History Question (RSCS V2 Ship Date)
Can anyone recall offhand when RSCS Version 2 (the first one to run under GCS rather than standalone) first shipped? I'd offer a free beer at SCIDS to the first person to respond with a verifiable and correct answer, but I understand that such behaviour is discouraged nowadays. Again, TIA. Jeff
Re: History Question (RSCS V2 Ship Date)
I first installed it on or about December, 1989, VM/SP/HPO 5.0 Jeff Gribbin jeff.grib...@gmail.com Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 09/10/2010 11:25 AM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject History Question (RSCS V2 Ship Date) Can anyone recall offhand when RSCS Version 2 (the first one to run under GCS rather than standalone) first shipped? I'd offer a free beer at SCIDS to the first person to respond with a verifiable and correct answer, but I understand that such behaviour is discouraged nowadays. Again, TIA. Jeff
Re: History Question (RSCS V2 Ship Date)
Earliest possible is 1985 and VM/SP Release 4 (first ship of GCS) but I h ave a nagging feeling that it shipped later and we started out on VM/SP Rel 4 with RSCS V1. For once, Mother's History didn't give me the answer ... Not really important - for my needs, 'A Long Time Ago' will do - it's jus t nice to nail these things down if one can.
Re: History Question (RSCS V2 Ship Date)
Really ? Is there any doc about how to do this? Restrictions (other than no SNA)? On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 9:04 AM, Alan Altmark alan_altm...@us.ibm.comwrote: On Friday, 09/10/2010 at 11:25 EDT, Jeff Gribbin jeff.grib...@gmail.com wrote: Can anyone recall offhand when RSCS Version 2 (the first one to run under GCS rather than standalone) first shipped? I'd offer a free beer at SCIDS to the first person to respond with a verifiable and correct answer, but I understand that such behaviour is discouraged nowadays. RSCS V2 was announced August 7, 1984. (Letter 284-269) Availabliity was September 5, 1985. (Letter 285-306) btw, for non-SNA usage, you can still RSCS in a standalone (single-user) GCS virtual machine - no recovery machine required. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: History Question (RSCS V2 Ship Date)
Tom, SC24-6098 z/VM Group Control System. Search for, 'Single User Group'. I've only skimmed it but it basically lo oks to me as if you just run RSCS in what would normally be the recovery machine. Should simplify things a bit for those who only need GCS for RS CS.
Re: History Question (RSCS V2 Ship Date)
On Friday, 09/10/2010 at 01:07 EDT, Tom Huegel tehue...@gmail.com wrote: Really ? Is there any doc about how to do this? Restrictions (other than no SNA)? See the GCS manual for references to single user group. You can use the GROUP exec to answer YES to the Single user environment question, or specify SGROUP=YES on the CONFIG macro. In either case, rebuild GCS. I'm overstating the no SNA restriction. If you want to run VTAM, VSCS, and RSCS in the same virtual machine, you can do it. You can even add AVS and PVMG. The more the merrier, eh? Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: VM history question
Absolutely right, Alan. That's what I get for wading through my emails from the top (most recent). I was composing a thread-closing post based on his reply when I saw your note. Sir Lynn does us amateur VM historians a great service with his encyclopedic records and recall. Not to mention having influenced a large part of it himself. :-) -Chip- On 7/14/09 04:35 Alan Altmark said: On Tuesday, 07/14/2009 at 12:12 EDT, Chip Davis c...@aresti.com wrote: Jeff, yours may be the earliest reference to saved segments so far. Is the named segment you mention the same concept? That would push implementation of the idea back into the CP/67 days. I thought Sir Lynn's posts on the subject rather definitive, no? If I read it rightly, NSS was in CP/67 and DCSS arrived VM/370 R3. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: VM history question
Mike Walter mike.wal...@hewitt.com said: Surely Sir Lynn would know off the top of his head, and have ALL the gory details in his astonishingly complete personal records. I'm definitely no substitute for Sir Lynn, but I remember DCSS and DMKSNT in VM/370 Release 3 PLC 8, which is where I started with VM. In fact, I used CMSAMS and CMSVSAM then for Unnatural Practices, or at least not for the purposes for which they were created. I was porting the CP/67 port of LISP/MTS to VM/370, and needed something to replace the named segment used under CP/67 for LISP's pushdown stack. Instead of checking the stack pointer for the end of the stack, it would just push onto the stack and take the program check when it ran off the end. I simulated that by using DIAG x'64' to attach CMSAMS and CMSVSAM, and then set the protect key to user key for all but the last 2K (remember 2K pages?) page. A LISP interpreter written entirely in BAL, with self-modifying code and almost out of base register addressibility... that was quite an interesting piece of code. regards, Jeff Savit
Re: VM history question
Jeff, yours may be the earliest reference to saved segments so far. Is the named segment you mention the same concept? That would push implementation of the idea back into the CP/67 days. -Chip- On 7/13/09 20:15 Jeff Savit said: I was porting the CP/67 port of LISP/MTS to VM/370, and needed something to replace the named segment used under CP/67 for LISP's pushdown stack.
Re: VM history question
On Tuesday, 07/14/2009 at 12:12 EDT, Chip Davis c...@aresti.com wrote: Jeff, yours may be the earliest reference to saved segments so far. Is the named segment you mention the same concept? That would push implementation of the idea back into the CP/67 days. I thought Sir Lynn's posts on the subject rather definitive, no? If I read it rightly, NSS was in CP/67 and DCSS arrived VM/370 R3. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
VM history question
Though I'm not sure if it was On the eighteenth of April, in Seventy-Five I suspect that Hardly a man is now alive Who remembers that famous day and year ... when shared segments were implemented in VM. It seems to me that it predated the VM/370 SEPP/BSEPP days when I started, but there's been many a synapse lost since then. Google, Wikipedia, ibm.com, and even Melinda's wonderful work have not been revealing, so I thought perhaps might be an old gray-beard like myself (with a better memory) still reading this list. Any help? -Chip-
Re: VM history question
Chip Davis wrote: ... when shared segments were implemented in VM. It seems to me that it predated the VM/370 SEPP/BSEPP days when I started, but there's been many a synapse lost since then. VM/370 R6 does have DCSS (DisContiguous Shared Segments IIRC) - Even without SEPP or BSEPP. But of course, contrary to modern VM systems (ie, VM/XA onward), these needed to be defined when the nucleus is built (via DMKSNT) - and space had to be allocated (that is, even though the space was allocated as PERM, you had to make sure no user MDISKs were sitting there) and formatted (through IPL FMT) especially for this purpose on a CP owned DASD. Note that VM/370 R6 is still being actively used as a learning tool by some individuals who aren't lucky enough to have access to a modern and up to date VM system - since it is the last VM release that was available as a no-charge SCP - and is also believed to be de-jure (although IANAL) public domain because of the lack of copyright statement and because it was release prior to the 1976 copyright laws. --Ivan
Re: VM history question
On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 5:09 AM, Ivan Warren i...@vmfacility.fr wrote: Chip Davis wrote: ... when shared segments were implemented in VM. It seems to me that it predated the VM/370 SEPP/BSEPP days when I started, but there's been many a synapse lost since then. VM/370 R6 does have DCSS (DisContiguous Shared Segments IIRC) - Even without SEPP or BSEPP. But of course, contrary to modern VM systems (ie, VM/XA onward), these needed to be defined when the nucleus is built (via DMKSNT) - and space had to be allocated (that is, even though the space was allocated as PERM, you had to make sure no user MDISKs were sitting there) and formatted (through IPL FMT) especially for this purpose on a CP owned DASD. Note that VM/370 R6 is still being actively used as a learning tool by some individuals who aren't lucky enough to have access to a modern and up to date VM system - since it is the last VM release that was available as a no-charge SCP - and is also believed to be de-jure (although IANAL) public domain because of the lack of copyright statement and because it was release prior to the 1976 copyright laws. DCSS = DisContiguous *SAVED* Segment. They aren't necessarily shared.
Re: VM history question
P S wrote: DCSS = DisContiguous *SAVED* Segment. They aren't necessarily shared. Doh ! Of course ! thanks for the correction --Ivan
Re: VM history question
Oh, I vividly remember the joys of DMKSNT and managing DCSSes, and of trying to squeeze everything below the 16Meg line yet above the VMSIZE. It seemed that the very users who needed access to the most packages also had to have the largest VMs. Things are *MUCH* better now that nearly everything can be changed on the fly and you don't even need an IPL, much less assembly and re-gen. These new kids today don't know how good they have it... wheeze cough hack ... I would think it would have been sometime in the early 70's, so I guess it might have been in the first release of VM/370, but I'm having trouble tracking it down. -Chip- On 7/12/09 09:09 Ivan Warren said: Chip Davis wrote: ... when shared segments were implemented in VM. It seems to me that it predated the VM/370 SEPP/BSEPP days when I started, but there's been many a synapse lost since then. VM/370 R6 does have DCSS (DisContiguous Shared Segments IIRC) - Even without SEPP or BSEPP. But of course, contrary to modern VM systems (ie, VM/XA onward), these needed to be defined when the nucleus is built (via DMKSNT) - and space had to be allocated (that is, even though the space was allocated as PERM, you had to make sure no user MDISKs were sitting there) and formatted (through IPL FMT) especially for this purpose on a CP owned DASD. Note that VM/370 R6 is still being actively used as a learning tool by some individuals who aren't lucky enough to have access to a modern and up to date VM system - since it is the last VM release that was available as a no-charge SCP - and is also believed to be de-jure (although IANAL) public domain because of the lack of copyright statement and because it was release prior to the 1976 copyright laws. --Ivan
Re: VM history question
Chip Davis wrote: Oh, I vividly remember the joys of DMKSNT and managing DCSSes, and of trying to squeeze everything below the 16Meg line yet above the VMSIZE. It seemed that the very users who needed access to the most packages also had to have the largest VMs. Things are *MUCH* better now that nearly everything can be changed on the fly and you don't even need an IPL, much less assembly and re-gen. These new kids today don't know how good they have it... wheeze cough hack ... I would think it would have been sometime in the early 70's, so I guess it might have been in the first release of VM/370, but I'm having trouble tracking it down. -Chip- Well, things sure are easier to manage today ! However, there is *one* thing that became more difficult with VM/XA : If you were unfortunate enough to have to use RMODE 24 code (that is, code sitting below the 16MB line) and/or were restricted to a S/370 virtual machine, then the XA requirement of 1M segments (compared to 64K segments for S/370) meant that you were pretty limited in the number of segments that you could bring up at any one time in a virtual machine. This is something I had to tackle when I started playing with VM/XA SP2.1 - and still had a lot of 24 bit code sitting around (for example, the CMS VSAM code - with its 3 required segments (CMSDOS, CMSBAM, CMSVSAM) PLUS the CMS segment meant a virtual machine running VSAM code had to have a virtual machine size of no more than 10MB or so. More than that, at that time, we were doing a lot of storage optimization work (my 4381 only had 32MB of real storage) so we were putting a lot of stuff in shared segments. So if you wanted to share anything - you were going to eat up 1 ou of the 16 available MBs in a virtual machine. Of course, nowadays, this is quite a moot point since most of the code is now RMODE 31 (and S/370 mode VMs don't exist anymore) - and doesn't have those restrictions (or rather, the constraint is to eat up 1 ou of 2048 MBs.. something I could have done with at that time !) --Ivan
Re: VM history question
On: Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 04:01:34PM +,Chip Davis Wrote: I would think it would have been sometime in the early 70's, so I guess it might have been in the first release of VM/370, but I'm having trouble tracking it down. Caution; going on rusty memory here but ISTR that CP-67 had the ability to IPL CMS in it. I also recall that saving CMS for CP-67 was done stand-alone rather than on the running system. CMS under CP-67 could be IPL'd on the bare iron which was no longer true under VM/370. -- Rich Greenberg N Ft Myers, FL, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 239 543 1353 Eastern time. N6LRT I speak for myself my dogs only.VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val, Red, Shasta Casey (RIP), Red Zero, Siberians Owner:Chinook-L Retired at the beach Asst Owner:Sibernet-L
Re: VM history question
Won't be at work for a week to check, but wouldn't the z/VM Migration Guide contain that info? It's a gold mine of release-to-release function, but I can't recall how far back it goes. Surely Sir Lynn would know off the top of his head, and have ALL the gory details in his astonishingly complete personal records. Mike Walter Hewitt Associates. (Sent from the wee keyboard on a Blackberry.) - Original Message - From: Chip Davis [c...@aresti.com] Sent: 07/12/2009 04:01 PM GMT To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: VM history question Oh, I vividly remember the joys of DMKSNT and managing DCSSes, and of trying to squeeze everything below the 16Meg line yet above the VMSIZE. It seemed that the very users who needed access to the most packages also had to have the largest VMs. Things are *MUCH* better now that nearly everything can be changed on the fly and you don't even need an IPL, much less assembly and re-gen. These new kids today don't know how good they have it... wheeze cough hack ... I would think it would have been sometime in the early 70's, so I guess it might have been in the first release of VM/370, but I'm having trouble tracking it down. -Chip- On 7/12/09 09:09 Ivan Warren said: Chip Davis wrote: ... when shared segments were implemented in VM. It seems to me that it predated the VM/370 SEPP/BSEPP days when I started, but there's been many a synapse lost since then. VM/370 R6 does have DCSS (DisContiguous Shared Segments IIRC) - Even without SEPP or BSEPP. But of course, contrary to modern VM systems (ie, VM/XA onward), these needed to be defined when the nucleus is built (via DMKSNT) - and space had to be allocated (that is, even though the space was allocated as PERM, you had to make sure no user MDISKs were sitting there) and formatted (through IPL FMT) especially for this purpose on a CP owned DASD. Note that VM/370 R6 is still being actively used as a learning tool by some individuals who aren't lucky enough to have access to a modern and up to date VM system - since it is the last VM release that was available as a no-charge SCP - and is also believed to be de-jure (although IANAL) public domain because of the lack of copyright statement and because it was release prior to the 1976 copyright laws. --Ivan The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. All messages sent to and from this e-mail address may be monitored as permitted by applicable law and regulations to ensure compliance with our internal policies and to protect our business. E-mails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by e-mail.
Re: history question
John McKown wrote: Just for my curiousity. Was CP-67 the first virtualization engine ever produced? Or did some other company have this type of ability before IBM did it? cp40 predated cp67. the science center really wanted a 360/50 to modify for virtual memory ... but all of the spare 50s were going to the FAA ... so they had to settle for 360/40. when 360/67 finally becames available they ported cp40 to cp67. lots of posts mentioning the science center http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech recent post mentioning some wiki entries about cp/cms http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007.html#8 The Elements of Programming Style http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007.html#12 The Elements of Programming Style a couple other posts in that thread http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006y.html#20 The Elements of Programming Style http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006y.html#34 The Elements of Programming Style http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007.html#1 The Elements of Programming Style no the 60s ... but index of old email (mostly from the 70s and 80s), much of it vm related http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/lhwemail.html = and large number of past posts mentioning cp40 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#0 360/67, was Re: IBM's Project F/S ? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#23 MTS LLMPS? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#25 MTS LLMPS? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#37 SIE instruction (S/390) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#46 Rethinking Virtual Memory http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#53 How Do the Old Mainframes http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#54 How Do the Old Mainframes http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/97.html#22 Pre S/360 IBM Operating Systems? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#28 Drive letters http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#33 ... cics ... from posting from another list http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#45 Why can't more CPUs virtualize themselves? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#126 Dispute about Internet's origins http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#139 OS/360 (and descendents) VM system? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#142 OS/360 (and descendents) VM system? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#174 S/360 history http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#237 I can't believe this newsgroup still exists http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#52 Correct usage of Image ??? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#81 Ux's good points. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#82 Ux's good points. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#42 Domainatrix - the final word http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#79 Unisys vs IBM mainframe comparisons http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#16 First OS with 'User' concept? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#30 OT? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#59 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#63 TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#66 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#78 TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#29 z900 and Virtual Machine Theory http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#9 VM: checking some myths. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#10 VM: checking some myths. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#46 Whom Do Programmers Admire Now??? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#34 IBM OS Timeline? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#39 IBM OS Timeline? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#47 TSS/360 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#49 TSS/360 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#6 Microcode? http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#44 PDP-10 Archive migration plan http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#64 ... the need for a Museum of Computer Software http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#8 TOPS-10 logins (Was Re: HP-2000F - want to know more about it) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#39 VAX, M68K complex instructions (was Re: Did Intel Bite Off More Than It Can Chew?) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#44 cp/67 (coss-post warning) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002e.html#47 Multics_Security http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#30 Computers in Science Fiction http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#36 Blade architectures http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#13 Secure Device Drivers http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#59 history of CMS http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#62 history of CMS http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#70 history of CMS http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#64 vm marketing (cross post) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#22 Computer Architectures http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#56 10 choices that were critical to the Net's success http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#65 The problem with installable operating systems http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002m.html#3 The problem with installable operating systems
History question.
Just for my curiousity. Was CP-67 the first virtualization engine ever produced? Or did some other company have this type of ability before IBM did it? -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing it.
Re: History question.
Before that, there was CP-40. Look at Melinda Varian's History of VM. You can find it at http://www.princeton.edu/~melinda/ Regards, Richard Schuh -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of McKown, John Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:21 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: History question. Just for my curiousity. Was CP-67 the first virtualization engine ever produced? Or did some other company have this type of ability before IBM did it? -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing it.
Re: History question.
Just for my curiousity. Was CP-67 the first virtualization engine ever produced? Or did some other company have this type of ability before IBM did it? See Melinda Varian's VM: Past Present and Future paper for all the gory details from the IBM perspective. There were efforts at DEC with the PDP-8 OS-8 system to do some device virtualization, but not the true simulation of CP. Probably the next really serious virtual machine implementation was the p-System at UCSD.
Re: History question.
On Jan 11, 2007, at 4:37 PM, David Boyes wrote: Just for my curiousity. Was CP-67 the first virtualization engine ever produced? Or did some other company have this type of ability before IBM did it? See Melinda Varian's VM: Past Present and Future paper for all the gory details from the IBM perspective. There were efforts at DEC with the PDP-8 OS-8 system to do some device virtualization, but not the true simulation of CP. Probably the next really serious virtual machine implementation was the p-System at UCSD. Interestingly, the first virtual machine implementation for microcomputers was *not* the p-System, but Infocom's Z-Machine, which they used to fit the Great Underground Empire into 48K. This is also how Infocom was able to support such a wide variety of systems in the magnificently diverse landscape that was the 8-bit mico era. zcode is still the native target of the Inform programming language, which is probably the most popular text adventure development platform extant. It has been extended with a virtual machine known as glulx, which is pretty much just like zcode but with the IO handed off to another layer (glk) and the 16-bitness removed, with the overall effect that you have 4G rather than 128K of memory to squeeze your game into. (later z-machine versions raised the bar to 256K (v5,6) during Infocom's lifetime, and the text adventure community has developed a z8 format allowing 512K (no one uses v7)) Adam
Re: History question.
On Jan 11, 2007, at 4:37 PM, David Boyes wrote: Just for my curiousity. Was CP-67 the first virtualization engine ever produced? Or did some other company have this type of ability before IBM did it? See Melinda Varian's VM: Past Present and Future paper for all the gory details from the IBM perspective. There were efforts at DEC with the PDP-8 OS-8 system to do some device virtualization, but not the true simulation of CP. Probably the next really serious virtual machine implementation was the p-System at UCSD. Interestingly, the first virtual machine implementation for microcomputers was *not* the p-System, but Infocom's Z-Machine, which they used to fit the Great Underground Empire into 48K. zcode is still the native target of the Inform programming language, which is probably the most popular text adventure development platform extant. It has been extended with a virtual machine known as glulx, which is pretty much just like zcode but with the IO handed off to another layer (glk) and the 16-bitness removed, with the overall effect that you have 4G rather than 128K of memory to squeeze your game into. (later z-machine versions raised the bar to 512K (v5,6) during Infocom's lifetime, and the text adventure community has developed a z8 format
Re: History question.
In the late 60's and early 70's I was a fairly junior IBM systems engineer in Chicago. I scrounged a lot of machine time to prepare for a benchmark and demo for a customer. One IBM site I found time at was in Des Plaines, IL, just NW of O'Hare field. I used a 360/40 that had an extra toggle switch on the front panel. It was labelled virtual and real. That was the test bed for CP/40. It was at least 10-15 years before I knew what that meant and the fact that I was using a museum piece. I think that when this came up a year or two ago, someone told me and I think that it was Steve Gentry from Lafayette Life, that that particular 360/40 was the only one. An interesting side on that demo (at least for me) was that the customer was a Honeywell user. Naturally the customer's programs that I was demonstrating were heavily tape. During the demo, the takeup reel and hub on the 240x tape drive completely fell off the drive and dropped down into the vacuum tube. We didn't get the sale that time. Jim Schuh, Richard wrote: Before that, there was CP-40. Look at Melinda Varian's History of VM. You can find it at http://www.princeton.edu/~melinda/ Regards,=20 Richard Schuh=20 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of McKown, John Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:21 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: History question. Just for my curiousity. Was CP-67 the first virtualization engine ever produced? Or did some other company have this type of ability before IBM did it? -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing it.=20 -- Jim Bohnsack Cornell University (607) 255-1760 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20
Dave, I have that it is : VS Fortran Interactive Debug (IAD) wfm = 3/31/98 eos = 7/26/91 munson -Original Message- From: David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Jul 17, 2006 9:23 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20 <ZZZ!--[IF !mso]> <ZZZ![ENDIF]--> Anybody recognize this product? I found a maintenance tape for it while sorting through the Princeton tape archives, but since the sales manual on IBMlink was lobotomized, the older product info appears to have vanished. Pointers or info about it appreciated. (COT: Id forgotten what a royal PITA 9 track tapes are. Especially on a 3430 w/o autoloading. No wonder the 3480 was considered such a enormous improvement. ) David Boyes Sine Nomine Associates -Original Message- From: David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Jul 17, 2006 9:23 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20 <ZZZ!--[IF !mso]> <ZZZ![ENDIF]--> Anybody recognize this product? I found a maintenance tape for it while sorting through the Princeton tape archives, but since the sales manual on IBMlink was lobotomized, the older product info appears to have vanished. Pointers or info about it appreciated. (COT: Id forgotten what a royal PITA 9 track tapes are. Especially on a 3430 w/o autoloading. No wonder the 3480 was considered such a enormous improvement. ) David Boyes Sine Nomine Associates Bill Munson VM Resources LTD www.vm-resources.com President MVMUA http://www.marist.edu/~mvmua
Re: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20
On Monday, 07/17/2006 at 09:23 AST, David Boyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anybody recognize this product? I found a maintenance tape for it while sorting through the Princetontape archives, but since the sales manual on IBMlink was lobotomized, the older product info appears to have vanished. No one ever listens to me. (sigh) The Sales Manual and Announcement archives are in the IBM Offering Information Tool. http://www.ibm.com/common/ssi/OIAccess.wss. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20
Apparently its: 5668-903FORTRAN VS Interactive Debug See http://www.phd.au.edu/curriculum/facilities.html Shimon On 17 Jul 2006 at 9:23, David Boyes wrote: Anybody recognize this product? I found a maintenance tape for it while sorting through the Princeton tape archives, but since the sales manual on IBMlink was lobotomized, the older product info appears to have vanished. Pointers or info about it appreciated. (COT: Id forgotten what a royal PITA 9 track tapes are. Especially on a 3430 w/o autoloading. No wonder the 3480 was considered such a enormous improvement. ) David Boyes Sine Nomine Associates
Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20
Anybody recognize this product? I found a maintenance tape for it while sorting through the Princeton tape archives, but since the sales manual on IBMlink was lobotomized, the older product info appears to have vanished. Pointers or info about it appreciated. (COT: Id forgotten what a royal PITA 9 track tapes are. Especially on a 3430 w/o autoloading. No wonder the 3480 was considered such a enormous improvement. ) David Boyes Sine Nomine Associates
Re: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20
My memories of what should be on PUT 8602 are getting a little faint, and the tape isn't in such good shape...8-) How could it not be in good shape? PUT 8602 is an even-numbered PUT and all old-timers know that it's only odd-numbered PUTs that are bad. Besides, PUT 8602 has far exceeded my personal PUT application aging standard of letting it age forty days and forty nights.;-) Mike Walter Hewitt Associates The opinions expressed above are mine alone, not those of my employer. David Boyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 07/17/2006 09:31 AM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20 No one ever listens to me. (sigh) The Sales Manual and Announcement archives are in the IBM Offering Information Tool. http://www.ibm.com/common/ssi/OIAccess.wss. Tried some common queries; that source has been lobotomized as well. The RPQ and announcements database is still fairly complete, but the sales manual is pretty much shot full of holes. Search for 3033 or 3705 if you want to see what I mean. Pretty much anything prior to late 1990's to 2000 is gone. (grumble... it's not like you guys don't *make* disk storage. What's a few gigs of disk really cost you? Heck, put the old sales manual stuff on CD/DVD and *sell* it to us history buffs...grumble...grumble) Thanks for the reference to the Fortran IAD. My memories of what should be on PUT 8602 are getting a little faint, and the tape isn't in such good shape...8-) -- db (who just set down the VM/370 R5 distribution tape on my desk. And VM/SP 1.0 source. And VM TCPIP 1.0 source and object. This tape archive is fascinating stuff. Or maybe I'm just easily amused.) The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.
Re: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20
How could it not be in good shape? PUT 8602 is an even-numbered PUT and all old-timers know that it's only odd-numbered PUTs that are bad. 8-) Seriously, though. Big chunks of the oxide are flaking off the backing. One thing that's been very illustrative in this project -- magnetic tape doesn't last forever. 20+ years is *really* pushing it. Besides, PUT 8602 has far exceeded my personal PUT application aging standard of letting it age forty days and forty nights.;-) It is approaching the unto the 7th generation rule, isn't it? We're definitely into the seventy times seven arena. Interesting update: the last box I processed this morning contained a TSS tape dated 1971. Lee Varian has better handwriting that most of us will *ever* have -- the label is still clearly readable, even if the tape isn't. To the authors of TAPEMAP: you guys rule. The absolute wonder-gadget of the week. -- db
Re: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20
VM/370 R5, PLC ?? with SEPP and the IBM internal Kingston Common system was my first VM system. Cut my teeth on it. Maybe that's why they look so bad. Jim At 10:31 AM 7/17/2006, you wrote: snip -- db (who just set down the VM/370 R5 distribution tape on my desk. And VM/SP 1.0 source. And VM TCPIP 1.0 source and object. This tape archive is fascinating stuff. Or maybe I'm just easily amused.) Jim Bohnsack Cornell Univ. (607) 255-1760
TAPEMAP (was: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20)
Do you have a version of TAPEMAP that understands 3480, 3490 and 3590 tap e drives? My copy still tells me all the internal stuff like CMS file information from VMFPLC2/TAPE dumps, but the length usage is broken. On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:20:36 -0400, David Boyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] w rote: Snipped To the authors of TAPEMAP: you guys rule. The absolute wonder-gadget of the week. -- db
Re: TAPEMAP (was: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20)
My TAPEMAP MODULE, 3.066, with a date of 1994 and I don't know if that's an actual date or not, at least reads 3480's. I have not had occasion to try to read 3590's on it. I can't swear to the length numbers, but it seems to understand the data as far as what kind of files it sees. David is right. TAPEMAP is great. Jim At 01:38 PM 7/17/2006, you wrote: Do you have a version of TAPEMAP that understands 3480, 3490 and 3590 tap= e drives? My copy still tells me all the internal stuff like CMS file information from VMFPLC2/TAPE dumps, but the length usage is broken. On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:20:36 -0400, David Boyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] w= rote: Snipped To the authors of TAPEMAP: you guys rule. The absolute wonder-gadget of the week.=20 -- db Jim Bohnsack Cornell Univ. (607) 255-1760
Re: TAPEMAP (was: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20)
I know there is a version that groks 3490/3590; I don't think my module has it. If you find it, let me know... 8-) David Boyes Sine Nomine Associates -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thomas Kern Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 1:46 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: TAPEMAP (was: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20) Do you have a version of TAPEMAP that understands 3480, 3490 and 3590 tap e drives? My copy still tells me all the internal stuff like CMS file information from VMFPLC2/TAPE dumps, but the length usage is broken. On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:20:36 -0400, David Boyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] w rote: Snipped To the authors of TAPEMAP: you guys rule. The absolute wonder-gadget of the week. -- db
Re: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20
VM/370 R5, PLC ?? with SEPP and the IBM internal Kingston Common system was my first VM system. Cut my teeth on it. Maybe that's why they look so bad. Well, they haven't been well stored, either. Two words: student operators. -- db
Re: TAPEMAP (was: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20)
David, Try www.cbttape.org Lots of goodies out there, not just MVS. Bob Richards -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Boyes Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 3:13 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: TAPEMAP (was: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20) I know there is a version that groks 3490/3590; I don't think my module has it. If you find it, let me know... 8-) David Boyes Sine Nomine Associates -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thomas Kern Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 1:46 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: TAPEMAP (was: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20) Do you have a version of TAPEMAP that understands 3480, 3490 and 3590 tap e drives? My copy still tells me all the internal stuff like CMS file information from VMFPLC2/TAPE dumps, but the length usage is broken. On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:20:36 -0400, David Boyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] w rote: Snipped To the authors of TAPEMAP: you guys rule. The absolute wonder-gadget of the week. -- db LEGAL DISCLAIMER The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. Seeing Beyond Money is a service mark of SunTrust Banks, Inc. [ST:XCL]
