Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC - Minix

This is a discussion on Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC - Minix ; Has anyone ever done such a thing? I need help doing so!...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC

  1. Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC

    Has anyone ever done such a thing? I need help doing so!

  2. Re: Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC

    Take a look at:
    http://minix1.woodhull.com
    All sorts of info about minix 2.xxx is here, including the source code
    seen in the text.

    Hul

    noodlez@gmail.com wrote:
    > Has anyone ever done such a thing? I need help doing so!


  3. Re: Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC

    noodlez@gmail.com wrote:
    > Has anyone ever done such a thing? I need help doing so!


    Without a lot of modifications, this is unlikely to work. Minix was
    written with the ACK compiler in mind, and especially some of the more
    intricate stuff is quite compiler dependent. The question is: why do you
    want to compile Minix using gcc?

    Regards,

    Jens

    --
    Jens de Smit
    Student Computer Science | Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
    jfdsmit@few.vu.nl | http://www.few.vu.nl/~jfdsmit
    "[In the end, people] get furious at IT that the goddamn magic isn't working"
    -- Stewart Dean

  4. Re: Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC

    I didn't see the reference to gcc initialy. Woodhull's site would be a
    help compiling with ACK, probably not with gcc.

    Hul

    dbr@kbrx.com wrote:
    > Take a look at:
    > http://minix1.woodhull.com
    > All sorts of info about minix 2.xxx is here, including the source code
    > seen in the text.


    > Hul


    > noodlez@gmail.com wrote:
    > > Has anyone ever done such a thing? I need help doing so!


  5. Re: Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC

    On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 09:58:57 +0000, J.F. de Smit wrote:

    > Without a lot of modifications, this is unlikely to work. Minix was
    > written with the ACK compiler in mind, and especially some of the more
    > intricate stuff is quite compiler dependent.


    What stuff forces MINIX 3 to be compiler-dependent. I've searched
    minix3.org and have come up empty.


    > The question is: why do you want to compile Minix using gcc?


    The Minix3 FAQ section "What is the performance of MINIX 3 like" states
    one of the reasons that causes MINIX 3 to be 5-10% slower than MINIX 2 is
    that "the ACK compiler is faster than gcc but the code is worse".


    Rui Maciel

  6. Re: Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC

    On Sun, 5 Oct 2008, Rui Maciel wrote:

    >> The question is: why do you want to compile Minix using gcc?

    >
    > The Minix3 FAQ section "What is the performance of MINIX 3 like" states
    > one of the reasons that causes MINIX 3 to be 5-10% slower than MINIX 2 is
    > that "the ACK compiler is faster than gcc but the code is worse".


    I think that means the output of ACK is faster, not it's speed of
    compilation but the source code for MINIX 3 is "worse" (not as optimized)
    so compliling the MINIX 3 souce under gcc would be even slower.

    Benchmarking gcc vs. ACK should be easy enough.

    3ch

  7. Re: Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC

    On 10月6日, 上午7时03分, colonel_h...@yahoo.com wrote:
    > On Sun, 5 Oct 2008, Rui Maciel wrote:
    > >> The question is: why do you want to compile Minix using gcc?

    >
    > > The Minix3 FAQ section "What is the performance of MINIX 3 like" states
    > > one of the reasons that causes MINIX 3 to be 5-10% slower than MINIX 2 is
    > > that "the ACK compiler is faster than gcc but the code is worse".

    >
    > I think that means the output of ACK is faster, not it's speed of
    > compilation but the source code for MINIX 3 is "worse" (not as optimized)
    > so compliling the MINIX 3 souce under gcc would be even slower.
    >
    > Benchmarking gcc vs. ACK should be easy enough.
    >
    > 3ch


    I was puzzled that why Minix is compiled with ACK otherwise gcc. After
    all, gcc is more widely used than ACK.

  8. Re: Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC

    Rui Maciel wrote:
    > On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 09:58:57 +0000, J.F. de Smit wrote:


    >> Without a lot of modifications, this is unlikely to work. Minix was
    >> written with the ACK compiler in mind, and especially some of the more
    >> intricate stuff is quite compiler dependent.


    > What stuff forces MINIX 3 to be compiler-dependent. I've searched
    > minix3.org and have come up empty.


    IIRC, ACK and GCC assembly don't see eye to eye, so you need to compile
    the assembler files using ACK. You can't feed ACK and GCC object files to
    the same linker, so you need to compile the kernel with ACK, at the very
    least.

    >> The question is: why do you want to compile Minix using gcc?


    > The Minix3 FAQ section "What is the performance of MINIX 3 like" states
    > one of the reasons that causes MINIX 3 to be 5-10% slower than MINIX 2 is
    > that "the ACK compiler is faster than gcc but the code is worse".


    Okay, that's pretty nice reason. I would be interested to see what exactly
    needs to be done to compile the Minix internals on GCC and get everything
    to work.

    Regards,

    Jens

    --
    Jens de Smit
    Student Computer Science | Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
    jfdsmit@few.vu.nl | http://www.few.vu.nl/~jfdsmit
    "[In the end, people] get furious at IT that the goddamn magic isn't working"
    -- Stewart Dean

  9. Re: Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC

    fetag wrote:
    > I was puzzled that why Minix is compiled with ACK otherwise gcc. After
    > all, gcc is more widely used than ACK.


    The release of Minix 1.1 (the version that came with the first book)
    happened in the same year that the first beta of GCC got released, and GCC
    then only ran on the Motorola 68k family, not on the x86. Since then,
    Minix and ACK have been intertwined and no amount of GCC adoption has
    changed that as of yet.

    Regards,

    Jens

    --
    Jens de Smit
    Student Computer Science | Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
    jfdsmit@few.vu.nl | http://www.few.vu.nl/~jfdsmit
    "[In the end, people] get furious at IT that the goddamn magic isn't working"
    -- Stewart Dean

  10. Re: Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC

    On Oct 3, 7:45*pm, nood...@gmail.com wrote:
    > Has anyone ever done such a thing? I need help doing so!


    Hi,
    I've been working on a project where I'm trying to compile Minix using
    gcc/nasm and boot using grub -
    Please check out svn checkout http://powerpack.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/
    powerpack-read-only
    Regards,
    Kashyap

  11. Re: Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC

    En news:gccj2k$slu$2@star.cs.vu.nl, J.F. de Smit va escriure:
    > fetag wrote:
    >> I was puzzled that why Minix is compiled with ACK otherwise gcc.
    >> After all, gcc is more widely used than ACK.

    >
    > The release of Minix 1.1 (the version that came with the first book)
    > happened in the same year that the first beta of GCC got released,
    > and GCC then only ran on the Motorola 68k family, not on the x86.


    True. Furthermore, as far as I know no version of GCC did target x86-16 aka
    8086 aka i86, i.e. the initial target of Minix (despite it being abandonned
    for Minix3).


    Antoine


  12. Re: Compling Minix book version 2.0 with GCC

    On 10月7日, 下午5时28分, kashyap wrote:
    > On Oct 3, 7:45 pm, nood...@gmail.com wrote:
    >
    > > Has anyone ever done such a thing? I need help doing so!

    >
    > Hi,
    > I've been working on a project where I'm trying to compile Minix using
    > gcc/nasm and boot using grub -
    > Please check out svn checkouthttp://powerpack.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/
    > powerpack-read-only
    > Regards,
    > Kashyap


    GOOD JOB !

    BTW: Which version of Minix did you use to compile by gcc ? Have you
    succeed ? If possible, I think, you'd better write a article about how
    to build a envoriment, it will be very useful. ^_^

    Best Regards!

    Shouwei

+ Reply to Thread