Much appriciated, thank you!
Time flies, that post was made quite a while ago. This software looks
interesting, thank you. I am working to set up an 11/34 at a museum, it
would be intetesting to get this bbs software running hooked up to some
dumb terminals.
--Devin D.
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022, 8:39
Necrobump! (I was searching for an email and came across this thread)
In college, we ran CoSy under VMS. CoSy (Computer Conferencing System)
started out under Unix on a PDP-11 and it looks like the source is
available:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CoSy_(computer_conferencing_system)
On Wed, May
On 05/23/2017 11:55 PM, Cameron Kaiser via cctalk wrote:
The Wikipedia article on Dr. Wetterhahn seems to indicate
this went a lot slower than we were told in the seminar.
Not sure who to trust, there.
The NEJM article seems to say it was also not a precipitous decline.
OK, then I guess the peo
> Metallic mercury isn't anything you want to ingest, but it won't go thru
> your skin unless it has some other compound to drag it,
This isn't quite true. Elemental liquid mercury will pass through skin but
at a much slower rate. Vapourized elemental mercury via inhalation is, uh,
more "efficien
On 5/23/2017 5:56 PM, William Sudbrink via cctalk wrote:
Mercury
"bouncing around" in her body for almost a year before she finally passed.
It also "went through" the back of her hand without making some awful
lesion. 1.3 grams?! I've always gone with the mental crutch that a paper
clip wei
> The Wikipedia article on Dr. Wetterhahn seems to indicate
> this went a lot slower than we were told in the seminar.
> Not sure who to trust, there.
The NEJM article seems to say it was also not a precipitous decline.
--
personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.
On 05/23/2017 01:57 PM, William Sudbrink via cctalk wrote:
I have a hard time getting my head around Dr. Wetterhahn's poisoning. How
many molecules of the toxin could have possibly entered her body?
How many molecules does it take to kill or fatally disable a cell? After it
does its damage, doe
Thanks for the reply. I would never dream of "messing with it." Even
reading the NEJM article, it still amazes me to think of the Mercury
"bouncing around" in her body for almost a year before she finally passed.
It also "went through" the back of her hand without making some awful
lesion. 1.3 g
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Wetterhahn
> > http://i.imgur.com/0dXdc.jpg
> >
> > Karen Wetterhahn spilled a drop of a Mercury compound on her latex
> > glove, and died of it 10 months later.
>
> I have a hard time getting my head around Dr. Wetterhahn's poisoning. How
> many molecu
g] On Behalf Of Tapley,
Mark via cctalk
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 12:30 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: OT: Mercury (Was: BBS software for the PDP 11)
On May 22, 2017, at 9:38 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk
wrote:
> ...I'm not sure if "mercury" b
On May 22, 2017, at 9:38 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk
wrote:
> ...I'm not sure if "mercury" batteries contain metallic mercury or mercury
> salts. Metallic mercury is actually pretty much harmless, even though
> bringing a thermometer into a US school can cause a major panic. Mercury
> salts
On 05/22/2017 10:23 AM, Doug Ingraham via cctalk wrote:
For even less power would be to use an Arduino (probably a
Due) because then you are talking less than 4 watts. This
would be about 35 cents per month. I wouldn't want to run
my Straight 8 24x7.and pay the power bill.
Or, a Beagle Bone Bl
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Ali via cctalk
wrote:
> > ___
> > The plate on the back of my 11/93 says 345 Watts. That's about a fifth
> > what your wifes hair dryer draws. Or slightly more than 3 100 watt
> > light bulbs (which your kids leave on all over the
> On May 22, 2017, at 10:21 AM, Christian Groessler via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> At least here in the EU, they banned mercury batteries, mostly used by old
> photo gear, and then supported light bulbs containing mercury.
>
> How many people will need and by these batteries and how many people need
n; GeneralDiscussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Cc: jwsm...@jwsss.com; cctalk@classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: BBS software for the PDP 11
And if you break one you have to call HAZMAT. You did realize that,
didn't you? They contain mercury and any breakage requires professional
-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Cc: jwsm...@jwsss.com; cctalk@classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: BBS software for the PDP 11
And if you break one you have to call HAZMAT. You did realize that,
didn't you? They contain mercury and any breakage requires professional
remediation by law!!
Uhm.
You don't even need call the law if you break a mercury thermometer,
which is about 3-4 grams of mercury. A bulb has what, a few
miligrams?
And if you break one you have to call HAZMAT. You did realize that,
didn't you? They contain mercury and any breakage requires professional
remediation by law!!
Uhm... No you don't. Stop the fearmongering please ...
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 07:20:34AM -0400, Ken Seefried via cctalk wrote:
> > And if you break one you have to call HAZMAT. You did realize that,
> > didn't you? They contain mercury and any breakage requires professional
> > remediation by law!!
>
> Please quit spreading this urban legend. Som
> And if you break one you have to call HAZMAT. You did realize that,
> didn't you? They contain mercury and any breakage requires professional
> remediation by law!!
Please quit spreading this urban legend. Some care in handling is
recommended, but no professional help is required, by law! or
On 5/20/2017 6:42 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
On 19 May 2017 at 21:39, jim stephens via cctalk wrote:
I have news for you. (maybe) From 1976 until it petered out, the phone time
cost a lot too. $200 or more a month at times.
What does "phone time" mean in this context?
Long distance t
On 05/20/2017 11:12 AM, Warner Losh via cctalk wrote:
> In the bay area in california, and likely elsewhere too, there was a local
> calling zone that was set based on the population patterns of the 1950's
> and 1960's. This meant that calls to some numbers were free, while others
> had a toll ass
On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On 19 May 2017 at 21:39, jim stephens via cctalk
> wrote:
> > I have news for you. (maybe) From 1976 until it petered out, the phone
> time
> > cost a lot too. $200 or more a month at times.
>
> What does "
On 19 May 2017 at 21:39, jim stephens via cctalk wrote:
> I have news for you. (maybe) From 1976 until it petered out, the phone time
> cost a lot too. $200 or more a month at times.
What does "phone time" mean in this context?
I mean, POTS billing, for me, was always time-based, but the amount
On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 02:01:12AM +, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> And if you break one you have to call HAZMAT. You did realize that, didn't
> you? They contain mercury and any breakage requires professional remediation
> by law!!
That's an "alternative fact". The EPA gives some
As for power, if you have a wife and/or kids, a PDP-11's power
> consumption is not even above the noise floor in your electric bill.
> (Unless your trying to do it with RA disks!!)
>
> bill
Out of curiosity how much power do these wee beasties consume?
___
The pl
> ___
> The plate on the back of my 11/93 says 345 Watts. That's about a fifth
> what your wifes hair dryer draws. Or slightly more than 3 100 watt
> light bulbs (which your kids leave on all over the house all the
> time!!) bill
>
> I run a similar PDP-11/83 syst
My dad had some bills of 5 grand he told me but he was dialing out from a
remote location in northern Manitoba that had only microwave said made huge
difference when he went from 500 baud to 5000
On May 19, 2017 2:40 PM, "jim stephens via cctalk"
wrote:
>
>
> On 5/19/2017 3:23 AM, Liam Proven vi
On 5/19/2017 7:01 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
And if you break one you have to call HAZMAT. You did realize that,
didn't you? They contain mercury and any breakage requires professional
remediation by law!!
I bag and take to the disposal all fluorescent discard, including CFL.
ht
From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of jim stephens via
cctalk [cctalk@classiccmp.org]
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 3:46 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: BBS software for the PDP 11
On 5/19/2017 5:13
On 5/19/2017 10:07 AM, allison via cctalk wrote:
Remember a BBS with 1 modem is ruing at less (back then) than
1200 baud (120CPS!). Name one CPU that can't grab one byte and
act on it in 8.333mS? The rest is enough storage to do a useful library
(download and upload programs, and some for
On 5/19/2017 5:13 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
Anyway, for those of us in Amsterdam who can actually be bothered to find and
hold down a job, go out and do the shopping, etc, we're replacing blown
incandescents with LED bulbs because that's what they sell in the shops.
Incandescent bulbs
So, if it's authenticity you want, you'll have to incorporate some sort
of noise generator on the lines. Telco quality is much better today
than 40 years ago (although you may not think so). I recall that
calling Sunnyvale from Los Gatos (or vice-versa) was a real adventure in
connectivity. Lo
On 5/19/2017 3:23 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
On 18 May 2017 at 17:16, allison via cctalk wrote:
All a DOS BBS was was a user interface that provided security by requiring
user/password
and limiting the commands usable. The easy was to do that was a version of
the CMD module
rewritten
On 05/19/2017 07:49 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
> On 19 May 2017 at 13:36, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> Nope. Take a trip to Amazon and look at just how much power this stuff
>> actually consumes. And, if you go back to the days when we started
>> running this stuff in our homes, compare the d
On 2017-05-19 9:10 AM, geneb via cctalk wrote:
On Fri, 19 May 2017, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
On 18 May 2017 at 22:06, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
wrote:
The plate on the back of my 11/93 says 345 Watts. That's about a
fifth what your
wifes hair dryer draws. Or slightly more than 3 100 w
> From: Christian Corti
> I have a similar setup with our 11/34. .. It's not the fastest system,
> and the kernel uses overlays like crazy ;-) ... I still have to add the
> cache and FPP boards and see how that improves the performance.
The cache should help some, but the FPP, pro
From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of Peter Corlett via
cctalk [cctalk@classiccmp.org]
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 8:13 AM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: BBS software for the PDP 11
On Fri, May 19
On Fri, 19 May 2017, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
On 18 May 2017 at 22:06, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
wrote:
The plate on the back of my 11/93 says 345 Watts. That's about a fifth what
your
wifes hair dryer draws. Or slightly more than 3 100 watt light bulbs
Jesus wept.
Are you certain
On Thu, 18 May 2017, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
8250 is a VAX, not a PDP-11. I doubt it even ran off of 120v single phase.
Um, yeah. It did. I bought the machine for $500 from Mannesmann Tally in
Kent, WA. A friend and I removed the 8250 from their machine room and
transported it
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 11:39:27AM +, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> But, seriously, just how many households do you think have made the move to
> LED lighting? The amount of energy wasted in the average house, especially
> those with wives and children (your wife never forget to tur
On 19 May 2017 at 13:36, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> Nope. Take a trip to Amazon and look at just how much power this stuff
> actually consumes. And, if you go back to the days when we started
> running this stuff in our homes, compare the draw of a QBUS PDP-11 to
> a TV with a picture tube, standar
From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of Peter Corlett via
cctalk [cctalk@classiccmp.org]
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 6:45 AM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: BBS software for the PDP 11
On Fri, May 19
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 12:25:44PM +0200, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
> Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
>> The plate on the back of my 11/93 says 345 Watts. That's about a fifth what
>> your
>> wifes hair dryer draws. Or slightly more than 3 100 watt light bulbs
> Jesus wept.
> Are you ce
On 19 May 2017 at 00:22, Ed via cctalk wrote:
> we ran ours first on a hp-2000 then migrated to a hp-3000
>
> final version had 100 boards on it email , multi user chat, poll and
> voting and much more.
> yep it kicked ass!
You'd think if you'd been online that long, you'd have worked out
On 18 May 2017 at 22:06, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
wrote:
> The plate on the back of my 11/93 says 345 Watts. That's about a fifth what
> your
> wifes hair dryer draws. Or slightly more than 3 100 watt light bulbs
Jesus wept.
Are you certain that this alleged "hair dryer" is not in fact a
h
On 18 May 2017 at 17:16, allison via cctalk wrote:
> All a DOS BBS was was a user interface that provided security by requiring
> user/password
> and limiting the commands usable. The easy was to do that was a version of
> the CMD module
> rewritten to not have things like RMDIR and DEL.
I was
On Thu, 18 May 2017, Lyle Bickley wrote:
I run BSD 2.9 on my 11/34C (w/max. mem.) & DZ using (2) RL02s with up to
three TTY sessions. It's a bit "sluggish" (by today's standards). TSX
I have a similar setup with our 11/34. 2.9BSD on one RL01 as root/swap,
the rest (/usr etc.) on a RA80 (with t
of geneb via cctalk
> [cctalk@classiccmp.org]
> Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 1:45 PM
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> Subject: Re: BBS software for the PDP 11
>
> On Thu, 18 May 2017, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote:
>
>> So a 11/03 aka a lsi11 wo
When I had my 11/34 (11/34, expansion chassis, RX01 and two RK05 drives) think
I ran a 30a, 240v circuit for the power distribution box in the rack but it
used way less when running. Maybe 10a max.
Rich
Sent from Verizon/AOL Mobile Mail
On Thursday, May 18, 2017, Adrian Stoness via cctalk
w
Allot of then can be run on a single 15 amp circuit with a some.other stuff
on it as well
On May 18, 2017 2:58 PM, "Ali via cctalk" wrote:
> > As for power, if you have a wife and/or kids, a PDP-11's power
> > consumption is not even above the noise floor in your electric bill.
> > (Unless your
_
> From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of geneb via
> cctalk [cctalk@classiccmp.org]
> Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 4:23 PM
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> Subject: Re: BBS software for the PDP 11
>
> On Thu, 18 May 2017, alli
From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of geneb via cctalk
[cctalk@classiccmp.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 4:23 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: BBS software for the PDP 11
On Thu, 18 May 2017
From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of geneb via cctalk
[cctalk@classiccmp.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 4:19 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: RE: BBS software for the PDP 11
On Thu, 18 May 2017
we ran ours first on a hp-2000 then migrated to a hp-3000
final version had 100 boards on it email , multi user chat, poll and
voting and much more.
yep it kicked ass!
The machines were used also as board test machines etc when needed
and also some were used as sale of compu
On 5/18/2017 1:45 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
Anyone remember Boardwatch magazine?
--Chuck
I had a subscription to Rickard's rag pretty much for the duration till
I got my first paid Shell account @ world.std.com and left dialup behind
for continuous connectivity (initially on a 56K pp
7;
Subject: RE: BBS software for the PDP 11
As for power, if you have a wife and/or kids, a PDP-11's power
consumption is not even above the noise floor in your electric bill.
(Unless your trying to do it with RA disks!!)
bill
Out of curiosity how much power do these wee b
On 05/18/2017 12:27 PM, allison via cctalk wrote:
> BBSs are really the thing from about 1978 to pre-internet (varied
> where you lived). Examples of the big BBS are Source, Delphi, Well,
> STD(software tool and die), and the big one Compuserve. Small ones
> like Sage and those mentioned by infer
On Thu, 18 May 2017, allison via cctalk wrote:
Never forget, BBS were about storage and cheap which at that time were mostly
opposed (disks weren't cheap!). The amount of Ram and CPU were less
important
considering what had to be done. Often the modem and hard disk were as
costly
as the basi
On Thu, 18 May 2017, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
As for power, if you have a wife and/or kids, a PDP-11's power
consumption is not even above the noise floor in your electric bill.
(Unless your trying to do it with RA disks!!)
I used to have an 8250 with four RA-81s and a TU-81+. The p
From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of Ali via cctalk
[cctalk@classiccmp.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 3:58 PM
To: 'General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts'
Subject: RE: BBS software for the PDP 11
> As for
On 5/18/17 3:14 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
On 05/18/2017 10:44 AM, geneb wrote:
Because. That's why. :)
Well, okay--but then let's be period-correct. The PDP-11 dates from
1970, when, AFAIK, BBSes, if they existed, were far from what people
think they were.
I'm thinking of,say, Cal
On 5/18/17 3:19 PM, geneb via cctalk wrote:
On Thu, 18 May 2017, allison via cctalk wrote:
On 5/18/17 12:51 PM, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote:
So a 11/03 aka a lsi11 would be to slow for such things? Such as those
Heathkit h11 lsi11 macheans? Witch was a hobyist pdp11 for those
that are
On 5/18/17 1:53 PM, jim stephens via cctalk wrote:
On 5/18/2017 9:51 AM, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote:
So a 11/03 aka a lsi11 would be to slow for such things? Such as those
Heathkit h11 lsi11 macheans? Witch was a hobyist pdp11 for those that
are
unfamiliar with the hearhkits
My take
> As for power, if you have a wife and/or kids, a PDP-11's power
> consumption is not even above the noise floor in your electric bill.
> (Unless your trying to do it with RA disks!!)
>
> bill
Out of curiosity how much power do these wee beasties consume?
-Ali
From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of jim stephens via
cctalk [cctalk@classiccmp.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 1:53 PM
To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: BBS software for the PDP 11
On 5/18/2017 9:51 AM, Adrian Stoness via
COSMAC Elf? :-)
bill
From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of geneb via cctalk
[cctalk@classiccmp.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 1:45 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: BBS software for the PDP 11
On
ctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of Adrian Stoness via
cctalk [cctalk@classiccmp.org]
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 12:51 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: BBS software for the PDP 11
So a 11/03 aka a lsi11 would be to slow for such things? Such as
> From: Chuck Guzis
> Well, okay--but then let's be period-correct. The PDP-11 dates from
> 1970, when, AFAIK, BBSes, if they existed, were far from what people
> think they were.
You're thinking of the -11/20, released in 1970. But that was only the first
PDP-11 model; the -11/23
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 1:45 PM, geneb via cctalk wrote:
> On Thu, 18 May 2017, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote:
>
>> So a 11/03 aka a lsi11 would be to slow for such things?
>
> The machine is plenty fast. There's been BBSes run on a VIC-20. You can't
> get much slower than that. :)
The VIC-20
On Thu, 18 May 2017, allison via cctalk wrote:
On 5/18/17 12:51 PM, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote:
So a 11/03 aka a lsi11 would be to slow for such things? Such as those
Heathkit h11 lsi11 macheans? Witch was a hobyist pdp11 for those that are
unfamiliar with the hearhkits
No, BBSs were
On 05/18/2017 10:44 AM, geneb wrote:
> Because. That's why. :)
Well, okay--but then let's be period-correct. The PDP-11 dates from
1970, when, AFAIK, BBSes, if they existed, were far from what people
think they were.
I'm thinking of,say, Call Computer in Mountain View, frequented by the
HCC pe
On 5/18/17 12:51 PM, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote:
So a 11/03 aka a lsi11 would be to slow for such things? Such as those
Heathkit h11 lsi11 macheans? Witch was a hobyist pdp11 for those that are
unfamiliar with the hearhkits
No, BBSs were run with 4mhz Z80s... compared to LSI-11 (H11 or
On Thu, 18 May 2017, Mike Whalen wrote:
The machine is plenty fast. There's been BBSes run on a VIC-20. You
can't get much slower than that. :)
In New Orleans, there was a rumor someone ran a VIC-20 BBS with no
persistent storage.
Maybe true but you also might not be able to tell!
I seem
On 5/18/2017 10:52 AM, Mike Whalen via cctalk wrote:
The machine is plenty fast. There's been BBSes run on a VIC-20. You
can't get much slower than that. :)
In New Orleans, there was a rumor someone ran a VIC-20 BBS with no
persistent storage.
Maybe true but you also might not be able to t
On 5/18/2017 9:51 AM, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote:
So a 11/03 aka a lsi11 would be to slow for such things? Such as those
Heathkit h11 lsi11 macheans? Witch was a hobyist pdp11 for those that are
unfamiliar with the hearhkits
My take and extension on Chuck's and Allison's question is that
> The machine is plenty fast. There's been BBSes run on a VIC-20. You
> can't get much slower than that. :)
>
In New Orleans, there was a rumor someone ran a VIC-20 BBS with no
persistent storage.
Maybe true but you also might not be able to tell!
I know of several very different PDP-11 BBS's using very disparate
architectures. Some were run on RT-11 or RSTS-11 entirely inside a BASIC
program that managed every element of call answering, logging in, and
disconnection. And others took advantage of TSX-11, RSX-11 and RSTS-11 login
security
On Thu, 18 May 2017, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote:
So a 11/03 aka a lsi11 would be to slow for such things? Such as those
Heathkit h11 lsi11 macheans? Witch was a hobyist pdp11 for those that are
unfamiliar with the hearhkits
The machine is plenty fast. There's been BBSes run on a VIC-20.
On Thu, 18 May 2017, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
On 05/18/2017 08:16 AM, allison via cctalk wrote:
The real question is why BBS? What is it trying to fix or enable?
You put the words into my mouth. Thank you.
Because. That's why. :)
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15s
So a 11/03 aka a lsi11 would be to slow for such things? Such as those
Heathkit h11 lsi11 macheans? Witch was a hobyist pdp11 for those that are
unfamiliar with the hearhkits
On May 18, 2017 11:45 AM, "Chuck Guzis via cctalk"
wrote:
> On 05/18/2017 08:16 AM, allison via cctalk wrote:
>
> > The
On 05/18/2017 08:16 AM, allison via cctalk wrote:
> The real question is why BBS? What is it trying to fix or enable?
You put the words into my mouth. Thank you.
--Chuck
On 5/18/17 9:45 AM, william degnan via cctalk wrote:
There may have been Rainbow BBS programs, but I doubt anything for the
11/34. You may have to write this.
That reminds me of a bit of obscure trivia...
Back in the early days of FidoNet, one or more of the Fido BBS sysops had
DEC Rainb
> On May 18, 2017, at 11:37 AM, John Wilson via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
>> As an RTS? Wow, that's doing it the hard way. In either RT or RSX
>> emulation it would be easier, you have a friendlier development
>> environment that way. I've done an application as an RT
On Thu, 18 May 2017 09:14:24 -0400
Systems Glitch via cctalk wrote:
> > BSD 2.11 should run fine on a 34 or 23
>
> You need split I&D for 2.11BSD, that rules out the 11/23 and IIRC the
> 11/34 as well. I want to say 2.9BSD will run though.
>
> Thanks,
> Jonathan
I run BSD 2.9 on my 11/34C (w
On 18/05/2017 14:45, william degnan via cctalk wrote:
There may have been Rainbow BBS programs, but I doubt anything for the
11/34. You may have to write this.
That reminds me of a bit of obscure trivia...
Back in the early days of FidoNet, one or more of the Fido BBS sysops had
DEC Rain
Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
>As an RTS? Wow, that's doing it the hard way. In either RT or RSX
>emulation it would be easier, you have a friendlier development
>environment that way. I've done an application as an RTS in the long-ago
>past (an implementation of QUBIC, 3D 4x4x4x tic-tac-toe for
> From: Systems Glitch
> You need split I&D for 2.11BSD
ISTR reading that the network code runs in Supervisor mode, so you need that
to, technically (although all -11s CPUs with Supervisor also have I+D, and
vice versa).
Does the 2.9 include networking code? If so, it must use overlays l
On Thu, 18 May 2017, Pontus Pihlgren wrote:
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 06:07:03AM -0700, geneb via cctalk wrote:
I'd be surprised if you did. This is however, an excellent opportunity to
write your own. :) (At least to me, it would be a fun project.)
FACEBK-11
*ducks*
You can run, but you
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 06:07:03AM -0700, geneb via cctalk wrote:
>
> I'd be surprised if you did. This is however, an excellent opportunity to
> write your own. :) (At least to me, it would be a fun project.)
>
FACEBK-11
*ducks*
On Thu, 18 May 2017, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
would preclude this. I did it on a SYS III Xenix clone). BSD 2.11
should run fine on a 34 or 23 and there is always Ultrix-11 which I have
No, it doesn't. 2.9BSD, yes, but not 2.11BSD as it requires split I/D and
more than 128 kwords of memory.
C
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Systems Glitch via cctalk
wrote:
>> BSD 2.11 should run fine on a 34 or 23
>
> You need split I&D for 2.11BSD, that rules out the 11/23 and IIRC the 11/34
> as well.
Yep.
> I want to say 2.9BSD will run though.
Yep, but you might not be happy running it on the
On Thu, 18 May 2017, william degnan wrote:
That's what I was thinking. I have some FidoNET files and mail from the
Rainbow. My guess the BBS would have been written in Pascal or C if for
the Rainbow (guess only) so if you wanted to attempt to port, after you
find a Rainbow BBS? I'd start w
On Wed, 17 May 2017, jim stephens via cctalk wrote:
If someone had done such, it might have been in boardwatch if anywhere. I
tossed tons of those in previous moves, so can't help with that. Plus as has
been stated it would have been rare, and looking thru paper copies would be
a long proce
>
>
>
> There may have been Rainbow BBS programs, but I doubt anything for the
>> 11/34. You may have to write this.
>>
>
> That reminds me of a bit of obscure trivia...
>
> Back in the early days of FidoNet, one or more of the Fido BBS sysops had
> DEC Rainbows. The machines could run Fido just
On Wed, 17 May 2017, william degnan via cctalk wrote:
There may have been Rainbow BBS programs, but I doubt anything for the
11/34. You may have to write this.
That reminds me of a bit of obscure trivia...
Back in the early days of FidoNet, one or more of the Fido BBS sysops had
DEC Rainbow
> BSD 2.11 should run fine on a 34 or 23
You need split I&D for 2.11BSD, that rules out the 11/23 and IIRC the 11/34 as
well. I want to say 2.9BSD will run though.
Thanks,
Jonathan
On Wed, 17 May 2017, devin davison via cctalk wrote:
I have both a pdp 11/34 and 11/23 and am trying to find some bbs software
to run. Preferably something that will run under an os and not monopolize
the whole machine.
Any suggestions? i have not had much luck finding anything.
I'd be surpri
> On May 18, 2017, at 1:26 AM, John Wilson via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 08:45:39PM -0400, devin davison via cctalk wrote:
>> I have both a pdp 11/34 and 11/23 and am trying to find some bbs software
>> to run. Preferably something that will run under an os and not monopolize
On 2017-05-18 1:26 AM, John Wilson via cctalk wrote:
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 08:45:39PM -0400, devin davison via cctalk wrote:
I have both a pdp 11/34 and 11/23 and am trying to find some bbs software
to run. Preferably something that will run under an os and not monopolize
the whole machine.
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
