From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 23:17:30 -0400 From: plan9@sigint.cs.purdue.edu To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] new compilers Message-ID: <20060403031730.GA20418@sigint.cs.purdue.edu> References: <200604021817.k32IHO4U011991@skeeve.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Topicbox-Message-UUID: 2c4d5ec6-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 09:47:03PM +0200, lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote: > > I wasn't paying attention to the public debate at the time and even > managed not to notice the micro-kernel/monolythic-kernel controversy, > but I have a pretty clear recollection that the licencing for Minix > was dictated by McGraw-Hill, the publishers of the Minix book, rather > than Tanenbaum himself. The publisher was Prentice Hall, not that anyone really cares.