>>> -spc (Wish the C standard committee had the balls to say "2's
>>> complement all the way, and a physical bit pattern of all 0s is a
>>> NULL pointer" ... )
>> As far as I'm concerned, this is different only in degree from `Wish
>> the C standard committee had the balls to say "Everything
Hi Brad,
I found these two links. I hope they help.
< http://www.old-computers.com/museum/computer.asp?st=1&c=732>
< http://www.hinkles.us/chuckbo/MSI-6800/index.htm>
Take care my friend.
Kip Koon
computer...@sc.rr.com
http://www.cocopedia.com/wiki/index.php/Kip_Koon
> -Original Message
>> Most executables are not performance-critical enough for
>> dynamic-linker overhead to matter. (For the few that are, or for
>> the few cases where lots are, yes, static linking can help.)
> I keep telling myself that whenever I launch Firefox after a reboot
> ...
Do you have reason to think d
On 21 May 2016 at 07:14, Sean Conner wrote:
>
> Oh my! I'm reading the manual for the C compiler for the Unisys 2200 [1]
> system and it's dated 2013! And yes, it does appear to be a 36-bit non-byte
> addressable system.
And you can run the OS free of charge on high-end x86 kit:
http://www.
> Wow!
Unisys is still making new machines as well.
--
Will
I tried the Dell on my Rainbow, but unfortunately it did not work. Looks like I
would need the scan doubler that was mentioned.
Regards
Rob
> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Rob Jarratt
> Sent: 17 May 2016 07:31
> To: Ian Finder ; Ge
On 21 May 2016 at 17:33, William Donzelli wrote:
> Unisys is still making new machines as well.
Yes it is, but they are x86 boxes running an emulator.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/05/26/unisys_finally_weans_itself_off_cmos_chippery/
AFAIK only IBM is still making actual hardware mainframe
Yes, I know - but so what? That is nothing new. The IBM 9370 line from
20-odd years ago was really an 801 inside, running S/370 in emulation.
--
Will
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 21 May 2016 at 17:33, William Donzelli wrote:
>> Unisys is still making new machines as
> On May 21, 2016, at 4:33 AM, Mouse wrote:
>
>>> Most executables are not performance-critical enough for
>>> dynamic-linker overhead to matter. (For the few that are, or for
>>> the few cases where lots are, yes, static linking can help.)
>> I keep telling myself that whenever I launch Firefo
On 21 May 2016 at 17:58, William Donzelli wrote:
> Yes, I know - but so what? That is nothing new. The IBM 9370 line from
> 20-odd years ago was really an 801 inside, running S/370 in emulation.
I thought it was noteworthy considering that this subthread originated
in discussion of how all conte
On Sat, 21 May 2016, Liam Proven wrote:
On 21 May 2016 at 07:14, Sean Conner wrote:
Oh my! I'm reading the manual for the C compiler for the Unisys 2200 [1]
system and it's dated 2013! And yes, it does appear to be a 36-bit non-byte
addressable system.
And you can run the OS free of ch
2016-04-22 14:52 GMT+02:00 Tor Arntsen :
> On 21 April 2016 at 14:43, Mattis Lind wrote:
>
> > PED2.DMK and DISK8.IMD is the same disk, but different ways of reading it
> > off the disk. I used both the standard PC-floppy and then also the
> > catweasel card. I tried the catweasel for some floppi
On 21 May 2016 at 18:37, Sean Caron wrote:
> On Sat, 21 May 2016, Liam Proven wrote:
>
>> On 21 May 2016 at 07:14, Sean Conner wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Oh my! I'm reading the manual for the C compiler for the Unisys 2200
>>> [1]
>>> system and it's dated 2013! And yes, it does appear to be a 36-bit
I have a DEC Rainbow 100B in the upright pedestal for sale. It comes with
128K of memory, a hard disk controller with hard disk cable, an RX50 drive
and the graphics option. It is just the base unit and the pedestal, there is
no keyboard, monitor or hard disk included. I collected this machine
rece
Hi
Further to my posts this morning I have one last hurdle to jump.
1. I have a VAX with a TK70 attached and a TQK70 controller.
2. The tape drive works just fine.
3. Also on the VAX I have the correct tape (.TAP) image file for a
RSTS/E V10 install tape.
4. I would like to copy t
> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Rod
> Smallwood
> Sent: 21 May 2016 19:29
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
>
> Subject: The RSTS riddle.
>
> Hi
>
> Further to my posts this morning I have one last hurdl
On 21/05/2016 19:56, Robert Jarratt wrote:
-Original Message-
From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Rod
Smallwood
Sent: 21 May 2016 19:29
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: The RSTS riddle.
Hi
Further to my posts this mor
On 5/21/16 12:28 PM, Rod Smallwood wrote:
> Third Point
> There's no way to copy an image only files under any DEC operating system.
>
> Fourth Point
>
> If I had a RSTS system how would I make a backup copy of the install
> tape?
>
you would use TPC, and you can convert b
Hello,
the EPROMs are labeled 07595-18045 and 07595-18046.
Can anyone do a dump for me? It's really urgent. Our local hackerspace
wants to get rid of it, if there is no chance to get the Firmware again.
greetings,
Martin
Thanks Kip!
I did manage to get it going. Turned out the switches for baud rate are not
labelled accurately. It has a monitor called Weebug.. no idea how to operate
it. :) Hoping it's similar to SWTBUG, MIKBUG etc.
Brad
Sent from my Samsung device
Original message
From:
> I would hope whoever gets it is prepared to exchange information. There is no
> software with my machine, of course.
Pete,
Congrats! Once you pick up the system feel free to contact me about
getting copies of the limited software I have for the MINC at this time. They
are great systems
Congratulations, Pete. I'd like to put some day my hands in one of these
but work and distance (Spain) make it complicated. Perhaps in some years
from now.
Kind Regards
Sergio
> Using a DW11-B to connect the MINC to a PDP-11/45 sounds fantastic!
Believe-it-or-not I did it becuase I didn't have an RL11. I used the RLV11 in
the
MINC to interface to the RL01s. Yes, that does work.
> What a neat idea! I have all the MINC modules except the MNCTP
> thermocouple inte
Hey Pete,
I have software and documentation, too. I really like my MINC. My machine
is RX02 based, but I have a SCSI adapter for it. One of these days, I'm
going to get around to either putting a real SCSI drive or a SCSI-to-SD
adapter in it.
If you have the 11/03 version, you need the earlier
Sergio,
Lots of folks travel from UK to Spain with large vans and the rates are quite
reasonable. I have just bought a house in Torrox near Malaga and have been
looking at the oprions.
Dave
G4UGM
> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of SP
It was thus said that the Great Mouse once stated:
> >>> -spc (Wish the C standard committee had the balls to say "2's
> >>> complement all the way, and a physical bit pattern of all 0s is a
> >>> NULL pointer" ... )
> >> As far as I'm concerned, this is different only in degree from `Wish
>
It was thus said that the Great Mouse once stated:
> >>> -spc (Wish the C standard committee had the balls to say "2's
> >>> complement all the way, and a physical bit pattern of all 0s is a
> >>> NULL pointer" ... )
> >> As far as I'm concerned, this is different only in degree from `Wish
>
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Guy Sotomayor Jr wrote:
>> On May 21, 2016, at 4:33 AM, Mouse wrote:
>>> First off, the C standard mandates that the order of fields in a
>>> struct cannot be reordered,
>> Yes. (I think this is a Bad Thing, but I can see why they did it.)
> Given that C is a sys
> On May 21, 2016, at 3:28 PM, Rod Smallwood
> wrote:
> Second point:
> The RSTS install tape is just a bunch of files.
> There's nothing requiring image copy to deal with funny file formats
No, that is not accurate. An install tape (for V9 or later) is a bootable tape
with
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016, Mouse wrote:
> Also,
> PostScript has a lot of language syntax, whereas FORTH has immediate
> words that act like language syntax. (The difference is that FORTH
> makes it possible to change those words, thereby changing the apparent
> syntax.)
What do you mean by that?
--
On 5/21/2016 6:42 AM, Liam Proven wrote:
On 21 May 2016 at 07:14, Sean Conner wrote:
Oh my! I'm reading the manual for the C compiler for the Unisys 2200 [1]
system and it's dated 2013! And yes, it does appear to be a 36-bit non-byte
addressable system.
And you can run the OS free of ch
On 5/20/2016 7:19 PM, Sean Conner wrote:
Hehe, what is a long long? Yes, you are totally right. Still, I assert
that C is still the defacto most portable language on Earth. What other
language runs on as many OS's and CPUs ? None that I can think of.
A long long is at least 64-bits long.
On 2016-05-21 10:26 PM, ben wrote:
On 5/20/2016 7:19 PM, Sean Conner wrote:
Hehe, what is a long long? Yes, you are totally right. Still, I assert
that C is still the defacto most portable language on Earth. What other
language runs on as many OS's and CPUs ? None that I can think of.
A lo
On 5/20/2016 2:58
[4] Say, a C compiler an 8088. How big is a pointer? How big of an
object can you point to? How much code is involved with "p++"?
How come INTEL thought that 64 KB segments ample? I guess they only used
FLOATING point in the large time shared machines.
Ben.
It was thus said that the Great ben once stated:
> On 5/20/2016 7:19 PM, Sean Conner wrote:
>
> >>
> >>Hehe, what is a long long? Yes, you are totally right. Still, I assert
> >>that C is still the defacto most portable language on Earth. What other
> >>language runs on as many OS's and CPUs ? Non
It was thus said that the Great ben once stated:
> On 5/20/2016 2:58
>
> >
> >[4] Say, a C compiler an 8088. How big is a pointer? How big of an
> > object can you point to? How much code is involved with "p++"?
>
> How come INTEL thought that 64 KB segments ample? I guess they only used
> On May 21, 2016, at 7:34 PM, ben wrote:
>
> On 5/20/2016 2:58
>
>>
>> [4] Say, a C compiler an 8088. How big is a pointer? How big of an
>> object can you point to? How much code is involved with "p++"?
>
> How come INTEL thought that 64 KB segments ample? I guess they only used
>
On 05/21/2016 09:34 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
On 2016-05-21 10:26 PM, ben wrote:
On 5/20/2016 7:19 PM, Sean Conner wrote:
Hehe, what is a long long? Yes, you are totally right.
Still, I assert
that C is still the defacto most portable language on
Earth. What other
language runs on as many OS's
On 5/21/2016 8:56 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
On 05/21/2016 09:34 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
On 2016-05-21 10:26 PM, ben wrote:
On 5/20/2016 7:19 PM, Sean Conner wrote:
Hehe, what is a long long? Yes, you are totally right. Still, I assert
that C is still the defacto most portable language on Earth. Wha
I need to make some paper tapes of the diagnostics for my PDP-8/e. I
built an RS232/current loop interface and have it working I think
Did anyone else notice that the standard cable to connect the M8655
to a tty uses shielded twisted pair cable, but doesn't have the signal
pairs in the twisted pa
On 2016-05-21 10:56 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
On 05/21/2016 09:34 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
On 2016-05-21 10:26 PM, ben wrote:
On 5/20/2016 7:19 PM, Sean Conner wrote:
Hehe, what is a long long? Yes, you are totally right. Still, I assert
that C is still the defacto most portable language on Earth. W
I saw one Altair 8800 and one TRS-80 III out in the swap fest. Some more
recent power (5?) series, but that’s about it.
Jerry WB9MRI
> On May 20, 2016, at 1:18 PM, Alex McWhirter wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Anyone spot anything list related at hamvention? I'm around trying to find
> anything cool
On 22/05/2016 02:25, Paul Koning wrote:
On May 21, 2016, at 3:28 PM, Rod Smallwood
wrote:
Second point:
The RSTS install tape is just a bunch of files.
There's nothing requiring image copy to deal with funny file formats
No, that is not accurate. An install tape (for V
After Alex mentioned it, I'd thought about driving up if anyone saw
anything of interest, but sounds like there isn't a great deal to pick from
for older computers. I really can't justify the drive anyway, this year...
Brian KI4GTD
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 11:48 PM, Jerry Weiss wrote:
> I saw on
Martin, I might be able to help you as I think we have a 7596A.
Are these EPROMs from the processor PCA? Are you able to tell me which 'U'
numbers they are in the PC board?
I haven't looked at the plotter itself, but the service manual we have shows
the following part numbers for the processor
45 matches
Mail list logo
