27 Feb
2003
27 Feb
'03
2:08 a.m.
I read
somewhere that it could be converted to a 11/53 with a minimal
effort. How much trouble?
Rip out the CXA's (16-port serial boards), add a
disk and/or tape
controller, and perhaps some memory. Off you go. The heart of
the DECserver 550 was/is indeed a barebones /53 CPU. Which comes
with 512KB RAM on the CPU card, and its console serial port. 
27 Feb
27 Feb
4:11 a.m.
I read somewhere that it could be converted to a 11/53
with a minimal
effort. How much trouble?
Rip out the CXA's (16-port serial boards), add a
disk and/or tape
controller, and perhaps some memory. Off you go. The heart of
the DECserver 550 was/is indeed a barebones /53 CPU. Which comes
with 512KB RAM on the CPU card, and its console serial port. 
5:03 a.m.
--- "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh(a)aracnet.com> wrote:
I can't remember how much memory is onboard, but
there should be enough
to to run RT-11.
Mine has 512KB.
Such a setup seems to be popular for 2.11BSD for some
odd
reason.
Is that sarcastic? I have lots of experience with 2.9BSD (I've had
distro tapes for 15+ years and have installed it on a number of real
PDP-11s and some old versions of SIMH (which is how I helped Bob find
the implementation bug with the RP emulation). I have stuck with it,
because until I recently aquired the DECserver CPU board, I didn't
_have_ a Q-bus J-11 board, just several F-11 boards (11/23 and 11/23+
CPUs). 2.9BSD does not require Split I&D and runs fine on an 11/23
or 11/24 (but it's nice to have more than a pair of RL02s to house it)
2.11BSD is desired by lots of folks because it has MSCP support built-
in (ISTR there are patches for 2.9BSD for it). These same people don't
mind that 2.11BSD requires Split I&D because now, J-11 systems are
widely available and, below the 11/83, inexpensive. You can have a
servicable 2.11BSD system in a BA-23 with this CPU board, an RQDX3
and an ST-225 (RD31). You can have a decent system with an ST-251 (RD32).
With an RD53 or RD54, you can really play. There are other disk options,
but the commonly available arrangements are more than satisfactory.
Also, MHz aside, you don't typically need what an 11/53 CPU offers
if you are going to be dabbling in RT-11. Even v5.7 is servicable
with far older hardware. The speed is nice, but I never complained
about running v5.3 on my 11/23 w/256K. I don't think there's much
out there for the RT-11 world that you *need* a J-11 chip. TSXplus
might be different; don't know - only ever run that on an 11/73 and
I was a lowly user.
The big problem with these boards is that due to the
bulkheads on the
boards, they'll work best in a BA213, rather than the normal chassis used
for a PDP-11.
Good point. I was going to remove my bulkhead since I have *no* BA213
equipment anywhere (and I have some COMBOARD handles...) I just wasn't
sure how I was going to handle (no pun intended) the I/O board that's
mounted up in there... too long and thin for a regular BA23 I/O panel.
I'm still looking for a BA213 or two for "haul-it-away" prices. I wish
I'd gotten to the trailer at the back of the Hamvention lot last Spring
before Mitch Miller did - I'd have loved to get that uVAX-III with
dual Ethernet for a song. I might have even left the CPU in it. :-)
-ethan
Zane
--
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
| | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| PDP-10 Emulation and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
8:39 a.m.
--- "Zane H. Healy"
<healyzh(a)aracnet.com> wrote:
No, I simply find it a little odd that the main OS to be used on systems
built from DECserver 550 boards is 2.11BSD. In fact I'm not sure I've
heard of anyone running anything else on one.
Zane
--
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
| | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| PDP-10 Emulation and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
Such a setup seems to be popular for 2.11BSD for
some odd
reason.
Is that sarcastic? I have lots of experience with 2.9BSD (I've had 
10:12 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh(a)aracnet.com>
To: <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: decserver 550 in Kansas City
<SNIP>
No, I simply find it a little odd that the main OS to
be used on systems
built from DECserver 550 boards is 2.11BSD. In fact I'm not sure I've
heard of anyone running anything else on one.
Zane
--
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
| | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| PDP-10 Emulation and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
Zane, I would suspect that BSD is because it is FREE, multi-user, and
multi-tasking. RT-11, RSX, etc. aren't free. I managed to purchase a RT-11
license back when I worked for a DEC OEM. We made MIL-STD 1553 data bus
controllers and sold a complete testing station built around both QBUS and
UNIBUS machines. In fact, I wrote the drivers for both RT-11 and VMS that
were provided with the systems.
As best as I recall, I paid $800+ for the full RT-11, which was, as I
remember, about my company's cost. I think retail was and sill is about
$1500. I didn't get any manuals, but didn't need them as I had access at
work.
As for myself, my first choice for running on an 11/53 built out of a
DECserver 550, which I am currently doing, would be TSX Plus over RT-11. Too
bad about that, huh - I'm not paying for TSX Plus for use in a hobby. RT-11
I have. I MAY try the BSD, as I never played with it in its day. It could
even be educational!
I'm still kicking myself over the $3,500 I spent on SCO Open Desktop
Developers kit, PLUS $500 to join their developers program so that I could
get the OS and tools AT THAT PRICE!!! Linux is MUCH more stable and is
downloadable for zilch. The (GCC) compiler doesn't dump core if you try to
get a listing either, unlike the SCO (Microsoft) compiler.
Regards,
Stuart Johnson
3:11 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stuart Johnson" <ssj152(a)charter.net>
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 7:08 PM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh(a)aracnet.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 4:36 PM
> No, I simply find it a little odd that the main OS to be used on systems
> built from DECserver 550 boards is 2.11BSD. In fact I'm not sure I've
> heard of anyone running anything else on one.
Zane, I would suspect that BSD is because it is FREE,
multi-user, and
multi-tasking. RT-11, RSX, etc. aren't free. I managed to purchase a RT-11
Another important factor is that 2.11BSD is FREE.
The availability of free Ancient UNIX is what got me interested in all this,
when I discovered the free license about a year and a half ago. Many thanks
to all those that made that possible. That motivated me to dig out some
11/23's that had been mouldering in the basement for the past 15 years and
see what I could do with them. Before then, all I had was the RT-11 that
came on them, and after playing with UNIX (mainly as a user) for the past
many years, I just could not get that excited over RT-11.
A main appeal of the PDP-11 and UNIX is that this is where much of the
technology that I've been using in my career sprang from: the C language,
UNIX, and even today, most microprocessor and DSP architectures seem to
derive in part from the PDP-11. For most of my career, I was isolated from
the actual PDP-11 machines by the locked door of the computer center, or was
using derivatives of that technology, such as the VAX, and SunOS. Now, it's
mine, all mine!
Just in the last couple weeks I got the networking up on 2.11. This brings
back many more old memories of the days when four words: telnet, ftp, mail,
and news, just about completely defined the Internet.
--
Jonathan Engdahl
http://users.safeaccess.com/engdahl
"The things which are seen are temporary,
but the things which are not seen are eternal." II Cor. 4:18
1 Mar
1 Mar
10:28 a.m.
Zane and Stuart,
Jonathan seems to be the expert on this. Check this out.
http://users.safeaccess.com/engdahl/PDP-11_53.htm
http://users.safeaccess.com/engdahl/KDJ11.htm
http://users.safeaccess.com/engdahl/pdp-11.htm
Best Regards
At 06:08 PM 2/27/03 -0600, you wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh(a)aracnet.com>
To: <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: decserver 550 in Kansas City
<SNIP>
No, I simply find it a little odd that the main
OS to be used on systems
built from DECserver 550 boards is 2.11BSD. In fact I'm not sure I've
heard of anyone running anything else on one.
Zane
--
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
| | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| PDP-10 Emulation and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
Zane, I would suspect that BSD is because it is FREE, multi-user, and
multi-tasking. RT-11, RSX, etc. aren't free. I managed to purchase a RT-11
license back when I worked for a DEC OEM. We made MIL-STD 1553 data bus
controllers and sold a complete testing station built around both QBUS and
UNIBUS machines. In fact, I wrote the drivers for both RT-11 and VMS that
were provided with the systems.
As best as I recall, I paid $800+ for the full RT-11, which was, as I
remember, about my company's cost. I think retail was and sill is about
$1500. I didn't get any manuals, but didn't need them as I had access at
work.
As for myself, my first choice for running on an 11/53 built out of a
DECserver 550, which I am currently doing, would be TSX Plus over RT-11. Too
bad about that, huh - I'm not paying for TSX Plus for use in a hobby. RT-11
I have. I MAY try the BSD, as I never played with it in its day. It could
even be educational!
I'm still kicking myself over the $3,500 I spent on SCO Open Desktop
Developers kit, PLUS $500 to join their developers program so that I could
get the OS and tools AT THAT PRICE!!! Linux is MUCH more stable and is
downloadable for zilch. The (GCC) compiler doesn't dump core if you try to
get a listing either, unlike the SCO (Microsoft) compiler.
Regards,
Stuart Johnson
7919
days inactive
7921
days old
6 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
erd_6502＠yahoo.com -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
j.r.engdahl＠adelphia.net -
mail.list＠analog-and-digital-solutions.com -
mbg＠TheWorld.com -
ssj152＠charter.net