Today, Andy Tanenbaum has officially announced the release of MINIX 3.0, the third stable version of this rather legendary operating system. The launch of v3 has been accompanied by a new website and a new logo. From the new website: "MINIX 3 is a new open-source operating system designed to be highly reliable and secure. It is based somewhat on previous versions of MINIX, but is fundamentally different in many key ways. MINIX 1 and 2 were intended as teaching tools; MINIX 3 adds the new goal of being usable as a serious system on resource-limited and embedded computers and for applications requiring high reliability." Read on for more information.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 0
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 0
Member since:2005-06-29
Fans: 0
Member since:
---
Fans: 0
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 0
The MINIX license [ http://www.minix3.org/license.html ] is (a slightly modified version of) the Modified BSD License [ http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#ModifiedBSD ] (i.e. without the advertising clause), so it should be compatible with pretty much everything, including the GPL.
Member since:---
Fans: 0
Member since:
---
Fans: 0
> Well, because MINIX, in combination with Andy Tanenbaum's
> books on operating system design, was the blueprint for what
> later would become the biggest free and open source operating
> system of the world-- yes, Linux
Linux was never based on Minix's code. The author may want to
clarify this statement. We do not want another FUD wave like the
one ADTI started.
Member since:2005-06-29
Fans: 19
Linux was never based on Minix's code.
I know. Where did I state otherwise? "Was a blueprint" does not mean "based on". Fact remains that MINIX and the book served a great and important inspiration for Linus. And that should not be left unmentioned.
More info on that here:
http://www.minix3.org/doc/faq.html#legal
Member since:---
Fans: 0
Member since:---
Fans: 0
Member since:---
Fans: 0
Member since:2005-07-11
Fans: 0
Member since:---
Fans: 0
I seldom reply to these things, but when I saw the word "blueprint" I thought the exact same thing. Google "define:blueprint" and you will see words like "plan", "guide", "design", and "template". Sounds like it means "based on" to me! "Inspiration", on the other hand, seems like an appropriate term, and my suggestion would be to update the article accordingly.
By the way, I have read both "Just for Fun" (Torvalds book as well as book on CD) and Tanenbaum's OS book, 2nd edition. I was also inspired by the book to write my own little OS kernel, but Minix was certainly not a blueprint. So before anybody accuses me of not "doing my homework" or some nonsense, be aware of that.
Member since:2005-08-27
Fans: 1
Member since:---
Fans: 0
I don't see the big deal about Thom's statement. Linux starting using Minix, and its modification became Linux. Thus, there's no doubt Minix was the launching vehicle for Linux. Heck, the first Linux filesystem was the Minix filesystem. Having said that, Linux became something else at the end of all, and they are both different animals. But if Minix had not existed, possibly we would not have Linux today, and credit should be due where is due!
Member since:
---
Fans: 0
Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 1
Member since:
---
Fans: 0
Member since:2005-10-18
Fans: 1
Member since:2005-06-29
Fans: 19
Obligatory begging for some screenies!
In Windows:
Start => Run... => "cmd.exe" => Full screen.
In Linux/GNOME:
Applications => System tools => Terminal => Full screen.
In Linux/KDE:
K => System tools => Terminal => Full screen.
In OSX Tiger:
[Apple]+[Space] => "Terminal" => Select Terminal from results => Full screen.
There, screenshots of MINIX 
.
Member since:
---
Fans: 0
Member since:
---
Fans: 0
Since some people have such a poor imagination.. Screenshots!
http://80.237.144.96/~christian/minix_311-screens/
Member since:---
Fans: 0
Member since:
---
Fans: 0
I was a bit surprised that Minix is still being developed. But this is good since Minix has been perceived to be the practical starting ground for microkernels.
However looking at the Minix website I miss some documentation regarding Minix's real-time capabilities. Does Minix do _hard_ real-time? And what is it's basic scheduling mechanisms?
If it's capable of doing hard real-time this would be great news for the embedded world for many purposes.
Linux in its current shape will not make it in embedded systems due to its lack of support for HRT. Maybe Minix is the way to go? 
What is needed today is an implementation of a microkernel which implements HRT support and also support all the wonderfull applications of the GNU/Linux world. This would rock both the desktop/server world and the embedded world for sure.
Member since:---
Fans: 0
I remember reading that Timesys had hard realtime patches for the Linux kernel at 2.4. When I was researching RTOSs they sent me a bunch of documentation on it and explanations about the architecture. It was pretty interesting, though I never actually downloaded their patches and looked at them. It was a good overview of what real-time systems do though.
Member since:2005-08-08
Fans: 0
> What is needed today is an implementation of a microkernel which implements HRT support and also support all the wonderfull applications of the GNU/Linux world. This would rock both the desktop/server world and the embedded world for sure.
What is the point of a real-time OS for desktop or server use? Desktop and server users want throughput, they do not care about real-time...
Anyway, this is great news but unfortunately the website is 503 for the moment...
Member since:
2005-07-13
Fans: 0
Member since:
---
Fans: 0
Member since:
2005-07-11
Fans: 0
"Linus Torvalds, then a student at the University of Helsinki, studied MINIX in an operating systems course and was sufficiently impressed that he bought a PC to run it."
So, that implies he was running the Minix code in his mind by reading the source before he decided to run it on a PC? I wonder how many Bogomips he was getting before he got his PC to run it faster for him?
Member since:
---
Fans: 0
BTW, I helped test Minix3 for throughout the Summer on VMware, and I have to say that it runs awesome on it. It's actually a breeze to install and run on VMware and pretty much any other platform.
After the basic install, which is way easier than before (no diskettes needed), you end up with a workable system. In the case of VMWare, you won't need to even enable (DHCP) networking, as it is up and running by default.
Andy Tanenbaum was working with a few fulltime coders, particular Ben Gras, who did an incredible job.
For example, the driver for the network card on VMware had not been ported/updated for Minix3, and they were nice enough to help me (and everyone else at this point) with that.
A couple of biggies with regards to Minix3 are the following:
-The install is easier than ever before, and faster too. There's no need to deal with 'part' (similar to fdisk, but kind of more complicated)
-Although it still has the requirement of at least two main partitions (root [boot monitor] and user), there's no need to hit '=' or anything else while booting. The exception is the ability to choose memory size before booting.
-cleaner code and many system updates (checkout the book when it comes out)
-gcc: It had been ported years ago, but it was not working; now it is.
-More updated network nic drivers than ever.
-A bunch of applications were ported and work from the start. Note that Minix does not have the 'less' command, as 'more' in Minix does the same thing.
My only complain is that I would love to see the Boot Monitor to go away for good, but that's something small in whole deal...
Member since:
2005-08-28
Fans: 1
What's the deal with the 75 MB 3.1 .iso (link dead) on the previous versions versus the 10 MB 3.1.1 .iso (link active) on the download page? Was the 75 MB image the one from the book?
http://www.minix3.org/previous-versions/index.html
http://www.minix3.org/download/
Member since:---
Fans: 0
Member since:
2005-08-10
Fans: 3
Taken horribly out of context but interesting to note.
From: torvalds@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Linus Benedict Torvalds)
Subject: Re: LINUX is obsolete
Date: 29 Jan 92 23:14:26 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki
"True, linux is monolithic, and I agree that microkernels are nicer. With
a less argumentative subject, I'd probably have agreed with most of what
you said. From a theoretical (and aesthetical) standpoint linux looses.
If the GNU kernel had been ready last spring, I'd not have bothered to
even start my project: the fact is that it wasn't and still isn't."
From:
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/opensources/book/appa.html