21 Aug
2002
21 Aug
'02
3:55 a.m.
Bilquist said (quoting Buitinck):
> we all know that UNIX first ran on the PDP-7 and
then on the PDP-11/20,
> but does anyone know anything about PDP-9 UNIX? it\'s mentioned in \"The
> UNIX Time-Sharing System\" in the V7 manual:
>
> \"The earliest [version of UNIX] (circa 1969-70) ran on the Digital
> Equipment Corporation PDP-7 and -9 computers.\"
Hmmm, I cannot exactly answer that, but the PDP-7 and
PDP-9 were both
18-bit machines, and somewhat compatible, I believe.
The whole line is (I believe):
PDP-4 -> PDP-7 -> PDP-9 -> PDP-15
So I guess that if you had it running on a PDP-7, you
could probably
almost take the code unmodified and run it on the PDP-9.
The PDP-15 have a different bus (Unibus?) I believe, and thus,
peripherials are different from the predecessors.
This obviosuly affects the OS. :-)
The 7, 9, 15 were very compatible. I think the -15
had some scheme for using an index register, which
the earlier ones didn't have, but it was otherwise
pretty much identical in IS architecture.
There was very little rewriting to try Unix out
on the -9 and -15; perhaps just some tweaks in
the disk device commands. I don't think the
system actually ran on either for more than a few
hours. Ken was just playing around.
The -15 may have had an electrically different
bus, but I'm reasonably sure it was not a Unibus.
All of them used IOT instructions, not memory-mapped
IO registers.
Both of the machines we tried were being used by other groups
and we couldn't squat on them as with the PDP-7.
I recall that the -15's main job was controlling a
step-and-repeat camera that exposed LSI masks.
Dennis
21 Aug
21 Aug
9:19 a.m.
Dennis Ritchie <dmr(a)plan9.bell-labs.com> writes:
The 7, 9, 15 were very compatible. [...] There was
very little
rewriting to try Unix out on the -9 and -15; perhaps just some
tweaks in the disk device commands. I don't think the system
actually ran on either for more than a few hours. Ken was just
playing around.
No attempts to run on a PDP-4, then?
--
Lars Brinkhoff http://lars.nocrew.org/ Linux, GCC, PDP-10,
Brinkhoff Consulting http://www.brinkhoff.se/ HTTP programming
9:21 a.m.
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Dennis Ritchie wrote:
Bilquist said (quoting Buitinck):
About as I suspected then.
Interesting to hear that the grade of compatibility was that high. I've
neved had the chance to play with any 18-bitters.
So I guess that if you had it running on a PDP-7,
you could probably
almost take the code unmodified and run it on the PDP-9.
The PDP-15 have a different bus (Unibus?) I believe, and thus,
peripherials are different from the predecessors.
This obviosuly affects the OS. :-)
The 7, 9, 15 were very compatible. I think the -15
had some scheme for using an index register, which
the earlier ones didn't have, but it was otherwise
pretty much identical in IS architecture.
There was very little rewriting to try Unix out
on the -9 and -15; perhaps just some tweaks in
the disk device commands. I don't think the
system actually ran on either for more than a few
hours. Ken was just playing around. The -15 may have had an electrically different
bus, but I'm reasonably sure it was not a Unibus.
All of them used IOT instructions, not memory-mapped
IO registers.
The Unibus do not require a memory mapped I/O model, though. And it does
have 18 address and data bits. (Two data bits are used for parity on a
PDP-11.)
The DEC-2020 also used a Unibus.
Johnny
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt(a)update.uu.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
9:57 a.m.
New subject: [pups] PDP-9
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Lars Buitinck wrote:
Thus spake Johnny Billquist unto PUPS:
Yes. The KS-10. The "small" PDP-10. The last PDP-10. The "modern"
PDP-10
without extended addressing.
And yes, it used the Unibus for an I/O bus. Someone else will probably
correct me, but I think it might even have used a variation of the RH-11
for Massbus.
Johnny
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt(a)update.uu.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
The DEC-2020 also used a Unibus.
2020? a PDP-10 model? 
22 Aug
22 Aug
2:06 a.m.
on 8/21/02 5:21 AM, Johnny Billquist at bqt(a)update.uu.se wrote:
About as I suspected then.
Interesting to hear that the grade of compatibility was that high. I've
neved had the chance to play with any 18-bitters.
You can indulge in 18-bit nostalgia courtesy of Bob Supnik. His Computer
History Simulation Project includes simulators for the DEC 18-bit computer
line. Check out http://simh.trailing-edge.com/ if you are interested.
Unfortunately, there isn't much surviving software for these machines. The
site does include a PDP-7 based simulator of the PDP-8(!), and the
"Advanced Software System" OS for the PDP-15 (which I believe will also run
on the PDP-9).
Bob's wish list includes a plea for DECsys and the First through Fourth
Editions of Unix, but unless someone unearths a cache somewhere, these may
be lost to history. Too bad. :-(
--
Frank
"It's snowing still. *And* freezing. However, we haven't had an
earthquake recently."
* Eeyore, "The House at Pooh Corner"
2:47 a.m.
New subject: [pups] Re: Missing 1st to 4th Editions
In article by Frank Wortner:
Bob's wish list includes a plea for DECsys and
the First through Fourth
Editions of Unix, but unless someone unearths a cache somewhere, these may
be lost to history. Too bad. :-(
Frank
A 3rd Edition kernel (ok, nearly 4th Edition) still survives at:
http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/research/Dennis_v3/
We don't have any 3rd Edition application. However, the kernel can be
tweaked to understand the 5th Edition filesystem layout, and we have
been able to boot this kernel and run some 5th Edition programs on it.
Of course, the pipe system call is missing :-)
Warren
7918
days inactive
7919
days old
6 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Dennis Ritchie -
Frank Wortner -
Johnny Billquist -
Lars Brinkhoff -
Lars Buitinck -
Warren Toomey