8 Jul
2005
8 Jul
'05
4:02 p.m.
Ok, so I have a working processor, and a basement full of peripherals. I'm
not sure which way to go with the rest of the build. I'm not really up on
DEC stuff I admit, so maybe others here can offer me some advice as to what
is the best way to proceed.
Background:
My 11/45 (11/45-CA actually) has the KB11-A processor, no FP. It's the older
style with the power distribution board on the back wall of the cpu cabinet
rather than on top. However, it's also got the newer 861A power control in
the bottom rather than the dual 860's in the top. There is the two H742A's
as well. I have one system unit installed - MF-11L in which is installed 8K
of core. In the cpu backplane there are three unibus slots which I believe
will take three quad? (C-F) boards. A&B in two of those slots are used for
the unibus A to unibus B jumper, and A&B of the last slot is the connector
to A&B of the MF-11L. The MF-11L has a 9312 in the last A&B slot. The SPC?
boards currently installed are two DL11's and a M7228. The ONLY board in
slot one is a 930C terminator in A&B. I have no MMU, so slot 13 is empty and
slot 14 has the M8116.
Separately, I have a lot of peripherals to choose from. Scads of RL02's,
DSD440, LincTape II, RX01's, RX02's, RA81's, etc. I also have a BA11-KU with
a DD11-DK backplane in it.
Problem:
The unibus space on the cpu backplane is quite limited. At the VERY least I
have to keep one of the DL11's there, so that leaves me with two more unibus
slots for peripherals. I *THINK* that that standard controller for an RX02
or RL02 takes all 6 rows (Hex cards?). However, the DSD440 controller only
takes slots C-F (quad?). The linctape II controller also only takes C-F. So,
I think I could have a reasonable system by putting the DSD440 controller,
LincTape controller, and a DL11 and be done with it. However, I then am
limited to using core memory in the MF11. At the very best, I can get...
what... 32K in a MF11? I think I can get the additional core boards. But
correct me if I'm wrong but isn't sticking with core (max 32K) going to make
my operating system choices extremely limited? I'm guessing I can't run RSTS
or Unix on it with that kinda memory. vtserver I think requires a full load
of 128KW. On top of it all, the DSD440 takes most of the rack depth, as does
an RL02, so I've been advised against mounting anything above the /45 except
maybe the linctape.
Possible solutions:
1) I just got a M7891 (64KW) off Ebay. I could yank out the MF-11L system
unit, yank out the DD11-DK from the spare BA11, and install the DD11 in the
cpu cabinet. I'd use the unibus memory M7891, ditch the core, and have a
fair number of slots left over in the DD11. However, there's problems with
this approach. I'd still be mounting stuff above the /45 (DSD440 & Linctape
at the least), and maybe an RL02. In other words, this would fix the memory
and unibus slot availability, but I believe I'd still be restricting the
airflow/cooling too much :\ Plus I'd need to find some of those rare Mate &
Lock connectors to get the DD11 into the /45 cabinet and do some power
harness building. I guess I might need one or more regulators for this
approach as well. Then I'd have to find/buy a KT11-C to USE the M7891 I
think.... I'm probably talking about unobtanium stuff aren't I :|
2) Take another H960 rack, bolt it to the 11/45 rack, and install the entire
extra BA11 in there. Now it's a dual bay system, but I could use core still
if I wanted, and I think also use the M7891 in the BA11. Then I'd have room
in the 2nd rack for the peripherals. However, I'd really like to keep this
in a single bay rack :\
I'm sure there's other solutions. Can someone advise me on what is likely to
be the best route to go? I don't want this to be a really huge /45 setup.
I'd like to run RT11 v5 with TSX+ on it. Temporarily, I'd also like to try
loading up RSTS and some form of Unix. Thoughts anyone?
Jay West
8 Jul
8 Jul
4:59 p.m.
On 7/8/05, Jay West <jwest at classiccmp.org> wrote:
Problem:
The unibus space on the cpu backplane is quite limited. At the VERY least I
have to keep one of the DL11's there, so that leaves me with two more unibus
slots for peripherals. I *THINK* that that standard controller for an RX02
or RL02 takes all 6 rows (Hex cards?). However, the DSD440 controller only
takes slots C-F (quad?). The linctape II controller also only takes C-F. So,
I think I could have a reasonable system by putting the DSD440 controller,
LincTape controller, and a DL11 and be done with it.
The RL11 is a hex card. The RX11 is a quad card.
I understand wanting to keep to a single rack, but to be honest, back
in the day, a single-rack 11/34 was pretty common, but the larger
machines tended to have multiple racks, a BA-11 in addition to the
CPU, etc. A BA-11K holds up to 3 DD11DK backplanes, *lots* of space.
You can also mount RK11D backplanes in there, or an RK611 for
RK06/RK07... all commonly done on machines in the 1970s and 1980s.
I'm sure there's other solutions. Can someone
advise me on what is likely to
be the best route to go? I don't want this to be a really huge /45 setup.
I'd like to run RT11 v5 with TSX+ on it. Temporarily, I'd also like to try
loading up RSTS and some form of Unix. Thoughts anyone?
Hmm... starting from small to large (memory), I'd say that RT-11 v5
should have 32Kw, a bit more for TSX+ to make sense (why try to cram
multiple "users" into 32K?), a bit more for RSTS (128K?) and as much
memory as the processor can address for most UNIX versions you are
likely to want to run.
In terms of disk, RT11 can live just fine on floppies, but a disk is
nice, even an RL01 or RL02 (5MB or 10MB). Older versions of RSTS are
OK on an RL02 or two; newer ones (v9, v10) may not fit on a system
with a single RL02. 2.9BSD doesn't really fit in 10MB - you can load
it, but there's no room for kernel sources. Not sure about disk
requirements for v6, v7, etc., but 10MB might be OK.
With leaving the top of the rack empty for cooling (probably not a bad
idea in a non-machine-room environment), your options are severely
limited. If it were my system, I don't think I'd even consider trying
to fit in a single rack, but I have a) empty H960 racks and b) space
to set them up.
Still... sounds like a cool system.
-ethan
5:17 p.m.
>>>> "Ethan" == Ethan Dicks
<ethan.dicks at gmail.com> writes:
Ethan> Hmm... starting from small to large (memory), I'd say that
Ethan> RT-11 v5 should have 32Kw, a bit more for TSX+ to make sense
Ethan> (why try to cram multiple "users" into 32K?), a bit more for
Ethan> RSTS (128K?) and as much memory as the processor can address
Ethan> for most UNIX versions you are likely to want to run.
RSTS/E would like max memory (124 kW on an 11/45), though less will
work -- depending on version; for example V5A runs fine with 48 kW.
And RSTS V4 uses 28kW (no MMU support -- no RL support either,
though).
32 kW for RT? Wow. Early on it didn't need anywhere near that much;
V2-SJ runs perfectly well in 8 kW.
DOS (earlier versions anyway) can run in 4 kW.
paul
6:23 p.m.
On 7/8/05, Paul Koning <pkoning at equallogic.com> wrote:
32 kW for RT? Wow. Early on it didn't need
anywhere near that much;
V2-SJ runs perfectly well in 8 kW.
Sure... early versions. Jay did say v5. Now... even v5 SJ will run
in a lot less than 32kW, but the applications I remember running (and
writing) wanted the full 16-bits of memory (minus the I/O page, of
course). You can probably play around fine in 16kW.
The memory isn't just for the OS... you need some space for the apps
(compilers, games, whatever).
-ethan
7:08 p.m.
>>>> "Ethan" == Ethan Dicks
<ethan.dicks at gmail.com> writes:
Ethan> On 7/8/05, Paul Koning <pkoning at equallogic.com> wrote:
> 32 kW for RT? Wow. Early on it didn't need
anywhere near that
> much; V2-SJ runs perfectly well in 8 kW.
Ethan> Sure... early versions. Jay did say v5. Now... even v5 SJ
Ethan> will run in a lot less than 32kW, but the applications I
Ethan> remember running (and writing) wanted the full 16-bits of
Ethan> memory (minus the I/O page, of course). You can probably play
Ethan> around fine in 16kW.
Ethan> The memory isn't just for the OS... you need some space for
Ethan> the apps (compilers, games, whatever).
True. But I did assemblies, Fortran, TECO, Basic all in an 8 kW
machine, with RT V2-SJ.
paul
10:17 p.m.
Ok, so the obvious question is...
If I add a 2nd bay.....
1) How unobtanium are the parts necessary to bolt the two H960 racks
together?
2) Can the MF11-L be present in the machine along with the M7891 in the BA11
(in the 2nd rack)? Can both the core and the semiconductor be used at the
same time? Or do I need to pull the core boards out of the MF11 to use the
M7891 in the BA11?
Jay
10:37 p.m.
At 05:17 PM 7/8/2005 -0500, you wrote:
Ok, so the obvious question is...
If I add a 2nd bay.....
1) How unobtanium are the parts necessary to bolt the two H960 racks together?
Just a few regular bolts, nothing special.
2) Can the MF11-L be present in the machine along with
the M7891 in the
BA11 (in the 2nd rack)? Can both the core and the semiconductor be used at
the same time? Or do I need to pull the core boards out of the MF11 to use
the M7891 in the BA11?
You are better off placing the memory as close to the CPU as possible. You
should be able to jumper the memories to work together. There is no reason
that I know of that you cannot use a mixture of core and MOS memory. Of
course MOS memory requires considerably less power to run, but doesn't
retain its memory when power is lost (unless it is the battery backed
variety).
--tom
10:45 p.m.
On 7/8/05, Jay West <jwest at classiccmp.org> wrote:
Ok, so the obvious question is...
If I add a 2nd bay.....
1) How unobtanium are the parts necessary to bolt the two H960 racks
together?
I don't remember ever afixing H960s together - just cranking down the
feet so they didn't move. Newer racks (like the 42" corporate-style
cabs) _did_ have panels to lock racks together, but I think that was a
new thing in the early 1980s.
2) Can the MF11-L be present in the machine along with
the M7891 in the BA11
(in the 2nd rack)? Can both the core and the semiconductor be used at the
same time? Or do I need to pull the core boards out of the MF11 to use the
M7891 in the BA11?
Ooh... can't help with something that processor specific, sorry. If I
had to guess, it'd be easier to have one or the other, not both. In
the case of semi-modern OSes, I wouldn't worry about core - it's
really nice when you are loading things from papertape and when you
are toggling bootstraps, but when you can press a switch to load fresh
from the boot disk, the non-volatility of core is less
important.
-ethan
11:27 p.m.
Ok, so the obvious question is...
If I add a 2nd bay.....
1) How unobtanium are the parts necessary to bolt the two H960 racks
together?
IIRC, it's just 8 nuts and bolts. Or at least that's what I used to fix
the 2 racks of my 11/45 system together.
2) Can the MF11-L be present in the machine along with
the M7891 in the BA11
(in the 2nd rack)? Can both the core and the semiconductor be used at the
same time? Or do I need to pull the core boards out of the MF11 to use the
M7891 in the BA11?
You can have any mix of memory up to the maximum amount your processor
can address. If you have the KT11-C boards, you could, for example, have
32kW card and 92kW MOS (remember 4kW of the address space goes to the I/O
page). Provided you give all the boards the right power, it'll work fine.
-tony
10:14 p.m.
Paul wrote...
32 kW for RT? Wow. Early on it didn't need
anywhere near that much;
V2-SJ runs perfectly well in 8 kW.
I am not sure if TSX+ will run on the SJ
monitor... don't recall. But I do
know it's memory requirement was higher than 8K. I'll have to go look that
up in my TSX+ manuals :)
Jay
10:10 p.m.
Ethan wrote....
I understand wanting to keep to a single rack, but to
be honest, back
in the day, a single-rack 11/34 was pretty common, but the larger
machines tended to have multiple racks, a BA-11 in addition to the
CPU, etc. A BA-11K holds up to 3 DD11DK backplanes, *lots* of space.
You can also mount RK11D backplanes in there, or an RK611 for
RK06/RK07... all commonly done on machines in the 1970s and 1980s.
I only have one
RK05, and it's destined for my PDP-8E, and I'm unlikely to
ever find more. Many list members have scads of them, but to me RK05's are
pretty much unobtanium in my area.
In terms of disk, RT11 can live just fine on floppies,
but a disk is
nice, even an RL01 or RL02 (5MB or 10MB). Older versions of RSTS are
OK on an RL02 or two; newer ones (v9, v10) may not fit on a system
with a single RL02. 2.9BSD doesn't really fit in 10MB - you can load
it, but there's no room for kernel sources. Not sure about disk
requirements for v6, v7, etc., but 10MB might be OK.
I'll go with either an
RL02 or RA81.
With leaving the top of the rack empty for cooling
(probably not a bad
idea in a non-machine-room environment), your options are severely
limited. If it were my system, I don't think I'd even consider trying
to fit in a single rack, but I have a) empty H960 racks and b) space
to set them up.
I have two other H960 racks, guess I'll have to add one to the
/45 and make
it a dual bay system. The other H960 will probably go to the 11/34
restoration.
Thanks for the input!
Jay West
10:32 p.m.
In terms of
disk, RT11 can live just fine on floppies, but a disk is
nice, even an RL01 or RL02 (5MB or 10MB). Older versions of RSTS are
OK on an RL02 or two; newer ones (v9, v10) may not fit on a system
with a single RL02. 2.9BSD doesn't really fit in 10MB - you can load
it, but there's no room for kernel sources. Not sure about disk
requirements for v6, v7, etc., but 10MB might be OK.
I'll go with either an RL02
or RA81. With leaving
the top of the rack empty for cooling (probably not a bad
idea in a non-machine-room environment), your options are severely
limited. If it were my system, I don't think I'd even consider trying
to fit in a single rack, but I have a) empty H960 racks and b) space
to set them up.
I have two other H960 racks, guess I'll have to add one to the
/45 and
make it a dual bay system. The other H960 will probably go to the 11/34
restoration.
9 Jul
9 Jul
2:05 a.m.
New subject: DEC 11/45 build
I had written....
>I have two other H960 racks, guess I'll have to
add one to the /45 and
>make it a dual bay system. The other H960 will probably go to the 11/34
>restoration.
And..... I was wrong. Just checked and I only have one other H960
rack. That
means if I go with a dual bay /45, I have no H960 to mount the /34 in.
Bummer. I'll just have to find a way to mount the /34 in one of those lowboy
white corporate cabinets. Not as common of a setup as the H960's, but I'm
not really up for freighting another H960, trying to find more side
panels... etc. So choosing between the two, I'll use my only other H960 to
make the /45 dualbay.
As long as you leave enough room for air to enter the
top of the BA11-F,
you
should be able to mount peripherals above the CPU bay. You will likely
need
to leave the back, sides, or front panels off in order to allow a space
for
the air to enter.
Ohhhhh no! I went to WAY too much trouble to locate side panels
for my two
H960's. Ain't no way I'm gonna leave them off to the side. A dual bay /45 it
shall be :)
I had exactly enough of those "two black post snap-on bracket thingies" that
hold the front cover panels on.... for 1 bay. Now that it's going to be a
dual bay setup, I'm short those black post snap-on bracket thingies. Maybe
it's time for me to re-read that article on the classiccmp knowledgebase
about casting plastic parts :). Worse, the rack I have the /45 in has a
"Digital" masthead. The other H960 doesn't. That especially sucks, seeing as
they are apparently worth 4 times their weight in gold on ebay for someone
who wants to hang one on a wall :\
Jay
3:01 p.m.
New subject: DEC 11/45 build
From: "Jay West" <jwest at classiccmp.org>
I had written....
That
>I have two other H960 racks, guess I'll
have to add one to the /45 and
>make it a dual bay system. The other H960 will probably go to the 11/34
>restoration.
And..... I was wrong. Just checked and I only have one other H960
rack. means if I go with a dual bay /45, I have no H960 to
mount the /34 in.
Bummer. I'll just have to find a way to mount the /34 in one of those
lowboy
white corporate cabinets. Not as common of a setup as
the H960's, but I'm
not really up for freighting another H960, trying to find more side
panels... etc. So choosing between the two, I'll use my only other H960 to
make the /45 dualbay.
Won't that leave you with another set of side panels -- The ones that would
have gone on the 11/34?
Vince
7:55 p.m.
New subject: DEC 11/45 build
I had exactly enough of those "two black post
snap-on bracket thingies" that
hold the front cover panels on.... for 1 bay. Now that it's going to be a
Those things are a right pain, and break if you look at them wrongly. I
try to avoid empty space in my racks anyway...
dual bay setup, I'm short those black post snap-on
bracket thingies. Maybe
it's time for me to re-read that article on the classiccmp knowledgebase
about casting plastic parts :). Worse, the rack I have the /45 in has a
"Digital" masthead. The other H960 doesn't. That especially sucks, seeing
as
IIRC the first cabinet -- the one coantining hte CPU, should have a top
panel with 'Digital PDP11' on it. All other racks have one that is the
same colours, but with no writing on it.
Alas I've not got one of the second type. Both cabinets of my 11/45
system have the 'Digitial PDP11' top panels.
-tony
11:40 p.m.
New subject: DEC 11/45 build
Tony wrote...
IIRC the first cabinet -- the one coantining hte CPU,
should have a top
panel with 'Digital PDP11' on it. All other racks have one that is the
same colours, but with no writing on it.
Yup, a listmember sold one or two on ebay
a few weeks ago, I didn't bother
cause I didn't think I'd need it. Of course, NOW, I do :) The ones he sold
didn't have writing on them.
Jay
11:56 p.m.
New subject: DEC 11/45 build
At 06:40 PM 7/9/2005 -0500, you wrote:
Tony wrote...
I think that I have a spare one (without writing) that you may have if you
like, and if you intend to keep your machine vs. sell it on eBay...
--tom
IIRC the first cabinet -- the one coantining hte
CPU, should have a top
panel with 'Digital PDP11' on it. All other racks have one that is the
same colours, but with no writing on it.
Yup, a listmember sold one or two on ebay a
few weeks ago, I didn't bother
cause I didn't think I'd need it. Of course, NOW, I do :) The ones he sold
didn't have writing on them. 
8 Jul
8 Jul
10:36 p.m.
"Jay West" wrote:
I'll go with either an RL02 or RA81.
My advise would be to start with the RL11 controller since it's only 1 card.
The UDA-50 is 2 cards and the cabling can be a pain.
Plus, if you've got a bunch of RL02's around you can probably boot RT11 or
XXDP right off the bat from a cart you already have.
When I started my 11/34a hacking I used vtserver to load up a test RL02
cart with RT11. It was simple and worked great. It took 2-3 hours to
load but I was not in a hurry.
Now days I use 9-track since I have a SCSI drive I can make takes using
my linux boxes.
-brad
10:41 p.m.
On 7/8/05, Jay West <jwest at classiccmp.org> wrote:
I only have one RK05, and it's destined for my
PDP-8E, and I'm unlikely to
ever find more. Many list members have scads of them, but to me RK05's are
pretty much unobtanium in my area.
I have a few drives and a few controllers (Unibus, Qbus, OMNIBUS), but
I realize that they aren't easy to find anymore. Years ago, they were
available in stacks for the hauling, but like most stuff, they are
rarer now.
I'll go with either an RL02 or RA81.
That limits you in terms of UNIX - smaller Unices don't have MSCP
support (not even unpatched 2.9BSD), and newer ones need lots of core
(1MB?) UNIX from the early 1980s should fit on an RL02 as long as
it's a new enough version for RL support (not an impossible
requirement).
With v5 RT11 or semi-recent versions of RSTS, you'll be able to use
your RA81 or your RL02. I find RT-11 on an RL02 is a really nice fit.
I did a contract in the late 1980s on an 11/23 w/RL01 for
OS/application development and the RL02 was solely to hold an 8MB data
file. Plenty of room.
Thanks for the input!
You bet.
-ethan
11:11 p.m.
Ok, so I have a working processor, and a basement full of peripherals. I'm
not sure which way to go with the rest of the build. I'm not really up on
DEC stuff I admit, so maybe others here can offer me some advice as to what
is the best way to proceed.
Background:
My 11/45 (11/45-CA actually) has the KB11-A processor, no FP. It's the older
style with the power distribution board on the back wall of the cpu cabinet
OK, mine is like that. I rebuilt the power harness to give me an extra 5V
feed from another regulator block to the expansion backplanes. The stock
system is a bit current-limited there.
rather than on top. However, it's also got the
newer 861A power control in
the bottom rather than the dual 860's in the top. There is the two H742A's
as well. I have one system unit installed - MF-11L in which is installed 8K
of core. In the cpu backplane there are three unibus slots which I believe
will take three quad? (C-F) boards. A&B in two of those slots are used for
Yes, they are standard SPC slots. Don't forget you'll have to play around
with the NPG jumper on the wire-side of the backplane if you put a DMA
device -- like an RX211 -- in one of those slots.
the unibus A to unibus B jumper, and A&B of the
last slot is the connector
to A&B of the MF-11L. The MF-11L has a 9312 in the last A&B slot. The SPC?
boards currently installed are two DL11's and a M7228. The ONLY board in
slot one is a 930C terminator in A&B. I have no MMU, so slot 13 is empty and
slot 14 has the M8116.
Pity. You really need that MMU. You are limited to 28kW of memory without
it.
Separately, I have a lot of peripherals to choose from. Scads of RL02's,
DSD440, LincTape II, RX01's, RX02's, RA81's, etc. I also have a BA11-KU with
a DD11-DK backplane in it.
Problem:
The unibus space on the cpu backplane is quite limited. At the VERY least I
have to keep one of the DL11's there, so that leaves me with two more unibus
slots for peripherals. I *THINK* that that standard controller for an RX02
or RL02 takes all 6 rows (Hex cards?). However, the DSD440 controller only
The RX02 controller (RX211) is a quad card and can go in the CPU
backplane. The RL11 is a hex card though.
takes slots C-F (quad?). The linctape II controller
also only takes C-F. So,
I think I could have a reasonable system by putting the DSD440 controller,
LincTape controller, and a DL11 and be done with it. However, I then am
limited to using core memory in the MF11. At the very best, I can get...
YOu have space for 3 'system units' behind the CPU backplane. The MF11,
IIRC, takes up 2 of them. You can fit a 4-slot backplane in as well. If
you are mildly eccentric, you can wire-wrap said backplane to be 2 quad
SPC slots, 2 hex SPC slots with MUD wiring on the top 2 connectors. That
might be enough for you.
what... 32K in a MF11? I think I can get the
additional core boards. But
correct me if I'm wrong but isn't sticking with core (max 32K) going to make
my operating system choices extremely limited? I'm guessing I can't run RSTS
or Unix on it with that kinda memory. vtserver I think requires a full load
of 128KW. On top of it all, the DSD440 takes most of the rack depth, as does
an RL02, so I've been advised against mounting anything above the /45 except
maybe the linctape.
I would only put a 'short' unit immediately above the 11/45 CPU, but
above that you can put an RL or something.
Possible solutions:
1) I just got a M7891 (64KW) off Ebay. I could yank out the MF-11L system
unit, yank out the DD11-DK from the spare BA11, and install the DD11 in the
cpu cabinet. I'd use the unibus memory M7891, ditch the core, and have a
fair number of slots left over in the DD11. However, there's problems with
this approach. I'd still be mounting stuff above the /45 (DSD440 & Linctape
at the least), and maybe an RL02. In other words, this would fix the memory
and unibus slot availability, but I believe I'd still be restricting the
airflow/cooling too much :\ Plus I'd need to find some of those rare Mate &
Lock connectors to get the DD11 into the /45 cabinet and do some power
The easiest place to find those connectors is to raid current-loop serial
cables....
harness building. I guess I might need one or more
regulators for this
approach as well. Then I'd have to find/buy a KT11-C to USE the M7891 I
think.... I'm probably talking about unobtanium stuff aren't I :|
-tony
7125
days inactive
7126
days old
19 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
brad＠heeltoe.com -
ethan.dicks＠gmail.com -
jwest＠classiccmp.org -
pkoning＠equallogic.com -
uban＠ubanproductions.com -
vrs＠email.msn.com