Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[Jon Elson]

On 02/08/2016 09:28 AM, tony duell wrote:

First week on the job in March 1980, my new boss brought me two pdp11/04s
and a box of memeory chips.  He to told me to double the memory in
the two computers by populating all the empty holes on the memory boards.

I had a boss in 1987 that asked the same of me...

I heard that when Bristol University physics department got its first VAX (an 
11/750,
somewhat before my time), it was cheaper to buy 256K memory boards full of 16K 
RAM
chips, clip them out, clean out the holes and solder in 64K RAMs rather than to 
buy 1MByte
boards full of 64K RAMs from DEC. And that is what they did


I assume they didn't buy a service contract with that 
machine?  I doubt DEC would be real happy with that.  Also, 
the 64K RAM chips need an extra address pin, were the boards 
laid out with that signal already in place?


(I seem to recall on the VAX 11/780 they had different array 
boards and memory controller when going from 4K to 16K DRAM 
chips.)


Jon

Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[Mattis Lind]

2016-02-07 18:55 GMT+01:00 Jos Dreesen :

>
>
> Yesterday I picked up the PDP11/04 that Jay mentioned a few days ago.
> Less than 15 miles from home  !
>
> The machine spend its early days as a processor in chemical analysis
> apparatus, and was subsequently bought by the employee using it.
> Before he could make use of it better, more powerful, easier to use
> machines came along and the -11 spend the next 30 years in a garage.
>
>
> The -04 is an entry level machine, and the cards inside match this :
>
> M7263 KD11 CPU
> 2 x M7264 16K DRAM cards
>

No, it cannot be M7264. I guess that it is a M7847 MS11-E board. M7264 is
the quad KD11 / LSI-11 CPU board.


> M7856 DL11 SLU/RTC
> M7846 RX01 controller
> 2 x M7814 DZ11-F
>
> and of course the M9301, M9302 and M9202.
> Alas it has just the simple 2-switch frontpanel.
>
> The machine also had the battery backup option, and the lead/acid
> batteries will celebrate their 40th birthday next year !
> Better not try to charge them
>
>
> Overall the machine is in very good condition, both CPU and RX01, and it
> is packed in a very nice half-height rack with the red PDP11 bezel at the
> top.
> Pictures next week when the machine is cleaned and reassembled,
> restoration is to start next winter, after a house move which will nearly
> double working area for the hobby.
>

This is a really nice, simple little system. It will happily run RT11 from
from the floppies. The lack of programmer console is a little bit annoying
when debugging it but when it is operating properly the console emulator
will be enough for most purposes. The M9301 is a rather fixed compared with
the M9312 were you can install your own boot ROMs of your own choice. For
example useful things like to have it to boot from TU58 or MSCP devices.

I guess that the CPU box is in a BA11-K box. They are incredibly heavy, but
much much easier to use compared with the BA11-L which is a pain to work
with.
The modularity of the BA11-K is also very nice. I haven't had much trouble
with the PSU modules in the BA11-Ks I have worked with. The lightbulb of
course but other than that they were fine.

Good luck and congratulations to a nice system!


> Many thanks to Roland for preserving the machine, and to Jay for acting as
> an interface !
>
>
> Jos
>
>

AIX 4.1-capable box

[Benjamin Huntsman]

Hi there!
   Does anyone on here do much with RS/6000 boxes?  I'm looking for a 7009-C10, 
7011-250, or (mostly) PCI-based 7012 system capable of running AIX 4.1.
   By any chance, anyone have such a system that they'd be willing to sell?

   Thanks much!!

-Ben

Re: 386 upgrade board

[Ian S. King]

On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Joe Giliberti  wrote:

> That's good to know that they are out there. If anyone has one they would
> be willing to part with, please let me know. I'm also in the market for an
> ISA hard card if anyone has one.
>
> Thanks,
> Joe
>  This email has been sent from a
> virus-free computer protected by Avast.
> www.avast.com 
> <#DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
>
Hi Joe,

Since you have a TeleVideo luggable: do you know any of the magic to open
up the cases?  I have a TPC-1 and I need to rebuild its power supply, but
I've yet to figure out how to get it open.  I don't want to break it, and
it seems to be *snapped* together, with a paucity of screws that don't seem
to loosen the cabinet itself.  Thanks for any help you can provide!  -- Ian

-- 
Ian S. King, MSIS, MSCS, Ph.D. Candidate
The Information School 
Dissertation: "Why the Conversation Mattered: Constructing a Sociotechnical
Narrative Through a Design Lens

Archivist, Voices From the Rwanda Tribunal 
Value Sensitive Design Research Lab 

University of Washington

There is an old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China."

Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[Mattis Lind]

>> I assume they didn't buy a service contract with that machine?  I doubt
> DEC would be real happy with that.  Also, the 64K RAM chips need an extra
> address pin, were the boards laid out with that signal already in place?
>

Probably not since the new address signal used to be the +5V supply voltage
(on 16 k chip) which one could assume is connected using one of the middle
layers of  of a multilayer PCB. As mentioned earlier in this thread I did
such a conversion on a MSV11-D board more than 25 years ago and then I had
to lift up this pin and connect it via an extra wire.

/Mattis


>
> (I seem to recall on the VAX 11/780 they had different array boards and
> memory controller when going from 4K to 16K DRAM chips.)
>
> Jon
>
>

Re: NiCd battery replacement in vintage computers

[Chuck Guzis]

On 02/08/2016 06:55 AM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:


As a matter of interest I've checked the MC146818 datasheet and it
claims a 50µA current draw in the usual configuration with a 32768Hz
oscillator.


Yup.  And things have only gotten better with time.  I suspect that you 
could power the '818 RTC with a few slices of potato and scavenged wire 
for several months.


--Chuck

Master index of ICL / 3R PERQ software?

[Nigel Williams]

Has anyone made a list of all the known software for the PERQ?

I'm on the hunt for a rumoured port of VAX ML (written in Pascal) to
the PERQ at Edinburgh.

thanks.

Re: Master index of ICL / 3R PERQ software?

[Mike Ross]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 10:01 PM, Nigel Williams
 wrote:
> Has anyone made a list of all the known software for the PERQ?
>
> I'm on the hunt for a rumoured port of VAX ML (written in Pascal) to
> the PERQ at Edinburgh.

I have a couple of PERQs - 1 & 2 - originally from ?UCL? as I recall.
Got several boxes of floppies plus whatever's on the hard disks.

No idea on your specific interest but I intend to get into restoring
these machines in the nearish future - they've been gathering dust for
about 20 years! - and I'll keep an eye out.

Mike

http://www.corestore.org
'No greater love hath a man than he lay down his life for his brother.
Not for millions, not for glory, not for fame.
For one person, in the dark, where no one will ever know or see.'

Re: AIX 4.1-capable box

[Paul Berger]

On 2016-02-08 11:14 PM, Benjamin Huntsman wrote:

I was eyeballing that 7009 that still has the door.  What do you think it's 
actually worth?  I was thinking something like $200 would be generous, but then 
again I might be equally off-base...

Sent from my iPhone


I should probably warn you that the 7009 was not the best microchannel 
system made.  The 10/100 ethernet card for one does not work well in 
it.  L2 cache options have been known to fail, and if you do get one you 
will probably want to renew the heat sink compound on the CPU it is 
known to dry out.


Paul.

RE: Oregon Pascal tape found

[Rob Jarratt]

I don't know if there are already images of this, but I would suggest taking an 
image *before* sending it anywhere.

Regards

Rob

Sent from Outlook Mail for Windows 10 phone



From: John Many Jars
Sent: 08 February 2016 22:13
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Oregon Pascal tape found


I would love an image of that!

On 5 Feb 2016 18:59, "Todd Goodman"  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd like it if still available.
>
> I'll certainly reimburse you for postage (and a beverage or two of your
> choice as well.)
>
> Thanks!
>
> Todd
>
> * E. Groenenberg  [160205 13:02]:
> >
> > While getting though some stuff, I did find a 800Bpi 9 track tape
> > with Oregon Pascal V2.0 for RSX.
> >
> > Anybody interested in it? Free to get, only postage fee would be nice.
> >
> > Ed
> > --
> > Ik email, dus ik besta.
> > BTC : 1J5fajt8ptyZ2V1YURj3YJZhe5j3fJVSHN
> > LTC : LP2WuEmYPbpWUBqMFGJfdm7pdHEW7fKvDz
> >

Re: AIX 4.1-capable box

[Kevin Bowling]

Yeah I would think $80-$200 would be fair for a typical MCA machine
depending on extras and condition, maybe the more prized ones are worth
more to the right person... you can pry my 7012-397 and 7012-G40 from cold
dead hands :p.  I would sell you a 7011-250 but it's particularly useful to
me for furthering the NetBSD port at some point.

Regards,

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Benjamin Huntsman <
bhunts...@mail2.cu-portland.edu> wrote:

> So more like $100?  :)
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Feb 8, 2016, at 7:21 PM, Paul Berger  wrote:
> >
> >> On 2016-02-08 11:14 PM, Benjamin Huntsman wrote:
> >> I was eyeballing that 7009 that still has the door.  What do you think
> it's actually worth?  I was thinking something like $200 would be generous,
> but then again I might be equally off-base...
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> > I should probably warn you that the 7009 was not the best microchannel
> system made.  The 10/100 ethernet card for one does not work well in it.
> L2 cache options have been known to fail, and if you do get one you will
> probably want to renew the heat sink compound on the CPU it is known to dry
> out.
> >
> > Paul.
>

Re: PRM-85 board case?

[curiousmarc3]

Interested too.
Marc


> On Feb 6, 2016, at 9:43 PM, Glen Slick  wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Jay West  wrote:
>> Rumor has it that one or more people have designed and 3d-printed cases for
>> their HP-85 PRM-85 boards. Anyone have any of those cases available? I'd
>> like to get my PRM-85 a proper case :)
> 
> I would like to hear about that too. I also have a bare PRM-85 board.
> It would be nice to have a proper case for it without gutting another
> plug in I/O module for it's case.

Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[Jon Elson]

On 02/08/2016 03:23 PM, Ethan Dicks wrote:
I don't know if you could use the 256K boards (populated 
with 4116s) in the 11/730 due to the tri-voltage 4116s, 
but even if they worked, you wouldn't want to - 5 of them 
just isn't that much RAM.
We ran our first 11/780 with 2 memory boards.  I THINK we 
had a total of 256 KB, and one Friday afternoon one of them 
died and we had to run over the weekend with only one board, 
so that would have been 128 KB.  Yes, it was a bit tight on 
memory, but we got a LOT done on that machine.


Jon

Re: AIX 4.1-capable box

[Benjamin Huntsman]

So more like $100?  :)

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 8, 2016, at 7:21 PM, Paul Berger  wrote:
> 
>> On 2016-02-08 11:14 PM, Benjamin Huntsman wrote:
>> I was eyeballing that 7009 that still has the door.  What do you think it's 
>> actually worth?  I was thinking something like $200 would be generous, but 
>> then again I might be equally off-base...
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
> I should probably warn you that the 7009 was not the best microchannel system 
> made.  The 10/100 ethernet card for one does not work well in it.  L2 cache 
> options have been known to fail, and if you do get one you will probably want 
> to renew the heat sink compound on the CPU it is known to dry out.
> 
> Paul.

Re: 6502 CPUs

[Fred Cisin]

In a thousand years, it is revealed that Bender has a 6502!

Re: 6502 CPUs

[Mike van Bokhoven]

On 9/02/2016 9:25 a.m., Adrian Graham wrote:

Having had another bit of CBM kit with a failed CPU I'm wondering where you
lovely US folk get your spares from since ebay seems a bit ridiculous for
replacements at ukp8 a pop being the lowest price. They're surely not THAT
valuable?

eBay does have some pretty cheap options...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1pcs-R6502AP-R6502-DIP-40-/170828631732?hash=item27c62e0eb4:g:KOUAAOxyzfNRtoK4

Bearing in mind that although this looks authentic, it may be a re-mark, 
and it will still probably be a working 6502.

Re: 11/73 into 11/03 chassis?

[Jerome H. Fine]

I top post only once or twice a year.  This is the exception since my reply
does not explicitly address the question.

An internal built-in power supply is just the ordinary standard power
supply which provides power to the board on which the CPU is
located.

I have managed to avoid many of the problems associated with power
supplies by using the built-in power supply only for the BA23 boards,
tape drives and, if any, floppy drives.

Note that when I use a TK70 tape drive in a BA23 box, it functions
correctly ONLY when connected to the built-in power supply.

Specifically, I always use a SEPARATE PC power supply for the hard
disk drives.  This is probably essential when I use THREE Hitachi ESDI
hard disk drives since their power requirements, when added to the
rest of the load, really challenge the BA23 box built-in power supply.
But I believe it is probably best even when just an RD51 is used
although the load from a single RD51 is probably OK to run using the
built-in power supply of the BA23.

In addition, the Hitachi ESDI hard drives also require an external fan
to keep them at a reasonable temperature.  The fans are also powered
by the separate PC power supply.

This procedure also works well with other systems, so I recommend
it to reduce the load and keep internal built-in power supplies from
being overloaded on any system, especially when there is more than
one hard drive.

Jerome Fine

>Jacob Ritorto wrote:


This is extremely good info (thank you to Robert, Joseph and Noel!) and I
plan to do something like this someday when I get more q-bus stuff, but I
must apoligise for my inaccuracy because what I was originally trying to
ask was:

Can I tear apart my little BA23 (which currently has a power supply problem
and not enough space for my high capacity 8" SMD disks) and put the
Micro/PDP-11 backplane (with all its nice 11/73 cards and SMD disk
controllers, etc.) into the spot that my 11/03 backplane currently occupies
and run it via the (working) stock 11/03 power supply?  This "11/03
chassis" is bolted into what appears to be a common, official Digital 19"
rack surrounded by some RL02s, mid-height style (don't know the name of
this racking option).

 Specifically, would I have to butcher power and clock lines to do this,
or is it all plug compatible?  I'm considering tearing the systems down and
assessing the situation, but wanted to ask in advance in case somebody's
already gone there and can save me the heartache.  The recent mention of
the dual 11/73 in a 19" rack prompted me to reconsider my original intent
instead of rewiring old backplanes to be 22-bit compliant.

thx
jake



On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Noel Chiappa  wrote:



   > From: Jacob Ritorto

   > Would you happen to have notes or references about how to do it?

It's not too hard; basically, one has to wire pins BC1, BD1, BE1 and BF1
(BDAL 18-BDAL21, respectively) on all _QBUS_ slots together into a bus. So
wire BC1 on slot 1 to BC1 on slot 2, slot 3, etc, etc.

A couple of notes: First, I said '_QBUS_' because if you have a Q/CD
backplane, clearly one doesn't run the extra BDAL lines to the CD slots,
only
the QBUS slots (which run down the left-hand side, when facing the
backplane).

Second, for optimal analog behaviour, the 'out' slot on the backplane
should
be the last slot you wire to, so that there are no branches in the
transmission line for BDAL18-BDAL21 (which can produce reflections - aka
noise - on the transmission lines). How to do this efficiently (in terms of
the wiring) can be a bit tricky, depending on the backplane configuration.

E.g. if one has the standard 'serpentine' backplane, i.e. one with the
slots
in the following kind of order (facing the backplane from the board side):

1-2
4-3
5-6
8-7
9-10

etc., one might naively think one has to run the extra bus lines back and
forth to match. However, only the _grant_ lines have to follow this pattern
(and they are already there); the added lines don't have to follow the same
pattern, as long as there are no branches.

So, for the example 5-slot backplane above, one could/would wire:

1-4-5-8-9--2-3-6-7-10

i.e. a single vertical run on the left hand side, a single diagonal from 9
back to 2 (shown with "--"), and then another vertical run on the right
hand
side. Much simpler than wiring back and forth in slot order; there are no
branches; and the last slot is the 'out' slot.

For backplane with an _even_ number of layers, e.g.:

1-2
4-3
5-6
8-7

it's a little more complicated: a single vertical run on each side
cannot be connected in such a way as to have the 'out' slot (8) be the
last slot. One has to do something a little more complex:

1-4-5--2-3-6-7--8

with a vertical run on the left side, stopping short of the last slot; then
a vertical run on the right side, then a lateral back across on the last
layer.

Obviously one _could_ run the wires back and forth, in slot order, but that
will take a lot more wire, which at the very least 

VAXen and minimal memory (was Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..)

[Ethan Dicks]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Jon Elson  wrote:
> On 02/08/2016 03:23 PM, Ethan Dicks wrote:
>>
>> I don't know if you could use the 256K boards (populated with 4116s) in
>> the 11/730 due to the tri-voltage 4116s, but even if they worked, you
>> wouldn't want to - 5 of them just isn't that much RAM.
>
> We ran our first 11/780 with 2 memory boards.  I THINK we had a total of 256
> KB, and one Friday afternoon one of them died and we had to run over the
> weekend with only one board, so that would have been 128 KB.  Yes, it was a
> bit tight on memory, but we got a LOT done on that machine.

As I mentioned our first 11/750 was delivered with 512KB (we upgraded
it pretty quickly to 8 boards for 2MB, where it ran for years).  The
11/750 first shipped with IIRC VMS 2.0.  My first encounters with VMS
was around mid-1984 and VMS 3.4.  We had 8MB of memory in our second
11/750 but it was supporting 50+ users.

That 11/750 went off-lease, we sent it back.  That's why I had to
upgrade the other one, so we'd still have an 8MB VAX in-house.  It ran
VMS 4.7 at the end of its days 23 years ago (we had quite a bit of
software that wasn't available for/wasn't licensed for/wasn't under
paid-maintenance for 5.x).  I haven't powered it up since we left that
building (I do occasionally power up the 8300 that we got for product
development).

So I'm fairly confident that 512MB is enough for VMS 2.0 but I _think_
by 3.0, you had to have a megabyte or two.  1.25MB would be the most
you could stuff in a 11/730 if you could use the boards populated with
16Kbit DRAMs.  I don't think VMS 2.x runs on an 11/730 (but I could be
wrong there).  We ran Ultrix 1.1 and VMS 5.0 on one of ours (with
5MB).  VMS 5.0 barely fit - we mostly used that to link our product
binaries under 5.x for distribution to our customers.

I do know someone in Ohio who ran VMS 5.0 on a VAX-11/725, but they
did it by cutting a slot in the skin and running a BC11 cable out to a
BA11 box next to the 11/725 and stuffing a UDA50 in the BA11.  With an
external disk, there's no practical difference between an 11/725 and
an 11/730... same CPU, same backplane, same memory... just a packaging
difference.

-ethan

Re: Solid state recommendations

[Bryan Everly]

Thanks Tom!

Thanks,
Bryan

> On Feb 8, 2016, at 4:40 PM, pdaguytom .  wrote:
>
> I'm pretty sure that the Sun Blade 100 uses IDE, one of the cheap IDE to CF
> cards from ebay would likely work there. I've usually bought these in bulk
> and have been less than picky (other than price☺) about these and have not
> had any issues.
> The SCSI to CF have always been a bit spendy for my taste, it was always
> easier to find the next cheap used SCSI drive.
>
> Tom
>
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Bryan Everly 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all
>>
>> I have the following gear in my stable:
>>
>> - Sun Blade 100
>> - SGI O2
>> - VAXstation 3100
>> - AlphaStation 500
>> - HP C3700
>>
>> I would like to start eliminating spinning SCSI drives from these
>> boxes for noise, heat and capacity reasons. Could you kind folks
>> recommend a solution?  I've seen SCSI to CF converters advertised but
>> I didn't know if there was one kind over another that people have been
>> successful with or if there is a totally different approach I should
>> be considering.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bryan
>>

Re: Oregon Pascal tape found

[Pete Lancashire]

I'll see what I can do to get it converted to a downloadable file. I have a
friend with both a 9 track (556/800/1600) and a 7 track transport.

-pete

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:13 PM, John Many Jars  wrote:

> I would love an image of that!
>
> On 5 Feb 2016 18:59, "Todd Goodman"  wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like it if still available.
> >
> > I'll certainly reimburse you for postage (and a beverage or two of your
> > choice as well.)
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Todd
> >
> > * E. Groenenberg  [160205 13:02]:
> > >
> > > While getting though some stuff, I did find a 800Bpi 9 track tape
> > > with Oregon Pascal V2.0 for RSX.
> > >
> > > Anybody interested in it? Free to get, only postage fee would be nice.
> > >
> > > Ed
> > > --
> > > Ik email, dus ik besta.
> > > BTC : 1J5fajt8ptyZ2V1YURj3YJZhe5j3fJVSHN
> > > LTC : LP2WuEmYPbpWUBqMFGJfdm7pdHEW7fKvDz
> > >
>
>

Re: Solid state recommendations

[Bryan Everly]

Thanks Dave. These look promising.

Thanks,
Bryan

> On Feb 8, 2016, at 5:07 PM, Dave G4UGM  wrote:
>
> These seem popular:-
>
> http://www.codesrc.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=SCSI2SD
>
> new version
>
> http://www.ebay.com/sch/inertialcomputing/m.html
>
>
> I have one, but I haven't used it yet.
>
> Dave
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Bryan
>> Everly
>> Sent: 08 February 2016 15:35
>> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
>> Subject: Solid state recommendations
>>
>> Hi all
>>
>> I have the following gear in my stable:
>>
>> - Sun Blade 100
>> - SGI O2
>> - VAXstation 3100
>> - AlphaStation 500
>> - HP C3700
>>
>> I would like to start eliminating spinning SCSI drives from these boxes for
>> noise, heat and capacity reasons. Could you kind folks recommend a
>> solution?  I've seen SCSI to CF converters advertised but I didn't know if
>> there was one kind over another that people have been successful with or if
>> there is a totally different approach I should be considering.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bryan
>

Re: AIX 4.1-capable box

[Benjamin Huntsman]

I was eyeballing that 7009 that still has the door.  What do you think it's 
actually worth?  I was thinking something like $200 would be generous, but then 
again I might be equally off-base...

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 8, 2016, at 3:41 PM, Kevin Bowling  wrote:
> 
> 7006 might also fit the bill.  I've got a few of the different models but
> not really looking to sell any.  eBay looks like slim pickings as well.
> One seller has a bunch of 7009s, you might try to talk him down to a
> realistic price.
> 
> If you need help comp.unix.aix on Usenet is probably a better bet.  I've
> cataloged a lot of info at http://ps-2.kev009.com/
> 
> Regards,
> 
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Benjamin Huntsman <
> bhunts...@mail2.cu-portland.edu> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Paul!
>>   Thanks for the correction.  I don't know why I thought some of those
>> had a PCI slot or two.  So nevermind the PCI part.  But I could still use a
>> box that'll run 3.2.5 up through at least 4.1.5...
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>> -Ben
>> 
>> 
>> From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of Paul Berger [
>> phb@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, February 08, 2016 9:20 AM
>> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
>> Subject: Re: AIX 4.1-capable box
>> 
>>> On 2016-02-08 1:05 PM, Benjamin Huntsman wrote:
>>> Hi there!
>>>Does anyone on here do much with RS/6000 boxes?  I'm looking for a
>> 7009-C10, 7011-250, or (mostly) PCI-based 7012 system capable of running
>> AIX 4.1.
>>>By any chance, anyone have such a system that they'd be willing to
>> sell?
>>> 
>>>Thanks much!!
>>> 
>>> -Ben
>> All of the systems you listed are microchannel machines.  The first PCI
>> machines where 7020, 7043, and 7025-F40.  The 7020 run AIX 4.1.1 and the
>> 7043-140, 240 and 7025-F40 require min 4.1.5  7043-150 requires 4.2.1.
>> 
>> Paul.
>> 

Re: VAXen and minimal memory (was Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..)

[william degnan]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Ethan Dicks  wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Jon Elson  wrote:
> > On 02/08/2016 03:23 PM, Ethan Dicks wrote:
> >>
> >> I don't know if you could use the 256K boards (populated with 4116s) in
> >> the 11/730 due to the tri-voltage 4116s, but even if they worked, you
> >> wouldn't want to - 5 of them just isn't that much RAM.
> >
> > We ran our first 11/780 with 2 memory boards.  I THINK we had a total of
> 256
> > KB, and one Friday afternoon one of them died and we had to run over the
> > weekend with only one board, so that would have been 128 KB.  Yes, it
> was a
> > bit tight on memory, but we got a LOT done on that machine.
>
> As I mentioned our first 11/750 was delivered with 512KB (we upgraded
> it pretty quickly to 8 boards for 2MB, where it ran for years).  The
> 11/750 first shipped with IIRC VMS 2.0.  My first encounters with VMS
> was around mid-1984 and VMS 3.4.  We had 8MB of memory in our second
> 11/750 but it was supporting 50+ users.
>
> That 11/750 went off-lease, we sent it back.  That's why I had to
> upgrade the other one, so we'd still have an 8MB VAX in-house.  It ran
> VMS 4.7 at the end of its days 23 years ago (we had quite a bit of
> software that wasn't available for/wasn't licensed for/wasn't under
> paid-maintenance for 5.x).  I haven't powered it up since we left that
> building (I do occasionally power up the 8300 that we got for product
> development).
>
> So I'm fairly confident that 512MB is enough for VMS 2.0 but I _think_
> by 3.0, you had to have a megabyte or two.  1.25MB would be the most
> you could stuff in a 11/730 if you could use the boards populated with
> 16Kbit DRAMs.  I don't think VMS 2.x runs on an 11/730 (but I could be
> wrong there).  We ran Ultrix 1.1 and VMS 5.0 on one of ours (with
> 5MB).  VMS 5.0 barely fit - we mostly used that to link our product
> binaries under 5.x for distribution to our customers.
>
> I do know someone in Ohio who ran VMS 5.0 on a VAX-11/725, but they
> did it by cutting a slot in the skin and running a BC11 cable out to a
> BA11 box next to the 11/725 and stuffing a UDA50 in the BA11.  With an
> external disk, there's no practical difference between an 11/725 and
> an 11/730... same CPU, same backplane, same memory... just a packaging
> difference.
>
> -ethan
>


I ran my VAX 4000-200 all day today.  I have never worked with an older
VAX.  I run VMS 6.2Today I booted off the backup drive to keep it
fresh, DIA5.  I am running MULTINET.

3 M7622 16MB RAM boards installed.  :-)

-- 
@ BillDeg:
Web: vintagecomputer.net
Twitter: @billdeg 
Youtube: @billdeg 
Unauthorized Bio 

Re: VAXen and minimal memory (was Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..)

[Ethan Dicks]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:11 PM, william degnan  wrote:
> I ran my VAX 4000-200 all day today.

Nice.

> I have never worked with an older

I happened to get a lot of opportunity in the 80s to work with VAXen,
then Alphas in the 90s and a little beyond (I haven't been paid to run
VMS since about 2003).

> VAX.  I run VMS 6.2Today I booted off the backup drive to keep it
> fresh, DIA5.  I am running MULTINET.

Nice.  We never had Ethernet back in the day - everything was async
lines (and Kermit and BLAST) and sync lines (HASP, 3780 and SNA via
our own products, plus DDCMP on DEC sync serial interfaces and a
point-to-point DECnet network)

> 3 M7622 16MB RAM boards installed.  :-)

I never had more than 8MB on a big VAX or 9MB on a MicroVAX.  I had to
go to Alphas to get that much RAM (and then, boy, did you need it!)
With 8-20 users on 9600 bps terminals, 8MB was a little pinched at
times, but mostly OK.  It kinda hurt first thing in the morning when
everyone was in VMS MAIL and soaking up a bunch of RAM, but unless we
had half our users in MAIL, a quarter of our users in business apps
like Access 20/20 (spreadsheets) or MASS-11 (word processor) _and_
someone kicking off a build with Whitesmith's C, we didn't swap much.
All this power for under $5,000 per user, terminal included, years
before $5,000 would buy you an IBM 5170 PC-AT.

-ethan

RE: Solid state recommendations

[Rob Jarratt]

For the VAX and Alpha you could just set up a cluster using SIMH and run them 
diskless

Sent from Outlook Mail for Windows 10 phone



From: Bryan Everly
Sent: 08 February 2016 21:12
To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
Subject: Solid state recommendations


Hi all

I have the following gear in my stable:

- Sun Blade 100
- SGI O2
- VAXstation 3100
- AlphaStation 500
- HP C3700

I would like to start eliminating spinning SCSI drives from these
boxes for noise, heat and capacity reasons. Could you kind folks
recommend a solution?  I've seen SCSI to CF converters advertised but
I didn't know if there was one kind over another that people have been
successful with or if there is a totally different approach I should
be considering.

Thanks,
Bryan

Re: NiCd battery replacement in vintage computers

[Maciej W. Rozycki]

On Sat, 6 Feb 2016, Chuck Guzis wrote:

> You're talking about RTC and perhaps a bit of static RAM maintenance. If this
> RTC unit is like most of the same era, the operating voltage range is quite
> wide (probably about 2-7V) and sub-1ma current draw. Chargers for this type of
> application are usually very low current, so "cooking' some AA cells is a very
> remote prospect.  This is hardly a power-hungry project.

 As a matter of interest I've checked the MC146818 datasheet and it claims 
a 50µA current draw in the usual configuration with a 32768Hz oscillator.

  Maciej

Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[Mattis Lind]

>
>
> Mine was a DEC MSV11 w/128Kbytes installed, solder filling the holes
> for the other half of the memory positions.  I did not have problems
> with traces lifting from that board (I was using an adjustable Weller
> soldering station and had fine control over the temperature).
> Installing the DIPs went fine but the first test was not successful -
> the new memory did not appear.  Quick inspection and a few bad solder
> joints found and reflowed, and two more cycles of that and I had my
> 256Mbytess.
>


Speaking of such modifications. Many, many years ago I modified a M8044 /
MSV11-D board. Removing all the 16 k chips. Replacing those with desoldered
64k chips. Burning a new address decoding PROM. One wire had to go on top
of the chips since the extra address pin used to be a supply pin of the 16k
chips. It worked after a few iterations. And it actually still works.
http://i.imgur.com/miyVaHC.png

RE: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[tony duell]

> > First week on the job in March 1980, my new boss brought me two pdp11/04s
> > and a box of memeory chips.  He to told me to double the memory in
> > the two computers by populating all the empty holes on the memory boards.
> 
> I had a boss in 1987 that asked the same of me...

I heard that when Bristol University physics department got its first VAX (an 
11/750,
somewhat before my time), it was cheaper to buy 256K memory boards full of 16K 
RAM
chips, clip them out, clean out the holes and solder in 64K RAMs rather than to 
buy 1MByte
boards full of 64K RAMs from DEC. And that is what they did

-tony

Re: NiCd battery replacement in vintage computers

[dwight]

Make sure to neutralize the leaked alkaline stuff from the cells.
Just a simple cleaning isn't enough. I use white vinegar.
Dwight



From: cctalk  on behalf of Maciej W. Rozycki 

Sent: Monday, February 8, 2016 6:55 AM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: NiCd battery replacement in vintage computers

On Sat, 6 Feb 2016, Chuck Guzis wrote:

> You're talking about RTC and perhaps a bit of static RAM maintenance. If this
> RTC unit is like most of the same era, the operating voltage range is quite
> wide (probably about 2-7V) and sub-1ma current draw. Chargers for this type of
> application are usually very low current, so "cooking' some AA cells is a very
> remote prospect.  This is hardly a power-hungry project.

 As a matter of interest I've checked the MC146818 datasheet and it claims
a 50µA current draw in the usual configuration with a 32768Hz oscillator.

  Maciej

Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[Ethan Dicks]

On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 11:57 PM, Richard Loken  wrote:
> First week on the job in March 1980, my new boss brought me two pdp11/04s
> and a box of memeory chips.  He to told me to double the memory in
> the two computers by populating all the empty holes on the memory boards.

I had a boss in 1987 that asked the same of me...

> Fortunately I started with only one memory board.
>
> All the holes were full of solder so I tried to clear the solder before
> putting in the chips.  It seemed that every time I touched the soldering
> iron to the board, any nearby traces immediately lifted and rolled up.
> I never finished the first board and I never started the second board.

Mine was a DEC MSV11 w/128Kbytes installed, solder filling the holes
for the other half of the memory positions.  I did not have problems
with traces lifting from that board (I was using an adjustable Weller
soldering station and had fine control over the temperature).
Installing the DIPs went fine but the first test was not successful -
the new memory did not appear.  Quick inspection and a few bad solder
joints found and reflowed, and two more cycles of that and I had my
256Mbytes.

-ethan

MEM11 update

[Guy Sotomayor]

Just wanted to let folks know where I am with respect to the MEM11 project.

I had decided to take a break from writing J1 code and updating the simulator 
to actually work on
the hardware.

To make things easy for myself, I decided to use my FPGA eval board and build a 
daughter board
with CPLDs and other parts (FRAMs, etc) so that I could have another vehicle 
for validating the J1
code.  This should also be a fairly simple board to build and I could focus on 
functionality (and test
points) rather than trying to make it fit into an SPC form factor.

I wrote a lot of the Verilog code for the CPLDs and quickly found out that my 
partitioning wouldn’t
fit in any reasonably sized CPLDs.  Even with some additional re-partitioning, 
it was touchy as to
if it would fit (changing a couple of lines of Verilog code caused the design 
to no longer fit).

I went back and thought about the problem and decided that the easiest thing to 
do would be to
create a non-SPC formfactor board that was SW & HW functionally correct.  So, 
I’ve been working
on writing all of the code to fit in an FPGA.  One advantage is that I could 
re-use a lot of the code
that I wrote for the CPLDs.

Last night I managed to get a reasonably clean synthesis of the design.  The 
only thing missing is
the UNIBUS code (which I hadn’t written yet).  It fits easily into the FPGA 
that I’ve chosen (a Xilinx
Spartan 3-E 500).

By going this route, I’ve discovered some incorrect assumptions that I’ve made 
in terms of how the
HW will appear to the J1 code.  So I have to update the simulator to match this 
and the relevant J1
code.

So, things are moving forward.  I also wanted to get folk's opinion on the need 
to actually produce
an SBC form factor board.  In other words (and sort of in line with how 
peripherals were done on the
original 11/20) is it OK to have the MEM11 be outside of the 11/20 chassis and 
connect via BC11A
(my replica) cables?

I wanted to put that out, because it may require a fair amount of work to make 
everything fit into an
SPC form factor.  That’s assuming of course that the power requirements for the 
MEM11 can be
fulfilled by a single SPC slot.  One of the things that I can do with the 
“prototype” is actually measure
the incoming power.  I’m hoping that it will but in the worst case, it may 
require splitting the MEM11
functionality across multiple boards.

TTFN - Guy

6502 CPUs

[Adrian Graham]

Hi folks,

Having had another bit of CBM kit with a failed CPU I'm wondering where you
lovely US folk get your spares from since ebay seems a bit ridiculous for
replacements at ukp8 a pop being the lowest price. They're surely not THAT
valuable?

I know Mouser have got the 're-released' WDC 65C02 which I may end up going
for since for 10 they're as low as ukp4.37, but don't us collectors have
bundles of spares?

Funny when I think of the number of BBC Micros that have been tossed over
the years

-- 
Adrian/Witchy
Binary Dinosaurs creator/curator
Www.binarydinosaurs.co.uk - the UK's biggest private home computer
collection?

Re: Programming

[Ian S. King]

On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Murray McCullough <
c.murray.mccullo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> There is the software side to classic computing: Back in the early
> days we wrote/coded in BASIC-TinyBASIC running in 2K(talk about
> writing efficient code!); EASY and SmallFORTRAN. What apps/programs
> are written in today I don’t know. They certainly can’t run in 2 or 4
> K but is the outcome the same – make a computer or computer-like
> machine do what we want it to.
>

How about FORTH?  I've always been fond of it, even if it is a write-only
language.  There's a version called SOL-11 that will run in 4kW on a
PDP-11, but it requires the EIS - so much for running that on my PDP-11/20.


-- 
Ian S. King, MSIS, MSCS, Ph.D. Candidate
The Information School 
Dissertation: "Why the Conversation Mattered: Constructing a Sociotechnical
Narrative Through a Design Lens

Archivist, Voices From the Rwanda Tribunal 
Value Sensitive Design Research Lab 

University of Washington

There is an old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China."

RE: AIX 4.1-capable box

[Benjamin Huntsman]

Hi Paul!
   Thanks for the correction.  I don't know why I thought some of those had a 
PCI slot or two.  So nevermind the PCI part.  But I could still use a box 
that'll run 3.2.5 up through at least 4.1.5...

Thanks!

-Ben


From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of Paul Berger 
[phb@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, February 08, 2016 9:20 AM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: AIX 4.1-capable box

On 2016-02-08 1:05 PM, Benjamin Huntsman wrote:
> Hi there!
> Does anyone on here do much with RS/6000 boxes?  I'm looking for a 
> 7009-C10, 7011-250, or (mostly) PCI-based 7012 system capable of running AIX 
> 4.1.
> By any chance, anyone have such a system that they'd be willing to sell?
>
> Thanks much!!
>
> -Ben
All of the systems you listed are microchannel machines.  The first PCI
machines where 7020, 7043, and 7025-F40.  The 7020 run AIX 4.1.1 and the
7043-140, 240 and 7025-F40 require min 4.1.5  7043-150 requires 4.2.1.

Paul.

RE: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[tony duell]

> 
> > I heard that when Bristol University physics department got its first VAX 
> > (an 11/750,
> > somewhat before my time), it was cheaper to buy 256K memory boards full of 
> > 16K RAM
> > chips, clip them out, clean out the holes and solder in 64K RAMs rather 
> > than to buy 1MByte
> > boards full of 64K RAMs from DEC. And that is what they did
> >
> >
> I assume they didn't buy a service contract with that

Almost certainly not. When I was there (many years later) we
did a lot of self-maintenance on everything. 

> machine?  I doubt DEC would be real happy with that.  Also,
> the 64K RAM chips need an extra address pin, were the boards
> laid out with that signal already in place?

Yes. IIRC there were some jumpers to re-set, but the boards were the same.

-tony

Re: Programming

[Ian S. King]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Paul Koning  wrote:

>
> > On Feb 8, 2016, at 12:31 PM, Ian S. King  wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Murray McCullough <
> > c.murray.mccullo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> There is the software side to classic computing: Back in the early
> >> days we wrote/coded in BASIC-TinyBASIC running in 2K(talk about
> >> writing efficient code!); EASY and SmallFORTRAN. What apps/programs
> >> are written in today I don’t know. They certainly can’t run in 2 or 4
> >> K but is the outcome the same – make a computer or computer-like
> >> machine do what we want it to.
> >>
> >
> > How about FORTH?  I've always been fond of it, even if it is a write-only
> > language.  There's a version called SOL-11 that will run in 4kW on a
> > PDP-11, but it requires the EIS - so much for running that on my
> PDP-11/20.
>
> There's FIG-Forth for the PDP11.  That has a few EIS instructions in it
> but that would be quite easy to change.
>
> paul
>
>
> FIG-Forth runs on RT-11, right?  I only have the original 4kW in my
11/20

-- 
Ian S. King, MSIS, MSCS, Ph.D. Candidate
The Information School 
Dissertation: "Why the Conversation Mattered: Constructing a Sociotechnical
Narrative Through a Design Lens

Archivist, Voices From the Rwanda Tribunal 
Value Sensitive Design Research Lab 

University of Washington

There is an old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China."

Re: AIX 4.1-capable box

[Paul Berger]

On 2016-02-08 1:05 PM, Benjamin Huntsman wrote:

Hi there!
Does anyone on here do much with RS/6000 boxes?  I'm looking for a 
7009-C10, 7011-250, or (mostly) PCI-based 7012 system capable of running AIX 
4.1.
By any chance, anyone have such a system that they'd be willing to sell?

Thanks much!!

-Ben
All of the systems you listed are microchannel machines.  The first PCI 
machines where 7020, 7043, and 7025-F40.  The 7020 run AIX 4.1.1 and the 
7043-140, 240 and 7025-F40 require min 4.1.5  7043-150 requires 4.2.1.


Paul.

Re: Programming

[Paul Koning]

> On Feb 8, 2016, at 12:31 PM, Ian S. King  wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Murray McCullough <
> c.murray.mccullo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> There is the software side to classic computing: Back in the early
>> days we wrote/coded in BASIC-TinyBASIC running in 2K(talk about
>> writing efficient code!); EASY and SmallFORTRAN. What apps/programs
>> are written in today I don’t know. They certainly can’t run in 2 or 4
>> K but is the outcome the same – make a computer or computer-like
>> machine do what we want it to.
>> 
> 
> How about FORTH?  I've always been fond of it, even if it is a write-only
> language.  There's a version called SOL-11 that will run in 4kW on a
> PDP-11, but it requires the EIS - so much for running that on my PDP-11/20.

There's FIG-Forth for the PDP11.  That has a few EIS instructions in it but 
that would be quite easy to change.  

paul

Re: Programming

[Paul Koning]

> On Feb 8, 2016, at 12:44 PM, Ian S. King  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Paul Koning  wrote:
>> ...
>> There's FIG-Forth for the PDP11.  That has a few EIS instructions in it
>> but that would be quite easy to change.
>> 
>>paul
>> 
>> 
>> FIG-Forth runs on RT-11, right?  I only have the original 4kW in my
> 11/20

The version I first saw was for RT-11, yes.  But converting it for bare metal 
is not a big job; the I/O is very basic.

paul

Re: MEM11 update

[Ethan Dicks]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Guy Sotomayor  wrote:
>> On 2/8/16 10:09 AM, Guy Sotomayor wrote:
>>> So, things are moving forward.  I also wanted to get folk's opinion on
>>> the need to actually produce
>>> an SPC form factor board.  In other words (and sort of in line with how
>>> peripherals were done on the
>>> original 11/20) is it OK to have the MEM11 be outside of the 11/20
>>> chassis and connect via BC11A (my replica) cables?

For my own case, I have a 3-box 11/20 that I need to restore (as I've posted
before, it was chopped apart and dumpstered, and I recovered it from there).
The majority of the second and third boxes is MM11-E core memory units
(I have N-1 because one of my co-workers nabbed a core plane to hang on
the wall).  My plan with the MEM11 has been to restore the CPU cabinet
and use the memory on the MEM11 instead of the MM11-E units, leaving
me plenty of space and power supply for peripherals with the ultimate goal
of running UNIX v1 on it (I also have an RK11C that would be a secondary
restoration project, or an RK11D that should "just work")

With that, I had been expecting that the MEM11 would be an SPC board
that would just sit in a DD11CK with some other periperhals.  Apparently,
it's sounding like there's too much "stuff" for a single quad-height card then?
Is it component density or having to go to a 4-layer board that's an issue?

> As Ian stated in a subsequent post, it'll probably be something like a 1U
> box with appropriate power supply.

That will certainly be functional, but it seems to up the cost quite a bit.

I would rather have an external something that works than not have
anything at all, but I think an SPC, if possible, would be the most
portable of solutions.

If this was an external device, would it just have a pair of 60-pin cables
to your replica BC11A?  Would it then have an onboard terminator or
option to install a terminator?  I get that you won't be selling the MEM11
as a bare board, but it doesn't seem that the intended audience would
be put out by soldering their own 60-pin connectors and/or a bunch of
terminating resistors if it needed to be at the end of a chain or in the
middle.

-ethan

Re: MEM11 update

[Guy Sotomayor]

> On Feb 8, 2016, at 1:03 PM, Ethan Dicks  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Guy Sotomayor  wrote:
>>> On 2/8/16 10:09 AM, Guy Sotomayor wrote:
 So, things are moving forward.  I also wanted to get folk's opinion on
 the need to actually produce
 an SPC form factor board.  In other words (and sort of in line with how
 peripherals were done on the
 original 11/20) is it OK to have the MEM11 be outside of the 11/20
 chassis and connect via BC11A (my replica) cables?
> 
> For my own case, I have a 3-box 11/20 that I need to restore (as I've posted
> before, it was chopped apart and dumpstered, and I recovered it from there).
> The majority of the second and third boxes is MM11-E core memory units
> (I have N-1 because one of my co-workers nabbed a core plane to hang on
> the wall).  My plan with the MEM11 has been to restore the CPU cabinet
> and use the memory on the MEM11 instead of the MM11-E units, leaving
> me plenty of space and power supply for peripherals with the ultimate goal
> of running UNIX v1 on it (I also have an RK11C that would be a secondary
> restoration project, or an RK11D that should "just work")
> 
> With that, I had been expecting that the MEM11 would be an SPC board
> that would just sit in a DD11CK with some other periperhals.  Apparently,
> it's sounding like there's too much "stuff" for a single quad-height card 
> then?

I don’t know at this point but I’m getting “uncomfortable” with the amount of
“stuff” on this board (most can’t really be helped).  I won’t know until I sit 
down
and do serious board layout.  The prototype will tell me a lot.

> Is it component density or having to go to a 4-layer board that's an issue?

It’s component density.  I have been assuming a 4-layer board from the get-go.

The other issue is daisy chaining of some of the signals.  I’m already running
out of pins on the PQFP and that just adds to the congestion.  I could probably
handle some of that with a small CPLD but again that adds to the board
congestion.

> 
>> As Ian stated in a subsequent post, it'll probably be something like a 1U
>> box with appropriate power supply.
> 
> That will certainly be functional, but it seems to up the cost quite a bit.
> 
> I would rather have an external something that works than not have
> anything at all, but I think an SPC, if possible, would be the most
> portable of solutions.

Yep.  I’m going the external route for the prototype for ease of development
and debugging.  I’d like to be able to do it in an SPC form factor.

> 
> If this was an external device, would it just have a pair of 60-pin cables
> to your replica BC11A?  Would it then have an onboard terminator or
> option to install a terminator?  I get that you won't be selling the MEM11
> as a bare board, but it doesn't seem that the intended audience would
> be put out by soldering their own 60-pin connectors and/or a bunch of
> terminating resistors if it needed to be at the end of a chain or in the
> middle.

Yes, I’ll probably put in two sets of connectors (in & out) so that it could be
in a chain or the option to install terminators.

Anything optional will be in sockets.  I’ll be putting the UNIBUS transceivers
in sockets because I can’t afford the overage that I’d need to provide to the
board house for assembly.

TTFN - Guy

Re: MEM11 update

[Guy Sotomayor]

> On Feb 8, 2016, at 1:29 PM, Ethan Dicks  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Guy Sotomayor  wrote:
>> Anything optional will be in sockets.  I’ll be putting the UNIBUS 
>> transceivers
>> in sockets because I can’t afford the overage that I’d need to provide to the
>> board house for assembly.
> 
> I'm starting to get sorry I sold off my surplus NS8641s from Software Results
> 20 years ago.  To be fair, I did get over $4 each for them, so at the
> time, it was
> a good deal for me (ISTR retail was $7.50 even then, so I got a good spread
> on the price).
> 
> I do have some left, but handfuls, not armloads.

Yea, I have enough of the various parts for ~25 boards.  I *think* I may have
more in the “basement” of my shop but I won’t know until I start to unpack it.

I’ll eventually have to come up with some sort of alternative (not pin 
compatible)
but that’s OK since one of the things that sucks up the board space is the 5v to
3.3v level translation (and going to/from tri-state, etc, etc).

TTFN - Guy

Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[Jos Dreesen]

On 07.02.2016 22:49, Jay West wrote:

Jos wrote...
--
restoration is to start next winter, after a house move which will nearly 
double working area for the hobby.
--
Bhahahahaha From experience... it will never be enough space. Double it 
again. Still won't be enough. These things reproduce *grin*

J




Na, Swiss real estate prices will very soon put a limit on that !

Jos (currently sharing the studyroom with 6 filled 19"racks)

Re: MEM11 update

[Guy Sotomayor]

> On Feb 8, 2016, at 12:43 PM, Noel Chiappa  wrote:
> 
>> From: Guy Sotomayor
> 
> 
>> I also wanted to get folk's opinion on the need to actually produce an
>> S[P]C form factor board. ... is it OK to have the MEM11 be outside of
>> the 11/20 chassis and connect via BC11A (my replica) cables?
> 
> Well, that's going to up the cost; for some people, that might be an issue.

The reality (unfortunately) is that no matter what solution I take, it’s not
going to be inexpensive.  The reality is that an SPC board will be more
expensive because of the gold edge fingers.

The other thing is that the boards will be fully assembled.  Except for some
connectors and the UNIBUS transceivers, everything else is surface mount.
I’m still crossing my fingers that I can keep within the 208 pin PQFP for the
FPGA and not have to move into a BGA part.

> 
> Also, I dunno if there are people out there with table-top 11/15's-20's (they
> did exist BITD, I worked with a table-top one), but for them, an additional
> box might be a hassle too.
> 
>> That's assuming of course that the power requirements for the MEM11
>> can be fulfilled by a single SPC slot. ... in the worst case, it may
>> require splitting the MEM11 functionality across multiple boards.
> 
> I guess I don't see the harm in making it two SPC (quad) boards? A flat cable
> or two to connect across (I dunno how extensive the interconnect requirements
> between the halves would be, and I have forgotten what the inter-slot
> interconnect capabilities of an SPC backplane are - ISTR that it has some
> bussing on the F section pins) would be easy and cheap.

See above re: gold edge fingers.  I was originally thinking that if I do have to
split the board up, that I’d make them completely independent.  But that has 
the issue of requiring 2x the number of UNIBUS transceiver parts (which are
all but unobtainium as of now).  One of the things that drives up the power (and
board area) are said transceivers (and level shifters, etc).  If I could come up
with a reasonable alternative for the SPC version, that may work.  But that’s
all in the future at the moment.

TTFN - Guy

Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[Mattis Lind]

2016-02-08 16:25 GMT+01:00 tony duell :

> >
> > I have one of these on my restoration list. I know the PSU does not
> work, and that others
> > have tried to fix it before me, who probably know PSUs much better than
> I do. It has core
> >  memory so I really would like to get his one fixed. I have never seen a
> PSU for it come
> >  available in the UK or Europe, so it looks like it won't be an easy
> job. :-(
>
> Which mounting box is it? (The 11/04 could certainly come in 5.25" and
> 10.5" versions, there
> may have been several versions of each). The common 10.5" one, BA11-K
> IIRC, is a fairly
> easy supply to work on, it's a big mains transformer and the DEC switching
> regulator bricks.
> The common 5.25" one, with the H777 PSU, is a bit more nasty, the H777 is
> a normal-ish
> SMPSU. I have worked on both.
>

The H765 PSU in the BA11-K and the H777 supply in the BA11-L are fairly
similar. Both have a big mains transformer. Both have the switchers on the
low voltage side, so they are fairly easy to work with both of them. The
big advantage with the H765 is the modular design.


> -tony
>

RE: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[tony duell]

> 
> I have one of these on my restoration list. I know the PSU does not work, and 
> that others
> have tried to fix it before me, who probably know PSUs much better than I do. 
> It has core
>  memory so I really would like to get his one fixed. I have never seen a PSU 
> for it come
>  available in the UK or Europe, so it looks like it won't be an easy job. :-(

Which mounting box is it? (The 11/04 could certainly come in 5.25" and 10.5" 
versions, there
may have been several versions of each). The common 10.5" one, BA11-K IIRC, is 
a fairly
easy supply to work on, it's a big mains transformer and the DEC switching 
regulator bricks.
The common 5.25" one, with the H777 PSU, is a bit more nasty, the H777 is a 
normal-ish
SMPSU. I have worked on both.

-tony

Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[Henk Gooijen]

> -Original Message-
> From: cctech [mailto:cctech-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Jos
> Dreesen
> Sent: 07 February 2016 17:55
> To: classic...@classiccmp.org
> Subject: The PDP11/04 has landed..
>
> Yesterday I picked up the PDP11/04 that Jay mentioned a few days ago.
> Less than 15 miles from home  !




On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Robert Jarratt 
wrote:

I have one of these on my restoration list. I know the PSU does not work,
and that others have tried to fix it before me, who probably know PSUs 
much

better than I do. It has core memory so I really would like to get his one
fixed. I have never seen a PSU for it come available in the UK or Europe,
so it looks like it won't be an easy job. :-(

Regards

Rob



-Oorspronkelijk bericht- 
From: Pete Lancashire

Sent: Monday, February 08, 2016 2:20 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic Posts
Cc: classic...@classiccmp.org ; jdr_...@bluewin.ch
Subject: Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..

Until one can restore the original power supply, it is pretty easy to
substitute a modern supply, good quality used commercial grade switchers
with remote sensing can but put on a rack shelf. But if you take that
route, be very very careful of Chinese supplies.

--
Jos,
great catch!  And so close to home ... you're very lucky ;-)

Rob,
the PSU of the 11/04 has a big transformer in the primary. Secondary
is just 24-30 VAC. The "bricks" are not overwhelming complicated.
They all have the 24 VAC as input which is rectified by a bridge and
followed by a big capacitor. There is also a fuse. A first check would
be these 3 components. Then the uA723 (or LM723) regulator ...
Only the +15V (or is it the -15V?) needs the - (or +) 15V besides
the 24VAC input.

Pete,
although you could use a "modern power supply", nothing beats
the original stuff. Also you need some some components to
generate the AC LO and DC LO signals. The 11/04 needs them.

- Henk 

Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[Ethan Dicks]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:33 PM, tony duell  wrote:
>> > I heard that when Bristol University physics department got its first VAX 
>> > (an 11/750,
>> > somewhat before my time), it was cheaper to buy 256K memory boards full of 
>> > 16K RAM
>> > chips, clip them out, clean out the holes and solder in 64K RAMs rather 
>> > than to buy 1MByte
>> > boards full of 64K RAMs from DEC. And that is what they did
>
>> machine?  I doubt DEC would be real happy with that.  Also,
>> the 64K RAM chips need an extra address pin, were the boards
>> laid out with that signal already in place?
>
> Yes. IIRC there were some jumpers to re-set, but the boards were the same.

Yep.  The boards were used in the 11/70, the 11/730, and the 11/750.
I don't know if
you could use the 256K boards (populated with 4116s) in the 11/730 due
to the tri-voltage
4116s, but even if they worked, you wouldn't want to - 5 of them just
isn't that much RAM.

In the case of the 11/750, one of mine, BT000354 (early S/N) shipped from DEC
with 512KB as two M8728 (256K) boards that I later upgraded to 8MB by removing
the old memory boards and memory controller board, adding eight M8750 boards (it
was not worth clipping and upgrading the actual boards at the time - 1MB boards
were under $300 each by then), and L0016 memory controller board (8MB max)
and adding the additional multiplexed address line to the memory slots.  We ran
it that way for many years.

-ethan

Re: MEM11 update

[Ian S. King]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Al Kossow  wrote:

>
>
> On 2/8/16 10:09 AM, Guy Sotomayor wrote:
>
>> So, things are moving forward.  I also wanted to get folk's opinion on
>> the need to actually produce
>> an SBC form factor board.  In other words (and sort of in line with how
>> peripherals were done on the
>> original 11/20) is it OK to have the MEM11 be outside of the 11/20
>> chassis and connect via BC11A
>> (my replica) cables?
>>
>>
>> main problem would be now you'll have to come up with a box and a power
> supply
>
> I assume you meant SPC (quad unibus) and not SBC
>
>
>
I'm envisioning a 1U enclosure connecting to the 11/20 by BC11A, as you
suggest.  The device could have its own PSU to avoid the risk of
overloading the 11/20's supply, and fit in a standard rack if desired.
Make it so!  :-)

-- 
Ian S. King, MSIS, MSCS, Ph.D. Candidate
The Information School 
Dissertation: "Why the Conversation Mattered: Constructing a Sociotechnical
Narrative Through a Design Lens

Archivist, Voices From the Rwanda Tribunal 
Value Sensitive Design Research Lab 

University of Washington

There is an old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China."

Re: Programming

[Noel Chiappa]

> From: Ian S. King

> so much for running that on my PDP-11/20

If you have an actual 11/20, you should be ecstatic! ;-)

Noel

Re: MEM11 update

[Guy Sotomayor]

On 2/8/16 11:53 AM, Al Kossow wrote:



On 2/8/16 10:09 AM, Guy Sotomayor wrote:
So, things are moving forward.  I also wanted to get folk's opinion 
on the need to actually produce
an SBC form factor board.  In other words (and sort of in line with 
how peripherals were done on the
original 11/20) is it OK to have the MEM11 be outside of the 11/20 
chassis and connect via BC11A

(my replica) cables?


main problem would be now you'll have to come up with a box and a 
power supply
As Ian stated in a subsequent post, it'll probably be something like a 
1U box with appropriate power
supply.  When I get to the point of doing serious board layout, then 
I'll start looking at board outlines
(with appropriate mounting holes and power supply connectors) that would 
fit in a reasonable

enclosure.

I'm hoping that my "prototype" will be sufficient where I don't need to 
re-layout the board for
production.  There may be extra pads for stuff (various test 
connectors/test points) that won't

be stuffed for production...but that's all a bit down the road.


I assume you meant SPC (quad unibus) and not SBC


Yes, typo!  :-(

TTFN  - Guy

Re: Programming

[Ian S. King]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Noel Chiappa 
wrote:

> > From: Ian S. King
>
> > so much for running that on my PDP-11/20
>
> If you have an actual 11/20, you should be ecstatic! ;-)
>
> Noel
>

Yes, its faceplate reads 'PDP-11', not 'PDP-11/20'.

-- 
Ian S. King, MSIS, MSCS, Ph.D. Candidate
The Information School 
Dissertation: "Why the Conversation Mattered: Constructing a Sociotechnical
Narrative Through a Design Lens

Archivist, Voices From the Rwanda Tribunal 
Value Sensitive Design Research Lab 

University of Washington

There is an old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China."

Re: Programming

[Christian Groessler]

On 02/07/16 09:31, n...@farumdata.dk wrote:

I really hate this damned machine
I wish that they would sell it
it never does quite what I want
but only what I tell it



I'm still working on a "do-what-I-want" program. It's difficult to 
implement...


But I already have a good idea of the layout of the GUI version:

Just one big red button in the middle of the window with description "Do 
what I want".


:-)

regards,
chris

Re: MEM11 update

[Noel Chiappa]

> From: Guy Sotomayor


> I also wanted to get folk's opinion on the need to actually produce an
> S[P]C form factor board. ... is it OK to have the MEM11 be outside of
> the 11/20 chassis and connect via BC11A (my replica) cables?

Well, that's going to up the cost; for some people, that might be an issue.

Also, I dunno if there are people out there with table-top 11/15's-20's (they
did exist BITD, I worked with a table-top one), but for them, an additional
box might be a hassle too.

> That's assuming of course that the power requirements for the MEM11
> can be fulfilled by a single SPC slot. ... in the worst case, it may
> require splitting the MEM11 functionality across multiple boards.

I guess I don't see the harm in making it two SPC (quad) boards? A flat cable
or two to connect across (I dunno how extensive the interconnect requirements
between the halves would be, and I have forgotten what the inter-slot
interconnect capabilities of an SPC backplane are - ISTR that it has some
bussing on the F section pins) would be easy and cheap.

Noel

Re: Programming

[Ian S. King]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Christian Groessler 
wrote:

> On 02/07/16 09:31, n...@farumdata.dk wrote:
>
>> I really hate this damned machine
>> I wish that they would sell it
>> it never does quite what I want
>> but only what I tell it
>>
>
>
> I'm still working on a "do-what-I-want" program. It's difficult to
> implement...
>
> But I already have a good idea of the layout of the GUI version:
>
> Just one big red button in the middle of the window with description "Do
> what I want".
>
> :-)
>
> regards,
> chris
>
>
I recall a version of Prolog that had a DWIM ('do what I mean') mode, which
applied some heuristics to minimize the impact of typos.  I'm not sure that
I like the idea of the machine second-guessing my logic - I usually leave
that to my Spousal Unit.  -- Ian

-- 
Ian S. King, MSIS, MSCS, Ph.D. Candidate
The Information School 
Dissertation: "Why the Conversation Mattered: Constructing a Sociotechnical
Narrative Through a Design Lens

Archivist, Voices From the Rwanda Tribunal 
Value Sensitive Design Research Lab 

University of Washington

There is an old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China."

Re: Programming

[Dan K]

This reminds me that last year when MARCH (Mid-Atlantic Retro
Computing Hobbyists) restored a PDP-8 that had come from a high school
computing club, they dumped the magnetic core memory and found three
programs:

1. A program to dump memory contents to paper tape

2. Some common utilities for debugging

3. At address 200 there was a program that had a fatal bug in it, but
had the young high school programmer been successful in fixing it, it
would've printed out the string "COMPUTERS ARE SHIT."

-Dan

On 2/8/16, Christian Groessler  wrote:
> On 02/07/16 09:31, n...@farumdata.dk wrote:
>> I really hate this damned machine
>> I wish that they would sell it
>> it never does quite what I want
>> but only what I tell it
>
>
> I'm still working on a "do-what-I-want" program. It's difficult to
> implement...
>
> But I already have a good idea of the layout of the GUI version:
>
> Just one big red button in the middle of the window with description "Do
> what I want".
>
> :-)
>
> regards,
> chris
>
>

Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[Pete Lancashire]

Until one can restore the original power supply, it is pretty easy to
substitute a modern supply, good quality used commercial grade switchers
with remote sensing can but put on a rack shelf. But if you take that
route, be very very careful of Chinese supplies.

On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Robert Jarratt 
wrote:

>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: cctech [mailto:cctech-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Jos
> > Dreesen
> > Sent: 07 February 2016 17:55
> > To: classic...@classiccmp.org
> > Subject: The PDP11/04 has landed..
> >
> >
> >
> > Yesterday I picked up the PDP11/04 that Jay mentioned a few days ago.
> > Less than 15 miles from home  !
> >
> > The machine spend its early days as a processor in chemical analysis
> > apparatus, and was subsequently bought by the employee using it.
> > Before he could make use of it better, more powerful, easier to use
> > machines came along and the -11 spend the next 30 years in a garage.
> >
> >
> > The -04 is an entry level machine, and the cards inside match this :
> >
> >  M7263 KD11 CPU
> > 2 x M7264 16K DRAM cards
> >  M7856 DL11 SLU/RTC
> >  M7846 RX01 controller
> > 2 x M7814 DZ11-F
> >
> > and of course the M9301, M9302 and M9202.
> > Alas it has just the simple 2-switch frontpanel.
> >
> > The machine also had the battery backup option, and the lead/acid
> batteries
> > will celebrate their 40th birthday next year !
> > Better not try to charge them
> >
> >
> > Overall the machine is in very good condition, both CPU and RX01, and it
> is
> > packed in a very nice half-height rack with the red PDP11 bezel at the
> top.
> > Pictures next week when the machine is cleaned and reassembled,
> > restoration is to start next winter, after a house move which will nearly
> > double working area for the hobby.
> >
> > Many thanks to Roland for preserving the machine, and to Jay for acting
> as an
> > interface !
> >
>
>
> I have one of these on my restoration list. I know the PSU does not work,
> and that others have tried to fix it before me, who probably know PSUs much
> better than I do. It has core memory so I really would like to get his one
> fixed. I have never seen a PSU for it come available in the UK or Europe,
> so it looks like it won't be an easy job. :-(
>
> Regards
>
> Rob
>
>
>

RE: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[Robert Jarratt]

> -Original Message-
> From: cctech [mailto:cctech-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of tony
> duell
> Sent: 08 February 2016 15:25
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic Posts ;
> jdr_...@bluewin.ch; classic...@classiccmp.org
> Subject: RE: The PDP11/04 has landed..
> 
> >
> > I have one of these on my restoration list. I know the PSU does not
> > work, and that others have tried to fix it before me, who probably
> > know PSUs much better than I do. It has core  memory so I really would
> > like to get his one fixed. I have never seen a PSU for it come
> > available in the UK or Europe, so it looks like it won't be an easy
> > job. :-(
> 
> Which mounting box is it? (The 11/04 could certainly come in 5.25" and
10.5"
> versions, there may have been several versions of each). The common 10.5"
> one, BA11-K IIRC, is a fairly easy supply to work on, it's a big mains
> transformer and the DEC switching regulator bricks.
> The common 5.25" one, with the H777 PSU, is a bit more nasty, the H777 is
a
> normal-ish SMPSU. I have worked on both.
> 


Sadly it is a H777. I have not even opened it up to look at yet. Until
recently I was fixing the PSU in my rtVAX 1000 (H7864, in a BA23) and the
H7874 from my VAX 4000-500, then I would still like to fix the H7140 from my
11/24, before getting to this one.

Regards

Rob

RE: The PDP11/04 has landed..

[Robert Jarratt]

> -Original Message-
> From: cctech [mailto:cctech-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Pete
> Lancashire
> Sent: 08 February 2016 13:20
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic Posts 
> Cc: classic...@classiccmp.org; jdr_...@bluewin.ch
> Subject: Re: The PDP11/04 has landed..
> 
> Until one can restore the original power supply, it is pretty easy to 
> substitute
> a modern supply, good quality used commercial grade switchers with remote
> sensing can but put on a rack shelf. But if you take that route, be very very
> careful of Chinese supplies.
> 

I should look at that idea.

Regards

Rob

Solid state recommendations

[Bryan Everly]

Hi all

I have the following gear in my stable:

- Sun Blade 100
- SGI O2
- VAXstation 3100
- AlphaStation 500
- HP C3700

I would like to start eliminating spinning SCSI drives from these
boxes for noise, heat and capacity reasons. Could you kind folks
recommend a solution?  I've seen SCSI to CF converters advertised but
I didn't know if there was one kind over another that people have been
successful with or if there is a totally different approach I should
be considering.

Thanks,
Bryan

Re: Solid state recommendations

[pdaguytom .]

I'm pretty sure that the Sun Blade 100 uses IDE, one of the cheap IDE to CF
cards from ebay would likely work there. I've usually bought these in bulk
and have been less than picky (other than price☺) about these and have not
had any issues.
The SCSI to CF have always been a bit spendy for my taste, it was always
easier to find the next cheap used SCSI drive.

Tom

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Bryan Everly 
wrote:

> Hi all
>
> I have the following gear in my stable:
>
> - Sun Blade 100
> - SGI O2
> - VAXstation 3100
> - AlphaStation 500
> - HP C3700
>
> I would like to start eliminating spinning SCSI drives from these
> boxes for noise, heat and capacity reasons. Could you kind folks
> recommend a solution?  I've seen SCSI to CF converters advertised but
> I didn't know if there was one kind over another that people have been
> successful with or if there is a totally different approach I should
> be considering.
>
> Thanks,
> Bryan
>

Re: MEM11 update

[Ian S. King]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Guy Sotomayor  wrote:

>
> > On Feb 8, 2016, at 12:43 PM, Noel Chiappa 
> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Guy Sotomayor
> >
> >
> >> I also wanted to get folk's opinion on the need to actually produce an
> >> S[P]C form factor board. ... is it OK to have the MEM11 be outside of
> >> the 11/20 chassis and connect via BC11A (my replica) cables?
> >
> > Well, that's going to up the cost; for some people, that might be an
> issue.
>
> The reality (unfortunately) is that no matter what solution I take, it’s
> not
> going to be inexpensive.  The reality is that an SPC board will be more
> expensive because of the gold edge fingers.
>
> The other thing is that the boards will be fully assembled.  Except for
> some
> connectors and the UNIBUS transceivers, everything else is surface mount.
> I’m still crossing my fingers that I can keep within the 208 pin PQFP for
> the
> FPGA and not have to move into a BGA part.
>
> >
> > Also, I dunno if there are people out there with table-top 11/15's-20's
> (they
> > did exist BITD, I worked with a table-top one), but for them, an
> additional
> > box might be a hassle too.
> >
> >> That's assuming of course that the power requirements for the MEM11
> >> can be fulfilled by a single SPC slot. ... in the worst case, it may
> >> require splitting the MEM11 functionality across multiple boards.
> >
> > I guess I don't see the harm in making it two SPC (quad) boards? A flat
> cable
> > or two to connect across (I dunno how extensive the interconnect
> requirements
> > between the halves would be, and I have forgotten what the inter-slot
> > interconnect capabilities of an SPC backplane are - ISTR that it has some
> > bussing on the F section pins) would be easy and cheap.
>
> See above re: gold edge fingers.  I was originally thinking that if I do
> have to
> split the board up, that I’d make them completely independent.  But that
> has
> the issue of requiring 2x the number of UNIBUS transceiver parts (which are
> all but unobtainium as of now).  One of the things that drives up the
> power (and
> board area) are said transceivers (and level shifters, etc).  If I could
> come up
> with a reasonable alternative for the SPC version, that may work.  But
> that’s
> all in the future at the moment.
>
> TTFN - Guy
>
>
A thought: would a second quad board necessarily need transceivers?  I'm
thinking of the top-block connectors used in the PDP-8, and the top-plugged
ribbon cables for e.g., MicroVAX II CPU-to-memory connection.  You might
still want to grab power through a few fingers, but that's an
implementation detail.  -- Ian

-- 
Ian S. King, MSIS, MSCS, Ph.D. Candidate
The Information School 
Dissertation: "Why the Conversation Mattered: Constructing a Sociotechnical
Narrative Through a Design Lens

Archivist, Voices From the Rwanda Tribunal 
Value Sensitive Design Research Lab 

University of Washington

There is an old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China."

Re: MEM11 update

[Guy Sotomayor]

> On Feb 8, 2016, at 1:08 PM, Ian S. King  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> See above re: gold edge fingers.  I was originally thinking that if I do
>> have to
>> split the board up, that I’d make them completely independent.  But that
>> has
>> the issue of requiring 2x the number of UNIBUS transceiver parts (which are
>> all but unobtainium as of now).  One of the things that drives up the
>> power (and
>> board area) are said transceivers (and level shifters, etc).  If I could
>> come up
>> with a reasonable alternative for the SPC version, that may work.  But
>> that’s
>> all in the future at the moment.
>> 
>> TTFN - Guy
>> 
>> 
> A thought: would a second quad board necessarily need transceivers?  I'm
> thinking of the top-block connectors used in the PDP-8, and the top-plugged
> ribbon cables for e.g., MicroVAX II CPU-to-memory connection.  You might
> still want to grab power through a few fingers, but that's an
> implementation detail.  — Ian
> 

I’m not a particular fan of that because some of the signals I’m running are
pretty fast between the FPGA and some of the other components (~40ns
cycle time for the FRAMs for example).  I wouldn’t want to run those signals
very far and certainly not across any sort of cabling.

It’s not clear to me (yet) how I could partition the design across 2 SPC boards.

TTFN - Guy

Re: MEM11 update

[Ethan Dicks]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Guy Sotomayor  wrote:
> Anything optional will be in sockets.  I’ll be putting the UNIBUS transceivers
> in sockets because I can’t afford the overage that I’d need to provide to the
> board house for assembly.

I'm starting to get sorry I sold off my surplus NS8641s from Software Results
20 years ago.  To be fair, I did get over $4 each for them, so at the
time, it was
a good deal for me (ISTR retail was $7.50 even then, so I got a good spread
on the price).

I do have some left, but handfuls, not armloads.

-ethan

Re: NiCd battery replacement in vintage computers

[Mark J. Blair]

> On Feb 8, 2016, at 07:08 , dwight  wrote:
> 
> Make sure to neutralize the leaked alkaline stuff from the cells.
> Just a simple cleaning isn't enough. I use white vinegar.

I physically removed the affected area down to bare copper and fiberglass:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cajr9LcUiIq.jpg:large


> On Feb 8, 2016, at 08:30 , Chuck Guzis  wrote:
> 
> 
> Yup.  And things have only gotten better with time.  I suspect that you could 
> power the '818 RTC with a few slices of potato and scavenged wire for several 
> months.


Or at least until I get hungry. :)

-- 
Mark J. Blair, NF6X 
http://www.nf6x.net/

6502 CPUs

[Adrian Graham]

2nd go, apologies if another version of this arrives but I sent it from a
non-list address so it might not get through with the emergency moderation
going on.

Hi folks,

Having had another bit of CBM kit with a failed CPU I'm wondering where you
lovely US folk get your spares from since ebay seems a bit ridiculous for
replacements at ukp8 a pop being the lowest price. They're surely not THAT
valuable?

I know Mouser have got the 're-released' WDC 65C02 which I may end up going
for since for 10 they're as low as ukp4.37, but don't us collectors have
bundles of spares?

Funny when I think of the number of BBC Micros that have been tossed over
the years

-- 
Adrian/Witchy
Binary Dinosaurs creator/curator
Www.binarydinosaurs.co.uk - the UK's biggest private home computer
collection?

Re: 386 upgrade board

[Joe Giliberti]

I haven't tried yet. I'll let you know if I am successful!
 This email has been sent from a
virus-free computer protected by Avast.
www.avast.com 
<#DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Ian S. King  wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Joe Giliberti 
> wrote:
>
> > That's good to know that they are out there. If anyone has one they would
> > be willing to part with, please let me know. I'm also in the market for
> an
> > ISA hard card if anyone has one.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Joe
> >  This email has been sent from a
> > virus-free computer protected by Avast.
> > www.avast.com 
> > <#DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >
> >
> Hi Joe,
>
> Since you have a TeleVideo luggable: do you know any of the magic to open
> up the cases?  I have a TPC-1 and I need to rebuild its power supply, but
> I've yet to figure out how to get it open.  I don't want to break it, and
> it seems to be *snapped* together, with a paucity of screws that don't seem
> to loosen the cabinet itself.  Thanks for any help you can provide!  -- Ian
>
> --
> Ian S. King, MSIS, MSCS, Ph.D. Candidate
> The Information School 
> Dissertation: "Why the Conversation Mattered: Constructing a Sociotechnical
> Narrative Through a Design Lens
>
> Archivist, Voices From the Rwanda Tribunal 
> Value Sensitive Design Research Lab 
>
> University of Washington
>
> There is an old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China."
>

Re: MEM11 update

[Guy Sotomayor]

> On Feb 8, 2016, at 2:04 PM, Noel Chiappa  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> From: Ethan Dicks
> 
>> I'm starting to get sorry I sold off my surplus NS8641s from Software
>> Results 20 years ago. To be fair, I did get over $4 each for them, so at the
>> time, it was a good deal for me (ISTR retail was $7.50 even then, so I
>> got a good spread on the price).
>> I do have some left, but handfuls, not armloads.
> 
> NS8641's are still available. I got a bunch from a guy in Hong Kong for
> US$1.50 each - considering the source, I built a test card to make sure they
> met specs, and they do, so I'm pretty sure they aren't counterfeits. :-)
> 
> When I was worried he couldn't find enough, I checked with a supplier (4 Star
> Electronics, I think) and they had like 50K available, and quoted me a price
> in about the same region, so I don't think UNIBUS transceivers actually are a
> problem, at least, not at the moment.

That’s good to know although I use a number of different UNIBUS interface
parts depending upon the signal (input only, output only or bi-directional).
But NS8641’s are the most numerous.

TTFN - Guy

Re: Oregon Pascal tape found

[John Many Jars]

I would love an image of that!

On 5 Feb 2016 18:59, "Todd Goodman"  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd like it if still available.
>
> I'll certainly reimburse you for postage (and a beverage or two of your
> choice as well.)
>
> Thanks!
>
> Todd
>
> * E. Groenenberg  [160205 13:02]:
> >
> > While getting though some stuff, I did find a 800Bpi 9 track tape
> > with Oregon Pascal V2.0 for RSX.
> >
> > Anybody interested in it? Free to get, only postage fee would be nice.
> >
> > Ed
> > --
> > Ik email, dus ik besta.
> > BTC : 1J5fajt8ptyZ2V1YURj3YJZhe5j3fJVSHN
> > LTC : LP2WuEmYPbpWUBqMFGJfdm7pdHEW7fKvDz
> >

Re: MEM11 update

[Noel Chiappa]

> From: Guy Sotomayor

> The reality is that an SPC board will be more expensive because of the
> gold edge fingers.

Oh, right, forgot about that. Yeah, six of one...

> I was originally thinking that if I do have to split the board up, that
> I'd make them completely independent. But that has the issue of
> requiring 2x the number of UNIBUS transceiver parts (which are all but
> unobtainium as of now).

Actually, 8641's (at least) are still around for not much. See below.

> some of the signals I'm running are pretty fast between the FPGA and
> some of the other components ... I wouldn't want to run those signals
> very far and certainly not across any sort of cabling.

For sure. We've been having issues (although we think we have it licked now)
with signals running across a flat cable between the prototype QSIC's
mother-card (a QBUS wire-wrap card) and its daughter-card (an bought-in FPGA
devel card), and that's for much slower signals (the only thing on the
mother-card are QBUS transceivers and level converters). Of course, the fact
that the interface doesn't put a ground wire between each pair signals wires
doesn't help! :-)


> From: Ethan Dicks

> I'm starting to get sorry I sold off my surplus NS8641s from Software
> Results 20 years ago. To be fair, I did get over $4 each for them, so at 
the
> time, it was a good deal for me (ISTR retail was $7.50 even then, so I
> got a good spread on the price).
> I do have some left, but handfuls, not armloads.

NS8641's are still available. I got a bunch from a guy in Hong Kong for
US$1.50 each - considering the source, I built a test card to make sure they
met specs, and they do, so I'm pretty sure they aren't counterfeits. :-)

When I was worried he couldn't find enough, I checked with a supplier (4 Star
Electronics, I think) and they had like 50K available, and quoted me a price
in about the same region, so I don't think UNIBUS transceivers actually are a
problem, at least, not at the moment.

Noel

RE: Solid state recommendations

[Dave G4UGM]

These seem popular:-

http://www.codesrc.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=SCSI2SD

new version

http://www.ebay.com/sch/inertialcomputing/m.html


I have one, but I haven't used it yet.

Dave

> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Bryan
> Everly
> Sent: 08 February 2016 15:35
> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
> Subject: Solid state recommendations
> 
> Hi all
> 
> I have the following gear in my stable:
> 
> - Sun Blade 100
> - SGI O2
> - VAXstation 3100
> - AlphaStation 500
> - HP C3700
> 
> I would like to start eliminating spinning SCSI drives from these boxes for
> noise, heat and capacity reasons. Could you kind folks recommend a
> solution?  I've seen SCSI to CF converters advertised but I didn't know if
> there was one kind over another that people have been successful with or if
> there is a totally different approach I should be considering.
> 
> Thanks,
> Bryan

Free TK50 Tapes for Postage and Handling

[Lee Courtney]

Five untested TK50 tapes available for postage and from 94025. Two have no
labels, the remainder have the following:
VMS 5.1-1 Maintenance Update
OD/OT Drivers for VMS 4.x 20-MAR-89
CZTK1D0 MICRO-11 CUST TK50

Please reply off-list if you'd like.
-- 
Lee Courtney

Re: AIX 4.1-capable box

[Kevin Bowling]

7006 might also fit the bill.  I've got a few of the different models but
not really looking to sell any.  eBay looks like slim pickings as well.
One seller has a bunch of 7009s, you might try to talk him down to a
realistic price.

If you need help comp.unix.aix on Usenet is probably a better bet.  I've
cataloged a lot of info at http://ps-2.kev009.com/

Regards,

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Benjamin Huntsman <
bhunts...@mail2.cu-portland.edu> wrote:

> Hi Paul!
>Thanks for the correction.  I don't know why I thought some of those
> had a PCI slot or two.  So nevermind the PCI part.  But I could still use a
> box that'll run 3.2.5 up through at least 4.1.5...
>
> Thanks!
>
> -Ben
>
> 
> From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of Paul Berger [
> phb@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 08, 2016 9:20 AM
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> Subject: Re: AIX 4.1-capable box
>
> On 2016-02-08 1:05 PM, Benjamin Huntsman wrote:
> > Hi there!
> > Does anyone on here do much with RS/6000 boxes?  I'm looking for a
> 7009-C10, 7011-250, or (mostly) PCI-based 7012 system capable of running
> AIX 4.1.
> > By any chance, anyone have such a system that they'd be willing to
> sell?
> >
> > Thanks much!!
> >
> > -Ben
> All of the systems you listed are microchannel machines.  The first PCI
> machines where 7020, 7043, and 7025-F40.  The 7020 run AIX 4.1.1 and the
> 7043-140, 240 and 7025-F40 require min 4.1.5  7043-150 requires 4.2.1.
>
> Paul.
>

Re: 11/73 into 11/03 chassis?

[Jacob Ritorto]

This is extremely good info (thank you to Robert, Joseph and Noel!) and I
plan to do something like this someday when I get more q-bus stuff, but I
must apoligise for my inaccuracy because what I was originally trying to
ask was:

Can I tear apart my little BA23 (which currently has a power supply problem
and not enough space for my high capacity 8" SMD disks) and put the
Micro/PDP-11 backplane (with all its nice 11/73 cards and SMD disk
controllers, etc.) into the spot that my 11/03 backplane currently occupies
and run it via the (working) stock 11/03 power supply?  This "11/03
chassis" is bolted into what appears to be a common, official Digital 19"
rack surrounded by some RL02s, mid-height style (don't know the name of
this racking option).

  Specifically, would I have to butcher power and clock lines to do this,
or is it all plug compatible?  I'm considering tearing the systems down and
assessing the situation, but wanted to ask in advance in case somebody's
already gone there and can save me the heartache.  The recent mention of
the dual 11/73 in a 19" rack prompted me to reconsider my original intent
instead of rewiring old backplanes to be 22-bit compliant.

thx
jake


On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Noel Chiappa 
wrote:

> > From: Jacob Ritorto
>
> > Would you happen to have notes or references about how to do it?
>
> It's not too hard; basically, one has to wire pins BC1, BD1, BE1 and BF1
> (BDAL 18-BDAL21, respectively) on all _QBUS_ slots together into a bus. So
> wire BC1 on slot 1 to BC1 on slot 2, slot 3, etc, etc.
>
> A couple of notes: First, I said '_QBUS_' because if you have a Q/CD
> backplane, clearly one doesn't run the extra BDAL lines to the CD slots,
> only
> the QBUS slots (which run down the left-hand side, when facing the
> backplane).
>
> Second, for optimal analog behaviour, the 'out' slot on the backplane
> should
> be the last slot you wire to, so that there are no branches in the
> transmission line for BDAL18-BDAL21 (which can produce reflections - aka
> noise - on the transmission lines). How to do this efficiently (in terms of
> the wiring) can be a bit tricky, depending on the backplane configuration.
>
> E.g. if one has the standard 'serpentine' backplane, i.e. one with the
> slots
> in the following kind of order (facing the backplane from the board side):
>
> 1-2
> 4-3
> 5-6
> 8-7
> 9-10
>
> etc., one might naively think one has to run the extra bus lines back and
> forth to match. However, only the _grant_ lines have to follow this pattern
> (and they are already there); the added lines don't have to follow the same
> pattern, as long as there are no branches.
>
> So, for the example 5-slot backplane above, one could/would wire:
>
> 1-4-5-8-9--2-3-6-7-10
>
> i.e. a single vertical run on the left hand side, a single diagonal from 9
> back to 2 (shown with "--"), and then another vertical run on the right
> hand
> side. Much simpler than wiring back and forth in slot order; there are no
> branches; and the last slot is the 'out' slot.
>
> For backplane with an _even_ number of layers, e.g.:
>
> 1-2
> 4-3
> 5-6
> 8-7
>
> it's a little more complicated: a single vertical run on each side
> cannot be connected in such a way as to have the 'out' slot (8) be the
> last slot. One has to do something a little more complex:
>
> 1-4-5--2-3-6-7--8
>
> with a vertical run on the left side, stopping short of the last slot; then
> a vertical run on the right side, then a lateral back across on the last
> layer.
>
> Obviously one _could_ run the wires back and forth, in slot order, but that
> will take a lot more wire, which at the very least is more work (especially
> on backplanes which don't have full wire-wrap pins, just the little stubby
> pins that have to have the wires soldered to); whether it also increases
> the
> delay down those transmission lines enough to be noticeable is something I
> don't know the answer to.
>
>
> All the obvious caveats apply: make sure not to get confused by the mirror
> pin and slot numbers on the front and back sides (you'll be wiring on the
> back, whereas the diagrams above are on the front), etc.
>
> Noel
>

Re: Solid state recommendations

[Jerry Weiss]

On Feb 8, 2016, at 4:07 PM, Dave G4UGM  wrote:
> 
> These seem popular:-
> 
> http://www.codesrc.com/mediawiki/index.php?title=SCSI2SD
> 
> new version
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/sch/inertialcomputing/m.html
> 
> 
> I have one, but I haven't used it yet.
> 
> Dave
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Bryan
>> Everly
>> Sent: 08 February 2016 15:35
>> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
>> Subject: Solid state recommendations
>> 
>> Hi all
>> 
>> I have the following gear in my stable:
>> 
>> - Sun Blade 100
>> - SGI O2
>> - VAXstation 3100
>> - AlphaStation 500
>> - HP C3700
>> 
>> I would like to start eliminating spinning SCSI drives from these boxes for
>> noise, heat and capacity reasons. Could you kind folks recommend a
>> solution?  I've seen SCSI to CF converters advertised but I didn't know if
>> there was one kind over another that people have been successful with or if
>> there is a totally different approach I should be considering.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Bryan
> 

I’ve been using SCSI2SD over a year with Emulex UC07, native MV 3100, 
Nextstep/Openstep and Adaptec PC SCSI adapters.
Michael has been constantly improving the device and firmware.  He worked out 
some bugs that allowed me to use these under VMS 5.5-2; which was very picky 
about the scsimode settings on disks of that era. Well worth the investment, 
especially if you are constantly tinkering with your machines. Its async and 
doesn’t take advantage of
high speed microSD cards, but they outperform the real Seagate SCSI-2 Narrow 
1-8GB drives I’ve compared them to.

Jerry WB9MRI