>
>Subject: Re: semi-homemade micro
> From: Wai-Sun Chia <waisun.chia at gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 10:42:45 +0800
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
>
>On 11/14/05, Allison <ajp166 at bellatlantic.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >Linux supported CPU's
>>
>> >Dec Vax
>> In rumor only!
>>
>
>Well, NetBSD iit is not. But to say it is just a rumor doesn't do
>justice of the work some of the hackers there are contributing.
>Disclaimer: I have no relationship with them.
>
>Extracted from the FAQ:
>http://linux-vax.sourceforge.net/newfaq/newfaq.html
>
This is fairly recent as last I looked (2 years ago) the page
was mostly blank.
NetBSD is a differnt animal. Still the list of systems like Z80 and some
where there used to be a proposed ELKs for never seems to have happend.
Allison
>
>Subject: Re: semi-homemade micro
> From: Wai-Sun Chia <waisun.chia at gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 10:42:45 +0800
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
>
>On 11/14/05, Allison <ajp166 at bellatlantic.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >Linux supported CPU's
>>
>> >Dec Vax
>> In rumor only!
>>
>
>Well, NetBSD iit is not. But to say it is just a rumor doesn't do
>justice of the work some of the hackers there are contributing.
>Disclaimer: I have no relationship with them.
>
>Extracted from the FAQ:
>http://linux-vax.sourceforge.net/newfaq/newfaq.html
Yes! Finally. I'd been looking at the linix will be on VAX
for over 10 years and it's finally comming around.
Now an ELKS kernal for Z80 maybe... please.
Allison
> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 20:36:34 +0100
> From: "Frederic BOSSU" <f5inl at wanadoo.fr>
> Subject: === IBM 5110 / 5120 terminator ===
> To: <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
> Message-ID: <FDENJOMFELLFCPHDMBABOEOKCAAA.f5inl at wanadoo.fr>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hi !
>
> Could anyone give me the REAL pin assignment of the
> terminator used on the IBM 5110 / 5120 systems ?
>
> Has anyone build such a terminator ?
>
> I tried to build one and I'm fed up with getting always the
> same error : I can obtain the file list (using basic command
> UTIL DIR,D80 or UTIL DIR,D40) but 5 seconds after giving me
> the file list, the systems blocks, the promt disappeared and
> I must restard all... No led is lightning on the
> pannel...Sometimes I get the 24 or 26 error code (''diskette
> error...''is only said in my reference manual : what a help !).
>
> Very strange diagnostic...
>
> Thanks for your help ;-)
>
> Fred.
>
I have scanned the two pages from the 5120 MIM that address the pinouts.
Hope this helps. Let me know if you have any trouble reading this - the
pages did not scan that well.
http://webpages.charter.net/jpepperman/5120InterfaceCable.pdf
-W
>
>Subject: Re: Ultrix for DECstations
> From: woodelf <bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca>
> Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 20:48:19 -0700
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
>
>Bill Sudbrink wrote:
>
>am using
>edit in XP. It comes with windows but for some reason they don't push
>80x24 text displays.
I'd forgotton that beast. For laughs I opened a dos box on the NT4 system
and typed edit... lo and behold it's there!
Allison
This auction was some time ago, but this guys sells all kinds of Unit Record
stuff. I think he is in Texas.
Gil
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lafley77517 at aol.com [mailto:Lafley77517 at aol.com]
> Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2004 1:02 AM
> To: gilcarrick at comcast.net
> Subject: Re: Question for seller -- Item #2784239371
>
> As a general rule older IBM keypunch machines cost more and
> are in worst condition. I can sell you a 1971 129 keypunch
> in good working condition for $2,000.00 plus shipping or a
> 1949 24 or 26 keypunch would cost you $3,000.00 and may not
> be in as good condition. A 1965 29 keypunch would be
> somewhere in between.
>
> Thanks for asking,
>
> Duwayne Lafley
>
>
>Subject: RE: Ultrix for DECstations
> From: "Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com>
> Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 19:17:50 -0800
> To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
>
>On 11/13/2005 at 10:10 PM Bill Sudbrink wrote:
>
>>Uh, no, I meant ex, the line level editor that runs under vi.
>>When you can't even get vi to run right (termcaps messed up
>>or, in one case I experienced, most control characters being
>>filtered/screwed up between me and the system I was trying to
>>edit a text file on) give ex a try.
>
>Wonder if TECO was ever ported to Linux?
I'd wonder what TECO wasnt ported to. Then there are
editors that while not TECO understand TECO macros
at the command level.
Allison
