Linked by David Adams on Thu 1st Mar 2012 22:39 UTC, submitted by Andy Kosela
OSNews, Generic OSes MINIX 3.2.0 stable is released. Major features include: Asynchronous, multithreaded virtual file system (VFS) server, Better reliability, Better virtualization support, and much more.
Order by: Score:
Doesn't work for me.
by jessesmith on Thu 1st Mar 2012 23:02 UTC
jessesmith
Member since:
2010-03-11

I tried the latest release today. Couldn't get it to run at all in VirtualBox, the kernel fails right after the boot menu. Also tried in a QEMU VM and got it to install, but can't get MINIX to connect to the network. The ifconfig utility keeps crashing with a memory allocation error. Haven't tried it on physical hardware as MINIX doesn't support my physical network card.

I checked the documentation and confirmed all my VM settings were what the MINIX devs recommend. The MINIX team may be making some great progress (the installer is certainly straight forward, man pages are well written, etc), but I can't get the operating system to a point where I can do anything useful with it. No network and no desktop makes for a limiting experience.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Doesn't work for me.
by 0brad0 on Thu 1st Mar 2012 23:54 UTC in reply to "Doesn't work for me."
0brad0 Member since:
2007-05-05

I tried the latest release today. Couldn't get it to run at all in VirtualBox, the kernel fails right after the boot menu.


Are you using VirtualBox 3.2 or newer? The release notes specifically mention this issue and it's a bug with VirtualBox (what a surprise).

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Doesn't work for me.
by csynt on Fri 2nd Mar 2012 10:29 UTC in reply to "RE: Doesn't work for me."
csynt Member since:
2006-03-19

There is a bug too with VirtualPC 2007 ;-(

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Doesn't work for me.
by jessesmith on Fri 2nd Mar 2012 13:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Doesn't work for me."
jessesmith Member since:
2010-03-11

I'm using VirtualBox 4.1.
As I mentioned in the above post I also tried qemu and, while MINIX sort of works there, I can't get a network connection with it. It struck me as odd since I was able to get a previous version (I think 3.1.x) working without any trouble.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Doesn't work for me.
by lucas_maximus on Fri 2nd Mar 2012 14:17 UTC in reply to "Doesn't work for me."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I am using Virtual Box 4.1.8 and install seems to be going fine.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by broken_symlink
by broken_symlink on Fri 2nd Mar 2012 01:44 UTC
broken_symlink
Member since:
2005-07-06

how ironic that they use git.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by broken_symlink
by jayrulez on Fri 2nd Mar 2012 02:33 UTC in reply to "Comment by broken_symlink"
jayrulez Member since:
2011-10-17

Why is that ironic?

Reply Score: 2

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Linus was one of the designers of GIT, apparently him and the creator of Minix do not (or did not) get along when it comes to their views on OSes.

Reply Score: 2

jayrulez Member since:
2011-10-17

But their views on oses have nothing to do with their views on scms...?

I have never heard or read about them not getting along. Mind pointing me to a source/reference?

Thank you in advance ;)

Edited 2012-03-02 04:48 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by broken_symlink
by tuma324 on Fri 2nd Mar 2012 05:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by broken_symlink"
tuma324 Member since:
2010-04-09

But their views on oses have nothing to do with their views on scms...?

I have never heard or read about them not getting along. Mind pointing me to a source/reference?

Thank you in advance ;)


Here is the whole thread:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.minix/browse_thread/thread/c...

Wikipedia article about it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanenbaum%E2%80%93Torvalds...

I agree that Andrew Tanenbaum using Git for MINIX is ironic. In a way I think it proves that professors can be wrong sometimes, too.

Maybe they should learn more about humility and being humble.

Edited 2012-03-02 05:43 UTC

Reply Score: 2

jayrulez Member since:
2011-10-17

Oh, the great debates?

This doesn't suggest that they don't get along. It only proves that they have different opinions regarding the design of os kernels.

Of course professors can be wrong but they usually aren't ;) .

Professor Andrew seems to be even more humble than Linus.

Using git has nothing to do with the architecture of os kernels so I don't see the irony.

If Andrew started accepting monothilic kernel designs in his kernel then that would be ironic.

Reply Score: 7

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

Sometimes a joke is just a joke...

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Comment by broken_symlink
by renox on Fri 2nd Mar 2012 08:49 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by broken_symlink"
renox Member since:
2005-07-06

Sometimes a bad joke is just a bad joke...

Reply Score: 4

moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Considering that VxWorks and QNX are very successful micro kernel OSs, that both Microsoft and Apple have a partial micro kernel approach in their OS, I would say that Andrew was/is quite right.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by broken_symlink
by zima on Sun 4th Mar 2012 20:56 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by broken_symlink"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Remember also, with this particular holy war, such gems as L4 ("one billion L4 kernels" in Qualcomm-based mobiles 1.5 year ago, who knows how much now http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L4_microkernel_family#Commercial_deplo... ) or INTEGRITY (flew a modern airliner or... jet fighter lately? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrity_(operating_system)#INTEGRITY-178B )

Edited 2012-03-04 21:00 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

In a way I think it proves that professors can be wrong sometimes, too.


How does minix using a tool that has nothing to do with the disagreement between Andy and Linus make him wrong in any way?

Reply Score: 4

RE[6]: Comment by broken_symlink
by tuma324 on Fri 2nd Mar 2012 07:17 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by broken_symlink"
tuma324 Member since:
2010-04-09

"In a way I think it proves that professors can be wrong sometimes, too.


How does minix using a tool that has nothing to do with the disagreement between Andy and Linus make him wrong in any way?
"

Perhaps I've used the wrong words, I just think there's some irony in this.

I mean, Linux became bigger than MINIX and Git was created as a result of Linux development and growth.

Andrew Tanenbaum in that post said that Linux would have no future due to its monolithic design, now they're using Git, which came out from Linux development not a long time ago.

Was Andrew right or not?

Edited 2012-03-02 07:30 UTC

Reply Score: 2

jayrulez Member since:
2011-10-17

Minix was not always free(as in speech).
Minix was initially just a research operating system. It's just since recent times that Andrew let known his ambitions for minix.

Too often I see Torvalds' minions spreading FUD about minix, general misconceptions etc...

Would u suggest that minix use inferior SCM tool just to avoid this perceiced irony? Avoid every and anything related to linux or its creator?
That would be cazy :/.
There is no irony in Andrew's team using git. Andrew has never publicly disagreed with anything git or related to git.

Was Andrew right or not?

You decide. Linux is widely used though a failure on the desktop. Linux is a huge piece of software, which is difficult to learn and maintain. Many distributions are unstable. Right now I'm using ubuntu which is forcing me to choose between having children in the future and resting my laptop on my lap because it goes well over 80 degrees C whenever I play any media or connect to my desktop over vnc. Sometimes I try to play a mp3 and for some reason the os hangs, then dies. If a microkernel like minix will offer me greater stability than this, then I welcome it.

The linux of yore was nothing like the linux of today. Linux has had to evolve to stay relevant. It will have to continue to evolve. So will minix.
Success for linux doesn't mean failure for minix or vice versa.

In the near future, minix will not be directly comparable to linux because linux is just a kernel while minix(3) is a full operating system.

Reply Score: 3

johndaly Member since:
2006-01-16

You are talking about a conversation from 1992!

Tanenbaum thought that Linux had no future because of its architecture and he was right! The Linux architecture back then was a monolithic kernel that was NOT portable at all. Our modern modular and portable Linux is a totally diferent animal.

Linux was right too, MINIX was an incomplete academic teaching toy and NOT free.

Both where right and over time we got a better Linux AND a better MINIX even if MINIX still has some way to before it becomes truly useful.

Consider the situation back then.
MINIX not free and a toy. Linux incomplete, monolithic, x86 only and more or less crap. BSD involved in a lawsuit. We had no good choices at all and now if you want a *NIX your best choices are all free AND we have so many of them that we get to argue about the best choice too!

When it comes to the issue which kernel architecture is better I really don't give a shit. Linux proved one thing (well Linux AND HURD proved one thing), it is easier to improve what you have then to start over from scratch to build a theoretically better or purer architecture.

Reply Score: 3

Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

Maybe they should learn more about humility and being humble.

This is pure irony. You talk about Linus opponents should be humble? And what about Linus himself? Doesnt he have an attitude problem with his big ego? Stealing all cred from the GNU project. Calling OpenBSD developers "Masturbating monkeys", for their focus on security. "I have scared away all normal developers, now only the rest is left on the Linux kernel project". etc etc

So Linus T has no attitude problems, right? He is humble right?

Reply Score: 5

RE[6]: Comment by broken_symlink
by MOS6510 on Fri 2nd Mar 2012 13:31 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by broken_symlink"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

It seems Linus' original post announcing he was going to do something called Linux was the last time he seemed to be a nice guy.

Since then he has turned to a rude and very easy to dislike bastard.

But hey, the Linux crowd loves this.

Reply Score: 1

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Actually Linus just speaks him mind.

I have heard myself saying the same things when being frustrated with people moaning about "browser X" ... being a web dev myself.

He is direct and honest ... I rather deal with someone like him than someone who smiles to my face and wishes to stab me in the back.

I see this similarly to the "Strict by fair" teachers ... these were always the best teachers, because you knew what they expected.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by broken_symlink
by tuma324 on Fri 2nd Mar 2012 17:06 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by broken_symlink"
tuma324 Member since:
2010-04-09

"Maybe they should learn more about humility and being humble.

This is pure irony. You talk about Linus opponents should be humble? And what about Linus himself? Doesnt he have an attitude problem with his big ego? Stealing all cred from the GNU project. Calling OpenBSD developers "Masturbating monkeys", for their focus on security. "I have scared away all normal developers, now only the rest is left on the Linux kernel project". etc etc

So Linus T has no attitude problems, right? He is humble right?
"

What I said about humility definitely goes to Linus Torvalds too.

Perhaps he needs to be taught a lesson? Maybe a fork is coming?

Reply Score: 2

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Its still funny.

Yes, its different software than they were arguing about, but they were really arguing about philosophies of software development. Pragmatic vs Academic. Linus is the ultimate pragmatist, IMHO. Git was designed with the same pragmatic philosophy ( "screw disk space, I need speed").

This along with the increased use of NetBSD code, shows that Minux is becoming more pragmatic all the time.

Edited 2012-03-02 15:50 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Linus was one of the designers of GIT, apparently him and the creator of Minix do not (or did not) get along when it comes to their views on OSes.

AFAIK the only thing they "don't get along with" is which of micro or monolithic kernels are a "better" design.

The whole thing is massively blown out of context by the press and even more so here as Git isn't even remotely related to kernel design.

It's a little like saying I'm not going to use any software nor services developed by anyone on OSNews who I've ever disagreed on. If everyone acted like that - nothing would ever get done.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by broken_symlink
by sathishmls on Fri 2nd Mar 2012 03:32 UTC in reply to "Comment by broken_symlink"
sathishmls Member since:
2005-11-13

Its give and take policy ;)

Reply Score: 1

Clang
by fithisux on Fri 2nd Mar 2012 08:42 UTC
fithisux
Member since:
2006-01-22

Nice work for Minix. I hope some day, Plan 9 would also embrace clang or gcc or pcc (modern supported compilers).

The lack of USB stack / peripherals is something that keeps Minix from being used more extensively.Hopefully soon they will have something in this area. Even more important, they could start thinking about DDE kit.

Reply Score: 2

Oh great!
by moondevil on Fri 2nd Mar 2012 08:46 UTC
moondevil
Member since:
2005-07-08

I had just installed 3.1.8 last week.

Now I have to install the new version again, but there lots of new things to play around with. ;)

Reply Score: 2