Posted on 10/27/2005 8:49:24 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Quit showing your ignorance and lack of a computer science education. Tanenbaum wrote a book called Operating Systems: Design and Implementation, which is standard in any decent CS curriculum (among others he wrote). He wrote Minix from scratch as an example of the programming principles in the book, such as modularity and true microkernels.
Minix served as the inspiration for Linus Torvalds's Linux (resulting in the famous Tanenbaum/Torvalds clash over monolithic vs. microkernels). Before you say Linux was stolen again, realize that Tanenbaum has seen Linux and has stated no code was stolen from Minix.
With these clones born overseas you constantly have to wonder.
BTW, on your "foreign" kick, Tanenbaum is an American.
Tanenbaum is an academic and a purist. Most of the Minix source code used to fit in his textbook.
AR,
I was under the impression that his code was strongly based on UNIX (System VII I think)
He claims he wrote it from scratch but based on his deep involvement with the original Unix developers it's very possible he utilized some of their tools if not software along the way. He certainly had access to them so it's hard to say with any certainty it was a clean room implementation, even n3wbie is questioning you about it.
GE, I said based on I did not say or question if there was actually unix code..
%s/unix/propritory unix
"possibly illegal"
"Lunix"
"radical leftist"
"whackos"
Good to see you haven't lost your objectivity.
Bothers you?
He's priceless entertainment to me.
You just don't know. Tanenbaum spent a few summers there, working around Richie and others, but then his interest was compilers, although he had previously written an OS of his own. He did not actually work on UNIX. Years later he was teaching an operating system course using UNIX, but at that time AT&T forbade people from teaching UNIX internals. So he wrote his own from scratch to teach with, no AT&T code at all.
The source was published in 1987, and no one has cried foul. Until YOU can go through and find some stolen code, the rest of us will go with that he wrote it all.
You need to understand the difference between code descendant and behavior descendant. You're thinking in the way that Darwin is descended from BSD, in that it uses the codebase. The other descendancy is in how it works, what flavor of UNIX it emulates. Minix works like (although has no code from) the original Bell Labs UNIX.
I wouldn't want anyone using an illegal foreign copy instead, if that is possibly the case.
And for once, please point me to an illegal foreign copy that any of us thinks is legal.
Does BSD have a true microkernel architecture? Do all drivers run isolated in user mode, making it extremely robust? Does it fit in a tiny footprint? No? Then it can't work as well in Minix's target market.
Of course, the real reason BSD isn't the standard now instead of Linux is people like you falsely claiming theft. The AT&T lawsuit held up acceptance of BSD just long enough for Linux to take hold. Linux was already popular by the time BSD was in the clear.
I wonder if SCO is still shipping Nmap although its author (copyright holder) forbids them from doing so. We know SCO respects copyright -- as long as it's SCO's.
And Linus has been quoted as saying if he knew about the x86 BSD project before he started Linux he would have went with that...
I doubt sco nixed nmap but I know a guy who uses their stuff so I will ask..
BS. He was using copyrighted Unix code in his class prior to Minix ever existing.
No, the reason Linux is popular is the radical leftists love the communistic "copyleft" aspect of the GPL license, and socialists the world over are rallying behind it. Threats of something being illegal don't curb the desire of those who want something for free in the least, just as we're seeing now.
Software isn't about politics, it's about utility. There was a need for a free UNIX, and Linux was the first to fit that bill. That's it. I know no one who uses Linux because of socialist ideology. They use it because it's a free UNIX.
BSD would have been the first to fit the bill, but the AT&T lawsuit delayed it. Minix could have been it, but Tanenbaum's publisher wouldn't allow it to be free. Linux was first, so Linux is the one that dominated.
Your like let Linux dominate. Enjoy that fact. You let a foreign competitor come to the forefront because you saw free software as a threat and tried to use the legal system to crush it. I wish your like hadn't won, because BSD is better.
Threats of something being illegal don't curb the desire of those who want something for free in the least, just as we're seeing now.
People wanted a free UNIX. BSD wasn't yet considered free. Remember, this is quite a while ago, when Stallman was known mainly in academic circles as the author of some great tools, and had some crazy idea about free software for the general public. This was when pretty much the only thing GPL was what Stallman himself wrote.
BTW, Stallman didn't come up with the term "Copyleft."
He was using a textbook that had UNIX code and taught UNIX internals. He wrote Minix from scratch exactly because AT&T declared the book illegal, because it was no longer legal to show anyone AT&T code. He needed legal material with which to teach his classes. It was published openly in a textbook, read by millions, no complaints so far.
Again, produce proof of Tanenbaum stealing AT&T code or shut up.
LOL! You think he'll actually do that?
Hogwash. Solaris is now free, and a better O/S, yet it's constantly criticized over its license.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.