- HECnet - lists @ Update

by b4＠gewt.net

On Thu, 3 Oct 2013, Dave McGuire wrote: On 10/03/2013 01:20 PM, lee.gleason at comcast.net wrote: The terminals themselves were just largish monitors and keyboard with an LSI11 system built in (an 11/03 or 11/2 - wasn't an 11/23, they were too new). Yup. That's why I'm drooling. I like that idea a lot. I like the idea, too. I'd put something else on my desk if I had the space. Or the ethernet cables. Even if you had one now, the magic was in the software that was downloaded from the TMS system, and the server side stuff that ran on the host 11. Without a TMS11 system to attach to, it would just be a bulky LSI11 system with no disk. Now, if you added a disk, and upgraded the processor, it would be the basis for an interesting desktop system - but it wouldn't provide the real VT71/72 experience. I'm not too interested in that very-vertical-market-sounding experience. I just like the idea of a small PDP-11 inside a rather iconic terminal that I can download arbitrary code into. It'd be fun. It'd be very neat. -Dave -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net Personal stuff http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

VT-62?

by mcguire＠neurotica.com

On 10/03/2013 01:20 PM, lee.gleason at comcast.net wrote: The terminals themselves were just largish monitors and keyboard with an LSI11 system built in (an 11/03 or 11/2 - wasn't an 11/23, they were too new). Yup. That's why I'm drooling. I like that idea a lot. Even if you had one now, the magic was in the software that was downloaded from the TMS system, and the server side stuff that ran on the host 11. Without a TMS11 system to attach to, it would just be a bulky LSI11 system with no disk. Now, if you added a disk, and upgraded the processor, it would be the basis for an interesting desktop system - but it wouldn't provide the real VT71/72 experience. I'm not too interested in that very-vertical-market-sounding experience. I just like the idea of a small PDP-11 inside a rather iconic terminal that I can download arbitrary code into. It'd be fun. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

VMS ACLs and DECNET

by system＠TMESIS.COM

Sampsa Laine <sampsa at mac.com> writes: Therefore, without the same RIGHTSLIST.DAT file on the remote node, = the ACL information is meaningless and, since there's no way to enforce having = the same RIGHTSLIST.DAT information on the remote, remote ACLs is not = supported.=20 Shame, granular security like that is some times very useful, but I can = see why it won't over DECNET In a VMScluster, it will work but across DECnet, which has loosely defined nodes agreeing to communicate, it's not really feasible. -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

VMS ACLs and DECNET

by sampsa＠mac.com

Therefore, without the same RIGHTSLIST.DAT file on the remote node, the ACL information is meaningless and, since there's no way to enforce having the same RIGHTSLIST.DAT information on the remote, remote ACLs is not supported. Shame, granular security like that is some times very useful, but I can see why it won't over DECNET sampsa

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

VMS ACLs and DECNET

by system＠TMESIS.COM

Sampsa Laine <sampsa at mac.com> writes: Do VMS ACLs work over DECNET? Let's say I'm on CHIMPY and want to edit the ACL of a file on GORVAX - = will that work? CHIMPY$ EDITT/ACL GORVAX::LOGIN.COM %SYSTEM-E_INVFILFOROP, invalid file specification for operation. ACLs are stored in the file header. Identifiers are stored as their binary equivalent from their definition in the local system's RIGHTSLIST.DAT file. Therefore, without the same RIGHTSLIST.DAT file on the remote node, the ACL information is meaningless and, since there's no way to enforce having the same RIGHTSLIST.DAT information on the remote, remote ACLs is not supported. $ DIRECTORY/SECURITY will display SOGR protections and ownershit UIC but it will not display the rights identifier names even IF they exists within the RIGHTSLIST.DAT of the local node. HERE$ DIRECTORY/SECURITY THERE::LOGIN.COM LOGIN.COM;1 [1,4] (RWED,RWED,RE,RE) THERE$ DIRECTORY/SECURITY LOGIN.COM LOGIN.COM;1 [HEGEMONY,SYSTEM] (RWED,RWED,RE,RE) If there were ACLs on the LOGIN.COM, you would not see them in the remote DIRECTORY listing. -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

VT-62?

by Paul_Koning＠Dell.com

On Oct 3, 2013, at 1:20 PM, <lee.gleason at comcast.net> wrote: The terminals themselves were just largish monitors and keyboard with an LSI11 system built in (an 11/03 or 11/2 - wasn't an 11/23, they were too new). Even if you had one now, the magic was in the software that was downloaded from the TMS system, and the server side stuff that ran on the host 11. Without a TMS11 system to attach to, it would just be a bulky LSI11 system with no disk. Now, if you added a disk, and upgraded the processor, it would be the basis for an interesting desktop system - but it wouldn't provide the real VT71/72 experience. Indeed. Then again, the download image would be the big thing -- the OS support for send/receive of files wouldn't be that big a deal. But unfortunately the odds of ever finding it would be very slim indeed; I think TMS-11 had a total customer base of perhaps 100 sites, maybe a little more. And I assume those things all shut down quite a long time ago. paul

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

VT-62?

by lee.gleason＠comcast.net

The terminals themselves were just largish monitors and keyboard with an LSI11 system built in (an 11/03 or 11/2 - wasn't an 11/23, they were too new). Even if you had one now, the magic was in the software that was downloaded from the TMS system, and the server side stuff that ran on the host 11. Without a TMS11 system to attach to, it would just be a bulky LSI11 system with no disk. Now, if you added a disk, and upgraded the processor, it would be the basis for an interesting desktop system - but it wouldn't provide the real VT71/72 experience. -- Lee K. Gleason N5ZMR Control-G Consultants lee.gleason at comcast.net From: "Dave McGuire" <mcguire at neurotica.com> To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Sent: Thursday, October 3, 2013 12:07:06 PM Subject: Re: [HECnet] VT-62? On 10/03/2013 11:40 AM, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote: > A VT71 is an LSI-11 based local editing terminal -- the host would > send the entire document to it, you'd edit it locally (very nice fast > response editor) and send back the result. Oh my I'd very much like to get my hands on one of those. I'd never even heard of it. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

VT-62?

by mcguire＠neurotica.com

On 10/03/2013 11:40 AM, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote: A VT71 is an LSI-11 based local editing terminal -- the host would send the entire document to it, you'd edit it locally (very nice fast response editor) and send back the result. Oh my I'd very much like to get my hands on one of those. I'd never even heard of it. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

Slightly OT: DECTape support in SIMH VMS?

by bqt＠softjar.se

On 2013-10-03 17:24, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote: On Sep 29, 2013, at 9:18 AM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote: On 2013-09-29 14:48, Sampsa Laine wrote: I noticed that the SIMH PDP-11 distribution contains emulation of TC11/TU56 DECtape drives. My questions are: - How hard would these be to port to the VAX SIMH emulation? - Do modern VMS (e.g > 7.0) OSes support DECtapes? I figure it would be a nice way to transfer files between a PDP-11 and VAX system for example.. VMS have never supported DECtape, as far as I know Not officially. But I know it was done as a "midnight project", by Andy Goldstein if I remember correctly. That supposedly even included overlapped seek support, just as TOPS-10 did. Why am I not surprised he would be involved... You might just turn it on and see if it works "out of the box". I would assume the file structure used is the same as what RSX uses, whatever that is. That would be normal Files-11 in that case. It might be a single directory file structure, though. Like for floppies. Johnny

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

VMS ACLs and DECNET

by sampsa＠mac.com

Do VMS ACLs work over DECNET? Let's say I'm on CHIMPY and want to edit the ACL of a file on GORVAX - will that work? sampsa

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

VT-62?

by Paul_Koning＠Dell.com

On Oct 3, 2013, at 12:03 PM, <lee.gleason at comcast.net> wrote: Not quite. TMS-11 used VT61/t and VT71 terminals. The VT61/t is a specialized block editing terminal in a VT52 enclosure, but with a whole pile of circuit >boards full of stuff. (All single sided boards, and about 1000 jumpers to make up for that silliness.) TMS-11 never used a VT62. They were built for TRAX, the most spectacular failure in DEC's history. (From release to retirement was a week or two.) Maybe so. I probably conflated the 2 from remembering the the VT72/t, a slightly different VT71/t that we used. Editing on a VT72/t was a dream - I've never had a better editing environment. Multiple cut and paste buffers, and easy to use User Definable Keys, a powerful yet obvious human interface, along with a programming language that could do an incredible job of text editing. We wrote entire systems in VT72 UDK language, and it was a kick to watch it do the work automatically. Programmers at this site worked night shifts by choice, since that was when the 72/t's were free and they could use them instead of a VT61 in VT52 mode for writing code. VT71 and VT72/t -- yes, two names for roughly the same terminal. Perhaps the VT72 had a newer processor in it, I don't remember. There was also an earlier terminal I saw in our lab but never at a customer site: the VT20. That was like a VT72, but with a PDP11/05 doing the controlling, and it had two displays on it in VT05 enclosures. TMS-11 was the first DEC group I worked for -- travelling fixer for that team. Very neat job for a guy just out of college. I wonder if I met you, Lee. I worked in that job from 1978 to 1980. If you had any on-site software repair done, that would have been me. I don't think you made it to our site (Composition Resources in Houston Texas). We had several visit from a wild man of a DEC hardware support person named Skip Bollinger. Perhaps you heard of him. Apparently his troubleshooting exploits were legendary. I'd retell some but they are way off topic for this list. One of the stories involved using a rubber chicken as a PDP-11/70 diagnostic and troubleshooting aid. Vice Presidents, both customer and DEC, were involved. Rubber chicken? Yikes. You're right, I did not visit your shop. And yes, I remember Skip, we occasionally worked together. Good ot hear from someone else who actually used TMS-11 (and the best thing about TMS-11 - it used IAS for the operating system!). Say, you didn't save any tape copies of IAS software from back then, did you? I'm still looking for DECnet for IAS in particular. Nope, I have no IAS leftovers at all. Actually, TMS-11 was a slightly renamed Typeset-11 which originally ran on RSX-11/D. It was then ported to IAS, but in the process all the non-RSX bits of IAS were turned off. So while IAS allegedly was a timesharing system (though never a competent one, only RSTS did a decent job there), for our purposes it was just an overweight RSX-11/D. BTW, I have mentioned this in the past: while TMS-11 had networking technology, that was not related in any way to DECnet. I think it may have predated it. Certainly it had routing before DECnet did, using the same "hot potato routing" algorithm DECnet Phase III used. The TMS-11 version was independently implemented, around 1977, by Joe Mauro. paul

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

VT-62?

by lee.gleason＠comcast.net

>Not quite. TMS-11 used VT61/t and VT71 terminals. The VT61/t is a specialized block editing terminal in a VT52 enclosure, but with a whole pile of circuit >boards full of stuff. (All single sided boards, and about 1000 jumpers to make up for that silliness.) >TMS-11 never used a VT62. They were built for TRAX, the most spectacular failure in DEC's history. (From release to retirement was a week or two.) Maybe so. I probably conflated the 2 from remembering the the VT72/t, a slightly different VT71/t that we used. Editing on a VT72/t was a dream - I've never had a better editing environment. Multiple cut and paste buffers, and easy to use User Definable Keys, a powerful yet obvious human interface, along with a programming language that could do an incredible job of text editing. We wrote entire systems in VT72 UDK language, and it was a kick to watch it do the work automatically. Programmers at this site worked night shifts by choice, since that was when the 72/t's were free and they could use them instead of a VT61 in VT52 mode for writing code. >TMS-11 was the first DEC group I worked for -- travelling fixer for that team. Very neat job for a guy just out of college. >I wonder if I met you, Lee. I worked in that job from 1978 to 1980. If you had any on-site software repair done, that would have been me. I don't think you made it to our site (Composition Resources in Houston Texas). We had several visit from a wild man of a DEC hardware support person named Skip Bollinger. Perhaps you heard of him. Apparently his troubleshooting exploits were legendary. I'd retell some but they are way off topic for this list. One of the stories involved using a rubber chicken as a PDP-11/70 diagnostic and troubleshooting aid. Vice Presidents, both customer and DEC, were involved. Good ot hear from someone else who actually used TMS-11 (and the best thing about TMS-11 - it used IAS for the operating system!). Say, you didn't save any tape copies of IAS software from back then, did you? I'm still looking for DECnet for IAS in particular. -- Lee K. Gleason N5ZMR Control-G Consultants lee.gleason at comcast.net

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

VT-62?

by Paul_Koning＠Dell.com

On Oct 1, 2013, at 12:12 AM, John Wilson <wilson at dbit.com> wrote: Even after the first 30 years, here's a dumb question: what color is a VT52? Mine (which does work) is a nice cirty yellow, like coffee-stained linoleum, even after a good scrub. Standard color was a light tan. It should be in the DEC color standard that's on-line somewhere, but unfortunately a lot of those color references don't translate to anything we can now reconstruct. If it's dirty yellow, it probably belonged to a smoker. You might try rubbing it with Windex, that does a great job removing smoke residue. paul

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

VT-62?

by Paul_Koning＠Dell.com

On Sep 27, 2013, at 9:31 PM, Lee Gleason <lee.gleason at comcast.net> wrote: Back in the day, in a galaxy far far away, I was system manager of a site that used TMS-11, a DEC product for newspaper/graphics arts production. Among a lot of other DEC gear most people have never heard of, we used VT/61 and VT/62 terminals. Not quite. TMS-11 used VT61/t and VT71 terminals. The VT61/t is a specialized block editing terminal in a VT52 enclosure, but with a whole pile of circuit boards full of stuff. (All single sided boards, and about 1000 jumpers to make up for that silliness.) A VT71 is an LSI-11 based local editing terminal -- the host would send the entire document to it, you'd edit it locally (very nice fast response editor) and send back the result. TMS-11 never used a VT62. They were built for TRAX, the most spectacular failure in DEC's history. (From release to retirement was a week or two.) TMS-11 was the first DEC group I worked for -- travelling fixer for that team. Very neat job for a guy just out of college. I wonder if I met you, Lee. I worked in that job from 1978 to 1980. If you had any on-site software repair done, that would have been me. paul

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

Slightly OT: DECTape support in SIMH VMS?

by Paul_Koning＠Dell.com

On Sep 29, 2013, at 9:18 AM, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote: On 2013-09-29 14:48, Sampsa Laine wrote: I noticed that the SIMH PDP-11 distribution contains emulation of TC11/TU56 DECtape drives. My questions are: - How hard would these be to port to the VAX SIMH emulation? - Do modern VMS (e.g > 7.0) OSes support DECtapes? I figure it would be a nice way to transfer files between a PDP-11 and VAX system for example.. VMS have never supported DECtape, as far as I know Not officially. But I know it was done as a "midnight project", by Andy Goldstein if I remember correctly. That supposedly even included overlapped seek support, just as TOPS-10 did. You might just turn it on and see if it works "out of the box". I would assume the file structure used is the same as what RSX uses, whatever that is. paul

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

OpenVMS on VAXstation 4000/60

by b4＠gewt.net

On Thu, 3 Oct 2013, Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote: Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> writes: On Thu, 3 Oct 2013, Mark Wickens wrote: 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. I like appropriate vintage OSes for systems, too. 6.2 also seems a bit lighter. Lighter??? I have a different definition of "lighter" than others. FWIW, you'd be much better off running the latest and greatest on your VAX hardware to take advantage of the performance features contained within it. The VAX processors, even in the latter generation VAX systems, are not very fast by today's standards. If you believe that every little bit helps, then you'd be running V7.3 to get every little bit of help you can get from VMS. I need to get a compatible CD drive before I can do that. Until then I shall stick with 6.2 -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net Personal stuff http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

OpenVMS on VAXstation 4000/60

by bqt＠softjar.se

On 2013-10-03 17:00, Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote: Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> writes: On Thu, 3 Oct 2013, Mark Wickens wrote: 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. I like appropriate vintage OSes for systems, too. 6.2 also seems a bit lighter. Lighter??? FWIW, you'd be much better off running the latest and greatest on your VAX hardware to take advantage of the performance features contained within it. The VAX processors, even in the latter generation VAX systems, are not very fast by today's standards. If you believe that every little bit helps, then you'd be running V7.3 to get every little bit of help you can get from VMS. I remember when VMS V5 came out. It was a total dog. I think DEC started to work on improving performance in V6, but I would not be surprised to learn that V7 is much better for performance than V6... Johnny

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

OpenVMS on VAXstation 4000/60

by system＠TMESIS.COM

Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> writes: On Thu, 3 Oct 2013, Mark Wickens wrote: 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. I like appropriate vintage OSes for systems, too. 6.2 also seems a bit lighter. Lighter??? FWIW, you'd be much better off running the latest and greatest on your VAX hardware to take advantage of the performance features contained within it. The VAX processors, even in the latter generation VAX systems, are not very fast by today's standards. If you believe that every little bit helps, then you'd be running V7.3 to get every little bit of help you can get from VMS. -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

OpenVMS on VAXstation 4000/60

by b4＠gewt.net

On Thu, 3 Oct 2013, Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote: Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> writes: On Wed, 2 Oct 2013, Dave McGuire wrote: On 10/02/2013 06:57 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: Write it directly. Backup can do that right? I don't have to right disk images to disk in VMS too often. ;) No. This is what I've done to write tape images to tapes: $ INIT/ERASE MUA0: "" $ MOUNT/FOREIGN/BLOCK=512 MUA0: $ COPY <filename> MUA0: $ DISMOUNT/UNLOAD MUA0: Can anyone (Brian S?) say if this will work with disk as the destination device as well? I'd guess yes, but I haven't done it myself, at least not recently enough that I remember. -Dave Crap. My only good disk (the quantum was DEAD++ it seems) is just about 60M too small. Which is weird as the drive says it's 2G despite on the casing. Meaning I can either copy the files off manually to a blank disk...or I can stick with VMS 6.3 instead of 7.3. ;) ALl of VMS, even V7.3, fit on a single CD. That 600MB, give or take, and should easily fit on a 1GB drive. So, if yours truly is a 2GB drive, more is at work here. 7.3 is around 619M when burned to CD. My 1.05G drive is dead and the 2G drive (really, it's some bizarre size like 2296M...go IBM!) yet only shows up as around 550M. After checking jumpers there is nothing to indicate size settings and I can read from/write to the drive fine. The drive that sounds like a bench grinder is just plain nonfunctional. ;) -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net Personal stuff http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

OpenVMS on VAXstation 4000/60

by b4＠gewt.net

On Thu, 3 Oct 2013, Mark Wickens wrote: 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. I like appropriate vintage OSes for systems, too. 6.2 also seems a bit lighter. It's also an excuse to break out the SPL and install some of the wonderful old tools and apps. Yup. ;) Regards, Mark. -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net Personal stuff http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

OpenVMS on VAXstation 4000/60

by system＠TMESIS.COM

Sampsa Laine <sampsa at mac.com> writes: =20 =20 (Seriously. I can't run unzip or tar...but I can run pico!) =20 PICO? I wouldn't mind a copy of that for HILANT, it's a great little = simple editor. PICO can be found in the DECUS Library compendium which I maintain. http://DECUSlib.com/DECUS/ Google: site:DECUSlib.com PICO editor -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

OpenVMS on VAXstation 4000/60

by system＠TMESIS.COM

Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> writes: On Wed, 2 Oct 2013, Dave McGuire wrote: On 10/02/2013 06:57 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: Write it directly. Backup can do that right? I don't have to right disk images to disk in VMS too often. ;) No. This is what I've done to write tape images to tapes: $ INIT/ERASE MUA0: "" $ MOUNT/FOREIGN/BLOCK=512 MUA0: $ COPY <filename> MUA0: $ DISMOUNT/UNLOAD MUA0: Can anyone (Brian S?) say if this will work with disk as the destination device as well? I'd guess yes, but I haven't done it myself, at least not recently enough that I remember. -Dave Crap. My only good disk (the quantum was DEAD++ it seems) is just about 60M too small. Which is weird as the drive says it's 2G despite on the casing. Meaning I can either copy the files off manually to a blank disk...or I can stick with VMS 6.3 instead of 7.3. ;) ALl of VMS, even V7.3, fit on a single CD. That 600MB, give or take, and should easily fit on a 1GB drive. So, if yours truly is a 2GB drive, more is at work here. -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

OpenVMS on VAXstation 4000/60

by system＠TMESIS.COM

Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> writes: On 10/02/2013 06:57 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote: Write it directly. Backup can do that right? I don't have to right disk images to disk in VMS too often. ;) No. This is what I've done to write tape images to tapes: $ INIT/ERASE MUA0: "" $ MOUNT/FOREIGN/BLOCK=512 MUA0: $ COPY <filename> MUA0: $ DISMOUNT/UNLOAD MUA0: Can anyone (Brian S?) say if this will work with disk as the destination device as well? I'd guess yes, but I haven't done it myself, at least not recently enough that I remember. Destination being a disk? Yes. $ MOUNT/FOREIGN DUA0: $ COPY <filename> DUA0: $ DISMOUNT DUA0: $ MOUNT [/OVERRIDE=IDENTIFICATION] [/SYSTEM] DUA0: [label] The [] items are optional depending upon what you will do with the drive after writing the image to it. -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

SIMH/VAX "temporary VMS cluster" for satellite installation notes

by jg＠jordi.guillaumes.name

El 03/10/2013, a les 1:37, Ryan Blair <blairrya at cse.msu.edu> va escriure: Since this has come up a few times as a recommendation (but without details on how to do it), I figured I'd provide my [really terse and unclean] notes on how to set up a SIMH/VAX image you can use to temporarily satellite boot VAXen into a cluster just to lay a fresh copy of VMS down onto them (and then on reboot have the targets be standalone machines). Please let me know if you have suggestions for cleaning this up! I'd love feedback for this. (...) ### installing VMS from a remote CD on a satellite-booted node: $ mount/over=id $1$dua3: (that's $ALLOCLASS$REMOTEDEVICE:) $ MOUNT/FOREIGN DUA0: $ backup $1$dua3:[000000]vms073.b/save_set dua0:/init /image/verify/list $ DISMOUNT DUA0: $ MOUNT/OVER=ID DUA0: $ COPY $1$dua3:[000000]vms073.* DUA0:[000000] ### if you want DECWindows you'll need DECW073.* too $ DISMOUNT DUA0: $ @SYS$SYSTEM:SHUTDOWN (make sure to pick REMOVE_NODE) SET BOOT DUA0: BOOT These download services are typically implemented using the host-based InfoServer support. ### END Wouldn't it be easier to use the "CREATE a duplicate system disk for XXXXX" of the config_cluster menu once you have setup the satellite? I mean, you could have a "clean" VMS install in a simh simulated VAX configured as a cluster boot server, then simply add any new machine as a satellite, configure the satelite so its own disk is visible from the boot node and then copy the clean system disk over the new machine. After that it is just question of updating MODPARAMS.DAT with the identifiers for your new system (and making it stand-alone if you don't want it to be clustered), clean up and initialize the DECNET databases and you will be done... Jordi Guillaumes i Pons jg at jordi.guillaumes.name HECnet: BITXOV::JGUILLAUMES

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

VT-62?

by e.olofsen＠xs4all.nl

One more note on Emacs and alternatives... Emacs 19.28 compiled on my Alpha with VMS 6.1. On my VAX I only have gcc 2.8.1, and after lots of trouble and batch time, I gave up. Having lost SOS and EDT fluency, I had a look at JED. Interestingly, recent sources compile both on the old VAX as well as on CHIMPY. JED's author still keeps the VMS dependencies in the distribution, but untested only. Erik On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 12:09:38AM +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote: On 2013-10-02 23:59, Clem Cole wrote: On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com <mailto:mcguire at neurotica.com>> wrote: Emacs builds on most everything, and is packaged for most (all?) Linux distributions. Dave -- might want to tighten comment that a little. GNU-emacs builds on most anything with a 32 bit linear address space or greater. Other emacs implementations YMMV. In addition, a port of Emacs is actually not that trivial. Anyone familiar with TOPS-20 (or OS/8, or probably some other of DEC OSes) will probably recognize what I'm going to write next. Emacs "knows" how an executable looks like, and how the memory layout is of the running program, and how dynamic libraries work, and so on. Because, as a part of building emacs, emacs will start bare bone, read in all kind of initial lisp packages, compile stuff, and create a finalized emacs in memory that is running with all the bit and pieces of initialization code already run. At that point, emacs will do a memory dump to disk, and munge that file to be an executable. And that is the actual emacs binary. For any new system, and especially for any new binary image format, emacs needs to be taught all about it. But anyway, if the scope would be "emacs" and not "GNU emacs", then implementations exists for just about everything. I've written a small emacs-clone in TECO-8, there exists multiple Emacs clones for MS-DOS (maybe the best known is Epsilon). Stacken (the computer club at the Royal Institute of Technology) wrote an emacs clone called AMIS, which ran on VMS way back, as well as on Tops-10, RSTS/E, Norsk Data machines, and god knows what else. There is MicroEMACS, which is really easy to port around (I have it running on RSX). 2BSD have JOVE. I'm sure people can easily come up with other implementations... 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

11 years, 10 months

1
0
0 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

HECnet