TUHS

tuhs@tuhs.org

47 participants
6503 discussions

by Fred N. van Kempen

> I recall V7 had UUCP and that some non-tcp/ip networking > implementations existed for it, Yes, various serial-networking based ones (early DECnet, X.25 and PacketNet stuff) and perhaps the multiplexer device stuff. > but I have never heard of a tcp/ip stack for V7. Does > such a thing exist? Nope, didnt fit in the address space. As far as I know, the earliest TCP/IP UNIX for PDP-11 was 2.10/2.11bsd. --f

22 years, 3 months

Re: Some questions, was Re: [pups] Test

by Gregg C Levine

Hello fron Gregg C Levine Um no. I was thinking of V7, of the original UNIX. As it happens, I am still not comfortable with the earlier versions of BSD. So, I am interested in getting V7, or V6 to work via a networked environment. And yes, I have seen your file, and the read me for it. Gregg C Levine drwho8(a)worldnet.att.net "Oh my!" The Second Doctor's nearly favorite phrase. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andru Luvisi" <luvisi(a)andru.sonoma.edu> To: "Gregg C Levine" <drwho8(a)worldnet.att.net> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 11:19 AM Subject: Re: Some questions, was Re: [pups] Test > On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Gregg C Levine wrote: > > Hello again from Gregg C Levine > > Here are those questions: > > 1) What is the status of networking, with regards to the boot images? > > 2) Has anyone actually managed to dump the image that's contained within the > > Soupnik collected UNIX versions to an actual disk? > > 3) Has anyone actually managed to build a kernel from that source code? > > Either native, and on a Simh setup will do. > > If you are asking about 2.11BSD, I have managed to build a kernel with > networking support which works on simh. It is at: > http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Boot_Images/2.11_on_Simh/ > > It's probably not suitable for a real PDP since it only supports RA/MSCP > and ram disks, and TS tape drives. > > Andru > -- > Andru Luvisi, Programmer/Analyst > > > Quote Of The Moment: > I'm not normal. I know it. I don't care! > - Ace Of Base >

22 years, 3 months

[pups] Test

by Gregg C Levine

Test! Sorry for the disturbance. Just a routine test message to confirm that the list is awake. I haven't gotten anything since sometime in the past. Gregg C Levine drwho8(a)worldnet.att.net "This signature wants to be playing in the snow!"

22 years, 3 months

Waking the List Up

by Warren Toomey

I guess it's time to wake the list up. So far the Unix Archive has done well at collecting mostly PDP-11 stuff, but now that were in the next century, we should start working on the 1980s and 1990s. I'd like to call for volunteer curators. Each would look after a subset of the Unix Archive: add files, write README.TXT, rearrange things to be more useful. The Archive has been pretty static for quite some time now, and there are a list of things TODO, and I know some of you have things waiting which I haven't done yet. So perhaps some new blood, will kick things along. Any volunteers?

22 years, 3 months

Re: Re: [TUHS] Test

by Norman Wilson

This list is most definitely low-volume. Speak up, please. We can't hear you up here under the snow. Norman Wilson In a naughtly rosewood igloo somewhere near Toronto, ON

22 years, 3 months

Test

by Gregg C Levine

Test! Sorry for the disturbance, I have not seen any mail on the list, since sometime in the past. Gregg C Levine drwho8(a)worldnet.att.net "This signature would rather be out in the snow!"

22 years, 3 months

[pups] Anyone got a bulkhead connector?

by Ian King

I've checked commercial vendors and eBay to no avail, so now I'll appeal to the community: I would really like to find a bulkhead connector for a DEQNA card (the part number is CK-DEQNA-KB). If anyone has one they're willing to part with, please send me email with your terms. Otherwise, I'll just have to kludge something - but I'd sure like to do it right, as my 11/73 is in pretty nice shape. :-) TIA -- Ian

22 years, 3 months

Re: Another happy customer (was Re: [pups] Bootable media for 2 .11BSD)

by robin.birch＠royalmail.com

Well done, My 83 has 2 RD54s it is a nice configuration. As to your other query about the boot loader saying that it is an 83 as opposed to a 73. The response that you have had is correct AFAIK. My 83 was a 73 before I changed the processor and I had a similar conversation with Steve Schultz. If it is a quad board then the boot loader is doing as well as it can :-) Have fun Robin To: "Robin Birch" <robinb(a)ruffnready.co.uk> cc: <pups(a)minnie.tuhs.org> Hard Copy To: Hard Copy cc: Date: 08/02/2003 18:48 From: "Ian King" <iking(a)killthewabbit.org>@minnie.tuhs.org Sent by: pups-admin(a)minnie.tuhs.org Subject: Another happy customer (was Re: [pups] Bootable media for 2.11BSD) It's amazing what happens when you follow the directions - thanks for your help, folks. I have 2.11BSD up and running on my 11/73 (booted off the disk, even), and it's currently untarring the last big chunk of /usr/src. (The docs mention that TK50s are slower than snot - believe it!) The system has two RD54s <woohoo!>, but I'm following the 'default' installation for now until I have everything running and have successfully rebuilt the kernel; then I'll probably move /usr and /tmp over to the second RD. I also need to dig into the machine a bit more - the bootloader tells me I have an 11/83, so I'm suspecting the CPU was changed at some point. For the record, I live in Seattle, and I can now produce bootable TK50s with 2.11BSD. :-) -- Ian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ian King" <iking(a)killthewabbit.org> To: "Robin Birch" <robinb(a)ruffnready.co.uk> Cc: <pups(a)minnie.tuhs.org> Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 9:23 AM Subject: Re: [pups] Bootable media for 2.11BSD > Yup, that's what I get for trying to be clever. :-) I built and ran > maketape, and the 11/73 likes the resulting tape (boots). So I'm remaking > the tape with the tar's on it (per the instructions). > > I also happened to look at my work email, and saw the recent thread on this > same subject - doh! > > Maybe we should add something to the /2.11BSD distribution README with the > caveats we've learned? -- Ian > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robin Birch" <robinb(a)ruffnready.co.uk> > To: "Ian King" <iking(a)killthewabbit.org> > Cc: <pups(a)minnie.tuhs.org> > Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 3:20 AM > Subject: Re: [pups] Bootable media for 2.11BSD > > > > Use the maketape program in the sys/pdpstand directory. You can build > > this on most things and use it to create a bootable tape with the > > standalone system which contains all of the tools to set the system up. > > > > Cheers > > > > Robin > > > > [snip] > > > > -- > > Robin Birch > > > > _______________________________________________ > PUPS mailing list > PUPS(a)minnie.tuhs.org > http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups _______________________________________________ PUPS mailing list PUPS(a)minnie.tuhs.org http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/pups

22 years, 3 months

[pups] Bootable media for 2.11BSD

by Ian King

I think I've done enough homework and legwork to feel like I can ask the list a question now. :-) I've acquired an 11/73 and want to install 2.11BSD on it; it includes a TK50 and RX33. I also have a DECstation 5000/200 with a TK50, so my first efforts were to dd the files onto a tape. Depending on how I hacked around, I either got a "non-bootable media" error or "Error 21 - drive error". The two ways I tried to put the boot files on were per the instructions (cat mtboot mtboot boot | dd), and not per the instructions (dd mtboot, dd mtboot, dd boot). Depending on how I hacked around, I either got a "non-bootable media" error or "Error 21 - drive error" from the boot ROM monitor. With no way to troubleshoot the TK50 drive, I then tried to put at least a boot sector on a 1.2MB floppy, using rawrite on a PC; I copied mtboot + mtboot + boot to an intermediate file, then used rawrite to put that on the floppy. I got the same "Error 21". The machine also has a working RD54 containing Micro/RSX and some proprietary software for managing a parking lot. :-) I can boot to an RSX prompt (although I can't log in, having none of the passwords), so most of the machine appears to be working. While there's a stubborn side that wants to figure out how to build bootable media :-) I'd also be happy at this point to get a copy of a bootable TK50; I have blank tapes.... Either way, I hope someone can point me in the right direction. Thanks in advance -- Ian

22 years, 3 months

[pups] DLVJ1 confusion on 2.11BSD

by David Evans

So the DLVJ1 has four serial ports. According to the info at http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/academic/computer-science/history/pdp-11/hardwar… they essentially appear as four separate gizmos, with independant CSRs and vectors. So should I therefore set NKL to 5 (the console plus these four) and then have appropriate entries for devices 1 through 4 in /etc/dtab? Sounds like it. My DHV11 seems to work happily, so I already have rediculously more serial ports than I need. -- 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, 3 months

Re: Re: [TUHS] The ^ = | ?

by Norman Wilson

The earliest UNIX Programmer's Manual to describe shell pipelines is the Third Edition, February 1973. It gives a syntax quite different from the modern one: com1 > com2 > com3 > outfile meant what we would now write as com1 | com2 | com3 > outfile This original syntax was pretty cumbersome; pretty obviously it was put in as a quick hack (as were many things in those early days). Because > and < applied only to the following word, pipelined commands with arguments had to be quoted: who > "grep ken" >/tmp/kenlogins Even worse, the shell had no inherent way to tell whether the final word was a file or a program; if the last element in a pipeline was to write to standard output, you had to say so explicitly: who > "grep ken" > On the other hand the syntax was symmetric: you could also write "grep ken" < who < pipe(II) also debuted in the Third Edition. By the Fourth Edition (November 1973) there had evidently been more time to think about the syntax; the modern notation is shown, except that ^ is allowed as a synonym for |. I have long guessed that was because in those dark days of the past, some upper-case-only terminals (remember stty lcase?) offered no way to type | (and perhaps likewise {}`~) but I don't really know. Dennis? Norman Wilson Toronto ON

22 years, 3 months

Re: [TUHS] The ^ = | ?

by Wolfgang Helbig

>I've been searching for some reference to the ^ symbol being the same a | in >Bourne shell. Does anyone remember seeing anything like this? I've searched >the early manpages to no avail. Look at http://www.ba-stuttgart.de/~helbig/os/v6/doc/index.html for the Unix V6 sh(I) man page. Greetings, Wolfgang

22 years, 3 months

re: The ^ = | ?

by Dennis Ritchie

As Norman said, the earliest notation for pipes used an extension (or abuse) of the semantics of > and < . Warren's memory of what Salus wrote (it's on p. 52-53) is correct about the introduction of | (though I suspect that McIlroy (whom Salus quotes) is being kind to me when he said "he [Ken] couldn't bear to reveal my [Doug's] ugly syntax." Actually, I was responsible for the particular < and > syntax as implemented, although the whole idea came from much earlier on blackboard-only ideas, and the blackboard was Doug's. As to the original question: probably the ^ as an alternative to | (which does seem to be there from the start, i.e. 4th Edition) did have to do with character-set convenience on upper-case-only terminals. The TTY driver accepted \! as an escape for |, but this was somewhat of a pain. Dennis

22 years, 4 months

Re: [TUHS] The ^ = | ?

by Carl Lowenstein

> From: "Lange, David" <Extern.David.Lange(a)gedas.com> > To: "'tuhs(a)minnie.tuhs.org'" <tuhs(a)minnie.tuhs.org> > Subject: [TUHS] The ^ = | ? > > Greetings, > > I've been searching for some reference to the ^ symbol being the same a | in > Bourne shell. Does anyone remember seeing anything like this? I've searched > the early manpages to no avail. It's here in my printed copy of the 6th Edition Unix Programmer's Manual. Page entitled SH(I) Section DESCRIPTION Subsection Command lines. One or more commands separated by '|' or '^' constitute a chain of filters. . . . carl -- carl lowenstein marine physical lab u.c. san diego clowenst(a)ucsd.edu

22 years, 4 months

The ^ = | ?

by Lange, David

Greetings, I've been searching for some reference to the ^ symbol being the same a | in Bourne shell. Does anyone remember seeing anything like this? I've searched the early manpages to no avail. Regards, D.

22 years, 4 months

Re: [TUHS] The ^ = | ?

by John Holden

> I've been searching for some reference to the ^ symbol being the same a | Yes, pre Bourne shell, edition 6 and earlier used ^ for piped. Also chdir insteads of the shortened 'cd'

22 years, 4 months

[pups] FreeBSD-4.7, p11-2.9, 2.11bsd

by M. Giegerich

I'm trying to run 2.11 BSD on the p11 emulator... The 2.11 BSD boot image I'm using is 211_on_rl2 (which works on sim, but without network sup- port). Before downloading 2.11_rp_unknown.gz that seems to work for sure with p11 (at least I found enough posts hinting at that), I would like to know if anybody has successfully used the 211_on_rl2 distro to boot 2.11 BSD on p11. My results so far are p11 boots (after FIGHTING with p11conf), recognizes the 4 rl and 5 rk disks and images and gives me a @-prompt. Telnetting to the defined ports won't do :-( Any hints anybody? -- M. Giegerich, mail: migieger(a)vsnl.com, phone: +91.(0)80.5530154

22 years, 4 months

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, 4 months

[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, 4 months

[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, 4 months

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, 4 months

[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, 4 months

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, 4 months

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, 4 months

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, 4 months

Jump to page:

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