Guys,
I've been reimplementing an old 80s BBS package called Waffle in Python (called Pyffle).
Anyway, it's accessible over HECNET as the host name PYFFLE, log in as pyffle at the Unix prompt.
Sampsa
When I boot my 3-machine SimH VAXcluster, my MOP booted VAX system I
am seeing this:
%VAXcluster, system loaded from node DARMOK (AA-00-04-00-33-18)
%SYSBOOT-I-SYSBOOT Mapping the SYSDUMP.DMP on the System Disk
%SYSBOOT-I-SYSBOOT SYSDUMP.DMP on System Disk successfully mapped
%SYSBOOT-I-SYSBOOT Mapping PAGEFILE.SYS on the System Disk
%SYSBOOT-I-SYSBOOT SAVEDUMP parameter not set to protect the PAGEFILE.SYS
OpenVMS (TM) VAX Version V7.3 Major version id = 1 Minor version id = 0
%WBM-I-WBMINFO Write Bitmap has successfully completed initialization.
%SYSINIT, waiting to form or join a VMScluster system
%PEA0, Excessive packet losses on LAN Path from XQA to XQA on REMOTE NODE DARMOK
%CNXMAN, sending VAXcluster membership request to system PIVAX2
%PEA0, Excessive packet losses on LAN Path from XQA to XQA on REMOTE NODE DARMOK
%PEA0, Excessive packet losses on LAN Path from XQA to XQA on REMOTE NODE DARMOK
%PEA0, Excessive packet losses on LAN Path from XQA to XQA on REMOTE NODE DARMOK
%PEA0, Excessive packet losses on LAN Path from XQA to XQA on REMOTE NODE DARMOK
%PEA0, Port has Closed Virtual Circuit - REMOTE NODE DARMOK
%PEA0, Excessive packet losses on LAN Path from XQA to XQA on REMOTE NODE PIVAX2
%PEA0, Excessive packet losses on LAN Path from XQA to XQA on REMOTE NODE PIVAX2
%PEA0, Excessive packet losses on LAN Path from XQA to XQA on REMOTE NODE PIVAX2
%PEA0, Excessive packet losses on LAN Path from XQA to XQA on REMOTE NODE PIVAX2
%CNXMAN, lost connection to system DARMOK
%PEA0, Excessive packet losses on LAN Path from XQA to XQA on REMOTE NODE PIVAX2
%CNXMAN, sending VAXcluster membership request to system PIVAX2
%CNXMAN, now a VAXcluster member -- system PIVAX3
%CNXMAN, re-established connection to system DARMOK
Is this;
%PEA0, Excessive packet losses on LAN Path from XQA to XQA on REMOTE NODE DARMOK
%PEA0, Excessive packet losses on LAN Path from XQA to XQA on REMOTE NODE DARMOK
normal? It seems to happen at boot in the same place in the sequence.
I wonder if it's the OS bootstrap reconfiguring the XQA0: interface?
I don't know, though, just looked odd.
--
Mark
*chuckle*
I had an IBM 850 that was afair a 120 or 133mhz 604 or 603e with 32mb ram that a mate grabbed a few years back so he could try it. Think he still keeps it with his extensive collection of Motorola power-stacks.
Al
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Jason Stevens Sent: Tuesday, 24 July 2012 4:54 PM To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Subject: Re: [HECnet] Webserver for Ultrix
I used it on PPC RS/6000's ... all the "advantages" of windows, without being able to run any x86 code.. which for IIS was a 'good thing' .. Naturally the day after I showed it off to management, IBM dropped support for PowerPC NT... Then so did Microsoft.
Qemu can run the MIPS version of NT which is fun to run from time to time... but just how much do you like NT 4.0 sp1???
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:23 PM, Boyanich, Alastair <Alastair.Boyanich at au.fujitsu.com> wrote:
.. feel free to cast the first stone at me $etc.. But on the topic of IIS, was NT 3.x and 4.x ever running on anything SPIM by DEC .. or was it purely the MIPS Magnum's? (Certainly the only place I've seen it on non-alpha/x86) Al.
> -----Original Message----- > From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On > Behalf Of Dave McGuire > Sent: Tuesday, 24 July 2012 1:38 PM > To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE > Subject: Re: [HECnet] Webserver for Ultrix > > On 07/23/2012 08:59 PM, Joe Ferraro wrote: > > More modern than 65% of market share in 2012? > > Yeah, really! > > > Lets see.... IIS -- nope (why would you?!?)... > > P.T. Barnum has an explanation for those who do. ;) > > > nginx? doubtful... > > Who? ;) > > > Hey.... Johnny wrote a very "modern" web server in the "recent" > > (equivocal) sense of the word... perhaps it would compile under Ultrix! > > Now THAT would be fun to port. ;) > > -Dave > > -- > Dave McGuire, AK4HZ > New Kensington, PA
El 24/07/2012, a les 11:12, Johnny Billquist va escriure:
On 2012-07-15 17:54, Jordi Guillaumes i Pons wrote:
I've completed 3 posts about the installation/generation of a RSX11M 4.6 (no plus) system from scratch under the simh simulator. If someone is interested, the links are:
http://ancientbits.blogspot.com.es/2012/07/installing-rsx-11m-46-from-scrat…http://ancientbits.blogspot.com.es/2012/07/installing-rsx-11m-46-from-scrat…http://ancientbits.blogspot.com.es/2012/07/installing-rsx-11m-46-from-scrat…
(There is no addsense in that blog, even though I must confess I tried to enable it and was rebuked by google because of "lack of content" ;), so this obvious spamming has no monetary interests behind ;)).
Read through them. My first reaction is that you are pretty much just letting ACF figure out your hardware, and taking the default answer
Yup. :)
almost everywhere. That is certainly a valid approach, and it makes life easy. However, if you ever need to start actually change anything, life becomes much more complex, and your guide leaves the user totally helpless. Atleast a few comments about the whats, whys and wheres would probably be useful.
I'll try to come up with something about this. For instance, ACF does not start up if I SYSGEN the running system again, then I have to go thru the whole device setup dialog.
Also, even though you say you have your system installed, finished, and done, it is not. You have not installed RMS, for instance, which many layered produects will require. You built all your tasks to not use any shared libraries, there are potential problems with doing a SAV /WB, as well as the generated system from the VMR step, that you should look at.
Also, there are potentially interesting stuff to change in the SYSVMR.CMD file, before you build your system.
:) I've managed to install DECnet on a 11M system. In a 256KW machine. It worked. Kinda. I had a good time fighting VMR and VNP. But it works, and connects. So yes, definitely VMR deserves more attention.
The queue manager is something you start in your SYSTARTUP.CMD, but unless my memory fails me, that is also something that needs some extra steps when you create it the first time, before it actually works in a usable way.
Well, it seems to have created the appropriate files. TBH I've not tried to print anything :)
XDT is sometimes a very nice thing to have in your system as well, which you skipped. Might be worth at least mentioning.
I can't remember offhand what else might be good to do/know, but that is partly a problem because I don't use 11M much these days, partly because I know my way around RSX pretty good, and partly because I just forget things. I might remember more later, or after some additional read throughs. :-)
Anyway, it's nice to see someone doing this kind of stuff. Keep at it. Hope someone finds it useful.
Thanks for this words. The idea was to put up a "quick and dirty" guide to set up a barebones RSX11M system. It can be elaborated ad infinitum (layered product installation, network installation, partition managing, you know...).
BTW, there is a huge, serious mistake in my setup. Perhaps I could leave it as an exercise to the reader... :) But no, it's too serious to leave it as is...
In the next POS I'll write about my adventures setting up a standalone development system. After a lot of help from ppl from the simh list I've got what I think can be a working (playing) solution...
Oh, remember I've never worked with 11s in my professional career :) I begun with a VAX, and now I am a mainframer. So it is just for fun. And, certinly, I'm having a LOT of fun.
Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
jg at jordi.guillaumes.name
HECnet: BITXOV::JGUILLAUMES
On Jul 24, 2012, at 4:08 AM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2012-07-24 01:33, Mark Benson wrote:
Is it feasible/advisable/possible to have 2 Area Routers on a DECnet Phase IV network?
The only reason I ask is that I'd like my emulated cluster system to be able to run Area 6 independently as all the nodes are area 6 nodes and it'd be neat to have area 6 working at places events like DEC Legacy.
Would it cause issues on HECNet having 2 Area 6 routers in different places also? I'm guessing not as they are still on the same DECnet network, same as if they are in the same room on the same LAN, but what do I know ;)
No problems. The only thing is that all area routers needs to have connectivity with other area routers with no level 1 routers in between.
So in your case, your two area routers must be able to talk to each other without using any level 1 routers. However, I don't think that you must have a direct connection between them. I *think* that it should work fine even if they only connect via area routers in other areas.
Yes.
There are two requirements:
1. Each area must be intact (no partitioned areas).
2. The level 2 net must be intact (not partitioned).
The level 2 net is defined as the set of connections between level 2 routers, so a pair of level 2 routers that have "connectivity" only via a level 1 router do not in fact have level 2 connectivity. (They do have level 1 connectivity, so they can communicate with each other and with other nodes in their area, but out of area communication will not work properly.)
paul
On 2012-07-24 11:46, MG wrote:
On 24-7-2012 10:30, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2012-07-24 03:50, Boyanich, Alastair wrote:
Nope. :-(
It's still owned, restricted and a silly situation. Just like the last
10 years...
Johnny
Nuts.
Indeed. Anyone have any really good contacts at HP?
That RSX is the property of HP, I didn't know. I thought DEC
sold several of its non-/pre-VMS proprietary operating systems
to at least one company other than Compaq, or am I thinking of
RT and RSTS/E?
No, you are right in principle, but the situation is more complicated than that. And have been all the time.
When DEC sold their PDP-11 software to Mentec, they retained some controlling rights over it. Those clauses are still in effect, meaning that even though DEC is now HP, and Mentec (or what's left of it) sold their PDP-11 software on, HP now have a controlling clause for all this software. It is HP that needs to be convinced to release things before anything else can happen.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On 24-7-2012 10:30, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2012-07-24 03:50, Boyanich, Alastair wrote:
Nope. :-(
It's still owned, restricted and a silly situation. Just like the last
10 years...
Johnny
Nuts.
Indeed. Anyone have any really good contacts at HP?
That RSX is the property of HP, I didn't know. I thought DEC
sold several of its non-/pre-VMS proprietary operating systems
to at least one company other than Compaq, or am I thinking of
RT and RSTS/E?
- MG
On 2012-07-15 17:54, Jordi Guillaumes i Pons wrote:
I've completed 3 posts about the installation/generation of a RSX11M 4.6 (no plus) system from scratch under the simh simulator. If someone is interested, the links are:
http://ancientbits.blogspot.com.es/2012/07/installing-rsx-11m-46-from-scrat…http://ancientbits.blogspot.com.es/2012/07/installing-rsx-11m-46-from-scrat…http://ancientbits.blogspot.com.es/2012/07/installing-rsx-11m-46-from-scrat…
(There is no addsense in that blog, even though I must confess I tried to enable it and was rebuked by google because of "lack of content" ;), so this obvious spamming has no monetary interests behind ;)).
Read through them. My first reaction is that you are pretty much just letting ACF figure out your hardware, and taking the default answer almost everywhere. That is certainly a valid approach, and it makes life easy. However, if you ever need to start actually change anything, life becomes much more complex, and your guide leaves the user totally helpless. Atleast a few comments about the whats, whys and wheres would probably be useful.
Also, even though you say you have your system installed, finished, and done, it is not. You have not installed RMS, for instance, which many layered produects will require. You built all your tasks to not use any shared libraries, there are potential problems with doing a SAV /WB, as well as the generated system from the VMR step, that you should look at.
Also, there are potentially interesting stuff to change in the SYSVMR.CMD file, before you build your system.
The queue manager is something you start in your SYSTARTUP.CMD, but unless my memory fails me, that is also something that needs some extra steps when you create it the first time, before it actually works in a usable way.
XDT is sometimes a very nice thing to have in your system as well, which you skipped. Might be worth at least mentioning.
I can't remember offhand what else might be good to do/know, but that is partly a problem because I don't use 11M much these days, partly because I know my way around RSX pretty good, and partly because I just forget things. I might remember more later, or after some additional read throughs. :-)
Anyway, it's nice to see someone doing this kind of stuff. Keep at it. Hope someone finds it useful.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On 2012-07-24 03:50, Boyanich, Alastair wrote:
Nope. :-(
It's still owned, restricted and a silly situation. Just like the last
10 years...
Johnny
Nuts.
Indeed. Anyone have any really good contacts at HP?
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On 2012-07-24 01:33, Mark Benson wrote:
Is it feasible/advisable/possible to have 2 Area Routers on a DECnet Phase IV network?
The only reason I ask is that I'd like my emulated cluster system to be able to run Area 6 independently as all the nodes are area 6 nodes and it'd be neat to have area 6 working at places events like DEC Legacy.
Would it cause issues on HECNet having 2 Area 6 routers in different places also? I'm guessing not as they are still on the same DECnet network, same as if they are in the same room on the same LAN, but what do I know ;)
No problems. The only thing is that all area routers needs to have connectivity with other area routers with no level 1 routers in between.
So in your case, your two area routers must be able to talk to each other without using any level 1 routers. However, I don't think that you must have a direct connection between them. I *think* that it should work fine even if they only connect via area routers in other areas.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
