[TUHS] Mach for i386 / Mt Xinu or other

Cory Smelosky b4 at gewt.net
Mon Feb 20 11:29:54 AEST 2017

On Sun, Feb 19, 2017, at 13:19, Clem Cole wrote:



> On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 1:20 AM,
> <jsteve at superglobalmegacorp.com> wrote:
>> True, but It’s not 4.3 BSD …  I was hoping for something vintage of
>> the era, just as Solaris 11 is SYSV, but it’s nothing like SYSVr2 on
>> the VAX….
> Fair enough... the Mt Xinu version is pretty much the CMU version
> unadorned.   Which mean that it is a 4.3BSD kernel, with the BSD based
> MMU code ripped out and replaced with the CMU code, and the Mach
> interfaces (ney RIG - Mach's and Accent's predecessor) messaging
> system spliced into it; then the whole mess was built back up using a
> 4.3BSD user space (and on top of the i386, an Intel developed boot
> system - which is a different story I'll not repeat at this time - but
> thankfully was common to all the UNIX systems of the day because Intel
> developed and make it available to community at large).

> The other option which I would suggest to look at is the OSF/1 mk for
> the i386 (monolithic) about version 3x which as I said forked off the
> Alpha line and a couple of other systems.   The i386 version of OSF/1
> supports the same chips (i386/i486/Pentium) at the CMU version, it
> also comes with more HW device support (disk, tape, network, display
> *et al*),  than the CMU/Mt Xinu version -- including most importantly
> SCSI support by default, which is why is might be a little easier to
> work on today's HW and VMs.   When I last used it, it lacked USB
> support; but that was being worked on around the time I started doing
> other things so even that might even be available today.

> FWIW: OSF/1 also started with 4.3BSD userspace, but it had a lot of
> work done to it to updating it - adding the Sys V commands that BSD
> lacked those days and adding Sys V options to many commands.  * i.e.*
> its user space is a tad more "complete" / "wider" than pure 4.3BSD and
> again makes it a little easier to complete.

> Note that the user space commands from the mk would become the basis
> for Tru64, HP/UX and later versions of AIX.   And also the OSF/1
> version will have better Graphics, Motif and a much better GUI options
> all around that Mt Xinu, which alone may be it easier to work.


> As I also said elsewhere, the uK or Research Institute (RI) version is
> a tad more fun to play with.   It's a real kernel architecture moving
> things like file systems *et al* in user space.  But you can do do
> things like start up multiple system interfaces.   LCC had their
> DOS/Win95 interface was actually developed running instead of as a VM
> like it did for the basic mk code, but in as "second server" but I do
> not think they ever sold it.   The other thing the RI never did, was
> the uk still has the pager and all the networking code in the kernel,
> so the uk, is hardly 'micro' in size.

> There is a OSF Version 4 and maybe even version 5 (I've forgotten, if
> some one remembers - please correct me).  The OSF RI folks were trying
> to rewrite it a bit in C++ as I recall, again this part of the UI vs
> OSF wars of the day and Chorus has rewritten there version from Pascal
> to C++, and IIRC the RI was trying to counter that.  I don't remember
> if that version of the uk ever saw the light of day.




> Anyway, no matter which is the 3 code streams you pick, Mt Xinu, OSF/1
> mk or uk one hardest problems for today will be that the compiler is
> of course extremely old by today's standards, and you are probably
> going to run it some walls in that area faster than you might think.
> That said, if you are willing to deal with the compiler as it comes,
> non of them should be very high, or hard to get clear, but some are
> likely to take some work.

> Have fun and good luck and let us know if you can get any of these
> running.

> Clem

Has any mtXinu stuff survived to be archives?


  Cory Smelosky

  b4 at gewt.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20170219/412abed1/attachment.html>

More information about the TUHS mailing list