HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: baron@clifton.hobby.nl (Wim `Blue Baron' van Dorst)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Distribution: world
Subject: Re: Drivers for 1.2
Organization: Minix Hobbynet Host
Date: Sat,  5 Sep 1992 12:38:31 MDT

drmo@gnv.ifas.ufl.edu () writes:
> I am trying to run Minix v1.2 for an OS class I am taking.

If you can get your hands on version 1.5 you'd have the version that has
been stable for 1.5 years. Where did you get such an old Minix?

> The version that is distributed with the class apparently will
> only run on an IBM PC/XT.  I have tried in on 3 different
> systems and it doesn't work on any of them.
> 	1.  386/40 with a SCSI controller.  1.2 meg

The SCSI-driver should be build in separately. At least two implementations
for ST0? and Adaptec are available from the archives.

> 	2.  286/10 with a MFM controller.   1.2 meg

Just switch the xt_wini.c for the at_wini.c, rebuild the kernel, and hoppa
> 	3.  8086 portable with 1 360k floppy.

Should work.

Good archvies are plains.nodak.edu, and Minnie.???.au (recommended, but I
don't know the complete name by heart. Read the FAQ).

Met vriendelijke groeten, Wim `Blue Baron' van Dorst
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Blue Baron = Wim van Dorst, Voice (+31) 074-443937, (+31) 02152-42319
(-:       baron@clifton.hobby.nl          tgcpwd@urc.tue.nl       :-)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: IKBE1%EBCCUAB1.BitNet@pucc.princeton.edu
Subject: Problem with cpdir.c using bcc or gcc
Originator: mmdf@louie.udel.edu
Organization: Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 18:03:16 GMT



Hi,


I have problems compiling cpdir.c with bcc. I think some structure is
passed as an argument and this is not implemented yet in this compiler.
(I don't know enough C to change the program).

I tried to install gcc but when I compiled cpdir.c the image generated
doesn't execute properly.
If I try to use -O option I get an error  fp: stack full

Could anyone give me some clue. Thanks.

I am using a 386 with 4Mb total ram (2Mb in a ram disk).

Victor Moreno
Barcelona, Spain.
ikbe1@cc.uab.es
-- 
Mail System (MMDF)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: malay@sae.com (Bob Malay)
Subject: ST Minix & DMA Interrupts
Reply-To: malay@sae.com
Organization: Template Software
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 17:37:34 GMT


I keep getting these very annoying "DMA Interrupt Discarded" messages which also
hangs the system.

System: 4MB 1040STe, TOS2.06, ICD HostAdapter+, Quantum 105MB, Minix 1.5.10.0

Whats going on????
Is there a fix, patch ??

Bob Malay

Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: JMURPHY@rcnvms.rcn.mass.edu
Subject: Re: Diffs between 1.0 and 1.1
Originator: mmdf@louie.udel.edu
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 11:04:35 GMT

Sorry to waste net bandwidth with this, but I couldn't respond directly.


>
hello,

I have the Tannebaum book and most of the source code already typed in. I
have been typing it in as I read the book. I recently noticed in the
FAQ that the books version is known as 1.0 but that the first release of
executables is 1.1.
<

I believe you are wasting your time.  I found key portions of the source code 
to be missing from the text, besides the fact you don't have the source code 
to any of the "build tools", utilities, shell etc.  I tried to do exactly 
what you're doing and decided I was better off buying the whole package.

>
Does it make more sense to buy the code from P-H and try to follow the book
with the new code or ...?
<

That's exactly what I'm doing, besides recompiling the code with a better C 
compiler (MPW C) than the one supplied (the ACK C compiler).
 
John D. Rogers    jmurphy@ecn.mass.edu  -OR-  jmurphy@rcnvms.rcn.mass.edu
-- 
Mail System (MMDF)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: dbenn@leven.appcomp.utas.edu.au (David Benn)
Subject: Re: Misc. AmigaMINIX questions
Organization: University of Tasmania at Launceston
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 03:25:49 GMT

Thanks to everyone who's answered my questions thus far. I'll be doing some
more experimenting in a few days.

I've just upgraded to 1.5.10.2 and the elvis bug has consistently changed
to "fred" is busy, when issuing:

	elvis fred 

instead of the exception 4. A minor improvement.    

All my executables have had their stack+heap sizes increased by at least
8192 bytes. 

I'll try the suggestions given and let you know the results.

Kind regards...


-- 
dbenn@leven.appcomp.utas.edu.au
David Benn - Applied Computing, University of Tasmania at Launceston.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
It seemed so simple when one was young, and new ideas were 
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: anapaula%ICMSC.USP.BR@uicvm.uic.edu
Subject: Re:  New user trying to install
Originator: mmdf@louie.udel.edu
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 19:59:12 GMT

>
>Just received version 1.5 and am working on installing this onto the hard disk.
>I am somewhat confused on relative versus actual disk partitions though.  The
> ....
>If I am correct to this point, then when I use "setup_root" and the text refers
    to
>the kernel variable "RAM_IMAGE" it is referring to /dev/hd3.  Which hd3?  Is it
>the actual partition 4 created with fdisk?  Or the actual partition 3?  This is
>unclear from the documentation.
>
>

Bill,

    In Minix, we can have two hard disks. So, /dev/hd0 refers to the hole disk 1
    and /dev/hd5
refers to the hole disk2.
     /dev/hd1 to /dev/hd4 refer to partition 1 to partition 4 of disk 1, respect
   ively.
     /dev/hd6 to /dev/hd9 refer to partition 1 to partition 4 of disk 2, respect
   ively.

    Then, /dev/hd3 is referring to the partition 3 created with fdisk and /dev/h
   d0 is referring
to the hole disk.


                                Ok? Good luck!!

                                                        Ana Paula.
-- 
Mail System (MMDF)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: hp@vmars.tuwien.ac.at (Peter Holzer)
Subject: Re: (none given)
Organization: Technical University Vienna, Dept. for Realtime Systems, AUSTRIA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 17:12:06 GMT

etlmike@jerry.ericsson.se (Mike Wilcox) writes:

>I seem to remember that using -finline-functions actually made things
>worse. If anyone can explain THAT one to me, I'd be grateful!

Two wild guesses: It could be that some critical loop grew beyond the
size of the instruction cache by inlining non-trivial functions, or
that the register allocation algorithm ran out of registers and
produced non-optimal code.

	Peter
-- 
|    _  | Peter J. Holzer                       | Think of it   |
| |_|_) | Technical University Vienna           | as evolution  |
| | |   | Dept. for Real-Time Systems           | in action!    |
| __/   | hp@vmars.tuwien.ac.at                 |     Tony Rand |
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: awoodhull@hamp.hampshire.edu
Subject: Minix and ethernet query
Organization: Hampshire College
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 00:37:02 GMT

I have been meaning to get around to installing Michael Temari's TCP/IP
for Minix, but haven't had the time yet. It seems to me a simpler
exercise would be to get two Minix systems to communicate minimally
across a net, and I would like to tackle this first.

The Minix 1.5 documentation mentions "to" and "from", which allow you to
pipe across an ethernet. I presume they use the net0 and net1 devices,
but I am not sure these are set up properly on my system -- I have Minix
on 2 computers that have WD8003E-clone type ethernet cards, but on neither
box are the ethernet cards configured in the default configuration. 

I would appreciate advice, help, or pointers to information on how to
get my Minix boxes talking across the network.  

Thanks,

Albert S. Woodhull  
School of Natural Science, Hampshire College, Amherst, MA 01002
413-549-4600 ext 581 (office), 413-549-4740 (home)
awoodhull@hamp.hampshire.edu, woodhull@dawn.hampshire.edu

Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: al@escom.com (Al Donaldson)
Subject: signal handling
Organization: ESCOM Corporation
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 17:15:27 GMT

For some time I've had this vague feeling that there was something
wrong with handling of signals generated from the keyboard.
Sometimes I would be able to blow away a running program, and other
times not, and I couldn't figure out why.

Recently I was trying to get a program to dump core (testing MM
creation of coredump files--see question below) and I found that
a control-backslash (SIGQUIT???) would dump core for the first
login session after starting the system, but not for successive
sessions.

This may be something I've done to my system (a 1.5.8 derivative),
so the first question is whether this occurs on anyone else's
system.

My second question is about MINIX signals in general.  I can't
find a table anywhere (including Section 4.6.7 of Andy's book)
that associates keyboard sequences with the signals generated,
and then explains what happens within the system.  I'm fairly
weak in understanding signals in general, but I'm finding it
really hard to get a handle on what MINIX does.

Finally, regarding my testing of coredumps -- why doesn't MM
just do a simple creat() call to FS, using the UID and GID of
the caller, instead of making all those calls to allowed() to see
if the directory is writable and then if the file is writable or
nonexistent?   There must be 5 or 6 separate calls from MM to
forbidden() in FS to check whether access is allowed.

Al
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: etlmike@jerry.ericsson.se (Mike Wilcox)
Subject: Re: (none given)
Organization: Ericsson Ltd., Cellular Systems & Special Networks.
	<1992Sep11.093444.223@email.tuwien.ac.at>
	<ETLMIKE.92Sep11121917@jerry.ericsson.se>
	<1992Sep11.120003.27063@klaava.Helsinki.FI>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 15:26:25 GMT

torvalds@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Linus Benedict Torvalds) writes:

   [ egg on my face - I didn't think a gcc-compiled minix existed at all. 
   Btw, did you rewrite all the .x files in gas syntax, or are you using
   some weird combination of gcc/bcc/bas? ]

Yes, at first I did use the gas syntax. But 
(a) the RS232 wouldn't work, and 
(b) once I added a second IDE (enough room for Linux then :), the
machine wouldn't allow that drive to be used until the ISA bus was
clocked down to around 2.5MHz

I gave up on that, and used a Bruce Evans fix (Cheers Bruce) that uses
the gld program supplied with bcc. When the -r option is used on
bcc-assembled objects, it creates gas-objects. A fix to the header
format of these objects then creates something I can link back into
the executable kernel.

   You might also try gcc-2.2.2, which gives some noticeable speed
   increases under some circumstances (notably floating-point which is
   essentially useless under minix unless you have patched that too, but
   integer performance is also better). 

As I got the Minix Centre's version, I just got a working GCC for the
system. Recently, I have been trying to port Alan Black's & Richard
Tobin's port of GCC 1.37 to work, then upgrading this to 1.41.
Along with this goes things like estdio, & floating point. Once I've
got that thoroughly sussed out, gcc-2 is the target.


   >I seem to remember that using -finline-functions actually made things
   >worse. If anyone can explain THAT one to me, I'd be grateful!

   This could be related to the general gcc speed decrease: has the kernel
   by any chance grown noticeably? -finline-functions (and some other
   options line -fstrength-reduce, -m486) can make the executable image
   noticeably bigger.  In general, gcc doesn't even try to make things
   small, and binaries compiled with gcc can be bigger than those of other
   compilers. 

   Size is normally not a problem, but if your minix has buffer-size
   limitations (low 1MB or similar - I know the version I used had that
   limit), over-all performance can go down due to much smaller buffer
   space. 

I could see that that would degrade performance, but I haven't had to
re-define the buffer size in order to fit the kenel into low memory.

Mike

--
Mike Wilcox                    Guildford, Surrey, England.
CME 20 Design Dept.            Tel:   +44-483-303666
Ericsson Cellular Systems.     Email: etlmike@deep-thought.ericsson.se
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: hp@vmars.tuwien.ac.at (Peter Holzer)
Subject: Re: FTP archive sites
Organization: Technical University Vienna, Dept. for Realtime Systems, AUSTRIA
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 15:57:12 GMT

gay@moebius.loria.fr (Gay Stephane) writes:

>  yes it has. i'm trying to locate bcc and bruce's 386 minix, and
>  archie is not really good ...

>  does anyone know if (and where) i can find bcc sources ?

As far as I know, you can't. Bruce has never released the sources. He
did send the sources for bcc-as and bcc-ld to Linus, who forwarded them
to me, so you can get these at the Linux archives and
ftp.vmars.tuwien.ac.at. If you need the sources for the compiler, your
best bet to write to Bruce directly. The binaries are available at
almost all archives.
-- 
|    _  | Peter J. Holzer                       | Think of it   |
| |_|_) | Technical University Vienna           | as evolution  |
| | |   | Dept. for Real-Time Systems           | in action!    |
| __/   | hp@vmars.tuwien.ac.at                 |     Tony Rand |
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: Steve_Kilbane@gec-epl.co.uk
Subject: Re: C386 V4.0 patches
Originator: mmdf@louie.udel.edu
Organization: DSDIC
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 07:24:29 GMT

In article <1992Sep7.222328.8185@vampire> you write:
>Somebody (sorry, can't find that article anymore) noticed that separate
>I&D doesn't work with c386, version 4.0. So I looked at the code and

I tried to download the m68 etc compiler that was posted recently. Couldn't
get all of it to untar (on a Sun, or on my ST). I suspect it might be due
to the uudecode I'm using - I don't think it copes with the tables, includes,
and so on. Where can I get a version that can?

Steve.
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Kilbane, MDD, CEGELEC PROJECTS Ltd, Boughton Road, Rugby, CV21 1BU,
England. Tel: +44 788 563493.            email:Steve_Kilbane@gec-epl.co.uk
Disclaimer: I don't speak for my employers. I don't speak for me. I mutter.
                       "(the_winds)caution();"
-- 
Mail System (MMDF)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: etlmike@jerry.ericsson.se (Mike Wilcox)
Subject: Re: (none given)
Organization: Ericsson Ltd., Cellular Systems & Special Networks.
	<1992Sep11.093444.223@email.tuwien.ac.at>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 11:19:17 GMT


In article <1992Sep11.093444.223@email.tuwien.ac.at> hp@vmars.tuwien.ac.at (Peter Holzer) writes:

   etlmike@jerry.ericsson.se (Mike Wilcox) writes:

   >Unfortunately, I have gone to the effort of changing the Minix
   >Centre's version of Minix-386 precisely to allow GCC to compile the
   >kernel.
   [...]
   >Now, granted I have a lot of other changes in my version of the
   >kernel, but I can say that after using GCC to compile this,
   >my system runs a LOT slower than when BCC compiled it in 32-bit
   >mode.

   Can you still compile your system with bcc (or c386)? If so, you could
   easily test if the lack of speed is due to the compiler or your
   changes.

I haven't recently tried - But, I know the changes are slowing the
system down, AND that GCC slows it down some more.

   Also, gcc has gazillions of options to control optimization. Some of
   them (e.g. -fomit_frame_pointer) make a huge difference in speed. The
   code produced by gcc without optimization is quite slow, usually.

Hmmm - it is very slow when no options are used. I have many
screenful's of benchmark speeds with the kernel compiled with
different compilers, and different options (especially to GCC).
Also with different speeds for different versions of GCC!

I think best compilation is with -O -fomit-frame-pointer
-fstrength-reduce -fcombine-regs.

I seem to remember that using -finline-functions actually made things
worse. If anyone can explain THAT one to me, I'd be grateful!


	   Peter
   -- 
   |    _  | Peter J. Holzer                       | Think of it   |
   | |_|_) | Technical University Vienna           | as evolution  |
   | | |   | Dept. for Real-Time Systems           | in action!    |
   | __/   | hp@vmars.tuwien.ac.at                 |     Tony Rand |

Mike
--
Mike Wilcox                    Guildford, Surrey, England.
CME 20 Design Dept.            Tel:   +44-483-303666
Ericsson Cellular Systems.     Email: etlmike@deep-thought.ericsson.se
From: chris@bwilab3.UUCP (Chris Curtin)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Diffs between 1.0 and 1.1
Date: 8 Sep 92 21:22:03 GMT
Organization: Bradley Ward Inc., Atlanta, Ga

hello, 

I have the Tannebaum book and most of the source code already typed in. I
have been typing it in as I read the book. I recently noticed in the
FAQ that the books version is known as 1.0 but that the first release of
executables is 1.1. 

What are the differences and does anyone have any diffs? I looked through
the list of sites that have the upgrade kits, but they all start a 1.1.

Does it make more sense to buy the code from P-H and try to follow the book
with the new code or ...?

Thanks for any help,

Chris
-- 
--
Christopher M. Curtin				Bradley Ward Systems, Inc.
gatech!warlord!bwilab3!chris			5901-A Peachtree Dunwoody Rd
						Atlanta, Ga 30350
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: hp@vmars.tuwien.ac.at (Peter Holzer)
Subject: Re: (none given)
Organization: Technical University Vienna, Dept. for Realtime Systems, AUSTRIA
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 09:34:44 GMT

etlmike@jerry.ericsson.se (Mike Wilcox) writes:

>Unfortunately, I have gone to the effort of changing the Minix
>Centre's version of Minix-386 precisely to allow GCC to compile the
>kernel.
[...]
>Now, granted I have a lot of other changes in my version of the
>kernel, but I can say that after using GCC to compile this,
>my system runs a LOT slower than when BCC compiled it in 32-bit
>mode.

Can you still compile your system with bcc (or c386)? If so, you could
easily test if the lack of speed is due to the compiler or your
changes.

Also, gcc has gazillions of options to control optimization. Some of
them (e.g. -fomit_frame_pointer) make a huge difference in speed. The
code produced by gcc without optimization is quite slow, usually.

	Peter
-- 
|    _  | Peter J. Holzer                       | Think of it   |
| |_|_) | Technical University Vienna           | as evolution  |
| | |   | Dept. for Real-Time Systems           | in action!    |
| __/   | hp@vmars.tuwien.ac.at                 |     Tony Rand |
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
From: laverman@cs.rug.nl (Bert Laverman)
Subject: Re: ST Minix & DMA Interrupts
Originator: laverman@rug16
Organization: Dept. of Computing Science, Groningen University
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 07:59:27 GMT


Bob Malay writes:
> System: 4MB 1040STe,
Nice
> TOS2.06,
Nice
> ICD HostAdapter+,
very Nice
> Quantum 105MB,
VERY Nice ;-)
> Minix 1.5.10.0
Less nice. Better get the patches to go to update 1.5.10.4

> Whats going on????
I don't know, But try updating first. There have been _very_
heavy changes since patchlevel 0.

Greetings, Bert

-- 
#include <std/disclaimer>

  Bert Laverman,  Dept. of Computing Science, Groningen University
  Friendly mail to: laverman@cs.rug.nl      The rest to: /dev/null
From: jmozdzen@tcl.stgt.sub.org (Mozdzen, Jens-Uwe, 7033 Herrenberg)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: Does the Shoe Fit?
Date: 13 Sep 92 16:25:35 GMT
Organization: tcl network development sites, Herrenberg, Germany

I haven't run Boot Manager & Minix on the same system, but used Shoelace
on this very machine to select between OS/2 2.0 and Minix/386. Works like
a charm, and doesn't use (waste) a partition. 
BTW, you don't need BM for HPFS - HPFS can be on any partition OS/2 accesses,
whether you have BM or not. It is only useful if you need to boot OS/2 2.0
from a secondary partition (logical drive). That's all!

Regards, and sorry for the late response,
Jens
--
Jens-U. Mozdzen			| jmozdzen@tcl.stgt.sub.org
Elsternweg 1			| tcl networks development sites:
W-7033 Herrenberg		| "We guarantee fast service -
Germany				|  no matter how long it takes!"
From: bill@soil.Princeton.EDU (Bill Wichser)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: New user trying to install
Date: 11 Sep 92 17:32:14 GMT
Reply-To: bill@soil.Princeton.EDU
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

Just received version 1.5 and am working on installing this onto the hard disk.
I am somewhat confused on relative versus actual disk partitions though.  The fdisk utility allows me to partition the disk into partitions 1 thru 4.  Now when I use "mkfs" to create these filesystems, the /dev/hd# is the partition number created with fdisk, less 1.  So in /dev one can have hd0 thru hd3 referring to the actual partitions.

If I am correct to this point, then when I use "setup_root" and the text refers to
the kernel variable "RAM_IMAGE" it is referring to /dev/hd3.  Which hd3?  Is it
the actual partition 4 created with fdisk?  Or the actual partition 3?  This is unclear from the documentation.

Thanks...Bill

-- 
********************************************************************************
* Internet: bill@soil.princeton.edu  William Wichser                           *
* UUCP:     princeton!soil!bill      Princeton University                      *
* BITNET:   wwichser@PUCC.BITNET     Civil Engineering and Operations Research *
* Phone:    609.258.4612             E114 E-Quad                               *
* FAX:      609.258.1270             Princeton, NJ 08544                       *
********************************************************************************
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix