From: Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Wed 6 Mar 91 11:14:36

Date: Wed 6 Mar 91 11:14:36
From: Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>

As far as I know, nothing has been set up yet, I'm still hoping,
though...

A few different ideas has been in the air, but things been very
quiet the last few months.

What do all you people say? (There must be more people out there...)

If we could get an archive site up and running, there is a lot of stuff
that could be placed there.
Anybody got any good suggestions?

	Johnny

Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1991 15:06:09 -0800 (PST)
From: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Sender: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: latest
To: PDP-8 Lovers <[email-masked]>

Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1991 15:06:09 -0800 (PST)
From: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Sender: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: latest
To: PDP-8 Lovers <[email-masked]>

Hi -

     My home menagerie received some help a few weeks ago (thank you, Messrs
Lothberg and Dempster!), and I once again have a working DECSYSTEM-2020
system.  I ended up replacing all of its disk drives; it now has three RM03
drives and one RM05.  I have a spare RM03 and RM05; I also have four dead
RM03's.

     On the PDP-8 front I have a "mostly working" PDP-8/f with 12K.  I can key
in the RIM loader, get it to load the BIN loader, and get that to load FOCAL,
but when I try to run FOCAL I immediately get an error.  Typing any character
hangs it, but CTRL/C gives me an error and back to the prompt.  I don't know
if it's the interrupt system or what.  Any ideas?

-- Mark --

To: [email-masked]
Cc: PDP-8 Lovers <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: latest 
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 91 15:56:06 PST
From: [email-masked]

To: [email-masked]
Cc: PDP-8 Lovers <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: latest 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 06 Mar 91 15:06:09 PST."
             <[email-masked]> 
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 91 15:56:06 PST
From: [email-masked]

Cool!  Hey, is your '20 on the Internet?  God, would I love to have a little
access to one of those guys again....  My own 8/E is still waiting for a
little of my time :-(.

					Good job!
					Andy Valencia
					[email-masked]

Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1991 16:27:45 -0800 (PST)
From: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Sender: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: latest 
To: [email-masked]
Cc: PDP-8 Lovers <[email-masked]>

Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1991 16:27:45 -0800 (PST)
From: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Sender: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: latest 
To: [email-masked]
Cc: PDP-8 Lovers <[email-masked]>
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>

The 20 isn't on the Internet, but it is e-mail addressable as PANDA.PANDA.COM;
that is, my e-mail address is [email-masked] there although [email-masked]
will also work.  PANDA.COM and *.PANDA.COM are MX records that point to WSMR-
SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL which has an e-mail link with PANDA via a dial-up email
protocol I invented called Cafard (this was in the days when AT&T considered
the UUCP protocol proprietary).

Actually, this is the second revival of PANDA.  PANDA (and its e-mail
connectivity) came into existance in 1985, and was shut down at the end of
September 1988.  In late spring 1989, living in a different state with a new
job, house, and lady, I brought PANDA back up but it was seriously damaged by
moving and several months' storage in an unheated damp storage locker.  It was
unreliable (including a head crash on my source disk) and died solidly that
autumn.  An unsucessful attempt was made to fix PANDA one weekend in 1990
(another head crash), but it wasn't until February 15-17 1991 that success was
achieved.

The repair effort involved almost totally stripping one 2020 (the former San
Mateo County Office of Education system).  A second 2020 (the former Stanford
University Knowledge Systems Lab system) also supplied parts, but it is in an
almost complete condition and may be brought up as TONTON.PANDA.COM.

It also involved retiring all of PANDA's original disk drives, and replacing
them with RM03 drives acquired from a surplus electronics store in Seattle and
with RM05 drives donated by Boeing.

The PANDA.COM menagerie is soon to get a new member; a 68040 NeXTstation
running version 1.1 of the NeXT operating system.  This machine will be called
IKKOKU-KAN.PANDA.COM.  If all goes well, it will be Internet accessible via a
9600 baud SLIP link to TOMOBIKI-CHO.CAC.WASHINGTON.EDU (my work NeXT).

Work is underway to get PANDA.PANDA.COM talking TCP/IP.  If successful, I will
attempt to have an Ethernet link between PANDA, IKKOKU-KAN, and possibly
TONTON.  Although my initial TOPS-20 IP debugging will use SLIP, 9600 baud
asynchronous input to a 2020 is too horrible to contemplate and I will never
run the machine in that mode.

Date: Wed, 6 Mar 91 18:04:20 PST
From: [email-masked] (Paul Hardy)
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: latest 

Date: Wed, 6 Mar 91 18:04:20 PST
From: [email-masked] (Paul Hardy)
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
In-Reply-To: [email-masked]'s message of Wed, 06 Mar 91 15:56:06 PST <[email-masked]>
Subject: latest 

Gee, a PDP-8/E.  This was the first PDP-8 I used.  It had an ASR-33 and
a (very!) small disk.  I don't even remember the type, but it held something
like 64 kwords.  It had FOCAL on disk, as well as PAL (don't remmeber which
version).  The actual disk unit looked a little like the robot's head
in Lost In Space (not see-through, but there was a cylinder, with a drive
shaft coming down from it, and that's what I thought of when I looked at it).
I don't remember what type it was -- RS08 or RF08 or something like that.
It's been almost 15 years since I've used it.  I've kept my programmer's
manual, though.  If you ever want to get rid of your 8...

Does anyone have docs for a DECMate I by the way?  I have a motherboard,
some sort of backplane, and another board but that's it.  Not even a power
supply (or cabinet for that matter).  I would at least like to hook up
power to the thing and get a prompt from it.

As for the '20, I'd settle for modem access!  If there is too little
interest for a PDP-20 lovers mailing list, maybe there's enough interest
in a PDP-20 system to log into.  Mark???

				--Paul

Date: Wed, 6 Mar 91 23:12:34 EST
From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked] (Paul Hardy)
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Re: latest

Date: Wed, 6 Mar 91 23:12:34 EST
From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked] (Paul Hardy)
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Re: latest
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 6 Mar 91 18:04:20 PST

The disk is/was the DF32 and it has only 32K words on it, but could be
expanded with up to three more DS32's for a total of 128K words!  The
RF08 is its big brother which starts at 1 platter with 256K words and
expands with RS08 expanders to 1024K words normally, but a few were
bundled with the DV08 data verifier option to be capable of up to 7
expanders for a total of 2048K words.  The DF32 was a negative bus
peripheral, as was the RF08, but there was also the DF32D and DS32D
which were the positive!negative bus versions.  Most TTL -8 peripherals
for the pos. bus could have negative counterparts merely by doing a
cookbook buss module and cable swap.  They are designated -P or -N
accordingly.  

You are obviously describing the 4K Disk Monitor system, which is not
the only or even the best software for this hardware, but was the only
DEC-sold choice prior to 1970.

cjl

Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1991 21:09:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Sender: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: re: latest 
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]

Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1991 21:09:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Sender: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: re: latest 
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
In-Reply-To: <9103070204.AA16201@ama>

In <9103070204.AA16201@ama>, [email-masked] writes:
>As for the '20, I'd settle for modem access!  If there is too little
>interest for a PDP-20 lovers mailing list, maybe there's enough interest
>in a PDP-20 system to log into.  Mark???

Hmm.  I'll have to think about it.  There are two 1200 baud dialups on PANDA,
but I'm a little worried about allowing random people to log in, particular as
my tape drive is still down, hence no backups.  There's enough disk space, and
enough spare cycles, but giving away "idle" resources is not necessarily a no-
cost operation, as I and others have found out the hard way...

I may be willing to make accounts on TONTON (whose boot disk is built from
PANDA's, hence no backup needed) once its disk channel is working (and
preferably get the second port on its disk drive working so the drive can be
accessed from both PANDA and TONTON).  It would cost me approximately
$1000/year (about 2KW for the CPU/disk plus extra air conditioning load, at
about 5.5 cents/KWH) extra in electricity to run the second machine.  Is there
enough interest that would enable me to recover some or all of this cost?

From: Matthew S Rosen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 91 01:03:34 -0500
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Archive site! (maybe...)

From: Matthew S Rosen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 91 01:03:34 -0500
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Archive site! (maybe...)

Hi.
	I may have found an archive (ftp) site for PDP8 lovers here
at RPI.. What I need is an idea of how much disk we would need, and
how many people would find a use in it.  I suppose the asiest thing to do
would to email (or post to the list..) they type (and size...) of 
things that would be put on it as well as your own interest in the
site (i.e. Would you find it useful..)

	As for me, I got a PDP8/f when I was 10 or so, with a TTY
(110 baud) paper tape reader/punch, and 4K core.  Yup. Rim loader
city when the core got trashed by some misbehaving code..  How?  How
did I have an 8 when I was 10?  Well, my dad ([email-masked])
used/uses them in a Neurophysilogical research lab, doing real
time data acquisation and processing (I'm sure he'd like to
describe the software and hardware to anyone interested.. He spent
quite some time designing and building it..)  So, I got the spare 8.
Programing in assembly, and 8K basic when I finally got the memory.. No
onder I'm hopelessly out of date with the "modern" world of computers..

Anyway,  My machine now is an 8/f with 32K MOS memory, VT220, EAE, dule
RX01 Floppy, kludeged (sorry dad!) high speed paper tape reader,
and misc. other stuff.  Dad's got an 8/e, 32K core, Expansion box,
RK05 hard disk, and duel RX02 (?) work-alikes, + some other neat stuff
like a 4096 x 4096 graphics display.... (wanna talk about it, dad?)

So, if anyone has any ideas about the archive site, let me know.

	-Matt

[email-masked]

Date: Thu, 7 Mar 91 6:57:37 EST
From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
To: Matthew S Rosen <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Archive site! (maybe...)

Date: Thu, 7 Mar 91 6:57:37 EST
From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
To: Matthew S Rosen <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Archive site! (maybe...)
In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 7 Mar 91 01:03:34 -0500

Ok, here is a rough guess:

I would like to see all OS/8 family sources on-line including all known
variants such as release-dependent versions and user-created versions,
etc.  This includes the original DEC sources as well as user add-ons,
etc.  In addition, I would like to see all TSS8 and DM sources, as well
as all known machine readable manuals for all of the above.  My
operating system, P?S/8 is proprietary, so it will NOT be posted here;
interested parties can contact me off the net for this software.
Certain diagnostics have their sources and/or writeups available as
files as well.
I would also encourage the posting of the LINC family source files as
well, since they can be converted to an ASCII format PAL language as
used on LAP6-DIAL, P?S/8 PAL, and DIAL10 for TOPS10/20.  This would get
us all of the LINC-8 and PDP-12 files that were available.
The DECmate family also hopefully contributes to the collection as
well.  We would welcome the sources for GTE, Master Menu, the hard disk
formatter, System Test Diskette, DEC-X8 diagnostics, etc., and of
course any PDP-8 specific games like adventure-8, spacewar, and editors
like TECO-8 and the DECmate Edit program, CPODT, etc.

Assuming all of this were to be submitted, I can't imagine it taking
more than 50 Megabytes compressed.Z format.

BTW, KERMIT-12 need not be placed in this archive, as
watsun.cc.columbia.edu serves as the home of all kermits, not just
mine.

cjl ([email-masked] and author of KERMIT-12)

ps: I can contribute a fair amount of the above and I know others that
would also.

From: Chris Green <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 91 12:34:41 GMT
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Re: latest, and also PDP-12's

From: Chris Green <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 91 12:34:41 GMT
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Re: latest, and also PDP-12's

Quite a burst of activity recently, it awoke my memories.  1974 to 1977 I
worked on PDP-12's, anyone else out there know that lovely beast?  The
one I spent most time on was in Saudi Arabia and had 16k of memory (a big
one!) and a 256k RF08 disk plus lots of other peripherals like a fast
lineprinter and so on.

The PDP-12 was great fun, it had a PDP-8/E (I think it was a /E) in it
plus a LINC machine, you could switch from one instruction set to the
other 'on the fly'.  The LINC was the only machine I have ever worked
on which did 1's complement arithmetic.

Chris Green  ([email-masked]   or   [email-masked])

Date: Thu, 7 Mar 91 14:57:55 EST
From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
To: Chris Green <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Re: latest, and also PDP-12's

Date: Thu, 7 Mar 91 14:57:55 EST
From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
To: Chris Green <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Re: latest, and also PDP-12's
In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 7 Mar 91 12:34:41 GMT

Not quite:
The PDP-12 is an 8/i with a LINC "grafted" on.  It was originally to be
called LINC-8/i as some of the modules actually say!  There is no
separate machine, rather the processor is integrated as both with mode
changing instructions.  There is no peripheral implementation as
implied or coprocessor concept either.  Unlike its predecessor, the
LINC-8, there is only one set of registers, and yes, while in LINC
mode, the arithmetic instructions of the LINC prevail which are all but
one a set of one's complement arithmetic instructions.
The instructions are totally different, and the similarity ends at the
fact that they both have 12 bits.  Addressing schemes are thoroughly
incompatible as well, and sometimes "clash" in terms of OS conventions,
interrupts, etc.
Late model PDP-12s also have hardware Automatic Priority Interrupt
(API) which never made it into the newer -8s.  Further, the FPP-12 had
a special lockout mode when it was enabled and connected only to a -12
which speeds up FPP Fortran.  (This was reimplemented in the FPP-8/e,a
for the newer machines though.)
EAE for these machines is still an option, not built-in even though so
much of the hardware is required to be a LINC anyway.  I believe two
cards gives you EAE here.
Let's not forget the PDP-12 console: virtually every register is
displayed simultaneously in individual bit lamps (and the bulbs plug
in, not soldered, and are replaceable today with LEDs).  There are two
switch registers each 12 switches, 6 sense switches, 8 knobs, 8 a-d
stereo phone jacks (optionally up to 16 more) all available on the
front panel as input devices.  There are also 12 TTL inputs available
(not on the front panel though) and 6 SPDT relays as well.  And let's
not forget the 12" 'scope display which is 512x512 complete with
character generator hardware (well, 1/2 char anyway :-), and a formica
table top to lean on in front of the machine.  The switches are
horizontally mounted rocker switches.  The console allows fetch/exec
stop, automatic restart delay (for slow-motion operation) variable over
four decades of speed.  While there is no hardware boot per se, there
is the ability to execute an instruction directly off of the switches,
not even in memory, so booting the machine generally consists of
executing a tape read instruction and manual startup.  The console
functions include filling or examining memory via hardware
autoincrement, so you can just watch the lights until you see something
"important" should that matter, without even having to hit a step key
(which is also available if you want), and a distinctive feature: the
ability to examine a location and change its contents without having to
reestablish the address.  Further, the address is specified on one set
of switches, and the contents being stored there on the other set which
allows multiple addresses to be patched with the same value with
minimal effort.  Since this machine has true fetch/exec stop, it is
possible to debug interrupt-driven code effectively without modifying
it.  Should a desired instruction have been left out, just execute it on
the switches and keep going.  We often forget to raise the TTY output
flag, so a routine would hang.  Just stop the machine, put 6046 on the
switches, and press DO, and then continue and you're on your way.
The PDP-12 was clearly the "ergonomic" top-of-the-line, as well as
having little subtle touches as well, such as nylon washers on the door
hinge points to prevent squeaking.  A PDP-8 "cadillac" if there ever
was one.

cjl

From [email-masked] Thu Mar  7 20:30:33 1991
From: Nick Troop <[email-masked]>
Subject: reuest
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 91 12:41:27 GMT

help

From: Chris Green <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 91 09:23:34 GMT
To: [email-masked]
Subject: PDP-12 continued

From: Chris Green <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 91 09:23:34 GMT
To: [email-masked]
Subject: PDP-12 continued

Re  cjl's long message on the PDP-12, thanks for the clarification and
extra description - it's a long time since I worked on the PDP-12!

Yes, of course, it's a PDP8/i plus a LINC machine.  And don't I remember
the horrendous problems brought on by being able to switch between the
two, as you say incompatible, architectures.  In particular the wierd
and wonderful things that had to be done to handle interrupts, so
that you could switch to the right mode to execute the interrupt handler
and then when finished return to the right mode and address.

And yes, the PDP-12 console was wonderful, always gave one the image of
a mad professor with his machine, all those flashing lights.  I wish
they had been LED's when I used it though as it was a weekly service
job to replace all the blown bulbs.  Users of other computers at the
time use to envy the simple boot sequence on the PDP-12 because of being
able to put a tape read instruction in the switch registers and execute
it, 0701 7310 wasn't it, followed by loading the start address and off
you go - something like that anyway.

The 'scope display was also something special as the programmers editor
on the PDP-12 used it as a VDU (though one still had to use the KSR-35
as a keyboard) and it was actually quite a civilised programming env-
ironment, especially with single stepping, break points and so on
easily available from the switches on the console.

The systems I worked on were actually 'Clinilab-12' hospital laboratory
systems, I think these were about the last PDP-12's that DEC actively
sold.  Certainly when I was involved DEC was withdrawing support for the
Clinilab-12 and my company (G.D.Searle) attempted to take over the market
by continuing to support them, unsuccessfully I fear!  I spent quite some
time at DEC in Maynard picking the brains of the few remaining PDP-12
experts at that time.  I was soon completely on my own though and even
more so when I went out to Saudi Arabia, all the other hospital computers
there were PDP-11's (new fangled 16 bit machines!!).

Chris Green

Date: Fri, 8 Mar 91 18:06:53 EST
From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
To: Chris Green <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: PDP-12 continued

Date: Fri, 8 Mar 91 18:06:53 EST
From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
To: Chris Green <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: PDP-12 continued
In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 8 Mar 91 09:23:34 GMT

0701 7310 was the tape operation to reconfigure and boot LAP6-DIAL's
(potentially) disk-based DIAL-MS system.  The typical boot is 0701 7300
which is a relic from the LINC-8 days.  With DIAL-MS, it means that the
tape is loaded, and then re-boots to the current configuration.  0701
7310 does a different thing: it guessworks the best available
configuration that DIAL can run from, which might be merely the tapes
if that's all that's available, but will auto-configure to 1 or 2
DF32s, RF08, or RK08 if available, rewrite the configuration on the
tape, and then do the equivalent of 0701 7300 to boot it up.  It is
curious that a tape is ALWAYS involved in booting a disk-oriented
system.

Btw, you used Clinical-Lab-12 systems?  So, your machines were blue!
Most of us have green PDP-12s in "normal" grey-side cabinets, not white
cabinets and PDP-15-color rocker switches!  Both of mine are green, but
I know another guy with machines of both colors, as he was also a
Clinical-Lab-12 person.

Dialco and others sell a plug-in replacement LED with limiting resistor
built-in to use instead of the bulbs which really looks like an
incandescent bulb.  DEC uses them disks like RK05 to replace the same
lamp there, but the Dialco LED is brighter; there is also an alternate
vendor, but the name escapes me; may have it on file though.

Regarding interrupts:

Much of our PDP-8 code for the -12 has various instruction sequences in
them to prevent the interrupt problem.  While not widely documented,
there are a few tricks that work:

	IOF

	{whatever}

	ION

	This is the classic method to prevent interrupts.  The whatever
part might include the sequence:

	LINC

	{whatever in LINC code}

	PDP

	It is vital that the code after the LINC and before the PDP not
be interrupted.

	One problem with this is that you have to have the ION and IOF
instructions so the code is longer, slower, etc., and unnecessarily
prevents interrupts during the sequence.  A better way on PDP-8's with
extended memory is to use:

	CIF	00   /or whatever the current field is

	LINC

	{whatever}

	PDP

	{whatever without a JMP or JMS}

	JMP WHEREVER /or JMS WHEREVER

	This takes care of the interrupt by inhibiting it after the CIF
until the next JMP or JMS, and doesn't need an explicit IOF.  The
problem is on 4K machines where CIF is not implemented because there is
no extended memory hardware.  If a program must be viable on a 4K
machine, you can't use this trick.

	Well, it turns out that even 4K PDP-12's *DO* implement the memory
extension control, just no extended memory.  The reason is that the
PDP-12 extended memory control understands the LINC portion of the
machine as a special case, and maintains LINC status.  All PDP-12's are
extended memory as far is the LINC is concerned, since the LINC is a
1K-oriented architecture with an additional 1K data-only segment.  So
even a lowly 4K PDP-12 has to maintain two bits of every register, so
the instructions for memory control ALWAYS work!

	So, for example, the P?S/8 system handler for the PDP-12 with
4K or more allows interrupts during the I/O call.  The few LINC
operations during the handler are interrupt-protected with a leading
CIF instruction.  Interrupts can freely happen during all of the rest
of the operation of the handler; LINC mode operation lasts only about
15 microseconds.  The handler waits for the tape to finish in -8 mode
in a totally interruptible manner.

cjl (Charles Lasner, [email-masked])

ps: It is most notable that the -8 family KERMIT is known as KERMIT-12.
KERMIT-12 runs on 12-bit PDP-8 family machines and the prompt is
related to the cpu hardware.  Running KERMIT-12 on an 8/i gives a
prompt of KERMIT-8/e> while running it on the PDP-12 gives a prompt of
KERMIT-12> so I guess that's its "true" home. :-)  In any case, I wrote
the code that way. :-)

Date: Fri, 8 Mar 91 20:57:15 EST
From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
Cc: Chris Green <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Subject: Re: PDP-12 continued

Date: Fri, 8 Mar 91 20:57:15 EST
From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
Cc: Chris Green <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Subject: Re: PDP-12 continued
In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 8 Mar 91 18:06:53 EST

a typo: KERMIT-12 says the prompt KERMIT-12> on a -12, but it says
KERMIT-8/i> on an 8/i, and KERMIT-8/e> on an 8/e, sorry for the
confusion.
cjl

From: [email-masked] (Robert E. Seastrom)
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 91 15:37:14 EST
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: PDP-12 continued

From: [email-masked] (Robert E. Seastrom)
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 91 15:37:14 EST
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
In-Reply-To: Charles Lasner's message of Fri, 8 Mar 91 20:57:15 EST <[email-masked]>
Subject: PDP-12 continued

   Date: Fri, 8 Mar 91 20:57:15 EST
   From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>

   a typo: KERMIT-12 says the prompt KERMIT-12> on a -12, but it says
   KERMIT-8/i> on an 8/i, and KERMIT-8/e> on an 8/e, sorry for the
   confusion.
   cjl

While you're at it, could you post an explanation of how FOCAL (and
presumably kermit) could tell what kind of machine they were running
on?

                                        ---Rob

Date: Sat, 9 Mar 91 18:07:28 EST
From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked] (Robert E. Seastrom)
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Re: PDP-12 continued

Date: Sat, 9 Mar 91 18:07:28 EST
From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked] (Robert E. Seastrom)
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Re: PDP-12 continued
In-Reply-To: Your message of Sat, 9 Mar 91 15:37:14 EST

How to identify what the machine is on any PDP-8 family cpu and other
sordid subjects.

    This subject started because FOCAL, 1969 tells you (sometimes
erroneously) what the machine is.  So, here is how it goes:

    The 8/i-type cpu can do some strange operate combinations.  When you
rotate right and left at the same time, the bits on the end get lopped
off.  So the combination CLA CMA RAL RAR makes 3776 in the accumulator.

    So, the first test is whether this is an 8/i-kinda cpu.  If this
fails, then it's either a newer type or a straight-8.  Newer types have
things the -8 lacks, so you can test for stuff like BSW.

    Focal, 1969 has an error in reporting an 8/i versus an 8/l.  They
assume two things you should NEVER do:

    a)  All 8/i's are faster than all 8/l's.  This is often just not true
since these are tunable asynchronous memory machines.

    b)  The console is 110 baud.  Very risky.

    The FOCAL, 1969 check is to output a TTY: character and execute a lot
of 6000 instructions.  If the flag is up, then the machine is slow (an
8/l) else an 8/i.  This is foolish and I discovered an improved method
(later).

    The PDP-5 is easy: since the program counter is in location zero,
just store an address-1 there and you will jump to the address of an "I
am a PDP-5" routine.  This is necessary for FOCAL, 1969 because PDP-5
interrupts are to location 2, not 1, and it must be changed.

    The PDP-8/s is done by noticing that CMA and RAL can't be done at the
same time here.  So, CLA CMA CLL RAL fails to achieve 1 7776 on the 8/s.
Note that the test for -5 and -8/s are only used in FOCAL, 1969, since all
PDP-8 operation systems that "matter" don't run on these retarded
machines.  Rumor has it that there were people modifying both CPUs to be
as smart as a straight -8 by adding on outboard logic, etc.

    The newer machines represent a different challenge: one of
packaging.  The KK-8/A CPU can be differentiated from the KK-8/F CPU
because while both have BSW, they handle the RAL RAR problem differently.
On the KK-8/F, CLA CLL RAL RAR loads the current page address + 16 into the
accumulator.  On the KK-8/A, the updated 12-bit PC address is loaded into
the accumulator.  A handler was once written for an omnibus peripheral
that depended on this; the instruction was located at 15 past the start
of the page to ensure compatibility either way.

    So, it is easy to know what the CPU is, but what box is it in?

    KK-8/F is the cpu for any 8/e, f, m, or 8A-500, 600, or theoretically
400 box.  The KK-8/A is the CPU for an 8A-400, 500, 600 box also,
depending on configuration.  My own machine is an 8/e in a 40-slot box
with an 8/a 20-slot hex box on the back (or is that the other way
around?) with both front panels present.  (This is totally legal; read
the configuration guide.)  So, what is MY machine to be called?

    The micro-8/e-type machines are a different problem: the 6100
machines are to be known as -78 or -6100 and can be discovered because
the RAL RAR combination does nothing at all, yet they also have BSW.
(It's a straight -8 if you can't do NL7776 and also don't have BSW.).  It
also has a strange quirk that's almost a feature:

    Instructions like TAD I 10 are autoindexers.  The octal is 1410,
which means that the operand 10 is on page zero.  If you move the
instruction itself to page zero somewhere, then the bit for current page
is effectively a NOP, thus, on page zero 1410 and 1610 do the same thing,
right? Wrong on the 6100! The current page bit sets to PREVENT the
auto-indexing!  The random instruction tests for the 8/e don't work on
the VT-78 because of this.  Also all code generated by any assembler
can't exploit this feature unless you express it in octal.

    The 6120 machines (all DECMATES) have an additional feature.  They
also do nothing with RAL RAR, and have BSW, but they also have R3L which
rotates the AC left three spaces WITHOUT involving the link.  So you can
make instructions like CLA IAC R3L to load the AC with 0010 without
affecting the link.  It's a little hard to pin down which DECmate because
they are all quite similar; a DECmate three looks an awful lot like a
DECmate II with floppies only, and a DECmate III+ looks an awful lot like
a DECmate II with a hard disk.  The DECmate I has different I/O ports
which can be/are detected within KERMIT-12.

    The LINC machines are no problem at all.  A LINC-8 is an -8 with a
LINC section where the -8 can access the LINC registers.  The -12 is an
8/i with the LINC CPU mode.  Just go into LINC mode with the LINC
instruction and do a few innocuous instructions like COM to complement
the AC and then do a PDP to come back.  If the AC complemented, then it's
a -12, not an 8/i.  If it is an 8/i, all the instructions look like AND
instructions and are innocuous.

    FOCAL, 1969 also checks for a LAB-8 configuration, meaning an AX08 is
hooked up.  This is so the FADC and FDIS functions can use the right
hardware.  There is a bit settable in one AX08 register that is readable
in another.  This isn't relevant to KERMIT-12 operation.  Further, FOCAL,
1969 fails to distinguish LAB-8 from LAB-8/i from LAB-8/l, etc.

    Since FOCAL, 1969 was written in 1969, newer stuff always defaults to
being claimed as PDP-8 only.

    There is also some "defensive business practices" code in FOCAL-8,
the deficient newer patched version of FOCAL, 1969.  This version
contains some constants and instructions in different places cleverly
hidden.  The source is also XLISTed at that point so the listing they
would sell you (NOT the source they would NOT!) shows code that gets
overlaid by the REAL instructions which do the following:

    If a strange combination of operates produces an unusual result
attributed to the DCC-112 and DCC-112H machines made by Digital Computer
Controls (later a division of Data General), FOCAL-8 deliberately
subtlely self-destructs by pointing the stack at the code, etc.  This is
to make the crash seem like unreliable hardware, etc., and to cover the
tracks of the code that did the dastardly deed!  I have somewhere a file
which is the source of how to patch the binary of FOCAL, 1969 so it
matches the binary of FOCAL-8 which was obtained by dis-assembling the
differences between the two versions.

    Other than this trap, the only fix in FOCAL-8 is taking advantage of
the 8/e superset hardware to avoid TTY: overrun of paper-tape instead of
a proper software fix, and fixing a one-line missing bug in the TYPE/ASK
code that was already fixed in FOCAL-12.  Their implementation was
therefore one-line longer than the original and involved axing some
adjacent code.  I invented an alternate patch myself which is used in
P?S/8 FOCAL which is based on FOCAL, 1969 which is the same length as the
original, but involves optimizing out a word and moving down a couple
dozen words to make room for the extra word, but the net result is a
clean patch over couple dozen words+1, not DEC's rewrite of the code.
The only other change in FOCAL-8 is removing the code to care about all
of those other machines, since it now won't work on any of them.  They
also charged extra for a paper-tape which merely restores the former code
so it works properly again on pre-8/e machines.  So, other than the
one-word TYPE/ASK fix, you have effectively come right back to FOCAL,
1969 except it can't be used on the -5 or 8/s at all since it doesn't
check and self-modify.  Better to implement my patch on FOCAL, 1969.

    The method of PROPERLY determining an 8/i versus an 8/l is something
I stumbled on: the normal operate instruction CLA actually has three
flavors.  7200 is group one CLA, 7600 is group two CLA, and 7601 is group
three (EAE) CLA.  The 8/l has inhibitor logic for ANY EAE instruction, so
7601 will NOT clear the AC!  Further, any 8/i or -12 for that matter
always decodes all CLA variants as CLA since this is independent of the
rest of the optional EAE hardware.  So, just load a number in the AC and
execute 7601.  If the AC is unchanged, this is an 8/l.

    So, summarizing a list of models and where applicable KERMIT-12
prompt and info lines:

CPU or model        KERMIT-12 prompt  info      method of discovery

PDP-5               N. A.             N. A.     (IAM5-1) > PC at 00000
PDP-8               KERMIT-8>         PDP-8     no RAL RAR no BSW
LINC-8              KERMIT-LINC-8>    LINC-8    no RAL RAR no BSW LINC regs
PDP-8/s             N. A.             N. A.     no CMA RAR
PDP-8/i             KERMIT-8/i>       PDP-8/i   NL3776 7601 clear
PDP-8/l             KERMIT-8/l>       PDP-8/l   NL3776 7601 non-clear
PDP-12              KERMIT-12>        PDP-12    NL3776 LINC mode
PDP-8/e             KERMIT-8/e>       PDP-8/e   BSW page+16 RAL RAR
PDP-8/f             KERMIT-8/e>       PDP-8/e   BSW page+16 RAL RAR
PDP-8/M             KERMIT-8/e>       PDP-8/e   BSW page+16 RAL RAR
PDP-8/A with KK-8/A KERMIT-8/a>       PDP-8/a   BSW absolute RAL RAR
PDP-8/A with KK-8/F KERMIT-8/e>       PDP-8/e   BSW page+16 RAL RAR
VT-78               KERMIT-8/e>       6100      BSW RAL RAR NOP non-XR
VT-278 (DECmate 1)  KERMIT-278>       6120      BSW NL0010 DM I ports
PC-278 (DECmate 2)  KERMIT-278>       6120      BSW NL0010 DM II ports
PC-238 (DECmate 3)  KERMIT-278>       6120      BSW NL0010 DM II ports
PC-239 (DECmate 3+) KERMIT-278>       6120      BSW NL0010 DM II ports

The info line is used as [6100] and the prompt is KERMIT-78>.  There is
also a connect mode line such as "type <escape character> C to get back
to your VT-78" or whatever.  The only problems here are that "your
{whatever}" will be PDP-8/e or PDP-8/a according to CPU type, and DECmate
II, III, III+ all indicate DM II as a consequence of CPU identification,
not box type where applicable.  Further, there are a few maverick
machines out there that are based on 6100, etc., so a box would be called
VT-78 instead of PCM-12, etc., so you can't handle it all perfectly.
Better than saying "type ^D C to get back to your {computer that has a
6100 type CPU in it}" for all of the actual VT-78s, etc.

cjl

Date: Fri, 8 Mar 91 22:02:11 +0100
From: P{r Emanuelsson <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re:  latest
Cc: [email-masked]

Date: Fri, 8 Mar 91 22:02:11 +0100
From: P{r Emanuelsson <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re:  latest
Cc: [email-masked]

We have a 2020 "on the internet". Telnet to 130.236.254.13 port 3001 and
you're there (hopefully). What happens is that you will be connected
to a terminal line into the 2020. At present there is only one line,
but if I get time I might wire up a couple more. Also, we have no
"guest" account, but might perhaps create one if there is interest...
Also, I'm having trouble with the disks at the moment so the 2020 may
be frequently inaccessible indefinitely... :-)

     /Pell

Date: Wed 13 Mar 91 11:38:53
From: Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Archive site! (maybe...)
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]

Date: Wed 13 Mar 91 11:38:53
From: Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Archive site! (maybe...)
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>

To give you a starter (I'm sure others will add to this)
I have about 4 meg of pdp8 software which would probably be
of interest to put on the archive. Much of this is common stuff for sure,
but about 1 meg is homecooked software, some of it very useful.
To mention a few bits:
A fancy KERMIT, which requires omnibus pdp8.
A heavily modified FORTRAN IV compiler.
A lot of small CUSPs.
And soon (hopefully) DUNGEON (the DECUS version) rehacked to run
under OS/8 FORTRAN IV...

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 91 13:57:36 EST
From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
To: Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked],
        [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Archive site! (maybe...)

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 91 13:57:36 EST
From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
To: Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked],
        [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Archive site! (maybe...)
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed 13 Mar 91 11:38:53

From: Charles Lasner <[email-masked]>
To: Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Archive site! (maybe...)
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed 13 Mar 91 11:38:53

Sorry about the test, but mail system is flakey at the moment.

I am curious about your mention of dungeon.  Who is working on that?
The history of dungeon (aka zork) is a checkered one.  First it was
written at MIT in MDL, an mit list-processing language.  Apparently,
MDL is very powerful, and presumably suitable for writing zork in.  MDL
only runs under TOPS10,20,ITS, etc., since no one ever ported it to any
other architecture.  The game evolved and there became a "standard"
version played at many universities, etc.  Several less than ethical
events occurred.  First, someone who is either a DEC employee or one
level removed, stole a copy of the zork files, or at least the "cave"
description portion.  This eventually became the hacked-up DECUS zork
for the -11/vax world.  Essentially they hacked on adventure to make it
do the cave stuff for zork.  This means that the game is somewhat
different in scope.  The original game was meant to be used with a
smart parser and a somewhat critical path strategy.  Due to the stupid
parser, several command simplicifcations bordering on hints have to be
used, and the overall criticality is relaxed.  I also stumbled on some
data errors in the cave description which affects the overall "map",
although no change to the outcome (proceed sw, not se to get to the
same place as in -20 zork, etc.).
The other event was that a company called infocom "bought off" some of
the MIT now ex-students who took with them the entire game file set. 
This borders on theft, as MIT has copyrighted ZORK.  Infocom had them
modify the particulars of the game so it is now incompatible enough
that maps to the original are useless, and some of the new features are
somewhat juvenile.  I get the impression that the programmers brought
into Infocom were not the prose writers who created the bulk of the
original game.  In any case, Infocom had them write a new
implementation language which they call ZIL or Zork Information
Language.  Presumably, this language, which incidentally was developed
on a -20, is fairly close to MDL so they could port the game to it. 
Object code was generated to run on Z80-based CP/M systems.  One
problem is sheer size.  The game got split up into three arbitrary
sections, which means much of the original spirit of the game is lost,
since now they have decided a major amount of the strategy for you.  In
actuality, the original game consisted of small mini-adventures whose
order was mostly immaterial, or at least consisted of groups which had
to be time-ordered, but whose members were not, etc.  Now they
arbitrate how much you have seen/not seen, and you can't even go back
to where you have been.  Further, the flow of the game is disrupted
because you onll "win" part one or two or three by getting to their
arbitrary "end" points.
Eventually, they ported the object code to the 8088 world, using
paranoically protected MS-DOS-type disks which had to boot standalone
on 360K PC disk drives.  Copying disks was only minimally allowed, and
a copy couldn't be copied.  You could not run these from MS-DOS on a
hard disk either.  Worse, the original restrictive segmentation arising
from CP/M-80 still applies; they are still known as the zork trilogy.  
Someone unlocked these disks so they could be run as normal MS-DOS
files, including from a hard disk, but it's still as bad as CP/M-80
version, and a far cry from the classic game it rips off.

On a related subject, PDP-8 adventure is a modification of the rt-11
version of adventure taken from the PDP-10 adventure.  I understand
that a major change in the -11 version stems from the inability to
define 36-bit storage elements, so they reduced the commands to 4
characters to fit in 32 bits to accomodate the -11's limitations.
Well, PDP-8 fortran DOES 36 bit data!  SO, it would appear that the -8
version should be repaired by restoring the PDP-10 original code, not
the -11 code which was used by m. Subnik for RT-11, etc.  Perhaps, in
this way, the PDP-8 can have a more authentic version of adventure.

Btw, the only redeeming feature of the Infocom version is that the
parser was maintained; they even claimed that it was somewhat enhanced,
and playing the game, even in the CP/M/MS-DOS variant does allow for
the smarter commands that the DECUS version lacks.

cjl

Date: Mon 18 Mar 91 22:20:06
From: Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>
Subject: [Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>: Re: Archive site! (maybe...)]
To: [email-masked]

Date: Mon 18 Mar 91 22:20:06
From: Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>
Subject: [Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>: Re: Archive site! (maybe...)]
To: [email-masked]

Mail-From: D89.JOHNNY-BILLQUIST created at 18-Mar-91 22:05:42
Date: Mon 18 Mar 91 22:05:42
From: Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Archive site! (maybe...)
To: [email-masked]
cc: [email-masked]
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>

As to who is doing the port of DUNGEON to the pdp8: I am.
I have done about 2/3 of it.
It has required some RALF hacking as well as rewriting of
the parser and I/O subroutines.

The DECUS version is copyrighted Infocom 1980.

As I am running on a TOPS-20 machine, I have tested the MDL version,
and I have not seen any discrepancies(?) yet.
The two things I know the DECUS version do not handle, which I
wished it did is AGAIN and ALL BUT...
Also, one room (or if it was two) is not in there, but they
play no real part in the game. I think the MDL version has
a room halfway down the chute.

The latest, and last, version from DECUS contains the endgame,
as well as the royal puzzle.

I can also add that "my" version of DUNGEON will require
a 32k pdp8, with my own version of OS/8 FORTRAN IV.
Reasons: boolean operators need to work on integers, dynamic open, close
and create files.

One difference from the pdp-11 version will be that everything is in
uppercase, since OS/8 FORTRAN IV uses sixbit.

Other than that, everything will probably look nice enough.

Also, I can add that I don't think the FORTRAN DUNGEON is based
on ADVENTURE codewise. The parser in DUNGEON is much more
versatile than ADVENTURE. It was a long time since I looked at
the code for ADVENTURE, but I remember that there is no similarities
in the data structures for the parser.

One more requirement: You cannot use RX01 floppies, since the
text data file is almost 500 blocks, and the "raw" data file
is about 300 blocks. Both is assumed to be on DSK:, also the
savefile will be put on DSK:

I don't know how fast (or slow) it will be, but I suspect that
a real FPP would be nice to have.

Is there anybody who has a spare FPP-8A? I WANT ONE!

	Johnny

Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1991 17:05:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Sender: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: RM03/5 for 36-bit machines
To: PDP-8 Lovers <[email-masked]>

Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1991 17:05:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Sender: Mark Crispin <[email-masked]>
Subject: RM03/5 for 36-bit machines
To: PDP-8 Lovers <[email-masked]>

The question of how to modify the drive control logic on an RM03 or RM05 so it
can be used with a 2020 has come up a few times in this forum.  Here's the
answer:

The way to fix an RM03/RM05 to work with a 36-bit CPU is to install a jumper
on the MBA backplane between E06E1 and E09C2.  If the jumper is not installed,
nothing works; you can't format the drive in 18-bit mode or even recognize an
18-bit format.  The jumper grounds signal BP144 ENB M on page D56 of the MBA
printset.

Date: Tue 19 Mar 91 02:55:31
From: Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>
Subject: MDL-ZORK vs. DECUS-DUNGEON.
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]

Date: Tue 19 Mar 91 02:55:31
From: Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>
Subject: MDL-ZORK vs. DECUS-DUNGEON.
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]

After a fast check in MDL-ZORK, I stand (probably much) corrected.
Lasner has obviously spent some time delving into the secrets
of ZORK.
The MDL version has a max score of 616, while the DECUS version
has max 585, more stuff than I know of must be missing.

	Johnny

Summary-line: 15-Feb    [email-masked]  #PDP-10, PDP-11
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 91 14:12:16 EST
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Subject: PDP-10, PDP-11

Date: Fri, 15 Feb 91 14:12:16 EST
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Subject: PDP-10, PDP-11

Does anyone know of any PDP-10- or PDP-11-specific mailing lists?
 
John

Summary-line: 25-Mar         [email-masked]  #MDL-ZORK vs. DECUS-DUNGEON.
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 91 11:58:31 PST
From: [email-masked] (Paul Hardy)
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: MDL-ZORK vs. DECUS-DUNGEON.

Date: Mon, 25 Mar 91 11:58:31 PST
From: [email-masked] (Paul Hardy)
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
In-Reply-To: Johnny Billquist's message of Tue 19 Mar 91 02:55:31 <[email-masked]>
Subject: MDL-ZORK vs. DECUS-DUNGEON.

MDL-ZORK?!  I would definitely like a copy of this.  I first played this
in '78, and didn't snarf the sources because I assumed it would live on
as free hacker software forever (oh, to be young again!)

				--Paul

Summary-line: 25-Mar  [email-masked]  #Re: MDL-ZORK vs. DECUS-DUNGEON.
Date: Mon 25 Mar 91 21:19:32
From: Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MDL-ZORK vs. DECUS-DUNGEON.
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked],
        [email-masked]

Date: Mon 25 Mar 91 21:19:32
From: Johnny Billquist <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MDL-ZORK vs. DECUS-DUNGEON.
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked],
        [email-masked]
In-Reply-To: <9103251958.AA02935@ama>

Sorry, don't have the sources...

I do like it, though...

Actually I don't know in what form the game is stored. But I suspect
it is compiled.

	Johnny

(Yes, I use a TOPS-20 machine)