Andrew S. Tanenbaum receives ACM Software System Award

[Thomas Cort]

Article on the VU website:

https://vu.nl/en/news/2024/andrew-s-tanenbaum-receives-acm-software-system-award

[Pierpaolo Bernardi]

On Sat, Jun 22, 2024 at 9:04 PM Thomas Cort <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Article on the VU website:
>
> https://vu.nl/en/news/2024/andrew-s-tanenbaum-receives-acm-software-system-award

Awful rewriting of history.

[Han Yang]

Congratulations!

[Jan Wieck]

> https://vu.nl/en/news/2024/andrew-s-tanenbaum-receives-acm-software-system-award <https://vu.nl/en/news/2024/andrew-s-tanenbaum-receives-acm-software-system-award>
>
> Awful rewriting of history.

How so?


Regards, Jan

[Pierpaolo Bernardi]

On Sun, Jul 14, 2024 at 1:15 AM Jan Wieck <j...@wi3ck.info> wrote:
> > On Sunday, June 23, 2024 at 12:45:52 AM UTC+2 Pierpaolo Bernardi wrote:
> > Awful rewriting of history.
> How so?

Since Linux today is known by everybody, the writer of that page
INVENTED that Minix influenced Linux.

Actually Minix and Linux are at the opposite side of the spectum of
OSes. It would have been great if Minix had influenced other Oses, but
unfortunately this has not happened, and we are stuck with monolithic
OSes.

The award is fully deserved, but not because of Linux.

[Jan Wieck]

That is true and that should have been in the initial email.

Linus Torvalds learned very little, if anything, while using Minix to
develop Linux. If he had then Linux would look more like a Mach
Microkernel today. So I agree that influencing Linux is total BS. It
just had to be spelled out.

For the record, I started using Minix at version 1.3, upgraded to 1.5
when I got an IBM AT (286) and later went on to Minix-386, on which I
used UUCP to spool my first email and NetNews using bnews (cnews
wouldn't compile on it due to its size). I met Mr. Tanenbaum once during
a CeBIT in Hannover to discuss packaging things like those applications,
enhancements like virtual consoles and so on. He was absolutely against
that and (at that time) wanted Minix to remain purely an aid for his OS
teachings. And that was the end of that story and the beginning of
leaving Minix.


Best Regards, Jan

[Minh Nguyen]

Although Minix and Linux have opposite designs, I think Minix influence on Linux cannot be underestimated. According to this book, Linus Torvalds acknowledged that "The book that launched me to new heights was Operating Systems: Design and Implementation, by Andrew S. Tanenbaum."

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "minix3" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minix3+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/minix3/709c7942-747d-4926-9827-611f2260eec9%40wi3ck.info.

[Giovanni Falzoni]

On 7/14/24 02:36, Pierpaolo Bernardi wrote:

> Since Linux today is known by everybody, the writer of that page
> INVENTED that Minix influenced Linux.

Go to the archives and you will find that Linux was started and
developed on Minix. As a matter of fact on beginning it only supported
the Minix file sysytem.

> Actually Minix and Linux are at the opposite side of the spectum of
> OSes. It would have been great if Minix had influenced other Oses, but
> unfortunately this has not happened, and we are stuck with monolithic
> OSes.

Did you ever use Minix in version 1.x or 2.x? Minix and Linux are a
different philosophy only starting version 3.x that began to be
developed starting year 2004 with the introduction of the microkernel.

Ciao
Giovanni

[Jan Wieck]

On 7/29/24 02:29, 'Giovanni Falzoni' via minix3 wrote:
> On 7/14/24 02:36, Pierpaolo Bernardi wrote:
>
>> Since Linux today is known by everybody, the writer of that page
>> INVENTED that Minix influenced Linux.
>
> Go to the archives and you will find that Linux was started and
> developed on Minix. As a matter of fact on beginning it only supported
> the Minix file sysytem.

As I remember things Linus used Minix as a "loader" to experiment with
the advanced 386 features. That Linux only supported Minix-FS was
because that was the back the monkey was riding on.

>
>> Actually Minix and Linux are at the opposite side of the spectum of
>> OSes. It would have been great if Minix had influenced other Oses, but
>> unfortunately this has not happened, and we are stuck with monolithic
>> OSes.
>
> Did you ever use Minix in version 1.x or 2.x? Minix and Linux are a
> different philosophy only starting version 3.x that began to be
> developed starting year 2004 with the introduction of the microkernel.

Yes, the first version I used was 1.3 on an XT. Then upgraded to 1.5 on
an AT. After 2.0 I used Minix-386 but because AST blocked anything in
that direction left Minix for Mach-386.


Regards, Jan

[Pierpaolo Bernardi]

On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 8:29 AM 'Giovanni Falzoni' via minix3
<min...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> On 7/14/24 02:36, Pierpaolo Bernardi wrote:

> Did you ever use Minix in version 1.x or 2.x?

I did.

> Minix and Linux are a
> different philosophy only starting version 3.x that began to be
> developed starting year 2004 with the introduction of the microkernel.

...and still don't agree with this.

Ciao

[Minh Nguyen]

> Minix and Linux are a
> different philosophy only starting version 3.x that began to be
> developed starting year 2004 with the introduction of the microkernel.

is a giant step back into the 1970s

> ...and still don't agree with this.

I also think they disagreed at the very beginning. In this 1992 famous debate, Tanenbaum criticized Linux is a giant step back into the 1970s.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "minix3" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minix3+un...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/minix3/CANY8u7GhUCNA1FiTpwgXpGU4nz-quTRQKU3ScXB8bGp66zW%2BWQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jan Wieck]

On 7/29/24 13:09, Minh Nguyen wrote:
>> Minix and Linux are a
>> different philosophy only starting version 3.x that began to be
>> developed starting year 2004 with the introduction of the microkernel.
> is a giant step back into the 1970s
>
> > ...and still don't agree with this.
>
> I also think they disagreed at the very beginning. In this 1992 famous

> debate <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.os.minix/c/wlhw16QWltI>,
> Tanenbaum criticized Linux is/a giant step back into the 1970s./

Maybe someone should ask Mr. Tanenbaum if he agrees with the statement
that Minix influenced Linux.

I met Mr. Tanenbaum in person during the early 90's at a CeBit in
Hannover. Another member of our Hamburg, Germany based Minix User Group
(Frank Rabe) and I discussed ideas about packaging extensions and
software for Minix with him. Things like virtual consoles, email and
news, spreadsheet applications and text processors. The discussion
didn't go well because as Minix users we saw it absolutely necessary to
go 32 bits (at that time), which required Minix 386 since pretty much
all of us were Intel users. Looking at the above linked archive
Tanenbaum was of course agains that and if memory serves even advised us
against using the name Minix in our efforts as it was at that time a
registered trademark of Prentice Hall. Our idea ended then and there.


Regards, Jan

[Minh Nguyen]

It would be next to impossible for an undergrad student to write an OS from nowhere. I think the influence went as far as Torvalds used Minix as a reference to implement Linux. As opposite in design as they are, the nuts and bolts still look similar.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "minix3" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minix3+un...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/minix3/b3523cd6-2696-4a27-b4ff-03533bcd1215%40wi3ck.info.

[Pierpaolo Bernardi]

On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 12:28 AM Minh Nguyen <md6n...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It would be next to impossible for an undergrad student to write an OS from nowhere. I think the influence went as far as Torvalds used Minix as a reference to implement Linux. As opposite in design as they are, the nuts and bolts still look similar.

He did not write it from nowhere. Linux is a reimplementation of Unix.
The design was already done by other people before him, and even in
1990 there were a lot of resources explaining the internals of Unix.
He did not need Minix as a reference.

[Minh Nguyen]

Sure but at that time was there any Unix clone for x86 other than Minix? And more importantly the fact is that he did use Minix as a reference.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "minix3" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minix3+un...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/minix3/CANY8u7GoXrNv0m-fMmU-hUcBCC-kkrpERzFm8mN7r-VZC570%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Jan Wieck]

On 7/29/24 19:44, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Sure but at that time was there any Unix clone for x86 other than Minix?
> And more importantly the fact is that he did use Minix as a reference.

Did he? Please list the design principles of Minix that are (or were)
reflected in the kernel design of Linux.


Regards, Jan

[Pierpaolo Bernardi]

On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 1:44 AM Minh Nguyen <md6n...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Sure but at that time was there any Unix clone for x86 other than Minix?

Yes. There were a few well-known Unix-like OSes around much earlier
than both Minix and Linux, plus, I'm sure, other less known ones.

One well-known at the time was Coherent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coherent_(operating_system).
Another that was well-known at the time and still going strong is
QUNIX (later renamed QNX)

[Giovanni Falzoni]

On 7/30/24 01:39, Pierpaolo Bernardi wrote:

> He did not write it from nowhere. Linux is a re-implementation of Unix.

> The design was already done by other people before him, and even in
> 1990 there were a lot of resources explaining the internals of Unix.
> He did not need Minix as a reference.

Minix is a re-implementation of Unix so we can say that Linux is a
re-implementation of Minix.

Reading this thread I realize that many users don't know the differences
between Minix-3.x and Minix-2.x

Ciao
Giovanni

[Jeremy Harden]

I know I'm late to the party, but a poster pointed out we are stuck with monolithic kernel OS's, that's not entirely true, albeit those OS's aren't necessarily influenced by MINIX, you can see the DNA of MINIX in those operating systems, if not bucking the trend of monolithic kernels.   Here's a list of the handful of microkernel operating systems that I'm aware of, excluding MINIX:

QNX

seL4

HelenOS

GNU/HURD

Genode

We shouldn't forget about hybrid kernels:

XNU

DragonflyBSD

Windows NT

Solaris

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "minix3" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minix3+un...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/minix3/f4a240d7-087f-2a60-714b-c6cb72335556%40inwind.it.