7 Sep
2007
7 Sep
'07
6:45 p.m.
Just as there were inquiries about using PDP-11 hardware, I thought
that it might be helpful to know if anyone uses RT-11 and for what
purpose.
For myself, I have the addiction of fixing RT-11 bugs
in the operating system as well as making enhancements.
Ten years ago, I even produced most of the Y2K changes
that were required for V05.04G of RT-11 for a customer
who could not wait for Mentec. Eventually, I want to
produce a set of Y9K changes to allow years up to 9999
to be used.
Other enhancements include SL: and a new pseudo device
driver, SB: (SymBolic device list device driver) which
is similar to the VMS SNL (Symbolic Name List), but
operates only on a device which supports a directory
as does PATH for DOS. At one point it was named PH:
for Path Handler, but SB: seems a better choice. Even
more reasonable would be Symbolic device List or SL:, but
SL: is already used by the Single Line editor (or the DOSKEY
interface). Symbolic Debugger is also taken for SD:
Lately, I mostly use Ersatz-11 and I have been making
changes and enhancements to the HD: (Hypothetical Disk)
device driver that John Wilson originally wrote in 1995.
The challenge I set myself was to produce a VM(X).SYS
equivalent that is:
(a) Faster - about 3 times as fast
(b) Higher capacity - a full 65536 blocks vs 8192 blocks
(c) Smaller number of LOADed words in low memory
(d) Support the command SET VM: [NO]WRITE
plus a number of other useful features.
Well, one idea led to another and other versions are also
being tested which support 8 units and eventually 64 units
(with monitors that have that support as well). If there is
any interest, eventually a translation table similar to the
one used by DU(X).SYS is possible. In addition, full 32 bit
block number support will be done eventually which will
allow 2 TeraByte disk drives.
The other HD: related code that is also interesting is the
ability to interface the HD: device directly from user code
WITHOUT a device driver. So while the HD: is about twice
as fast as DU(X).SYS when a device driver HD(X).SYS is used,
the direct user interface (which avoids all the overhead of
a system EMT call) is about twice as fast again. For this
user interface, 32 bit blocks numbers are already possible.
Under a Windows (YEK !! Double YEK) operating system or even
just DOS, all disk access is completed before the HD: returns
control to the RT-11 operating system. Consequently, no
interrupts are required. I am not sure about Linux operation,
but if anyone does know, please advise.
Sincerely yours,
Jerome Fine
7 Sep
7 Sep
7:10 p.m.
On 9/7/07, Jerome H. Fine <jhfinedp3k at compsys.to> wrote:
Just as there were inquiries about using PDP-11
hardware, I thought
that it might be helpful to know if anyone uses RT-11 and for what
purpose.
Twenty years ago, I wrote a custom Computer-aided Instruction (CAI)
application for an PDP-11-based ultrasonic parts inspection machine in
MACRO-11 for RT-11. Besides having to carve up multi-megabyte files
full of scan nybbles and throw them up onto a high-res screen with
lecture text, then later administrating automated tests of the
material, I also had to tweak the ultrasonic scanning machine itself,
a bit of a nightmare since all the non-MACRO code was written in
PASCAL.
Since then, I've mostly used RT-11 for recreation and hardware
checkout. If I can slap a CPU, some memory, a serial port and a disk
controller together and boot it up to a '.', it tells me that I
probably have a pile of working hardware.
I haven't written any apps for RT-11 since 1989, but I have always
wanted to fire up PLANETFALL or ZORK I on it, since long, long ago,
before I owned a machine that could run Zork, I saw Planetfall on 8"
floppy, hanging up in the Digital store in downtown Columbus. It's a
bit of a silly play-time project, considering how many machines I now
own that run a Z-machine, but I've never gotten around to running a
Z-machine on a PDP-11. I know it's not hard; I just haven't whittled
down the project pile to that depth yet.
I probably split my PDP-11 time between RT-11 and 2BSD, having a
fondness and appreciation for both. If I had a PDP-11 with mass
storage that was smaller than a Professional or a BA23, I'd probably
have more time to fiddle with hardware, but lately, I seem to spend
more time in simh than using the real thing. I love the hardware, and
I have lots of it, but it's difficult to pack one more machine into my
office than I have right now.
-ethan
9:11 p.m.
I haven't written any apps for RT-11 since 1989,
but I have always
wanted to fire up PLANETFALL or ZORK I on it, since long, long ago,
before I owned a machine that could run Zork, I saw Planetfall on 8"
floppy, hanging up in the Digital store in downtown Columbus. It's a
bit of a silly play-time project, considering how many machines I now
own that run a Z-machine, but I've never gotten around to running a
Z-machine on a PDP-11. I know it's not hard; I just haven't whittled
down the project pile to that depth yet.
You do realize that a Z-machine exists for RT-11, don't you? Johnny wrote
it a few years back (~2001 probably), Megan ported it, and some work was
done a couple years ago to get the latest version building on RT-11 again.
Zane
9:51 p.m.
On 9/7/07, Zane H. Healy <healyzh at aracnet.com> wrote:
You do realize that a Z-machine exists for RT-11,
don't you? Johnny wrote
it a few years back (~2001 probably), Megan ported it, and some work was
done a couple years ago to get the latest version building on RT-11 again.
Yes. I am entirely aware of that effort and have a copy already. I
was more thinking of running the classic (c. 1984) Z-machine on
contemporary hardware, for the sole fact that at that time, I had a
PDP-8, but lusted after a PDP-11 (I bought my first one in 1986, the
$300 I wrote about recently).
This is entirely a nostalgia thing. Nothing practical about it.
-ethan
10:07 p.m.
Yes. I am entirely aware of that effort and have a
copy already. I
was more thinking of running the classic (c. 1984) Z-machine on
contemporary hardware, for the sole fact that at that time, I had a
PDP-8, but lusted after a PDP-11 (I bought my first one in 1986, the
$300 I wrote about recently).
This is entirely a nostalgia thing. Nothing practical about it.
-ethan
That is understandable. Though good luck finding a copy. I'm not aware of
*anyone* that has a copy, in fact you're about the only one that has even
seen a copy. :^(
Zane
10:15 p.m.
On 9/7/07, Zane H. Healy <healyzh at aracnet.com> wrote:
That is understandable. Though good luck finding a
copy. I'm not aware of
*anyone* that has a copy, in fact you're about the only one that has even
seen a copy. :^(
I _may_ have a copy of a .SAV file of an RT-11 Z-machine somewhere in
an ancient e-mail or an archive somewhere on a disk, but I am
reasonably certain that I do not have a whole-game disk image.
I really did see a commercial copy, printed package and all, hanging
on a peg. It's one of those things that I'm regretting that I didn't
purchase, but, as I said, at the time, I only had a 4K PDP-8, and
merely lusted after a *POWERFUL* PDP-11 ;-)
Another one my dream projects is a 12-bit Z-machine. There are a
variety of technical reasons that make it a difficult project, so I am
mired in the woolgathering stage. :-(
-ethan
9 Sep
9 Sep
9:22 a.m.
On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 17:15 -0500, Ethan Dicks wrote:
I really did see a commercial copy, printed package
and all, hanging
on a peg. It's one of those things that I'm regretting that I didn't
purchase, but, as I said, at the time, I only had a 4K PDP-8, and
merely lusted after a *POWERFUL* PDP-11 ;-)
I'm sure we can all contribute to a Jay-annoying massively off-topic
thread of stories of stuff we nearly bought. Mine ends with "And the
thing is I had 50 quid on me at the time, they're worth ten times that
now..."
Gordon
8 Sep
8 Sep
1:16 p.m.
"Jerome H. Fine" <jhfinedp3k at compsys.to> wrote:
Just as there were inquiries about using PDP-11
hardware, I thought
that it might be helpful to know if anyone uses RT-11 and for what
purpose.
I find myself firing it up a few times a year to try
building a crufty old DECUS program that I recovered.
But really I haven't found a big stash of DECUS stuff
since you got me some of the Canadian collections a
decade ago.
Just don't have any patience or time for computers in
general these days!
Tim.
9 Sep
9 Sep
3:36 a.m.
I hope to have it running on an 11/05 and a 11/34 late this year'
Paul
On 9/7/07, Jerome H. Fine <jhfinedp3k at compsys.to> wrote:
Just as there were inquiries about using PDP-11 hardware, I thought
that it might be helpful to know if anyone uses RT-11 and for what
purpose.
For myself, I have the addiction of fixing RT-11 bugs
in the operating system as well as making enhancements.
Ten years ago, I even produced most of the Y2K changes
that were required for V05.04G of RT-11 for a customer
who could not wait for Mentec. Eventually, I want to
produce a set of Y9K changes to allow years up to 9999
to be used.
Other enhancements include SL: and a new pseudo device
driver, SB: (SymBolic device list device driver) which
is similar to the VMS SNL (Symbolic Name List), but
operates only on a device which supports a directory
as does PATH for DOS. At one point it was named PH:
for Path Handler, but SB: seems a better choice. Even
more reasonable would be Symbolic device List or SL:, but
SL: is already used by the Single Line editor (or the DOSKEY
interface). Symbolic Debugger is also taken for SD:
Lately, I mostly use Ersatz-11 and I have been making
changes and enhancements to the HD: (Hypothetical Disk)
device driver that John Wilson originally wrote in 1995.
The challenge I set myself was to produce a VM(X).SYS
equivalent that is:
(a) Faster - about 3 times as fast
(b) Higher capacity - a full 65536 blocks vs 8192 blocks
(c) Smaller number of LOADed words in low memory
(d) Support the command SET VM: [NO]WRITE
plus a number of other useful features.
Well, one idea led to another and other versions are also
being tested which support 8 units and eventually 64 units
(with monitors that have that support as well). If there is
any interest, eventually a translation table similar to the
one used by DU(X).SYS is possible. In addition, full 32 bit
block number support will be done eventually which will
allow 2 TeraByte disk drives.
The other HD: related code that is also interesting is the
ability to interface the HD: device directly from user code
WITHOUT a device driver. So while the HD: is about twice
as fast as DU(X).SYS when a device driver HD(X).SYS is used,
the direct user interface (which avoids all the overhead of
a system EMT call) is about twice as fast again. For this
user interface, 32 bit blocks numbers are already possible.
Under a Windows (YEK !! Double YEK) operating system or even
just DOS, all disk access is completed before the HD: returns
control to the RT-11 operating system. Consequently, no
interrupts are required. I am not sure about Linux operation,
but if anyone does know, please advise.
Sincerely yours,
Jerome Fine
6:02 p.m.
Paul Anderson wrote:
I hope to have it running on an 11/05 and a 11/34 late
this year'
Jerome Fine replies:
Yes that seems to be the goal, but what will you do with
RT-11 at that point? If playing games is the objective,
then RT-11 is not really being used except to start the
process.
Based on the few responses, I guess that no one is writing
any programs, let alone modifying any utilities. And almost
certainly, no one seems to be modifying device drivers or
the operating system itself. If anyone is actually interested
in that aspect, please let me know.
Tim also sent a short reply which was very appreciated.
However his job and family commitments are such that
Tim no longer has any time to give to RT-11. But any
help in locating old source files would be appreciated.
I have been unable to locate the most recent source code
for SDX.SYS which places most of the code and data in high
memory. Also missing is the most recent source code for
MACRO-11. The Y2K source code modifications would also
be interesting, but are not extensive.
One interesting (and almost trivial) modification to the
operating system is support for READ ONLY files. The
resident monitor requires modifications in only a couple
of areas to support READ ONLY files. However, DIR and
PIP require far more - is anyone interested? Probably
the user visual interface is the most easily decided.
Protected files are shown by DIR with a "P" beside the
file name. If the file is READ ONLY, then an "R" can
be used. I suggest using "r" (lower case) when the
file is both READ ONLY and Protected. Does anyone
have any other suggestions - other than using TWO
characters as with "PR"? When two files are displayed
per line (as is the normal case) and the starting block
numbers are included, 40 characters per file description
is just too limited and more than 80 characters per
line is not recommended. Now that the year requires
4 digits, there is not enough room for even 2 more
characters on the line.
Sincerely yours,
Jerome Fine
--
If you attempted to send a reply and the original e-mail
address has been discontinued due a high volume of junk
e-mail, then the semi-permanent e-mail address can be
obtained by replacing the four characters preceding the
'at' with the four digits of the current year.
10 Sep
10 Sep
9:33 a.m.
On Sun, 9 Sep 2007, Jerome H. Fine wrote:
Yes that seems to be the goal, but what will you do
with
RT-11 at that point? If playing games is the objective,
then RT-11 is not really being used except to start the
process.
I do this on our 11/10 with VT11/VR17 to play lunar lander (the visitors
and especially children like it!).
Based on the few responses, I guess that no one is
writing
any programs, let alone modifying any utilities. And almost
certainly, no one seems to be modifying device drivers or
the operating system itself. If anyone is actually interested
in that aspect, please let me know.
Don't say that. My "main" PDP11 in our museum is a 11/34 with all sorts of
peripherals. I've built a small interface to attach a PC to a DR11-C and
wrote a RT-11 device driver (works in FB and XM). On the PC side I have
virtual disk images of various sizes (up to 65536 RT-11 blocks) and on the
RT-11 side I have up to eight devices that map to these disk images.
Although the data path between the 11 and the PC is only 8 bits (I was too
lazy to make it 16 bits, that would have required two latches and logic
for multiplexing/demultiplexing) I achieve data rates of about 70kB/s. I
can transfer whole RK05 disk images in less than one minute (that's btw.
the reason why I built this interface) with COPY/DEV (in both directions).
And I can boot from the virtual disk...
The project isn't finished yet (no time, other projects, ...). The
protocol needs to be more robust and fault tolerant, and I need to
implement some kind of timeouts on both sides.
Ah, almost forgot that: Since there is no official way to format DECtapes
under RT-11, I've enhanced the modified TC11 formatter from the spring '76
sigtape to be verbose and tell the user what to do. I think this counts as
"modifying utilities", doesn't it? :-)
Christian
5:09 p.m.
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:33:39 +0200> From: cc at
corti-net.de> To: cctalk at classiccmp.org> Subject: Re: Does anyone use RT-11?>
> On Sun, 9 Sep 2007, Jerome H. Fine wrote:> > Yes that seems to be the goal, but
what will you do with> > RT-11 at that point? If playing games is the objective,>
> then RT-11 is not really being used except to start the> > process.> > I
do this on our 11/10 with VT11/VR17 to play lunar lander (the visitors > and especially
children like it!).> > > Based on the few responses, I guess that no one is
writing> > any programs, let alone modifying any utilities. And almost> >
certainly, no one seems to be modifying device drivers or> > the operating system
itself. If anyone is actually interested> > in that aspect, please let me know.>
> Don't say that. My "main" PDP11 in our museum is a 11/34 with all sorts
of > peripherals. I've built a small interface to attach a PC to a DR11-C and >
wrote a RT-11 device driver (works in FB and XM). On the PC side I have > virtual disk
images of various sizes (up to 65536 RT-11 blocks) and on the > RT-11 side I have up to
eight devices that map to these disk images. > Although the data path between the 11
and the PC is only 8 bits (I was too > lazy to make it 16 bits, that would have
required two latches and logic > for multiplexing/demultiplexing) I achieve data rates
of about 70kB/s. I > can transfer whole RK05 disk images in less than one minute
(that's btw. > the reason why I built this interface) with COPY/DEV (in both
directions).> And I can boot from the virtual disk...> The project isn't
finished yet (no time, other projects, ...). The > protocol needs to be more robust and
fault tolerant, and I need to > implement some kind of timeouts on both sides.> >
Ah, almost forgot that: Since there is no official way to format DECtapes > under
RT-11, I've enhanced the modified TC11 formatter from the spring '76 > sigtape
to be verbose and tell the user what to do. I think this counts as > "modifying
utilities", doesn't it? :-)> > Christian
That DR11-C interface sounds very interesting Christian.
Do you happen to have a webpage on that, or (brief) descriptions?
Would love to see and try that here!
- Henk www.pdp-11.nl
5:39 p.m.
Sorry all, this is my first post to the list after changing from employer.It seems that
the settings in Outlook Express are not that fantastic
to generate a decent reply :-(
I seem to be able to post to the list again. Thanks Jay!
A quick update ...
I moved to a new job in another company. That means that my oce.nl
or oce.com mail account is now unreachable. The new job is great, but
one thing I already miss is the very nice capability to scan documents.
I have setup a hotmail account, so no more company footers :-)
- Henk,
www.pdp-11.nl
6333
days inactive
6336
days old
13 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
cc＠corti-net.de -
ethan.dicks＠gmail.com -
gordon＠gjcp.net -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
henk.gooijen＠hotmail.com -
jhfinedp3k＠compsys.to -
ploopster＠gmail.com -
shoppa_classiccmp＠trailing-edge.com -
useddec＠gmail.com