On Mon, 9 Dec 1996 18:58:12 -0600 (CST), "The Great Mr. Kurtz [David A. =
Gatwood]" <davagatw@Mars.utm.edU> wrote:
> Well, since the Mach Microkernel is evidently based on a code base similar
> to the BSD's, that could make things easier.

*grrr* The mk is not based on BSD code, except for some drivers and assembly =
snippets.  The BSD OS server is.  Are you sure you are not confusing the =
two?  It's not like it is incredibly easy to discern the two in Mach-UX.

> That was what I was thinking, especially some of the stuff that's a pain
> to write....  Like the Assembly Language code.  :-)

You will not get around the assembly portion.  Learn it, use it, and then =
get a life. ;-)

> > Well, you don't need a second booting partition to use the multi-server
> > part of mach.  You can run it off a zip untill it out grow that.  Just
>=20
> Right.  EZ135.  Same dif.

Aha.  And you are accessing the ZIP from the Mach mk how? ;-)  Oh, you are =
saying you have boot blocks that don't care and load anything from any SCSI =
device? ;-)

You can't get there from here.  At least not non-stop.  Start with something =
simple like a boot block which loads Mach-O or a.out and runs it.  That is =
more than enough to mess with the Mach mk. =20

Then, integrate a Minix fs, or similiar cheap-o-filesystem.  No point in =
wasting time on funky filesystems while none of the rest of the kernel is =
working.  You will not be able to use the fs from the kernel for a long time =
anyway.=20

Burning the kernel onto the disk, with a stupid boot block loader is the =
best way to start, IMHO.

--
Christian Kuhtz          kuhtz@ix.netcom.com - hm, ckuhtz@paranet.com - wk=20=

Network/UNIX Specialist      BOYCOTT INTERNET SPAM http://www.vix.com/spam
Paranet, Inc.                                      http://www.paranet.com/