9 Nov
2015
9 Nov
'15
2:44 p.m.
On 09/11/2015 21:42, Josh Dersch wrote:
Thanks, I should have thought to check the revision
codes in the first
place. Looks like the Bitsavers docs are from revision C; I've been
running the paper-tape version that's on Bitsavers (
http://bitsavers.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/bits/DEC/pdp11/papertapeimagesā¦),
which is labeled as "maindec-11-dzqkc-e-pb" which looks like it should be
Revision E (which is fortunate!).
Yes, Revision E. XXDP diagnostic files are labelled with the first
character denoting the type of system/processor they're supposed to run
on, the next pair denotes the device they're to test, the fourth denotes
which test it is within a set, and the last two are the version number
and patch level. The leading D in the title stands for "document" or
"documentation" IIRC and isn't part of the diagnostic name.
The specific diagnostic is usually something like (in this case)
ZQKCE0.BIN if it's on a disk, but old paper tape titles often don't note
a patch level.
Z means it should run on any processor
QK denotes a CPU diagnostic
C means it's the third of a set intended to be run in sequence
E is the version "number" (5th version, or 4th revision if you like)
Usually DEC changed the version character (always a letter) if things
like entry points or error halts or routines moved or changed, and just
changed the patch level (always a numeric digit) if things like
locations of error halts remained the same. So ZQKCEn will have
significantly different code and error halts than ZQKCCn.
Interesting that ZQKB is in that tar file along with ZQKC, but ZQKA isn't.
--
Pete
Pete Turnbull