atex system in Houston

Hmmm, are these the atex racks seen lurking in the background of that recent storage space trawl down near Houston? https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-DEC-PDP-11-34-Minicomputer-With-Kennedy-Tape-Drive-J11-CPU-2-Terminals/123688125244

Re: V6 cc needs hash before whitespace before first include?

> On Feb 28, 2019, at 11:43 AM, Phil Budne wrote: > It's an indicator that the pre-processor needs to be run first. Ah, okay! So that's a fun bit of V6 apocrypha. Was this gone by V7?

V6 cc needs hash before whitespace before first include?

So, I've been having some fun playing around with V6 Unix on my 11/45 a bit after that last repair. I've just been tripped up for a little over the fact that the C compiler barfs if there is whitespace/comentary before the first #include; the workaround seems to be to add a lone '#' at the

Re: PDP-11 LDA BFD backend for gnu binutils

> On Feb 24, 2019, at 10:16 AM, Paul Koning wrote: > What LDA do you have in mind? Absolute loader binary, for bare metal > execution? I had in mind absolute loader binary for bare metal as a starting point. Most of the coding I’ve had to do on my restoration adventure has been standalone

PDP-11 LDA BFD backend for gnu binutils

I've been thinking it might be nice to have an LDA BFD backend for gnu binutils, so gas, ld, objdump etc. could deal with LDA's directly without having to use separate conversion utilities. Before jumping in on that, though, I thought I'd ask here to see if anybody might have already started

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

That's right -- I wasn't without an army, it was just a very small and quite dedicated army! :-) I think I'd have gone down many blind alleys without help and perspective provided by others here, and in particular a lot guidance provided by Noel over the past couple weeks in private

PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

[oops, accidentally replied directly instead of to the list] On 2/13/19 12:54 PM, Ethan Dicks wrote: > It's interesting that it was a bad 7430 in [your RK11-C]. I find that for > equipment of that vintage, my usual suspects are failed 7474s and failed > 7440s, probably 80% of the total.

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

On 2/13/19 5:20 PM, Jerry Weiss wrote: I am trying to understand how the diagnostics didn't reveal this defect.  I see in the source for the diagnostic DZRKH-F there are tests for address in the 28K-32K range and also for the 32K boundary. So, to catch this defect the diagnostic would have to

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

SUCCESS!! Put the M795 out on an extender, loaded 16 in RKBAR, and had a look around with a logic probe. Narrowed it down to E34 (a 7430 8-input NAND). Pulled, socketed, replaced, and off she goes! I can now successfully boot and run both V6 Unix and RSTS/E V06C from disk. *THAT* was a

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

Yup; specifically, the symptoms are consistent with 'D15 RKBA=ALL 1 L' being incorrectly generated at BA 16, causing an increment to EX.MEM, causing a skip in the DMA. So it looks like problem with bit 12 in that carry logic; I'll check E28 and E34 when I get back to it tonight, but I have

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

>> This seems the best place to start with the LA this weekend then. > > I'm going to respectfully semi-disagree! I think that at this point there's a > good chance we can localize to within a gate or two before we start applying > test instruments. Oh, I agree completely, Noel. I should have

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

>>> How about a Unibus trace? >> >> I don't think my sad little HP LA has enough buffer for that... > > You could use triggers in innovative ways. Ah, quite right, gentlemen. This seems the best place to start with the LA this weekend then. --FritzM.

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> How about a Unibus trace? That would give you the RK11 commands as well as > the data it sends in response. I don't think my sad little HP LA has enough buffer for that... --FritzM.

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Feb 7, 2019, at 9:47 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > > So, with UISA0 containing 01614, that gives us PA:161400 + 04200 = PA:165600, > I think. And it wound up at PA:171600 - off by 04000 (higher) - which is > obviously an interesting number. Thanks, Noel. > ...it might be

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> Seems a little less-likely to be the problem, given(?) as well that you have > fairly consistent (is deterministic overstating it?) behaviour. Yeah. We've gotten to the point now where enough layered problems have been cleared away that the remaining behavior is quite deterministic. > If

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> 4116 datasheet specs 2mS, my calcs give a refresh period of 1.5mS, the 14.5uS > from the manual would give 1.86 mS, 7% shy of 2. > The schematic specs 1% resistors, and the parts list does appear to spec a > high-tolerance "1%200PPM" cap. > > Although there are the internal voltage divider Rs

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

It looks like the question boils down to either "how did that part of the binary get to that part of memory?", or "how did we end up executing out of that part of memory?" More the former, I think... Noel, is it possible for you deduce where Unix _should_ be placing these "bad" bits

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

On 2/6/19 6:25 PM, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote: I'm thinking it is bad memory.  It seems unlikely bus problems could alter only ONE BIT per word, so I think it is just a bad memory chip, and finding multiple words where the 01 bit is now turned on sure looks like that kind of problem.

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

>> On Feb 6, 2019, at 2:24 PM, Brent Hilpert via cctalk >> wrote: >> >> Is the schematic available for the memory board at-issue? >> Curious myself to see what approach for refresh DEC used. > > Yes, here: > http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/dec/pdp11/memory/MP00672_MS11L_engDrw.pdf

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Feb 6, 2019, at 2:24 PM, Brent Hilpert via cctalk > wrote: > > Is the schematic available for the memory board at-issue? > Curious myself to see what approach for refresh DEC used. Yes, here: http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/dec/pdp11/memory/MP00672_MS11L_engDrw.pdf There is

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On the logic analyzer suggestion: I remember seeing a logic analyzer hooked > to a PDP-11 at DEC, for software debugging. As I recall, it was connected at > the console front panel, which seems reasonable since several key CPU data > paths are exposed there. Ooh, I like that suggestion! It

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

>> Would it be any difference if you run the machine at full speed or lower >> speed... > > Ah, yes -- this I haven't tried yet! I have a KM11 replica, so this is easy > enough to do; I'll give that a go when I next get back to the machine > (possibly this evening). Ran the machine on the

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Feb 5, 2019, at 10:03 AM, Fritz Mueller wrote: > > Unfortunately, when I tried to apply this, it seemed that SIMH's write single > sector wasn't working correctly for me... Correction to above: "PDP11GUI's write single sector". Apologies! --FritzM.

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> Would it be any difference if you run the machine at full speed or lower > speed... Ah, yes -- this I haven't tried yet! I have a KM11 replica, so this is easy enough to do; I'll give that a go when I next get back to the machine (possibly this evening). > ...or even single step past

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

>>> I keep wondering about the psu. >> >> Good theory. > > I'll give these a double-check... I did give these a look yesterday. Indeed, the +5 regulator in position "C" (which includes supply to the KT11) was running a little low (4.9 and change). I trimmed it up, and checked the rest of

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Feb 5, 2019, at 8:45 AM, Jon Elson via cctalk > wrote: > > I'd guess the diagnostic tries a few patterns to test for gross failure of > this circuitry, but since it involves memory on a system running a program, > it may not be able to exhaustively test these adders and comparators.

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> Perhaps compile [test programs] under SimH and do a block-level diff of the > image with what is currently in use, and transfer just those blocks? I did experiment with this a little way back. I wrote a small standalone code that dumps a CRC of every sector over the console; I can run this

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

>>> The obvious answer is bad memory. >> >> At the board level, yes. Deeper, it could be bad memory bits or bad >> memory decode. > > Yes, one of the standard early PDP-11 memory tests is the "no duplicate > address test". I should say that the memory board is not _completely_ whack -- it

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Feb 4, 2019, at 2:28 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > > I'm pretty sure the command only gets a few instructions in before it blows > up. Here are the process' registers, and the _entire_ contents of the user > mode stack: > > R0 10 > R1 0 > R2 0 > R3 0 > R4 34 > R5 444 > SP

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Feb 4, 2019, at 10:34 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk > wrote: > >> On Feb 4, 2019, at 12:18 PM, Bob Smith via cctalk >> wrote: >> >> I keep wondering about the psu. > > Good theory. I'll give these a double-check... > Is there any way to attach a logic analyzer to various data paths on

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Feb 4, 2019, at 9:13 AM, Jay Jaeger wrote: > > If he hasn't already, if Fritz has more than one memory board, he might > try swapping them to see if that changes anything. I only have an 128kw MS11-L here to work with, unfortunately. Its been through a bunch of recent troubleshooting

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

Hi all; thanks for the write-up on the issue, Noel! > On Feb 4, 2019, at 8:24 AM, Jon Elson via cctalk > wrote: > Is this truly a fault given by the memory management system, or some other > kind of fault (Unibus timeout or memory parity error)? Trap 250, which is explicitly memory

Re: advice / suggestion wanted PDP 11/40 only boots XXDP, not RT11

> On Jan 31, 2019, at 12:26 PM, Bill Degnan via cctech > wrote: > > My PDP 11/40 suddenly lost it's ability to boot RL02 disks except the XXDP > disk. I have two drives, both boot up an XXDP (I have more than one) just > fine, but any formerly-working RT-11 (v 5, 5.1, 5.3) no longer boots,

Re: early PDP-11/45 info sought

> On Jan 31, 2019, at 12:02 PM, Jay Jaeger wrote: > > The parity change in the CPU was to change parity errors from vectoring > thru location 4 to vector through 114. Yes, but also, there was apparently rework of logic feeding the CONF console flag and associated abort signaling. Before the

Re: early PDP-11/45 info sought

> On Jan 31, 2019, at 11:47 AM, Jay Jaeger wrote: > > I have completed my transcription of what I felt would be the most > salient entries and information in those entries of the PDP-11/45 > DEC-O-Logs. > > The transcripts are available on my Google Drive at > >

Re: early PDP-11/45 info sought

> On Jan 31, 2019, at 9:19 AM, Jay Jaeger wrote: > > I am working on transcribing some DEC-O-Logs - more than are on > bitsavers that relate to the KB11-A and its cards. Oooh! I'm excited again! :-) > In the process, I came across KB11A-B0008 - which indicates that NPG, > PA, PB, LTC,

Re: early PDP-11/45 info sought

> The first batch of scanning is done... 600dpi, CCITT Group 4 except for > the cover pages which are LZW. > > You will find them in my Google Drive at > > https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2v4WRwISEQRWWFFdVpCZWFTZEU > > In subfolder pdf/dec/pdp11/1145 Thanks, Jay! I note with some

Re: early PDP-11/45 info sought

> On Jan 28, 2019, at 8:26 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > > E.g. my M8100 prints are dated 2/72, and none contain any entries in the > 'Revisions' block (lower left). However, they are marked as Rev. D, which is > newer than the KB11-A prints at Bitsaver, which are marked as Rev. C.

Re: Oh Darn (Re: early PDP-11/45 info sought)

> On Jan 29, 2019, at 1:46 PM, Jay Jaeger wrote: > > Dang it - the dates fooled me. (blush) Sorry to get your hopes up, > Fritz. Oh, darn! Well, thanks anyway for taking a look. And so the search continues... The later revisions and other docs are still quite a nice find, and it would

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 28, 2019, at 7:06 AM, Paul Koning wrote: > > So you do need the correct SIL file. As-built should be sufficient (I don't > believe it cares about the defaults, so the stuff INIT saves into the DEFALT > section of the monitor SIL should not be needed). Well, it *should* be the same

Re: early PDP-11/45 info sought

Hi Jay, > On Jan 27, 2019, at 7:07 PM, Jay Jaeger wrote: > > I think I can help some... I DO have earlier PDP-11/45 CPU drawings... Man, this list is the absolute best! The '72 KB11-A drawings would be most immediately useful. If you only have time for a subset of pages, I would find the

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 27, 2019, at 3:06 PM, Fritz Mueller wrote: > > I'll keep you posted about what I find out from ANALYS! Posted below. I've elided the core dump here so not to spam everybody; will send off-list. Note that I only copied over the blocks of [0,1]CRASH.SYS, and overlaid them on a copy

early PDP-11/45 info sought

Those reading through the recent "PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem" thread here will know that I've gotten to some corners of my 11/45 CPU now that don't match up with the commonly available engineering drawings. My /45 is an early serial number (#152). So far I've verified hardware differences

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 27, 2019, at 1:34 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > > I have the impression that RSTS tries to identify the parity CSRs by forcing > wrong parity and seeing which CSR reports the issue. So if you have a CPU > ECO issue that causes trap to 114 not to work, I don't see how you could get >

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 20, 2019, at 7:11 PM, Will Cooke via cctalk > wrote: > > Jack Ganssle wrote a couple of articles about memory testing and failure > modes... > http://www.ganssle.com/articles/aramrom.htm > http://www.ganssle.com/articles/ramtest.htm Thanks for the pointers, Will; I found the

Re: PDP-11 ID page, a few images needed

> On Jan 23, 2019, at 2:37 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > > In response to a request a couple of years back from Cindy, I've been slowly > working on a page to help scrappers identify PDP-11's, and give them an idea > what to look for. I have it _mostly_ done... Hey, now -- those

Re: Change in UNIBUS parity operation (Was: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem)

> On Jan 21, 2019, at 8:35 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > >> Even better, it claims to be able to control whether the memory uses odd >> or even parity! (How, for UNIBUS memory, I don't know - there's no way to do >> this over the UNIBUS. > > So this really confused me... The answer is... Super

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

Further archeology has led me to the "PDP-11/45, 11/50 MOS Memory Troublshooting Guide", the cover letter of which is quite amusing: "...COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL, that is take [this guide] on site but do not let the customer read it." "Please do not send these to the Depot for repair!! Instead

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

Thanks, Paul and Noel, for the detailed responses per usual! > On Jan 20, 2019, at 6:55 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote: > > What is [MAINDEC ZQMC] complaining about? Looks like a few more flaky bits in a couple of additional banks. For those reading along who may be unfamiliar with the MS11-L, it is

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

Happy weekend, all! Latest updates on this issue: Identified and replaced a faulty 4116 DRAM (E204) on my MS11-L. After this, my small hand-rolled standalone diagnostic passes the full 256K. I'll post my diagnostic source over on my blog soon. After this repair, tried MAINDEC ZQMC, called

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 14, 2019, at 9:25 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > > Is it really an MS11-P? Nope, I fat-fingered that! It’s a 256KB MS11-L. --FritzM.

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

Got to work on this problem a little more this weekend. Worked up some simple standalone diagnostics to map and test all the memory on my 256K MS11-P. Sure enough, I’m seeing some stuck bits at various addresses in physical address range 70-75. Need to clean up the diagnostics a bit

Re: IBM in TX

> If the half panels are for sale, I'll take them! :-) They’d nicely compliment or house those new QSIC indicator panels you’ve been working up, huh? :-)

Re: IBM in TX

I think I see an H960 with a couple DEC half panels stuck on it peeking out of the very back there...

Re: warped RK05 pack -- lost cause?

> On Jan 10, 2019, at 11:23 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk > wrote: > > http://rescue1130.blogspot.com/2017/11/resolved-copy-and-burn-of-264x-terminal.html Oh, thanks — I’ll check that out as well!

Re: warped RK05 pack -- lost cause?

> On Jan 10, 2019, at 12:47 AM, Christian Corti via cctalk > wrote: > > I don't think it's the platter but perhaps a dirty hub ring or centering > cone. Try cleaning the ring and the cone of your disk pack. Ah, thanks — I’ll take a look!

warped RK05 pack -- lost cause?

So, one of the things I have along with my 11/45 is an RK05 alignment cartridge. Unfortunately, its seems warped -- rides up an down a few millimeters in each direction as you turn it in an RK05 drive. :-( Is there any hope for bending one of these platters back more into true (maybe using a

Re: RL02 packs FTGH in 01057

[oops, meant that to be a DM, sorry all, Linux mailer was being tricky with the "To:" address :-/]

Re: RL02 packs FTGH in 01057

Hi John -- I could really use a few more 12-sector RK05 packs, and would happily pay for shipping plus whatever small "inconvenience fee" seems reasonable to you? If you have nothing to pack them in, I could ship you a some materials as well? I have almost no media to use on my recently

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

Hey Noel, Did get away with ‘od’ without generating a second core file — sending to you in direct messsage! Also found and ran the appropriate MS11 MAINDEC that matches the vintage of my MS11-L board (a bit of an anachronism for an '11/45) and it is indeed indicating some sort of issue now,

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

On 1/8/19 3:07 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote: :-) Don't worry, we'll nail it! Oh yes, it would be much less fun if it were all working. The finding and fixing is the best part :-) Rest up and feel better soon, Noel! --FritzM.

Re: Bogus "account hacked" message

They need to tune the pitch to the audience: "We see that you ran 'EDITH' with three sense switches activated..."

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

On 1/8/19 1:53 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote: Can PDP11GUI save output from the -11's console? If so, just say 'od core', and send me the output. Assuming that doesn't create another core file... :-) I'll give it a go when I get home tonight. --FritzM.

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

Update from last night: I did manage to build a bootable single-RK05 V6 unix image under SIMH, starting from the Ken Wellsch tape image. Yeah, it needs to be converted to SIMH tape format, as documented in various places on the web, including actually a gunkies page that I didn’t notice until

Re: KD11-E/EA microcode flow diagrams

> On Jan 8, 2019, at 9:23 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > > ... Dave B and I need a PDP-11 in the FPGA on the QSIC, to run the USB > protocol on; rather than using a microcontroller, we decided the hack value > of putting an -11 in there was too much to resist. Fun! I should go

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 7, 2019, at 10:02 PM, Fritz Mueller wrote: > >> On Jan 7, 2019, at 12:56 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk >> wrote: >> >> Well, there are single-RK05 images up already: >> >> http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/research/Ken_Wellsch_v6/ > > ...which directory contains

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 7, 2019, at 12:56 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > > Well, there are single-RK05 images up already: > > http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/research/Ken_Wellsch_v6/ Hmm, this link didn’t work for me; I found I think equivalent mirrored at:

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 7, 2019, at 12:56 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > > ...there are single-RK05 images up already: > > http://www.tuhs.org/Archive/PDP-11/Distributions/research/Ken_Wellsch_v6/ > > but they only include binary for /40’s ... but really, it's drop-dead simple > to build a /45

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

Hi Paul, > On Jan 7, 2019, at 7:40 AM, Paul Koning wrote: > >> On Jan 6, 2019, at 5:58 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >> >> I'd have to refresh my memory on how but it's clearly possible to force a >> crash dump. That would allow us to dig into exactly what went wrong, >> provided you can read the

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 7, 2019, at 6:29 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > > Try running your RSTS image on Ersatz-11, see if it's a simulator issue. I’ll give that a go. > And try bringing up Unix V6 on your machine ... I can help with providing the > image, if needed. I’ve thought about that;

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

Hi Paul, > On Jan 6, 2019, at 5:58 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > > Hm. Can you read data back from the RK05 pack? I'd have to refresh my > memory on how but it's clearly possible to force a crash dump. That would > allow us to dig into exactly what went wrong, provided you can read the dump >

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

Oh, one last thing: if anybody else out there has a real working '11/45 + RK05 and wants to try this RSTS image, let me know, and I’ll send you a copy (all 2.5MB of it, hah). It’d be interesting to see if this a really just limited to my machine? --FritzM.

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 5, 2019, at 12:58 PM, Fritz Mueller wrote: > > I did get some MACRO CRC-16 sub-routines coded up last night while waiting > for various transfers, so I think I’ll go ahead and finish up the standalone > CRC dumper utility today. > > Lastly, a 5V-tolerant USB FIFO breakout board is

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 5, 2019, at 9:51 PM, Tony Duell wrote: > > Actually, is there a good reason not to fit all jumpers on that board? Looking at it, I was just wondering the same thing!

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 5, 2019, at 9:17 PM, Tony Duell wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 12:45 AM Fritz Mueller via cctalk > >> Easy enough experiment to try; would need to re-jumper the G740 disk >> selection flip chip in the RK11-C too, I guess? > > No. One difference

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

Hi Jerry, > On Jan 5, 2019, at 4:06 PM, Jerry Weiss wrote: > > Along those lines if you have a spare disk pack, try putting RT11(FB,XM) on > the machine and give it a workout. This would exercise the machine a bit > more than MAINDECS, though not as much as RSTS. Yup, I have previously

Re: KD11-E/EA microcode flow diagrams

> On Jan 5, 2019, at 3:35 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > > The only difference I can see (I compared page by page, to see if each page > had the same microinstructions on it) is that on sheet 17; the last > microinstruction for RTI/RTT has been moved from 002 -> 744. (The actual >

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 5, 2019, at 8:07 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > >> From: Fritz Mueller >> All the CPU, FPU, KT11, KW11, and RK11 MAINDECS are passing just fine. > > Don't forget Vonada Maxim #12: > "Diagnostics are highly efficient in finding solved problems.” Well, there’s wisdom there,

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 4, 2019, at 5:15 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > > So the likely answer is that either your INIT.BAC program, or your BASIC.RTS, > is damaged ... > Can you read the RK05 from the machinery you used to fill it originally? It > might make sense simply to read parts of it, or all of it, and

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 4, 2019, at 5:15 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > > So the likely answer is that either your INIT.BAC program, or your BASIC.RTS, > is damaged ... > Can you read the RK05 from the machinery you used to fill it originally? It > might make sense simply to read parts of it, or all of it, and

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 4, 2019, at 6:51 AM, Paul Koning wrote: > > Plan B: set a breakpoint at "ERL" (040672 in your map) which is the entry > point to the error logging code. That's where the display register is > incremented as part of logging an error. On entry, R0 is the EMT code (a > LOG$xx code,

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

Hi Paul, > On Jan 3, 2019, at 7:01 AM, Paul Koning wrote: > > I have a Monitor ODT manual from RSTS V4, I should find a way to make that > available. It's pretty nearly standard ODT, there are a few extensions for > mapping addresses Bitsavers has some docs for ODT from contemporaneous

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Jan 1, 2019, at 5:10 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk > wrote: > > You could load monitor ODT (ODT option in the memory layout settings in > DEFAULT) and set a breakpoint at LOG$DK, that's the error logging entry point > of the driver. Then you could display the RK11 CSRs and we can see if

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Dec 31, 2018, at 8:43 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > > In the RKDS: bit 7 has changed the definition slightly ("Drive Ready" to > "R/W/S Ready"), but seems to be basically the same. In the RKCS, bit 9 is > "Read/Write All" in the -C, and unused in the -D; bit 12 is "Maint" in the

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Dec 31, 2018, at 5:15 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > >> On Dec 31, 2018, at 6:32 PM, Henk Gooijen via cctalk >> wrote: >> >> There are one or two bits in a register of the RK11 that have a different >> meaning/function, depending on the controller being a -C or -D. The RK11-C >> was

Re: PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

> On Dec 31, 2018, at 1:54 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > > The standard idle pattern is in the data lights. I don't remember if the > "fancy" pattern appeared in V7.0 or earlier, but in any case it's an > undocumented SYSGEN option. > > In RSTS/E, the display register shows the system error

PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem

Hi all, Some here may know I’ve been working on an 11/45 restoration off and on for some time now. My ’45 currently has floating point, KT11-C mem mgmt, 124 kword MS11-L, and an RK11-C with one restored RK05 drive. Last week I decided to see if I could bring up RSTS/E on the machine. I managed

Re: RK05 spindle pulleys - trade 50Hz vs 60Hz?

> On Jul 26, 2018, at 12:19 AM, Mattis Lind via cctalk > wrote: > > You need to move the motor to a new position in the RK05. The drive is > already prepared for all this. It is just the pulley, moving the motor and > the 220VAC jumper that is needed. I'm just working on my second RK05 drive

Re: RK05 spindle pulleys - trade 50Hz vs 60Hz?

> On Jul 26, 2018, at 12:19 AM, Mattis Lind via cctalk > wrote: > > You need to move the motor to a new position in the RK05. The drive is > already prepared for all this. It is just the pulley, moving the motor and > the 220VAC jumper that is needed. I'm just

Re: DEC power connectors (UNIBUS PDP-11s, mostly)

If these are what you are talking about, I ordered up a bunch a couple years ago when I rebuilt the power harness for my 11/45, and can attest they are the right thing: https://www.connectorpeople.com/Connector/TYCO-AMP-TE_CONNECTIVITY/1/1-480460-0

Re: Looking for Heath H-29 operation manual and schematic

Al, following up on this thread from February, in case you are still looking, I just came across my copies of: - Z-29 Uers's & Technical Guide (1983) - Z-29 ASCII character and escape code chart Despite the claim to be a "Technical" guide, the above is really more of a user manual,

Re: How to set DZ11 line speeds under RT-11 V4?

> On Mar 30, 2018, at 10:37 AM, Fritz Mueller wrote: > > When SYSGEN-ing RT-11 V4, the only speed initialization options offered for > the DZ11 lines are 110 or 300 baud. Is there a utility or incantation which > will allow me to reconfigure these after RT-11 is booted?

How to set DZ11 line speeds under RT-11 V4?

Hi all, I've now had some success getting MU-BASIC configured and running on multiple terminals under RT-11 V4 in simh, with a hardware configuration similar to that in my real PDP-11/45. I have a serial console + DZ11 in both configurations. When SYSGEN-ing RT-11 V4, the only speed

Re: RT-11 V4 MU-BASIC help

> On Mar 30, 2018, at 8:25 AM, Sytse van Slooten wrote: > > I've used that image quite a bit for testing my vhdl pdp11. So it should work. Thanks, Sytse. In my case, I kept running up against traps and halts after that point, while interacting with MU-BASIC after the "say

Re: RL02 Question

>> It is also possible that a capacitor has deteriorated in the >> timeout one-shot > > I was beginning to wonder if it was a capacitor FWIW, while restoring my 11/45 and its RK11-C, I found several failed 74LS123 dual one-shots in various places. Haven’t looked at the RL02 drawings yet, but

Re: RT-11 V4 MU-BASIC help

> On Mar 29, 2018, at 11:01 PM, Mattis Lind wrote: > > Fixed now (I hope). Yes, I was able to get these now, I will give them a go -- thanks again! I also see that there's a paper tape distribution up on bitsavers, but it looks like it might be v1? --FritzM.

Re: RT-11 V4 MU-BASIC help

> On Mar 29, 2018, at 9:53 PM, Mattis Lind wrote: > > I have imaged some RX01 and RX02 floppy disks with RT11 V3B and MU Basic. > http://www.datormuseum.se/documentation-software/rx01-and-rx02-floppy-disks >

RT-11 V4 MU-BASIC help

Hello all, I would like to try and get MU-BASIC working on my PDP-11/45, under RT-11 V4. The best bits I've been able to find to work with so far are the RK05 image here: http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/bits/DEC/pdp11/discimages/rk05/rt11v4-mubasicv2.rk.gz ...but I've not had

Re: PDP-11 floating CSRs: 760010, or 760100?

> On Mar 17, 2018, at 6:57 PM, Fritz Mueller wrote: > > I have a question about floating CSR allocation on PDP-11s. Both the 1976 > and 1981 versions of the PDP-11 peripherals handbook indicate the floating > CSRs are to be allocated starting at address 760010. However,

PDP-11 floating CSRs: 760010, or 760100?

Hi folks, I have a question about floating CSR allocation on PDP-11s. Both the 1976 and 1981 versions of the PDP-11 peripherals handbook indicate the floating CSRs are to be allocated starting at address 760010. However, both the XXDP FLOAT program and simh's autoconfig suggest I should set

<    1   2   3   >