On Apr 3, 5:55, Tim Shoppa wrote:
> > Yes to all of those, though there are three standard recording densities
> > (80bpi, 1600bpi, 6250bpi) and several recording methods (NRZ, NRZI, PE,
etc).
>
> But in the 9-track world at least, 800 BPI was always NRZI, 1600 BPI
> (and 3200 BPI) was always PE, and 6250 BPI was always a specific type
> of GCR.
Yes, I didn't mean to imply you could have any mixture. It's always irritated
me that I can't read 800bpi tapes on my 1600bpi drive simply because it doesn't
have the (optional) NRZI board.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id GAA19782
for pups-liszt; Sat, 4 Apr 1998 06:30:31 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From "Steven M. Schultz" <sms(a)moe.2bsd.com> Sat Apr 4 06:28:54 1998
Received: from moe.2bsd.com (0(a)MOE.2BSD.COM [206.139.202.200])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA19776
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Sat, 4 Apr 1998 06:30:24 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from sms@localhost)
by moe.2bsd.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA25193;
Fri, 3 Apr 1998 12:28:54 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 12:28:54 -0800 (PST)
From: "Steven M. Schultz" <sms(a)moe.2bsd.com>
Message-Id: <199804032028.MAA25193(a)moe.2bsd.com>
To: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au, shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca
Subject: Re: Bug in Bob Supnik's Emulator!
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
Tim -
> From: Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
> On a cow orker's 200 MHz Pentium Pro, Bob Supnik's emulator (compiled
He's in the "dairy business"? :-) :-)
> with gcc and running under Linux) is about twice as fast as a real
> 11/73 for most CPU-intensive operations. Speeds for I/O based
> operations can range from incredibly faster to incredibly slower
Ok - I finally got around to retrying Bob's emulator. This is using
gcc 2.8.1 under BSD/OS 3.1 with a PPro 200 and the Dhrystone 2.1 (C
language version) program.
Running under the emulator I get 555 dhrystones/second. On a real
11/73 I see 664 dhrystones/sec.
I/O operations are faster but I suspect a some of that is
due to Ultra-Wide Barracuda drives vs. HP 3724 and an Emulex UC08.
> than a real -11, of course, and a lot of the interrupt and device
> priority schemes seem seriously out of whack with how a real PDP-11
The line frequency clock seems to be acting strange. When running
the dhrystone program I see:
Measured time too small to obtain meaningful results
Please increase number of runs
EVEN THOUGH the (wall clock) run time for 20000 dhrystones was 36
seconds.
> The same emulator running on a 7-year-old 133 MHz DEC Alpha is about
I recall when the DEC rep here brought in one of the first 150mhz
Alpha systems. Thought it was awesome that a machine could do a
3 phase build of GCC in about 1 hour. Ummm, today a PPro can do it
in about 15 or 20 minutes ;)
Other benchmarks of possible interest:
A recompile of the 2.11BSD C compiler:
11/44 9min 20sec
11/73 9min 33sec
11/93 6min 43sec
emulated PDP-11 5min 25sec (BUT the 'time' reported with "time make" was 10min
4 sec)
the 44 and 73 are suprisingly close because the 44 was hobbled with
RA81s on a UDA50 while the 73 had a HP3724S on Emulex UC08. Alas,
the RA81 died so I no longer have a 44 to test with (until I get a RA9x
or something myself since the support department refused to do it).
Interesting that the emulated one is faster on this test even though
the dhrystone rating is about 20% slower.
Steven
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA22011
for pups-liszt; Sat, 4 Apr 1998 23:40:52 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Johnny Billquist <bqt(a)minsk.docs.uu.se> Sat Apr 4 23:40:02 1998
Received: from Radha.DoCS.UU.SE (Radha.DoCS.UU.SE [130.238.9.99])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id XAA22006
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Sat, 4 Apr 1998 23:40:41 +1000 (EST)
Received: from Minsk.DoCS.UU.SE (bqt(a)Minsk.DoCS.UU.SE [130.238.9.30]) by Radha.DoCS.UU.SE (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA10577; Sat, 4 Apr 1998 15:40:05 +0200
Received: from localhost by Minsk.DoCS.UU.SE (Sun-4/630, SunOS 4.1.2)
with sendmail 5.61-bind 1.5+ida/ICU/DoCS id AA15396; Sat, 4 Apr 98 15:40:03 +0200
Date: Sat, 4 Apr 1998 15:40:02 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Johnny Billquist <bqt(a)minsk.docs.uu.se>
To: wkt(a)cs.adfa.oz.au
Cc: PDP Unix Preservation <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Re: Sunchip package [was Assember in C?]
In-Reply-To: <199803172059.HAA01365(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.95q.980404153822.15388A-100000(a)Minsk.DoCS.UU.SE>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
> > > P.S. As I suspected and feared,
> >
> > % diff -r Trees/V7/usr/src/cmd/c Xinu/src/cmd/cc11
> >
> > indicates the C compiler provided in all these archives (Xinu,
> > CHIP, sunCHIP) are directly derived from the V6/V7 compiler.
>
> So is the DECUS C compiler, I hear. Is there any native C compiler
> for the PDP-11 which isn't derived from V6/V7?
Well, the obvious answer is DEC's (nowadays MENTEC's) own ANSI C
compiler, which runs under RSX and RSTS/e (not sure about RT-11
though...)
Johnny
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
CS student at Uppsala University || on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt(a)minsk.docs.uu.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id FAA22903
for pups-liszt; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 05:16:13 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca> Sun Apr 5 05:16:02 1998
Received: from alph02.triumf.ca (alph02.Triumf.CA [142.90.114.18])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id FAA22898
for <pups(a)minnie.CS.ADFA.OZ.au>; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 05:16:07 +1000 (EST)
Received: by alph02.triumf.ca; id AA21693; Sat, 4 Apr 1998 11:16:03 -0800
From: Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
Message-Id: <9804041916.AA21693(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
Subject: Re: Sunchip package [was Assember in C?]
To: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Date: Sat, 4 Apr 1998 11:16:02 -0800 (PST)
Cc: shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.95q.980404153822.15388A-100000(a)Minsk.DoCS.UU.SE> from "Johnny Billquist" at Apr 4, 98 03:40:02 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
> > So is the DECUS C compiler, I hear. Is there any native C compiler
> > for the PDP-11 which isn't derived from V6/V7?
>
> Well, the obvious answer is DEC's (nowadays MENTEC's) own ANSI C
> compiler, which runs under RSX and RSTS/e (not sure about RT-11
> though...)
Yes, it does run under RT-11 (that's the only version I've used.)
But I've no idea of the lineage of that particular compiler - it wouldn't
surprise me to find out that it was derived from V6/V7 in some way.
(Though clearly with entirely new run-time libraries.)
As long as we're on the subject: has anyone succesfully cross-compiled
using 'gcc' on some non-11 platform to produce PDP-11 object code, which
they than succesfully ran? While the compiler seems to work fine, I've
run into confusion when trying to use the *.h files from 2.11BSD to
do something useful.
Tim. (shoppa(a)triumf.ca)
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id GAA23137
for pups-liszt; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 06:43:45 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca> Sun Apr 5 06:43:25 1998
Received: from alph02.triumf.ca (alph02.Triumf.CA [142.90.114.18])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id GAA23132
for <pups(a)minnie.CS.ADFA.OZ.au>; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 06:43:40 +1000 (EST)
Received: by alph02.triumf.ca; id AA19446; Sat, 4 Apr 1998 12:43:25 -0800
From: Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
Message-Id: <9804042043.AA19446(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
Subject: Re: Bug in Bob Supnik's Emulator!
To: sms(a)moe.2bsd.com (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Sat, 4 Apr 1998 12:43:25 -0800 (PST)
Cc: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
In-Reply-To: <199804032028.MAA25193(a)moe.2bsd.com> from "Steven M. Schultz" at Apr 3, 98 12:28:54 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
> > with gcc and running under Linux) is about twice as fast as a real
> > 11/73 for most CPU-intensive operations. Speeds for I/O based
> > operations can range from incredibly faster to incredibly slower
>
> Ok - I finally got around to retrying Bob's emulator. This is using
> gcc 2.8.1 under BSD/OS 3.1 with a PPro 200 and the Dhrystone 2.1 (C
> language version) program.
>
> Running under the emulator I get 555 dhrystones/second. On a real
> 11/73 I see 664 dhrystones/sec.
I suspect that the emulator will be quite slow on any math-heavy
benchmark - and your observations confirm this. Doesn't Bob's
emulator do the FP operations by converting everything to IEEE
and back for each and every operand?
> > than a real -11, of course, and a lot of the interrupt and device
> > priority schemes seem seriously out of whack with how a real PDP-11
>
> The line frequency clock seems to be acting strange. When running
> the dhrystone program I see:
>
> Measured time too small to obtain meaningful results
> Please increase number of runs
>
> EVEN THOUGH the (wall clock) run time for 20000 dhrystones was 36
> seconds.
On my cow-oreker's Pentium Pro, the line-time clock under Bob's emulator
appears to work fine, but it "misses" a lot of ticks when running on
my 7-year-old Alpha. I've never looked at the logic to figure out exactly
what is going on, but I suspect that I couldn't emulate the interrupt/
priority structure any better than Bob's already done!
> Other benchmarks of possible interest:
>
> A recompile of the 2.11BSD C compiler:
>
> 11/44 9min 20sec
> 11/73 9min 33sec
> 11/93 6min 43sec
> emulated PDP-11 5min 25sec
For most "real" PDP-11 emulation uses this is probably a more realistic
benchark than the Dhrystone. I know lots of currently-being-used-and-
maintained PDP-11 applications, and none of them are heavy on FP - all
the FP-specific stuff got migrated to a faster machine the instant
the faster machine became available. (You'd be amazed at the awful
machines that I've seen people use *just* because it did their integral
faster. Farms of I860's and I960's were the rage a couple of years ago,
and boy was that an icky development platform.)
> (BUT the 'time' reported with "time make" was 10min
> 4 sec)
The line-time-clock on Bob's emulator doesn't necessarily have anything
to do with reality. On my cow-orker's 200 MHz pentium Pro, it ticks
about twice as fast as real time, but on my Alpha it'll often not tick
at all if there's something else keeping the (emulated) CPU busy. I
think other emulators (like John Wilson's) put more emphasis on real-time
applications and probably emulate the line-time-clock more faithfully.
> Interesting that the emulated one is faster on this test even though
> the dhrystone rating is about 20% slower.
Again, I think the C recompile is probably a better benchmark - unless
someone's specifically interested primarily in FP emulation, which I think
is likely to be the exception.
Tim. (shoppa(a)triumf.ca)
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA23510
for pups-liszt; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 09:29:27 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Warren Toomey <wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au> Sun Apr 5 09:30:24 1998
Received: from henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (henry.cs.adfa.oz.au [131.236.21.158])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA23505
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 09:29:22 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from wkt@localhost) by henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA28084; Sun, 5 Apr 1998 09:30:24 +1000 (EST)
From: Warren Toomey <wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199804042330.JAA28084(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Re: licenses mail today
To: dionj(a)sco.COM (Dion Johnson)
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 09:30:24 +1000 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <19980403095446.48700(a)sco.com> from Dion Johnson at "Apr 3, 98 09:54:46 am"
Reply-To: wkt(a)cs.adfa.oz.au
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL22 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
In article by Dion Johnson:
> I think I can get the licenses mailed today to the licensees.
Ta!
Warren
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA27137
for pups-liszt; Mon, 6 Apr 1998 09:45:53 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Greg Lehey <grog(a)lemis.com> Mon Apr 6 09:45:32 1998
Received: from allegro.lemis.com (allegro.lemis.com [192.109.197.134])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA27132
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Mon, 6 Apr 1998 09:45:47 +1000 (EST)
Received: from freebie.lemis.com (freebie.lemis.com [192.109.197.137])
by allegro.lemis.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA10674;
Mon, 6 Apr 1998 09:15:34 +0930 (CST)
Received: (from grog@localhost)
by freebie.lemis.com (8.8.8/8.8.7) id JAA27639;
Mon, 6 Apr 1998 09:15:32 +0930 (CST)
(envelope-from grog)
Message-ID: <19980406091532.27504(a)freebie.lemis.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 09:15:32 +0930
From: Greg Lehey <grog(a)lemis.com>
To: pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com, pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Subject: Re: Bug in Bob Supnik's Emulator!
References: <199804030750.XAA10664(a)moe.2bsd.com> <19980403172621.30485(a)papillon.lemis.com> <grog(a)lemis.com> <9804031317.ZM14102(a)indy.dunnington.york.ac.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.89i
In-Reply-To: <9804031317.ZM14102(a)indy.dunnington.york.ac.uk>; from Pete Turnbull on Fri, Apr 03, 1998 at 12:17:19PM +0000
WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog
Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia
Phone: +61-8-8388-8286
Fax: +61-8-8388-8725
Mobile: +61-41-739-7062
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
On Fri, 3 April 1998 at 12:17:19 +0000, Pete Turnbull wrote:
> On Apr 3, 17:26, Greg Lehey wrote:
>> On 2 April 1998 at 23:50:23 -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
>
>>> Not having any great need of an emulated PDP-11 I've not pursued
>>> the (suspected) bug in Bob Supnik's emulator. Even on a PentiumPro
>>> an emulated 11 is slower than a real 11/73 (and a lot slower than an
>>> 11/93 - which I should cease neglecting and stuff a SCSI card into
>>> some day as I did with the 11/73).
>>
>> Interesting. I was running this on an AMD K6/233, which should be
>> slower than a PPro, and I had the impression it was faster. Does
>> anybody have some benchmarks?
>
> I don't have numbers for anything running under the emulator, but I do have
> Dhrystone sources (and some figures for real PDP-11s of various sorts with
> various operating systems and compilers). If anyone wants to try it, I can
> post the source.
I'd be interested.
Greg
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA27211
for pups-liszt; Mon, 6 Apr 1998 10:17:22 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Greg Lehey <grog(a)lemis.com> Mon Apr 6 10:16:56 1998
Received: from allegro.lemis.com (allegro.lemis.com [192.109.197.134])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA27206
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Mon, 6 Apr 1998 10:17:17 +1000 (EST)
Received: from freebie.lemis.com (freebie.lemis.com [192.109.197.137])
by allegro.lemis.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA10698;
Mon, 6 Apr 1998 09:46:58 +0930 (CST)
Received: (from grog@localhost)
by freebie.lemis.com (8.8.8/8.8.7) id JAA27787;
Mon, 6 Apr 1998 09:46:56 +0930 (CST)
(envelope-from grog)
Message-ID: <19980406094656.23449(a)freebie.lemis.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 09:46:56 +0930
From: Greg Lehey <grog(a)lemis.com>
To: "Steven M. Schultz" <sms(a)moe.2bsd.com>, pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au,
shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca
Subject: Re: Bug in Bob Supnik's Emulator!
References: <199804032028.MAA25193(a)moe.2bsd.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.89i
In-Reply-To: <199804032028.MAA25193(a)moe.2bsd.com>; from Steven M. Schultz on Fri, Apr 03, 1998 at 12:28:54PM -0800
WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog
Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia
Phone: +61-8-8388-8286
Fax: +61-8-8388-8725
Mobile: +61-41-739-7062
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
On Fri, 3 April 1998 at 12:28:54 -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> Ok - I finally got around to retrying Bob's emulator. This is using
> gcc 2.8.1 under BSD/OS 3.1 with a PPro 200 and the Dhrystone 2.1 (C
> language version) program.
>
> Other benchmarks of possible interest:
>
> A recompile of the 2.11BSD C compiler:
>
> 11/44 9min 20sec
> 11/73 9min 33sec
> 11/93 6min 43sec
> emulated PDP-11 5min 25sec (BUT the 'time' reported with "time make" was 10min
> 4 sec)
>
I don't know which directories you compiled, but here are the results
on a K6/233 running FreeBSD 3.0 and the Begemot emulator:
/usr/src/lib/c2 39.4 real 30.5 user 8.4 sys
/usr/src/lib/ccom 223.6 real 186.9 user 36.2 sys
/usr/src/lib/cpp 55.6 real 41.9 user 13.3 sys
date(1) showed times consistent with time(1).
Greg
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA27499
for pups-liszt; Mon, 6 Apr 1998 11:59:29 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
On Apr 3, 17:26, Greg Lehey wrote:
> On 2 April 1998 at 23:50:23 -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> > Not having any great need of an emulated PDP-11 I've not pursued
> > the (suspected) bug in Bob Supnik's emulator. Even on a PentiumPro
> > an emulated 11 is slower than a real 11/73 (and a lot slower than an
> > 11/93 - which I should cease neglecting and stuff a SCSI card into
> > some day as I did with the 11/73).
>
> Interesting. I was running this on an AMD K6/233, which should be
> slower than a PPro, and I had the impression it was faster. Does
> anybody have some benchmarks?
I don't have numbers for anything running under the emulator, but I do have
Dhrystone sources (and some figures for real PDP-11s of various sorts with
various operating systems and compilers). If anyone wants to try it, I can
post the source.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA18297
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 22:19:51 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
On Apr 3, 15:41, Greg Lehey wrote:
> Subject: Re: Bug in Bob Supnik's Emulator!
> On Thu, 2 April 1998 at 16:00:40 -0800, Tim Shoppa wrote:
> >> I suspect the FP emulation in Bob's Emulator, so it might be worth
> >> watching the floating point values in the program. Bob mailed me during
> >> the week, and I sent him a virgin binary of factor so he could verify that
> >> there is a bug.
I'd be very surprised if factor used FP. My 7th Edition system's offline ATM,
so I can't check the source.
> > More evidence of a bug is that 'vi' doesn't work right under Bob
> > Supnik's emulator, either. At one point Steven Schultz made some
> > private speculations to me about where the problem might be, but
> > I've forgotten the details. Is it possible that these two bugs
> > are both due to FP emulation? Does the 2.11BSD 'vi' even use
> > the FP registers?
Dunno, but I'd be surprised.
> applied multiple patches to the system. I did have some as yet
> unexplained problems with the assembler, which Steven Schultz
> considers to be due to the emulator (more specifically, instruction
> restart), but Hartmut Brandt (the principal author) thinks this is
> unlikely.
Well, it is one of the areas that causes trouble on different flavours of
PDP-11. Both DEC and Unix O/S's had all sorts of games being played in the
trap recovery code, according to which processor the O/S thought it was running
under. But AFAIK, that code only gets called if an instruction is aborted,
which I wouldn't expect would happen exactly the same way every time factor was
run (but again, I'm speculating without having looked at the code).
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA18305
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 22:19:55 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
On Apr 2, 22:15, Ed G. wrote:
> Subject: Re: What's magtape good for anyway?
> Was dectape an attempt to remedy some of these problems? My
> hazy recollection was that you could treat dectape in some ways as if
> it were a disk.
Yes, in the sense that you could perform random-access operations on it. I
used a PDP-8 that had twin DECtape instead of disks. It supported 4(?)
teletypes in a multi-user environment. But DECtape was not 1/2" tape, nor did
it use reels like the ones that later became standard.
> How much data can magtape hold? If magtape was a portable media,
> does that mean that the manufacturers agreed on the width of
> the tape, the density of recording, the method of recording bits,
> etc.?
Yes to all of those, though there are three standard recording densities
(80bpi, 1600bpi, 6250bpi) and several recording methods (NRZ, NRZI, PE, etc).
There are different standard lengths too: 600' 1200' 2400'.
> I have an old 9 track tape from a computer course I took in 1980.
> For sentimental reasons I'd love to get a copy of its contents. Is
> this possible do you think?
Shouldn't be hard, unless it's suffered from print-through after 18 years.
It's probably 800bpi (NRZI) or 1600bpi (PE). Whether you can understand the
contents depends on the format of the data, of course.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA18540
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 23:50:27 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca> Fri Apr 3 23:50:14 1998
Received: from alph02.triumf.ca (alph02.Triumf.CA [142.90.114.18])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id XAA18535
for <pups(a)minnie.CS.ADFA.OZ.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 23:50:19 +1000 (EST)
Received: by alph02.triumf.ca; id AA00796; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 05:50:14 -0800
From: Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
Message-Id: <9804031350.AA00796(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
Subject: Re: What's magtape good for anyway?
To: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 05:50:14 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <199804030315.WAA06617(a)renoir.op.net> from "Ed G." at Apr 2, 98 10:15:08 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
> > Mag tape has
> > several things that make it difficult, one is old (late 60s and through
>
> In old movies, filmmakers often focused on spinning tape
> drives when they wanted to show a computer "thinking." What is it
> about tape drives that made them such a powerful symbol for big,
> complicated computer systems?
You have to realize that disk storage on mainframe systems in the
1960's was usually quite small. Almost all "large-scale" processing
was from tape drive(s) to tape drive(s). If you find a really good
reference on sorting and collating (Knuth, for example) a lot of
effort is made on doing things with as little core and disk space
as possible. Most of these methods are still used today on really
large data sets (for example, FFT's on multi-gigabyte data sets
which are never entirely in memory.)
> > the 70s) drives had a difficult time starting and stopping without
> > breaking tape or resorting to complex(then standards) controllers. This
> > lead to things like large interrecord gaps (start, speed up read, stop,
> > backspace records, stop, read) due to the inerta of starting and stoping
> > the reels. Also fixed record sizes were used to make blocks about the
> > same length so blocks and marks could be differentiated using simple
> > timers.
>
> Was dectape an attempt to remedy some of these problems? My
> hazy recollection was that you could treat dectape in some ways as if
> it were a disk.
DECtape was very much different from other tape media of the time.
You didn't treat it as a disk in just some ways, you treated it as
a disk in all ways.
At the time of DECtape, the most inexpensive removable disk media was
the RK05 DECpack, which cost about $150-$200 per platter. DECtape was
created as a more affordable "disk-like" removable media so that
each user could carry his files around with him.
> > Magtape was for the longest time the only portable media, which lead to
> > the ansi/EBCDIC problems (Evryone else and IBM/HP). It was generally
> > used for archival storage making file organized access excess overhead.
> > While often used as block oriented, many systems used it more as a stream
> > device where the high volume storage (relative to the disks of the time)
> > capability was available.
>
> How much data can magtape hold?
A 1600 bpi 2400 foot 9-track holds about 40 Megabytes if you use long
blocks. Other more recent magtapes (i.e. DLT's) hold 40-100 Gigabytes per
reel/cartridge. Some specialized optical tape media hold Terabytes
per reel.
> If magtape was a portable media,
> does that mean that the manufacturers agreed on the width of
> the tape, the density of recording, the method of recording bits,
> etc.?
Absolutely. There are ANSI standards for all of the above. Despite
what others claim, interchangability was always rather straightforward,
and the worst problems are the "concepts" not supported by some operating
systems (i.e. Unix lacks file support for anything other than a file that's
just a stream-of-bytes).
> I have an old 9 track tape from a computer course I took in 1980.
> For sentimental reasons I'd love to get a copy of its contents. Is
> this possible do you think?
Absolutely. Part of my current profession is reading 9- (and 7-) tracks
that are up to 35 years old.
> > When processing was done on early system usually two or three drives were
> > involved as one of two were for reading and the third was writing results
> > usually due to memory size limitations of the time compared to the amount
> > of data. Alot of magtapes lore is a result of historical use.
These uses aren't just historical - many of us still deal with datasets
that are Terabytes in size and which cannot be disk (or core) resident.
Tim. (shoppa(a)triumf.ca)
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA18575
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 23:55:45 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca> Fri Apr 3 23:55:06 1998
Received: from alph02.triumf.ca (alph02.Triumf.CA [142.90.114.18])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id XAA18565
for <pups(a)minnie.CS.ADFA.OZ.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 23:55:32 +1000 (EST)
Received: by alph02.triumf.ca; id AA32661; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 05:55:06 -0800
From: Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
Message-Id: <9804031355.AA32661(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
Subject: Re: What's magtape good for anyway?
To: pete(a)dunnington.U-NET.com
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 05:55:06 -0800 (PST)
Cc: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
In-Reply-To: <9804031301.ZM14090(a)indy.dunnington.york.ac.uk> from "Pete Turnbull" at Apr 3, 98 12:01:48 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
> > How much data can magtape hold? If magtape was a portable media,
> > does that mean that the manufacturers agreed on the width of
> > the tape, the density of recording, the method of recording bits,
> > etc.?
>
> Yes to all of those, though there are three standard recording densities
> (80bpi, 1600bpi, 6250bpi) and several recording methods (NRZ, NRZI, PE, etc).
But in the 9-track world at least, 800 BPI was always NRZI, 1600 BPI
(and 3200 BPI) was always PE, and 6250 BPI was always a specific type
of GCR.
In the 7-track world, recording was almost always NRZI. One manufacturer
did make a 7-track PE system, but it was never a standard.
Tim.
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id AAA18630
for pups-liszt; Sat, 4 Apr 1998 00:00:54 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca> Sat Apr 4 00:00:44 1998
Received: from alph02.triumf.ca (alph02.Triumf.CA [142.90.114.18])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA18625
for <pups(a)minnie.CS.ADFA.OZ.au>; Sat, 4 Apr 1998 00:00:48 +1000 (EST)
Received: by alph02.triumf.ca; id AA23631; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 06:00:44 -0800
From: Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
Message-Id: <9804031400.AA23631(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
Subject: Re: Bug in Bob Supnik's Emulator!
To: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 06:00:44 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <199804030750.XAA10664(a)moe.2bsd.com> from "Steven M. Schultz" at Apr 2, 98 11:50:23 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
> Not having any great need of an emulated PDP-11 I've not pursued
> the (suspected) bug in Bob Supnik's emulator. Even on a PentiumPro
> an emulated 11 is slower than a real 11/73 (and a lot slower than an
> 11/93 - which I should cease neglecting and stuff a SCSI card into
> some day as I did with the 11/73).
On a cow orker's 200 MHz Pentium Pro, Bob Supnik's emulator (compiled
with gcc and running under Linux) is about twice as fast as a real
11/73 for most CPU-intensive operations. Speeds for I/O based
operations can range from incredibly faster to incredibly slower
than a real -11, of course, and a lot of the interrupt and device
priority schemes seem seriously out of whack with how a real PDP-11
works. And speed also depends on whether the MMU
is enabled or not, too.
The same emulator running on a 7-year-old 133 MHz DEC Alpha is about
a third the speed of a real 11/73 (slow enough that a lot of 60 Hz
line-time-clock interrupts go uncounted under RT-11, for example!)
Tim.
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id EAA19270
for pups-liszt; Sat, 4 Apr 1998 04:25:23 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
<Was dectape an attempt to remedy some of these problems? My
<hazy recollection was that you could treat dectape in some ways as if
<it were a disk.
Dectape was an attempt to achive moderate amount of storage at low cost
with good reliability. It's stop, turnaround time was poor but the cost
was very low. It was preceeded by linktape which was very much similar.
<How much data can magtape hold? If magtape was a portable media,
varies with the size of the reel and the density it was recorded at.
<does that mean that the manufacturers agreed on the width of
<the tape, the density of recording, the method of recording bits,
<etc.?
To a point.
<I have an old 9 track tape from a computer course I took in 1980.
<For sentimental reasons I'd love to get a copy of its contents. Is
<this possible do you think?
Highly likely if you can find someone with a drive.
<Is 'merge sort' an example of an application that required three tape
<drives?
Thats a typical one. Sometimes 4 drives were used plus maybe a disk
system. Two for source material, one for intermediate results, one or
more for programs and the last for final results. Some machines were
very limited in the local memory they had so programs often were broken
into small modules and loaded (chained) as needed on the fly. Imagine
processing 500k of data in a 16k memory where a portion was also used
for program code.
Allison
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA17456
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 17:08:58 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Greg Lehey <grog(a)lemis.com> Fri Apr 3 16:41:11 1998
Received: from mailext02.compaq.com (mailext02.compaq.com [207.18.199.33])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA17451
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 17:08:47 +1000 (EST)
Received: from mail.compaq.com(really [207.18.199.34]) by mailext02.compaq.com
via sendmail with smtp
id <m0yL0TQ-0005L4C(a)mailext02.compaq.com>
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 01:01:12 -0600 (CST)
(Smail-3.2.0.93 1997-Apr-12 #2 built 1997-Dec-21)
Received: from papillon.lemis.com(really [202.48.19.19]) by mail.compaq.com
via sendmail with smtp
id <m0yL0ay-00059KC(a)mail.compaq.com>
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 98 01:09:00 -0600 (CST)
(/\##/\ Smail3.1.30.16 #30.10 built 18-dec-97)
Received: (grog@localhost) by papillon.lemis.com (8.8.8/8.6.12)
id PAA00975; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 15:41:15 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: <19980403154111.63328(a)papillon.lemis.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 15:41:11 +0900
From: Greg Lehey <grog(a)lemis.com>
To: Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca>, wkt(a)CS.ADFA.OZ.au
Cc: pete(a)dunnington.U-NET.com, edgee(a)cyberpass.net, pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Subject: Re: Bug in Bob Supnik's Emulator!
References: <199803280050.LAA05410(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au> <9804030000.AA00122(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.89i
In-Reply-To: <9804030000.AA00122(a)alph02.triumf.ca>; from Tim Shoppa on Thu, Apr 02, 1998 at 04:00:40PM -0800
WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog
Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia
Phone: +61-8-8388-8286
Fax: +61-8-8388-8725
Mobile: +61-41-739-7062
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
On Thu, 2 April 1998 at 16:00:40 -0800, Tim Shoppa wrote:
>> I suspect the FP emulation in Bob's Emulator, so it might be worth
>> watching the floating point values in the program. Bob mailed me during
>> the week, and I sent him a virgin binary of factor so he could verify that
>> there is a bug.
>
> More evidence of a bug is that 'vi' doesn't work right under Bob
> Supnik's emulator, either. At one point Steven Schultz made some
> private speculations to me about where the problem might be, but
> I've forgotten the details. Is it possible that these two bugs
> are both due to FP emulation? Does the 2.11BSD 'vi' even use
> the FP registers?
FWIW, I've used the latest (and not yet committed) version of the
Begemot emulator to run 2.11BSD for over a week. In that time, I
applied multiple patches to the system. I did have some as yet
unexplained problems with the assembler, which Steven Schultz
considers to be due to the emulator (more specifically, instruction
restart), but Hartmut Brandt (the principal author) thinks this is
unlikely. vi works as well as vi ever works.
Greg
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA17551
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 17:50:55 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From "Steven M. Schultz" <sms(a)moe.2bsd.com> Fri Apr 3 17:50:23 1998
Received: from moe.2bsd.com (0(a)MOE.2BSD.COM [206.139.202.200])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA17545
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 17:50:49 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from sms@localhost)
by moe.2bsd.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id XAA10664;
Thu, 2 Apr 1998 23:50:23 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 23:50:23 -0800 (PST)
From: "Steven M. Schultz" <sms(a)moe.2bsd.com>
Message-Id: <199804030750.XAA10664(a)moe.2bsd.com>
To: grog(a)lemis.com, shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca, wkt(a)CS.ADFA.OZ.au
Subject: Re: Bug in Bob Supnik's Emulator!
Cc: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
Greg -
> FWIW, I've used the latest (and not yet committed) version of the
> Begemot emulator to run 2.11BSD for over a week. In that time, I
AH, a new and improved version? Great! SOmething to look forward to.
> unexplained problems with the assembler, which Steven Schultz
> considers to be due to the emulator (more specifically, instruction
> restart), but Hartmut Brandt (the principal author) thinks this is unlikely.
It was a possibility - the only other thing which I've seen cause
similar problems was bad memory/cache. I presumed your memory
wasn't failing ;).
Programs suddenly dying for no apparent reason on otherwise healthy
"hardware" led me to suspect a problem with the emulator. The final
arbiter of course is a real PDP-11 :)
I take it then that the problems went away as mysteriously as they
arrived and that all is well with your system (no more assembler
or kernel recompile troubles)?
Not having any great need of an emulated PDP-11 I've not pursued
the (suspected) bug in Bob Supnik's emulator. Even on a PentiumPro
an emulated 11 is slower than a real 11/73 (and a lot slower than an
11/93 - which I should cease neglecting and stuff a SCSI card into
some day as I did with the 11/73).
Steven
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA17660
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 18:37:02 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Greg Lehey <grog(a)lemis.com> Fri Apr 3 18:26:21 1998
Received: from mailext02.compaq.com (mailext02.compaq.com [207.18.199.33])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA17655
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 18:36:56 +1000 (EST)
Received: from mail.compaq.com(really [207.18.199.34]) by mailext02.compaq.com
via sendmail with smtp
id <m0yL1ql-0005DcC(a)mailext02.compaq.com>
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 02:29:23 -0600 (CST)
(Smail-3.2.0.93 1997-Apr-12 #2 built 1997-Dec-21)
Received: from papillon.lemis.com(really [202.48.19.19]) by mail.compaq.com
via sendmail with smtp
id <m0yL1yM-00059UC(a)mail.compaq.com>
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 98 02:37:14 -0600 (CST)
(/\##/\ Smail3.1.30.16 #30.10 built 18-dec-97)
Received: (grog@localhost) by papillon.lemis.com (8.8.8/8.6.12)
id RAA01094; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 17:26:22 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: <19980403172621.30485(a)papillon.lemis.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 17:26:21 +0900
From: Greg Lehey <grog(a)lemis.com>
To: "Steven M. Schultz" <sms(a)moe.2bsd.com>, shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca,
wkt(a)CS.ADFA.OZ.au
Cc: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Subject: Re: Bug in Bob Supnik's Emulator!
References: <199804030750.XAA10664(a)moe.2bsd.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.89i
In-Reply-To: <199804030750.XAA10664(a)moe.2bsd.com>; from Steven M. Schultz on Thu, Apr 02, 1998 at 11:50:23PM -0800
WWW-Home-Page: http://www.lemis.com/~grog
Organization: LEMIS, PO Box 460, Echunga SA 5153, Australia
Phone: +61-8-8388-8286
Fax: +61-8-8388-8725
Mobile: +61-41-739-7062
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
On Thu, 2 April 1998 at 23:50:23 -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> Greg -
>
>> FWIW, I've used the latest (and not yet committed) version of the
>> Begemot emulator to run 2.11BSD for over a week. In that time, I
>
> AH, a new and improved version? Great! SOmething to look forward to.
It's the one I've been using all along. I never used an older version.
>> unexplained problems with the assembler, which Steven Schultz
>> considers to be due to the emulator (more specifically, instruction
>> restart), but Hartmut Brandt (the principal author) thinks this is unlikely.
>
> It was a possibility - the only other thing which I've seen cause
> similar problems was bad memory/cache. I presumed your memory
> wasn't failing ;).
Reasonable assumption.
> Programs suddenly dying for no apparent reason on otherwise healthy
> "hardware" led me to suspect a problem with the emulator. The final
> arbiter of course is a real PDP-11 :)
Sure, that makes sense. I did too, but I couldn't see anything obvious.
> I take it then that the problems went away as mysteriously as they
> arrived and that all is well with your system (no more assembler
> or kernel recompile troubles)?
Well, not quite. I finally got back to the real work I should have
been doing, and I haven't had time to look at it again since. But
they went into hiding when I tried to show them to Hartmut :-) I think
we still have a problem somewhere. BTW, Hartmut had already upgraded
to PL 40? before I tried to start, so I'm still not completely
convinced that it's not something I did wrong in upgrading.
> Not having any great need of an emulated PDP-11 I've not pursued
> the (suspected) bug in Bob Supnik's emulator. Even on a PentiumPro
> an emulated 11 is slower than a real 11/73 (and a lot slower than an
> 11/93 - which I should cease neglecting and stuff a SCSI card into
> some day as I did with the 11/73).
Interesting. I was running this on an AMD K6/233, which should be
slower than a PPro, and I had the impression it was faster. Does
anybody have some benchmarks?
Greg
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id WAA18306
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 22:19:57 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
<> Does anybody know what `distribution from within Digital' is being
<> referred to here, and how I can get my hands on it, for the archive.
<> Is this an early Ultrix?
<
<
< I have an Edition 7 distribution from DEC. The work was largely
<done by Fred Canter, along with Jerry Brenner and Armando Stettner. It
<had prebuilt kernels as follows :-
So happens I have a tk50 tape labeled ULRIX-11 X3.1 27-jul-87.
Never looked at it as its apparently a tarball and all my systems with
tk50 to date are rt-11/rsts or VMS. I keep meaning to look at it with
the VAX ULTRIX4.2 VS2000.
Allison
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA13686
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 08:40:53 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Warren Toomey <wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au> Fri Apr 3 08:41:49 1998
Received: from henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (henry.cs.adfa.oz.au [131.236.21.158])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA13681
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 08:40:49 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from wkt@localhost) by henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA12757 for pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 08:41:49 +1000 (EST)
From: Warren Toomey <wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199804022241.IAA12757(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Ultrix for PDP-11
To: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (PDP Unix Preservation)
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 08:41:49 +1000 (EST)
Reply-To: wkt(a)cs.adfa.oz.au
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL22 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
Briefly, Jean tells me the stuff I saw on his web page (early DEC support)
is called UNIX V7M RELEASE 2.1. There's a copy of _a_ V7M in the archive, but
I've asked Jean to look at his tape so we can compare contents.
John Holden, as you saw, also has a tape with lots of pre-built kernels.
I've asked John if we can get a copy of this tape too.
A few people mentioned Ultrix for the PDP-11. This is probably a dumb
question, but I assume DEC still owns these systems. Would it be possible
(and/or worth it) to ask DEC to make it freely available to licensees?
I guess we could ask Bob Supnik about it.
Thanks again,
Warren
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA13909
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 09:58:51 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Warren Toomey <wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au> Fri Apr 3 09:59:47 1998
Received: from henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (henry.cs.adfa.oz.au [131.236.21.158])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA13904
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 09:58:47 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from wkt@localhost) by henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA12908 for pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 09:59:48 +1000 (EST)
From: Warren Toomey <wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199804022359.JAA12908(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Ultrix: reply from Bob Supnik
To: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (PDP Unix Preservation)
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 09:59:47 +1000 (EST)
Reply-To: wkt(a)cs.adfa.oz.au
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL22 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
All,
I've just received this reply from Bob Supnik on PDP-11 Ultrix:
> If you can clear the other license issues (SCO's) Digital would have no
> problem giving a free license to its value add, whatever that was.
>
> That is, if the user can obtain a valid license from SCO, either binary
> or source, Digital will agree to license its portion at no cost under
> existing terms.
I asked him if DEC would permit us to distribute Ultrix to LICENSEES ONLY,
if some license agreement was also distributed. Awaiting a reply....
Warren
P.S Ken, Allison, can you send in some tape images??? Thanks 8-)
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA13931
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 10:02:59 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca> Fri Apr 3 10:00:40 1998
Received: from alph02.triumf.ca (alph02.Triumf.CA [142.90.114.18])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA13926
for <pups(a)minnie.CS.ADFA.OZ.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 10:02:54 +1000 (EST)
Received: by alph02.triumf.ca; id AA00122; Thu, 2 Apr 1998 16:00:40 -0800
From: Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
Message-Id: <9804030000.AA00122(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
Subject: Re: Bug in Bob Supnik's Emulator!
To: wkt(a)CS.ADFA.OZ.au
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 16:00:40 -0800 (PST)
Cc: pete(a)dunnington.U-NET.com, edgee(a)cyberpass.net, pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
In-Reply-To: <199803280050.LAA05410(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au> from "Warren Toomey" at Mar 28, 98 11:50:54 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
> I suspect the FP emulation in Bob's Emulator, so it might be worth
> watching the floating point values in the program. Bob mailed me during
> the week, and I sent him a virgin binary of factor so he could verify that
> there is a bug.
More evidence of a bug is that 'vi' doesn't work right under Bob
Supnik's emulator, either. At one point Steven Schultz made some
private speculations to me about where the problem might be, but
I've forgotten the details. Is it possible that these two bugs
are both due to FP emulation? Does the 2.11BSD 'vi' even use
the FP registers?
Tim. (shoppa(a)triumf.ca)
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA13973
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 10:15:18 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Warren Toomey <wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au> Fri Apr 3 10:16:15 1998
Received: from henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (henry.cs.adfa.oz.au [131.236.21.158])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA13968
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 10:15:14 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from wkt@localhost) by henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA12956 for pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 10:16:15 +1000 (EST)
From: Warren Toomey <wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199804030016.KAA12956(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Re: Bug in Bob Supnik's Emulator!
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 10:16:15 +1000 (EST)
Cc: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (PDP Unix Preservation)
In-Reply-To: <9804030000.AA00122(a)alph02.triumf.ca> from Tim Shoppa at "Apr 2, 98 04:00:40 pm"
Reply-To: wkt(a)cs.adfa.oz.au
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL22 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
In article by Tim Shoppa:
> > I suspect the FP emulation in Bob's Emulator [breaking factor(6)]
> More evidence of a bug is that 'vi' doesn't work right under Bob
> Supnik's emulator, either. At one point Steven Schultz made some
> private speculations to me about where the problem might be, but
> I've forgotten the details. Is it possible that these two bugs
> are both due to FP emulation? Does the 2.11BSD 'vi' even use
> the FP registers?
Don't know about vi FP, I could go have a look at the source. No, vi
doesn't appear to use any floating point.
I asked Bob about the factor(6) bug in my Ultrix mail, he didn't mention
it, but he might at some stage. I'll keep people informed.
As for vi, what was the abnormal behaviour?
Warren
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA14061
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 10:52:23 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From "Steven M. Schultz" <sms(a)moe.2bsd.com> Fri Apr 3 10:50:26 1998
Received: from moe.2bsd.com (0(a)MOE.2BSD.COM [206.139.202.200])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA14056
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 10:52:17 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from sms@localhost)
by moe.2bsd.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA07798
for pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au; Thu, 2 Apr 1998 16:50:26 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 16:50:26 -0800 (PST)
From: "Steven M. Schultz" <sms(a)moe.2bsd.com>
Message-Id: <199804030050.QAA07798(a)moe.2bsd.com>
To: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Subject: Re: Bug in Bob Supnik's Emulator?
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
> Tim. (shoppa(a)triumf.ca)
> More evidence of a bug is that 'vi' doesn't work right under Bob
> Supnik's emulator, either. At one point Steven Schultz made some
> private speculations to me about where the problem might be, but
> I've forgotten the details. Is it possible that these two bugs
> are both due to FP emulation? Does the 2.11BSD 'vi' even use
> the FP registers?
To the best of my knowledge 'vi' does NOT use any FP at all (other than
the usual 32 bit arithmetic that all programs do if they do any 'long'
arithmetic).
My speculation is that there's a MMU emulation bug somewhere. 'vi' is
a overlaid split I/D program. Overlays in 2.11BSD are done via
'page flipping' (altering MMU registers). Also 2.11 uses the 'expand
downward' bit on the stack (as well as relying on MMR3 - i think that's
the one - for instruction restart after growing the stack). If there's
a subtle gotcha in the MMU emulation that will cause problems
eventually. 2.11 is not alone in using the ED bit and instruction
restart - if the problem is MMU related it could show up under other
systems (V7). It would be interesting to know if 'vi' encountered
problems on V7 but V7 doesn't have usermode overlays so getting 'vi'
to run would be very problematic.
Steven
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA14110
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 10:59:44 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Warren Toomey <wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au> Fri Apr 3 11:00:34 1998
Received: from henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (henry.cs.adfa.oz.au [131.236.21.158])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA14105
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 10:59:40 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from wkt@localhost) by henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA13088; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 11:00:35 +1000 (EST)
From: Warren Toomey <wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199804030100.LAA13088(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Re: Bug in Bob Supnik's Emulator?
To: sms(a)moe.2bsd.com (Steven M. Schultz)
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 11:00:34 +1000 (EST)
Cc: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
In-Reply-To: <199804030050.QAA07798(a)moe.2bsd.com> from "Steven M. Schultz" at "Apr 2, 98 04:50:26 pm"
Reply-To: wkt(a)cs.adfa.oz.au
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL22 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
In article by Steven M. Schultz:
[re bugs in Bob Sunik's PDP emulator]
> My speculation is that there's a MMU emulation bug somewhere. 'vi' is
> a overlaid split I/D program. Overlays in 2.11BSD are done via
> 'page flipping' (altering MMU registers). Also 2.11 uses the 'expand
> downward' bit on the stack (as well as relying on MMR3 - i think that's
> the one - for instruction restart after growing the stack). If there's
> a subtle gotcha in the MMU emulation that will cause problems
> eventually. 2.11 is not alone in using the ED bit and instruction
> restart - if the problem is MMU related it could show up under other
> systems (V7). It would be interesting to know if 'vi' encountered
> problems on V7 but V7 doesn't have usermode overlays so getting 'vi'
> to run would be very problematic.
>
> Steven
The 2bsd distribution in the archive comes with an early non-overlayed vi
which compiles on V7. However, I haven't got it to work correctly yet. I
suspect that the /etc/termcap entry I was using is not recognised by this
early version of termlib.
This is all irrelevant to the emulator bug, BTW.
Steven, have you mentioned your hypothesis to Bob?
Warren
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA14677
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 13:15:33 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From "Ed G." <edgee(a)cyberpass.net> Fri Apr 3 12:15:08 1998
Received: from renoir.op.net (root(a)renoir.op.net [209.152.193.4])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA14672
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 13:15:25 +1000 (EST)
Received: from goppelt.op.net (d-phlarc2-06.ppp.op.net [209.152.199.102]) by renoir.op.net (o1/$Revision: 1.15 $) with SMTP id WAA06617; Thu, 2 Apr 1998 22:15:08 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199804030315.WAA06617(a)renoir.op.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <edgee(a)cyberpass.net>
From: "Ed G." <edgee(a)cyberpass.net>
To: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 22:15:08 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: What's magtape good for anyway?
Reply-to: edgee(a)cyberpass.net
CC: allisonp(a)world.std.com (Allison J Parent)
In-reply-to: <199803251433.AA22737(a)world.std.com>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.54)
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
> Mag tape has
> several things that make it difficult, one is old (late 60s and through
In old movies, filmmakers often focused on spinning tape
drives when they wanted to show a computer "thinking." What is it
about tape drives that made them such a powerful symbol for big,
complicated computer systems?
> the 70s) drives had a difficult time starting and stopping without
> breaking tape or resorting to complex(then standards) controllers. This
> lead to things like large interrecord gaps (start, speed up read, stop,
> backspace records, stop, read) due to the inerta of starting and stoping
> the reels. Also fixed record sizes were used to make blocks about the
> same length so blocks and marks could be differentiated using simple
> timers.
Was dectape an attempt to remedy some of these problems? My
hazy recollection was that you could treat dectape in some ways as if
it were a disk.
> Magtape was for the longest time the only portable media, which lead to
> the ansi/EBCDIC problems (Evryone else and IBM/HP). It was generally
> used for archival storage making file organized access excess overhead.
> While often used as block oriented, many systems used it more as a stream
> device where the high volume storage (relative to the disks of the time)
> capability was available.
How much data can magtape hold? If magtape was a portable media,
does that mean that the manufacturers agreed on the width of
the tape, the density of recording, the method of recording bits,
etc.?
I have an old 9 track tape from a computer course I took in 1980.
For sentimental reasons I'd love to get a copy of its contents. Is
this possible do you think?
> When processing was done on early system usually two or three drives were
> involved as one of two were for reading and the third was writing results
> usually due to memory size limitations of the time compared to the amount
> of data. Alot of magtapes lore is a result of historical use.
Is 'merge sort' an example of an application that required three tape
drives?
Ed
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA16168
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 15:44:37 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
Has anyone gotten their "Antique Source Code License" yet?
I sent in my signed contract to the SCO 3/11/98, but I haven't heard
a thing.
Ed
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA10655
for pups-liszt; Thu, 2 Apr 1998 14:13:24 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Warren Toomey <wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au> Thu Apr 2 14:14:09 1998
Received: from henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (henry.cs.adfa.oz.au [131.236.21.158])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA10650
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Thu, 2 Apr 1998 14:13:20 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from wkt@localhost) by henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA11901; Thu, 2 Apr 1998 14:14:09 +1000 (EST)
From: Warren Toomey <wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199804020414.OAA11901(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Re: SCO Licenses-where are they?
To: edgee(a)cyberpass.net
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 14:14:09 +1000 (EST)
Cc: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (PDP Unix Preservation)
In-Reply-To: <199804020315.WAA25507(a)renoir.op.net> from "Ed G." at "Apr 1, 98 10:15:20 pm"
Reply-To: wkt(a)cs.adfa.oz.au
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL22 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
In article by Ed G.:
> Has anyone gotten their "Antique Source Code License" yet?
> I sent in my signed contract to the SCO 3/11/98, but I haven't heard
> a thing.
> Ed
This is the word from Dion, as at 1st April:
Well, we have 12 licenses accumulated here and I haven't got any
"system" set up to deal with these. I will probably just send
you a list of the peoples' names and addresses by postal mail.
Hope that's not too primitive.
I asked if he could send me the list via PGP email, but he countered
that they were all on paper, and he didn't have the time to send me the
list. However, he did say:
I will just drop them into a DHL or similar express shipment
thing. Hopefully in a day or two.
Now, I'm not sure if this means:
+ he will ship the licenses in a day or two,
+ he will ship me the list in a day or two,
+ it will only take a day or two for the list to reach me.
However, the worst-case scenario is that the licenses will be posted
in a day or two, and they should reach you quickly after that.
I checked my bank account, and SCO removed $100 on the 24th March.
I take this to indicate that I am now licensed. I don't know if this
is of much help, though.
I am waiting in anticipation, as we all are.
BTW First person to announce their license in the mailing list wins.
Wins what, I haven't a clue ;-)
Warren
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA10899
for pups-liszt; Thu, 2 Apr 1998 15:35:13 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From Warren Toomey <wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au> Thu Apr 2 15:36:04 1998
Received: from henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (henry.cs.adfa.oz.au [131.236.21.158])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA10894
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Thu, 2 Apr 1998 15:35:09 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from wkt@localhost) by henry.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA12273 for pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au; Thu, 2 Apr 1998 15:36:04 +1000 (EST)
From: Warren Toomey <wkt(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199804020536.PAA12273(a)henry.cs.adfa.oz.au>
Subject: Early DEC support for UNIX?
To: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (PDP Unix Preservation)
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 15:36:04 +1000 (EST)
Reply-To: wkt(a)cs.adfa.oz.au
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL22 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
I was just browsing for web pages related to PDP-11s and UNIX, and I found:
http://idefix-45.cs.kuleuven.ac.be/museum/pdp/unix-E.html
which has a most interesting paragraph at the bottom:
Officially Digital Equipment did not support Unix. With the
maintenance technicians we made the agreement that the hardware was
OK, when their test programs did not produce error messages.
At the end of 1983 we found out that within Digital there was a
very small group which distributed Unix V7 with support and drivers
for all PDP 11 models and devices. Sources were distributed freely to
all source licensees of Bell labs. From then on we have used that
distribution.
Does anybody know what `distribution from within Digital' is being
referred to here, and how I can get my hands on it, for the archive.
Is this an early Ultrix?
I've mailed the maintainer of the web page in question for more information.
Warren
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA11109
for pups-liszt; Thu, 2 Apr 1998 17:05:05 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
>From John Holden <johnh(a)psychvax.psych.usyd.edu.au> Thu Apr 2 17:04:51 1998
Received: from psychvax.psych.usyd.edu.au (psychvax.psych.usyd.edu.au [129.78.83.1])
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA11104
for <pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Thu, 2 Apr 1998 17:05:01 +1000 (EST)
Received: (from johnh@localhost)
by psychvax.psych.usyd.edu.au (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA25088
for pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au; Thu, 2 Apr 1998 17:04:51 +1000
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 17:04:51 +1000
From: John Holden <johnh(a)psychvax.psych.usyd.edu.au>
Message-Id: <199804020704.RAA25088(a)psychvax.psych.usyd.edu.au>
To: pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Subject: Re: Early DEC support for UNIX?
Sender: owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Precedence: bulk
> Does anybody know what `distribution from within Digital' is being
> referred to here, and how I can get my hands on it, for the archive.
> Is this an early Ultrix?
I have an Edition 7 distribution from DEC. The work was largely
done by Fred Canter, along with Jerry Brenner and Armando Stettner. It
had prebuilt kernels as follows :-
CPU Disk Tape
11/23 RL02 TU10
11/34 RK06 TE10
11/40 RK07 TU16
11/60 RM02 TE16
11/44 RM03 TS11
11/45 RP03
11/70 RP04
RP05
RP06
I have a 1600bpi tape, but haven't tried to read it lately.
Received: (from major@localhost)
by minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) id AAA12448
for pups-liszt; Fri, 3 Apr 1998 00:54:20 +1000 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au: major set sender to owner-pups(a)minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au using -f
