In article by Dave Horsfall:
> On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Randy Merkel wrote:
> > Golly, I think we have a spammer ;)
> Either he/she/it took the trouble to subscribe (few do), or the list
> is wide open; if the latter, expect more crap.
Open no more, and I have to approve subscriptions too :-)
Warren
Hello from Gregg C Levine
I've just joined this list, so bear with me. I am developing applications
that will be using the protcols covered in DECnet to access a running PDP-11
system. Actually it is running, but its a SimH program posing as a
PDP-11/23. I have downloaded the boot images, especially the 2.11BSD system
that is available, and booted it under the SimH simulator. Any suggestions
as to how I take this one step further? This is running on both Windows, and
Linux. But the DECnet programs were built on Slackware Linux.
Gregg C Levine drwho8(a)worldnet.att.net
"How many floors does this TARDIS of yours have, anyway?"
I am building a PDP 11 from junked parts and have it
mostly working. I'm now installing BSD 2.11 and have run into
a problem i could use some help with.
When compiling a new kernel (to include network) I get an error
ld: too big for type 431
*** exit 2
I assume this error is due to one of the overlays being too
large. (this is pointed out in the install docs)
How do I figure out which overlay (or base) is the problem?
The random module shuffle in the documents only has 10 million
combinations and at 30 minutes to compile, well I'm not going
to live that long.
Is there a more scientific way to arrange the overlays?
Am I missing something obvious?
joe lang
langj(a)bellsouth.net
Hi!
> From: "Chuck Dickman" <chd_1(a)nktelco.net>
I see you beat me to the answer ;)
> During the compile 'size' outputs a list of the sizes of the
> overlays. Look at the output. For mine....
>
> > How do I figure out which overlay (or base) is the problem?
>
> The base must be less than 7 8k pages or 57344(decimal) bytes.
> Each overlay must be less than 8k bytes or 8192(decimal).
> The network code is not overlayed, so you have 8 pages or the
> full 64k.
And you use "size" on the .o files to see how much each object file
contributes to an overlay.
With the exception of a few .o files which *must* be in the base
segment (and these are identified in the Makefile) anything can go
anywhere it will fit. The overlay switching is extremely efficient
so don't worry about the 'affinity' of modules too much.
Oh, it should be mentioned that it is not legal to have an empty
(0 length) overlay except at the end - i.e. you can't have overlay 3
be 0 bytes if overlay 4 or higher has nonzero size.
> To make it work, just get the sizes below the limits. The
> optimal arrangement would be placing the code in such that
> the overlay changes were minimized. So... move your system
> disk drivers into base and change the configuration to
> remove any hardware you don't actually have.
With the exception of perhaps the tty driver for the specific serial
devices present on the system it's not worth trying to pack things
"optimally". The overhead of overlays is inhererent in the function
prologue and epilogue - the only extra overhead of actually switching
overlays is stuffing ~two words or so into the MMU registers.
DO NOT remove anything from the actual OV lines in the makefile - just
make sure you define/configure devices as not being present in the
config file (by saying you have 0 of them). Then the .o files do
not take up any space and can be segregated into unused overlays
at the end (OV9 or 10 or so).
Good Luck!
Steven Schultz
sms(a)2bsd.com
>I'll upload it soon. Meanwhile, instead of a DOS C compiler, people
>should be able Bruce Evans' bcc or C86 as the compiler, which would
>eventually allow the system to compile itself.
The source code to the Watcom compilers has also finally
been released.
I think this would be a great addition to the archive! I'm glad I
didn't throw out that old 286 motherboard yet. :-) -- Ian
-----Original Message-----
From: Warren Toomey [mailto:wkt@minnie.tuhs.org]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 4:35 PM
To: Szigeti Szabolcs
Cc: tuhs(a)minnie.tuhs.org
Subject: Re: [TUHS] Re: Porting Unix v6 to i386
In article by Szigeti Szabolcs:
> I don't know if i can now legally give out parts of the original code,
> if anyone wants to experiment with it (some parts are pretty ugly,
> because i intedned to rewrite it, but never did, and the parts of the
> comments are in Hungarian), drop me an email (though i'm now doing my
> MBA thesis, so might not answer immediatey). If there is interest, I
> can summarize my experiences.
Hi, yes it's now legal to distribute your code, as Caldera's license
allows for distribution of changes, see
http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/Caldera-license.pdf
I'm the guy who runs the Unix Archive, so I'd be very happy to take a
copy of your work and add it to the archive.
Cheers,
Warren
_______________________________________________
TUHS mailing list
TUHS(a)minnie.tuhs.org http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
