TUHS January 2003

tuhs@tuhs.org

20 participants
23 discussions

Re: [pups] The infamous 2.11BSD patch archive

by Steven M. Schultz

Hi - > From: David Evans <dfevans(a)bbcr.uwaterloo.ca> > What's up with the 2.11BSD patch archive? I assume that the version Both it and the mirror are up and running. There are quite a few netblocks that have portscanned/spammed/whatever me here (dialups and cablemodems for the most part) and they're listed in the packet filters so if you're seeing timeouts, etc connecting that's probably the reason. > in the Unix Archive is the original release and does not have these > patches applied. The mirror to which 2bsd.com referrs is gone and I Companies play the "musical domain name" everytime they have a re-organization (and, sigh, another one is in the works as I type). What was listed was probably a name from the last reorganization and of course it's very difficult to track down all the places that an old name was used. The mirror I maintain at work is: ftp://ftp.cato.gd-ais.com (for some time yet it will also respond to 'ftp.to.gd-es.com') There may be other sites that also mirror > don't want to pound on Steve's site if I don't have to. Any Others have done that - usually it's not too bad, especially if I'm asleep at the time :) > suggestions? Once I get the files I presume I'm just supposed to feed them > through patch in sequence (with the appropriate options, of course). Sequence is important because the patches are diffs against the last current version of a file. Each patch has rather good (if I do say so myself ;)) instructions and explainations of what was changed, how to apply, what to rebuild immediately (and what can be deferred until it is convenient). Have Fun! Steven Schultz sms(a)2bsd.com

22 years

[pups] The infamous 2.11BSD patch archive

by David Evans

This *must* be a FAQ, but I didn't find a real answer to it anywhere. What's up with the 2.11BSD patch archive? I assume that the version in the Unix Archive is the original release and does not have these patches applied. The mirror to which 2bsd.com referrs is gone and I don't want to pound on Steve's site if I don't have to. Any suggestions? Once I get the files I presume I'm just supposed to feed them through patch in sequence (with the appropriate options, of course). -- David Evans (NeXTMail/MIME OK) dfevans(a)bbcr.uwaterloo.ca Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/ University of Waterloo "Default is the value selected by the composer Ontario, Canada overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual

22 years

[pups] PDP-11 happily booted

by David Evans

Yanked a SCSI disk and the penguin could manage dding the simh image on to it. The PDP-11 booted quite happily. -- David Evans (NeXTMail/MIME OK) dfevans(a)bbcr.uwaterloo.ca Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/ University of Waterloo "Default is the value selected by the composer Ontario, Canada overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual

22 years, 1 month

Re: [pups] Making a TK50 2.11BSD boot tape for an 11/73

by norman＠nose.cs.utoronto.ca

If all that is needed is to concatenate three files into a single tape file, with each new file aligned on a block boundary, isn't (for f in f1 f2 f3; do dd <$f conv=sync; done) >/dev/rmt0 sufficient? The only time I had to do anything like this, the target system was a MicroVAX; hence the tape had to have ISO labels, and the program to be booted a particular tape filename. I don't remember how I handled that; probably I used one of the several public-domain tape-label-writing programs. But that was a VAX; I would assume an 11/73 doesn't have so much enforced complexity in its firmware.

22 years, 1 month

[pups] Making a TK50 2.11BSD boot tape for an 11/73

by David Evans

Howdy. I'd like to confirm that somebody has successfully made a TK50 boot tape for 2.11BSD using a TK50Z attached to some other Unix box. In my case it will likely have to be Linux, though IRIX might be doable. It *should* work, after all, but, well, you know. :) -- David Evans (NeXTMail/MIME OK) dfevans(a)bbcr.uwaterloo.ca Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/ University of Waterloo "Default is the value selected by the composer Ontario, Canada overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual

22 years, 1 month

Re: [TUHS] unsigned division in V7's C

by Wolfgang Helbig

Warren replies: >Not sure if: > >http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Bug_Fixes/Net.v7bugs/0017 > >is a bug fix for this. And Dennis replies: >Does > http://www.cs.bell-labs.com/who/dmr/odd.html#muldiv >suffice to explain the behavior Thanks for the replies, but the bug I found is about unsigned int's and not long int's. The V7 C code simply the DIV instruction for unsigned division. The dividend is put in the low word of a register pair with the upper word cleared. When the divisor is >= 2^15, DIV interprets it as a negative integer and produces the result (N = 2^16): N - a/(N-b) instead of a/b, and a%(N-b) instead of a%b. This explains the bug I've sent yesterday. I is easily fixed, since when b >= N/2 and a < N, then a/b is either zero or one. And there is another bug when using DIV for unsigned integers: If b = 1 and a >= N/2, then a/b >= N/2, that is a signed overflow. With V7 on Bob Supniks simulator (2.10), I get 60000/1: 0, 60000%1: 60000 DIV did not change the dividend because of overflow. Again a fix is easy: With unsigned ints, don't use DIV to divide by one. In all other cases, DIV produces the correct unsigned results, if the dividend is less N, that is its high word is zero. I wonder why these bugs went unnoticed. Greetings Wolfgang

22 years, 1 month

re: unsigned division in V7's C

by Dennis Ritchie

Helbig observed > while wondering how unsigned integer division is implemented in C > I found a bug in V7: a/b and a%b with b >= 2^15 does not give the expected > results, if a and b are unsigned int's. Does http://www.cs.bell-labs.com/who/dmr/odd.html#muldiv suffice to explain the behavior? Dennis

22 years, 1 month

unsigned division in V7's C

by Wolfgang Helbig

Hi, while wondering how unsigned integer division is implemented in C I found a bug in V7: a/b and a%b with b >= 2^15 does not give the expected results, if a and b are unsigned int's. Was this bug ever noticed or even fixed? Greetings, Wolfgang Here is a program showing the bug: main() { unsigned int a, b; a = 60000; b = 40000; printf("a/b: %u, a%%b: %u\n", a/b, a%b); b = 25000; printf("a/b: %u, a%%b: %u\n", a/b, a%b); } The above program prints a/b: 65534, a%b: 8928 a/b: 2, a%b: 10000 The first line should be of course a/b: 1, a%b: 20000

22 years, 1 month

Re: Patches to improve 6th Edition

by norman＠nose.cs.utoronto.ca

A belated rejoinder to: This bug existed from (at least) the Fifth up until the Eighth editions from 1127 (BTL research). The Ninth edition had much rewrites in the kernel and the algorthim was changed at that point. You're welcome. I can't remember, though, whether I fixed it on purpose or as part of the many general cleanups and restructurings I did at that point. And I didn't do enough of it; recently I discovered a dumb problem that I probably introduced in the same cleanups, wherein the i-node allocated for a file that couldn't be created because the file system was full and the directory entry couldn't be written was left allocated but nameless ... Norman Wilson Toronto ON

22 years, 1 month

Re: [pups] Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Jan 6, 19:01, Wolfgang Helbig wrote: > Richard L. Hamilton searches: > >The files > > > >http://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixTree/V7/usr/sys/dev/rl.c > >http://minnie.tuhs.org/UnixTree/V7/usr/sys/conf/mkconf.c > > > >don't seem to match - mkconf.c wants to generate references to > >rlopen() and rlclose(), which don't exist in that version of rl. > >What I'm really looking for is the right version of driver(s) etc. > > It seems that a version of the rl driver that matches > mkconf, was never supplied by the bell labs. > > As a workaround delete the rl entry in cdevsw and the line > "int rlopen,..." from c.c. This will give you a block device of the rl disk, > but no raw device. Hmm... my 7th Edition distribution /usr/sys/dev/rl.c certainly *does* have rlopen() and rlclose(). If you want them, I can send rl.c and the matching mkconf.c to you, or to Warren, along with the rl1conf and rl2conf (for RL01 and RL02 disks) from /usr/sys/conf/ and any other files needed (if someone can tell me what might be required -- it's a long long time since I looked at any of this. The distribution came for an 11/23 with 2 x RL02, and it also has some special source files for 11/23, 11/34, etc ("small machines") including tests for recovery from segmentation traps in floating point (which isn't the same on all PDP-11 models), and an RK driver from the Boston Children's Museum which handles overlapped seeks on multiple drives. I'll be away for a couple of days so don't expect a prompt reply, but the source is online here so I can easily copy a few files when I get back. -- Pete Peter Turnbull Network Manager University of York

22 years, 1 month

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

TUHS January 2003