On Jun 6, 2012, at 6:13 PM, Mark Wickens wrote:
...
This is also mildly interesting: http://netbsd0.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/retrocomputing-with-vamp-stack-vax.ht…
Always good to see a VAXstation being put to good use.
Strange that gcc has so much trouble for VAX. I thought that had gotten a fair amount of care & feeding lately.
pdp11, that's a different story, though I do try to do some more bits from time to time...
paul
On 2012-06-07 02:10, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 06/06/2012 06:11 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
By the way, as a warning...
I seem to remember that DECnet support now have been dropped from Linux.
So it might not be in there anymore, if you look at recent versions.
Huh? Nope, works fine here, on a two-week-old Mint installation.
(Mint is Ubuntu with Canonical's bad decisions un-done)
Snip from 2.6-33 release notes:
====
commit f8b55f251012e104093e105483c45c5d85ad3040
Author: Christine Caulfield <christine.caulfield at googlemail.com>
Date: Thu Feb 18 11:33:13 2010 +0000
Orphan DECnet
Due to lack of time, space, motivation, hardware and probably expertise,
I have reluctantly decided to orphan the DECnet code in the kernel.
Judging by the deafening silence on the linux-decnet mailing list I
suspect it's either not being used anyway, or the few people that are
using it are happy with their older kernels.
Signed-off-by: Christine Caulfield <christine.caulfield at googlemail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds at linux-foundation.org>
====
I guess the code might still be in there, but there is even less guarantee (if such a thing is possible in an open source project) that it works.
Chrissie is on HECnet, so she can expand more on the current status, I guess.
I've also had less than stellar results from trying to talk from Linux
to RSX. So it might not work absolutely right under all conditions.
Developers mostly (it not only) had VMS machines to test against...
I've had similar results talking to RSTS/E DECnet. From the little
bits of old mailing list traffic I've seen, I'd guess they'd be happy to
have it work with other platforms' DECnet implementations, but finding
people with machines to test against is tough outside of this crowd.
:-)
I plan to contact the developers when I have a little time and offer
to do some more formalized testing against RSTS/E and RSX and get them
feedback, and possibly fix some of the issues.
This really needs to happen.
Well, she is on HECnet, and is already reading this. However, since she formally disowned it, it might be that there is actually noone you could contact...
Johnny
On Jun 6, 2012, at 6:11 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
By the way, as a warning...
I seem to remember that DECnet support now have been dropped from Linux. So it might not be in there anymore, if you look at recent versions.
I've also had less than stellar results from trying to talk from Linux to RSX. So it might not work absolutely right under all conditions. Developers mostly (it not only) had VMS machines to test against...
Johnny
It's been some years ago, but I did a bunch of work to make it talk well with RSTS/E. And I thought others had done the RSX work.
I remember the rumor that it was dropped. Too bad. But there's no reason the older version couldn't be used, unless your chosen platform requires a later one.
paul
On 2012-06-07 01:29, Rob Jarratt wrote:
As I have hacked my own copy around a bit to make it work on Windows, can
you tell me what the fix was as I may find it hard to locate your change?
The port variable in the struct BRIDGE should be unsigned... :-)
What changes have you made? Maybe something that should be incorporated in my sources?
Johnny
Thanks
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-
hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: 06 June 2012 23:43
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: [HECnet] The bridge program...
Hi all. I found a stupid bug in the bridge program, which I fixed.
Improved the code documentation slightly while I was at it. New version at
http://www.update.uu.se/~bqt/hecnet as usual.
Johnny
I've been running it out here on an old U10 running base I do builds on.
It's sol9 9/04 with studio 11 and 9_Recommendeds fed to it. 1gb ram and
a 40gb disk. SIMH hasn't crashed yet. Idle seems to be functional also,
it's idling at about 17% cpu on a 2Mb cache 400Mhz UltraSPARC-IIi
running at 440Mhz. CPU is a v12 impl, Mask 9.1 in prtdiag -v.
It's been fluctuating between 91% usage and 17% for the last few days.
Only other oddity is that the machine has swift with a second HME and
scsi on it (tape). No probs thus far. I have dedicated the internal
happy meal for the TAP devs.
Al.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Brian Hechinger
Sent: Thursday, 7 June 2012 6:53 AM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Eeeewwwww
On 6/4/2012 8:51 PM, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 06/04/2012 12:13 PM, Brian Hechinger wrote:
SIMH 3.9 somehow kernel paniced my solaris server!
Wow.
-brian
ps: it's older solaris, but stil!
Holy cow! I have NEVER seen that happen. (which is why I run
it!)
How the heck did you do that?
Built and ran SIMH 3.9
3.8-1 works just fine (it's what i'm running now) and 3.9 runs fine in
my sol11 VM.
-brian
On 06/06/2012 06:11 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
By the way, as a warning...
I seem to remember that DECnet support now have been dropped from Linux.
So it might not be in there anymore, if you look at recent versions.
Huh? Nope, works fine here, on a two-week-old Mint installation.
(Mint is Ubuntu with Canonical's bad decisions un-done)
I've also had less than stellar results from trying to talk from Linux
to RSX. So it might not work absolutely right under all conditions.
Developers mostly (it not only) had VMS machines to test against...
I've had similar results talking to RSTS/E DECnet. From the little
bits of old mailing list traffic I've seen, I'd guess they'd be happy to
have it work with other platforms' DECnet implementations, but finding
people with machines to test against is tough outside of this crowd.
I plan to contact the developers when I have a little time and offer
to do some more formalized testing against RSTS/E and RSX and get them
feedback, and possibly fix some of the issues.
This really needs to happen.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
Can you talk to sol::
-P
On 06/06/2012 06:11 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
By the way, as a warning...
I seem to remember that DECnet support now have been dropped from Linux.
So it might not be in there anymore, if you look at recent versions.
Huh? Nope, works fine here, on a two-week-old Mint installation.
(Mint is Ubuntu with Canonical's bad decisions un-done)
I've also had less than stellar results from trying to talk from Linux
to RSX. So it might not work absolutely right under all conditions.
Developers mostly (it not only) had VMS machines to test against...
I've had similar results talking to RSTS/E DECnet. From the little
bits of old mailing list traffic I've seen, I'd guess they'd be happy to
have it work with other platforms' DECnet implementations, but finding
people with machines to test against is tough outside of this crowd.
I plan to contact the developers when I have a little time and offer
to do some more formalized testing against RSTS/E and RSX and get them
feedback, and possibly fix some of the issues.
This really needs to happen.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
On 06/06/2012 06:07 PM, Rob Jarratt wrote:
I reckon it could be done with a single interface.
Will take a look at the specs, a raspberry pi DECnet router would be great!
I haven't followed this whole thread since I'm in a busy time right
now, but just a quick thought...if it can't easily be done with a single
physical interface, perhaps a virtual interface might do the trick?
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
On 06/06/2012 04:53 PM, Brian Hechinger wrote:
SIMH 3.9 somehow kernel paniced my solaris server!
Wow.
-brian
ps: it's older solaris, but stil!
Holy cow! I have NEVER seen that happen. (which is why I run it!)
How the heck did you do that?
Built and ran SIMH 3.9
3.8-1 works just fine (it's what i'm running now) and 3.9 runs fine in
my sol11 VM.
Did it have something to do with the networking perhaps, maybe a weird
interaction with the Crossbow subsystem? We already know that part of
that doesn't do things exactly the way we need them to, I wonder if
there are other issues.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
Hmm. Sure. But if you go the Linux routing route, then you instead get
into the problem that it don't have a point-to-point connection to
another Linux box on the Internet...
If anyone makes a Linux implemenation, I'll suggest that it would be
made to support the Cisco/GRE and Multinet/UDP formats, and you could
also have Johnny's bridge on the other side....
-P
