Look at United States Patent 4074285
http://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US4074285.pdf
Figure 1 is identical to the machine I ran at Whippany Bell Labs
in the early to mid 80s. It was about 4 1/2 feet tall
Figure 4 is the font wheel (seen as 16 in Fig 1) there were 4 distinct
sectors, each with a different font. One with Times Roman, one with
Times Roman Bold, one with Times Roman Italic and the last was the
symbol fonts (math, greek chars, left hand (\lh right hand \(rh etc. and
this one was made specifically for the Labs as it had a Bell Logo \(bs on it)
The paper was a roll of photo paper, glossy on the text side, rough on
the reverse, it was thick. It would end up going into the cassette
(20 in Fig 1) and would need to be developed. Not shown in the patent
figures was the developing and drying apparatus. At the end of
a job the exposed paper was in the cassette you'd remove
it from the typesetter and put into a device with rollers that would pull
it out and run it thru developer and fixer liquid chemicals. Exiting
that it would go into a dryer drum.
After it was completly dry, as it was still a continuous roll, you
would need to cut all the pages apart by hand (that is why there was
the cut mark macro (.CM) is -ms so you could tell where to cut)
As it came from a roll, no pages ever layed completely flat.
The checmical baths were nasty smelling and it gummed up the rollers.
You'd needed to regularly take the developer roller and gear guts into
the janitor's closet and scrub it with a toothbrush in the slop sink
under running water.
By the second half of the 80s it was replaced by QMS PostScript
laser printers.
> From: "Jacob Goense" <dugo(a)xs4all.nl>
> All, I'm looking for images of the cat device as mentioned several
> times in the 7th edition manual, see e.g. TROFF(1)and CAT(4).
>
> From what I gathered during my digs is that it should look like a
> GSI 8400, but that didn't help. Anyone here who can help me find out
> what these machines looked like? A picture would be the best, but
> information on what to look for in images of unnamed typesetters will
> do as well.
>
> /Jacob
>
>
All, I'm looking for images of the cat device as mentioned several
times in the 7th edition manual, see e.g. TROFF(1)and CAT(4).
>From what I gathered during my digs is that it should look like a
GSI 8400, but that didn't help. Anyone here who can help me find out
what these machines looked like? A picture would be the best, but
information on what to look for in images of unnamed typesetters will
do as well.
/Jacob
Hi all.
This may be of some interest. From a friend at Utah:
> Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 16:06:25 -0700 (MST)
> Subject: [it-professionals] computer history: Arpanet IMPs resurrected
>
> The simh list about simulators for early computers recently carried
> traffic about an effort to reconstruct and resurrect the Arpanet
> Interface Message Processors (IMPs), which were the network boxes that
> connected hosts on the early Arpanet, which later became the Internet.
>
> There is a draft of a paper about the work here:
>
> The ARPANET IMP Program: Retrospective and Resurrection
> http://walden-family.com/bbn/imp-code.pdf
>
> Utah was one of the original gang-of-five hosts on the Arpanet, and we
> received IMP number 4. Utah is mentioned twice in the article, and
> also appears in the map in Figure 3 on page 14.
>
> One amusing remark in the article (bottom of page 7) has to do with
> the fail-safe design of the IMPs:
>
> In addition ``reliability code'' was developed to allow a
> Pluribus IMP to keep functioning as a packet switch in the
> face of various bits of its hardware failing, such as a
> processor or memory [Katsuki78, Walden11 pp. 534-538]. This
> was so successful there was no simple off switch for the
> machine; a program had to be run to shut parts of the machine
> down faster than the machine could ``fix itself'' and keep
> running.
>
> As happened with early Unix releases, machine-readable code for the
> IMPs was lost, but fortunately, some old listings that turned up
> recently allowed its laborious reconstruction, verification, assembly,
> and simulation.
Arnold
Clem Cole <clemc(a)ccc.com> wrote:
>If the original BBN code had
>been left alone, since most people did not have the issues Berkeley did,
>they would never have bothered with sendmail.cf.
Now I might be badly wrong, but nonetheless this strikes me as
badly revisionist history.
The motivation for sendmail.cf was the collision of multiple
namespaces (Arpanet, Bitnet, Usenet, etc.), each implemented
in varying nonstandard ways by different mail clients and servers,
resulting in messes like "IJQ3SRA%UCLAMVS.BITNET%SU-LINDY(a)SU-CSLI.ARPA",
as one of many, many examples, as observed in the famous
"The Hideous Name", Rob Pike & P.J. Weinberger, 1985
http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/~rsc/pike85hideous.pdf
The thing is, although sendmail.cf was/is itself hideous to understand
and therefore make maintenance changes to (although I have), it is
quite capable of actually handling the above kinds of messes, and
being extended to handle new messes as they turn up.
In short, it got the job done, despite its weaknesses.
I may be wrong, but it was my strong impression that, back in the
day, this could not be said of anyone else's code, BBN or otherwise.
Doug Merritt
I am reading the delivermail (later known as postbox and then sendmail)
code from 4.0BSD and from sccs history from June 1980.
Its arpa-mailer(8) manual says it just spools the letter and actual
delivery will be performed by the ARPANET mailer daemon and refers to
mailer(ARPA) manual. The arpa.c code says "is stuck away in the
outgoing arpanet mail queue for delivery by the true arpanet mailer."
Where is this true arpanet mailer? I am guessing it periodically looks
in /usr/spool/netmail/ and delivers the messages using FTP and RFC458.
Where is this mailer(ARPA) manual?
Where is the ftp server code used for the incoming mail? (Example
code mail-dm.c is provided for the ftp server to "handle the MAIL <user>
command over the command connection.")
Also where is the uucp-mailer(8) manpage referenced in delivermail(8)?
Jeremy C. Reed
echo 'EhZ[h ^jjf0%%h[[Zc[Z_W$d[j%Xeeai%ZW[ced#]dk#f[d]k_d%' | \
tr '#-~' '\-.-{'
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 04:55:58PM -0600, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> Kashtan's VMS performance comparison paper and Joy's followup from early
> 1980 both refered to the VM/UNIX as Version 2.1 of the Berkeley system;
> this was the "Third" distribution; by April the kernel was known as 3.1.
>
> 2.4BSD was mentioned in the kermit source's Makefile. But maybe a
> mistake.
I stand well corrected!
Thanks,
Warren
Just saw this on the ClassicCMP list. Wonder if anyone could read it out... or if it's actually something that's already out there.
--Dave
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Chuck Guzis <cclist(a)sydex.com>
> Subject: 4.3BSD source tape offered on FreeBSD
> Date: November 25, 2013 at 2:29:19 PM EST
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
> Reply-To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
>
> http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=43346
(For reference ... I am writing a detailed history of Berkeley Unix ...)
Does anyone have a copy of and the story about the Univ. of Toronto
license used for their tape distributions around 1977?
In an interview in Linux Magazine, Volume 1, Number 6, in November
1999, Joy said he just took a license from the University of Toronto
and modified it a little bit and started using that for his BSD.
It was a one-page license.
I have a copy of an early one page license (from AUUGN newsletter V01.3,
Feb/Mar 1979) which was used for the Pascal and Ex release, but it says
"(first) Berkeley Software Tape" on it which seems odd to number the
real first distribution. Also the copy of the license I have is for $60,
but the first distribution tapes were $50; these amounts are both
documented in various places for 2BSD and 1BSD respectively. Since maybe
the one page license says "(first)" and "$60", maybe there is a
different earlier license?
I also tried Googling for some of the terminology but didn't find any
hits.
So does anyone have a copy of the license for the Univ. of Toronto tape
distribution from the mid 1970's?
On that note, can anyone tell me about the story of the Toronto Unix
distributions? I understand in late 1978, the Univ. of Toronto Computing
Services group and some other Toronto-area installations were providing
their own Unix distributions for standardization of their commonly used
commands and were forming the "Toronto Distribution Centre" (mentioned
by Gregory Hill, see AUUGN V01.2, Dec-78 / Jan-79). But within a few
years, the UTCS was using BSD.
Jeremy C. Reed
echo 'EhZ[h ^jjf0%%h[[Zc[Z_W$d[j%Xeeai%ZW[ced#]dk#f[d]k_d%' | \
tr '#-~' '\-.-{'
Hi, all!
Sorry for slightly off-topic question, but do anybody have a copy of
original circa 1969 RS232C standard? I need it to resolve conflict with me
and my customer regarding if RS-232C REQUIRES the use of DE-25M connector
or just
RECOMMENDS it? It seems that there is a lot of interpretations of this
standard, but
no original document anywhere :(
I know it might cost $$$, but I will pay all needed fees.
All the best,
S.
> Hi all,
> I am hoping this list is still alive, since I'd like to find out a bit
more info about this backplane.
> It's part of an 11/23 system (based on CPU) that is made by Netcom. It
had
> standard DEC
> cards in it DLV11, M8021 bootstrap board etc. Apparently the system ran
a
> few years back
> before it was put in storage.
I have a few Netcom boxes at home. I'll try to remember to look
at what models when I go home.
> I aquired it, in the hopes of bringing it
> back to life and getting
> it to successfully display a login: prompt.
That would depend on the OS more than the hardware. :-)
> I have read through the archives, esp. a post from Michael Sokolov back
in
> 98, where he describes
> the different types of QBus'es. Q/Q, Q/CD etc.
> It looks like the backplane that I have (according to some documents
written at SLAC in late 70's)
> is a serpentine or sinusoidal.
> A diagram on the cardcage describes as follows:
> A B C D
> ------------>
> <-----------
> ------------->
> <------------
> There is also a blurb about slot 2/CD being wired differently. Two slots
on the diagram are pre-printed for RL controllers.
There were backplanes like that for the two card RL controller.
> My CPU card is a later rev. D so it can do 22bit addressing. I'd like if
possible to run 22bits, since this would allow
> me at a later time to put in a 11/73 cpu that would run 2.11.
I may be wrong (but I am sure someone here will correct me) but if the
backplane is designed for the two card RL controller I think it will be 18
bit and not capable of 22 bit.
> How would I go about checking if the backplane is wired for 22bits or
not.
> I seem to remeber the standard qbuses had the W1-W4 pins (?)
> that you could wirewrap to change from 18to22, but this backplane has
nothing like that.
I would guess you could look at it and see how many bits are wired thru.
And, if you have a clear view of the wirewrap side you should be able to
see if it has two A-B-C-D slots in the middle. Difference in wirewrap
pattern will be obvious. :-)
> Also, in the present configuration, with an 11/23 and 128Kw, could I run
v6 or v7 (assuming I can get some form of supported disk storage)? At
present
> I only have a floppy controller and a bunch of 8" Shugart 801 drives..
What floppy controller? Dec didn't use the standard Shugart 8" inteface
for RX01/RX02 disks. If it is like the Terak which also used 801's you
are going to need to find drivers for what OS you decide to use. Good
luck with that.
> thanks in advance for any replies.
You might try asking on alt.sys.pdp11 as there are a lot much more
knowlegable people than I active over there.
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
bill(a)cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
