Hi all,
This is a general announcement :)
I have been working on getting to know the format used by the Ultrix-32
"setld" tapes for system (boot) tapes, and I am happy to announce that I
can now create bootable TK50 tapes from any valid Ultrix-32 CD-ROM dist
kit.
Once I get my stuff here sorted out (I am in the midst of redoing all my
computer stuff...) I will post the HOWTO (in PDF format, no less !) and
associated files on my web server.
I was able to successfully install Ultrix-32/VAX V4.5 on a MicroVAX 3300
with TK50 tape and no errors.
Next project is to get the V4.4 or V4.5 source to add CPU support for the
4000 series, and, eventually, add DSSI support for the SHAC chipset.
Anyone have pointers to source kits newer than V4.2 ?
Cheers,
Fred
--
InterNetworking, Network Security and Communications Consultants
MicroWalt Corporation (Netherlands), Postbus 8, 1400 AA BUSSUM
Phone +31 (35) 6980059 FAX +31 (35) 6980215 http://WWW.MicroWalt.NL/
Dit bericht en eventuele bijlagen is uitsluitend bestemd voor de
geadresseerde. Openbaarmaking, vermenigvuldiging, verspreiding aan
derden is niet toegestaan. Er wordt geen verantwoordelijkheid
genomen voor de juiste en volledige overbrenging van de inhoud van
dit bericht, noch voor de tijdige ontvangst ervan.
Bleh, sorry for the blank post... notes went schitzo....
If MS can release WinCE source, then they would probably do the same for
XENIX.... both PDP/11 and the x86 version perhaps...
Its not like we want the source... just a tape image would do me :)
Perhaps there is someone in MS who knows of XENIX's existance and can
help.... I'll have a word with a friend of mine who works there :)
Regards,
Paul.
Frank Wortner <frank(a)wortner.com>
Sent by: pups-admin(a)minnie.tuhs.org
04/03/2002 04:31
To: <asmodai(a)unixware.org.uk>, <pups(a)minnie.tuhs.org>
cc:
Subject: Re: [pups] Interesting PDP/Xenix History
on 4/2/02 5:38 PM, asmodai(a)unixware.org.uk at asmodai(a)unixware.org.uk
wrote:
I wrote to SCO/Caldera a while back about this one... Here's a quote
from the mail I got in reply:
"XENIX will never be released under any license, as it is too full of
Microsoft copyrights...?
Well, there?s always the possibility that Microsoft could see fit to make
a ?hobby? PDP/11 XENIX license available. Why not?
--
Frank
"Don't Blame Me."
* Eeyore, "Winnie the Pooh"
Frank Wortner <frank(a)wortner.com>
Sent by: pups-admin(a)minnie.tuhs.org
04/03/2002 04:31
To: <asmodai(a)unixware.org.uk>, <pups(a)minnie.tuhs.org>
cc:
Subject: Re: [pups] Interesting PDP/Xenix History
on 4/2/02 5:38 PM, asmodai(a)unixware.org.uk at asmodai(a)unixware.org.uk
wrote:
I wrote to SCO/Caldera a while back about this one... Here's a quote
from the mail I got in reply:
"XENIX will never be released under any license, as it is too full of
Microsoft copyrights...?
Well, there?s always the possibility that Microsoft could see fit to make
a ?hobby? PDP/11 XENIX license available. Why not?
--
Frank
"Don't Blame Me."
* Eeyore, "Winnie the Pooh"
I wrote to SCO/Caldera a while back about this one... Here's a quote
from the mail I got in reply:
"XENIX will never be released under any license, as it is too full of
Microsoft copyrights, and "sanitizing" the source to remove such code
would render the product useless, and would be a MASSIVE undertaking."
Looks like we wont get Xenix in source format unless Microsoft want us to
have it.
Regards,
Paul.
"The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that
cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go
wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or
repair" - Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy
Robert Tillyard <rob(a)vetsystems.com>
Sent by: pups-admin(a)minnie.tuhs.org
03/25/2002 10:38
To: pups(a)minnie.tuhs.org
cc:
Subject: Re: [pups] Interesting PDP/Xenix History
Frank Wortner wrote:
>
> on 3/23/02 11:26 PM, Warren Toomey at wkt(a)minnie.tuhs.org wrote:
>
> > In article by Martin Crehan:
> >> From a thread on Slashdot about Microsoft's Ancient History w/Unix
> >> http://slashdot.org/articles/02/03/23/1422243.shtml?tid=130
> >>
> >> First Unix/Xenix (Score:1)
> >> by presearch on Saturday March 23, @01:58PM (#3213453)
> >> (User #214913 Info)
> >
> > I've left a comment in the thread asking if they would
> > donate a copy of the tape's contents to our Archive.
>
> I also remember running PDP/11 Xenix. The article is basically correct,
> although Microsoft (or HCR) did add a working paging system that enabled
> simulation of split I&D on small PDP/11s like the 11/23, 11/34, and
11/40.
> I also remember that my copy of the installation document had been
printed
> by Microsoft's PDP/10 (referred to as the "Microsoft Heating Plant" :-)
in
> the printout). I wish I still had the tape and that printout. Sigh
...
>
> --
> Frank
Would SCO->Caldera have copies of this? SCO did the Intel port of Xenix
so they would probably have started with the PDP source. Would tapes be
copyright to Microsoft?
I doubt that they would release the source for the Intel version as it
is still in use today although I don't think that SCO/Caldera will sell
it anymore.
Rob.
_______________________________________________
PUPS mailing list
PUPS(a)minnie.tuhs.org
http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups
HI!
After a week or so of trying, I finally got 2.11BSD to recognize a KFQSA
in a PDP-11/73. The problem seems to be that 2.11BSD sets an MSCP packet
length of 64 bytes, but the KFQSA must have this field set to 60 bytes.
There is some confusion about if the header is part of the packet or
not. For the KFQSA, it is not included in the length. After that, life
is good........
Unfortunately I trashed my 2.11BSD installation in the process. :-( I
did a backup I think.....
Anyway, KFQSA modules are not that expensive and RF drives are pretty
cheap, so it is another solution to the lack of disk drives for QBus
PDPs. As long as you have a VAX for configuration. A 390MB RF71 is a
useful size for 2.11BSD.
After I get things put back together, I will send off a patch to sms for
the next release.... :-)
-chuck
