Xref: utzoo comp.os.minix:15205 comp.sys.3b1:764
Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!hybrid!chance!john
From: john@chance.UUCP (John R. MacMillan)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix,comp.sys.3b1
Subject: Re: Port of MINIX to Unix-PC
Keywords: AT&T-Unix/PC, 3B1, 7300
Message-ID: <1991Mar17.163331.330@chance.UUCP>
Date: 17 Mar 91 16:33:31 GMT
References: <1991Mar9.180250.15471@cbnewsj.att.com> <1991Mar14.054318.25699@chance.UUCP> <5409@umbc3.UMBC.EDU>
Organization: Haphazard
Lines: 28

|>A friend and I have just started, using the Atari ST source as a
|>base.  We don't think it will be too hard, but we're both pretty busy,
|
|WHAT????  Do you have this system confused with IBM's toy PC (and clones)?
|The AT&T _Unix_ PC is named the Unix PC because it was designed to run
|a derivative of AT&T's SysVR2, which comes with the machine.

Damn!  Now I know why I haven't been able to get Lotus 1-2-3 to work
for the past 3 1/2 years! :-)

Seriously, I really do mean we're porting Minix to the AT&T UNIX PC,
aka 3B1 aka PC7300.  Wouldn't be much work to do a port where all you
had to do was buy the floppies for the target machine, and stuff them
in, now, would it? :-)

|Just curious; why would you want to port Minix to this system when you
|already have a better version of Unix running on it?

A few reasons.  I don't get to do any kernel work at work, and I don't
have source for the UNIXpc OS.  Also, at the time we decided to do the
port, it didn't look like any future upgrades from AT&T would be forth-
coming, so it would have been one way to support future hardware
development with the machine.

Also ``better'' is a matter of opinion.  Personally, I feel modern
commercial Unices have too much bloat, and even if upgrades come,
they're not likely to trim down any, so the only way for me to get a
``better'' UNIX is to start small, and do it myself.