HECnet

hecnet@lists.dfupdate.se

6 participants
15552 discussions

by jeep＠scshome.net

DECnet-11/RT-11 came in tape and RX50 distributions. The last version was Phase-III. Phase-IV was never produced. It really requires the XM (and variants) monitor and it is BIG... And SLOW... And... -Steve -----Original Message----- From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Cory Smelosky Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2014 22:12 To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Subject: [HECnet] RT-11 DECnet? Hello, Now that I've gotten RT-11 rolling on the 11/23...is there any way to get DECnet rolling on it? I can't find a tape image anywhere. :( If I'm going to get stuff copied to this...it's going to help to have higher than 9600baud going for me. ;) I suppose I could install the TCP/IP stuff but I've never actually done that. Would TSX+ run on an 11/23? Once my cleaning tapes arrive I'm going to install RSTS/E from one of my DDS-3 tapes via SCSI drive. ;) (Here's hoping the bootstrap on the SCSI controller does TMSCP bootstrap!) -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net Personal stuff http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects

10 years, 6 months

Parallel computing using DECnet

by jeep＠scshome.net

The DEC calling standards and the design of DECnet do not limit us to using only one language. Each system could use what ever is available on that system (and what the user knows how to program in) and use DECnet objects to pass information back and forth. A simple protocol (if you will) could be spec'd out and implemented for any of the languages. A common language could be used for the "glue". MACRO-11 might be fun - it could easily manage the differences between BASIC and FORTRAN (and others) calling sequences (ie R5). -Steve -----Original Message----- From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Dave McGuire Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 23:59 To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Subject: Re: [HECnet] Parallel computing using DECnet On 05/01/2014 11:41 PM, Jovan Trujillo wrote: Oh man ha ha so we are going to do amazing things with 64kb. Like those demo scene guys and their commodore 64's. Alright fractals sound like a good first project for something like this. ...we do have 64kb available right? :) There are very few PDP-11s that won't kick the living snot out of a Commodore 64, FYI. But using FORTRAN, we could potentially use overlays and such. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA

10 years, 6 months

QBUS sound [Was: Re: [HECnet] Parallel computing using DECnet]

by jeep＠scshome.net

My Pro-380 has built-in color (and graphics). Sound would be possible using the TMS-11 - I have one of those as well... -Steve -----Original Message----- From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Dave McGuire Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 02:10 To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Subject: Re: QBUS sound [Was: Re: [HECnet] Parallel computing using DECnet] On 05/02/2014 02:05 AM, Pontus Pihlgren wrote: There are very few PDP-11s that won't kick the living snot out of a Commodore 64, FYI. I've yet to see a PDP-11 with builtin color graphics _and_ sound. Me neither. The 64 probably outsold all models of 11 taken together. That's certainly possible, but one cannot argue that their target markets were even remotely related. Or even aware of each other's existence, for tha tmatter. so it depends on your application and measurement I suppose. We were talking about distributed math apps. I'm told there were, probably third party, sound cards for qbus. Has anyone of you seen one or know more? I haven't. I have a really neat Qbus card with a TMS9918 sprite-based video chip on it, though! -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA

10 years, 6 months

Parallel computing using DECnet

by jeep＠scshome.net

Count me in as well. -Steve -----Original Message----- From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf Of Dave McGuire Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 00:09 To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Subject: Re: [HECnet] Parallel computing using DECnet On 04/30/2014 08:18 PM, Jovan Trujillo wrote: This is what got me interested in HECnet: http://www.math.uni-trier.de/~ries/pcud32.pdf <http://www.math.uni-trier.de/%7Eries/pcud32.pdf> Have you guys ever banded together to solve a few math problems with this network? I would be interested in learning how to do it. That would be LOTS of fun. I'm in! I'm even more interested if we could do it with (or including) PDP-11s. Many of my PDP-11s have serious floating point hardware. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA

10 years, 6 months

"Dropped by adjacent node" ....

by bqt＠softjar.se

On 2014-05-30 04:27, Peter Lothberg wrote: Would it be possible to change the metric on SG1 on TCP-0-2 to for example 10? Actually, what hapen if we set all multinet UDP links to 20 and TCP links to 10 10 and 20 are way too high. The problem is that the default cost for QNA and UNA circuits is 3 (or 4 - I don't remember). Everybody connected to Johnny's bridge therefore sees a cost of 3 to everybody else on the bridge, even though that connection actually requires a hop over to Sweden (psilo) and back again. Any two machines with Johnny's bridge would never use the Multinet connection, even if it were a direct link between the two. Cost don't impact performance. .. .... I guess that the "problem" here is that most people have local machines on the same segent that is bridged. Having a "to low" metric makes it impoissible to prefer a better path that have serveral hops, over the bridge..... This sounds strange but..... Reliable - PTP link 10 Unreliable PTP link 20 Ethernet bridged 30 Would most likely render the optimal performance. Why? The ethernet bridge would, in my eyes be preferred to two or three reliable PTP links. The ethernet link is very fast for most people (unless they themself are on an ISP with severe limitations, in which case any other link will suffer equally), and has, with one or two exceptions proved very reliable. 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

10 years, 6 months

OVMS AXP emacs?

by e.olofsen＠xs4all.nl

Hi Bob, In case an old version (19.28) is ok you can try the following. I recently copied that version which compiles under 6.1 to a machine with 8.4 and it works. As usual, if X is not available you get the terminal version. At RULLFS:: you may find EMACS.ZIP and GNU_STARTUP.COM. I zipped the contents of SYS$SYSDEVICE:[GNU]. In LOGIN.COM: @SYS$COMMON:[SYS$STARTUP]GNU_STARTUP EMACS-19.28 NOLOGICALS,NOVERBOSE which gives you EMACS == "@SYS$SYSDEVICE:[GNU.LIB.EMACS.VMS]KEPTEDITOR EMACS" In case something is missing, the V6.1 machine still boots :) Erik On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 08:20:15PM -0700, Bob Armstrong wrote: Does anybody have a ready to run copy of emacs for the Alpha and OVMS 8.3 that I could copy? Building it can be a struggle that I'd rather skip right now. FWIW, I need the plain old fashioned terminal, NOT DECwindows, version. Thanks, Bob

10 years, 6 months

OVMS AXP emacs?

by bob＠jfcl.com

Does anybody have a ready to run copy of emacs for the Alpha and OVMS 8.3 that I could copy? Building it can be a struggle that I d rather skip right now. FWIW, I need the plain old fashioned terminal, NOT DECwindows, version. Thanks, Bob

10 years, 6 months

"Dropped by adjacent node" ....

by roll＠Stupi.SE

Cost don't impact performance. .. .... Of course not, but two hops via the bridge (as compared to one hop via Multinet) does... Bob But 10 or 20 on SG1 for the multinet link to you would make you in control over all of it. You could chise your bridge, my Multinet or the SG1 multinet. I can give you login on STUPI... -P

10 years, 6 months

"Dropped by adjacent node" ....

by bob＠jfcl.com

Cost don't impact performance. .. .... Of course not, but two hops via the bridge (as compared to one hop via Multinet) does... Bob

10 years, 6 months

"Dropped by adjacent node" ....

by roll＠Stupi.SE

Would it be possible to change the metric on SG1 on TCP-0-2 to for example 10? Actually, what hapen if we set all multinet UDP links to 20 and TCP links to 10 10 and 20 are way too high. The problem is that the default cost for QNA and UNA circuits is 3 (or 4 - I don't remember). Everybody connected to Johnny's bridge therefore sees a cost of 3 to everybody else on the bridge, even though that connection actually requires a hop over to Sweden (psilo) and back again. Any two machines with Johnny's bridge would never use the Multinet connection, even if it were a direct link between the two. Cost don't impact performance. .. .... I guess that the "problem" here is that most people have local machines on the same segent that is bridged. Having a "to low" metric makes it impoissible to prefer a better path that have serveral hops, over the bridge..... This sounds strange but..... Reliable - PTP link 10 Unreliable PTP link 20 Ethernet bridged 30 Would most likely render the optimal performance. -P

10 years, 6 months

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

HECnet