Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
Personally I think anything with castors on On Jul 8, 2015 7:37 AM, "P Gebhardt" wrote: > > > - Ursprüngliche Message - > > Von: Johnny Billquist > > An: cct...@classiccmp.org > > CC: > > Gesendet: 23:02 Dienstag, 7.Juli 2015 > > Betreff: Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750) > > > > On 2015-07-07 23:55, Robert Armstrong wrote: > >>> Johnny Billquist bqt at update.uu.se wrote: > >>> some of the 8000-series stuff are probably the biggest ... > >> > >> Not all of them. The 82xx/83xx family was just one 10-1/2" chassis > > for > >> the CPU - the same physical size as a 11/730, yet they were genuine > single > >> or dual CPU BI bus VAXen. Of course, many of their brothers were > quite a > >> bit bigger. > >> > >> And don't forget the VAXstation-8000... > > > > Right. But I did say "some". :-) > > > > Think 8978 for example... > > > I'd say that the 8000 series (besides the 11/7x0 series) were the most > diverse in size compared to the 6000, 7000 and 9000 series. As already > mentioned, the 82x0 or 83x0 fit into a small half-height cabinet. The 85x0 > has the size of a 6000 or 7000 series vax, if I remember well. The 8800 > series were housed in very large cabients, larger than the 6000 and 7000 > series cabinets. > > Pierre >
Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
On 2015-07-07 23:55, Robert Armstrong wrote: Johnny Billquist bqt at update.uu.se wrote: some of the 8000-series stuff are probably the biggest ... Not all of them. The 82xx/83xx family was just one 10-1/2" chassis for the CPU - the same physical size as a 11/730, yet they were genuine single or dual CPU BI bus VAXen. Of course, many of their brothers were quite a bit bigger. And don't forget the VAXstation-8000... Right. But I did say "some". :-) Think 8978 for example... Johnny -- Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus || on a psychedelic trip email: b...@softjar.se || Reading murder books pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
On 07/07/15 23:02, Johnny Billquist wrote: Right. But I did say "some". :-) Think 8978 for example... Does that really count as a VAX? It was just a marketing name for cluster ... Antonio
Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
- Ursprüngliche Message - > Von: Johnny Billquist > An: cct...@classiccmp.org > CC: > Gesendet: 23:02 Dienstag, 7.Juli 2015 > Betreff: Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750) > > On 2015-07-07 23:55, Robert Armstrong wrote: >>> Johnny Billquist bqt at update.uu.se wrote: >>> some of the 8000-series stuff are probably the biggest ... >> >> Not all of them. The 82xx/83xx family was just one 10-1/2" chassis > for >> the CPU - the same physical size as a 11/730, yet they were genuine single >> or dual CPU BI bus VAXen. Of course, many of their brothers were quite a >> bit bigger. >> >> And don't forget the VAXstation-8000... > > Right. But I did say "some". :-) > > Think 8978 for example... I'd say that the 8000 series (besides the 11/7x0 series) were the most diverse in size compared to the 6000, 7000 and 9000 series. As already mentioned, the 82x0 or 83x0 fit into a small half-height cabinet. The 85x0 has the size of a 6000 or 7000 series vax, if I remember well. The 8800 series were housed in very large cabients, larger than the 6000 and 7000 series cabinets. Pierre
Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
>Johnny Billquist bqt at update.uu.se wrote: >some of the 8000-series stuff are probably the biggest ... Not all of them. The 82xx/83xx family was just one 10-1/2" chassis for the CPU - the same physical size as a 11/730, yet they were genuine single or dual CPU BI bus VAXen. Of course, many of their brothers were quite a bit bigger. And don't forget the VAXstation-8000... Bob
SDK-86 Chess source code, anybody?
I have the docs and the ROM images from Nigel, but not the source. I did my share of googling, nothing but a piece or two, and not the whole thing. Anybody have this? Thanks, Randy
Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
On 2015-07-07 23:30, Robert Armstrong wrote: P Gebhardt p.gebhardt at ymail.com wrote: wonder how the ratio of VAX 6000s and 7000s in enthusiasts' hands compared of VAX 11's in terms of numbers is? I guess that /780 and larger systems are rare, but I'd guess that there are some more /730 and /750 around. No idea if my gut feeling reflects facts, though. I know there are several people around with the larger VAXes in storage. That's why I asked about the "working condition" - I'm sure the number of big VAXes that could be switched on, say, this afternoon, is quite a bit smaller. FWIW, most 6000 machines weren't even that big. They're smaller than a 780 by quite a bit. I don't know about a 7000 or 1 - I never actually used one of those in real life. 7000 machines are normally the same size as 6000 machines. Not big at all, in other words. (Update have a 7000-720). I think the 1 machines were larger, but I haven't actually seen any of them. But as far as large go, some of the 8000-series stuff are probably the biggest, depending on how you define things. The 9000 are also very serious. Johnny -- Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus || on a psychedelic trip email: b...@softjar.se || Reading murder books pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
>P Gebhardt p.gebhardt at ymail.com wrote: > wonder how the ratio of VAX 6000s and 7000s in enthusiasts' hands > compared of VAX 11's in terms of numbers is? I guess that /780 and > larger systems are rare, but I'd guess that there are some more /730 > and /750 around. No idea if my gut feeling reflects facts, though. I know there are several people around with the larger VAXes in storage. That's why I asked about the "working condition" - I'm sure the number of big VAXes that could be switched on, say, this afternoon, is quite a bit smaller. FWIW, most 6000 machines weren't even that big. They're smaller than a 780 by quite a bit. I don't know about a 7000 or 1 - I never actually used one of those in real life. Bob
Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
There is a HECNET list http://madame.update.uu.se/~bqt/nodedb?search=&field=0&sort=0 With that in mind, a more list of "live" VAXen of any type, operating hours, IP/domain, hardware, owner, location. I realize it's not a list of every known VAX out there, but "live/operational/networking status" is a good way to trim things down. On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Robert Armstrong wrote: > >I'd vote for "big VAX" list. > > I'd say any VAX with a UNIBUS, SDI, BI or XMI bus, at least, should > qualify. I think that would include all the 7xx, 6xxx, 8xxx, and > 7xxx/1 machines. I don't really know what was in a 9000... > > BTW, is this list limited to machines that are in operable condition? > > Bob > > > >
Re: Looking for SGI Onyx parts
Awesome, mike. Will do. Thanks much. Sent from my iPhone > On Jul 6, 2015, at 13:07, Mike Ross wrote: > > Poke me in a couple of weeks when I'm back home in NZ; I have an > operational Onyx and a few spare boards... > > Mike >> On Jul 6, 2015 9:53 PM, "Ian Finder" wrote: >> >> I recently picked up a full rack ( >> https://instagram.com/p/4yEZlYNSxx/?taken-by=tr1nitr0n) >> >> It was an awesome project, now that I have a home where I can install 220v. >> >> Unfortunately, one of the 4x R4400 @ 150mhz boards is shot, and the System >> Controller is shot. I borrowed the latter from another Onyx system, but >> don't like leaving systems in inoperable states. >> >> Does anyone have these or other ONYX parts they'd be willing to part with >> or sell? >> >> Thanks! >> >> - Ian >> >> -- >> Ian Finder >> (206) 395-MIPS >> ian.fin...@gmail.com >>
Re: email gripe
On 07/07/2015 6:14 PM, Chris Osborn wrote: Begin forwarded message: From: John Robertson Subject: Re: email gripe Date: July 7, 2015 at 6:03:49 PM PDT To: gene...@classiccmp.org, "discuss...@classiccmp.org":On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Reply-To: pinb...@telus.net, "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 Not sure what you are talking about - my Thunderbird (OSX 31.7.0) when I hit reply (Apple-R) created the To: field as: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts ". Am I missing something here? Check out the To: line that made it to the list, notice the first thing is gene...@classiccmp.org. If you go through the archives it only shows up when people using Thunderbird send a message. -- Follow me on twitter: @FozzTexx Check out my blog: http://insentricity.com Ah-ha! I turned on Show All Headers, and you are quite correct (as you knew) - it does address it as gene...@classiccmp.org. Oddly enough when I type in General into the To: field it does pop up with cct...@classiccmp.org as the recipient-to-be. My address book had: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts and General Discussion: On-Topic Posts And I have now deleted the "General Discussion:" - perhaps the colon is throwing things off? Let's see... John :-#)# -- John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9 Call (604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, VideoGames) www.flippers.com "Old pinballers never die, they just flip out"
Re: email gripe
On 07/07/2015 08:29 PM, Fred Cisin wrote: On Tue, 7 Jul 2015, Chuck Guzis wrote: Let's see if my reply has the same problem as Chris cited. Yep! It took "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" and parsed it into: gene...@classiccmp.org, discuss...@classiccmp.org:On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Weird. Let's try this--replace spaces with underscores... --Chuck
Re: email gripe
On Tue, 7 Jul 2015, Chuck Guzis wrote: Let's see if my reply has the same problem as Chris cited. Yep! It took "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" and parsed it into: gene...@classiccmp.org, discuss...@classiccmp.org:On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Re: email gripe
On 07/07/2015 07:27 PM, wulfman wrote: yes html email gets deleted for the most part I don't have that option--customers send whatever they want. Another annoyance is when they send attachments in that Outlook winmail.dat format. I think that Libre office can open it. --Chuck
Re: email gripe
On 07/07/2015 06:41 PM, jwsmobile wrote: Thunderbird does have a bad habit of interpolating and remembering typos, however, so if you at some point in time type in gene...@classicmp.org, there is an entry in the Thunderbird address book called "collected addresses". It may have your general @ classiccmp entry and clearing out crap from there was a recent exercise for me. Also when I go to enter an address there is an attempt to match an address to what I'm typing that had gotten messed up from typos that I had had, and it took an act of congress to find out how to clear out that crap. I simply turned off the option to collect addresses; too many times, I'd wind up sending email to someone I didn't intend to. Let's see if my reply has the same problem as Chris cited. --Chuck
Re: email gripe
yes html email gets deleted for the most part On 7/7/2015 7:13 PM, Jay West wrote: > Chris wrote... > > Boy, count another vote against HTML-izing this list if that's what's being > considered. > - > No, forcing the list to send email as HTML has never been done, nor is it > being considered. > > I do believe there is an option where each member can set their subscription > to be plain text, which I believe is set by default. > > J > > > -- The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the named addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized use, copying, disclosure, or distribution of the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited by the sender and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail.
RE: email gripe
Chris wrote... Boy, count another vote against HTML-izing this list if that's what's being considered. - No, forcing the list to send email as HTML has never been done, nor is it being considered. I do believe there is an option where each member can set their subscription to be plain text, which I believe is set by default. J
Re: email gripe
On 7/7/2015 6:14 PM, Chris Osborn wrote: Begin forwarded message: From: John Robertson Subject: Re: email gripe Date: July 7, 2015 at 6:03:49 PM PDT To: gene...@classiccmp.org, "discuss...@classiccmp.org":On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Reply-To: pinb...@telus.net, "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 Not sure what you are talking about - my Thunderbird (OSX 31.7.0) when I hit reply (Apple-R) created the To: field as: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts ". Am I missing something here? Check out the To: line that made it to the list, notice the first thing is gene...@classiccmp.org. If you go through the archives it only shows up when people using Thunderbird send a message. All of my email ever has come from thunderbird, and it never sends out that. Thunderbird does have a bad habit of interpolating and remembering typos, however, so if you at some point in time type in gene...@classicmp.org, there is an entry in the Thunderbird address book called "collected addresses". It may have your general @ classiccmp entry and clearing out crap from there was a recent exercise for me. Also when I go to enter an address there is an attempt to match an address to what I'm typing that had gotten messed up from typos that I had had, and it took an act of congress to find out how to clear out that crap. thanks Jim
Re: email gripe
Begin forwarded message: > From: John Robertson > Subject: Re: email gripe > Date: July 7, 2015 at 6:03:49 PM PDT > To: gene...@classiccmp.org, > "discuss...@classiccmp.org":On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > > Reply-To: pinb...@telus.net, "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic > Posts" > User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; > rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 > > Not sure what you are talking about - my Thunderbird (OSX 31.7.0) when I hit > reply (Apple-R) created the To: field as: "General Discussion: On-Topic and > Off-Topic Posts ". > > Am I missing something here? Check out the To: line that made it to the list, notice the first thing is gene...@classiccmp.org. If you go through the archives it only shows up when people using Thunderbird send a message. -- Follow me on twitter: @FozzTexx Check out my blog: http://insentricity.com
Re: email gripe
It was thus said that the Great jwsmobile once stated: > > > On 7/7/2015 12:43 PM, Sean Conner wrote: > >It was thus said that the Great jwsmobile once stated: > >>sending live URL's in the text that don't require a multi step copy > >>paste, or even save email edit, feed to lynx would be nice. Html email > >>does that. > > There are some on this list (such as I) that do not use a graphical > > email > >client, but a text-mode email client. [1] > > > > -spc (And the etiquette for this list is inline or bottom posting, not > > top) > > > >[1] To even look at a attached PDF, for example, I have to save it > > first, then download it to view it. > Most of us have either browser embedded PDF viewers, or Adobe associated > with PDF's and are one click away. True enough. But I've tried using a GUI to check email and frankly, I found it too painful to use. It wasn't that the GUI was confusing or inconsistent, but that it was *way too slow*. Sluggish to display, and painfully slow to download (it's not unusual for me to receive everal hundred emails per day). By checking email on the server using a command line tool, I can do the filtering upon receipt (not when downloading) and blast through two emails in the time it would take a GUI to display one. Right now, I'm using an iPad (and a Bluetooth keyboard) with an SSH client to check my email. I get to use an email client I'm familiar with for reading, along with my preferred editor to write this email. > > Yes, I do check my email on the server using a command line program > > [2]. > > > >[2] mutt. I was forced to upgrade a decade ago because elm was no > > longer maintained and non-Y2K compliant (I think that's why I > > switched). > > > > > I just don't see inconveniencing an entire list because a few people > want to run on internet connected 286 machines, with attached ASR33's. I think that's only Tony who does that. > As far as email browsing, I have used thunderbird and prior to that the > same facility in the combined netscape. The way of all emails seem to > be towards letting some great and wonderful company such as your ISP, > Google, Yahoo, or heaven forbid AOL keep all of your email, and present > it, and even thunderbird has gone into "we don't support it anymore" > status with Firefox. > > So archiving my own email may end up in the same state as your argument > for text archiving. Did I mention I run my own email sever? > However the format of the email won't be an issue > in my case. Would that be HTML? HTML 2? HTML 3? HTML 3.2? HTML 4? HTML 5? -spc (Or even XHTML?)
Re: email gripe
On 07/07/2015 4:44 PM, Chris Osborn wrote: On Jul 7, 2015, at 4:18 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: using Thunderbird Which I’ve noticed has problems parsing the "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" No matter which platform anyone is using, it’s always Thunderbird that creates the gene...@classiccmp.org address into the To: field. Not sure what you are talking about - my Thunderbird (OSX 31.7.0) when I hit reply (Apple-R) created the To: field as: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts ". Am I missing something here? John :-#)# (mostly lurking from Vancouver, BC)
Re: email gripe
On 7/7/2015 5:43 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: On Jul 7, 2015, at 3:43 PM, jwsmobile wrote: If there were a technical reason to keep it in a simple format that would be fine, but as Al K pointed out quite some time ago, Google already indexes all of this quite fine as it and most search engines do, so the list is text searchable. There are (at least) two fallacies here: 1) The entire planet has 24x7 ubiquitous and effectively free internet connectivity, and 2) All the visually impaired have software that can cleanly, accurately, and efficiently scrape the browser results these various web search pages display, and can articulate them clearly in an alternate format. This also goes for figuring out how to use the search pages to begin with. --lyndon Not sure what fallacy you see here. The list goes to a location online that is searchable. Search engines index the information from there. Near as I can tell Jay plans on it being online 24/7 and there are no blocks to search engines reading the information and including it in their indexes. Nothing about html format prevents search engines from capturing the information as accurately as text formatting. My point is, that keeping it in text format is not a requirement to make put it in a form that it can be indexed. And I pointed out that some people had warned that all of our discussions were being included in search engines , as a possible source of objection. I only included that point because the same people lobbying for text form may also be the ones who may not want list traffic in search engines, and I conceded that is a separate point. Apologies to Al for dragging his name into the thread. Not sure where your 2 points came from. thanks Jim
Re: email gripe
On 7/7/2015 4:18 PM, Vincent Slyngstad wrote: From: jwsmobile: Tuesday, July 07, 2015 3:43 PM If there were a technical reason to keep it in a simple format that would be fine, but as Al K pointed out quite some time ago, Google already indexes all of this quite fine as it and most search engines do, so the list is text searchable. For me, HTML mail is disdained because it's a security nightmare. I don't want to worry about transparent tracking images, cookies, javascript, and who knows what else they've invented or will invent. I just want to read what you've got to say. I might want to follow your link, if I have sufficient interest and trust, but I want to have to make that decision *before* entering the spy filled, all-singing, all-dancing hype arena. I agree with this. I am not aware of a useful reader of email which supports html that does not block offline content. Thunderbird requires you hit a button to activate remote content. I usually forward such to a yahoo or gmail account if I have doubts about the embedded content. However none of the emails I read are any different than a text formatted message with summary blocking of where graphical content will appear. What are you using which allows day zero type activation of any html content? As I said, I don't use any web based readers or archivers for the reason you cite, but I've never had a problem with any content. Vince -- o< The ASCII Ribbon Campaign Against HTML Email!
Re: email gripe
On Tuesday (07/07/2015 at 04:18PM -0700), Vincent Slyngstad wrote: > > For me, HTML mail is disdained because it's a security nightmare. > I don't want to worry about transparent tracking images, cookies, > javascript, and who knows what else they've invented or will invent. > > I just want to read what you've got to say. > > I might want to follow your link, if I have sufficient interest and > trust, but I want to have to make that decision *before* entering > the spy filled, all-singing, all-dancing hype arena. Boy, count another vote against HTML-izing this list if that's what's being considered. I just want to read people's words. Not execute programs that they send to my inbox. I don't want to use a graphical email client because they are huge software pigs, slow and ridden with bugs and security holes and force me to use far more computer horsepower just to support the GUI than should ever be required to handle simple email. I don't want to have to guess what they quoted because they colored that blue and put their response in in pink and my HTML to text conversion doesn't do colors. Nor do I want to guess which text was in bold and which was in italics because the conversion throws all that away too. People get reduced to putting their initials in front of their inline replies just so you can find the new text they wrote. What would be the benefit to HTML-izing the list? Chris -- Chris Elmquist I joined The ASCII Ribbon Campaign Against HTML Email!
Re: email gripe
On 2015-07-08 01:44, Chris Osborn wrote: On Jul 7, 2015, at 4:18 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: using Thunderbird Which I’ve noticed has problems parsing the "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" No matter which platform anyone is using, it’s always Thunderbird that creates the gene...@classiccmp.org address into the To: field. Just checking. This reply was written in thunderbird, and the to:-address certainly looks like "cctalk@classiccmp.org" to me. Let's see if something happens along the way... Johnny -- Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus || on a psychedelic trip email: b...@softjar.se || Reading murder books pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
Re: email gripe
At 07:18 PM 7/7/2015, Vincent Slyngstad wrote: >For me, HTML mail is disdained because it's a security nightmare. >I don't want to worry about transparent tracking images, cookies, javascript, >and who knows what else they've invented or will invent. That is one reason why I still run Eudora Pro, with HTML disabled. >I just want to read what you've got to say. As do I, but with a message that begins by quoting, unedited, an entire previous post, I never get to what the person has to say. I send those messages to the bit bucket - my reasoning is that if someone cannot take the time to edit their quotes they probably have not taken sufficient time in framing their response. Vincent's post was an excellent example of a succinctly edited post, so it got read. Dale H. Cook, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA Osborne 1 / Kaypro 4-84 / Kaypro 1 / Amstrad PPC-640 http://plymouthcolony.net/starcity/radios/index.html
Re: email gripe
On Jul 7, 2015, at 4:18 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > using Thunderbird Which I’ve noticed has problems parsing the "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" No matter which platform anyone is using, it’s always Thunderbird that creates the gene...@classiccmp.org address into the To: field. -- Follow me on twitter: @FozzTexx Check out my blog: http://insentricity.com
Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
On 2015-07-08 01:25, Antonio Carlini wrote: On 07/07/15 23:06, Johnny Billquist wrote: I honestly don't have a good idea of what defines a "large" VAX. Buses feels unsuitable. Power connector maybe? :-) If the intention is to avoid a huge list then excluding MicroVAXes and VAXstations should produce a list of VAXen that you probably cannot easily simply carry home on the bus. That would unfortunately exclude the VAXstation 8000, which is pretty rare AFAIK. It would also exclude the VAXstation I, which I imagine is also relatively rare these days. I don't think you can easily come up with a simple set of criteria based on power connectors or buses or similar. Perhaps "too big to hug" is what you really want :-) Yeah... Or maybe we should start by asking what would the purpose of the list be. Once that has bee figured out, I'm sure we can come up with some criteria, or explicit list of models to include... Johnny -- Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus || on a psychedelic trip email: b...@softjar.se || Reading murder books pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
On 07/07/15 23:06, Johnny Billquist wrote: I honestly don't have a good idea of what defines a "large" VAX. Buses feels unsuitable. Power connector maybe? :-) If the intention is to avoid a huge list then excluding MicroVAXes and VAXstations should produce a list of VAXen that you probably cannot easily simply carry home on the bus. That would unfortunately exclude the VAXstation 8000, which is pretty rare AFAIK. It would also exclude the VAXstation I, which I imagine is also relatively rare these days. I don't think you can easily come up with a simple set of criteria based on power connectors or buses or similar. Perhaps "too big to hug" is what you really want :-) Antonio
Re: email gripe
On 07/07/2015 03:43 PM, jwsmobile wrote: I just don't see inconveniencing an entire list because a few people want to run on internet connected 286 machines, with attached ASR33's. And to say that should carry much weight on selecting the format of the email is pretty inconsiderate to everyone. Well, I started out with the basic Unix mail program years ago, collecting my incoming mail using uucp. It was better than most of the alternatives, including Compuserve and BBS setups (which I also used). When things went to a GUI under Windows 3.1, I adopted Eudora, then Calypso, then...a list of others and finally am using Thunderbird under Linux. It's pretty decent. I don't have any problems viewing content. Generally, I maintain two levels in my personal work--one is mostly up-to-date in tools; the other is mostly older tools that I'm used to and can use efficiently. That includes a full-screen editor that hails back to my 8080 days and has been 'ported many times. --Chuck
Re: email gripe
From: jwsmobile: Tuesday, July 07, 2015 3:43 PM If there were a technical reason to keep it in a simple format that would be fine, but as Al K pointed out quite some time ago, Google already indexes all of this quite fine as it and most search engines do, so the list is text searchable. For me, HTML mail is disdained because it's a security nightmare. I don't want to worry about transparent tracking images, cookies, javascript, and who knows what else they've invented or will invent. I just want to read what you've got to say. I might want to follow your link, if I have sufficient interest and trust, but I want to have to make that decision *before* entering the spy filled, all-singing, all-dancing hype arena. Vince -- o< The ASCII Ribbon Campaign Against HTML Email!
Re: email gripe
On 7/7/2015 12:43 PM, Sean Conner wrote: It was thus said that the Great jwsmobile once stated: sending live URL's in the text that don't require a multi step copy paste, or even save email edit, feed to lynx would be nice. Html email does that. There are some on this list (such as I) that do not use a graphical email client, but a text-mode email client. [1] -spc (And the etiquette for this list is inline or bottom posting, not top) [1] To even look at a attached PDF, for example, I have to save it first, then download it to view it. Most of us have either browser embedded PDF viewers, or Adobe associated with PDF's and are one click away. Yes, I do check my email on the server using a command line program [2]. [2] mutt. I was forced to upgrade a decade ago because elm was no longer maintained and non-Y2K compliant (I think that's why I switched). I just don't see inconveniencing an entire list because a few people want to run on internet connected 286 machines, with attached ASR33's. And to say that should carry much weight on selecting the format of the email is pretty inconsiderate to everyone. If there were a technical reason to keep it in a simple format that would be fine, but as Al K pointed out quite some time ago, Google already indexes all of this quite fine as it and most search engines do, so the list is text searchable. As far as email browsing, I have used thunderbird and prior to that the same facility in the combined netscape. The way of all emails seem to be towards letting some great and wonderful company such as your ISP, Google, Yahoo, or heaven forbid AOL keep all of your email, and present it, and even thunderbird has gone into "we don't support it anymore" status with Firefox. So archiving my own email may end up in the same state as your argument for text archiving. However the format of the email won't be an issue in my case.
Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
On 2015-07-07 23:49, tony duell wrote: I'd say any VAX with a UNIBUS, SDI, BI or XMI bus, at least, should qualify. I think that would include all the 7xx, 6xxx, 8xxx, and 7xxx/1 machines. I don't really know what was in a 9000... 9000 is also XMI. Several of them, if I remember right. SDI on the other hand is just a disk interface. I don't think it makes sense to include Perhaps SDI is a typo for SBI, as in the 11/780? Good point. SBI would make much more since in there. But this also becomes a question of what kind of buses are we interested in. The I/O buses, or the CPU buses, or something else? Unibus was always just an I/O bus for the VAX. Should we then also mention Massbus? How about CI? And on some of the 8000 machines, the CPU sat on a bus called NMI, on which you then had the VAXBI adapters. I honestly don't have a good idea of what defines a "large" VAX. Buses feels unsuitable. Power connector maybe? :-) Johnny -- Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus || on a psychedelic trip email: b...@softjar.se || Reading murder books pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
RE: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
> >I'd say any VAX with a UNIBUS, SDI, BI or XMI bus, at least, should > > qualify. I think that would include all the > > 7xx, 6xxx, 8xxx, and 7xxx/1 machines. I don't really know what was in > > a 9000... > > 9000 is also XMI. Several of them, if I remember right. SDI on the other > hand is just a disk interface. I don't think it makes sense to include Perhaps SDI is a typo for SBI, as in the 11/780? -tony
Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
On 2015-07-07 20:54, Robert Armstrong wrote: I'd vote for "big VAX" list. I'd say any VAX with a UNIBUS, SDI, BI or XMI bus, at least, should qualify. I think that would include all the 7xx, 6xxx, 8xxx, and 7xxx/1 machines. I don't really know what was in a 9000... 9000 is also XMI. Several of them, if I remember right. SDI on the other hand is just a disk interface. I don't think it makes sense to include that here, as SDI controllers existed for Qbus machines as well, meaning we're now including almost everything but pizza boxes. :-) BTW, is this list limited to machines that are in operable condition? If you were to ask me, I would find it interesting to find even inoperable ones. But on the other hand, I would probably abuse such a list to try and collect a few more bits for the 8650 machines I'm involved with. (More memory first and foremost.) Which might not be what others think would be the purpose of such a list... :-) (I'll also happily help anyone else who want to try and get an 86x0 machine running. There are a bunch of things people usually needs help with if they are trying this.) Johnny -- Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus || on a psychedelic trip email: b...@softjar.se || Reading murder books pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
RE: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
> BTW, is this list limited to machines that are in operable condition? I would include machines that were clearly restorable. OK, anything can be restored, but you know what I mean :-). In other words an 11/730 or 11/750 that needs its TU58 rollers replaced, or an 11/780 that needs somebody to go through the logic and find the TTL chip that's died. Something like that. But probably not the VAXbar :-) -tony
RE: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
>I'd vote for "big VAX" list. I'd say any VAX with a UNIBUS, SDI, BI or XMI bus, at least, should qualify. I think that would include all the 7xx, 6xxx, 8xxx, and 7xxx/1 machines. I don't really know what was in a 9000... BTW, is this list limited to machines that are in operable condition? Bob
Re: email gripe
>> sending live URL's in the text that don't require a multi step copy
>> paste, or even save email edit, feed to lynx would be nice.
This is a client-side issue; there is no need to uglify the rest of the
email just because someone has an email reader that doesn't know what
to do with URLs.
>> Html email does that.
Only if the mail reader already knows how to handle such horrors. And
there's no reason a GUI MUA can't turn URLs in text/plain text into
clickable links; I've seen it happen (over others' shoulders).
> There are some on this list (such as I) that do not use a graphical
> email client, but a text-mode email client.
Me too. Not that that is necessarily incompatible with HTML, though I
am not aware of any text MUAs that do anything with HTML but display it
like any other text.
But, send me mail that's HTML-only and it will be refused at SMTP time;
send me mail that's plain-and-HTML multipart and I will usually stop
reading when I see the HTML-uglified version. (And yes, that means
right at the beginning if you put the HTML part first - which would be
a strange thing to do anyway, as multipart is defined to express sender
preference by ordering, with later parts more preferred.)
> [1] To even look at a attached PDF, for example, I have to save it
> first, then download it to view it.
Somewhat similar here: quit the less(1) that's reading the text, run
mimesplit on the message file ("mimesplit `mmpath cur`" is the usual
incantation), step through and save the attachment when I get to it,
then start up gs or pdftotext or whatever on it - possibly after
copying it to my desktop machine, possibly running on the mail-reading
machine but displaying on my desktop (those two machines sit less than
a foot apart and are in the same broadcast domain on my house network).
> Yes, I do check my email on the server using a command line
> program
So do I: my routine mail-reading machine is the same machine that my MX
record points to, the machine that handles incoming mail.
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTMLmo...@rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
Re: List Gripes
It was thus said that the Great couryho...@aol.com once stated: > Dwight, yes I think so as I am on many lists and some hate the > aol address more than others do I've had my fights with AOL (since I run my own email server). I think in the end, I had to tell AOL that I was responsible for email from 66.252.224.242 so that AOL wouldn't lump me in with problematic servers in the 66.252.224.0/24 block, and I had to whitelist all of AOL's IP addresses with the greylist software I run [1]. All because my dad has an AOL address ... -spc (I've also had my fair share of grief from gmail ...) [1] http://www.x-grey.com/
Re: email gripe
It was thus said that the Great jwsmobile once stated: > > sending live URL's in the text that don't require a multi step copy > paste, or even save email edit, feed to lynx would be nice. Html email > does that. There are some on this list (such as I) that do not use a graphical email client, but a text-mode email client. [1] -spc (And the etiquette for this list is inline or bottom posting, not top) [1] To even look at a attached PDF, for example, I have to save it first, then download it to view it. Yes, I do check my email on the server using a command line program [2]. [2] mutt. I was forced to upgrade a decade ago because elm was no longer maintained and non-Y2K compliant (I think that's why I switched).
Re: List Gripes
It was thus said that the Great william degnan once stated: > I have found that bounces can be reduced if you play around with the > receiving mail server.For example, turn off greylisting (returns 400 > level codes some servers don't like). I do greylisting on my email server [1] and I have no problems with this list. I do have a delay of 25 minutes though. And currently, the following have been whitelisted (classiccmp.org survived the timeout period): 199.188.211.196 cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org s...@conman.org 199.188.211.196 cctech-boun...@classiccmp.org s...@conman.org 199.188.211.196 mailman-boun...@classiccmp.org s...@conman.org -spc [1] http://www.x-grey.com/ Supports both sendmail and postfix
RE: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
Should the requirement be weight, physical size, or what tools are lost in it? BTU requirements.
Re: PDP-11/23, accessories, software, manuals and IBM portable available (South Africa)
Would love a VT125, is shipping to the UK likely to be expensive? On 7 July 2015 at 12:25, Steve Maddison wrote: > I was contacted by a chap in South Africa (Pretoria area) who has the > following kit available. If interested, please reply to me directly and > I'll put you in touch. > > * PDP-11/23, with dual RL02 drives and 9 disks > * 2x VT100, one modified to VT125 > * DecPrinter III > * HP 70470A plotter > * RSX11-M 4 with manuals > * RSX11-M 3.2 (I think manuals only) > * Fortran 77 with manuals > * IBM portable (ca. 1982) > > -- > Steve Maddison > http://www.cosam.org/ >
Re: List Gripes
Dwight, yes I think so as I am on many lists and some hate the aol address more than others do Ed# In a message dated 7/7/2015 7:29:43 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time, dkel...@hotmail.com writes: As providers get more crowded, they will have more bounces. They tend to happen at times when a lot of messages are being handled. It seems that the list parameters were set when only a few bounces happened. Times have changed. I've only been back on the list for about a week and already it has determined that my address has too many bounces. There must be a parameter that can be set to adjust the sensitivity. Dwight =
Re: email gripe
sending live URL's in the text that don't require a multi step copy paste, or even save email edit, feed to lynx would be nice. Html email does that. thanks Jim On 7/7/2015 7:44 AM, dwight wrote: What happened to email. If your into looking at something, look at the source of this simple email. What is all that html code for? This is just a few simple text strings with nothing special needed. Dwight
Re: List Gripes
I have found that bounces can be reduced if you play around with the receiving mail server.For example, turn off greylisting (returns 400 level codes some servers don't like). On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Mouse wrote: > > I've only been back on the list for about a week and already it has > > determined that my address has too many bounces. > > > There must be a parameter that can be set to adjust the sensitivity. > > I wouldn't count on it. I've already run into aspects of mailman which > exhibit astonishing blind spots. (As a possibly-outdated example, the > version I looked at could not be configured for sane unsubscribes; it > always insisted on the subscriber providing a password, which is a good > option to have but just plain antisocial to inflict even on lists > and/or subscribers with no history justifying it.) > > /~\ The ASCII Mouse > \ / Ribbon Campaign > X Against HTMLmo...@rodents-montreal.org > / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B >
Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
I'd vote for "big VAX" list. The minutiae of marketing names is pretty boring and irrelevant to such a list isn't it? Should the requirement be weight, physical size, or what tools are lost in it?
Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
>> Sorry for the scope creep; but perhaps it might be more >> useful/interesting to make it a registry of any VAX that has a name of >> the form "VAX-11/7xx"? (Which could also include the VAX 8600 and > VAX >> 8650, since were originally to be called the VAX-11/790 and >> VAX-11/795.) > > I'd vote for "big VAX" list. The minutiae of marketing names is > pretty > boring and irrelevant to such a list isn't it? > > --Toby I wonder how the ratio of VAX 6000s and 7000s in enthusiasts' hands compared of VAX 11's in terms of numbers is? I guess that /780 and larger systems are rare, but I'd guess that there are some more /730 and /750 around. No idea if my gut feeling reflects facts, though. Kind regards, Pierre
email gripe
What happened to email. If your into looking at something, look at the source of this simple email. What is all that html code for? This is just a few simple text strings with nothing special needed. Dwight
Re: List Gripes
> I've only been back on the list for about a week and already it has > determined that my address has too many bounces. > There must be a parameter that can be set to adjust the sensitivity. I wouldn't count on it. I've already run into aspects of mailman which exhibit astonishing blind spots. (As a possibly-outdated example, the version I looked at could not be configured for sane unsubscribes; it always insisted on the subscriber providing a password, which is a good option to have but just plain antisocial to inflict even on lists and/or subscribers with no history justifying it.) /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTMLmo...@rodents-montreal.org / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
RE: List Gripes
As providers get more crowded, they will have more bounces. They tend to happen at times when a lot of messages are being handled. It seems that the list parameters were set when only a few bounces happened. Times have changed. I've only been back on the list for about a week and already it has determined that my address has too many bounces. There must be a parameter that can be set to adjust the sensitivity. Dwight
Re: VAX-11/750 registry (Was: Reviving a VAX-11/750)
On 2015-07-06 11:17 PM, Christian Gauger-Cosgrove wrote: On 6 July 2015 at 23:03, Alan Perry wrote: Is there any interest in starting a VAX-11/750 registry? I wouldn't mind knowing who else out there has one and where they are now. If you are interested, send me e-mail (vax11-...@snowmoose.com). Sorry for the scope creep; but perhaps it might be more useful/interesting to make it a registry of any VAX that has a name of the form "VAX-11/7xx"? (Which could also include the VAX 8600 and VAX 8650, since were originally to be called the VAX-11/790 and VAX-11/795.) I'd vote for "big VAX" list. The minutiae of marketing names is pretty boring and irrelevant to such a list isn't it? --Toby Thoughts on that idea? Regards, Christian
PDP-11/23, accessories, software, manuals and IBM portable available (South Africa)
I was contacted by a chap in South Africa (Pretoria area) who has the following kit available. If interested, please reply to me directly and I'll put you in touch. * PDP-11/23, with dual RL02 drives and 9 disks * 2x VT100, one modified to VT125 * DecPrinter III * HP 70470A plotter * RSX11-M 4 with manuals * RSX11-M 3.2 (I think manuals only) * Fortran 77 with manuals * IBM portable (ca. 1982) -- Steve Maddison http://www.cosam.org/
Masscomp MC-500 - Re: cctech Digest, Vol 13, Issue 5
On 2015-07-06 3:33 PM, Clem Cole wrote: ... One other note about the MC-500. If was the first commercial Multiprocessor UNIX (predating the 386 bases symmetric boxes but a few years) as well as being the first real time UNIX box. I still have working one in my basement. It has 4 CPU boards in it with a 68010 and 68000 on each, plus a 68000 in the display processor, a number of 29000's in the FP and APP's units, more 29000 logic in the Data Acq Unit, as well as 80186 in the network processor. All in all, a pretty neat federation of processors each doing their thing. Pretty cool for early 1980s' Small quibble - If you mean AMD 29K wasn't released until 1988? So those boards must have come later than the MC-500 itself (~1984?) --Toby Clem
Re: cctech Digest, Vol 13, Issue 5
On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 1:00 PM, wrote: > Having the primary CPU just stall, and have the second CPU normally just > be idle until a page fault happens on the other hand is something I can see > how it could be done. Indeed that is exactly how it was done on the Masscomp MC-500 and I believe the original Apollo - this was know as "Forest Baskett Mode" - who wrote up the idea in a letter/comment to one of the architecture groups in the late 1970s when the chip was first released. The primary processor is called the "executor" and the second is called the "fixer." The fixer is either halted or runs a small loop keeping the translation buffer (TB) full. When the TB logic detects a fault for the executor, it is put in wait state and the fixer is restarted (if ned be) and refills the TB. When it's valid the executor is allowed to come out of wait state (a very slow memory fill). When the 68010 was released we make a small change the CPU board (a couple of PALs) and allowed the executor to actually fault. But the fixer still did the TB fill. But the executor could do a task switch and run some other code, while the fill was taking place. I'm not sure if Apollo updated their original CPU board or just designed a new one with the 68010, I would have to ask some one like Les Crudele to find out for sure. And Sun never did the Forest Baskett dual 68K trick. Sun-1's with 68000 ran a V7 version of swapping Unix (originally from Unisoft) until the 68010 came out when they could support VM on the "SUN-2" and Joy et all moved BSD 4.1 to it. One other note about the MC-500. If was the first commercial Multiprocessor UNIX (predating the 386 bases symmetric boxes but a few years) as well as being the first real time UNIX box. I still have working one in my basement. It has 4 CPU boards in it with a 68010 and 68000 on each, plus a 68000 in the display processor, a number of 29000's in the FP and APP's units, more 29000 logic in the Data Acq Unit, as well as 80186 in the network processor. All in all, a pretty neat federation of processors each doing their thing. Pretty cool for early 1980s' Clem
