> Redox is a Unix-like microkernel operating system written in the programming language Rust, which has a focus on safety, stability, and performance. [4][5][6] Redox aims to be secure, usable, and free.
Linux was NEVER a fork of MINIX. That is just false. Linus developed Linux in response to the experience he had with MINIX - but there is no MINIX code in Linux and never was.
"Eric Raymond claimed that Linus hasn't actually written Linux from scratch, but rather reused source code of MINIX itself to have working codebase. As the development progressed, MINIX code was gradually phased out completely."
"Linus Torvalds (http://www.tuxedo.org/˜esr/faqs/linus), for example, didn’t actually try to write Linux from scratch. Instead, he started by reusing code and ideas from Minix, a tiny Unix-like operating system for PC clones. Eventually all the Minix code went away or was completely rewritten—but while it was there, it provided scaffolding for the infant that would eventually become Linux."
I was there. I watched Linux from the beginning, including the minix-list discussions.
The only thing Linus 'copied' (rather, modelled) was the initial directory tree layout and some of the names of the core module filenames - none of the code.
Linus was interested in MINIX, no question - and motivated to write his own kernel - but he literally did not fork MINIX.
In "History of Linux" this falsehood is addressed - and it has to be said is amazing that you are parroting even still today:
Fork: take the existing code, make your own version and start modifying. That does not apply here.
Torvalds did not take any Minix code; one of the reasons he did his own was that the licence agreement on Minix prevented distribution of modified versions. At the time Freax/Linux got started, people were distributing patch sets to Minix to add 286 memory management, 386 handling and so on, because they could not distribute modified versions.
The Linux kernel started out as 100% new original code. I was there; I watched the mailing lists and the USEnet posts as it happened. It's the year I started paying for my own personal online account and email, after 4Y in the industry.
The origins of Torvalds' kernel were as a homegrown terminal emulator. He wanted it to be able to do downloads in the background while he worked in a different terminal session. This required timeslicing. He tried and found it was complicated, so he started implementing a very simple little program that time-sliced between 2 tasks, one printing "AAAAAA..." to the console and the other printing "BBBBB..."
This is all documented history, which it seems you have not read.
You are wrong.
Furthermore:
> including the regression to a macrokernel.
This indicates that you are not aware of the differences between Minix 1, 2 and 3.
Minix 3 (2005) is a microkernel.
Minix 1 (1987) was not and does not support an MMU. It runs on the 8086 and 68000 among other things.
Linux (1991) was originally a native 80386 OS, the first x86-32 device and a chip that was not yet on sale the year that Minix 1 was first published.
Summary:
Linux is not a fork of Minix and is unrelated to Minix code.
You've got that reversed. IME runs MINIX now, it used to run on ThreadX.
Linux (1991) started as a fork of MINIX (1987) by Tanenbaum.
History of Linux: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Linux
MINIX: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minix
Redox OS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redox_(operating_system) :
> Redox is a Unix-like microkernel operating system written in the programming language Rust, which has a focus on safety, stability, and performance. [4][5][6] Redox aims to be secure, usable, and free.
Linux was NEVER a fork of MINIX. That is just false. Linus developed Linux in response to the experience he had with MINIX - but there is no MINIX code in Linux and never was.
> Linus developed Linux in response to the experience he had with MINIX - but there is no MINIX code in Linux and never was.
For the last statement, Wikipedia disagrees:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Minix&oldid=11846...
"Eric Raymond claimed that Linus hasn't actually written Linux from scratch, but rather reused source code of MINIX itself to have working codebase. As the development progressed, MINIX code was gradually phased out completely."
quoting "The Cathedral and the Bazaar"
> https://monoskop.org/images/e/e0/Raymond_Eric_S_The_Cathedra...
for this statement. On p. 24 you can read:
"Linus Torvalds (http://www.tuxedo.org/˜esr/faqs/linus), for example, didn’t actually try to write Linux from scratch. Instead, he started by reusing code and ideas from Minix, a tiny Unix-like operating system for PC clones. Eventually all the Minix code went away or was completely rewritten—but while it was there, it provided scaffolding for the infant that would eventually become Linux."
I was there. I watched Linux from the beginning, including the minix-list discussions.
The only thing Linus 'copied' (rather, modelled) was the initial directory tree layout and some of the names of the core module filenames - none of the code.
Linus was interested in MINIX, no question - and motivated to write his own kernel - but he literally did not fork MINIX.
In "History of Linux" this falsehood is addressed - and it has to be said is amazing that you are parroting even still today:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Linux
I challenge you to find the code, from MINIX, that Linus copied and then modified and called it Linux. This is what forking means.
> Linux (1991) started as a fork of MINIX (1987) by Tanenbaum.
That is not true and never was.
It was in part bootstrapped on Minix but it contains no Minix code at all and was built with GNU tools.
No, that's definitely a fork (or a clone); fairly with significant differences, including the regression to a macrokernel.
That the MINIX code was replaced before release does not make it not a fork.
Nope.
Fork: take the existing code, make your own version and start modifying. That does not apply here.
Torvalds did not take any Minix code; one of the reasons he did his own was that the licence agreement on Minix prevented distribution of modified versions. At the time Freax/Linux got started, people were distributing patch sets to Minix to add 286 memory management, 386 handling and so on, because they could not distribute modified versions.
The Linux kernel started out as 100% new original code. I was there; I watched the mailing lists and the USEnet posts as it happened. It's the year I started paying for my own personal online account and email, after 4Y in the industry.
The origins of Torvalds' kernel were as a homegrown terminal emulator. He wanted it to be able to do downloads in the background while he worked in a different terminal session. This required timeslicing. He tried and found it was complicated, so he started implementing a very simple little program that time-sliced between 2 tasks, one printing "AAAAAA..." to the console and the other printing "BBBBB..."
This is all documented history, which it seems you have not read.
You are wrong.
Furthermore:
> including the regression to a macrokernel.
This indicates that you are not aware of the differences between Minix 1, 2 and 3.
Minix 3 (2005) is a microkernel.
Minix 1 (1987) was not and does not support an MMU. It runs on the 8086 and 68000 among other things.
Linux (1991) was originally a native 80386 OS, the first x86-32 device and a chip that was not yet on sale the year that Minix 1 was first published.
Summary:
Linux is not a fork of Minix and is unrelated to Minix code.
Intel Management Engine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine