[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 2hu / animu / asmr / cafechan / rule34 / tk / u / zoo ][Options][ watchlist ]

/tech/ - Technology

You can now write text to your AI-generated image at https://aiproto.com It is currently free to use for Proto members.
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Expand all images

[–]

 No.845162>>845183 >>845286 [Watch Thread][Show All Posts]

>minix3.org

>Unfortunately, the MINIXCon 2017 conference had to be cancelled due to the small number of talks submitted

>http://wiki.minix3.org/doku.php?id=roadmap

>this page is not being actively maintained

Somehow used in more than half of all computers produced today and still falling apart at the seams. Funny, I wonder why. Actually, none of us do

 No.845169>>845171 >>845196 >>845275

>minix

>used in more than half of all computers produced today

since when?


 No.845171

>>845169

Intel ME


 No.845183>>845200

>>845162 (OP)

B-but how can this be?! After all microkernel is superior technology, right?! Right guys?


 No.845196>>845221


 No.845200>>845248 >>846132 >>858673 >>858772

>>845183

>The long view of history may tell a different story, but in 2003 it looks like Plan 9 failed simply because it fell short of being a compelling enough improvement on Unix to displace its ancestor. Compared to Plan 9, Unix creaks and clanks and has obvious rust spots, but it gets the job done well enough to hold its position. There is a lesson here for ambitious system architects: the most dangerous enemy of a better solution is an existing codebase that is just good enough.

Same for MINIX 3. Classic monolithic *nix, as mediocre as it is, is "just good enough".


 No.845207>>845210 >>845670

"Good enough" for what exactly? DragonflyBSD has already caught up to it in terms of scalability, despite being a much newer and smaller project. I guess Linux is "good enough" if you don't mind blowing 1000 times as much developer man years.

Maybe it made sense to use monolithic kernel in 1991 when the best hardware the average dude could buy was an 68030 or 80386, but that was almost three decades ago. And on top of that there's not a whole lot more security problems that would benefit from being isolated, which a microkernel design is better suited for.


 No.845210>>845258 >>846293

>>845207

0punctuation


 No.845221>>845258

>>845196

How retarded do you have to be to think that? MINIX is only used since Skylake, so that alone severely limits its numbers.

It's good as a joke, but hardly justifiable as a statement of fact on a Vietnamese wood-carving forum.


 No.845248>>845250 >>847995 >>849081

>>845200

Plan 9 failed because BSD and System V were better than Plan 9. The kernel functionality was better. The desktop environments were better. The shells were better. They sucked (and still do) compared to a real mainframe or workstation OS, but Plan 9 was even worse.


 No.845250>>845251 >>845711 >>847733

>>845248

>They sucked (and still do) compared to a real mainframe or workstation OS

I'm interested as to what you think is a "real workstation OS".


 No.845251

>>845250

I was wondering about this too


 No.845258>>845583 >>845585

>>845221

Maybe "LITERALLY ALL COMPUTERS run Minix!" is an overstatement, but it is present in enough computers to deserve attention.

>>845210

Still

better

than

Reddit

spacing.


 No.845275

>>845169

He said produced not computers in use.


 No.845286>>845678 >>848646

>>845162 (OP)

>Funny, I wonder why.

Cuck license.


 No.845583

>>845258

>muh plebbit spacing

reported


 No.845585

>>845258

I'd rather have understandable text that is awkward to read instead of easily readable text that makes no sense.


 No.845670

>>845207

This is so true. DF also has the added advantage that it's close enough to FreeBSD that porting is relatively easier.


 No.845678

>>845286

You're black.


 No.845711

>>845250

Obviously TempleOS


 No.846025>>846027 >>846133 >>848719

I seem to remember reading something about how including MINIX iniside the Intel ME violates the terms of the BSD license, making a legal battle a reality. Intel derserves to die.


 No.846027>>846035

>>846025

You remember wrong, the whole point of BSD-style licenses is to allow for it to be used in proprietary software.


 No.846035

>>846027

>the whole point of BSD-style licenses is to allow for it to be used in proprietary software

As Linus said, BSD license is for the code, you don't care, even if it's forked and became better in some way. Obviously better license for smaller programs than the copyleft crap.


 No.846043>>848698

File (hide): 2451cf10b804f14⋯.jpg (25.24 KB, 491x585, 491:585, ywyrHntjPZw.jpg) (h) (u)

>>846038

Intel could use QNX or keep the pre skylake system. Also think about the countless examples of GPL infringements that makes Linux as bad as BSD and lawsuits push firms to use even less copyleft software, like Google did with Busybox or spearheading clang support for Linux compiling just for decrease the size of the toolchain.


 No.846132

>>845200

Minix doesn't even have the advantage of having a noticably different user and development environment (like Plan 9.) It's just another Unix in a world that already has too many Unixes.


 No.846133>>846150

>>846025

The BSD license has only one term: do whatever the fuck you want with it, as long as I get credit.

So theoretically all computers with ME should have a copyright Andrew Tanenbaum notice somewhere.


 No.846150

>>846133

It doesn't. BSD infringement is also a nice achievement


 No.846174>>846184

Microkernels are really awesome in theory. The practice is shit. If there was an interesting microkernel os that was GPL v3 I'd install it on partition and play around with it, but I'd still consider it just a glorified toy kernel.


 No.846184>>846185 >>846385 >>846417

>>846174

Do you think that GNU Mach is not good enough for you?


 No.846185>>846191

>>846184

No. It's not interesting.


 No.846191>>846299

>>846185

I'm not sure what you mean by an interesting microkernel. Microkernels are minimalist by definition. This means that microkernels are interesting by the virtue that they don't do more than what is necessary for the job they do.


 No.846293

File (hide): dcd9e3af4082075⋯.jpg (28.33 KB, 442x330, 221:165, You are an idiot.jpg) (h) (u)

>>845210

0intelligence


 No.846299>>847757

File (hide): 5b829ad79841c2f⋯.jpg (87.73 KB, 541x331, 541:331, microexpressions-happiness.jpg) (h) (u)

>>846191

>This means that microkernels are interesting by the virtue that they don't do more than what is necessary for the job they do.

Which is exactly what any software should do everywhere.


 No.846385

>>846184

If it has Mach in it it's shit. Even the people who designed it hate it.


 No.846417>>847759

>>846184

>no usb support

what do you think


 No.847733

>>845250

nobody gives a shit about how "REAL" it is

if it runs like ass and has horrible software to back it up


 No.847745>>858917

Microkernels are going to get fucked hard by Meltdown. Switching address spaces on syscalls is bad enough, now imagine that happening orders of magnitude more often as multiple services communicate to do the work of one syscall.


 No.847757

>>846299

You have this software, it's called Plan 9 OS. It is not a popular way to use your computer.


 No.847759>>847762

>>846417

That's actually a good thing. You're supposed to implement USB drivers as a userspace service.


 No.847762

>>847759

>You're supposed to implement USB drivers as a userspace service.

This


 No.847786>>847805

Can't wait to use Minix3 as a desktop workstation with opensource stable software...


 No.847805>>847990


 No.847978>>847987 >>847991

MINIX is supposed to be a "teaching OS" that teaches you how to write an OS. Not a replacement for UNIX. Also, Intel forked MINIX over 10 years ago, so it's fork is probably significantly different.


 No.847987

>>847978

We will probably know soon, once somebody gets the source, or extracts it from the motherboards that half of the world uses and decompile it


 No.847990>>848021

>>847805

sta.li is just a GNU/Linux distro without the GNU. Instead of GNU it's pure suckless autism. I like suckless but couldn't live without X.


 No.847991>>848049

>>847978

MINIX and MINIX 2 are "teach OSes" (note: they are OSes in which the development is explained in a book from which you can learn, they are still usable and pretty good operating systems). MINIX 3 is a whole new deal. Entirely new kernel, userspace, and development process. Calling it MINIX is only a namesake if anything. MINIX 3 is a solid competitor to UNIX aside from the lack of hardware support (USB being a PITA).

Please stop spreading bullshit. MINIX 3 is not MINIX 2.


 No.847995

>>845248

>The desktop environments were better.

Perhaps.

>The shells were better

No. rc is fucking brilliant, and to ignore that is to do a disservice to yourself and the developers. The problem is, UNIX was just good enough. BSD is irrelevant to the Plan 9 debacle.


 No.848021>>848024 >>848326

>>847990

stali stands for statically linked, what makes you think it cannot have x and graphical display?


 No.848024>>848036 >>848041

>>848021

>Follow the suckless philosophy


 No.848036


 No.848041>>848190

>>848024

https://awesomewm.org/

it is also funny that linux users are not able to distribute binary executable files (and sources) that simply run or even can be compiled on any system, because there are cancerous dynamic dependencies with unlimited faggotry, stali addresses this problem. It is also funny and ironic how statically linking everything makes a system that is much smaller and faster.


 No.848049>>848110

>>847991

Sorry, I only remember reading on Tannenbaum's blog that that's what he wanted Minix to be, I don't have a link to it. Most people (myself included) didn't know that there was such a conceptual difference between MINIX 2 and MINIX 3


 No.848110>>848122

>>848049

Tannenbaum mentioned his concern towards Intel chosing an older teaching version of minix instead of their production ready version.

http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/intel/

"I certainly hope Intel did thorough security hardening and testing before deploying the chip, since apparently an older version of MINIX was used. Older versions were primarily for education and newer ones were for high availability. Military-grade security was never a goal."


 No.848122>>848182 >>848385

>>848110

>I hope the DRM is strong and the users can not possible take control of their hardware.

What a cunt. Intel fucking up is good for us though.


 No.848182

>>848122

>I hope the DRM is strong and the users can not possible take control of their hardware.

wtf are you on about?


 No.848190

File (hide): d4517550f6bde27⋯.gif (2.13 MB, 370x240, 37:24, 1505053760.gif) (h) (u)

>>848041

I'm still trying to understand why the fuck can't I make static binary out of glibc. Why did you freetards have to let this happen?

WHY?


 No.848326>>848352

>>848021

because you obviously never tried having statically linked X, let alone any graphical userspace using gtk/qt


 No.848352

>>848326

>statically linked X

yea that shit needs deleting some junk

https://blog.plenz.com/2011-08/statically-linking-dwm-against-x11-and-xcb.html


 No.848385

>>848122

Anta baka? He said that it was wrong for them to do this and doesn't agree with it, but he foolishly thinks that it being one of the most used OS's on the planet is a good thing. Reminder to trust in Stallman. Run Libreboot or TALOS and only GNU/Linux flavors that respect your freedom.


 No.848646

>>845286

/thread


 No.848698>>848748

>>846043

>qnx

Intel wouldn't. The tech industry is trying as hard as possible to kill Blackberry.


 No.848719>>858680 >>858724

>>846025

BSD license basically says : "Please take my code and use it for your proprietary garbage without giving me any compensation or recognition."

But at least, this way Theo the rat can stick it to the (Stall)man


 No.848748>>848751

>>848698

>The tech industry is trying as hard as possible to kill Blackberry.

Why?


 No.848751

>>848748

They never conformed to normies.


 No.849081

>>845248

For a text-centric workflow Plan9 is great, it's also quite good if you're a programmer. Vi and emacs tards hate acme though.

It's worth getting used to just in case, and the whole environment has far fewer lines of code than systemd or the Linux kernel.


 No.858673

>>845200

Linus raped Andrew so hard


 No.858680

>>848719

The BSD license appeals, the way I see it, to "anarchists" who see any kind of rules as constrictive, but aren't quite smart enough to realize that their philosophy, a priori free-er than GPL, in reality turns out to be just another iteration of neo-con/ultra-capitalist ideology.

The license is literal shit, at least Stallman had a vision of software and beyond society that went beyond kindergarten "would like rules or rules? I want no rules! yeah, i'm an anarcho/crypto/poly meme."


 No.858724>>858769

>>848719

>or recognition.

<Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice,

Recognition is part of the license.

https://www.openbsd.org/policy.html

Most GNUfanatics have no problems pirating commercial software,movies,games and music but when it comes to OSes all of a sudden they care about copyright law. smh fam tbh


 No.858769

>>858724

>pirating

It's sharing.


 No.858772>>858773 >>858879

>>845200

We're not using MINX today because Tannenbaum spent decades being a retard. The old versions of Minix were all payed proprietary software, and by the time Tannenbaum realized that nobody wants to pay for some hobbyist's kernel, GNU/Linux had already cornered the market in free (both gratis and libre) operating systems. If he'd just made it free from the get-go we'd all be using GNU/Minix right now.


 No.858773>>858782

>>858772

>we'd all be using systemd/Minix right now.

Fixed it for you. Poettering would have crept along anyways, so, in the end, what's the big difference.


 No.858782

>>858773

I don't know that a microkernel could possess all those linux-specific functionalities that systemdicks depends on.


 No.858879>>858918

>>858772

Allegedly he wanted to make it free, but it wasn't possible for some stupid bureaucratic reasons. So he just sold it for the minimum.

Too bad he couldn't, because the design was simpler/better than Linux, and ran fine on much older/cheaper 286 computers with less memory. So at least it accomplished its instructional purposes well.


 No.858917>>859761

>>847745

Depends, Muen kernel claims they are safe from it.

Hi,

We thoroughly studied the potential impact of the recent

Spectre/Meltdown speculative execution CPU design issues on the Muen

Separation Kernel. In this mail we would like to share our findings

regarding Meltdown. The analysis of Spectre will follow in a separate

mail.

For the technical details of the Meltdown vulnerability the reader is

directed to the associated papers and blog posts [1][2][3].

= Introduction

Meltdown is part of a new attack class which relies on observing side

effects caused by speculative instruction execution by the processor. It

is also referred to as Rogue Data Cache Load (CVE-2017-5754).

For a successful Meltdown attack, three requirements have to be met:

(1) The memory space of the unprivileged attacker contains privileged

memory mappings to which the attacker has no access (U/S bit not

set)

(2) The mappings contain desired information

(3) The attacker can measure the timing effects introduced by its attack

= Assessment

Muen uses VT-x and not ring-0/ring-3 transitions as isolation mechanism

between subjects and the kernel. As VT-x transitions automatically

switch the memory layout between guests and the host, Muen does not use

the User/Supervisor bit in page tables for the enforcement of access

rights.

Consequently the precondition (1) for the attack is not met and the Muen

kernel is not vulnerable.

Subjects which internally rely on ring-0/ring-3 transition (e.g. Linux,

Windows) are vulnerable from local attacks unless adequate mitigation is

performed at subject level. E.g. for Linux guests, Kernel Page Table

Isolation (KPTI, formerly KAISER) must be enabled.

= Conclusion

Meltdown is defended by our design decision to have a simple

architecture which only utilizes a single isolation mechanism: hardware

virtualization. We prioritized a minimal design over performance

considerations and decided not to use ring-3 in VMX-root mode for native

subjects. Since Meltdown only affects the ring-0/ring-3 isolation

mechanism we were spared from that pit of lava.

Kind regards,

The Muen Team

[1] - https://meltdownattack.com

[2] -

https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.ch/2018/01/reading-privileged-memory-

with-side.html

[3] -

https://newsroom.intel.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2018/01/Intel-Ana

lysis-of-Speculative-Execution-Side-Channels.pdf


 No.858918>>858941

>>858879

No, if you go back and read the Torvalds/Tannenbaum debate, you'll see that Andrew actually defended charging for Minix.


 No.858941

>>858918

He was bound by a publishing contract.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MINIX#Licensing

> At the time of its original development, the license for MINIX was considered to be rather liberal. Its licensing fee was very small ($69) compared to those of other operating systems. Although Tanenbaum wished for MINIX to be as accessible as possible to students, his publisher was not prepared to offer material (such as the source code) that could be copied freely, so a restrictive license requiring a nominal fee (included in the price of Tanenbaum's book) was applied as a compromise. This prevented the use of MINIX as the basis for a freely distributed software system.

https://www.webcitation.org/mainframe.php

> I set out to write a minimal UNIX clone, MINIX, and did it alone. The code was 100% free of AT&T's intellectual property. The full source code was published in 1987 as the appendix to a book, Operating Systems: Design and Implementation, which later went into a second edition co-authored with Al Woodhull. MINIX 2.0 was even POSIX-conformant. Both editions contained hundreds of pages of text describing the code in great detail. A box of 10 floppy disks containing all the binaries and source code was available separately from Prentice Hall for $69.

> While this was not free software in the sense of "free beer" it was free software in the sense of "free speech" since all the source code was available for only slightly more than the manufacturing cost. But even "free speech" is not completely "free"--think about slander, yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, etc. Also Remember (if you are old enough) that by 1987, a university educational license for UNIX cost $300, a commercial license for a university cost $28,000, and a commercial license for a company cost a lot more. For the first time, MINIX brought the cost of "UNIX-like" source code down to something a student could afford. Prentice Hall wasn't really interested in selling software. They were interested in selling books, so there was a fairly liberal policy on copying MINIX, but if a company wanted to sell it to make big bucks, PH wanted a royalty. Hence the PH lawyers equipped MINIX with a lot of boilerplate, but there was never any intention of really enforcing this against universities or students. Using the Internet for distributing that much code was not feasible in 1987, even for people with a high-speed (i.e., 1200 bps) modem. When distribution via the Internet became feasible, I convinced Prentice Hall to drop its (extremely modest) commercial ambitions and they gave me permission to put the source on my website for free downloading, where it still is.

Ironically, the modest $69 fee for floppy disks and shipping would probably have been considered reasonable by RMS. Since all the source code was available and provided thus, he would or should have vetted this OS as libre software, which the user has full access to source codes for the purposes of learning and modifications.


 No.859761>>859775

>>858917

>Muen kernel

Where is the firefox port for it?

Also

>SPARK


 No.859775

>>859761

There's no VisiCalc port either.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Screencap][Nerve Center][Cancer][Update] ( Scroll to new posts) ( Auto) 5
77 replies | 5 images | Page ?
[Post a Reply]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / 2hu / animu / asmr / cafechan / rule34 / tk / u / zoo ][ watchlist ]