Show HN: My self-written hobby OS is finally running on my vintage IBM ThinkPad

2 days ago (github.com)

Finally got my hobby OS up and running on real hardware. I love the old IBM thinkpads, so thought it was the perfect machine to get it working on. Been working on it for quite some time now, but this has been a big milestone!

These things are way better to see than stupid AI. It’s not going to “sell”, but it’s a tech person being creative and doing their craft.

I used to study a lot of hobbyist OS development in my late teens. It was awesome, I still try doing small kernels from time to time (last one was a RISCV small kernel that printed a message to my partner).

  • Thanks! It’s really liberating not having to worry about selling, marketing etc. Only reinvent the wheel till new ideas come. :D

    • I did that all my life: no unicorns but if you do enough things, some will sell auto (once any traction happens I sell: I don't like running a company, I like building stuff). Without all this stress and grifting. Granted, I was lucky that my hobby in 2000 turned out to be worth millions, but it still works fine 25 years later.

  • It's weird to characterize ai categorically as "stupid" when, until it was wrapped with clever UX, it was an entirely academic pursuit (craft), with little to no money in it.

  • little hobby gadgets much more interesting than the most ridiculous technology in human history

This is great! What would you do differently if you started again today? What are your thoughts on language suitability for the lower level parts (ie. Sticking to c or a simple subset of c++ or any of the newer languages)?

Given the myriad of resources available, how did you manage to keep the project engaging rather than copying others people code?

  • Thanks for the feedback! I think the biggest thing I’d do different is to have a plan. I just started out with the goal of doing the basic hello world OS, and that’s it. But then I kept adding new things, adding more and more working on multiple things at the same time. Which has lead to some technical debt I’m still trying to fix. I’d also try to be less UNIX dependent.

    Regarding language, I love C for its basic syntax and “straight to the point” style. Maybe I’d consider some other languages for userspace applications.

    A goal for me from the start was always that I wanted to write everything myself, no porting of any software, and for me that’s the entire point of the project. I mostly adhered to the rule of copy ideas not code.

    • I'm not sure it's a bad thing to not necessarily have a plan. Intuition is the hidden sister of logic, both children of reason, and we don't always see her because she's often behind the scenes doing all the work.

      Technical debt is as sure as death and taxes. Good software grows over time, like a person growing up. Sometimes you have parts that are needed for a time but not permanently, like baby teeth. That's what technical debt is like.

      Other times there are parts that are absolutely ideal long term, but it's a long time before they even make sense. And sometimes things only develop much later than we expect, like wisdom teeth. These are software features that won't make sense until you write the thing that you don't realize yet is only temporary.

      I have the same goal of writing everything myself from scratch. It's a very important goal to me for a reason I don't fully understand yet.

      Congrats on writing an entire OS, and getting it booting on real hardware! That must be such a rewarding feeling in its own right, even if no one understood how. And it looks so very cool.

      You've given me more motivation to announce my project soon. Maybe next week. Thanks.

      Have you played around with Zig yet? I hear that would be a good replacement for C here. Did you have any thoughts on porting your OS to that, or did you have any branches some Zig code made its way into?

      1 reply →

    • Regarding a plan, I often feel the same way about my own project. There are a number of systems I've rewritten multiple times, and I can't help but think much of that would have been unnecessary if I had been more tedious about diagramming out my needs and requirements beforehand. Other times I wonder if I would have gotten this far had I planned things out... It's the age old question of "would I have started this project if I had known how much time and effort it would have taken?"

      Each approach has a clear set of pros and cons, as others have explored in this thread. In the end, I think what ultimately matters is whether we're satisfied (and proud) of a project after a significant amount of progress has been made.

      I also took the "I want to write everything myself" approach with my project since I wanted it to be a demonstration of my abilities. I wanted to prove to myself and others I could create a project of significant size and scope. It seems like this often means working without libraries and having to reinvent the wheel over and over again. It's tedious, but it certainly adds to the satisfaction you get as you look over your work and think "this is truly mine; I did this."

      And yes, copy ideas, not code, is one of those things I do my best to adhere to. Sometimes, at least with JS, you run into problems, look into solutions, and it turns out there's really only one sensible way to do something; what you end up writing feels like a boilerplate solution to the problem. I often find myself going back and forth through search results from places like Stack Overflow and trying to siphon out the best techniques and ideas from multiple examples to mesh together into some usable code in a style I prefer.

      Finally, since I failed to say this eariler, congrats on your project! I'm gonna have to try it out as soon as I get some extra time.

    • I'd like to second the mention of plan vs. no plan.

      Having no plan is often better when you're facing a deep pit of work, pick at it every now and again, whatever you feel like working on that day.

      vs. having a clear Todo list that is longer than a DNA chain and just giving on it after item 5 because 6 is boring.

      Oh, and congrats, looks great.

      4 replies →

    • Curious about the less UNIX dependent part - did you find the UNIX model (everything is a file - or more accurately everything is a serial connection) to be a poor abstraction for a hobby OS?

      1 reply →

I think the default system font should be a more condensed variant; it would make the system look much more refined. There are a number of areas where it's clear you need more horizontal space for characters. Each character should have less width, and there should be as little space between the characters as possible - just a single pixel ought to be enough at the font size and resolution you're using.

I don't know anything about your font system; I'm assuming it's fixed width bitmap fonts? I don't know how hard it would be to make these changes within your codebase so if it's too much work then don't worry about it.

I've been building a web OS site from scratch for a while now (not as technically impressive as what you're doing) and I just got through a total rewrite of the font classes, so it's at the top of my mind.

  • I agree my current font is very sub optimal. It’s basically still the original font I got working when I started out. I have looked into rendering proper fonts, so it’s on my todo list. Just have been neglecting it.

    • I had the same problem, I made a 3x4 font that was just barely servicable for the initial project to show text on screen. It was my first (and only) font I ever made! Eventually I needed lower-case, so I turned those into lower-case and made a 3x5 variant for uppercase. It's still not ideal, and I'm sure when I announce my project, people will complain about it. So I've prepared to say "it's a stop-gap solution to make the OS servicable, but we can make more fonts."

      I think people skimming a project often just don't quite get how much we pour into our projects, and how very much it cost us. But it's okay, they don't have to understand just how cool it is what we made. At least we know.

      When I saw your video of your project, I was thinking to myself, "wow, that's incredibly cool, and I can relate to the steps he's doing!" Just trying to be the voice here of someone who thought that way, in case there are no others.

      1 reply →

    • One can really get bogged down in fonts. (-:

      http://jdebp.uk./Softwares/nosh/guide/terminal-resources.htm...

      If you want a quick improvement over that 8by8 IBM ROM font, I suggest two things:

      1. Switch to a 16by16 square.

      2. For the ASCII range, go with one of the old home computer fonts, rather than IBM ROMs. Viznut has .hex files for Commodore PET and BBC Micro graphics modes squirrelled away inside Unscii.

      I've done the work of upscaling the 8by8 PET font to 16by16, and it works quite nicely as a monospace square font. These old home computer fonts were of course designed to. Whereas in the world of VGA you're soon in trouble with glyphs designed for 9by16.

      2 replies →

    • Supporting variable-width fonts is pretty easy on its own (if bit-packing, you might wish to store them vertically), but does complicate combining characters (remember, they go in different places and may need to make the new character larger).

      For vector fonts, the interesting question is "if I render this at a different resolution and then scale it, will it line up?" which fundamentally has no answer that can satisfy everyone. Most other difficulties are merely a Small Matter of Coding (and providing appropriate APIs).

      2 replies →

  • Tough crowd!

    - “Look, I wrote an operating system!”

    - “Meh the font is weak”

    Peak HN IMO :D

    • The fact that the OP built an entire hobby OS complete enough to have windowing and font rendering, and got it booting off his vintage notebook, is extremely impressive, and much more so than the ChatGPT frontends and Chrome reskins that HN usually enthusiastically updoots.

    • The power of the crowd compells you.

      The power of the crowd compells you.

      The power of the crowd compells you.

Congrats! Looks great coming from someone who had a Commodore PET 2001 in 1977. I have been toying with KolibriOS and MenuetOSx64, but I would sure like to try rolling my own OS. You did it! Keep truckin'!

Just adding this comment to say congratulations and how impressed I am by your project! I've been an OS Dev fan since my teens and it feels great to see this achievement come to life. I am a little curious to know how the graphics subsystem is initialized. I wish you the best of success.

Hi, I'm in this field about decades and trying to learn OS development. I've an idea of FASM, NASM, FASM-G. But I need to study the output of assembler program. So I can understand how the OS is actually works in the binary level. Do you learned opcodes for the particular architecture? What did you for device driver programs? Can you please list out the steps to develop my own OS.

  • I think the two best places to learn about it is the osdev forum and osdev wiki. There are so many useful resources to get you started there.

    There are some tutorials out there too, but a lot of them have bugs and you basically recreate their OS.

    Regarding studying opcodes, I never went that deep, closest I got was looking them up for my C compiler, so I know the most common basic ones.

    https://forum.osdev.org/ https://wiki.osdev.org/Expanded_Main_Page

    • An x86 disassembler is not that hard, as long as you stick to a single mode and ignore the SIMD alphabet soup.

      You have a short loop that scans through the prefixes, checks for a REX prefix (if you handle 64-bit mode), reads the opcode (1-3 bytes), reads the MOD/RM byte if there is one (use a table lookup), reads the SIB byte if there is one (table), reads offset if there is one (table), reads immediate if there is one (table).

      It's probably easiest if you use an "expanded/normalized" opcode internally so the 1-3 opcode bytes + the 3 extra bits from some MOD/RM bytes + prefix info (for certain SIMD instructions) map to a single 16-bit opcode (likely around a couple hundred to a thousand opcodes in total).

      You have a table that maps those to mnemonics + operand info. You have some tables that map 0-7 (or 0-15) to AL/AH/... and AX/BX/CX/... and CS/DS/ES/... and various system registers.

      Not that much code all in all. Several tables. You can squeeze them and bit pack them to your heart's content if you want.

      Once you have that, a simple assembler isn't so hard.

That is so awesome! I'd really like to see more people bringing back the spirit of early computing with much more tinkering at the computer rather than app level.

I've been thinking about doing a long term hobby project of creating a personal computer - one where I create the entire software stack myself and can know the provenance of every bit that goes into the system (though I can't do the same with the hardware, unless I can get enough performance out of an FPGA to run everything on it).

Until now it seemed unrealistic but you proved it's possible! And looks like you're even implementing a hobby C compiler: https://github.com/joexbayer/C-Compiler

  • Thanks! Yes, knowing that you’ve written everything from high up in userspace down to the drivers is a great feeling! But also a debugging hell…

    The C compiler is built for the OS, and works inside it. The project became just so big that I wanted to take it out of the OS repo. Especially because it works on Linux too.

Could you elaborate on how this compiler interacts with the operating system? Specifically, how does it handle features like structs, and what are the current limitations or planned enhancements in this area?

  • There is no magic interaction between the compiler and OS. It simples compiles to the same machine code (i386) and uses interrupts for system calls. Structs are handled as a memory region with a size based on its members, and the member access is simply an offset into that region.

    Current it has lots of limitations such as only int and char, no switch statements etc. The biggest change from default C, is allowing functions in structs and implicit passing a struct to a function if it’s a struct function. You can read more here:

    https://github.com/joexbayer/C-Compiler

Easily one of the most impressive passion projects I've seen here in a long time. Out of curiosity, why did you opt to write your own C compiler?

  • Had a rule for myself that I wanted to write everything myself, and it had always been a “goal” of mine to build one. So it just kinda fit together

    • Really worthwhile goal no matter what anybody says :)

      Did a little testing myself.

      Tried it on some bare metal, looks pretty good.

      There were two phases, wouldn't fit in a single comment.

      Wrote RetrOS-32.img to a blank SSD and it boots in CSM/Legacy mode.

      That's a nice milestone right there :)

      This was on a tiny Lenovo desktop about as old as an x240. These are low-power, run on the same Thinkpad A/C adapter, so there are some similarities to a laptop.

      But the cursor wasn't very responsive and wouldn't come down below the very top rows either so could not sign in. Using mainstream wired mouse & kybd. (The PC has 8GB memory, in the login box it showed the nominal 15mb, but extended memory was a negative number, about 8GB itself.)

      Then I remembered things like the x240 often have a touchpad that is recognized as a PS/2 mouse, not USB. Moved the SSD to an old tower that has a PS/2 mouse and kybd and then could sign on. Cursor was still quite a bit sluggish, but it worked. This one has 12GB memory and the reported extended was about 464mb so it looked realistic in the login box.

      It boots! It works nominally! It's some kind of Golden IMG already, so congratulations!

      Back at the Lenovo I do boot to DOS from time to time, and I enable Legacy USB in the BIOS so I can use the USB mouse for DOS which had no concept of USB. After booting DOS, if I want to use the mouse I still have to load DOS mouse drivers, just like the 1980's but this firmware setting fools the old pre-USB DOS mouse driver so it will handle the USB mouse & kybd that people are using now. This setting has been there for ages since the PS/2 sockets on PC's started becoming scarce. Checked the BIOS, and Legacy USB was enabled the whole time.

      However, on this Lenovo there was an additional setting, for "USB Virtual KBC Support". I don't know if I ever saw this along with Legacy USB settings in one BIOS, up to now would have assumed they were both the same thing but using different terminology. This setting was not only disabled by default, the text says this one auto-disables once an XHCI driver has been loaded. Then definitely found it to auto-disable after booting Windows.

      Enabled Virtual KBC, booted to RetrOS and the USB mouse could log in. More sluggish cursor than on the PS/2 machine though.

      Plus there were some untyped characters that would sometimes appear when logging in, or admin would duplicate itself so username said adminadmin after you typed in the password below.

      Still has a huge negative number in the login box for extended mem, that was not a show-stopper, mem appears normal when looking at the system stats once logged in.

      I would now imagine this Virtual KBC setting emulates how mouse & kybd are presented to a VM?

      Interesting finding that DOS does not require this setting for a USB mouse to work on bare metal, but RetrOS does.

      Have not put it through its paces thoroughly, focusing on the bare metal aspect.

      3 replies →

Looks great! I wanted to try it on my old 2010 computer but I can't find it anymore... these days things are always getting rid of old stuff, keep it up!

Is there any chance of booting this on a raspberry pi someday?

I'd love a non-linux minimal single-user OS that boots in <1 second

It's interesting that a few of these projects seem to be reaching milestones at the same time. It's reassuring to see that there are people out there who are still working on this deep of a level with computers and sharing their results with us.

Rock on!

Amazing work! I tried a few years ago to write my own OS, seeing what you have achieved is very impressive and inspiring. Congrats!

  • Thanks! I’d encourage you to continue! Took alot of breaks myself, but chipping away at it is really rewarding.

Nice! I was just thinking about an old eee pc I have somewhere and how I might revive it. What's the performance like?

  • I have an old eee pc myself! Tested it on that one too, performance is alright, not really optimized but since it’s so “basic” compared to real OSes it should be quite fast. Bigger problems are bugs and lack of functionality for real hardware. (Userspace applications are only available on the QEMU images.

Congrats on running on real hardware, rather than something like qemu!

I'd love to see more of this - eventually there will be some new OS concept, as opposed to everything just being a rehash of the same old ideas from the 1970s. (For reference, the VAX 11/780 was announced in 1977, and we run on fundamentally the same model of hardware today. Nothing particularly exciting or different than VMS or UNIX is being used in today's operating systems.)

An example of a radically different way to think is TempleOS.

Great job! How did you get started in this ? Seems like a lot to figure out on your own

  • It started after finishing the operating systems class in university. The class was really “on rails” and I wanted to do my own thing.

I wish I could spare time like this to work passion projects.

Forget practicality.

Forget "go to market" strategy.

Forget target fit.

Just build and learn.

  • Yeah! It’s really refreshing, not having to think about it actually being “used” or the market. Simply just for fun and learning.

  • Out of curiosity, why can’t you spare time? I’d be pretty lost without my hobby projects (one of them was a toy OS, but that stopped when low level OS development became my actual job), ever since I was a kid.

Will it be big and professional like GNU? :)

  • Oh I doubt that, probably will never be even close. But, it was never the goal to create a “real” product. Just a hobby project for myself to tinker with.

    • Great, good luck :) It was a reference to the original Linux announcement in 1991,

      > I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu)

      1 reply →

been messing with old laptops myself so i get it - hitting a milestone like this feels way better when its your own code running for real

Congrats on hitting the milestone! This is exactly the kind of work I want to see on HN: passion projects just for the sake of making something, not advertisements, market news, or AI bullshit.

Let me guess, you're trying to dethrone Microsoft, aren't you?! Well, good luck with that!

Just kidding. This is really impressive.

There are two types of people that I think of as gods: drummers (but not the bad ones) and OS developers (even the bad ones).

Congrats!

Oh this is cool! I have a couple of 386/486 machines that would be fun to test on.

Are you planning on cardbus/pcmcia support and wifi?

  • WiFi is definitely on my todo list! Already have written some C WiFi code, just need to find time to writer the driver.

I think you could easily give the UI a refresh, modernize it a bit :)

  • Oh I’d love to, but good UI is apparently my biggest weakness. I’ve rewritten it so many times. And I’m probably gonna rewrite it soon again.