test-drb May 2016

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

202 participants
259 discussions

by pete＠petelancashire.com

Reminds me of a challenge I had in the early 80's The place I worked made IC test and evaluation systems, starting price in 1980 was around $300K and many where close to $1.5 million. This one was for IBM. They were designing a 288K bit ram and one thing they wanted was to be able to 'see' failed bits as parameters such as supply voltage were changed. If you looked at the die it was 9 'squares' of i think 128 x 256 ( i think that was the size) cell or bits. The 9 th was for parity. The memory was read by the system and a 0 or 1 was stored in a buffer in the system. The system was run by a PDP11/44 the display was a Tektronix GMA125 with option 42/43. The GMA 125 was the OEM display used in the 4116, a 25" DVST terminal. Option 42/43 was feed from a DR11. The 42/43 could be driven in Tek 401x format (that's the same you still see today when you put your X11 display into Tek mode) which had a point plotting set of commands. So one had to read in a loop this external memory which came back in some long forgotten 16 bits per something mode, calculate the position of the 'bit' which was in memory block x and position x and y in each block and either display a dot or plus or something at the respective location on the CRT. Doing it all in some time IBM wanted it done in .. loops within loops within loops and finally a test for 1 or 0 and out the DR11W. The only way I could get the code to meet IBM speed requirement was to do the unthinkable. Upon start the inner most work that was test for 'display if zero' or display if one' was modified to be branch of true or branch if false. Sometimes you just have to violate all the rules. Other fun things were using shifting bits and using indexing for some of the coordinate translations. oh well when every instruction time made a difference. it was challenging but fun -pete On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Bill Sudbrink <wh.sudbrink at verizon.net> wrote: > I took a peek at the access logs for the Cromemco Dazzler > files that I recently put up on my web server. I'm > gratified to see that a lot of people are taking advantage > of the availability of these documents, that have not > recently (if ever) been easily available on the web. I > also see that a lot of people took the Dazzlemation HEX > file and the Magenta Martini paper tape image, presumably > to run on Udo Monk's great Windows Cromemco Z1 simulator. > > Also, thanks to everyone that generated pdf files for me! > > One thing I noticed is that not many people looked at the > disassembly of Dazzlemation. If you are an 8080 or Z80 > programmer (or any 8-bitter for that matter) I really > recommend that you take a look, it's a real treat. I'm > reliably informed that Mr. Dompier hand wrote that program > LITERALLY (hand, pencil, paper), no editor, no assembler. > He then toggled it in (or maybe raw keyed it in with a > primitive ROM monitor) and went through a few iterations of: > > 1) store to paper tape > 2) modify in memory > 3) test > 4) go to 1 > > It's neat to see some of the "tricks" he used and also the > level of sophistication of the code. It does a lot of > stuff in not a lot of bytes. Also, here and there, in > "dead" areas, you can also see the debris of ideas that he > started and then abandoned. > > Bill S. > > >

8 years, 7 months

Steve Dompier's coding...

by wh.sudbrink＠verizon.net

I took a peek at the access logs for the Cromemco Dazzler files that I recently put up on my web server. I'm gratified to see that a lot of people are taking advantage of the availability of these documents, that have not recently (if ever) been easily available on the web. I also see that a lot of people took the Dazzlemation HEX file and the Magenta Martini paper tape image, presumably to run on Udo Monk's great Windows Cromemco Z1 simulator. Also, thanks to everyone that generated pdf files for me! One thing I noticed is that not many people looked at the disassembly of Dazzlemation. If you are an 8080 or Z80 programmer (or any 8-bitter for that matter) I really recommend that you take a look, it's a real treat. I'm reliably informed that Mr. Dompier hand wrote that program LITERALLY (hand, pencil, paper), no editor, no assembler. He then toggled it in (or maybe raw keyed it in with a primitive ROM monitor) and went through a few iterations of: 1) store to paper tape 2) modify in memory 3) test 4) go to 1 It's neat to see some of the "tricks" he used and also the level of sophistication of the code. It does a lot of stuff in not a lot of bytes. Also, here and there, in "dead" areas, you can also see the debris of ideas that he started and then abandoned. Bill S.

8 years, 7 months

Titlers, Switchers, Paintboxes, Paint Apps and Old Broadcast Equipment

by swiftgriggs＠gmail.com

Back in the early 90's I remember that many times I'd see a print advertisement for a Video Toaster or a new genlock card, they'd say things like "features you'd have to pay thousands for in a professional paintbox or titler!" I always wondered what they were talking about, since I'd never seen how broadcast was done back then (and still don't know). So, I'm really talking about the tech of the 80's (since that's what the marketing folks were referring to, I assume). Here's what I could find that I'm speculating were the "competition" of the time: The Quantel Paintbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantel_Paintbox Superpaint running on a DG Nova 800 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpaint The Bosch FGS 4000 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oyGaEu7D7s These are about the only ones I could find. Does anyone know of any others? Also, here are my favorite paint and 2D animation programs of yore. If you guys have others that you loved and remember, what were they? DOS 1. Deluxe Paint II Enhanced 2. PC Paintbrush 3. Autodesk Animator 4. Paul Mace's GRASP 5. Deluxe Paint Animation Amiga 1. Photogenics 2. Photon Paint 3. TVPaint 4. Brilliance 5. Disney Animation Studio Sorry, I didn't use the Mac enough to form any favorites, though I did love Fractal Design Painter (now Corel Painter). -Swift

8 years, 7 months

Ideas for running a VB4 application on modern hardware?

by mark＠markesystems.com

> I have a Visual Basic 4 application that I need to run on modern 64-bit > hardware I can do this in a VM, but I really need this VM to be wicked > small, like under a gig. The smallest XP VM I?ve seen is 600MB (which > might > be good) but XP is becoming very hard to source these days. VB4 was a bridge between 16-bit Windows 3.1 applications and 32-bit everything later (such as the DOS-based Win-95, -98, and -ME, and all of the NT-based operating systems, which is everything else through Win-10 64-bit). As such, the package included both a 16-bit an 32-bit compiler. If your application was compiled using the 16-bit version, you're pretty much stuck with XP-32 or earlier (in a VM, if necessary), as it will automatically spawn a 16-bit virtual environment (ntvdm.exe) to run the 16-bit applications. Win7 and beyond, and all 64-bit versions, do not support this feature (I supported a VB3 application for 20 years; Win7 was what finally broke it for good.) If it was compiled to 32-bit, then you should be pretty much good to go; you may run into a few insurmountable problems with some now unsupported OCX's. Other than those, all of the 32-bit code should run fine on anything current. If you have the source, you're also in pretty good shape. VB4 is very easy to port to VB6; there were almost no backward-incompatible features of the later Visual Basic classic languages. Find an old copy of VB6 SP6, re-compile it (perhaps replacing some of the failed OCXs with others that will work - a common one was DBGrid, which is quite easy to replace with FlexGrid), and you're golden. I currently support just such an application, and although the development environment requires a couple of tricks to get working smoothly, the compiled application works just fine on Win10-64. Drop me a note off-line if you'd like any additional or more specific help with this; I have a reasonable amount of experience with just this problem. Of course, there are always older versions of Wine... ~~ Mark Moulding

8 years, 7 months

center tapped power transformer help needed

by brain＠jbrain.com

Anyone here do any transformer specification or design and would be interested in some consulting dollars to help me source/create a weird transformer option? What I need is a 12V primary, 12V:12V center tapped secondary that can support 12VA of power. Higher voltages are OK, but not needed. I am struggling on the Xformer details, but I know it needs to be center tapped, 1:1:1 @12VA Jim -- Jim Brain brain at jbrain.com www.jbrain.com

8 years, 7 months

Nice LAB11 brochure.

by mattislind＠gmail.com

Yet another nice color brochure. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/96935524/Datormusuem/lab11.pdf Has anyone seen a VR20 in real? Rather interesting to be able to do a red and green X/Y screen based on different energy levels. Someone care to explain how that works? If I read the fine print on the back correctly (and comparing with the others) I would guess that this brochure is from 1971.

8 years, 7 months

Fwd: RSTS and slow DECnet operation in SIMH

by paulkoning＠comcast.net

For those of you running DECnet/E on simulators... paul > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Paul Koning <paulkoning at comcast.net> > Subject: Re: RSTS and slow DECnet operation in SIMH > Date: May 2, 2016 at 1:37:45 PM EDT > To: SIMH <simh at trailing-edge.com> > >> >> On Apr 19, 2016, at 2:46 PM, Paul Koning <paulkoning at comcast.net> wrote: >> >> With help from Mark Pizzolato, I've been looking at why RSTS (DECnet/E) operates so slowly when it's dealing with one way transfers. This is independent of protocol and datalink type; it shows up very clearly in NFT (any kind of file transfer or directory listing) and also in NET (Set Host). The symptom is that data comes across in fairly short bursts, separated by about a second of pause. >> >> This turns out to be an interaction between the DECnet/E queueing rules and the very fast operation of SIMH on modern hosts. DECnet/E will queue up to some small number of NSP segments for any given connection, set by the executor parameter "data transmit queue max". The default value is 4 or 5, but it can be set higher, and that helps some. >> >> The trouble is this: if you have a one way data flow, for example NFT or FAL doing a copy, the sending program simply fires off a sequence of send-packet operations until it gets a "queue full" reject from the kernel. At that point it delays, but the delay is one second since sleep operations have one second granularity. The other end acks all that data quite promptly, but since the emulation runs so fast, the whole transmit queue can fill up before the ack from the other end arrives, so the queue full condition occurs, then a one second delay, then the process starts over. >> >> This sort of thing doesn't happen on request/response exchanges; for example the NCP command LOOP NODE runs at top speed because traffic is going both ways. >> >> I tried fiddling with the data queue limit to see if increasing it would help. It seems to, but it's not sufficient. What does work is a larger queue limit (32 looks good) combined with CPU throttling to slow things down a bit. I used "set throttle 2000/1" (which produces a 1 ms delay every 2000 instructions, i.e., roughly 2 MIPS processing speed which is at the high end of what real PDP-11s can do). Those two changes combined make file transfer run smoothly and fast. >> >> Ideally DECnet/E should cancel the program sleep when the queue transitions from full to not-full, but that's not part of the existing logic (at least not unless the program explicitly asks for "link status notifications"). I could probably add that; the question is how large a change it is -- does it exceed what's feasible for a patch. I may still do that, but at least for now the above should be helpful. > > Followup: I created a patch that implements the "wake up when the queue goes not-full". Or more precisely, it wakes up the process whenever an ack is received; that covers the probem case and probably doesn't create many other wakeups since the program is unlikely to be sleeping otherwise. > > The attached patch script does the job. This is for RSTS V10.1. I will take a look at RSTS 9.6; the patch is unlikely to apply there (offsets probably don't match) but the concept will apply there too. I don't have other DECnet/E versions, let alone source listings which is what's needed to create the patch. > > With this patch, you can run at full emulation speed, with the default queue limit (5). In fact, I would recommend setting that limit; if you make the queue limit significantly larger, the patch doesn't help and things are still slow. I suspect that comes from overrunning the queue limits at the receiving end. (Note that DECnet/E leaves the flow control choice to the application, and most use "no" flow control, i.e., on/off only which isn't effective if the sender can overrun the buffer pool of the receiver.) > > To apply the patch, give it to ONLPAT and select the monitor SIL (just <CR> will give you the installed one). Or you can do it with the PATCH option at boot time, in that case enter the information manually. The manual will spell this out some more, I expect. > > I have no idea if this issue can appear on real PDP-11 systems. Possibly, if you have a fast CPU, a fast network (Ethernet) and enough latency to make the issue visible (more than a few milliseconds but way under a second). In any case, it's unlikely to hurt, and it clearly helps a great deal in emulated systems. > > paul >

8 years, 7 months

Cromemco Dazzler 40th birthday presents...

by fritz_chwolka＠t-online.de

Am 03.05.2016 um 04:06 schrieb Bill Sudbrink: > Check it out: > > http://wsudbrink.dyndns.org:8080/dazzler.html > > More to come. > > Bill S. > > > > Look at : http://oldcomputers.dyndns.org/public/pub/manuals/dazzler/index.html greetings

8 years, 7 months

Plan9 and Inferno (was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from)

by blstuart＠bellsouth.net

On Thu, 4/28/16, Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com> wrote: >>> The efforts to fix and improve Unix -- Plan 9, Inferno -- forgotten. > > It is, true, but it's a sideline now. And the steps made by Inferno > seem to have had even less impact. I'd like to see the 2 merged back > into 1. Actually, it's best not to think of Inferno as a successor to Plan 9, but as an offshoot. The real story has more to do with Lucent internal dynamics than to do with attempting to develop a better research platform. Plan 9 has always been a good platform for research, and the fact that it's the most pleasant development environment I've ever used is a nice plus. However, Inferno was created to be a platform for products. The Inferno kernel was basically forked from the 2nd Edition Plan9 kernel, and naturally there are some places that differ from the current 4th Edition Plan 9 kernel. However, a number of the differences have been resolved over the years, and the same guy does most of the maintenance of the compiler suite that's used for native Inferno builds and for Plan 9. Although you usually can't just drop driver code from one kernel into the other, the differences are not so great as to make the port difficult. So both still exist and both still get some development as people who care decide to make changes, but they've never really been in a position to merge. And BTW, if you like the objectives of the Limbo language in Inferno, you'll find a lot of the ideas and lessons learned from it in Go. After all, Rob Pike and Ken Thompson were two of the main people behind Go and, of course, they had been at the labs, primarily working on Plan 9, before moving to Google. BLS

8 years, 7 months

Only slightly vintage

by lproven＠gmail.com

http://jalopnik.com/this-ancient-laptop-is-the-only-key-to-the-most-valuabl… -- Sent from my phone - please pardon brevity & typos.

8 years, 7 months

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

test-drb May 2016