• A Basil Plant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      https://www.linuxjournal.com/article/10754

      MINIX originally was developed in 1987 by Andrew S. Tanenbaum as a teaching tool for his textbook Operating Systems Design and Implementation. Today, it is a text-oriented operating system with a kernel of less than 6,000 lines of code. MINIX’s largest claim to fame is as an example of a microkernel, in which each device driver runs as an isolated user-mode process—a structure that not only increases security but also reliability, because it means a bug in a driver cannot bring down the entire system.

      In its heyday during the early 1990s, MINIX was popular among hobbyists and developers because of its inexpensive proprietary license. However, by the time it was licensed under a BSD-style license in 2000, MINIX had been overshadowed by other free-licensed operating systems.

      Today, MINIX is best known as a footnote in GNU/Linux history. It inspired Linus Torvalds to develop Linux, and some of his early work was written on MINIX. Probably too, Torvalds’ early decision to support the MINIX filesystem is responsible for the Linux kernel’s support of almost every filesystem imaginable.

      Later, Torvalds and Tanenbaum had a frank e-mail debate about the relative merits of macrokernels (sic) and microkernels. This early history resurfaced in 2004 when Kenneth Brown of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution prepared a book alleging that Torvalds borrowed code from MINIX—a charge that Tanenbaum, among others, so comprehensively debunked, and the book was never actually published (see Resources).

      See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanenbaum–Torvalds_debate

    • zarkanian
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 months ago

      What was minix then? A non FOSS version?

      It wasn’t FOSS, but then neither was Linux originally.

      • IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 months ago

        That kind of depends on how you define FOSS. The way we think of that today was in very early stages back in the 1991 and the orignal source was distributed as free, both as in speech and as in beer, but commercial use was prohibited, so it doesn’t strictly speaking qualify as FOSS (like we understand it today). About a year later Linux was released under GPL and the rest is history.

        Public domain code, academic world with any source code and things like that predate both Linux and GNU by a few decades and even the Free Software Foundation came 5-6 years before Linux, but the Linux itself has been pretty much as free as it is today from the start. GPL, GNU, FSF and all the things Stallman created or was a part of (regardless of his conflicting personality) just created a set of rules on how to play this game, pretty much before any game or rules for it existed.

        Minix was a commercial thing from the start, Linux wasn’t, and things just refined on the way. You are of course correct that the first release of Linux wasn’t strictly speaking FOSS, but the whole ‘FOSS’ mentality and rules for it wasn’t really a thing either back then.

        There’s of course adacemic debate to have for days on which came first and what rules whoever did obey and what release counts as FOSS or not, but for all intents and purposes, Linux was free software from the start and the competition was not.

        • zarkanian
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          4 months ago

          I read a biography of Stallman several years ago. The whole free software movement was an attempt to preserve the early hacker culture where everybody freely swapped code. So, Stallman didn’t really “invent” FOSS; he just codified that early hacker ethos.

        • LeFantome@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          Agree with you up until “the competition was not”.

          GNU HURD was competition for one thing.

          More importantly, so was BSD. BSD predates Linux ( though its distribution specifically as FreeBSD does not ).

          • IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            I’ve read Linus’s book several years ago, and based on that flimsy knowledge on back of my head, I don’t think Linus was really competing with anyone at the time. Hurd was around, but it’s still coming soon™ to widespread use and things with AT&T and BSD were “a bit” complex at the time.

            BSD obviously has brought a ton of stuff on the table which Linux greatly benefited from and their stance on FOSS shouldn’t go without appreciation, but assuming my history knowledge isn’t too badly flawed, BSD and Linux weren’t straight competitors, but they started to gain traction (regardless of a lot longer history with BSD) around the same time and they grew stronger together instead of competing with eachother.

            A ton of us owes our current corporate lifes to the people who built the stepping stones before us, and Linus is no different. Obviously I personally owe Linus a ton for enabling my current status at the office, but the whole thing wouldn’t been possible without people coming before him. RMS and GNU movement plays a big part of that, but equally big part is played by a ton of other people.

            I’m not an expert by any stretch on history of Linux/Unix, but I’m glad that the people preceding my career did what they did. Covering all the bases on the topic would require a ton more than I can spit out on a platform like this, I’m just happy that we have the FOSS movement at all instead of everything being a walled garden today.

            • Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 months ago

              386BSD was not available until some months after Linux was released, so you had GNU with no working kernel and BSD not yet available on the hardware he had, hardware a lot of normal people had. I think the GPL also felt more philosophically right to many of them, and it limited how much they needed to re-do work that someone else had already done but kept secret.

              The AT&T lawsuit definitely hampered BSD growth just as it was ported to the 386, but it was filed after Linux was already a thing.

    • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      A microkernel teaching OS by Andrew S. Tanenbaum.

      In 2017 the world (including Tanenbaum) found out that the Intel Management Engine uses Minix internally. Intel just kind of did that silently. So Minix is still around.