test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

more housecleaning -- floppy disk manuals

by frustum＠pacbell.net

For the cost of shipping from Austin, TX. All are originals, except where noted. If any of these aren't yet scanned, I'd be happy to donate them to someone who would scan them. I'm more interested in shipping the bunch than splitting them up. SA850/851 Double Sided Diskette Storage Drive OEM Manual SA850/851 Double Sided Diskette Storage Drive Service Manual SA810/860 Single/Double Sided Half-Height Diskette Storage Drives OEM Manual (copy) SA800/801 Illustrated Parts Catalog SA800/801 Diskette Storage Drive Theory of Operations SA800/801 Diskette Storage Drive Maintenance Manual SA800/801 Diskette Storage Drive OEM Manual SA400 minifloppy Diskette Storage Drive OEM Manual SA400 minifloppy Diskette Storage Drive Service Manual Tandon OEM Operating and Service Manual TM-100-1 and -2 Disk drives 48 TPI Tandon Product Specifications Mini Double Sided Recording Flexible Disk Drive Model TM100-4 96 TPI DSR Tandon TM 100 DIsk Drive OPerating & Service Manual Tandon TM100-1 and TM100-2 Disk Drives 48 TPI Service Manual Tandon TM100 Disk Drive 96/100 TPI Operating & Service Manual (copy)

17 years, 3 months

Preserving directory times on mirrors created with wget

by aek＠bitsavers.org

General question about mirroring with wget that has been driving me crazy for a couple of days. My mirror of bitsavers is maintained using wget to my local work machine. Over the break, I switched to 10.5 of OS X, and got the latest darwin port of wget. In the version I had been running, directory dates were maintained drwxr-xr-x 9 aek staff 264 Nov 23 2006 . drwxr-xr-x 380 aek staff 12876 Jan 3 09:02 .. -rw-r--r-- 1 aek staff 479 Dec 19 10:54 .listing -rw-r--r-- 1 aek staff 3835317 Mar 3 2004 M-4660_IOU-40_Jun79.pdf -rw-r--r-- 1 aek staff 8160815 Mar 3 2004 M-4908_Q30cpuTech_1983.pdf note the directory date is Nov 2006 even though the .listing was from 2008 using the same command (wget -m -np ftp://...) I now get drwxrwxr-x 2 pdp1 pdp1 4096 Jan 7 11:41 . drwxrwxr-x 3 pdp1 pdp1 4096 Jan 7 11:37 .. -rw-rw-r-- 1 pdp1 pdp1 479 Jan 7 11:37 .listing -rw-rw-r-- 1 pdp1 pdp1 3835317 Mar 3 2004 M-4660_IOU-40_Jun79.pdf -rw-rw-r-- 1 pdp1 pdp1 8160815 Mar 3 2004 M-4908_Q30cpuTech_1983.pdf I remember having a hell of a time finding a version that had the correct directory behavior, and now I've forgotten what I had done to get it to work. Anyone recognize this?

17 years, 3 months

KD-11F (11/03) in a BA11-N??

by bob＠jfcl.com

>Pete Turnbull (pete at dunnington.plus.com) wrote: >No, that'll be a BA11-M ... Oopss. Sorry. >The issue is not the number of address bits, which won't matter at all. That's what I was hoping, but there's one thing I don't understand - the LSI11 CPU only drives 16 address bits, but some of the option cards (e.g. DLV11-E) and the MSV11 memory decode 18 address bits. It's not sufficient to simply pull the upper two address bits to always be zeros or ones - the upper two address bits have to be zeros (for the memories) when the CPU outputs an address in the range 000000..157777, and ones (for the I/O cards) when the CPU outputs an address from 160000..177777. It's not a difficult problem, but where is the logic to do this? It's not on the LSI11 card, since those extra address bits weren't even defined in the QBUS when this card was made. > It's that your H9273 backplane is set up for an 11/23 and won't have >W2 and W3 inserted, but they need to be for a quad-height M7264 ... Actually the BA11-N H9273 does have W2 and W3 installed - according to the Microcomputers and Memories handbook, those are supposed to be installed if the CPU is in slot one, and removed if there's no CPU (i.e. for an expansion box). It doesn't actually say anything about which model CPU, but in any case they are installed on mine. Do they need to be _removed_ for an M7264? So is W1 (installed) for that matter, which I think controls the LTC. Thanks, Bob

17 years, 3 months

H9273 backplane wiring (was KD-11F (11/03) in a BA11-N?? )

by bob＠jfcl.com

>tiggerlasv (tiggerlasv at aim.com) wrote: >The BA11-N user guide can be found here: >http://vt100.net/mirror/antonio/ba11nug1.pdf Thanks - I guess I should have done this first :-) Actually it says pretty much what I expected except for figure 1-9 on page 1-8. This shows that slots 4 and 6 in the H9273 are wired differently (it implies that they have no QBUS connection!) from the adjacent slots. That seems hard to believe - can that really be true?? Were these slots reserved only for things like the second card in the RLV11? Another question - this diagram implies that the BDV11 is always in the bottom slot regardless of how many cards you have. Is that correct? Do you need grant continuity cards then for all the empty slots? Other than that, table 2-1 describes the jumpers and it looks like it says pretty much the same thing as the Microcomputers and Interfaces handbook - W2 and W3 are inserted for the first chassis, and removed for an expansion chassis. It doesn't look like any of the front panel jumpers would be affected by the type of the CPU card. Thanks again, Bob

17 years, 3 months

PDP-8/e rack questions

by pontus＠update.uu.se

Hello. I recently acquired a PDP-8/e with a TU56 and a PC04(I think) with reader only. I've also gotten a DEC rack, but only one set of rails which I think are wrong and incomplete to boot. I've done some searching on bitsavers, but I've only found partial depictions of the actual rails. So, what I'm wondering is what does the rails for a PDP-8/e look like? These are the ones I got (same rails, different angles): http://www.update.uu.se/~pontus/slask/pdp8/rails_1.jpg http://www.update.uu.se/~pontus/slask/pdp8/rails_2.jpg What does the rails for a TU56 look like? I could not find any holes on the sides, are they simply screwed in place with the holes behind the flip-front? My TU56: http://www.update.uu.se/~pontus/slask/pdp8/tu56.jpg And what does the rails for a PC04 look like? I found this picture over at Mikes great corestore site: http://www.corestore.org/8i-2.jpg, which shows part of it. Also, the full height PDP family rack was called H960, but what was the shorter version called, depicted here: http://www.corestore.org/8m-1.jpg If you have any of the above mounting kits, I would be interested in buying or trading. I don't have much to trade with though, mostly SGI and Sun machines. /Pontus.

17 years, 3 months

KD-11F (11/03) in a BA11-N??

by bob＠jfcl.com

I have a BA11-N chassis that says "11/03-L" on the front, and the backplane in it is an H9273-A. I want to get this to work with a 11/03 CPU (a real KD11-F M7264) but there's something strange about this backplane that I can't figure out. The boards I'm using are the M7264, an M8044 (MSV11-D), M8017 (DLV11-E) and a BDV11. In a small, 4 slot 11/03 chassis (a BA11-S, I think) all these boards work fine together, however in the BA-11N there's no joy. It powers up, but the processor appears to halt immediately - it never executes the BDV11 bootstrap. But, if I replace the 11/03 CPU in the BA11-N with a 11/23 CPU card, then everything is fine. So the 11/03 works fine in the BA11-S but not in the BA11-N, and the 11/23 works fine in the BA11-N. It seems fairly likely that there's some kind 16/18/22 bit addressing issue here, but what's the fix? It must have been possible to use the KD11-F in the BA11-N, given the 11/03-L designation. FWIW, the backplane has not been field upgraded with wire wrap to add the extra address bits. In fact, the H9273-A doesn't even have wire wrap pins at all - the pins are all cut off right at PCB level. Is this the standard backplane for a 11/03-L system? I'm wondering if at some time maybe the whole backplane was replaced with a newer one. Thanks, Bob P.S. Yes, I do know that BA11-S backplane is QQ/QQ where as the H9273 is QQ/CD. I don't think that's the problem - there's nothing in the CD slots below the 11/03 card.

17 years, 3 months

PDP-11/05 returns to life

by tiggerlasv＠aim.com

Tobias Russell wrote: > The next challenge will be to get an RX01 disk built > with RT11 on it. I'm planning on making the image with SIMH and then use > vtserver to copy the image onto the RX01 (connected to my 11/73). Does > this sound like a sane approach? I have a faster, albeit slightly convoluted method for getting information between the PC and the PDP. I created a standalone PC from old pieces/parts. This PC is a plain-old PC, with minimal memory, a small disk drive, a Teac FD55-GFR floppy, a generic SCSI controller, and an IDE <> CF adapter. The PC boots plain ol' DOS. I use a compact flash card to move SIMH images back & forth from my real PC to the DOS PC. (This saves ALOT of rebooting.) Using PUTR, I can make bootable RX50's and RX33's. Using John Wilson's ST.EXE (SCSI Tape utility), I can make bootable TK50 / TK70 images, merely by attaching a SCSI TK50 / TK70 to the SCSI controller. Although there are several steps involved in the process, it is infinitely faster than using VTserver, particularly when dealing with larger images. You could easily make a bootable RT11 disk on RX50 or RX33, boot your 11/73 with it, and make your RX01 images from there. That way, if you run into any problems, or want to make changes, you won't have to wait for VTserver to work it's magic. . . (Now, if ST.EXE would work with Exabyte 8mm drives, I'd really be a happy camper !) T

17 years, 3 months

KD-11F (11/03) in a BA11-N??

by tiggerlasv＠aim.com

Check out the BA11-N user guide, starting at chapter 2. Make sure the appropriate jumpers are installed on the backplane, and on the control panel circuit board. They may affect operation of the KD11 modules. The BA11-N user guide can be found here: http://vt100.net/mirror/antonio/ba11nug1.pdf

17 years, 3 months

2.11BSD Patch 446+447; fixes for ulrem,umount,tar,tcsh,ps,vmstat,apropos,pstat,rk

by w.f.j.mueller＠gsi.de

A note to all 2.11bsd users: Over the past 2 years several bug fixes for 2.11BSD accumulated, and over xmas break I finally found the time to communicate them to Steven Schultz. Steven was so kind to package them into two new patch files 446 issued December 27, 2008 447 issued December 31, 2008 Together, the patches address the following points - ulrem.s: the unsigned long modulo operator (%) was broken in libkern - umount: returned inverted exit codes (1 for success, 0 for failure) - tar: core dumped when a whole /usr tree was archived - tcsh: the time buildin function printed some erroneous or zero statistics - ps: core dumped when '-t' option was used with no further argument - apropos: core dumped when 2 or more arguments were given - vmstat: wrong normalization for some fields - several issues around the rk disk driver - no rk root attach function - no rk BOOTDEV support - incorrect UCB_METER code (vmstat/iostat never showed any rk activity) - autoconfig left the RK11 controller in an error state - pstat: added additional options to access more kernel data structures - new -c option, dumping the coremap - new -m option, dumping the ub_map (UNIBUS map) - new -b option, dumping the buffer pool table - change -s output, gives now full table dump - adapt the info's displayed by -T - some documentation corrections (vmstat, pstat, tcsh) Note: In case you wonder, as I did, why 211BSD survived 20 years with a broken unsigned long % operator: - only the non-FPP libkern implementation was affected - the kernel simply doesn't have any unsigned long modulo's :) - apparently only standalone mkfs after patch 434 was compromised For the full story of all the above consult the header of the patch files. The patch files are available from moe.2bsd.com and ftp.wx.gd-ais.com. Note, that Steven changed the packaging some time ago, the patches are now packed in bzip'ed tarballs in groups of ten patches. So you'll have to look into ftp://moe.2bsd.com/pub/2.11BSD/440-447.tar.bz2 ftp://ftp.wx.gd-ais.com/pub/2.11BSD/440-447.tar.bz2 With best regards, Walter Mueller

17 years, 3 months

Z80 instruction fetch mechanism

by jules.richardson99＠gmail.com

Someone asked this over on the Sinclair group a short while ago, but I suddenly thought that someone here might know... Basically they were wondering what the internals of the Z80's instruction fetch were, given that some instructions are multiple bytes in length, but there's only a single-byte instruction register. I theorised that control in the Z80 is all just a state machine, so multiple instruction bytes presumably advance things to a new state (and what's left in the IR during execution is just one byte from a multi-byte instruction) - but it sounds like the OP was wondering if anyone knew the exact mechanism (basically, has the design of the state machine ever been documented anywhere). (Given that I'm on a 'homebrew CPU' trip right now, I'm rather curious, too :-) Quite possibly this level of detail's never been made publicly available, but I figure someone here may have had close involvement with Zilog and know more. Online resources cover the overall internal architecture, but just 'black box' the control logic section (including the IR). cheers Jules

17 years, 3 months

MicroAngelo Board

by marvin＠west.net

I just put up another MicroAngelo S-100 board on the VCGM. Sorry for the additional "sale" post, but a number of people here were looking for one that might not check VCGM regularly. http://marketplace.vintage-computer.com/

17 years, 3 months

Free Calculators

by grant＠stockly.com

I have a SR-51 TI calculator. I don't know if it works. Available for shipping costs. I also have a HP-35 with manual, purchase receipt, hard case, and power supply. It doesn't work with the power supply as is, but I don't know if the power supply works. Available for shipping costs. If they aren't worth anything, I can send them to the recycler. I don't know if there are any useful parts or not. I also have some little computer/calculator units. They are like the TRS-80 portable version, except smaller. I'm not sure what I'm going to do with them.

17 years, 3 months

[Fwd: AT&T UNIX PC 3B1 Chicago area, northwest]

by ljw-cctech＠ljw.me.uk

Reply to the From: address below, not to me - LJW -------- Forwarded Message -------- From: Cheryl & John Wilkins <wilkins at foxvalley.net> Reply-To: Cheryl & John Wilkins <wilkins at foxvalley.net> To: cctalk-owner at classiccmp.org Subject: AT&T UNIX PC 3B1 Chicago area, northwest Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 12:20:42 -0600 I have an AT&T UNIX PC 3B1 I'd like to get into good hands locally, northwest Chicago (ee.gg., Schaumburg, Hoffman Estates, Fox River areas). Indianapolis or Knoxville, TN, are possibilities, but less preferable. -- Lawrence Wilkinson lawrence at ljw.me.uk The IBM 360/30 page http://www.ljw.me.uk/ibm360

17 years, 3 months

two old computer books for the cost of shipping

by frustum＠pacbell.net

"Logical Design of Digital Computers", Montgomery Phister, Jr., (c) 1958, 5th printing 1960. hardback w/cover, 400 pages, good shape. "Digital Computer Design", Braun, 1963. hardback, 600 pages, good shape. Shipped from Austin, TX Both have basics of boolean logic, branch out into more system level issues, have detail on memory types and issues, circuit level considerations.

17 years, 4 months

Jupiter Ace PCB

by classiccmp＠philpem.me.uk

Peter Coghlan wrote: >> A few of you might remember the Jupiter Ace I had that took a 9V spike to >> the expansion slot -- and my futile attempts at repairing it. It's been well >> over four years since I sent it to a listmember who offered to repair it, and >> all attempts to get the board or the spares I sent with it have failed. At >> this point, I haven't seen hide nor hair of him in months, although he's >> apparently still updating his website... >> > > Hi Phil, > > If you are not going to let us know the identity of the person involved, > please at least inform the list owner. A lot of people regard membership > of the list as conferring a degree of trustworthyness and it would be a > shame if that was damaged. The person in question is Lee Davison. Specifically, the Lee Davison that maintains the website <http://themotionstore.com/leeedavison/>. I sent the Ace motherboard to him in ~2002, complete with about ?7 worth of stamps and a ready-filled-out Special Delivery sticker. The agreement was, he'd try and fix it, and if he couldn't fix it (or if I asked for it to be returned), he'd return it. I'm fully aware that postage prices have increased over the past few years, and I've offered to pay for them. The last time I heard from Lee was in April 2004; he said he didn't want to send it back "disassembled, which it is -- very much so". It can't be in much worse shape than it was when I sent it.. the CPU and RAM were removed, among other things. IIRC, it was due a full set of new IC sockets (the CPU socket was certainly well stuffed)... > Ps: I once repaired a Jupiter Ace for a friend. At the time, I had no idea > whatsoever how to diagnose the problem. Luckily, the defective RAM chip gave > itself away by overheating (to the point of burning my finger) and replacing > it sorted it out. Yeah, 2114s like doing that... I was going to build a RAM tester for 2114s at one point, until I realised that they don't usually fail with any degree of subtlety :) > I do have a very bad memory so I hope it wasn't me you sent your Ace to :-( > However, I don't fit the bill as I don't have a website :-) > Unless I've forgotten about that too... LOL! :) Thanks, -- Phil. classiccmp at philpem.me.uk http://www.philpem.me.uk/

17 years, 4 months

PDP-8/e rack questions

by djg＠pdp8.net

For my PC01 the rails can be seen here (third from top). Sounds like the PC04 rails are similar. They have an added plate to make the rack attachment stronger since they don't bolt at the back. http://www.pdp8.net/shows/vcfe08/pics/booth3.shtml http://www.pdp8.net/shows/vcfe08/pics/showing.shtml Normal rails work fine, my PC04 didn't have any so I used normal ones that attach both front and back. You can see that in the next picture. For the TU56 I cheated. I mounted angle iron below it which I can slide it in on and then bolt at my leisure. The drive has a lip which makes things a little strange but works pretty well. I used aluminum but that is messed up by sliding the drive. http://www.pdp8.net/shows/tcf05/pics/big_stuff.shtml?small The maintenance manual says how it is supposed to be installed. It has a a support bracket between the rails the drive rests on. (pg 2-3) http://www.pdp8online.com/pdp8cgi/query_docs/view.pl?id=27

17 years, 4 months

PDP-8/e rack questions

by quapla＠xs4all.nl

The 'short' rack is indeed a H950 (H950-AA). The one I have houses curently my 11/35 config (11/35, RX02, RL02). I'm considering to converting this rack into a GT40 setup, but I do miss the keyboard for it (LK40). Ed > On Jan 5, 2009, at 5:32 PM, Henk Gooijen wrote: >>>> Also, the full height PDP family rack was called H960, but what >>>> was the shorter version called, depicted here: >>>> http://www.corestore.org/8m-1.jpg >> >> If I am not mistaken they are called H950. Come to think of it, >> in H960 fit *6* 10.5" high units, in an H950 fit *4* 10.5" high >> units :-) But as said, not 100% sure that they are called H950. >> Anyway, I would love to get one "H950" here in The Netherlands! > > I know those racks; love 'em...I've never been able to find one. > The guy I mentioned the other day (my childhood PDP mentor who is > working on an 8/a for a factory) had several when I used to hang out > at his place, but that was ~1985...they are long gone. I'll ask him > what the part number was; he may remember. > > H950, though...I'm pretty sure that is the part number of the > large rectangular bracket that the rear door mounts to on the rear of > an H960. Page 6 of the PDP-8/e Illustrated Parts Breakdown suggests > this (see item #24, referenced on page 8). I have one of these > frames in my garage, from one of my racks...if I can find it, I'll > take a look. > > The only thing I'm 100% sure about is that I've seen "H950" on a > sticker somewhere on one of my 19" racks that looks exactly like an > H960. > > -Dave > > -- > Dave McGuire > Port Charlotte, FL > > >

17 years, 4 months

for the true collector...

by jos.mar＠bluewin.ch

Posted on DAFC, but also of interest here : 7 track tapedrive with a scope for each track : http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=360121005247

17 years, 4 months

PDP8 spares required

by srp＠saslab.net

I am trying to keep a PDP8 computer alive which controls a measurement system. I have a need for spares for this computer, in particular 16k memory boards and all other boards. In fact the only parts I am now sure about are the power supply and backplane. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Marek Pawlik

17 years, 4 months

Stuff for Sale

by marvin＠west.net

I'm starting to put stuff up for sale again on the Vintage Computer & Gaming Marketplace. New stuff I put up include the 13 1950-51 Radio-Electronics magazines that have the Simon Relay computer series, Omnitronix RS-232 for Vic-20/C64, and other such stuff. I plan on putting new stuff up daily. http://marketplace.vintage-computer.com/ If something doesn't sell in two weeks, I usually just stick it in the store. There are some interesting things up for sale by others as well.

17 years, 4 months

chip identification

by rescue＠hawkmountain.net

Trying to ID some chips I pulled from various pieces of equipment. I have a cpu? I pulled out of a modem ... Signetics SC80C31BCPN40. This would appear to be an Intel 8031 based cpu. But does it have an internal ROM/etc that would preclude its reuse ? I have 3 chips now in the trash pile... I believe they are OTP EPROMs (and since used, are no good). MX 27C1000PC-70, ATMEL AT27LV256A, and AtMel AT27C010-70JC. Lastly I have what I think is EEPROM. SST PH29EE010-150-4CF. I believe this to be a 1Mbit EEPROM. Searching google for chip part numbers is paramount to useless due to all the chip vendors advertising.... there has to be a better way.... So, beyond looking for better ways to search for chip data/datasheets, can anyone confirm the identification of the above chips ? Is an 8031 cpu 'fun' to play with ? :-) -- Curt

17 years, 4 months

Orthogonality and contrivedness

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: Orthogonality and contrivedness > From: "Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com> > Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 11:57:30 -0800 > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > >On 4 Jan 2009 at 13:40, Tim Shoppa wrote: > > Try programming an 1802 for a while. You'll know you're really into >> it when it seems "contrived" that all those other processors can >> only use a single of their registers as a program counter :-). >> Twisting my mind to switch to 1802 mode and back is a interesting >> experience. > >Well, at least the PC on the 430 is a regular register, operable by >any applicable instruction of the set. Doing a decimal add to the PC >must certainly yield interesting results! > >I'd always considered the 1802 to be in a unique position in the >70's, in that it was a (comparatively) low-power CMOS design. No >doubt this was aided somewhat by its simple architecture. Was 1802 >RCA's one and only veture in the microprocessor world? In the 70s CMOS was mostly RCAs game and calling card. They never got the density very high till mid 70s. There was 6100 (aka PDP-8 in cmos) and the 1800/1801 then the 1802 and 1804 and 1805 The 1800/01 was the base of the family and took two chips to complee the processor. The 1802 was the first CPU from RCA that took only one chip and the 04/05 added minor improvements and brought rom on the chip. If memeory serves RCA also had a mini that has a similar archetecture. The odditiy of the cosmac is once you program with it enough it's PHI SEX and GLO. Seriously it's fairly efficient once you get used to it. If it were made with current processes, the number of clocks per cycle dropped it would likely still have staying power. >> The smaller PIC's make perfect sense once you realize they're >> Harvard architecture. Bigger PIC's, I never really grokked. > >The Harvard architecture really falls down in uCs because of lack of >space to store read-only constants. Small PICs have to resort to all >sorts of oddball tricks to accommodate this for things such as lookup >tables. (Use a "return from subroutine with immediate value" >instruction). Upper PICs include instructions to access program >memory and AFAIK, all AVRs have them. Which doesn't make them >strictly Harvard architecture anymore. Had the ROM area included a >space in data memory for constant storage, it might have done the >trick. Yes, there's EEPROM, but it has a different purpose and is >not easy to use. Most all of the Harvard machines have a way to load a constant or acccess a table in rom. Started with the TMS1000. >The 430 drops the charade and adopts a Von Neumann architecture, >relying on the read-only nature of ROM to enforce the separation >between code and data. > >> To me it's perfectly obvious that the MSP430 is PDP-11 like, and >> in some ways even more orthogonal than the -11. The CP1600 was >> substantially less orthogonal, more Nova-like with some >> of the registers obviously intended for index use. Never tried that one. > >How many Nova programmers would have killed for 16 registers? To me, >what distinguishes the CP1600 was its inefficient use of instruction >memory (Yes, I know about the 10-bit ROM, but still...) > It was aimed at a rom based systems and back then rom was A)bulky, B)expensive silicon. ALlison >Cheers, >Chuck

17 years, 4 months

RSTS/E question and media.

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: RE: RSTS/E question and media. > From: "Paul Koning" <Paul_Koning at Dell.com> > Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 12:38:33 -0500 > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > >> > ...you'd need a sync DDCMP interface (for a Q-bus system like that >it >> would >> > be a DMV11). More to the point, it looks like the Micro-PDP11 >> support >> > appeared in V8.0, and I suspect there may be some other small >details >> > specific to the 11/53 that are later still. >> >> Right, so I'd need to plumb the 11/53 into say an Alpha via a serial >> connection. Sync... so I'd need to get a PCI sync card too, for the >> latter. > >Or later yet (V10.x?) there's async DDCMP, I'm not sure how clearly >accessible but I'm pretty sure it's in there. > > paul DDCMP can run over sync or async lines it was commonly done async for slow lines and sync for fast lines the division was around 19.2kbaud with the sync cards favoring the faster than that rates. I used to run DDCMP async at 2400baud though the Mill gandalf switch to a Vax host in the the Mill. Worked ok in the days when 2400 was fast and 9600 was fastest and expensive. Allison

17 years, 4 months

RSTS/E question and media

by ken＠seefried.com

From: Andrew Back <andrew at smokebelch.org> > Right, so I'd need to plumb the 11/53 into say an Alpha via a > serial connection. Sync... so I'd need to get a PCI sync card > too, for the latter. Ugh. Is this something you could do with a low end Cisco (2500 class) and the apropos IOS image (Enterprise, with support for DECNet)? Sync serial is built in. KJ

17 years, 4 months

Offer- VGA and SoundBlaster Card collections/last chance

by wpileggi＠juno.com

Couple of months ago, I offered up my classic VGA (ISA, PCI, AGP) card collection and Soundblaster (ISA, PCI) card collection(s). I had several take me up on my offer. I still have a lot left, if you have any interest, please email. Most went for shipping costs + small fee. Thanks. Bill KA3AIS ____________________________________________________________ Save $15 on Flowers and Gifts from FTD! Shop now at http://offers.juno.com/TGL1131/?u=http://www.ftd.com/17007

17 years, 4 months

Jump to page:

2026

2025

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