST, $150.00 - Multi Tasking Operating
System. Structured
Interactive BASIC, and other
utilities.
Professional OS-9/ST, $600.00 - Full C language support
including Assembler, Linker,
and User Debugger. Pascal,
Fortran, electronic mail,
print spooler, etc. optional.
(Fall, 1987, STart, page 79)
Computer Tools International, Inc.
14900 Interurban Ave.
Seattle, WA 98168
(206)243-7060
Idris Operating System, $300.00 - Multi User, Multi
Tasking Operating System.
(STart, Special Issue Three,
1988, page 106)
|
| 152.14 | RTX will run what Minix wont | DELNI::GOLDSTEIN | Resident curmudgeon | Thu Jul 07 1988 20:50 | 13 |
| I think I posted a note from Dave Beckemeyer about RTX in the older
version of this conference.
GEM is not re-entrant. Much of TOS is; however, it's not particularly
friendly to multitasking. Micro-RTX (from which MTCshell was derived)
replaces many of the TOS routines with new ones, and provides
multitasking with TOS/GEM compatibility. (You may need VSH Manager
to run GEM programs under MTCshell.) Quite clever, but it's a
developer's tool, not an end-user product. (Sublicenses are $10/each,
which means somebody could write a multitasking GEM-compatible shell
and link RTX into it, selling it cheaply.) Alas, Dave Beckemeyer
is rather peeved at the sh**ty support Atari has given, so he's
not doing much more for the ST.
|
| 152.15 | Why I support minix | CIMBAD::POWERS | I Dream Of Wires - G. Numan | Thu Jul 07 1988 21:59 | 56 |
|
I own a copy of MT-Cshell. Yes, it does multitask, and you can
"log-in" at a terminal connected to the serial port, send mail to
another user, etc. The big problem with it, is a lot of software
just simply won't run under it. This is due to every developer
comes up with their own solution to a buggy O/S. This is not a
new O/S for TOS, just adds some multi tasking functionality to it.
I still feel that the best solution is minix. For the following
reasons. You may agree, you may disagree, that is your right.
OS/9 is attractive, but I don't feel it has the acceptance of
as large an audience as minix. Remember, OS/9 is an pretty much
if not completely a motorolla cpu based OS. I have never seen it
on anything other then 6809's, and 680x0's. Now minix on the other
hand comes from being on I believe 3 other archetectures. I did
not bring my minix book with me today, but I can remember 2, they
are: PDP11, and intel architecture (8086/8,80286). Mainly though
the fact that it is available for the pc's gives it a chance for
a rather large installed base. As I have mentioned several times,
you get the source code to minix, so you can do any hacking of the
OS that you feel is needed. You can't do that to OS/9.
Idris is more *functionaly* similar to Unix then OS/9 is. But
I don't feel that it has any following, nor will it ever. To my
knowledge the ST was it's first implementation. Atari wanted it
to be an alternative OS for ST users, except they and the company
(whitesmith's ltd ???) who wrote it, disagreed on price, so Atari
isn't going to support/push it. And you people see what kind of
support atari gives the st's main OS. The ST has been out for over
3 years now, and not one major OS update.
MT-Cshell/RTX/VSH - suffer from the problem, that they try to work
with what is there, which sucks. By the way, MT-Cshell, and VSH
are simmply implementations of RTX.
PDOS (I think Jeff mentioned this one in another note) although
I knew of it's existance, I wonder how long it will stay around,
I have never heard of anyone using it, etc.
Now granted UNIX on one machine, is not necessacarily compatible
with unix on another, but the world shouts unix. Personally I prefer
VMS, but that is impossible on a ST. Now granted minix does not
give you workstation like windows, etc. But the underlying layers
are there to do that. I am not to familiar with the architecture
of how DEC/X windows works, but isn't it just a layered product
over VMS. For example, a mouse click happens, well, an interupt
gets tripped, and it sends a msg to the layered product above, which
handles it. Probably along those sort of line's. Anybody out there
can fill us in on how it works???
Well I guess I've said enough for this note. Are there any other
people out there who think they might try minix out, when it arrives?
Bill Powers
|
| 152.16 | Well... | IOWAIT::MESSENGER | An Index of Metals | Thu Jul 07 1988 22:50 | 20 |
| re: .-1
> (stuff about Idris) To my
> knowledge the ST was it's first implementation. Atari wanted it
That turns out not to be the case. Idris has been around for a coon's
age. In fact, I was running it on a Chromatics CGC7900 about 4 years
ago.
> are there to do that. I am not to familiar with the architecture
> of how DEC/X windows works, but isn't it just a layered product
> over VMS. For example, a mouse click happens, well, an interupt
X11 is a source distribution from MIT. This means you could modify
and recompile in on the ST. The bad news is I hear the X11 source
kit is 30+ megabytes. The other bad news is that MINIX doesn't have
any network stuff built into it and X11 wants a network.
- HBM
|
| 152.17 | more comments... | LEDS::ACCIARDI | I Blit, therefore I am... | Fri Jul 08 1988 04:22 | 43 |
|
An important point that hasn't been mentioned yet is the ability
of a multitasking OS to share data in some sensible way between
applications.
D.F. Scott, the ST columnist in Computer Shopper made a few valid
points in the last issue, when the topic of multitasking came up. For
now, put aside whether or not real (meaning hardware protected)
multitasking is practical on a 68000 based machine. Greater minds than
mine can debate this.
I generally disagree with Scott on most everything, but he made
a point using the Amiga as an example. While it may be a swell
trick to play Marble Madness while writing a term paper, what use
is it if I can't share data between applications?
There are obvious exceptions, like background printing and
downloading, but both these problems have been solved without
multitasking.
One of my biggest peeves about the Amiga is the lack of support
for the built-in clipboard.device. Almost no software uses it. Sure,
there are PD hacks that allow you to snip text and graphics from
window to window and even from different screens, but without rigorous
standards, the Mac is going to be way ahead when they finally get
real multitasking working. Apple software developers seem to follow
guidlines laid down by Apple with religous zeal. In fact, I've
never seen a Mac application that didn't support cutting and pasting.
In many cases, this is much more important that actually being able
to run programs at (what appears to be) the same time.
On an even higher level, it would be useful to download stock
quotations directly into a graphing program. I think this is 'PIPES'
in UNIX, and it will be supported under AmigaDOS 1.3, but here again,
if developers don't embrace it, it will remain application dependant.
Anyway, I think you get my drift. Multitasking is real slick, but
there must be some real cooperation and guidelines to follow so
that different applications work together.
Ed.
|
| 152.18 | I goofed again | CIMBAD::POWERS | I Dream Of Wires - G. Numan | Fri Jul 08 1988 13:04 | 14 |
|
I goofed again.
> Now minix on the other hand comes from being on I believe 3
> other archetectures.
This is also an incorrect statement. I looked it up in his book,
and what Andy T. said was that he has written 3 different OS's on
3 different architectures. PDP-11, 8086/8, and 68000.
Sorry about the misinformation :^)
Bill Powers
|
| 152.19 | Windows need multitasking, but not networking. | PRNSYS::LOMICKAJ | Jeff Lomicka | Fri Jul 08 1988 13:52 | 7 |
| X11 doesn't need a network, it needs a transport. How many computers do
you have at home? Unless you're like me, you have one real computer,
not counting the occasional VIC-20 or TRS-80 in the attic. So who needs
the network? It's not a big deal to make X11 use pipes or sockets instead.
My biggest concern is the overwhelming size.
|
| 152.20 | | DOOBER::MESSENGER | An Index of Metals | Fri Jul 08 1988 17:08 | 16 |
| Re: .-1
> X11 doesn't need a network, it needs a transport. How many computers do
> you have at home? Unless you're like me, you have one real computer,
> not counting the occasional VIC-20 or TRS-80 in the attic. So who needs
> the network? It's not a big deal to make X11 use pipes or sockets instead.
This is, of course, technically correct. However, one of the great
advantages of X11 is that I can write the same program for the
workstation or the mainframe, and have *either* do output to the
workstation. Without a network, this doesn't happen.
Even without "real" X11, just implementing the X11 Client module
under GEM would be quite powerful -- one would then use the ST as
a "dumb" front end to your friendly neighborhood VAX...
- HBM
|
| 152.21 | Why I bought an ST. | PANGLS::BAILEY | | Tue Jul 12 1988 19:32 | 16 |
| > It's not a big deal to make X11 use pipes or sockets instead.
Actually, what you get from MIT already uses sockets. (A pipe is a
special type of socket, in Unix parlance).
The big problem with X11/multitasking is that the ``resources (esp.
space--disk and memory) are cheap'' mentality seems to be getting away
from the technology. You get mucho functions at a penalty. I like TOS
because it is on the other end of the spectrum--everything you need is
in ROM, and I can use every last byte of my disks for my own data and
programs.
I don't forsee the day that I buy a PC which boots in over 20 seconds.
(Well, maybe if it NEVER crashes, even when I'm slinging kernel code!).
Steph
|
| 152.22 | minix description | CIMBAD::POWERS | I Dream Of Wires - G. Numan | Wed Jul 13 1988 17:15 | 384 |
|
Here is a more coherent minix description, gotten off of usenet.
From the comp.os.minix newsgroup. It contains a lot of PC info, but
if you are interested in minix at all, is worth looking over.
Bill Powers
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Path: decwrl!ucbvax!pasteur!helios.ee.lbl.gov!lll-tis!lll-winken!uunet!ndsuvax!ncoverby
Subject: Minix Information Sheet
Posted: 10 Jul 88 19:13:52 GMT
Organization: North Dakota State University Fargo, ND
This is my July posting of the Minix Information Sheet. It
answers most of the commonly asked questions (notably WHERE
CAN I GET THE 1.3 PATCHES). Since the last posting, I have
added compatability information; see the diff listing in my
next message for changes.
Section 9, "What Clones Has Minix Been Tested On", needs to
be cleaned up. Many of the machines list 'with fix', but
there is no reference to EXACTLY what the fix is (Message-ID
or something). I am going to start recording references to
fixes posted relative to 1.3 (you ARE going to make 1.3 work
on your machines and share that with us, aren't you?). This
should make finding things in the archives a bit easier.
Updates, comments and suggestions for improvement to this
list are always welcome at:
Glen Overby
UUCP: uunet!ndsuvax!ncoverby
ihnp4!umn-cs!ndsuvax!ncoverby (for a while yet)
Bitnet: ncoverby@ndsuvax
Internet: ncoverby@plains.nodak.edu (pending)
[Most recent change: 10 Jul 1988 by ncoverby@ndsuvax (Glen Overby)]
[Origional From ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tannenbaum ) 88/02/23]
MINIX INFORMATION SHEET
1. WHAT IS MINIX?
MINIX is an operating system that is a subset of UNIX Version 7. It contains
nearly all the V7 system calls, and these calls are identical to the
corresponding V7 calls. It also includes a Bourne-compatible shell, and close
to 100 utility programs, including cc, grep, ls, make, etc. To the average
user, it is effectively V7 UNIX. If you dig deep enough, you will, however,
find some differences.
The MINIX kernel has been written from scratch by Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl).
It does not contain ANY AT&T code at all. The utility programs have been
written by Andy Tanenbaum, his students, and a number of other people,
including people on USENET. None of the utilities contain any AT&T code
either. The shell, the Pascal and C compilers, make, etc. have all been
completely redone. As a result, this code is not covered by the ATT UNIX
license, and it can be made available.
2. WHAT CPUS DOES MINIX RUN ON?
MINIX was originally written for the IBM PC, XT, and AT. It has since been
ported to the NS 16032 and the 68000 (Atari ST). It will also work on many
386-based machines. A list of clones on which MINIX has been tested is
included below.
3. HOW CAN I GET MINIX?
MINIX is being sold by:
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632 (1-800-223-1360), and
Prentice-Hall Int'l, Hemel, Hempstead, England (+44 442 231555)
When ordering it, please specify the 640K PC version, 512K AT version or
256K PC version (which will be dropped starting with Version 1.3). The Atari
version will run on any Atari ST, from a 512K machine with 1 floppy to a Mega
ST with 4M and 16 hard disks. It works better on the latter. The Atari version
will be available from Prentice-Hall in the late Spring.
The U.S. price for the IBM version is $80. The price outside the U.S. is
somewhat higher due to the way Prentice-Hall's divisions are financed.
The price for the Atari version will be roughly similarly to the IBM version.
All distributions contain executable binaries and the complete source code.
4. HOW CAN I FIND OUT MORE ABOUT MINIX?
MINIX is described in detail in the following book:
Title: Operating Systems: Design and Implementation
Author: Andrew S. Tanenbaum
Publisher: Prentice-Hall
ISBN: 0-13-637406-9
There is also a paperback available outside the U.S. only. A German
translation was begun in Feb. 1988. The software package does not contain a
manual; this is contained in the appendices to the book, which also contain a
complete source code listing (in C) of the MINIX kernel.
5. IS MINIX PUBLIC DOMAIN?
No. MINIX has been copyrighted by Prentice-Hall. Prentice-Hall has decided to
permit a limited amount of copying of the sources and binaries for educational
use. Professors may make copies for students in their operating systems
classes. Academic researchers may use it for their new experimental machines,
and things like that. A small amount of private copying of diskettes for the
use of personal friends is ok, but please do not make more than 3 copies from
each original. Prentice-Hall is trying to be more reasonable than most
software publishers. Please do not abuse this. Online repositories of the
full source code distribution are not permitted. All commercial uses of MINIX
require written permission from Prentice-Hall; for the most part, they are
willing to grant such permission in return for a royalty on sales.
6. WHAT PROGRAMS COME WITH MINIX
The list below gives the programs that are either distributed with Version 1.2
or have been posted to USENET since then:
ar ascii basename bawk cal cat cc chmem chmod chown clr cmp
comm cp cpdir date dd df diff dosread du echo ed elle expr
factor fdisk find fix getlf grep gres head kill libpack libupack ln
login lpr ls make mined mkdir mkfs mknod more mount mv od
passwd pr prep printenv pwd readfs rev rm rmdir roff run sed
sh shar size sleep sort spell split stty su sum sync tail
tar tee test time touch tr treecmp umount uniq update uudecode uuencode wc
Various other programs have also been posted, but the ones above are considered
part of the "official" distribution and will appear in Version 1.3 (summer '88).
7. HOW DO I KEEP UP TO DATE ABOUT MINIX.
If you are on USENET, subscribe to newsgroup comp.os.minix. There are about
10,000 people in this group, and new software, bug fixes, and general discussion
about MINIX take place here. If you are on BITNET or ARPANET, you can get this
newsgroup via a mailing list by contacting:
ARPANET: info-minix-request@udel.edu
BITNET: sending a message (either interactive or mail) to listserv@ndsuvm1
saying:
signup minix-l Your_Full_Name
8. ARE THE MESSAGES POSTED TO COMP.OS.MINIX SAVED ANYWHERE?
Yes. There are several archives, one run by Vincent Broman on bugs.nosc.mil,
another run by James Galvin on louie.udel.edu, one on the Bitnet
"LISTSERV" at NDSUVM1, and an archive area on Simtel20.arpa
The following text was posted by Vincent Broman and describes how his archive
works.
>> Bugs.Nosc.Mil archives comp.os.minix news articles of lasting interest
>> and other Minix material, such as a list of machines reported to be
>> able to run Minix. Material of widespread interest includes diffs for
>> updating v1.1 to v1.2 and preliminary fixes headed for v1.3, code developing
>> toward a serial port driver, diffs for cross compilation under MS-C and
>> Turbo-C, the new asld with split I&D, and recently the editor, Elle v4.1 .
>>
>> This material is available by anonymous FTP (during non-business hours)
>> on bugs.nosc.mil in directory pub/Minix . The file SUBJECTS contains a list
>> of Subject lines serving as a kind of index. The file names are mostly just
>> the Message-Id of a news article.
>>
>> Several ways to get these kinds of goodies, in order:
>>
>> 1. Look, or ask someone you know to look, for articles still available
>> on the machine where you read news, or on a neighbor.
>> 2. Ask the person who posted the material to mail it to you.
>> 3. Get access to a machine on the ArpaNet (or talk to an acquaintance who
>> has access) and FTP to louie.udel.edu or bugs.nosc.mil .
>> 4. To get smaller selections from the bugs.nosc.mil archive by Email,
>> see the instructions following.
>> 5. To get very large amounts of material from archives, talk to someone
>> in charge of it, e.g. me, about mailing a tape. Surface-mailing of tapes
>> is cheap. Voluminous Email is expensive, though not as expensive as
>> posting news.
>>
>> Everything available to anonymous FTP in directory pub/Minix can be obtained by
>> sending a mailed request to minix-server@bugs.nosc.mil or nosc!minix-server .
>> Include in the message, either among the header fields or the body, a line like:
>>
>> Reply-To: <your mail address>
>>
>> and after that a line or lines naming desired files e.g.:
>>
>> send compatibility
>> send SUBJECTS
>> send 1180@botter.cs.vu.nl
>>
>> to get an automatic mailed reply. Notice file names are case sensitive.
>> <your mail address> should look something like one of these examples:
>>
>> you@stolaf.uucp
>> sdcsvax!ihnp4!mtgzz!guru
>> cs.vu.nl!giant@uunet.uu.net
>> person%utoronto.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu
>> user%ulowell.csnet@relay.cs.net
>> honcho%durham.mailnet@mit-multics.arpa .
>>
>> Email is not free. Abuse of the system will cause bad karma.
>> Contents may have settled during shipment.
>>
>>
>> Vincent Broman, code 632, Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego, CA 92152, USA
>> Phone: +1 619 553 1641 Internet: broman@nosc.mil Uucp: sdcsvax!nosc!broman
Information about the other archives can be found below.
>> NDSUVM1's listserv has two archives of Minix information. The first is
>> an automated weekly log of all messages sent to the MINIX-L list. The
>> other is an manually organized manual of sources sent to the list. Both
>> are accessed by sending either interactive messages (bitnet only) or
>> mail (all other networks) to LISTSERV@NDSUVM1. Some possible addresses
>> from other networks are:
>>
>> Bitnet: listserv@ndsuvm1
>> Internet: listserv%ndsuvm1.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu
>> UUCP: psuvax1!ndsuvm1.bitnet!listserv
>>
>> **NOTE*** the UUCP gateway at PSUVAX1 appears to violate some rule of
>> RFC822 which listserv does not like being violated (duplicate 'From:'
>> lines). If possible, use a different gateway; otherwise expect a nasty
>> letter from NDSUVM1's postmaster, if anything. I am interested in hearing
>> from anybody on on UUCP or a Bitnet Unix machine who does successfully
>> receive anything from listserv.
>>
>> The message logs are kept in the "MINIX-L" section, with names in the form:
>>
>> MINIX-L LOGyymmw
>>
>> where "yy" is the year, "mm" is the numeric month and "w" is an alphabetic
>> character from A to E indicating what week of the month. Several months of
>> log files are kept on-line, the number depending on disk space availability.
>>
>>
>> The other archives are kept in the "MINIX" section.
>> To obtain a list of the files in the Minix archives, issue the command:
>>
>> INDEX MINIX
>> or
>> INDEX MINIX-L
>>
>> (if you use mail, the command must be in the body of your message)
>>
>> Files are retrieved with the 'GET' command:
>>
>> GET MORE INFO MINIX
>>
>> to get the file "MORE INFO" from the group "MINIX".
>>
>> For a complete list of information on the listserv:
>>
>> INFO ?
>>
>> Due to the 80-character per line (punched card) limit on Bitnet mail, many of
>> the files will be shipped using an encoding scheme that allows logical lines
>> to be split up into many physical lines. The default for going to other
>> networks is "Listserv Punch". It can be obtained from the file 'MISC LPUN'.
>> This file should traverse networks unscathed.
>>
>> Please direct all comments and questions about this archive to Glen Overby at
>> nu070156@ndsuvm1.bitnet
>> A limited archive of MINIX related material is available from simtel20.arpa
>> in the directory PD:<MISC.MINIX>. These same files are available on Bitnet
>> from LISTSERV@RPICICGE in the same directory.
>>
>> To get these files from LISTSERV@RPICICGE, use the /pddir and /pdget commands
>> for a directory listing and file retrieval, respectively.
9. WHAT CLONES HAS MINIX BEEN TESTED ON?
MINIX runs on the IBM PC, XT, and AT. It also runs on those clones that are
IBM compatible. You would be amazed at how many are not. The following list
was compiled by Vincent Broman from postings to comp.os.minix:
Computer info source MINIX runs? HD runs?
--------- ----------- ----------- --------
AMT-ATjr darren@ethos.uucp yes
ARC Turbo XT clone m692040@sdsu.uucp yes
AT&T 6300 dklann@marque.uucp yes no
AT&T 6300 jcs@chinet.uucp yes yes with fix of go
ATronics AT clone hubble@cae780.uucp yes
ATronics XT clone dhb@bek-mc.caltech.edu yes yes w/ fix
Aerocomp Clone rmtodd@uokmax.uucp yes no
Amstrad steve@warwick.uucp yes no
BIOS silent partner ast@cs.vu.nl yes yes
Commodore PC-10 II ast@cs.vu.nl yes yes
Compaq 386 ast@cs.vu.nl no
Compaq DeskPro walker@xanth.uucp yes
Compaq DeskPro 286 walker@xanth.uucp yes
Compaq Portable cavender@drivax.uucp yes yes w/fix
Compaq Portable II foster@beno.css.gov yes
Computer Classfd ST/286 myxm@lanl.gov yes
Corona PC-400 dtinker@utoronto.bitnet yes
Corona PC-400 janet@unrvax.uucp no (see below)
Epson Equity 3 ast@cs.vu.nl yes yes
Faraday motherboard jallen@netxcom.uucp yes
Ferranti PC860/XT lyo@uk.ac.newcastle.cheviot yes yes w/ fix
GRID GridCase 3 steven@cwi.nl yes
Honeywell AP ast@cs.vu.nl yes yes
HP Vectra eric@unmvax.unm.edu no
IBM PC ganesh@utah-cs.uucp yes
IBM PC-AT @6MHz ast@cs.vu.nl yes yes
IBM PC-AT @8MHz ast@cs.vu.nl yes no
IBM PC-XT ast@cs.vu.nl yes yes 10Mb
IBM PC-XT-286 ast@cs.vu.nl yes no
IBM PC Convertible bdale@winfree.uucp no
IBS system 2000 sbanner1@sol.uvic.cdn yes yes w/ fix
IMC XT, 8MHz V20, beugel@klipper.cs.vu.nl yes
ITT XTRA ast@cs.vu.nl yes
Kaypro 286i (AT) comp13@tjalk.cs.vu.nl yes
Kaypro PC ken@driwash.uucp yes
Leading Edge clone ganesh@utah-cs.uucp yes
Leading Edge models M&D wegrzyn@cdx39.uucp yes
Leading Edge MP-1673 wjc@eddie.mit.edu yes no
NCR PC8 ast@cs.vu.nl yes no
Samsung clone ganesh@utah-cs.uucp yes
SEFCO AT Clone dhb@bek-mc.caltech.edu yes yes?
Shitel ast@cs.vu.nl no
Tandy 1000 kimery@wdl1.uucp no
Tandy 1000SX,1000EX john@moncol.uucp no
Tandy 1000 johnc@mia.uucp yes w/fix yes w/fix
Tandy 1200 modified bdale@winfree.uucp yes
Televideo Telenix 286 ast@cs.vu.nl yes
Toshiba T1100+ bdale@winfree.uucp yes
Toshiba T1100+ stuart@bms-at.uucp yes
Unisys micro IT ast@cs.vu.nl yes yes
Unnamed Asian Clone arthur@ubu.uucp yes
Xerox 6085 PC emulator lindsay@cheviot.newcastle.ac.uk yes yes
XT-2000 clone subelman@ttidca.tti.com yes
Zenith 150 n0ano@wldrdg.uucp yes no
Zenith Z-151 zemon@felix.uucp yes yes w/ fix
Zenith 181 bdale@winfree.uucp yes
Zenith Z-248 (AT) ast@cs.vu.nl yes yes (20 Mb)
CAF Turbo College megevand@cgeuge54.bitnetyes yes w/ fix
Disks Info source Comment
----------- ----------- -------
Adaptec 2002/Rodime bdale@winfree.uucp works with fix of n0ano@wldrdg
Data Technology Corp ast@cs.vu.nl AT controller; works
DTC-5150BX HDC lyo@uk.ac.newcastle.cheviot runs with fix
Everex AT compat HD myxm@lanl.gov HD troubles
Maynard Corp Hard Card ganesh@utah-cs.uucp not compat
Omti 5527 RLL ST238 megevand@cgeuge54.bitnet yes w/ fix
Seagate 4026, IBM Ctrlr sheu@gitpyr.gatech.edu runs with fix of hubble@cae780
Seagate ST4906 80Mb HD hubble@cae780.uucp yes with posted fix
WD 1002S-WX2 HDC, ST225, go@orstcs.uucp runs with posted fix
WD 1002A-WX1 HDC, Rodine 204, bdale@winfree.uucp runs with fix of n0ano@wldrdg
WD 1002/ST225 HD albery@ncoast.uucp won't run yet
WD 1003-WA3 FDC comp13@tjalk.cs.vu.nl runs with posted fix
Xebec HDC 20Mb disk arthur@warwick.uucp works, but hd <3Mb only
Xebec HDC, 10Mb HD m692040@sdsu.uucp runs if minix on 1st partition
Z150 Hard Disk n0ano@wldrdg.uucp works with posted fix
Bernoulli disk acharya@sbcs has problems doing mkfs thereon
Toshiba T1100+ 720K stuart@bms-at.uucp supported by posted fixes
AT&T 6300 Floppies ast@cs.vu.nl supported by posted mod
Video cards Info source Comment
----------- ----------- -------
ATI EGA Wonder megevand@cgeuge54.bitnet fine
Corona PC-400 own display janet@unrvax.uucp cursor stuck, scrolls wrong.
CT-6040S mono-graphics go@orstcs.uucp support by posted fix
EGA video ast@cs.vu.nl not working, fixes suggested
(EGA) NEC GB-1 vizard@dartvax scroll fix unsuccessful also
PGC sheu@gitpyr.gatech.edu fine
Sigma Designs Color 400 bc@njitsc1.uucp incompat, causes NMIs
Tecmar Graphics Master sbanner1@sol.uvic.cdn CGA emul probs like EGA
Toshiba T1100+ display stuart@bms-at.uucp scroll problem, mod posted
Printers Info source Comment
--------- ----------- -------
Epson FX-80 prtr arthur@warwick.uucp unreliable prtr driver
printer MSDOS ok, Minix not, dlong@sdsu.uucp supported by posted fix.
Seikosha SP1200AI megevand@cgeuge54.bitnetDoesn't work properly
Other boards Info source Comment
--------- ----------- -------
AST Six Pack Clock tsp@killer.uucp support by posted code
AST Six Pack Premium go@orstcs.uucp clock code posted
... MegaPlus diamant@hpfclp.hp.com simpler clock code posted
CAF Multi-IO card megevand@cgeuge54.bitnet Posted clock code (880205)
MCT multi-IO card myxm@lanl.gov code for clock setting posted
Multi-IO card/AMT-ATjr darren@ethos.uucp none of above clock code worked
CompuAdd MFC cavender@drivax.uucp myxm's clock code worked
Alpha Micro Videotrax zemon@felix.uucp board is inimical
--
Glen Overby
UUCP: uunet!ndsuvax!ncoverby
Bitnet: ncoverby@ndsuvax
Internet: ncoverby@plains.nodak.edu (pending)
|
| 152.23 | | STAR::HEERMANCE | In Stereo Where Available | Fri Jul 15 1988 18:12 | 9 |
| From the tone of the note it sounds like MINIX/ST is out now.
Does anyone have it? Does anyone have 1.3?
One thing I would like to know is if it's possible to port a
file from TOS format to MINIX format. My guess is that it's
possible but no utility exists. Although, if a MS-DOS to MINIX
existed that would be almost as good.
Martin H.
|
| 152.24 | minix availability | CIMBAD::POWERS | I Dream Of Wires - G. Numan | Fri Jul 15 1988 19:13 | 17 |
| Martin,
The person who wrote that note, was not Andy Tanenbaum, and
so some of the information might be suspect. I just read in todays
posting Andy mentioned that minix for st will not be out till Sep.
It was originally schedualed to be out in spring, but didn't make
it. There have been quite a few posting's on comp.os.minix by
people asking about the ST version. I see them about every day
to every other day, on average. As for transfering files, I have
not seen any programs, to read an ms-dos file and put it on a minix
disk, but I have gotten a program from the newsgroup comp.sources.unix
that is a close facsimile to PROCOMM, which is a popular terminal
program on the PC's. I don't think it should be to difficult to
get it to work under minix.
Bill_who_just_cant_wait_till_minix_gets_here_Powers
|
| 152.25 | Latest Iridus info. | PNO::SANDERSB | a belagana | Mon Jul 18 1988 23:10 | 52 |
|
From: ASHBY::USENET "USENET Newsgroup Distributor 18-Jul-1988 1739" 18-JUL-1988 15:45
To: @SUBSCRIBERS.DIS
Subj: USENET comp.sys.atari.st newsgroup articles
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Path: decwrl!purdue!bu-cs!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!uw-june!uw-entropy!dataio!pilchuck!ssc!mcgp1!fst
Subject: Re: Idris??
Posted: 16 Jul 88 20:19:41 GMT
Organization: Computer Tools Int'l Inc.
In article <12577@sunybcs.UUCP>, ugbernie@sunybcs.uucp (Bernard Bediako) writes:
>
> What's happened to Idris??
> Has anyone seen it running at all, or did it just disapear????
> bernie
Idris is alive and well. We are currently selling it with X-Windows (v10.4)
for $200 (US). It is doing well outside U.S., although we have a number of
customers in the U.S. A few month back I posted the announcement of the
STX-Windows and price changes (lowered prices). I received a few pieces of
mail in response, asking for information. I apologize to those who did not
get a replay back (I am fundamentally lazy). One of these letters accused us
of ``hype'' and ``vaporware''.
In my defense (I take these things personally), I would like to suggest that
we send a review copy of IDRIS, WSL C and STX-Windows to one or two prominent
members of this news group (like Mr. Simon Poole or Mr. Beckemeyer (hi Dave))
for a month or two and ask them to post their views and critique to this news
group. Does this sound fair?
I believe one of the reasons people have not heard so much from us is due
to lack of advertising. This is mainly due to economics (i.e. potential
gains versus the cost of advertising). Most of current users of IDRIS tend to
be individual and companies that already were using IDRIS on other machines
and now they could use it on more affordable hardware.
We have also been developing hardware (including a 4-PORT I/O card and an
Ethernet card) for the ST/MEGA systems. Unfortunately the market potential
for such products does not seem to be there. If anyone wants to manufacture
any of the above hardware, we would very much like to talk to you.
As much as I hate to say it (my own personal opinion) the ST/MEGA markets
seem to be dying a slow death in the U.S. and that will require us to direct
the porting and maintenance of IDRIS,X,TCP/IP to other 680x0 hardware
platforms.
Sincerely
--
Fariborz ``Skip'' Tavakkolian
UUCP ...!uw-beaver!tikal!mcgp1!fst
|
| 152.26 | minix now available | CIMBAD::POWERS | I Dream Of Wires - G. Numan | Mon Oct 03 1988 19:06 | 7 |
| 152.27 | Minix notesfile? | NAC::HARBO | Dare to struggle and dare to win | Thu Oct 06 1988 12:54 | 3 |
| How many people are planning to buy Minix now that it is available?
Is there a MINIX notes file on the Easynet?
|
| 152.28 | I am | BENTLY::MESSENGER | Dreamer Fithp | Thu Oct 06 1988 14:43 | 3 |
| I am definitely planning to buy Minix. After all, you can't have
too many operating systems :-)
- HBM
|
| 152.29 | I am gonna give it a try | CIMBAD::POWERS | I Dream Of Wires - G. Numan | Thu Oct 06 1988 15:58 | 16 |
| RE: < Note 152.27 by NAC::HARBO "Dare to struggle and dare to win" >
> How many people are planning to buy Minix now that it is available?
I already have.
> Is there a MINIX notes file on the Easynet?
Not yet, I was thinking of starting one, but I am unsure of the
number of people who would be interested. It seems like inside
DEC, there would be very few people interested. I am unsure
of how many people from the Messy-dos world use it.
Bill Powers
|
| 152.30 | I'm planning to buy it too ... | KBOMFG::HEIDEN | | Mon Oct 17 1988 09:58 | 5 |
| I'm planning to buy it too ....
.... would welcome a separate notesfile, or at least a separate
topic within this notesfile
Matthias
|
| 152.31 | minix notesfile | CIMBAD::POWERS | I Dream Of Wires - G. Numan | Mon Oct 17 1988 12:33 | 20 |
|
RE: < Note 152.30 by KBOMFG::HEIDEN >
> .... would welcome a separate notesfile, or at least a separate
> topic within this notesfile
A topic in this notes file would not be a good idea, to discuss
minix in, because it is also available for the Pee-Cee's.
I will send a message off to my system mangler today, to see if
I can start a minix conference on my system. We have plenty of
disk space here. I also have most of the diffs that appeared
accross usenet, over the past couple of months. I will weed them
out, and place them in a publicly accessable (SP?) directory.
Most of the diffs won't be of benefit to the st version of minix,
but for the pc version.
Bill Powers
|
| 152.32 | MINIX is Here! | CIMBAD::POWERS | I Dream Of Wires - G. Numan | Wed Oct 19 1988 10:46 | 22 |
|
Well, Minix for the Atari arrived yesterday. It comes with
9 single sided floppies and a small manual. The manual is only 62
pages, and tells you the differences between the ST version and the
PC version.
The first thing I did was to back up the distribution floppies,
I used Copy II ST for this. I then took my set of floppies, and
booted it up. It booted up in just a few seconds. It also comes
with a set of about 11 tests you can run to see that everything is
ok, I ran these, (they take about 15 minutes), and all of them passed.
Two things seem weird. First there is no keyclicks, and second
the cursor doesn't blink. For those of you who might use one
of the various shells available, this makes (at least to me) that
the atari is hung.
I created the minix notesfile yesterday, and will try to have it
ready for public use today. When it is available, I will post a
note here.
Bill Powers
|
| 152.33 | Notes file. | NAC::HARBO | Dare to struggle and dare to win | Wed Oct 19 1988 16:15 | 2 |
| Thanks for the notes file Bill. I think there would be enough people
between PC and ST minix to make it worthwhile.
|
| 152.34 | notesconference location | CIMBAD::POWERS | I Dream Of Wires - G. Numan | Wed Oct 19 1988 18:51 | 6 |
|
Well, the MINIX notesfile is now set up, to add it to your notebook,
type "add entry cimbad::minix" or KP7 or select.
Bill Powers
|