From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 11883 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2022 21:24:52 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (50.116.15.146) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 11 Jul 2022 21:24:52 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B2AA40BA8; Tue, 12 Jul 2022 07:24:17 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mercury.lcs.mit.edu (mercury.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.122]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA26940BA7 for ; Tue, 12 Jul 2022 07:24:13 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Postfix, from userid 11178) id 29B5618C097; Mon, 11 Jul 2022 17:24:13 -0400 (EDT) To: gctersteeg@gmail.com, tuhs@tuhs.org Message-Id: <20220711212413.29B5618C097@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 17:24:13 -0400 (EDT) From: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) Message-ID-Hash: ZVNB7VPZJ55LLWVEPS2PQ77HZ6H4R3SB X-Message-ID-Hash: ZVNB7VPZJ55LLWVEPS2PQ77HZ6H4R3SB X-MailFrom: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tuhs.tuhs.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1 Precedence: list Subject: [TUHS] Re: LSX issues and musing List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: > From: Gavin Tersteeg > I spent a lot of time getting UNIX V6 working on my PDP-11/23 system. > It took a lot of tinkering with the kernel and drivers to make it work > in the way I wanted to You must have made a lot of changes for it to take "a lot of tinkering". Bringing V6 up on the /23 has been done several times, and when I did it, it only took about 2 dozen lines of code in about 2 files. What all did you wind up changing? > From my research, it seems like there were two different UNIX variants > that could run on a system like this. These variants were LSX and > MINI-UNIX. MINI-UNIX seems to require a decent mass-storage device like > a RK05 and some porting to work on an 11/03, while LSX is designed to > work on exactly the hardware specs that I have on hand. Bringing up MINI-UNIX on the /03 has been done at least twice; once historically (now lost, AFAIK), and again recently: http://ana-3.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/unix/Mini/Mini.html I'm not sure what you're basing the "MINI-UNIX seems to require a decent mass-storage device like a RK05" on - it should run as well on whatever you're running LSX on as LSX does. I haven't run LSX myself, but from what I've seen, the only significant difference between the two is that LSX will run with less main memory than MINI-UNIX (which really kind of needs 56KB; LSX you can probably get away with 40KB).That was a significant issue when the LSI-11 was originally released, but these days one has to really work to have a QBUS PDP-11 with less than 56KB. > my EIS-less 11/03 EIS chips can be found on eBait for not much money (I just bought a couple myself), and it's worth investing in one, so on can dispense with the emulator, which takes real memory for which a better use can be found. > The first issue is that the C compiler will randomly spit out a "0: > Missing temp file" when attempting to compile something. This is > annoying, but circumventable by just running the same command over and > over until it works. Schaeffer's Law (from Larry Niven): anything you don't understand might be dangerous. I'd track down why this is happening. Noel