2 Feb
2017
2 Feb
'17
8:06 p.m.
From: Allison
for laughs I wandered over to:
http://ftp.math.utah.edu/pub/mirrors/minnie.tuhs.org/PDP-11/Boot_Images/
To see if the copy of V6 on RL02 is still there.... yep it is. and it
runs on a 11/23 just fine
Yes, that's another copy of the Shoppa disk.
So, I looked at that system, to see how it dealt with the clock issue on an
11/23 (in /sys/ken/main.c, if anyone else is interested). While looking, I
noticed something that made it extremely unlikely that it would boot on an
11/40. Sure enough, attempting to boot the /unix on it on a (simulated) -11/40
blows out.
There are a couple of other unix loads on that pack image (oldunix, unix.tmp,
etc), but all the ones I looked at had the same issue (only tried booting the
'unix' one, though); they're probably all for the same machine, so have the
same configuration issue.
V6 Unix was pretty persnickety about the hardware configuration it ran on;
while it was possible to create builds that would run on almost any
configuration, on 'vanilla' V6 that really only applies to the /40/45/70
era. And even then you still had to re-build the system to match your actual
hardware configuration, almost all the time.
The advent of the /23 (with no CSW, and no KW11-L/P), made things more
complicated. (The clock is pretty key - Unix needs one - several things,
e.g. parts of the teletype drivers, require real-time delays provided by the
clock. I've never tried to run Unix without a working clock, I'm not sure if
it would run without slowly grinding to a halt as stuff waited for clocks
delays that never happened.(
With a little work, a suite of 'universal boot' versions (one for each type of
disk controller - RK05/RL02/RX02 etc) could have been created that would boot
and run on any pretty much CPU/etc configuration - at least, well enough to
build one that did exactly match the hardware configuration at hand. (The one
on the Shoppa disk is close, from what I could see.)
I don't think anyone ever bothered, though (in part because it was much more
of a PITA to test them all, BITD, with only real hardware).
Noel
2 Feb
2 Feb
8:19 p.m.
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 11:06 PM, Noel Chiappa <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
wrote:
Well I must say my focus has been on just getting an 11/40 hardware working
enough to be a candidate for any flavor of UNIX, then figure out the
details, but this thread has been an education. I suppose I should be
happy with RT-11 given my circumstances.
Too bad I have not been able to get my EIS running. I tried a number of
things so far. I may have to shot gun approach the caps and such in an
effort to repair. It's not possible with the 3 over the back cables to put
the 7238 on a riser card to probe signals as easily. I have downloaded the
docs associated with this card.
Also, following your directions I had no issues getting V5 and V7 running
in simH.
I am curious to see what OS's run on an 11/40 without the EIS card other
than RT-11. I am researching this. I have always wanted to learn more
about batch-11.
b
From: Allison
for laughs I wandered over to:
http://ftp.math.utah.edu/pub/mirrors/minnie.tuhs.org/PDP-
11/Boot_Images/
To see if the copy of V6 on RL02 is still
there.... yep it is. and
it
runs on a 11/23 just fine
Yes, that's another copy of the Shoppa disk.
So, I looked at that system, to see how it dealt with the clock issue on an
11/23 (in /sys/ken/main.c, if anyone else is interested). While looking, I
noticed something that made it extremely unlikely that it would boot on an
11/40. Sure enough, attempting to boot the /unix on it on a (simulated)
-11/40
blows out.
There are a couple of other unix loads on that pack image (oldunix,
unix.tmp,
etc), but all the ones I looked at had the same issue (only tried booting
the
'unix' one, though); they're probably all for the same machine, so have the
same configuration issue.
V6 Unix was pretty persnickety about the hardware configuration it ran on;
while it was possible to create builds that would run on almost any
configuration, on 'vanilla' V6 that really only applies to the /40/45/70
era. And even then you still had to re-build the system to match your
actual
hardware configuration, almost all the time.
The advent of the /23 (with no CSW, and no KW11-L/P), made things more
complicated. (The clock is pretty key - Unix needs one - several things,
e.g. parts of the teletype drivers, require real-time delays provided by
the
clock. I've never tried to run Unix without a working clock, I'm not sure
if
it would run without slowly grinding to a halt as stuff waited for clocks
delays that never happened.(
With a little work, a suite of 'universal boot' versions (one for each
type of
disk controller - RK05/RL02/RX02 etc) could have been created that would
boot
and run on any pretty much CPU/etc configuration - at least, well enough to
build one that did exactly match the hardware configuration at hand. (The
one
on the Shoppa disk is close, from what I could see.)
I don't think anyone ever bothered, though (in part because it was much
more
of a PITA to test them all, BITD, with only real hardware).
Noel
3 Feb
3 Feb
5:22 a.m.
On Feb 2, 2017, at 11:19 PM, william degnan
<billdegnan at gmail.com> wrote:
...
I am curious to see what OS's run on an 11/40 without the EIS card other
than RT-11. I am researching this. I have always wanted to learn more
about batch-11.
You mean DOS/BATCH? Yes, that would run on that machine, it's an 11/20 OS. So would
the pre-Batch version of DOS-11 (V4).
Another OS that would run on your machine (as well as an 11/20) would be RSTS-11 (V4, or I
suppose V3 if you can find that), the predecessor of RSTS/E that didn't use the MMU.
It may be that some flavors of RSX-11/M or /S can be built with no EIS, since it's
supposed to be possible to build a non-MMU version at least of /S. But I don't know
the specifics (no RSX experience).
paul
8:18 a.m.
On Feb 3, 2017, at 8:22 AM, Paul Koning <paulkoning
at comcast.net> wrote:
It looks as though Bill only has RL02 drives on the 11/40 so that would rule out
DOS/BATCH. One of the later 3.x releases of RSX-11M should be OK (4.x seems to have
dropped unmapped support).
John.
On Feb 2, 2017, at 11:19 PM, william degnan
<billdegnan at gmail.com> wrote:
...
I am curious to see what OS's run on an 11/40 without the EIS card other
than RT-11. I am researching this. I have always wanted to learn more
about batch-11.
You mean DOS/BATCH? Yes, that would run on that machine, it's an 11/20 OS. So would
the pre-Batch version of DOS-11 (V4).
Another OS that would run on your machine (as well as an 11/20) would be RSTS-11 (V4, or
I suppose V3 if you can find that), the predecessor of RSTS/E that didn't use the
MMU.
It may be that some flavors of RSX-11/M or /S can be built with no EIS, since it's
supposed to be possible to build a non-MMU version at least of /S. But I don't know
the specifics (no RSX experience).
paul
8:50 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 11:18 AM, John Forecast <john at forecast.name> wrote:
Yah, too bad about DOS batch I have some nice manuals to work from, but I
will see if I can find RSX-11M, so far I have not found an RL02 image for
this, I have one here that is too new to work on my system, it crashes.
Bill
On Feb 3, 2017, at 8:22 AM, Paul Koning
<paulkoning at comcast.net> wrote:
paul
It looks as though Bill only has RL02 drives on the 11/40 so that would
rule out DOS/BATCH. One of the later 3.x releases of RSX-11M should be OK
(4.x seems to have dropped unmapped support).
John.
9:16 a.m.
On Feb 3, 2017, at 11:50 AM, william degnan
<billdegnan at gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 11:18 AM, John Forecast <john at forecast.name> wrote:
Yah, too bad about DOS batch I have some nice manuals to work from, but I
will see if I can find RSX-11M, so far I have not found an RL02 image for
this, I have one here that is too new to work on my system, it crashes.
Bill
RSX-11M V3.2 supports RL02s and bitsavers has images of the 3.2 RL01 distribution disks.
I?m not sure if those will boot if copied to an RL02.
John.
On Feb 3, 2017, at 8:22 AM, Paul Koning
<paulkoning at comcast.net> wrote:
paul
It looks as though Bill only has RL02 drives on the 11/40 so that would
rule out DOS/BATCH. One of the later 3.x releases of RSX-11M should be OK
(4.x seems to have dropped unmapped support).
John.
10:21 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 12:59 PM, william degnan <billdegnan at gmail.com>
wrote:
I saw that, and was thinking the same thing
b
I don't want to jumper the RL02 to think it's an RL01, but just for fun I
wonder what would happen if I used PDPGUI to build a RL02 disk from a RL01
image. It might format a smaller amount of the disk, and if it's a
distribution disk I could create a real RL02 disk working bootable.
Nothing to lose I suppose to experiment.
b
Bill
RSX-11M V3.2 supports RL02s and bitsavers has images of the 3.2 RL01
distribution disks. I?m not sure if those will boot if copied to an RL02.
John.
2 Feb
2 Feb
10 p.m.
On Feb 2, 2017, at 10:06 PM, Noel Chiappa <jnc at
mercury.lcs.mit.edu> wrote:
,,,,,,
The advent of the /23 (with no CSW, and no KW11-L/P), made things more
complicated. (The clock is pretty key - Unix needs one - several things,
e.g. parts of the teletype drivers, require real-time delays provided by the
clock. I've never tried to run Unix without a working clock, I'm not sure if
it would run without slowly grinding to a halt as stuff waited for clocks
delays that never happened.(
Of course many preemptive OS?es use clock or other interrupts to drive their task
schedulers.
I recall a situation in which the LTC was buggy or someone just switched it off.
The OS didn?t crash, but its responsiveness was rather odd. Disk and perhaps some
terminal IO kept the scheduler going. With many users we barely noticed a difference,
but when there were only 1 or 2 users, it just kind of crept slowly along. Someone
finally
noticed the timestamps on files never changed.
Jerry
jsw at ieee.org
2832
days inactive
2832
days old
8 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
billdegnan＠gmail.com -
jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu -
john＠forecast.name -
jsw＠ieee.org -
paulkoning＠comcast.net