Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ogicse!pdxgate!eecs!deo
From: deo@eecs.cs.pdx.edu (Steven Furber)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: Where is Minix headed?!?!?!?!?!?!
Message-ID: <477@pdxgate.UUCP>
Date: 30 Oct 90 14:46:42 GMT
References: <4936@crash.cts.com> <33393@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <463@pdxgate.UUCP> <1391@ul-cs.ulowell.edu>
Sender: news@pdxgate.UUCP
Reply-To: deo@eecs.UUCP (Steven Furber)
Organization: Portland State University, Portland, OR
Lines: 22

In article <1391@ul-cs.ulowell.edu> sgerakin@hawk.ulowell.edu (Steve Gerakines) writes:
>
>Personally I like Minix and its' "small is simple" philosophy.  It gives
>people a building block to go from, and expand as they see fit.  I'm
>sure Dr. Tanenbaum is well aware that Minix is growing beyond the
>classroom.  I just hope that a POSIX compliant Minix doesn't forget
>its more simple ancestors.

What I am mainly worried about is that people are talking about an "Internet
Minix Kernel" or "Extended Kernel" (the first name was probably due to a
great deal of us reading the news on the Internet) that would be a superset
of the current kernel.  What I'm worried about is that if such a beast ever
comes into being a lot of us will be left further behind than we are; the
documentation-- as should be expected since it was written for the PC to begin
with --is pretty much focused on the PC version.  The main reasons that I
bought Minix had to do with me not wanting to have to prgram Mac applications
for all of the text manipulation programs I do, my preference for UNIX being
what operating system I develop things under, and the rather open nature for
the operating system itself.

If my previous post sounded like I was screaming "Don't develop any machine
specific stuff!" then I didn't write very clearly.