On 03/10/2013 03:01, Cory Smelosky wrote:
On Thu, 3 Oct 2013, Dave McGuire wrote:
Sweet! :-)
I'm thinking I'll stick with VMS 6.2. With patches.
I like trying appropriate vintage VMS for the machines. It's weird how the subtle differences creep in.
It's obvious at 6.1 how much TCP/IP, for example, is a 'bolt on'. Not required for the OS. DECnet and underlying clustering protocols working just fine on their own. Happy days.
It's also an excuse to break out the SPL and install some of the wonderful old tools and apps.
Regards, Mark.
--
http://www.wickensonline.co.ukhttp://hecnet.euhttp://declegacy.org.ukhttp://retrochallenge.nethttps://twitter.com/#!/%40urbancamo
From: "Jerome H. Fine" <jhfinedp3k at compsys.to>
As for EDT, I have heard of it, but never found any details. Is there
a LINK you can provide to a manual for EDT? Briefly, what
additional features did EDT support over KED? If there were so
many extra features, please pick just 3 or even 2 from EDT that you
especially found to be so much of an improvement over KED?
I only ever learned to use about 1% of EDT and it was already way more
than KED. I think the turning point for EDT was V2.0 (which I think was
where it started to smell more like KED). The craziest thing is that it's
four editors (that I know of) in one:
(a) "change" mode with keypad enabled -- the KED-like mode that
most people actually use.
(b) "change" mode with NOKEYPAD -- which is not modeless, so it's
about as annoying as "vi" on Unix (e.g. "itext$" to insert text,
instead of just typing text), but naturally not compatible with
it or anything else.
(c) "change" mode on a hardcopy terminal -- kinky!!! maybe a
little more TECO-like, minus the power (so I guess maybe it's
more EDIT.SAV-like then?).
(d) line mode -- which is like pretty much any other line editor.
Besides that, EDT has a near-infinite number of features. Multiple
buffers are certainly a huge one. And yet, no LOCAL -- KED's greatest
single features!
John Wilson
D Bit
On 3 Oct 2013, at 07:02, Daniel Soderstrom <snaggs at mac.com> wrote:
I like to keep HECnet somewhat low volume, on topic, technical, yadda yadda. I don't want it to be a general forum for people to vent their hot air.
If the list grows larger, I will have to start policing more.
I agree, the volume of emails is growing. Many of these discussions would be better housed on a news or Eisner feed.
I second that - I think we should move general discussions to DECTEC as it's meant for exactly this.
I personally enjoy the witty responses to technical questions one gets in this list, but I have also noticed that some threads seem to spiral out of control - not that I'm wholly innocent myself :)
I like to keep HECnet somewhat low volume, on topic, technical, yadda yadda. I don't want it to be a general forum for people to vent their hot air.
If the list grows larger, I will have to start policing more.
I agree, the volume of emails is growing. Many of these discussions would be better housed on a news or Eisner feed.
>Dave McGuire wrote:
On 10/02/2013 09:36 AM, Jerome H. Fine wrote:
Another MACRO project was to add additional variants
to the nine KED variants that DEC supports for RT-11
and RSTS/E. DEC supports the VT100, the VT52 and
the VT62. I added the VT420 which supports more than
24 lines as I mentioned in my last post. Having a "terminal"
with 44 lines was a huge advantage when I started to enhance
SDHX.SYS, as I find when I type this post under Netscape
and have about 36 lines in additional to all the tool bars.
What I'm curious about is why EDT never appeared under RT-11. (or did
it?) KED is respectable, but EDT is pure heaven.
While RT-11 distributions always included a file named "EDIT.SAV"
(or at least the ones I checked starting at V1 of RT-11 and ending
at V05.07 of RT-11), the last official release of TECO was in V04.00
of RT-11 (and the identical file was also included in the V05.00 and
the V05.07 releases).
The first release of KED that I can find was with V04.00 of RT-11
in 1980. Thereafter, Ked.SAV was always included in every release.
As for EDT, I have heard of it, but never found any details. Is there
a LINK you can provide to a manual for EDT? Briefly, what
additional features did EDT support over KED? If there were so
many extra features, please pick just 3 or even 2 from EDT that you
especially found to be so much of an improvement over KED?
I know that the standard DEC Ked.SAV release has a very small
cut / paste buffer which I have extended to over 16 KB along with
a working buffer of 22 KB. That can easily be changed back and
forth as needed if a user requires one of the buffers to be much larger.
At one point, although I knew how to define a MACRO (LEARN),
it was not clear how easy it was to execute that MACRO as many
times as I wanted to, so I no longer need to use TECO for even
complicated repeat things.
The HELP screens were not much help since they did not show the
current status of variable things such as:
(a) The names of OPEN files
(b) The current search string
(c) The current search settings
Since I added support to Ked.SAV for the VT420 with more than
24 lines (the new variant name is K42.SAV), I find K42 to be much
more useful. It can also handle up to 255 columns, although even
under the Win32 variant of Ersatz-11, the maximum my video card
and monitor will support is 69 lines by 199 columns. Since I almost
always prefer to use the DOS variant of Ersatz-11, I normally use the
largest screen sizes which my video card supports in FULL SCREEN:
50 lines by 80 columns
44 lines by 132 columns
As for the size of a file, KED can handle an input file of up to 16 MB
and an output file of up to 16 MB.
And what is the single feature under EDT which you like the most
which KED does not support?
Jerome Fine
On Thu, 3 Oct 2013, Sampsa Laine wrote:
(Seriously. I can't run unzip or tar...but I can run pico!)
PICO? I wouldn't mind a copy of that for HILANT, it's a great little simple editor.
Yeah. It really is. I'll upload it after I toss the VAXstation on the UPS in ~10 minutes or so if not less.
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects
On Thu, 3 Oct 2013, Dave McGuire wrote:
Sweet! :-)
I'm thinking I'll stick with VMS 6.2. With patches.
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects
Sweet! :-)
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
On Oct 2, 2013, at 9:50 PM, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
There! Got it!
$ sh us/fu
OpenVMS User Processes at 2-OCT-2013 21:49:32.06
Total number of users = 1, number of processes = 2
Username Process Name PID Terminal
SYSTEM SYSTEM 0000010C OPA0:
SYSTEM _TNA1: 00000117 TNA1: (Host: 10.10.10.21 Port: 41690 )
$ sh sys
OpenVMS V6.2 on node MOIRA 2-OCT-2013 21:49:35.82 Uptime 0 00:31:27
I can only run included editors...or pico. All of the others were built for newer VMS. ;)
(Seriously. I can't run unzip or tar...but I can run pico!)
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects
There! Got it!
$ sh us/fu
OpenVMS User Processes at 2-OCT-2013 21:49:32.06
Total number of users = 1, number of processes = 2
Username Process Name PID Terminal
SYSTEM SYSTEM 0000010C OPA0:
SYSTEM _TNA1: 00000117 TNA1: (Host: 10.10.10.21 Port: 41690 )
$ sh sys
OpenVMS V6.2 on node MOIRA 2-OCT-2013 21:49:35.82 Uptime 0 00:31:27
I can only run included editors...or pico. All of the others were built for newer VMS. ;)
(Seriously. I can't run unzip or tar...but I can run pico!)
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects
