OSNews: http://www.osnews.com/story/17831/Fiwix_0_3_1_Released Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2012, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Wed, 15 Feb 2012 12:45:11 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif OSNews.com http://www.osnews.com Sounds like fun... http://www.osnews.com/thread?236764 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236764 ...or at least sounds like the developer/leader is having fun! ;) Wed, 02 May 2007 23:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Tuishimi) Comments Hmm... http://www.osnews.com/thread?236770 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236770 Looks interesting... and more educational OS tools are definately needed!

I hope it goes public domain. Wed, 02 May 2007 23:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Almafeta) Comments RE: Hmm... http://www.osnews.com/thread?236775 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236775 I agree. The more tools we have to learn how an OS works, the better. This is especially true when the code is simplified to better allow students to understand the fundamentals of good OS design. Wed, 02 May 2007 23:37:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (bulio) Comments RE[2]: Hmm... http://www.osnews.com/thread?236776 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236776 I feel that I must point out that even if code is simplified, it by no means lends it to an understanding of good OS design. This is because simple, easy to read code is not guaranteed to make good design.

Bad design can just as easily be made to be simple and easy to read. Wed, 02 May 2007 23:48:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (jdrake) Comments RE: Sounds like fun... http://www.osnews.com/thread?236777 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236777 Sounds like a LOT of fun, and great for cultivating the interest in operating systems needed to sustain more serious free software kernel development efforts such as Linux. I've said this many times, but you don't need an advanced computer science degree to hack free software. The whole premise is to keep the complexity down and to limit the expertise needed to contribute. Educational kernel projects such as this one are a great extension of this principle, particularly as this one tries to be a simpler Linux rather than an academic demonstration of OS design such as MINIX.

Like Almafeta (not something I say everyday), I also hope this project breaks with the Linux tradition and goes public domain. As an AIX developer, I can't look at a GPL kernel without forms filed in triplicate and two lawyers looking over my shoulders, and I'd like to take a look at this if only to satisfy my curiosity.Edited 2007-05-02 23:55 Wed, 02 May 2007 23:48:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (butters) Comments RE[3]: Hmm... http://www.osnews.com/thread?236781 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236781 This is because simple, easy to read code is not guaranteed to make good design.

Strictly speaking, you're correct. However, good design correlates extremely well with simple and clear code. Wed, 02 May 2007 23:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (butters) Comments RE[2]: Sounds like fun... http://www.osnews.com/thread?236782 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236782 Perhaps someone could provide other resources for those interested in learning operating systems? Wed, 02 May 2007 23:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (samad) Comments RE[2]: Sounds like fun... http://www.osnews.com/thread?236784 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236784 *nodnods*

If we (using a very very generic 'we' here) ever want to have a really competitive market develop, then we need to build the sorts of resources that will help make many more people able to understand and (hopefully) turn to OS development. Not just developers who like the GPL license, not just developers who like the BSD license, not just developers who want to work at Microsoft, but anyone who will at least try.

The only problem I can see with that there are a very few countries who don't let people who are alive put their works into the public domain. One way I have of solving that: if ever SkunkyOS (see my profile) gets to a 'distributable' stage, I'm probably going to use this license: "© [whenever] Shanya Almafeta. Permission is granted to use the code of SkunkyOS for any use. [Standard disclaimer here.]" This 'one-clause BSD' license grants a maximum of flexibility to me (able to change license in future if needed, able to keep control of SkunkyOS's name as a trademark to prevent abuse) while not restricting users in any way (not even asking for credit or for the end-user to find an unobtrusive place to put the license).

Anywho, sorry for the tangent. Thu, 03 May 2007 00:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Almafeta) Comments RE[3]: Sounds like fun... http://www.osnews.com/thread?236785 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236785 Linux Kernel Development, second edition, by Robert Love, is highly recommended if your focus is on Linux. Otherwise, Operating System Design and Implementation, by Andrew Tanenbaum, is the classic textbook on OS design based on MINIX. An indispensable reference for any *nix programmer is The C Programming Language, by Kernighan and Ritche. These are by far the most useful dead tree resources I own.Edited 2007-05-03 00:13 Thu, 03 May 2007 00:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (butters) Comments RE[4]: Sounds like fun... http://www.osnews.com/thread?236787 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236787 "An indispensable reference for any *nix programmer is The C Programming Language, by Kernighan and Ritche."

Followed by complains such as "But C is not object oriented" or "C is not a safe language", or at least "C is not Java!" :-)

"These are by far the most useful dead tree resources I own."

Dead tree resources... :-) Let's see how much of these resources are occupied by the OS in the resource monitor. :-)

By the way, if nothing else works, you'll be happy about printed material (e. g. system reference manual, troubleshooting and maintenance section). Thu, 03 May 2007 00:27:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Doc Pain) Comments RE[3]: Sounds like fun... http://www.osnews.com/thread?236788 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236788 Here's some of the pages I use the most.

This site's resources page:

* http://www.osnews.com/resources.php

The OSDev Wiki (currently in a rebuilding process as they try to combine two unrelated wikis from two unrelated software into a third set of software, but still has Good Stuff):

* http://www.osdev.org/wiki/Main_Page

Linux's kernel (they can't stop you from just reading the thing):

* http://www.kernel.org/

Minix 3's kernel (as a single HUGE file):

* http://www.minix3.org/doc/AppendixB.html

Some alt.os.development (usenet ftw!) archives:

* http://my.execpc.com/~geezer/osd/

Some questions to ask yourself before you write a single line of code:

* http://www.openbg.net/sto/os/
* http://chuos.genezys.net/wiki/Questions%20for%20an%20OS... (almost identical, but not quite the same)

Single UNIX Standard (free registration required) -- A standard that competes with (but in reality is almost identical) to the POSIX standard. You don't have to implement it if working like Unix isn't among your goals(although it's one of the few things used by pretty much every extant OS out there), but even if you don't implement it, it gives you a good idea of how modern OSs are structured:

* http://www.unix.org/version3/

Most of my other links I'm using go things specific to my OS, or to deficiencies in my skills that I'm amending, or references for specific hardware, so I doubt they'd be useful.

Hope all this helps! Thu, 03 May 2007 00:29:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Almafeta) Comments Source code? http://www.osnews.com/thread?236810 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236810 Forgive me if I'm not looking hard enough, but where is the source code available? Judging from the inclusion of "GNU" in the operating system's name, I would guess that source is -- uhm, released under the GPL. Thu, 03 May 2007 03:02:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Maciek) Comments RE[3]: Hmm... http://www.osnews.com/thread?236811 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236811 Yes, but well-planned, well-documented, and well-written bad design is that much easier to make into good design. :> Thu, 03 May 2007 03:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Almafeta) Comments RE[2]: Sounds like fun... http://www.osnews.com/thread?236814 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236814
As an AIX developer, I can't look at a GPL kernel without forms filed in triplicate and two lawyers looking over my shoulders, and I'd like to take a look at this if only to satisfy my curiosity.Edited 2007-05-02 23:55


Shame on you. Thu, 03 May 2007 03:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sbenitezb) Comments Reinventing the wheel again ? http://www.osnews.com/thread?236826 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236826 I hope this not another case of reinventing the wheel.

Unless this OS have some new concept in creating a new OS that others educational OS like Minix cannot emulate. There is no point in creating this OS. Thu, 03 May 2007 04:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (funny_irony) Comments RE: Reinventing the wheel again ? http://www.osnews.com/thread?236838 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236838 "Unless this OS have some new concept in creating a new OS that others educational OS like Minix cannot emulate. There is no point in creating this OS."

Sure, you can read other peoples' code and learn from it - but I, and probably a large majority of other CS students - learn by tinkering and tweaking. Writing one's own code is the perfection of this.

For example (C++-specific, since that's what I was taught), when we first learn about linked lists, do we immediately start using the STL std::list class? No: we write our own dinky class for it. Do we start with std::stack or std::queue when learning about stack and queue operations, respectively? No! We write our own dinky classes for them that do the basic insert/remove/etc. functions needed. Do we use std::map when learning about key-value pair management? NO! We Write Our Own(tm). Is it becoming clearer to you now? ;) Thu, 03 May 2007 05:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (codergeek42) Comments RE: Source code? http://www.osnews.com/thread?236852 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236852 The inclusion of the word "GNU" in the OS name means that the OS is indeed using GNU software (in the user space) and hence its complete name GNU/Fiwix, but does not mean nothing about the license of the other name "Fiwix". Thu, 03 May 2007 08:02:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Mikaku) Comments I like this type of news http://www.osnews.com/thread?236854 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236854 It is so refreshing to see news like this appear on OSNews, instead of the endless Ubuntu/Vista news items. Thu, 03 May 2007 08:25:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Isolationist) Comments RE: Reinventing the wheel again ? http://www.osnews.com/thread?236866 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236866 Why should it matter to you if somebody is reinventing the wheel again - simply ignore it. It is very useful to others as an educational tool and exciting to work on. Thu, 03 May 2007 09:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Isolationist) Comments retro tools http://www.osnews.com/thread?236872 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236872 > It is based on monolithic kernel design and it is
> written entirely in C language, leaving only for the
> Assembler the small needed parts.

I would have hoped a new OS in 2007 would use C++ and
a microkernel. Thu, 03 May 2007 10:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (mjones) Comments RE: Source code? http://www.osnews.com/thread?236875 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236875 « License
The Fiwix kernel will be publicly available under an open license when it reach the 1.0 version. »

mmmm. I would like to see the code now, since it *is* small ! Thu, 03 May 2007 10:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (holywood) Comments Speaking of kernel source http://www.osnews.com/thread?236877 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236877 I'm definitely going to look into fiwix. I wonder if I can run it in vmware? Also I just read the book reviewed here:

http://ezine.daemonnews.org/200704/bsd_root_kits_review.html

I think it's [retty awesome that there seems to be a trend toward bringing more people to kernel code ;) Thu, 03 May 2007 11:13:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sequethin) Comments License woes http://www.osnews.com/thread?236879 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236879 According to an earlier article here, Fixix is going to be licensed under the GPL:

* http://www.osnews.com/story.php/4839/The-GNUFiwix-Operating-System

It's too bad. Thu, 03 May 2007 11:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Almafeta) Comments Why all experimental O/Ses have to be in C??? http://www.osnews.com/thread?236889 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236889 Why all experimental O/Ses have to be in C??? there should be great benefit from using other languages to make an O/S. Thu, 03 May 2007 13:25:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (axilmar) Comments RE: Why all experimental O/Ses have to be in C??? http://www.osnews.com/thread?236895 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236895 I think this one is monolithic OS written in C because both Windows and Linux are monolithic kernels primarially written in C, and C is the language that the most students will be familiar with.

(I know, I know, Windows includes some sections in Pascal, but the majority is in C.) Thu, 03 May 2007 13:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Almafeta) Comments RE: Why all experimental O/Ses have to be in C??? http://www.osnews.com/thread?236900 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236900 It is my impression that C is still the best language for implementing an operating system. For one, we created HelenOS in C and a bit of assembly. However, one of our developers is now working on a research project in which he implements parts of HelenOS in Objective C. His research area is componentization of the operating system. The object oriented language can be also used to implement some operating system constructs more straightforwardly (e.g. virtual methods) than it would be possible in plain C. As for performance loss, according to Martin's experimentation and measurements, it is almost negligible. With ObjC, you need to supply the kernel with a small ObjC runtime code. In case of C++, this runtime would be a bit bigger.

But again, there is nothing you couldn't achieve in C which you could in other languages. So I think using a different language can make your code more expressive and straightforward but will not bring more research into your OS.

Sadly and no offence here, I also feel that the idea of writing an operating system in a non-C language, especially in an object oriented language, has become sort of a cliche. Thu, 03 May 2007 14:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (jermar) Comments Does it do UAC? http://www.osnews.com/thread?236922 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236922 But does it do UAE? ;)
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070501-microsoft-uac-approac...

-m Thu, 03 May 2007 17:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (mefogus) Comments Cool http://www.osnews.com/thread?236923 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236923 But I thought Minix already served the purpose of an educational OS. Thu, 03 May 2007 17:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Xaero_Vincent) Comments RE: Why all experimental O/Ses have to be in C??? http://www.osnews.com/thread?236938 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236938 First, this is not simply an experimental OS. It is at least partially intended to serve as an easy introduction to OS development for those interested in hacking the Linux kernel. So it wouldn't make sense to code it in anything other than C and native assembler.

While C is the undisputed king of system programming languages and the ideological underpinning of UNIX, I find it hard to imagine that C will remain the dominant systems programming language indefinitely. Although I don't see any OS project on the horizon to unseat C-based systems within the next 15 years, I would be surprised to find C retaining its ubiquity when I'm old and gray in 50 years. Certain technologies are incredibly resilient in the face of progress, and C is one of them. But they all fade away eventually, pushed aside by new technologies whose fundamental ideas are irreconcilable with the giants of yesterday.

While D is a promising evolution of the C heritage, one on which I would like to see an OS based, it is not at odds with C in a fundamental way. Therefore I don't see it ever rising to dominance. The technology that makes C irrelevant will most likely involve a revolutionary hardware architecture that demands a more dynamic and adaptive language than anything we have today. Thu, 03 May 2007 18:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (butters) Comments RE[3]: Hmm... http://www.osnews.com/thread?236974 http://www.osnews.com/thread?236974 "I feel that I must point out that even if code is simplified, it by no means lends it to an understanding of good OS design. This is because simple, easy to read code is not guaranteed to make good design.

Bad design can just as easily be made to be simple and easy to read."

That's true, but I think the original poster meant that, assuming the design is good, it can be better understood if the code is clean and well documented. Hence the didactic value of this initiative. Thu, 03 May 2007 20:00:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (wannabe geek) Comments RE: Cool http://www.osnews.com/thread?237003 http://www.osnews.com/thread?237003 I wonder if Mr. Tanenbaum and Mr. Sanfeliu will ever go at it. Thu, 03 May 2007 21:29:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Almafeta) Comments RE[2]: Reinventing the wheel again ? http://www.osnews.com/thread?237024 http://www.osnews.com/thread?237024 "Sure, you can read other peoples' code and learn from it - but I, and probably a large majority of other CS students - learn by tinkering and tweaking."

Remember, kids, trial & error is not a programming concept. :-)

"Writing one's own code is the perfection of this."

Learning by doing seems to be the way most developers achieved their knowledge and abilities.

"For example (C++-specific, since that's what I was taught), when we first learn about linked lists, do we immediately start using the STL std::list class? No: we write our own dinky class for it. Do we start with std::stack or std::queue when learning about stack and queue operations, respectively? No! We write our own dinky classes for them that do the basic insert/remove/etc. functions needed. Do we use std::map when learning about key-value pair management? NO! We Write Our Own(tm). Is it becoming clearer to you now? ;) "

Same here. :-) This "archaic slime" is what makes programmers know what they're doing. Using std:queue is easy, but knowing how it works will help you in some situation that might be not that easy. Therefore, atomic types (int, char, void *, even FILE *) are important to know about. They don't need to be used everywhere (especially when functional libraries exist). It even teaches structure (the one you can see when you're looking at source code) - if the teacher is smart enough.

If you know one programming language, you know them all. :-) Thu, 03 May 2007 22:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Doc Pain) Comments RE[4]: Hmm... http://www.osnews.com/thread?237317 http://www.osnews.com/thread?237317 Does this mean NetBSD is an educational OS too? Fri, 04 May 2007 21:21:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Silent_Seer) Comments