On 12/31/2018 12:00 PM, simh-requ...@trailing-edge.com wrote:
Control/T support was an optional feature, enabled during SYSGEN, for
some time.  I'm fairly sure it was never an undocumented feature, but it
  wasn't standard originally.



     paul

I decided to dig into the V6C system a bit further. I am amazed at what I have remembered these 30+ years. I patched SYSTAT.BAS to display the Pri/RB column that we had available on our V06C-03 system. Even remembered how to change a protection to <232> using:

PIP SYSTAT.BAC<232> /RE

(not even sure how I recalled that after all these years LOL)

RSTS V06C-03 Timesharing status at 31-Dec-98, 13:16    Up: 24

Job    Who    Where    What    Size    State    Run-Time  Pri/RB RTS
 1     1,2    Det     ERRCPY   5/28K   SR            4.7    0/6 BASIC
 2     1,4    KB0     SYSTAT   8/28K   RN Lck        0.0   -8/6 BASIC

Then I took a look at V06C TTDVR.MAC and that is where it got interesting. There are references to CONTROL/T support but it is not calling the mini SYSTAT routine:

TI$CRR::                        ;;HANDLE CONTROL/R (RETYPE)
TI$CTT::                        ;;HANDLE CONTROL/T (SYSTAT)

.IF     NE      EKOCTL

        BITB    #TTECTL,TTMODE(R1) ;;ECHO CONTROL MODE?
        BNE     TTNORM          ;;YES, MAKE A NORMAL CHARACTER

.ENDC   ;EKOCTL

        CALL    TTISGL          ;;CHECK FOR SPECIAL MODE(S)
        BNE     TTNORM          ;;MAKE NORMAL CHARACTER IF ANY
        BIT     #TTFUNC,TTCHAR(R1) ;;ALLOWING SPECIAL FUNCTION CHARACTER
S?
        BNE     TTNORM          ;;NOPE, MAKE A NORMAL CHARACTER
        CMP     R2,#'R-100      ;;IS IT CONTROL/R?
        BNE     40$             ;;NOPE, IT IS CONTROL/T
        CALL    ASCOUE,R5,TTICRC ;;ANNOUNCE WITH "^R"<CR><LF>
        MOV     R5,-(SP)        ;;SAVE R5
        MOV     TTINPT+EP(R1),R5 ;;GET THE CURRENT EMPTY POINTER
        BIT     #TT2741!TAPE!NOECHO,DDFLAG(R1) ;;SHOULD WE DO THIS?
        BEQ     30$             ;;YES
10$:    MOV     (SP)+,R5        ;;RESTORE R5
        RETURN                  ;;EXIT

20$:    MOV     -40(R5),R5      ;;GET NEXT BUFFER IN CHAIN
30$:    CMP     R5,TTINPT+FP(R1) ;;MORE CHARACTERS?
        BEQ     10$             ;;NO, DONE
        BIT     R5,#40-1        ;;YES, MORE ROOM IN THIS BUFFER?
        BEQ     20$             ;;OUT OF ROOM, GO TO NEXT BUFFER
        MOVB    (R5)+,R2        ;;ROOM, GET THE CHARACTER
        BIC     #^C<177>,R2     ;;TRIM OFF ANY JUNK
        CALL    CHOUTO          ;; AND OUTPUT IT
        BR      30$             ;;  THEN LOOP

40$:    JMP     TTSYST          ;;GO DO THE MINI SYSTAT

        TMPORG  TTSYST

TTSYST: JMP     TTNORM          ;;MAKE IT A NORMAL CHARACTER

The TTSYST label simply reverts control-T to a normal character without calling the mini SYSTAT routine (wherever it is located). Checking the V7.0 TTDVR.MAC code I see there is support to call the routine:

40$:    CALL    MAPPED,R5,TTSYST ;;GO TRY FOR A MINI SYSTEM (USING PAR6 CODE)
        BCS     TTNORM          ;;NOT LEGAL NOW, MAKE A NORMAL CHARACTER
        RETURN                  ;;DONE, JUST RETURN

        TMPORG  TTSYST
TTSYST: SEC                     ;;SAY MINI SYSTAT NOT LEGAL (UNLESS OVERLAID)
        RETURN                  ;; AND EXIT
        UNORG

I did my own V06C SYSGEN and there is no option to build it in like there is in a V7.0 SYSGEN. I can only imagine the site we were using, Nassau County New York's BOCES system that was shared by schools all over the county, had some additional, possibly experimental, patches that were not part of the base V06C-03. As I noted earlier, our control-T functionality was controlled by the SET CTRL/R command and if control-R was turned off in TTYSET, so was control-T. Also we non-privileged users could see our job priority which was a feature that was removed for non-privileged users in V7.0.

Oh well, it has been an interesting few hours reminiscing with that old V06C system. The stuff I still recall is amusing. My last on-the-job work with RSTS/E was at a shop that had a V8.0 system on an 11/34 and a V9.0 system on an 11/73 back in the fall of 1985. We developers preferred working on the V9.0 system as it was faster and more "VMS" like. V8.0 was a very odd duck IMHO.

Robert

_______________________________________________
Simh mailing list
Simh@trailing-edge.com
http://mailman.trailing-edge.com/mailman/listinfo/simh

Reply via email to