On Tue, 20 May 2014, Johnny Billquist wrote:
My memory board is third-party. Looks like it's truncating my memory
then. ;)
Are you sure. Very few 11/23 systems actually exist. Most people really have 11/23+ systems, even if they are not aware of it.
It's a dual-height board. I don't think it /can/ be an 11/23+!
(That said, without split I/D-space, you'll have preciously little
pool space, but that might not be a big issue for you right here.)
Probably not. I'll only have one disk in use at a time really.
Pool space is used for many things, but with just one user, and few
things running, not much pool is needed.
Ahh. I must be thinking of...buffer space?
Not sure what you are thinking of. :-)
I'm tired and I've been fiddling with many different things. ;)
Johnny
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects
On 2014-05-20 17:06, Cory Smelosky wrote:
On Tue, 20 May 2014, Johnny Billquist wrote:
4.6M+'s SYSGEN and it wouldn't accept 11/23 as an answer.
The difference between the 11/23 and 11/23+ is the amount of memory.
The original 11/23 could not go above 256K... If you have more, then
you actually have an 11/23+.
My memory board is third-party. Looks like it's truncating my memory
then. ;)
Are you sure. Very few 11/23 systems actually exist. Most people really have 11/23+ systems, even if they are not aware of it.
(That said, without split I/D-space, you'll have preciously little
pool space, but that might not be a big issue for you right here.)
Probably not. I'll only have one disk in use at a time really.
Pool space is used for many things, but with just one user, and few
things running, not much pool is needed.
Ahh. I must be thinking of...buffer space?
Not sure what you are thinking of. :-)
Johnny
On Tue, 20 May 2014, Johnny Billquist wrote:
4.6M+'s SYSGEN and it wouldn't accept 11/23 as an answer.
The difference between the 11/23 and 11/23+ is the amount of memory. The original 11/23 could not go above 256K... If you have more, then you actually have an 11/23+.
My memory board is third-party. Looks like it's truncating my memory then. ;)
(That said, without split I/D-space, you'll have preciously little
pool space, but that might not be a big issue for you right here.)
Probably not. I'll only have one disk in use at a time really.
Pool space is used for many things, but with just one user, and few things running, not much pool is needed.
Ahh. I must be thinking of...buffer space?
Johnny
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects
On 2014-05-20 17:01, Cory Smelosky wrote:
On Tue, 20 May 2014, Johnny Billquist wrote:
M+ do not need split I/D-space. But you do need 512K of memory. But
the 11/23 and 11/24 are supported CPUs.
I have 1M of memory.
Sure you're not confusing the 11/23 with the 11/23+? I was poking at
4.6M+'s SYSGEN and it wouldn't accept 11/23 as an answer.
The difference between the 11/23 and 11/23+ is the amount of memory. The original 11/23 could not go above 256K... If you have more, then you actually have an 11/23+.
(That said, without split I/D-space, you'll have preciously little
pool space, but that might not be a big issue for you right here.)
Probably not. I'll only have one disk in use at a time really.
Pool space is used for many things, but with just one user, and few things running, not much pool is needed.
Johnny
Hans Vlems asks: What's wrong with it?
I have had a number of Exabyte units over the years on UNIX systems. I still have at least one of each 8200 and 8500. I always found them to be reliable and if you used data style cartridges (not the video ones) very reliable and the standard BSD tape utilities and drivers support them. The biggest issue I had with them is feeding them: when writing to them, they can consume data faster than many applications can source it and "data late" caused "bad things" to happen on the tape firmware. For UNIX, years before I had written a program called double DD which was modeled after a program of the same name from Europe (the original was two cooperating processes that hand off control back and forth over a pipe]. My version used multiple threads to over lap the I/O and thus reduce if not remove the data late errors. [I used to the same program for QIC tapes too on the Sun systems we had].
So a tar command line would look like:
tar cvf - . | ddd ibs=20b obs=256K of=/dev/rmt0
Clem
On Tue, 20 May 2014, Johnny Billquist wrote:
M+ do not need split I/D-space. But you do need 512K of memory. But the 11/23 and 11/24 are supported CPUs.
I have 1M of memory.
Sure you're not confusing the 11/23 with the 11/23+? I was poking at 4.6M+'s SYSGEN and it wouldn't accept 11/23 as an answer.
(That said, without split I/D-space, you'll have preciously little pool space, but that might not be a big issue for you right here.)
Probably not. I'll only have one disk in use at a time really.
Johnny
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects
On Tue, 20 May 2014, Cory Smelosky wrote:
After a reboot:
Pack cluster size is not 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 or 64.
PC=120324 PS=030344 OV=000006 M5=004000 M6=004200 SP=041236
R0=000026 R1=143161 R2=143161 R3=000000 R4=000002 R5=041350
The disk is 1048778 blocks. I created a 512M image and copied it bit-for-bit to the disk. I think i'll just go SYSGEN 4.8 and wait for my cleaning tapes to get RSTS/E working.
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects
On 2014-05-20 15:14, Cory Smelosky wrote:
On Tue, 20 May 2014, Jordi Guillaumes i Pons wrote:
El 20/05/2014, a les 14.33, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> va escriure:
Back to trying RSX-11M 4.8. That's 100M and doubtful it'll complain.
Unless you want to feel the pain (or the joy) of manually defining
memory partitions, I'd suggest you to go PLUS :)
Can't! No Split I&D.
M+ do not need split I/D-space. But you do need 512K of memory. But the 11/23 and 11/24 are supported CPUs.
(That said, without split I/D-space, you'll have preciously little pool space, but that might not be a big issue for you right here.)
Johnny
On Tue, 20 May 2014, Paul_Koning at Dell.com wrote:
Could you explain what you wanted to do, what steps you followed, and what exactly the trouble is?
I staged RSTS/E in SIMH before copying its disk image to the real PDP-11/23.
It kept complaining about the pack size and whatnot...but I think I might have finally made progress.
BOOT DU1 . ARE YOU SURE? yes
WAIT...
?
?RU0: timeout during initialization, step 000003 - device disabled.
RU0: failed during units lookup - device disabled.
Fatal RSTS/E system initialization error!
Disk DU1: is hung
PC=120400 PS=030340 OV=000006 M5=004000 M6=004200 SP=041236
R0=000001 R1=000026 R2=042125 R3=000016 R4=000001 R5=041350
Progress!
If you feed a disk to RSTS that doesn t have a RSTS file system on it, it will get confused/annoyed. The error message you quoted is an example of what you would see.
Ahhhhh. I see. I was copying the disk incorrectly then.
Given an uninitialized disk, you use the disk initialization procedure (from INIT or online). The dialog you showed does that. After that procedure, you ll have a RSTS format disk.
Okay.
Partitioning? RSTS doesn t have partitions. The whole physical drive is a single file system. It also doesn t depend on NVRAM (PDP11s traditionally have none).
My controller is splitting a 2G drive in to 4 ~500M drives. It appears the config is stored in its NVRAM.
Block 0 is the boot block (dummy not bootable boot block by default). Boot 1 is the superblock ( pack label ). For new (V9 or later) disks that points to the MFD (top level directory); for old disks (format 0.0) it is the first block of the [1,1] directory which doubles as MFD on that layout.
paul
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects
On May 20, 2014, at 8:33 AM, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
So:
Pack cluster size is not 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 or 64.
PC=120324 PS=030344 OV=000006 M5=004000 M6=004200 SP=041240
R0=000026 R1=143161 R2=143161 R3=000000 R4=000000 R5=041350
The disk should be around ~512M. I created a 500M disk.
Disk? DU0
Pack ID? 0
Pack cluster size <16>?
MFD cluster size <16>?
SATT.SYS base <30530>?
Pre-extend directories <NO>?
PUB, PRI, or SYS <SYS>?
[1,1] cluster size <16>?
[1,2] cluster size <16>?
[1,1] and [1,2] account base <30530>?
Date last modified <YES>?
New files first <NO>?
Read-only <NO>?
Patterns <3>? 0
Erase Disk <YES>? YES
Proceed (Y or N)? Y
Unless the partitioning is written to the first block and not done through controller NVRAM...I can't see the reasoning.
Could you explain what you wanted to do, what steps you followed, and what exactly the trouble is?
If you feed a disk to RSTS that doesn t have a RSTS file system on it, it will get confused/annoyed. The error message you quoted is an example of what you would see.
Given an uninitialized disk, you use the disk initialization procedure (from INIT or online). The dialog you showed does that. After that procedure, you ll have a RSTS format disk.
Partitioning? RSTS doesn t have partitions. The whole physical drive is a single file system. It also doesn t depend on NVRAM (PDP11s traditionally have none).
Block 0 is the boot block (dummy not bootable boot block by default). Boot 1 is the superblock ( pack label ). For new (V9 or later) disks that points to the MFD (top level directory); for old disks (format 0.0) it is the first block of the [1,1] directory which doubles as MFD on that layout.
paul
