4 Feb
2002
4 Feb
'02
1:07 p.m.
On Feb 4, 17:48, Jerome Fine wrote:
(a) As far as I know, there are no hobby versions, as
yet, for TSX-PLUS.
However, if there is enough interest, perhaps we could inquire. I would
certainly be willing to contact S&H to see if they might be interested.
Since I was a sort of distributor for S&H at one point and I already have
my own license, I would be able to support hobby users. SO!!!! Are
there any potential TSX-PLUS hobby users out there who would like
to have this software?
Yes!
Like Jerome's, one or two of my RT-11 systems are SYSGENed for
multi-terminal support. But it's not the same.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
4 Feb
4 Feb
5:40 p.m.
New subject: TSX-PLUS (Was MicroPDP 11/73)
Pete Turnbull wrote:
On Feb 4,
17:48, Jerome Fine wrote:
(a) As far as I know, there are no hobby versions, as yet, for TSX-PLUS.
However, if there is enough interest, perhaps we could inquire. I would
certainly be willing to contact S&H to see if they might be interested.
Since I was a sort of distributor for S&H at one point and I already have
my own license, I would be able to support hobby users. SO!!!! Are
there any potential TSX-PLUS hobby users out there who would like
to have this software?
Yes! Like Jerome's, one or two of my RT-11 systems are
SYSGENed for
multi-terminal support. But it's not the same.
You are correct. The worst part is the scheduler. There really is none
in RT-11. Now, might that be a project that would be useful? But running
under VBGEXE provides all 64 KBytes of memory if needed for any job.
One thing nice about KEX is that:
SRUN KEX.SAV/LEVEL:n/TERMINAL:n/NAME:KEXn
is allowed so that each job can have its own name - which means that
more than one KEX can run as a system job at the same time. However,
if you are using VBGEXE to trigger the job via:
.SRUN VBGEXE.SAV/LEVEL:n/TERMINAL:n
?Program FOO
then the name of each job will be VBGEXE which is NOT allowed
for the second job. I added a few lines of code to VBGEXE to allow:
.SRUN VBGEXE.SAV/LEVEL:n/TERMINAL:n/NAME:VBGEXn
?Program FOO
such that if VBGEXn matches the value if "n" in the "/LEVEL:n"
switch,
then the name of the job becomes VBGEXn which becomes unique
for each job. All the extra code does is compare the characters in the
"/NAME:VBGEXn" switch with the characters "VBGEXn" as derived
from the "/LEVEL:n" switch. If they match,
then the normal default
of "VBGEXE" for the name of the job is changed to
"VBGEXn"
rather than looking for a file named "VBGEXn.SAV" which is the
way that the "/NAME:FOO" is handled. Obviously this means that
the user can't have any programs named:
VBGEX1.SAV
VBGEX2.SAV
VBGEX3.SAV
VBGEX4.SAV
VBGEX5.SAV
VBGEX6.SAV
a small price to pay for the extra flexibility in my opinion. Note, I did
this before I found out that KEX accepts:
.SRUN KEX.SAV/LEVEL:n/TERMINAL:n/NAME:KEXn
but it has come in handy once or twice over the years since then.
If anyone objects, can you suggest another method?
5 Feb
5 Feb
1:39 a.m.
New subject: TSX-PLUS (Was MicroPDP 11/73)
Make that two! I have a legit copy of TSX+, both manuals and software. But I
would still like very much to see a hobbyist license.
Jay West
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerome Fine" <jhfine(a)postoffice.idirect.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 10:40 PM
Subject: TSX-PLUS (Was MicroPDP 11/73)
TSX-PLUS.
ONE! I will inquire if the total reaches FIVE!
Pete Turnbull
wrote:
> >On Feb 4, 17:48, Jerome Fine wrote:
> > (a) As far as I know, there are no hobby versions, as yet, for
> > However, if there is enough interest,
perhaps we could inquire. I
would
> > certainly be willing to contact S&H to
see if they might be
interested.
> > Since I was a sort of distributor for
S&H at one point and I already
have
my own license, I would be able to support hobby
users. SO!!!! Are
there any potential TSX-PLUS hobby users out there who would like
to have this software?
Yes! Like Jerome's, one or two of my RT-11 systems
are SYSGENed for
multi-terminal support. But it's not the same.
You are correct. The worst part is the scheduler. There really is none
in RT-11. Now, might that be a project that would be useful? But running
under VBGEXE provides all 64 KBytes of memory if needed for any job.
One thing nice about KEX is that:
SRUN KEX.SAV/LEVEL:n/TERMINAL:n/NAME:KEXn
is allowed so that each job can have its own name - which means that
more than one KEX can run as a system job at the same time. However,
if you are using VBGEXE to trigger the job via:
.SRUN VBGEXE.SAV/LEVEL:n/TERMINAL:n
?Program FOO
then the name of each job will be VBGEXE which is NOT allowed
for the second job. I added a few lines of code to VBGEXE to allow:
.SRUN VBGEXE.SAV/LEVEL:n/TERMINAL:n/NAME:VBGEXn
?Program FOO
such that if VBGEXn matches the value if "n" in the "/LEVEL:n"
switch,
then the name of the job becomes VBGEXn which becomes unique
for each job. All the extra code does is compare the characters in the
"/NAME:VBGEXn" switch with the characters "VBGEXn" as derived
from the "/LEVEL:n" switch. If they match, then the normal default
of "VBGEXE" for the name of the job is changed to "VBGEXn"
rather than looking for a file named "VBGEXn.SAV" which is the
way that the "/NAME:FOO" is handled. Obviously this means that
the user can't have any programs named:
VBGEX1.SAV
VBGEX2.SAV
VBGEX3.SAV
VBGEX4.SAV
VBGEX5.SAV
VBGEX6.SAV
a small price to pay for the extra flexibility in my opinion. Note, I did
this before I found out that KEX accepts:
.SRUN KEX.SAV/LEVEL:n/TERMINAL:n/NAME:KEXn
but it has come in handy once or twice over the years since then.
If anyone objects, can you suggest another method?
6:49 a.m.
New subject: TSX-PLUS (Was MicroPDP 11/73)
Quothe Jay West, from writings of Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 06:39:45AM -0600:
Make that two! I have a legit copy of TSX+, both
manuals and software. But I
would still like very much to see a hobbyist license.
Make that three! Several years ago, I called S&H about a hobbyist
license; they said it was ok for me to use TSX-Plus for personal use.
However, I really would like to obtain a newer version of the software
and manuals; I seem to recall my manuals being older than the OS
version.
--
Copyright (C) 2001 R. D. Davis The difference between humans & other animals:
All Rights Reserved an unnatural belief that we're above Nature &
rdd(a)rddavis.org 410-744-4900 her other creatures, using dogma to justify such
http://www.rddavis.org beliefs and to justify much human cruelty.
6:45 a.m.
New subject: TSX-PLUS (Was MicroPDP 11/73)
R. D. Davis wrote:
Quothe Jay
West, from writings of Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 06:39:45AM -0600:
Make that two! I have a legit copy of TSX+, both manuals and software. But I
would still like very much to see a hobbyist license.
Make that three! Several
years ago, I called S&H about a hobbyist
license; they said it was ok for me to use TSX-Plus for personal use.
However, I really would like to obtain a newer version of the software
and manuals; I seem to recall my manuals being older than the OS
version. 
7:51 a.m.
New subject: TSX-PLUS (Was MicroPDP 11/73)
Oh, I forgot to whine "me too!" to the TSX-11[/Plus] question.
Bruce
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerome Fine" <jhfine(a)idirect.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2002 10:45 AM
Subject: Re: TSX-PLUS (Was MicroPDP 11/73)
06:39:45AM -0600:
Jerome Fine replies:
If that was the case, I hope they still are of the same opinion. Of course,
R. D. Davis
wrote:
> > Quothe Jay West, from writings of Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at > > Make that two! I have a legit copy of TSX+,
both manuals and software.
But I
would still like very much to see a hobbyist license.
Make that three! Several years ago, I called S&H about a hobbyist
license; they said it was ok for me to use TSX-Plus for personal use.
However, I really would like to obtain a newer version of the software
and manuals; I seem to recall my manuals being older than the OS
version. the key is the manuals - will S&H allow them to be
copied and shared with
other hobby users? If the answer is yes and the distribution can also be
shared so long as S&H does not have to provide any support and need
not be involved in any manner whatsoever, then the hobby users should
soon be able to use TSX-PLUS since hopefully RT-11 will also soon be
allowed as well.
Keep sending your response to my question:
"Is anyone interested in having V6.05 of TSX-PLUS as a hobby user?"
I will attempt to co-ordinate with S&H, but the more interest there is,
probably the better - I hope?
3:43 a.m.
New subject: TSX-PLUS (Was MicroPDP 11/73)
--- Jerome Fine <jhfine(a)postoffice.idirect.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 4, 17:48, Jerome Fine wrote:
> > (a) As far as I know, there are no hobby versions, as yet, for
> > TSX-PLUS.
> > However, if there is enough interest, perhaps we could inquire...
ONE! I will inquire if the total reaches FIVE!
Two! (at least)
I worked on an industrial inspection product based on TSX-PLUS. It was
long enough ago (1986) that perhaps it was called TSX-11. I did the
development on a $300 Qbus box (KDF11, 256KW, LPV11, RLV12 - well... the
$300 was for the box, the CPU, memory, line printer interface and a
serial card... the RLV12 was another $100 and I already owned most of the
peripherals - I stole them from my PDP-8/a, proof that occasionally,
collecting computers is profitable). The target was an 11/73 with
all the trimmings including a full boat of RAM and a Fujitsu Eagle
for a data disk.
I always got a kick out of the fact that my machine was well under $500,
but I could develop software for a $20K computer on it. We used RL02
packs to migrate work back and forth. I didn't own one, but the boss did -
I booted from RL01 and used the RL02 for the data set and software
transport.
So... I'd be interested in a hobbyist license for TSX-PLUS.
-ethan
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
9 a.m.
New subject: TSX-PLUS (Was MicroPDP 11/73)
--- Ethan Dicks <erd_6502(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
I worked on an industrial inspection product based on
TSX-PLUS...
...on a $300 Qbus box (KDF11, 256KW, LPV11, RLV12
^^^^^
I meant to say "RLV11" - in no way was an RLV12 $100 in 1986. I think I
typoed it because I just located my RLV12 in a box on a shelf in the
closet this past weekend. Now to go stuff it into my BA123 so I can
make a backup of the disk from that very same company (I got to clean out
the boss' basement after he moved - I got my old transfer pack back
and the H-11 that _he_ used (that I'm still trying to fix the H-27 on)).
-ethan
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
8200
days inactive
8201
days old
7 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
bkr＠WildHareComputers.com -
erd_6502＠yahoo.com -
jhfine＠idirect.com -
jhfine＠postoffice.idirect.com -
pete＠dunnington.u-net.com -
rdd＠rddavis.org -
west＠tseinc.com