Re: [Simh] VAX vectors
On Sat, 11 Jul 2015 14:42:42 +0200 Rhialto rhia...@falu.nl wrote: On Fri 10 Jul 2015 at 09:33:56 +, li...@openmailbox.org wrote: I think you could argue at the beginning System/360 did have things in common with what would later be called RISC although z/Architecture has overshadowed a lot of that RISC flavor in favor of more specialized instructions and addressing modes. I recall reading that the whole RISC thing was more or less started with compiler writes for the 360 noticin that in practice they only used a rather limited subset of the available instructions. That got developed in hardware in the POWER cpu and later in the POWERPC (PPC). That is not what I meant, obviously. I'm talking about the approach to the architecture itself which was very clean, up until z/Architecture anyway. It used very simple and few addressing modes and a reasonably compact instruction set. On the other hand there were just the right number of storage-to-storage instructions to be able to move data around, do arithmetic from storage to register, and bit operations on storage without having to load storage to a register first. There were no relative addressing modes with offset more than 12 bits. And we never missed it. And even in the 64-bit z/System there isn't, apparently... There is a 20 bit signed offset in the Long Displacement Facility instructions in z/Architecture. But we still don't use it. It is exploited by the newer compiler versions and sometimes also by newcomers to the system, not that there are many of those. and each instruction has its own different subset of addressing modes it works with. More correctly each instruction may be categorized by the addressing mode it uses. Each instruction has a proper one-to-one relationship with each opcode. This is one of many things about that system that makes encoding and decoding so simple. It is notable virtually all systems software and all the compilers are still written in assembler (or PL/X, a sort of PL/I-like high-level assembler with no runtime) on Z. Another interesting thing is object code and virtually all application code from the 1960s still runs on the very latest hardware and OS in 2015. -- Please DO NOT COPY ME on mailing list replies. I read the mailing list. RSA 4096 fingerprint 7940 3F02 16D3 AFEE F2F8 ACAA 557C 4B36 98E4 4D49 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Simh mailing list Simh@trailing-edge.com http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
Re: [Simh] Off topic: ULTRIX question
On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 06:52:18 -0500 Gary Lee Phillips tivo.ov...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Clem and Johnny for at least confirming what I suspected. I worked with VMS on Vaxen in the 80s, At the time I wished for an opportunity to compare VMS with UNIX on the same hardware. In the 90s I worked with UNIX, mostly AIX on RS/6000. Today I mostly use Linux, though I have a couple of Alphas in working order. I run OpenVMS and Linux on those. I keep looking for a way to get a real UNIX going, hence the ULTRIX experiment. As far as I can tell, neither Tru64 nor HP-UX have any kind of hobbyist licensing program available and I am just playing with stuff at this point, I was looking for another way to get at UNIX here at home. What about Solaris 10? It's a real UNIX and has real documentation and a nice toolchain for C/C++/Fortran. It is all free as in beer for use as a development box. Licensing terms are annoying and unclear but there are no reports of anybody being skewered for running a Solaris box at home. SPARC hardware is good, cheap, and plentiful. Can't say the same for power or air conditioning though. Get earplugs! -- Please DO NOT COPY ME on mailing list replies. I read the mailing list. RSA 4096 fingerprint 7940 3F02 16D3 AFEE F2F8 ACAA 557C 4B36 98E4 4D49 ___ Simh mailing list Simh@trailing-edge.com http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
Re: [Simh] Off topic: ULTRIX question
On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 17:20:19 -0500 Gary Lee Phillips tivo.ov...@gmail.com wrote: There is still Linux for Alpha, Johnny, though it's beginning to age from lack of supporters. Debian for Alpha exists up through Sid I think. CentOS also had an Alpha version last time I looked. I have run the Debian versions and they pretty much work as they should. I've never seen Linux for VAX at all, that's true. More to like about the VAX... I'm not personally concerned with security patches, as my machines are not usually on the net at all. I live in a rural area where connectivity is costly and not to be wasted. I use the machines mostly for mathematical and engineering experiments and personal amusement. I'm a radio amateur, and the Alphas are real nice for circuit simulations and RF modeling, for instance. Fortran does pretty well there. I raised my question because though the unsupported distribution tape for ULTRIX 4.0 includes Gnu EMACS as a source archive, it was clearly not actually ported or tested (as in, make fails immediately despite README claiming otherwise.) Solaris has a pretty nice Fortran compiler available that covers most of F2003 in the latest release. And you can build Emacs without much difficulty using that or the old gcc (4.2.2 I believe) that comes with Solaris or get a prebuilt copy from someplace like OpenCSW. Since downloading large files is next to impossible here, I try to know what I'm getting into before forking over $60 for a set of distribution CDs. One of the BSD flavors might suit, but it's very difficult to be sure from the descriptions that are offered. Ask on the mailing lists and if it is something you want to try you can probably find somebody willing to burn CDs (yep, don't even need a DVD) for whatever you want. Clearly VAX or Alpha aren't exactly high on their priority lists. Current pages on both BSD sites link to non-existent pages on HP sites, for instance. Judging from what's going on at HP right now that might be an HP problem rather than a problem at the sites linking to HP... And you may not be able to judge what's going on with the platform support based on the web pages. OpenBSD is a small project and if they have one or two good devs on a platform they might not have any time to write the doc or fix web pages. And once the port works it might not get any attention because it simply doesn't need any. Checking the mirrors for packages for that architecture is a good way to get an idea if the platform is still alive as far as they are concerned. Of course if the OS itself is not found for that platform on the mirrors then chances are it's going to be some work. -- Please DO NOT COPY ME on mailing list replies. I read the mailing list. RSA 4096 fingerprint 7940 3F02 16D3 AFEE F2F8 ACAA 557C 4B36 98E4 4D49 ___ Simh mailing list Simh@trailing-edge.com http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
Re: [Simh] Off topic: ULTRIX question
On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 10:04:43 -0500 Gary Lee Phillips tivo.ov...@gmail.com wrote: As far as I know, Solaris these days only runs on Intel hardware. Both Solaris 10 and Solaris 11 run on Intel and SPARC. Solaris 11 doesn't run on any SPARC hardware sun4v or older IIRC. I've tried it there, and it seems to devote way too much processor power and memory to making pretty windowed screen displays (a weakness it shares with most Linux distributions.) I have no idea what this means. I have several Solaris Intel boxes and they run great. One is a fairly heavy duty but old desktop and one is a low-spec desktop rescued from Windows that has a new lease on life as a file server. Both these boxes run headless. If you don't want graphics don't use them. Solaris does support most nVidia cards including some high end stuff. Performance is excellent and snappy, and memory utilization is low. I also run Solaris SPARC and if that isn't UNIX heaven I don't know what is. Not that I am a UNIX fan but if you have to run UNIX then make it Solaris SPARC... I guess I didn't make it clear that I'm looking for UNIX to run on VAX or Alpha hardware platforms. OpenBSD should work. If you are really curious ask on the mailing lists about your specific hardware. I used to be able to recommend NetBSD but that was a long time ago. Same thing with FreeBSD. Those two just do not run on non-Intel hardware the way they used to. Most of the interested developers appear to have gone to greener pastures. -- Please DO NOT COPY ME on mailing list replies. I read the mailing list. RSA 4096 fingerprint 7940 3F02 16D3 AFEE F2F8 ACAA 557C 4B36 98E4 4D49 ___ Simh mailing list Simh@trailing-edge.com http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
Re: [Simh] Off topic: ULTRIX question
On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 14:45:24 +0200 Johnny Billquist b...@softjar.se wrote: What is your definition of real Unix? Ultrix is sortof a BSD-derivative. I hope you understand that. If so and if the OP was aware of that then OpenBSD would be a good option. The problem with Ultrix is not documentation, but the fact that it is somewhat different than other Unix clones you might hit upon. Back in the 80s this was a more common phenomenon. Every Unix system was slightly different. This is why tools like autoconf got created - because it is a pain in the butt to make software that runs on all different styles of Unix. And it still doesn't work because it's just a theory. No Linux developers seem to be aware anything besides Linux exists and nobody seems to attempt to write portable code or actually test it anywhere besides Linux. So those of us who run alternative OS report the autoconf bugs and gccisms when we try building gnu crapware on other platforms or with other compilers... -- Please DO NOT COPY ME on mailing list replies. I read the mailing list. RSA 4096 fingerprint 7940 3F02 16D3 AFEE F2F8 ACAA 557C 4B36 98E4 4D49 ___ Simh mailing list Simh@trailing-edge.com http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
Re: [Simh] Off topic: ULTRIX question
On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 7:08 PM, li...@openmailbox.org wrote: On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 17:20:19 -0500 Gary Lee Phillips tivo.ov...@gmail.com wrote: There is still Linux for Alpha, Johnny, though it's beginning to age from lack of supporters. Debian for Alpha exists up through Sid I think. CentOS also had an Alpha version last time I looked. I have run the Debian versions and they pretty much work as they should. I've never seen Linux for VAX at all, that's true. More to like about the VAX... Actually, Linux on VAX does exist. http://vax-linux.org/. Though, it seems to be mostly abandoned. I've never tried running it on a VAX, but maybe I should sometime. Pat ___ Simh mailing list Simh@trailing-edge.com http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
Re: [Simh] Off topic: ULTRIX question
On Mon, 13 Jul 2015 09:18:22 -0400 Patrick Finnegan p...@computer-refuge.org wrote: On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 7:08 PM, li...@openmailbox.org wrote: On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 17:20:19 -0500 Gary Lee Phillips tivo.ov...@gmail.com wrote: There is still Linux for Alpha, Johnny, though it's beginning to age from lack of supporters. Debian for Alpha exists up through Sid I think. CentOS also had an Alpha version last time I looked. I have run the Debian versions and they pretty much work as they should. I've never seen Linux for VAX at all, that's true. More to like about the VAX... Actually, Linux on VAX does exist. http://vax-linux.org/. Oh, well, it was a nice thought while it lasted... Though, it seems to be mostly abandoned. Hope springs eternal! I've never tried running it on a VAX, but maybe I should sometime. Maybe you shouldn't but that is entirely up to you, of course. -- Please DO NOT COPY ME on mailing list replies. I read the mailing list. RSA 4096 fingerprint 7940 3F02 16D3 AFEE F2F8 ACAA 557C 4B36 98E4 4D49 ___ Simh mailing list Simh@trailing-edge.com http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
[Simh] PDP-11 and VAX VMS SPITBOL
Rummaging in my storage unit today, I found two 1/2 tape mini-reels in a box of SPITBOL (SPeedy ImplemenTation of SNOBOL4) materials. Most of the materials and tapes in the box are 370 SPITBOL related, but there were these two distribution tapes - one labeled PDP-11 Unix and the other VAX VMS. There was also a printed manual. I know nothing about the contents of the tape, although I know someone who might. Alas, Robert B.K. Dewar, who first conceived and created SPITBOL, passed away June 30th. I will send the DEC tapes and manual at my expense to anyone in the U.S. who might want them. Mark Emmer ___ Simh mailing list Simh@trailing-edge.com http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
Re: [Simh] Off topic: ULTRIX question
On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 06:10:25PM +, li...@openmailbox.org wrote: On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 10:04:43 -0500 Gary Lee Phillips tivo.ov...@gmail.com wrote: I guess I didn't make it clear that I'm looking for UNIX to run on VAX or Alpha hardware platforms. OpenBSD should work. If you are really curious ask on the mailing lists about your specific hardware. I used to be able to recommend NetBSD but that was a long time ago. Same thing with FreeBSD. Those two just do not run on non-Intel hardware the way they used to. Most of the interested developers appear to have gone to greener pastures. I have FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE running on a SUN V100 right here. Even ZFS works just fine, if quite slow - but that is the fault of the shitty IDE controller SUN used (and it isn't helped by the fact that I hooked two 1 TB SATA drives up to it via SATA-PATA adapters). It is earning its power as one of my live backup storage systems. Kind regards, Alex. -- Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. -- Thomas A. Edison ___ Simh mailing list Simh@trailing-edge.com http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
Re: [Simh] Off topic: ULTRIX question
On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 03:41:49PM -0400, David Holland wrote: Has Oracle changed its position with regards to patch availability for the freely available downloads of Solaris x86? Last I heard, patches were not available with out a support contract. ( Granted, HP is no better with its position towards VMS patches, but at least (last I checked) VMS wasn't terribly attractive option for the script kiddies. ) Unfortunately, as far as I know, if you want a free (as in beer) patched Unix-alike, your choices are a Linux based distribution, or a Linux based distribution. Which is unfortunate. Well, NetBSD _might_ smell a little funny, but it is certainly still alive ;-) And it should support Alpha VAX (worked fine, a few years ago, even on simh/vax). A friend of mine is still actively working on netbsd/vax. If the less wide platform support isn't a problem, FreeBSD might be worth a look too. Besides Intel, it runs on sparc64 (like the Sun V100 beside me), but only as a Tier 2 platform (i.e. it works, but doesn't get high priority support). Kind regards, Alex. -- Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. -- Thomas A. Edison ___ Simh mailing list Simh@trailing-edge.com http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
Re: [Simh] Off topic: ULTRIX question
Fwiw, netbsd was the first OS fully booted on simh vax. Vms took a lot more debuggibg. Original message From Alexander Schreiber a...@thangorodrim.ch Date: 07/13/2015 4:29 PM (GMT-07:00) To Gary Lee Phillips tivo.ov...@gmail.com Cc simh@trailing-edge.com Subject Re: [Simh] Off topic: ULTRIX question On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 10:04:43AM -0500, Gary Lee Phillips wrote: As far as I know, Solaris these days only runs on Intel hardware. I've tried it there, and it seems to devote way too much processor power and memory to making pretty windowed screen displays (a weakness it shares with most Linux distributions.) Hmm? I run Linux on quite a number of different machines (and different hardware architectures as well). Out of all of those, only four devote _any_ amount of CPU and RAM to pretty displays: the workstations for my wife and me and our laptops. Some of the others don't even have the _hardware_ for showing pretty graphics (like the Edgerouter Lite, whose only console is a serial one with a Cisco style connector). I guess I didn't make it clear that I'm looking for UNIX to run on VAX or Alpha hardware platforms. Try NetBSD. For fun giggles I ran NetBSD on simh/vax for a while. Was surprising usable interactively, only disk access and compiles where slow. NetBSD also is comparatively lightweight among modern Unix systems. Kind regards, Alex. -- Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. -- Thomas A. Edison ___ Simh mailing list Simh@trailing-edge.com http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh___ Simh mailing list Simh@trailing-edge.com http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
Re: [Simh] Off topic: ULTRIX question
Hi, If i am honest i think there would be significant advantages to just running the same OS on all the bits of hardware, NetBSD has a much wider hardware support base, Alpha, pmax and VAX. http://wiki.netbsd.org/ports/alpha/ http://wiki.netbsd.org/ports/pmax/ http://wiki.netbsd.org/ports/vax/ Have a look to see if it supports the models you have. NetBSD also has pretty up to date GCC support,.. but lots of other compilers as well http://pkgsrc.se/lang I would use GCC 4.9 http://pkgsrc.se/lang/gcc49 https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/4.9.3/ Which for Fortran supports the old F77 and F95 standards as well as F2003 and F2008 https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.9.3/gfortran/GNU-Fortran-and-G77.html#GNU-Fortran-and-G77 https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.9.3/gfortran/Fortran-2003-and-2008-status.html#Fortran-2003-and-2008-status GCC like GEM is split frontend/middle/backend, so the C,C++,Fortran, etc compilers are quite separate from the targets. There are Alpha, MIPS and VAX backends, which i guess i implicit as thats what NetBSD uses to compile the OS. https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.9.3/gcc/DEC-Alpha-Options.html#DEC-Alpha-Options https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.9.3/gcc/MIPS-Options.html#MIPS-Options https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.9.3/gcc/VAX-Options.html#VAX-Options regards --- Matthew J Fletcher ___ Simh mailing list Simh@trailing-edge.com http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh
