There are at this time, a number of what I would term 'OS re-creation projects' (OSRs) in active development. These are OSes that attempt, by varying degrees, to re-implement the features of another operating system. In this article, I'm going to explore some of issues surrounding projects of this type. In the second half of the article, I apply these observations and examine two example platforms (Amiga and OS/2) and the related re-creation OSes.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-01-26
Member since:2005-06-30
"Which was really just a unix-like implementation for x86 right?"
Sure, that's why I said "more directly." Minix, Linux, BSD, OS X, etc. are all descendants of Unix and can probably be considered "recreations."
But, IIRC, Linus' original purpose for Linux was specifically to recreate Minix because the Minix license wouldn't allow him to extend it.
Member since:2006-06-12
"Really, BSD would probably be one of the best candidates for "recreation of unix""
Correct me if I am wrong, please, but BSD was not a recreation of Unix. It IS Unix.
BSD was developed at Berkeley based on the Bell Labs project. Bell's Unix included the source code. Berkeley built on this and over the years because BSD.
Bell Labs (or AT&T) and Berkeley went to court over who owns BSD. They settled out of court....
Nice little diagram:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/Unix_history-sim...
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:2005-11-11
//Linux was more directly a recreation of Minix.//
Err, no.
Linux was written on a Minix computer, but Linux is nothing like Minix.
Minix is a microkernel, Linux is a monolithic kernel, for a start. Fundamentally different from the get go.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minix
"MINIX is an open source, Unix-like operating system based on a microkernel architecture. Andrew S. Tanenbaum wrote the operating system to be used for educational purposes; MINIX also inspired the creation of Linux. Its name derives from the words minimal and Unix."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_%28kernel%29
"Architecture
Linux is a monolithic kernel. Device drivers and kernel extensions run in kernel space (ring 0), with full access to the hardware, although some exceptions run in user space. The GNU/Linux graphics subsystem (the X Window System) is not part of the kernel, is optional, and runs in user space, in contrast with Microsoft Windows.
Kernel mode preemption means device drivers can be preempted under certain conditions. This latter feature was added to handle hardware interrupts correctly, and to improve support for symmetric multiprocessing (SMP). Preemption also improves latency, increasing responsiveness and making Linux more suitable for real-time applications.
The fact that Linux is not a microkernel was the topic of the Tanenbaum-Torvalds debate[12] which was started in 1992 by Andrew S. Tanenbaum with Linus Torvalds regarding Linux and kernel architecture in general on the Usenet discussion group comp.os.minix.[13] Tanenbaum argues that microkernels are superior to monolithic kernels and that, for this reason, Linux is obsolete. This subject was revisited in 2006.[14] [15]
Unlike traditional monolithic kernels, device drivers are easily configured as modules, and loaded or unloaded while running the system."
Chalk and cheese.
Member since:
2005-06-30
"What about Linux recreating Unix ?"
Linux was more directly a recreation of Minix.