Re: [Simh] Lost PDP-11 OSes?

[John Forecast]

> On May 21, 2020, at 2:53 PM, Paul Koning  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On May 20, 2020, at 11:38 PM, Ray Jewhurst  wrote:
>> 
>> I am trying to collect all the OSes that I can for the PDP-11 on Simh and I 
>> have noticed that there are a few missing.  
> 
> Along those lines: is there MUMPS-11 anywhere?  That's nicely obscure.  
> Another obscure one is CAPS-11, though that's probably far less interesting.
> 
> MUMPS was a database system, apparently a very good one.  It was used as the 
> core for ASSIST-11, a telephone directory assistance database.  In other 
> words, the database that 411 operators would consult to answer your request 
> for a phone number in a second or two.  Database lookup in a million-record 
> or so database, in around a second, on a PDP-11 in 1978.  Nice.
> 
>   paul

I have a distribution tape image of Mumps-11 v3.3 and a pre-built RL02 image 
which I got from the Computer Conservation  Society in the UK. The images are 
no longer available on their website. I have no place to make them available 
but if someone wants to host them I can make them available (total is ~8MB).

   John.

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

Re: [Simh] Lost PDP-11 OSes?

[John Forecast]

> On May 21, 2020, at 2:59 AM, Bob Eager  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 20 May 2020 23:38:08 -0400
> Ray Jewhurst  wrote:
> 
>> I am trying to collect all the OSes that I can for the PDP-11 on Simh
>> and I have noticed that there are a few missing.  The ones I'm
>> looking for are LSX (which used to be available online but I haven't
>> seen it in a few years.), PWB-Unix (which I heard is available but is
>> not able to run on the simulator.), UCSB Pascal (which I haven't seen
>> hide nor hair of. Also, the only Pascal I've seen is SOLO), TRIPOS
>> (which I have only seen broken links even mentioning it for the
>> PDP-11.) and lastly, XINU (which I have only seen tar.gz's on TUHS
>> but no install instructions or disk images.).  If anyone has any
>> leads on any of these, it would be much appreciated.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Ray
> 
> I thunk I have the TRIPOS sources somewhere. I'll have a dig.

The TRIPOS sources are available from Martin Richards web site at Cambridge:

>

   John.

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

Re: [Simh] Problems running simH in Android

[John Forecast]

Works fine for me - LineageOS 14.1 (which is basically Nougat 7.1) on a Nexus 7 
tablet.

  John.

> On May 9, 2018, at 2:49 PM, Mark Pizzolato  wrote:
> 
> The github master branch code should now work under termux on Android for at 
> least Marshmallow on up.  I have tested Marshmallow and Oreo.  I would 
> appreciate confirmation on other Android versions:
>  
> 1)  Install termux from the Google Play Store
> 2)  Under termux, Install the tool chain:
> $ pkg install clang make git
> 3)  Testing with:
> $ git clone https://github.com/simh/simh 
> $ cd simh
> $ make vax
> $ BIN/vax
> sim> B
> If you end up at the >>> prompt everything looks good.  If you did this 
> without a physical keyboard connected, you won’t be able to type Control-E to 
> get back to the sim> prompt.  Just enter B ZZZ which is an unknown device and 
> the boot ROM will halt returning you to the sim> prompt.
>  
> Once you get that far, all the other simulators should build fine and be 
> usable pretty much like on most other Linux environments.  Things which 
> require root access won’t work since termux doesn’t give you that.  It would 
> be interesting to know if NAT mode networking works for the VAX simulators… <>
>  
> From: Mark Pizzolato 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 11:00 PM
> To: Mark Pizzolato >; Ray 
> Jewhurst >; simh 
> >
> Subject: RE: [Simh] Problems running simH in Android
>  
> Hi Ray,
>  
> Give the latest github code a try.
>  
> BTW, what Android version is running on your phone/tablet?
>  
> What is the output of ‘uname –a’ in your termux session?
>  
> -  Mark
>   __
> From: Simh [mailto:simh-boun...@trailing-edge.com 
> ] On Behalf Of Mark Pizzolato
> Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 8:13 AM
> To: Ray Jewhurst >; 
> simh >
> Subject: Re: [Simh] Problems running simH in Android
>  
> To follow up a little more on this.  
>  
> The call to tcsetattr() is failing with errno: 13 – Permission denied
>  
> From: Mark Pizzolato 
> Sent: Sunday, May 6, 2018 11:47 PM
> To: Mark Pizzolato >; Ray 
> Jewhurst >; simh 
> >
> Subject: RE: [Simh] Problems running simH in Android
>  
> I did a little digging and struggled with typing a whole bunch on my 
> phone.
>  
> The problem you’re seeing is due to the Linux OS environment you’re 
> running under doesn’t support ‘raw’ mode for terminal I/O.  When you
> start a simulator the traffic to/from the simulated console device is 
> expected to be exactly the characters that the user types on the console
> keyboard.  To achieve this, the current tt mode is gathered with tcgetattr()
> then those attributes are adjusted so that every character typed is received
> without any interpretation by the OS and output is also not translated (i.e. 
> \n only sends a LF character instead of CRLF characters).  The error message, 
> you seeing is due to the call a tcsetattr() failing.
>  
> From: Simh [mailto:simh-boun...@trailing-edge.com 
> ] On Behalf Of Mark Pizzolato
> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 8:38 PM
> To: Ray Jewhurst >; 
> simh >
> Subject: Re: [Simh] Problems running simH in Android
>  
> If you’re not comfortable digging into this yourself, then please create an 
> Issue at https://github.com/simh/simh/issues 
>  and spell out exactly how to
> recreate your setup and reproduce the problem.
>  
> From: Simh [mailto:simh-boun...@trailing-edge.com 
> ] On Behalf Of Ray Jewhurst
> Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 5:48 PM
> To: simh >
> Subject: [Simh] Problems running simH in Android
>  
> Greetings 
>  
> I have been trying forever to get simh to run under the Termux Android shell 
> app and got very close but no cigar. It builds okay but then when I try 
> running it, it starts fine but when I go to run an OS,  I get this: 
>  
> PDP-11 simulator V4.0-0 Currentgit commit id: f2f4bfa8
> sim> do rt1154f.ini
> Disabling XQ
> rt1154f.ini-3> b rk0
> sim_ttrun() returned: Console input I/O error
> sim>
>  
> Any ideas? 
>  
> Thanks 
>  
> Ray
> ___
> Simh mailing list
> Simh@trailing-edge.com 
> http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh 
> 

Re: [Simh] BLISS ( was Re: 101 Basic Games for RSTS/E (was Re: PDP11 on Simh for public access))

[John Forecast]

> On Jan 26, 2018, at 2:17 PM, Johnny Billquist  wrote:
> 
> On 2018-01-26 18:48, Timothe Litt wrote:
>> BLISS-36,-16,-32,-32E,-64E, MIPS, INTEL, IA64, are DEC's common BLISS - 
>> evolved (and greatly extended) from BLISS-11, but not (really) 
>> source-compatible for non-trivial programs.  "common" means that (with 
>> carefully defined exceptions that can be conditionally compiled), the same 
>> language is accepted by all, and it's possible to write portable programs.  
>> Including common BLISS itself.  RMS-10/20 is another non-trivial example - 
>> same sources as VAX/RMS.  There are a number of targets and host environment 
>> combinations that are supported.
>> BLISS-16 is hosted on both PDP-10 and VAX, producing PDP-11 object code.  I 
>> used both.  I didn't encounter an Alpha-hosted version - but it should have 
>> compiled & run there, so it probably existed.  Or was VESTed.
> 
> I don't think BLISS-16 ran on PDP-10, but I could be wrong. I've never seen 
> or heard anything about BLISS-16 running on Alpha or beyond. I guess it could 
> be possible to do, but I sortof doubt anyone did. If anyone have the bits, I 
> would be very interested in hearing about it, as I would like to recompile 
> some bits and pieces. (Any BLISS-16 compiler would be a good start.)
> 
>> Most software written in BLISS-10 & -11 was converted to common  BLISS.
>> There was an attempt at self-hosting BLISS-16, but it failed - technically, 
>> it ran, but there really wasn't enough address space to make it usable.  
>> Cross-compiling wasn't popular (networks were crude), so BLISS-16 was not as 
>> widely adopted.
> 
> Well, parts of the RSX kernel is written in BLISS-16, and all of RMS-11. Also 
> some parts of DECnet-11M-PLUS.
> That much I know. I don't know what else might been written in BLISS-16.
> 
Do you know which parts ended up in Bliss? I was project lead for the 
first version of DECnet-11M-Plus which was written entirely in Macro-11 (Well 
there may have been Fortran/Basic etc in the run-time libraries).

  John.

>   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
> ___
> Simh mailing list
> Simh@trailing-edge.com
> http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

[Simh] CDC1700 simulator update

[John Forecast]

I’ve updated the CDC1700 simulator to include:

1. Support for the 1752 Drum controller with capacities from 192KB to 
3MB

2. Implement the ability to share subroutines between interrupt service 
routines at different priorities.

3. Implement a number of Simh expect scripts for customizing MSOS 5. 

Back in the day, CDC would have supplied each site with 2 
distribution tapes/card decks:

1. A generic distribution with drivers for every 
supported device/feature.

2. A distribution tailored explicitly to the customer’s 
configuration.

Unfortunately, none of the generic distributions seemed to have 
survived but we can use the tailored distribution as the base
for limited customization. We can easily remove support for 
specific peripherals but adding a new device requires finding a
suitable update kit (there are a few available on bitsavers) 
and performing the update by trial and error. The MSOS 4
customization guide (available on bitsavers) can be helpful.

This is probably the last release which will only support the 1700-series. CDC 
moved on to the Cyber-18 series which included an
enhanced instruction set along with the ability to address up to 512KB. The 
current simulator can disassemble the enhanced instruction set
(if SET CPU INSTR=ENHANCED command is used) but cannot execute these 
instructions.

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

Re: [Simh] VMS 1.5 installable?

[John Forecast]

> On Oct 17, 2017, at 3:48 PM, Zane Healy  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Oct 17, 2017, at 12:39 PM, Paul Koning  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Oct 17, 2017, at 3:31 PM, Ray Jewhurst  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I'm sure this has asked before but I couldn't find any references to it 
>>> here. On Bitsavers, I found a file called vms_1.5_1600.tap and was 
>>> wondering if it is something that can be installed on Simh and if so could 
>>> someone please give me instructions on how to it? I think it would be fun 
>>> to play with an early version of VMS.
>> 
>> I would assume so.  You need to set up the right simulated hardware and 
>> devices.  11/780 with RP06 or something like that?  
>> 
>> There's a documentation set for V1.5 also on Bitsavers, including the 
>> installation manual.
>> 
>>  paul
> 
> This is something I’ve wanted to try for years, but never found the time for. 
>  Please let us know how it goes!
> 
> Zane
> 
> 
I don’t think you’ll be able to get early versions of VMS running on SIMH. A 
lot (almost all?) of the utilities run in PDP-11 compatibility mode  which, as 
far as I can see, is not supported by the 11/780 emulator.

  John.

> 
> 
> ___
> Simh mailing list
> Simh@trailing-edge.com
> http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

Re: [Simh] Announcement: CDC 1700 release 2 and request for documentation

[John Forecast]

Mark reported that the build was broken but it looks like it’s all there now. 
There are a number of Coverity issues with a new file that I added but you 
should be OK unless you’re interested in tracing MSOS system requests.

  John.

> On Mar 15, 2017, at 3:37 AM, SPC <spedr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 2017-03-15 1:41 GMT+01:00 John Forecast <j...@forecast.name>:
>> I would like to announce release 2 of the CDC 1700 simulator. The major 
>> changes include:
>> 
>>1. Fix protect fault for 2-word instructions so that background task 
>> now work correctly
>>2. Lay the ground work for supporting the enhanced instruction set of 
>> later
>>Cyber-18 series processors
>>3. Fix disk layout bug (Disks are not backwards compatible with 
>> previous version)
>>4. Add debugging support for displaying MSOS 5 system requests
>>5. Fix various problems found by Coverity
>> 
>> Fix #1 means that the Macro Assembler and Fortran compiler are now 
>> functional.
>> 
>> I’ve also added some utilities to simtools for manipulating .tap files 
>> (creating, extracting and
>> copying) along with a utility for handling COSY archives (COSY is a 
>> run-length encoding
>> scheme used on the CDC 1700 for storing source card decks). Bitsavers has 
>> tapes containing
>> source archives for the Macro Assembler, the Fortran compiler and MSOS 4.
> 
> Hi! Only a question... Is this release added to the SIMH repository?
> 
> Gracias | Regards - Saludos | Greetings | Freundliche Grüße | Salutations
> -- 
> Sergio Pedraja
> -
> No crea todo lo que ve, ni crea que está viéndolo todo

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

[Simh] Announcement: CDC 1700 release 2 and request for documentation

[John Forecast]

I would like to announce release 2 of the CDC 1700 simulator. The major changes 
include:

1. Fix protect fault for 2-word instructions so that background task 
now work correctly
2. Lay the ground work for supporting the enhanced instruction set of 
later
Cyber-18 series processors
3. Fix disk layout bug (Disks are not backwards compatible with 
previous version)
4. Add debugging support for displaying MSOS 5 system requests
5. Fix various problems found by Coverity

Fix #1 means that the Macro Assembler and Fortran compiler are now functional.

I’ve also added some utilities to simtools for manipulating .tap files 
(creating, extracting and
copying) along with a utility for handling COSY archives (COSY is a run-length 
encoding
scheme used on the CDC 1700 for storing source card decks). Bitsavers has tapes 
containing
source archives for the Macro Assembler, the Fortran compiler and MSOS 4.

The install tape I’ve been using was created by CDC explicitly for Exxon’s 1784 
system. It
includes device drivers for a 1752 drum, a 1743-2 asynchronous communications 
controller
and a 1728/430 card reader punch. I have documentation for the card 
reader/punch but if
anyone has documentation for the 1752 or 1743-2 I would appreciate hearing 
about. In fact I
would be interested in any 1700/Cyber-18 documentation.

I believe that it should be possible to generate a new system from scratch 
including whatever
peripherals are available in the simulator. In order to do this I would need a 
copy of the
MSOS 5 customization guide - bitsavers has a preliminary copy of the MSOS 4 
version but
that may not be sufficient.

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

Re: [Simh] Is the CDC 1700 FORTRAN compiler available?

[John Forecast]

> On Jan 30, 2017, at 12:35 AM, Leo Broukhis  wrote:
> 
> In the very first BESM-6 FORTRAN compiler -- the one derived from the CDC 
> 1604 FORTRAN compiler by manually retargeting the assembly language source -- 
> there is a peculiar bug: the line
> IF (X=Y) stmt
> which should be rejected as syntactically incorrect (and is rejected by 
> another, independently written compiler), does compile, and the resulting 
> code is like
> X=Y
> IF(0.NE.0) stmt
> 
> I'd like to check if the bug was there in the CDC compiler, or was introduced 
> in the process of retargeting. As there is no CDC 1604 emulator in SIMH, CDC 
> 1700 is the closest thing available (I know that their architectures are 
> different; it's still worth checking in case the CDC 1700 compiler uses the 
> same parsing algorithm). 
> 
> Does anyone have the knowledge how to run FORTRAN on the CDC 1700 emulator? 
> 
> Thanks,
> Leo
> 
> ___
> Simh mailing list
> Simh@trailing-edge.com
> http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

Leo,
 The MSOS installation described in CDC1700-MSOS.txt includes the Fortran 
compiler. Unfortunately, both the assembler and fortran compiler cause a 
protection fault (jp01) when run. I believe this is due to the emulator being 
based on the original instruction  set definition which included a number of 
“unused” bits in certain  instructions. Later implementations of the 
architecture (using the MP17 microprocessor to emulate the 1700 instructions) 
added enhancements to the instruction set which redefined these bits - MSOS 
assumes that it is running on one of these later implementations. I’m actively 
working on allowing the emulator to run in multiple modes; the original 
instruction set and the basic instruction set which will treat enhanced 
instructions as a NOP. I just started this a few days ago and have no idea how 
long it will take.

John.

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

[Simh] Announcing CDC 1700 series simulator

[John Forecast]

For the past couple of years or so, I have been working on a SIMH-based
simulator for the CDC1700 series, a 16-bit system from the mid-1960's, using
the documentation and software available at bitsavers. It has now sufficiently
stable to allow others to make use ot the software. The base system implements:

- a 1714 CPU with:
 - 1705 multi-level interrupts and direct storage access bus
 - up to 32KW of memory
 - memory protect system
 - Optional 64KW support

- 1711-A teletypewriter
- 1721-A paper tape reader
- 1723-A paper tape punch
- 1740 or 1742-30 line printer
- 1738-B disk pack controller with up to 2 disk packs:
 (853 disk pack - 1.5MW)
 (854 disk pack - 3.0MW)
- 1733-2 cartridge disk controller with up to 4 drives:
 Each drive has 1 fixed disk and 1 removeable disk:
  (856-2 CDD - 1.13MW per disk)
  (856-4 CDD - 2.25MW per disk)
- 1732-A or 1732-3 magtape controller with 4 transports

The simulator is able to boot the diagnostic tape (SYSTEM17_SMM_DIAGS.TAP at
bitsavers.org) and successfully execute tests for each of the above
components. Some test sections fail due to various reasons; lack of
documentation, timing issues, feature not implemented etc.

The simulator is also able to boot and install MSOS 5 from an installation
tape (MSOS5_SL136.tap at bitsavers.org) onto a 1733-2 cartridge drive. This
is a copy of a distribution tape provided by CDC to run on a 64KW system at
Exxon.

I would like to thank Doug Gwyn for answering questions about the system
architecture and providing details about specific diagnostics tests and
Al Kossow for for peripheral documentation so that I could get MSOS 5
installed.

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

Re: [Simh] pdp11 and unix

[John Forecast]

> On Feb 27, 2016, at 2:01 PM, Paul Koning  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Feb 26, 2016, at 7:13 PM, Clem Cole  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 6:28 PM, Nigel Williams 
>>  wrote:
>> Perhaps not unusual for the 1960s but laborious none-the-less.
>> 
>> ​Depends who you are.   For grins look for the original Cray-1 "assembler" 
>> box.   You'll discover there are no mnemonics like "add", "branch" - just 
>> octal codes.   Seymor didn't need them. ​
> 
> Obviously, to get an assembler you'd first have to bootstrap *that*, unless 
> you could write a cross-assembler.  And early assemblers weren't necessarily 
> all that fancy.  
> 
> I've been reading some 1950s era computer descriptions, for machines without 
> assemblers.  Opcodes are simply written as op/addr so you'd remember, say, 
> that 0 is add and 6 is store, and so forth.  A machine introduced in Holland 
> in 1958 -- the EL-X1 -- had a very bare-bones assembler, or slightly smart 
> loader, depending on how you'd want to think about it.  Just a few hundred 
> instructions; it had opcodes like "0A" (add to A) or "6S" (store S register). 
>  And it had symbolic addresses, but you couldn't label individual locations, 
> only "paragraphs" because symbols were only pairs of one of 13 letters, i.e., 
> a max of 169 symbols per program.  Still, with that primitive tool some large 
> software was written, such as the world's first ALGOL compiler.
> 
> It isn't really all that much harder than a modern assembler once you get 
> used to the different look.
> 
>   paul
> 

When I was in secondary school in the mid-1960’s, I had a weekend job as an 
operator on the
Atlas 2 (Titan) at Cambridge University in the UK and later worked as a junior 
programmer there over the summer when I went to university. Atlas instructions 
were fixed format (10-bit opcode field, 2 7-bit B-register addresses and a 
24-bit memory address) and the assembler
accepted numeric input for each of the fields. I still remember some of the 
basic instructions:

121 3   0   5   would load 5 
into B-register 3
121 127 0   addrwould jump to addr 
since B127 was the “PC”

The hardware did not include a subroutine call instruction so you had to use an 
“Extracted”
(sort of like a trap to BIOS) IIRC:

 1362   0   0   addrwould call the 
routine at addr and leave a return
link in B90
121 12790   0   would return from the 
subroutine

This was the first computer I had contact with and it really wasn’t that hard 
to remember the
basics although there were something like 300 instructions and a similar number 
of extracodes!

  John.

> ___
> Simh mailing list
> Simh@trailing-edge.com
> http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

Re: [Simh] VMS/VDE: Almost there

[John Forecast]

On Oct 8, 2015, at 9:57 AM, Paul Koning <paulkon...@comcast.net> wrote:

> 
>> On Oct 7, 2015, at 11:42 PM, John Forecast <j...@forecast.name> wrote:
>> 
>> On Oct 7, 2015, at 7:17 PM, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>> 
>>> ...
>>> 
>>  Phase II use NSP v3.1 so that’s probably another indication that it’s a 
>> Phase I product.
> 
> That would be an interesting surprise.  The history I have seen says that 
> Phase I was RSX only.
> 
> It also appears that Phase I is undocumented, and that it isn't compatible 
> (can't be made to interoperate) with Phase II.
> 
Before coming to the US, I worked at a customer site in Sweden which 
had 2 11/40s
running RSX-11D and DECnet Phase I ( I think hey had DU-11s 
interfaces). For a first
version it was actually pretty stable.The intention was to run a 
master/warm standby
system - I don’t know how well it worked since I left before the system 
went on-line.

The only documentation I saw was the end-user docs; installation guide, 
programming guide
etc. I suspect that there were only a small number of Phase I 
installations (I do know that
Volvo in Gothenburg was one) - I submitted an SPR (Software Problem 
Report) while in
Sweden and then proceeded to answer it once I got to the US!

John.

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

Re: [Simh] VMS/VDE: Almost there

[John Forecast]

On Oct 7, 2015, at 7:17 PM, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:

> On 2015-10-07 21:50, John Forecast wrote:
>> 
>> On Oct 7, 2015, at 1:16 PM, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2015-10-07 18:43, John Forecast wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Oct 7, 2015, at 9:56 AM, Paul Koning <paulkon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> DECNET is available under RSX-11M and RSTS/E on PDP-11s, Tops-10 and 
>>>>>> TOPS-20
>>>>>> on PDP-10s, and under VMS (and possibly Ultrix, I don't remember for 
>>>>>> certain)
>>>>>> on VAXen, and on VMS follow-on systems.  It is as far as possible 
>>>>>> agnostic
>>>>>> about what kind of system it was running on or connecting to.
>>>>> 
>>>>> DECnet/Ultrix, yes.  There is also a limited DECnet for RT-11, and for 
>>>>> DOS.  And VAXELAN.  And possibly IAS, I don't remember that one for sure.
>>>>> 
>>>>Both IAS and RSX-11D (essentially the same code) were Phase II only. 
>>>> There was also a
>>>>Phase II implementation for OS/8 but I seem to remember it being 
>>>> cancelled fairly early
>>>>in the Phase II schedule.
>>> 
>>> I thought IAS and -11D made it to phase III, but I can't find any evidence 
>>> either way now that I'm looking.
>>> 
>>  I worked on the 2.0 release and I know there was a 2.1 bug fix update 
>> but I don’t remember
>>  any phase III implementation.
> 
> You might well be right. I tried searching for SPDs for DECnet/IAS and only 
> found the 2.0 release that way. And the 2.0 release was for phase II. IAS 
> itself got to at least V3.5 release in 1992. Surprised that DECnet was never 
> updated, but like I said, can't find anything.
> 
>>> I have DECNET-8. It's not for OS/8 but for RTS-8. But yes, it is phase II. 
>>> I have never tried it, though. So I don't know how/if it actually works, 
>>> and I don't have any phase II or phase III nodes to test against.
>>> 
>>  Yes, you’re right, it was RTS-8. Looking at the date on the DECNET-8 
>> SPD (May 1977) seems
>>  to imply that it was a Phase I product. Around that time we were just 
>> putting together the
>>  system-level architecture of DECnet-11M/11D/IAS and it would be another 
>> year before
>>  they would ship (SPD says June 1978).
> 
> I have always just assumed it was phase II, but now I sat down and tried 
> reading through the code. And I'm not sure anymore.
> 
> It's clearly called V1A (some modules are at V1C) of DECNET/8, but the 
> problem is that I can't find any clear mention of which phase it is anywhere.
> What I can find is that it claims to implement NSP SPEC LEVEL 2.2. Not sure 
> what that is worth. The TLK program also mention adding PDP11 compatibility, 
> so it would definitely appear that it worked, and could communicate with 
> PDP-11 systems.
> 
Phase II use NSP v3.1 so that’s probably another indication that it’s a 
Phase I product.

> It's also clearly dated early 1977.
> 
>   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
> ___
> Simh mailing list
> Simh@trailing-edge.com
> http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

Re: [Simh] VMS/VDE: Almost there

[John Forecast]

On Oct 7, 2015, at 1:16 PM, Johnny Billquist <b...@softjar.se> wrote:

> On 2015-10-07 18:43, John Forecast wrote:
>> 
>> On Oct 7, 2015, at 9:56 AM, Paul Koning <paulkon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>>> ...
>>>> DECNET is available under RSX-11M and RSTS/E on PDP-11s, Tops-10 and 
>>>> TOPS-20
>>>> on PDP-10s, and under VMS (and possibly Ultrix, I don't remember for 
>>>> certain)
>>>> on VAXen, and on VMS follow-on systems.  It is as far as possible agnostic
>>>> about what kind of system it was running on or connecting to.
>>> 
>>> DECnet/Ultrix, yes.  There is also a limited DECnet for RT-11, and for DOS. 
>>>  And VAXELAN.  And possibly IAS, I don't remember that one for sure.
>>> 
>>  Both IAS and RSX-11D (essentially the same code) were Phase II only. 
>> There was also a
>>  Phase II implementation for OS/8 but I seem to remember it being 
>> cancelled fairly early
>>  in the Phase II schedule.
> 
> I thought IAS and -11D made it to phase III, but I can't find any evidence 
> either way now that I'm looking.
> 
I worked on the 2.0 release and I know there was a 2.1 bug fix update 
but I don’t remember
any phase III implementation.

> I have DECNET-8. It's not for OS/8 but for RTS-8. But yes, it is phase II. I 
> have never tried it, though. So I don't know how/if it actually works, and I 
> don't have any phase II or phase III nodes to test against.
> 
Yes, you’re right, it was RTS-8. Looking at the date on the DECNET-8 
SPD (May 1977) seems
to imply that it was a Phase I product. Around that time we were just 
putting together the
system-level architecture of DECnet-11M/11D/IAS and it would be another 
year before
they would ship (SPD says June 1978).

John.

>   Johnny
> 
> ___
> Simh mailing list
> Simh@trailing-edge.com
> http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

Re: [Simh] VMS/VDE: Almost there

[John Forecast]

On Oct 7, 2015, at 9:56 AM, Paul Koning  wrote:

> 
>> On Oct 6, 2015, at 7:13 PM, Rich Alderson  
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> From: Zachary Kline 
>>> Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 09:42:36 -0700
>> 
>>> as far as DecNet goes, am I correct in assuming that it's mostly useful for
>>> connecting clusters? I'm learning VMS almost entirely on my own, never 
>>> having
>>> been exposed to it during its heyday.
>> 
>> DECNET predates VMS.
> 
> Indeed, by several generations.
> 
>> ...
>> DECNET is available under RSX-11M and RSTS/E on PDP-11s, Tops-10 and TOPS-20
>> on PDP-10s, and under VMS (and possibly Ultrix, I don't remember for certain)
>> on VAXen, and on VMS follow-on systems.  It is as far as possible agnostic
>> about what kind of system it was running on or connecting to.
> 
> DECnet/Ultrix, yes.  There is also a limited DECnet for RT-11, and for DOS.  
> And VAXELAN.  And possibly IAS, I don't remember that one for sure.
> 
Both IAS and RSX-11D (essentially the same code) were Phase II only. 
There was also a
Phase II implementation for OS/8 but I seem to remember it being 
cancelled fairly early
in the Phase II schedule.

   John.

>   paul
> 
> ___
> Simh mailing list
> Simh@trailing-edge.com
> http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

Re: [Simh] Hardware fidelity in the VAX family simulators

[John Forecast]

On Jul 8, 2015, at 5:39 PM, Bob Supnik b...@supnik.org wrote:

 First, congratulations to Mark for running the current Ultrix 750 problem to 
 earth.
 
 Second, a brief diatribe about the need for fidelity to the hardware in the 
 VAX simulators, which is (on the face of it) lacking outside the 3900 and 780 
 simulators.
 
 I have preached and documented the need for reasonable fidelity to hardware 
 in implementing simulators. The papers on the SImH web site are filled with 
 examples of minute details gumming up software behavior if a simulator gets 
 them wrong. It looks to me like the 750, 730, 8600 are cut-and-paste jobs on 
 the 780, and the MicroVAX I and II on the 3900. I admit there are strong 
 family resemblances and, in some cases, reuse of hardware (the 8600 uses some 
 of the 780 IO adapters), but as Ultrix proved, running VMS is an insufficient 
 proof of correctness. Without reading (and implementing) the gory details of 
 all the system-specific hardware, something is going to break. And if the 
 goal is just to run VMS, why bother with variant models? The 780 and 3900 
 between them cover the complete history of VAX/VMS, Ultrix, and all the BSD 
 variants.
 
 While the 750 now runs Ultrix, will it run the next OS it is given? Even with 
 the current fix, there are multiple errors remaining in the UBA. The 730 
 won't boot Ultrix off the RB80; and so on.
 
 So my challenge to the community is twofold. First, is there more 
 documentation on the variants available somewhere? I haven't found microcode 
 sources or listings for the 750, 730, MicroVAX I, or 8600, for example. 
 Second, are people prepared to adopt a model, read its documentation, and 
 clean it up?
 
 End of diatribe.
 
 /Bob

Let’s not forget different peripheral usage models between the various OSs. I 
have an open issue where Ultrix 2.0/2.2 run fine on a Microvax II, but as soon 
as I enable DECnet the system panics with:

panic: qe: Non existent memory interrupt

Mark, were you able to reproduce this problem with the updated image I pointed 
you at?

  John.


___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

Re: [Simh] Simh Digest, Vol 114, Issue 1

[John Forecast]

On Jun 7, 2013, at 2:29 PM, simh-requ...@trailing-edge.com wrote:

 You wouldn't happen to have any of those old DECnet-11M tapes lying
 around, would you?  I've looked for archived distributions of DECnet-11/M
 prior to Phase IV many times and have never found a complete one.

Regrettably no. I also would like to run some of the older 
distributions.

  John.

___
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh