2 Apr
2008
2 Apr
'08
10:32 p.m.
I guess my first question would be -
If you're running on an 11/83 under RSTS/E,
why WOULDN'T you want to use 22-bit addressing?
Surely you're not "wasting" a perfectly good 11/83 on V6C or V7.0 ?
;-)
But, to answer your question -
My interpretation is that you can:
Use 22-bit addressing, in which case RSTS/E (V8.0 and above)
will see the controller as a TSV05, and will use 22-bit addressing
to access memory above 256K (when applicable).
You'll note that if you do a HAR LIST under RSTS/E V8.0 or above,
it will flag this drive as "extended features enabled", indicating that
it can use the full 22-bit address range.
or
Set 18-bit addressing, in which case RSTS/E (V7.0)
will see the controller as a TS11, which will ONLY be able to access
256K of memory without modification to the device driver.
(V8.0 and above might (properly) recognize it as a TSV05 either way,
however, the "extended features" will be disabled, and it will only be
able to access 256K of memory.)
If I left anything out, I'm sure someone will chime in. . . .
Tim
3 Apr
3 Apr
8:30 a.m.
On Apr 3, 2008, at 1:32 AM, tiggerlasv at aim.com wrote:
I guess my first question would be -
If you're running on an 11/83 under RSTS/E,
why WOULDN'T you want to use 22-bit addressing?
Well that was my thought...I've never used a 9-track drive on a 22-
bit system running RSTS/E, so I was guessing a bit. I thought
perhaps the driver might implement bounce buffers if the board was
operating in 18-bit mode.
Later last night (in total screaming frustration trying to get at
least ONE of my five 9-track drives working) I discovered that the
driver identifies the board correctly and says "extended features
disabled" in the HA LI output, then init disables the device.
Surely you're not "wasting" a perfectly
good 11/83 on V6C or
V7.0 ? ;-)
No way. RSTS/E is, by far, my favorite PDP-11 OS...but only v9+.
I'm definitely not a fan of the pre-v9 RSTS/E releases. Most of my
early computer knowledge was gained on a v9.4 system.
You'll note that if you do a HAR LIST under RSTS/E
V8.0 or above,
it will flag this drive as "extended features enabled", indicating
that
it can use the full 22-bit address range.
Yup, I found that out later last night. Of course the drive
doesn't actually *work*, but that's a different (extremely
irritating) matter.
Set 18-bit addressing, in which case RSTS/E (V7.0)
will see the controller as a TS11, which will ONLY be able to access
256K of memory without modification to the device driver.
(V8.0 and above might (properly) recognize it as a TSV05 either way,
however, the "extended features" will be disabled, and it will only be
able to access 256K of memory.)
I've got 4MB of RAM in the system; init disabled the device when
it was set for 18-bit addressing. (it's running v9.5)
It seems that all of my 9-track drives are nonfunctional now. At
least two of them worked when put into storage; I'm very displeased.
I've given up on them for the moment and am going to try to get a
TK50 or TK70 working in the system.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
8:52 a.m.
At 11:30 AM -0400 4/3/08, Dave McGuire wrote:
On Apr 3, 2008, at 1:32 AM, tiggerlasv at aim.com
wrote:
Is _that_ particular device SYSGEN'd into the RSTS SIL you're
attempting to run? IIRC, the boot-time code (HA LI) will show all
the devices it successfully identifies on the bus, but the RSTS image
you try to run after that may not be (and usually isn't) configured
to support all devices. One good reason is because some of the
magtape controllers use the same CSR but are otherwise incompatible.
You may need to SYSGEN a new .SIL before you can actually use the
device.
John
I guess my first question would be -
If you're running on an 11/83 under RSTS/E,
why WOULDN'T you want to use 22-bit addressing?
Well that was my thought...I've never used a 9-track drive on a
22-bit system running RSTS/E, so I was guessing a bit. I thought
perhaps the driver might implement bounce buffers if the board was
operating in 18-bit mode.
Later last night (in total screaming frustration trying to get at
least ONE of my five 9-track drives working) I discovered that the
driver identifies the board correctly and says "extended features
disabled" in the HA LI output, then init disables the device.
8:08 p.m.
On Apr 3, 2008, at 11:52 AM, John A. Dundas III wrote:
The .SIL I was running was generated with the DQ132 configured
with extended features enabled. That was probably why init disabled it.
It's moot at this point, though, because I can't get the damn
drive to work. The universe just doesn't want me to have tapes on my
PDP-11s, it seems.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
Well that
was my thought...I've never used a 9-track drive on a
22-bit system running RSTS/E, so I was guessing a bit. I thought
perhaps the driver might implement bounce buffers if the board was
operating in 18-bit mode.
Later last night (in total screaming frustration trying to get
at least ONE of my five 9-track drives working) I discovered that
the driver identifies the board correctly and says "extended
features disabled" in the HA LI output, then init disables the
device.
Is _that_ particular device SYSGEN'd into the RSTS SIL you're
attempting to run? IIRC, the boot-time code (HA LI) will show all
the devices it successfully identifies on the bus, but the RSTS
image you try to run after that may not be (and usually isn't)
configured to support all devices. One good reason is because some
of the magtape controllers use the same CSR but are otherwise
incompatible. You may need to SYSGEN a new .SIL before you can
actually use the device. 
10:14 a.m.
New subject: Dilog DQ132 question [now 9-track repair]
At 09:30 AM 4/3/2008, Dave McGuire wrote:
It seems that all of my 9-track drives are
nonfunctional now. At
least two of them worked when put into storage; I'm very displeased.
I've given up on them for the moment and am going to try to get a
TK50 or TK70 working in the system.
I mentioned this place back on 5/06, but I'll ask again.
Where do you get repairs on old 9-tracks?
Back then I'd bought an M4 9914, an Overland Data 5622, and an HP 88780
in the hopes that one would work but none did.
After a few months of trying, I eventually exchanged emails and
a phone call with http://www.comco-inc.com/ in the hope of getting
one of them fixed. I never bit the bullet on shipping and
repair costs, though.
- John
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1356 - Release Date: 4/2/2008 4:14 PM
8:11 p.m.
New subject: Dilog DQ132 question [now 9-track repair]
On Apr 3, 2008, at 1:14 PM, John Foust wrote:
Where to get repairs? I have tools, test equipment, and a service
manual for my HP 88780... ;)
The 88780 is a fairly modern device as 9-track drives go. It has
extensive onboard diagnostic capability. Do you have the docs to be
able to go through the test procedures? That should narrow things
down quite a bit for that tape drive at least. I'll be doing that
soon myself.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
It seems that
all of my 9-track drives are nonfunctional now. At
least two of them worked when put into storage; I'm very displeased.
I've given up on them for the moment and am going to try to get a
TK50 or TK70 working in the system.
I mentioned this place back on 5/06, but I'll ask again.
Where do you get repairs on old 9-tracks?
Back then I'd bought an M4 9914, an Overland Data 5622, and an HP
88780
in the hopes that one would work but none did.
After a few months of trying, I eventually exchanged emails and
a phone call with http://www.comco-inc.com/ in the hope of getting
one of them fixed. I never bit the bullet on shipping and
repair costs, though. 
11:11 a.m.
Dave McGuire wrote:
...
No way. RSTS/E is, by far, my favorite PDP-11
OS...but only v9+.
I'm definitely not a fan of the pre-v9 RSTS/E releases. Most of my
early computer knowledge was gained on a v9.4 system.
Interesting. Could you expound on that a bit?
I'm pretty ignorant about v9+. I first touched RSTS very early on - I'm
pretty sure I saw version 2A running (sneaking into the computer lab at
Carleton). Later I actually got paid to use it around V6/V7 but after
that I moved on to other machines.
(Always likes rsts, however. something cool about basic+ and then being
able to run rt11 also)
What would I notice/like/want running V9+ over running V7? I'd enjoy
hearing from someone who's used it a lot.
-brad
Brad Parker
Heeltoe Consulting
+1-781-483-3101
http://www.heeltoe.com
2:54 p.m.
At 2:11 PM -0400 4/3/08, Brad Parker wrote:
What would I notice/like/want running V9+ over running
V7? I'd enjoy
hearing from someone who's used it a lot.
I might be the wrong one to answer this as the bulk of my experience
was from <= V7.2. However here are some things I know changed:
- support for I/D-space; both in the kernel and in user programs
- DCL as one of the CLIs; I think it's the default from 9.0 on
- more/better shareable library support
- on-disk structure changes
- support for VMS-style BACKUP
- granularity in privileges and quotas
- support for later processors and devices [somewhat obvious];
correspondingly, support was removed for some older devices
- async read/write [from user programs]
Also, I think it was Zane who used to maintain (maybe still does) a
compatibility matrix of layered products to OS versions. Many
changes there over time.
John
8:07 p.m.
On Apr 3, 2008, at 2:11 PM, Brad Parker wrote:
Well, I had been exposed to VMS, so I knew a bit of DCL. Since
RSTS/E includes DCL as a runtime system from V9 onwards, I was
instantly comfortable with it. It's a pretty limited DCL compared to
that of VMS, but it's close enough for someone to sit down and start
working right away.
The notion of logging in and being dumped into a BASIC interpreter
didn't excite me at all, as I had an Atari 800 that did that just
fine. Granted BASIC-Plus is a damn nice dialect of BASIC, it still
wasn't enough to justify (to me) running two-and-a-half racks of
equipment over the Atari 800. The first OS I ran on my first PDP-11
was RSX-11M v4.2, and I liked it a lot, but once I found RSTS/E
(v9.4), I felt like I was right at home with DCL. I had written some
little programs under RSX and they moved right over (a BBS program
comes to mind) so I was able to keep hacking on my longer-term
projects after converting.
Doing a SYSGEN under RSX-11M at age 16 with just a doc kit and no
help was...fun. :)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
No way.
RSTS/E is, by far, my favorite PDP-11 OS...but only v9+.
I'm definitely not a fan of the pre-v9 RSTS/E releases. Most of my
early computer knowledge was gained on a v9.4 system.
Interesting. Could you expound on that a bit?
I'm pretty ignorant about v9+. I first touched RSTS very early on
- I'm
pretty sure I saw version 2A running (sneaking into the computer
lab at
Carleton). Later I actually got paid to use it around V6/V7 but after
that I moved on to other machines.
(Always likes rsts, however. something cool about basic+ and then
being
able to run rt11 also)
What would I notice/like/want running V9+ over running V7? I'd enjoy
hearing from someone who's used it a lot.
6419
days inactive
6420
days old
8 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
brad＠heeltoe.com -
dundas＠caltech.edu -
jfoust＠threedee.com -
mcguire＠neurotica.com -
tiggerlasv＠aim.com