Hi.
On 2024-06-18 00:47, Thomas DeBellis wrote:
Updating the Tops-20 Finger client was simple enough,
a table entry for
DECnet and a small routine to build the JFN string, viz:
Ugh. That notions seems risky... How do you know you should be using
DECnet and not IP if you say @mim ?
After all, @mim is a perfectly valid IP address as well.
FINGER>@mim
[Fork FINGER opening DCN:MIM-117 for reading, writing]
18:40:07 FINGER IO wait at FNGPRT+23 Used 0:00:09.5 in 481:11:26,
Load 0.04
RSX-11M-PLUS system MIM. Tue Jun 18 00:40:08 2024. Up: 2 days, 22:09.
Luser Real name Term Idle Logged in
B
ILLQUIST Johnny Billquist TT10: 2d 15 Jun 02:31
BILLQUIST Johnny Billquist TT14: 2:03 17 Jun 21:20
FINGER>
Ultra-cool!!
Nice.
It would appear that there is no carriage return
before the line feed.
For the TCP version of finger, you are conforming to the TELNET
standard, which wants CR - LF, not simple LF. As I recall, the Tops-20
DECnet finger server would do the same thing as that is what the client
does (recall that it is in a fork and has no idea of what it might be
talking to)
Whups. Yeah. I'll add a CR to the outputs. Check if it looks better now...
Johnny
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 6/17/24 5:36 PM, Thomas DeBellis wrote:
Actually Tops-20 finger does functions exactly the same whether you
are local or network; that is, a line of text is parsed from primary
input (.PRIIN) and the resulting output is typed on the terminal or
primary output (.PRIOU). What happens in the network case is that the
backing JFN's for .PRIIN and .PRIOU are changed from the controlling
terminal (I.E., .CTTRM) to the network JFN with the SPJFN% JSYS.
When running as such in 'server mode', Finger has no idea of what is
going on. It literally can not tell the difference in input source
unless it does some terminal specific things, which it largely doesn't
do. This is how the NETSRV daemon implements the Finger TCP service.
Similarly, when finger is run as a client and asks for a network
connection, the protocol is deduced by a table lookup and the line it
has is simply shoved over the connection. The only difference isin
the syntax for the constructed JFN. Code exists for TCP and Pup and
it's simple enough to put in a DECnet entry. I might do that to try
it out.
Regarding Batch, it would be difficult to imagine a valid use case for
IDLE%. CPU time is probably fine as it takes processor time to
consume characters. That being said, it's possible that you could
have a background task that pops every so often to do some minor thing
while the main fork could be wedged. It all seems a little contrived.
I bring it up because the Tops-20 pseudo-terminal implementation is
accurate enough so that I can test certain arcane features such as
parity with Kermit-20. When I use Kermit-20 to establish a local
connection over a PTY, it works fine, viz:
User Personal name Job Subsys Idle TTY Console location
SLOGIN Thomas DeBellis 8 EMACS 1:21 44 iSnack.Laurel:
Development, Large
--> 10 FINGER 46 iSnack.Laurel:
Secondary Testing, Kermit-20
--> 12 EXEC 14. 21 Job 10, SLOGIN, FINGER
You can see that I haven't typed anything into job 12 for fourteen
minutes since I pushed to an EXEC to run the finger.
This doesn't happen with the Batch controller, so I've wondered what
it might be doing that clears idle.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 6/17/24 3:57 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> On 2024-06-17 21:37, Thomas DeBellis wrote:
>> The finger server simply listened on a particularly port and when a
>> connect was accepted, it was handed off to a fork with finger mapped
>> and the primary I/O JFN's were set to the network connection. I
>> don'tsee that it is on the PANDA distribution, but it's an easy
>> thing to write.
>
> From a DECnet perspective it's definitely easy. Connection
> estavlished, client sends one line in the same format as the command
> line, server responds, just like if you'd get a line and process
> locally.
>
> I would expect that either the TOPS-20 version also does things
> slightly differently for DECnet than local, or else it's not
> compatible with the RSX (and I assume VMS) version.
>
> For a local processing, the command line is provided as a part of
> starting the process, while over DECnet it will need to read a
> command line from the DECnet connection. But from there on, it's
> pretty much the same story either way.
>
>> As I recall, it doesn't quite work right with a batch job, but since
>> there is nobody there, this doesn't really matter. Idle time in
>> that case is detected by CPU consumption.
>
> Idle for batch jobs would be weird. As soone as one thing is
> completed, the next thing should be started. Where would any idle
> time be? Unless there is something like a sleep at the CLI prompt level.
>
> Johnny
>
_______________________________________________
HECnet mailing list -- hecnet(a)lists.dfupdate.se
To unsubscribe send an email to hecnet-leave(a)lists.dfupdate.se
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt(a)softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol