22 Oct
2022
22 Oct
'22
12:03 p.m.
On 2022-10-22 04:59, Thomas DeBellis wrote:
As we've noted earlier, the operating system
numbers are not consistent
between terminal transport and DAP. Your numbers correspond to the DAP
5.6 specification as far as it goes, viz:
Value OS Type
0 Illegal
1 RT-11
2 RSTS/E
3 RSX-11S
4 RSX-11M
5 RSX-11D
6 IAS
7 VAX/VMS
8 TOPS-20
9 TOPS-10
10 RTS-8
11 OS-8
12 RSX-11M+
13 COPOS/11 (TOPS-20 front-end)
Right.
I wish I hadn't sent out my last email because
P/OS was staring me right
in the face... I don't recall there being any COPOS/11 on any Tops-20
front end. The master DTE ran RSX20F, the RJE ran DN60 code and the
Phase III DN20's ran what I thought was called "MCB".
The "TOPS-20 front-end" was a bit of news to me. Makes me more curious...
And yeah, P/OS was in my list. Right after COPOS/11. You should have
read one more line. :-)
The Tops-20 DAP library has the following operating
system numbers which
partly correspond to yours. By this, I mean they are table offsets
which are used to pick the default mode. Assuming the following:
.OSRT==1 ;RT-11
.OSRST==2 ;RSTS/E
.OSRXS==3 ;RSX-11S
.OSRXM==4 ;RSX-11M
.OSRXD==5 ;RSX-11D
.OSIAS==6 ;IAS
.OSVAX==7 ;VAX/VMS
.OSTP20==10 ;TOPS-20 (^D8)
.OSTP10==11 ;TOPS-10 (^D9)
.OSOS8==12 ;OS-8 (^D10)
.OSRXP==13 ;RSX11-M PLUS (^D11)
It would appear that there is a conflict in the list in the PDP-8
entries and RSX-11M+. If MIM:: is reporting decimal 11 (octal 13), the
right thing from my list, then it is reporting itself as a PDP-8 running
OS-8 according DAP 5.6.
So... go with what MIM:: says, not what is documented?
I don't get this. The documentation says RSX-11M-PLUS is 12, the code in
RSX itself says it's 12. The only thing disagreeing is your list in TOPS-20.
Johnny
--
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