History of Operating Systems on the PDP-8

27 katselukertaa
Siirry ensimmäiseen lukemattomaan viestiin

nospam

lukematon,
10.2.2004 klo 21.00.1810.2.2004
vastaanottaja
in article d8ab5055.04021...@posting.google.com, Patrick Mulvany
at pa...@firedrake.org wrote on 10/02/2004 23:29:

> I am currently undertaking some research into the history on operating
> systems. I have been able to place over 450 OS and versions
> in a timeline. The current but unfinished version is available at :-
>
> http://firedrake.org/paddy

Others here can clarify this, back in 1964 and before a certain date there
was no such an OS as TOPS-10. There where various monitors that eventually
evolved into what was named TOPS-10

I find the drawn line showing a direct lineage of VMS from TOPS-20 IMHO
WRONG ;)
I didn't look much further

Al Kossow

lukematon,
10.2.2004 klo 21.23.1410.2.2004
vastaanottaja
From article <BC4FD7D6.22F29%x...@wedontwantyourspam.com>, by nospam <x...@wedontwantyourspam.com>:

>
> I find the drawn line showing a direct lineage of VMS from TOPS-20 IMHO
> WRONG ;)
> I didn't look much further
>

This looks to be heavily biased towards what can be found on web pages

A few days in a good university library (hint.. start with AFIPS proceedings
and ACM SIGOPS) would be an good place to start.

Patrick Mulvany

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 2.41.3811.2.2004
vastaanottaja
nospam <x...@wedontwantyourspam.com> wrote in message news:<BC4FD7D6.22F29%x...@wedontwantyourspam.com>...

I have a probable link from TOPS-10 to VMS but none from TOPS-20. Is
this the link you are questioning?

My understanding was that VMS and TOPS-20 were quite seperate.

Thank you for your help.
Paddy

Sean Case

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 3.17.2211.2.2004
vastaanottaja
In article <d8ab5055.04021...@posting.google.com>,
pa...@firedrake.org (Patrick Mulvany) wrote:

> I have a probable link from TOPS-10 to VMS but none from TOPS-20. Is
> this the link you are questioning?

BAH isn't going to like that...

> My understanding was that VMS and TOPS-20 were quite seperate.

TOPS-10 and VMS are even more separate.

Sean Case

--
Sean Case g...@zip.com.au

Code is an illusion. Only assertions are real.

jmfb...@aol.com

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 5.10.3411.2.2004
vastaanottaja
In article <d8ab5055.04021...@posting.google.com>,
pa...@firedrake.org (Patrick Mulvany) wrote:
>nospam <x...@wedontwantyourspam.com> wrote in message
news:<BC4FD7D6.22F29%x...@wedontwantyourspam.com>...
>> in article d8ab5055.04021...@posting.google.com, Patrick
Mulvany
>> at pa...@firedrake.org wrote on 10/02/2004 23:29:
>>
>> > I am currently undertaking some research into the history on operating
>> > systems. I have been able to place over 450 OS and versions
>> > in a timeline. The current but unfinished version is available at :-
>> >
>> > http://firedrake.org/paddy
>>
>> Others here can clarify this, back in 1964 and before a certain date
there
>> was no such an OS as TOPS-10. There where various monitors that
eventually
>> evolved into what was named TOPS-10
>>
>> I find the drawn line showing a direct lineage of VMS from TOPS-20 IMHO
>> WRONG ;)
>> I didn't look much further
>
>I have a probable link from TOPS-10 to VMS

Very definitely not. The VMS guru was so anti-PDP-10 that he
wrote code to make sure there would be no way to put in
features that the -10s had.

> ..but none from TOPS-20. Is


>this the link you are questioning?
>
>My understanding was that VMS and TOPS-20 were quite seperate.

VMS's grandfather was RSX-11M (probably not RSX-11M+ but I'd
lost track of the source evolutions by that time).

/BAH


/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

jmfb...@aol.com

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 5.13.5511.2.2004
vastaanottaja
In article <gsc-DD255F.1...@nasal.pacific.net.au>,

Sean Case <g...@zip.com.au> wrote:
>In article <d8ab5055.04021...@posting.google.com>,
> pa...@firedrake.org (Patrick Mulvany) wrote:
>
>> I have a probable link from TOPS-10 to VMS but none from TOPS-20. Is
>> this the link you are questioning?
>
>BAH isn't going to like that...

The VMS people were supposed to learn from TOPS-10's experiences
but the top ones suffered from extreme NIH syndrome to the point
of pathology.

>
>> My understanding was that VMS and TOPS-20 were quite seperate.
>
>TOPS-10 and VMS are even more separate.

Even to the point of the CUSPs. It took a complete house-cleaning
of the old guard and some infiltration of people who were very
experienced in timesharing OSes to get VMS projects to even look
at a reasonable queuing service for input/output and batch.

HarrisNewman

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 8.47.2911.2.2004
vastaanottaja
I don't see any listing for the Data General Operating system lines
such as RDOS, AOS and AOS/VS. Also, there is another OS that ran on
Alpha micro simular to Tops-10: AMOS.

-Harris

pa...@firedrake.org (Patrick Mulvany) wrote in message news:<d8ab5055.04021...@posting.google.com>...

Paul Repacholi

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 4.42.5511.2.2004
vastaanottaja
nospam <x...@wedontwantyourspam.com> writes:

> in article d8ab5055.04021...@posting.google.com, Patrick Mulvany
> at pa...@firedrake.org wrote on 10/02/2004 23:29:

>> I am currently undertaking some research into the history on
>> operating systems. I have been able to place over 450 OS and
>> versions in a timeline. The current but unfinished version is
>> available at :-

>> http://firedrake.org/paddy

> Others here can clarify this, back in 1964 and before a certain date
> there was no such an OS as TOPS-10. There where various monitors
> that eventually evolved into what was named TOPS-10

TOPS-10 was started in '69, it was a working over of the existing 6/10
monitor and CUSPs that shipped with it.

> I find the drawn line showing a direct lineage of VMS from TOPS-20
> IMHO WRONG ;) I didn't look much further

I can hear the scream already...

--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.

nospam

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 10.55.0711.2.2004
vastaanottaja
in article d8ab5055.04021...@posting.google.com, Patrick Mulvany

Sorry I did read it rather too quickly, you have a link from TOPS-10 -> VMS
But I still stick by the noway clause.

John Everett

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 12.51.2311.2.2004
vastaanottaja
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:42:55 +0800, Paul Repacholi
<pr...@prep.synonet.com> wrote:

>> Others here can clarify this, back in 1964 and before a certain date
>> there was no such an OS as TOPS-10. There where various monitors
>> that eventually evolved into what was named TOPS-10
>
>TOPS-10 was started in '69, it was a working over of the existing 6/10
>monitor and CUSPs that shipped with it.

Perhaps you'll listen to someone who was actually there. TOPS-10 was
not "started in 1969". It was just a name David Stone thought up one
day because he didn't like it being called "The Monitor". "Operating
System" just sounded so much more computer sciency than Monitor. He
decided on "Timesharing OPerating System-10". I still remember the
Monitor Group meeting where Dave announced the new name. We (the
members of the Monitor Group) just hated the name at first. All we
could think of was AM radio. :-)

The operating system that became TOPS-10 actually began as the PDP-6
Monitor in 1964. It developed in stages and at some point (perhaps
actually in 1969) it acquired the TOPS-10 name.

There may be some confusion, perhaps as viewed through the prism of
time, with the introduction of the "Level D" Monitor, also known as
the 5 Series Monitor. This was indeed a significant enhancement, but
was in no way connected with the new name.


jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net http://home.earthlink.net/~jeverett3

Michael Roach

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 14.38.5011.2.2004
vastaanottaja
In article <73dff34c.04021...@posting.google.com>,

HarrisNewman <hsne...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>I don't see any listing for the Data General Operating system lines
>such as RDOS, AOS and AOS/VS. Also, there is another OS that ran on
>Alpha micro simular to Tops-10: AMOS.

AMOS ran on the WD-16 processor, a re-microcoding of the LSI-11 chip
set. It's assembly language is similar to that of the PDP-11 line. An
AMOS emulator (as well as old Alpha Micro documentation) can be found at
http://www, .otterway.com/am100 . The latest version (0.3n) runs out of
the box under Cygwin, and the earlier 0.3c version runs out of the box
under NetBSD for Intel 32 bit machines.

AMOS was later moved to the 68000 line as AMOS32. Information on AMOS32
can be fount at http://www.alphamicro.com . Their latest product, the
AM-8000, actually runs under control of a 680x0 emulator running on an
AMD processor. Some native code is used but this machine is much faster
than previous Alpha Micros.

Programs written in AlphaBASIC (Alpha Micro's Business BASIC-like
language) on the original machine back in 1977 will still compile and
run on the latest offerings.
--
Life is like an onion: you peel off layer after layer, then you find
there is nothing in it.

Paul Repacholi

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 12.49.2211.2.2004
vastaanottaja
jmfb...@aol.com writes:

> VMS's grandfather was RSX-11M (probably not RSX-11M+ but I'd lost
> track of the source evolutions by that time).

Right. RSX-11M+/TRAX *post* dated VMS v1! It also wrote its
own death warrent by outperforming it on the 74s...

Wolfgang Houben

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 15.25.5411.2.2004
vastaanottaja

"Paul Repacholi" <pr...@prep.synonet.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:87ad3p7...@prep.synonet.com...

> jmfb...@aol.com writes:
>
> > VMS's grandfather was RSX-11M (probably not RSX-11M+ but I'd lost
> > track of the source evolutions by that time).
>
> Right. RSX-11M+/TRAX *post* dated VMS v1! It also wrote its
> own death warrent by outperforming it on the 74s...

What about RSX-11D / IAS? Was there some connection to the VMS-People?

Wolfgang Houben
castor at houben dot com


Al Kossow

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 16.05.2411.2.2004
vastaanottaja
From article <c0e38h$163u$1...@ulysses.news.tiscali.de>, by "Wolfgang Houben" <cas...@houben.com>:

>
> What about RSX-11D / IAS? Was there some connection to the VMS-People?

Dave Cutler was project manager for RSX-11M. RSX-11D was a parallel project
not under his control. Dave was one of the principal architects of VMS. There
is an architectural continuity between 11-M and VMS if you look at the way the
two systems are put together.

There was a thread a while back pointing out that Cutler is NOT the inventor of
RSX-11. RSX traces its roots back to RSX-15 and back still farther to a system
developed in 1959

http://www.demillar.com/RSX/

--

A BIG omission in the timeline are all of the OS's developed by Burroughs, the
Univac 41x real time systems, etc, etc, etc.

--

CAL
Late 1960's

Is this a reference to the UCB SDS 940 operating system, or to CAL-TSS on the
6400?

CAL ties into the work at PARC (as does TENEX)

SDS940 -> BCC500 -> MAXC at PARC -> Alto OS -> CEDAR
-> Mesa/Pilot (the Star OS)
-> Interlisp-D (roots back to TENEX)

RSTS-11 was called Edusystem 100 at one point (TSS/8 was Edusystem 50)
which begat RSTS/E

What about all of the OTHER CDC operating systems (Oregon Open TS System on the
3400, the 16 bit real-time systems)

--

Peter da Silva

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 16.11.4811.2.2004
vastaanottaja
Need:

Line from UNIX/Xenix into MS-DOS 2.x somewhere.
CDOS: Cromemco CP/M clone, late '70s.
Cromix: Multiprocessor CDOS (16k shared between CPUs, 48K separate).
Had a UNIX-like filesystem and a large chunk of UNIXy BIOS calls
that went as far as having a "printf" built in.

--
Rev. Peter da Silva, ULC. 29.6852N 95.5770W WWFD?

Give a man a fish and you've got a loyal customer forever. Teach a man to fish
and he'll walk away with half your market. (updated for the computer industry)

Peter da Silva

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 16.23.4811.2.2004
vastaanottaja
And what's that dotted line from CP/M to the LISA? Where's the dotted
line from the Star to the LISA?

Mark Crispin

lukematon,
11.2.2004 klo 17.19.5911.2.2004
vastaanottaja
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 jmfb...@aol.com wrote:
> The VMS people were supposed to learn from TOPS-10's experiences
> but the top ones suffered from extreme NIH syndrome to the point
> of pathology.

This gets my nomination for "understatement of the year."

It was even worse when it came to learning from TOPS-20's experiences. It
was a specific VMS design goal *not* to take *anything* from TOPS-20.

-- Mark --

http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

jmfb...@aol.com

lukematon,
12.2.2004 klo 5.58.5612.2.2004
vastaanottaja
In article <87ad3p7...@prep.synonet.com>,

Paul Repacholi <pr...@prep.synonet.com> wrote:
>jmfb...@aol.com writes:
>
>> VMS's grandfather was RSX-11M (probably not RSX-11M+ but I'd lost
>> track of the source evolutions by that time).
>
>Right. RSX-11M+/TRAX *post* dated VMS v1! It also wrote its
>own death warrent by outperforming it on the 74s...

Nope. M+ came before VMS. I was typing up docs for M+ in 1972.

jmfb...@aol.com

lukematon,
12.2.2004 klo 6.07.1712.2.2004
vastaanottaja
In article <c0e38h$163u$1...@ulysses.news.tiscali.de>,

The D, S, M and M+ were various flavors of RSX and came before
VMS. I would suspect that people who had worked on projects
for all of these worked on VMS in the beginning (unless they'ld
moved to other companies).

What people don't seem to understand these days, is that most
developers (there were a few <ahem>remarkable exceptions) would
float from one OS to another. This is one of the reasons that
most of DEC's OSes had a common set of of user interface rules.
For instance PPNs were bracketed with [] square brackets, even
in TOPS-20 where they tried to not be like anybody else and
angle-bracketed <> directories.

I also suspect that's why there was a TECO available everywhere.
A guy whose fingers knew TECO commands without having to reference
his brain, would hack a TECO when he started to work on a PDP OS
that didn't have it.

In the olden days, workers weren't jailed within a single OS. We
worked on and with all of them.

IAS came from a marvelous group of people in the UK. Not only
were the people who worked on IAS as helpful as TOPS-10 flavored
types, but the OS actually didn't get in the way of a user trying
to get some work done. I doubt IAS had much to do with the
pointy-headed VMS types.

jmfb...@aol.com

lukematon,
12.2.2004 klo 6.10.0312.2.2004
vastaanottaja
In article
<Pine.WNT.4.60.04...@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>,

Mark Crispin <M...@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:
>On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 jmfb...@aol.com wrote:
>> The VMS people were supposed to learn from TOPS-10's experiences
>> but the top ones suffered from extreme NIH syndrome to the point
>> of pathology.
>
>This gets my nomination for "understatement of the year."
>
>It was even worse when it came to learning from TOPS-20's experiences. It
>was a specific VMS design goal *not* to take *anything* from TOPS-20.

After Husvedt(sp?)'s meeting with JMF and TW, he stated
that he would write code so that nothing, absolutely nothing,
could be transferred from _any_ PDP-10 experience. That included
TOPS-20...although I understand that the on-line help facility
was an early implementation...and that idea came from the -20.

Mark Crispin

lukematon,
12.2.2004 klo 11.34.3712.2.2004
vastaanottaja
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 jmfb...@aol.com wrote:
> After Husvedt(sp?)'s meeting with JMF and TW, he stated
> that he would write code so that nothing, absolutely nothing,
> could be transferred from _any_ PDP-10 experience.

That was probably the asshole who told me at a DECUS, more than 20 years
ago, that he would make sure that VMS never had command completion, "?",
or CTRL/T because these features were "inefficient".

VMS was an abomination that transferred nothing of any use to the future.
VMS users are now far more orphaned than TOPS-20 users ever were. The
UNIX folks took *some* ideas from TOPS-20, and that eased the transition
for TOPS-20 users immensely.

> That included
> TOPS-20...although I understand that the on-line help facility
> was an early implementation...and that idea came from the -20.

The VMS help facility (if you can call it that) took nothing from TOPS-20.

As distributed by DEC, TOPS-20's help facility was the same as TOPS-10;
that is, "HELP FOO" was the equivalent of "TYPE HLP:FOO.HLP".

Stanford developed a more advanced, tree-structured HELP system that built
on that. Basically, there was a simple form of tags to allow help files
to have sections.

nospam

lukematon,
12.2.2004 klo 12.55.5212.2.2004
vastaanottaja
in article 402b71f2$0$3164$61fe...@news.rcn.com, jmfb...@aol.com at
jmfb...@aol.com wrote on 12/02/2004 22:10:

> Husvedt
Yes correct :-

The development of the first version (V1), codenamed "Starlet" started in
1975, led by Roger Gourd, assisted by Dave Cutler, Dick Husvedt and Peter
Lipman.


Mark maybe Dick Head would have suited than "asshole" ;>


Cheers
Mark ;)

Patrick Mulvany

lukematon,
12.2.2004 klo 16.55.1712.2.2004
vastaanottaja
never...@panix.com.invalid (Michael Roach) wrote in message news:<c0e0ca$77$1...@reader2.panix.com>...

Updated diagram with more information on AMOS, AMOS/L and AMOS 32 as
well as some other changes. (v0.3.5)

A general question do you think I should include emulators as well as
OSes in the tree. AMOS emulator and VAX-11 RSX are stepping stones but
not strictly OSes. My personal preference is to include them but
colour code them.

Paddy

jmfb...@aol.com

lukematon,
13.2.2004 klo 5.42.4313.2.2004
vastaanottaja
In article <Pine.LNX.4.60.04...@shiva1.cac.washington.edu>,

Mark Crispin <m...@CAC.Washington.EDU> wrote:
>On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 jmfb...@aol.com wrote:
>> After Husvedt(sp?)'s meeting with JMF and TW, he stated
>> that he would write code so that nothing, absolutely nothing,
>> could be transferred from _any_ PDP-10 experience.
>
>That was probably the asshole who told me at a DECUS, more than 20 years
>ago, that he would make sure that VMS never had command completion, "?",
>or CTRL/T because these features were "inefficient".

Those folks suffered from terminal small computer thinking.

>
>VMS was an abomination that transferred nothing of any use to the future.
>VMS users are now far more orphaned than TOPS-20 users ever were. The
>UNIX folks took *some* ideas from TOPS-20, and that eased the transition
>for TOPS-20 users immensely.

But it took a long time (in computer biz terms) for Unix to
get itself uncanned.


>
>> That included
>> TOPS-20...although I understand that the on-line help facility
>> was an early implementation...and that idea came from the -20.
>
>The VMS help facility (if you can call it that) took nothing from TOPS-20.

They got the ? command completion from the -20.


>
>As distributed by DEC, TOPS-20's help facility was the same as TOPS-10;
>that is, "HELP FOO" was the equivalent of "TYPE HLP:FOO.HLP".

Sure. The -20 people were working on getting docs online with
a user interface. This wasn't an easy thing to do, especially
"converting" the documentaion part of DEC into thinking differently.
If you knew how long and how much work it took me to get the writers
to go from using typists to getting their writing online, you wouldn't
be so <ahem>impatient.

>
>Stanford developed a more advanced, tree-structured HELP system that built
>on that. Basically, there was a simple form of tags to allow help files
>to have sections.

Standford may have written code. That is only a small part of
shipping a complete _commercial_ computer package. Stanford
proved it could be done and honed techniques to make the feature
usable. That is a long way from getting a couple of hundred thousand
pages of well-written and well-organized documention into
bits-on-demand. The old doc prep publication techniques can't
be used.

jmfb...@aol.com

lukematon,
13.2.2004 klo 5.44.4213.2.2004
vastaanottaja
In article <BC520963.23029%x...@wedontwantyourspam.com>,

No, having another member on the team that could say no
to the both of them and making it stick would have been
more profitable. Note that us TOPS-10 developers were also
stockholders.

Paul Repacholi

lukematon,
13.2.2004 klo 10.21.1713.2.2004
vastaanottaja
John Everett <jeve...@earthlink.DEFEAT.UCE.BOTS.net> writes:

> On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:42:55 +0800, Paul Repacholi
> <pr...@prep.synonet.com> wrote:

>>> Others here can clarify this, back in 1964 and before a certain date
>>> there was no such an OS as TOPS-10. There where various monitors
>>> that eventually evolved into what was named TOPS-10

>>TOPS-10 was started in '69, it was a working over of the existing
>>6/10 monitor and CUSPs that shipped with it.

> Perhaps you'll listen to someone who was actually there. TOPS-10 was
> not "started in 1969". It was just a name David Stone thought up one
> day because he didn't like it being called "The Monitor". "Operating
> System" just sounded so much more computer sciency than Monitor. He
> decided on "Timesharing OPerating System-10". I still remember the
> Monitor Group meeting where Dave announced the new name. We (the
> members of the Monitor Group) just hated the name at first. All we
> could think of was AM radio. :-)

I am passing on what I was told by Chris White. He told me he was head
hunted from Reading to go to the Mill for a big overhaul and clean-up
of `the monitor' and that it was named TOPS-10 in the process.

> The operating system that became TOPS-10 actually began as the PDP-6
> Monitor in 1964. It developed in stages and at some point (perhaps
> actually in 1969) it acquired the TOPS-10 name.

Yes. I am looking for the listing of the predecessor to SCNSER, "as
modified for UWA", but fear it may have been junked.

John Everett

lukematon,
13.2.2004 klo 13.34.0513.2.2004
vastaanottaja
On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 23:21:17 +0800, Paul Repacholi
<pr...@prep.synonet.com> wrote:

>John Everett <jeve...@earthlink.DEFEAT.UCE.BOTS.net> writes:
>
>> On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:42:55 +0800, Paul Repacholi
>> <pr...@prep.synonet.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Others here can clarify this, back in 1964 and before a certain date
>>>> there was no such an OS as TOPS-10. There where various monitors
>>>> that eventually evolved into what was named TOPS-10
>
>>>TOPS-10 was started in '69, it was a working over of the existing
>>>6/10 monitor and CUSPs that shipped with it.
>
>> Perhaps you'll listen to someone who was actually there. TOPS-10 was
>> not "started in 1969". It was just a name David Stone thought up one
>> day because he didn't like it being called "The Monitor". "Operating
>> System" just sounded so much more computer sciency than Monitor. He
>> decided on "Timesharing OPerating System-10". I still remember the
>> Monitor Group meeting where Dave announced the new name. We (the
>> members of the Monitor Group) just hated the name at first. All we
>> could think of was AM radio. :-)
>
>I am passing on what I was told by Chris White. He told me he was head
>hunted from Reading to go to the Mill for a big overhaul and clean-up
>of `the monitor' and that it was named TOPS-10 in the process.

Yes, the big overhaul Chris worked on was the 5 Series Monitor, also
called the Level D Monitor. As I recall the design work, which was
primarily for an entirely new file system, was done by Tom Hastings,
Tony Wachs and Chris. Tony actually implemented FILSER, which was
later broken up into three modules. At the same time, AC naming was
rationalized primarily by (IIRC) Don Black.

While all this was going on Jim Flemming and I were working on a
real-time monitor project, which never saw the light of day. By the
time David Stone came up with the TOPS-10 name, Jim and I were both in
the Monitor Group and Chris was off doing other things.

>> The operating system that became TOPS-10 actually began as the PDP-6
>> Monitor in 1964. It developed in stages and at some point (perhaps
>> actually in 1969) it acquired the TOPS-10 name.
>
>Yes. I am looking for the listing of the predecessor to SCNSER, "as
>modified for UWA", but fear it may have been junked.

Yes, I recalll that there was a predecessor to SCNSER, and although
I've been wracking my brain I can't come up with the name of the
module. A google search hasn't helped, but did confirm my above
assertion that TH, CW, and TW designed the Level D disk service.

Mark Crispin

lukematon,
13.2.2004 klo 13.21.5713.2.2004
vastaanottaja
On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 jmfb...@aol.com wrote:
> But it took a long time (in computer biz terms) for Unix to
> get itself uncanned.

Perhaps to a DECie. UNIX was well-established in academia and research by
the early 1980s.

VMS never caught up, at least in part because of the active efforts of
certain individuals to block any VMS system purchases. DEC thought that
it was doing great with all the VAXen that it was selling...until SUN came
out with a better hardware offering.

> >The VMS help facility (if you can call it that) took nothing from TOPS-20.
> They got the ? command completion from the -20.

I just logged on to a system calling itseld "OpenVMS VAX V7.1" and I can
assure you that there is nothing like TOPS-20 command completion or
TOPS-20 "?" on it.

"OpenVMS VAX V7.1" sucks just as badly as all the previous versions did.

> >As distributed by DEC, TOPS-20's help facility was the same as TOPS-10;
> >that is, "HELP FOO" was the equivalent of "TYPE HLP:FOO.HLP".
> Sure. The -20 people were working on getting docs online with
> a user interface. This wasn't an easy thing to do, especially
> "converting" the documentaion part of DEC into thinking differently.
> If you knew how long and how much work it took me to get the writers
> to go from using typists to getting their writing online, you wouldn't
> be so <ahem>impatient.

I don't know what your point is, Barb. I can assure you that as of the
final DEC-distributed version of TOPS-20 (TOPS-20 7.0) "HELP FOO" was
exactly equivalent to "TYPE HLP:FOO.HLP".

The only online documents distributed with TOPS-20 with either flat text
.HLP files or, at the very end, lineprinter versions of the TOPS-20
manuals. There were no viewers.

> >Stanford developed a more advanced, tree-structured HELP system that built
> >on that. Basically, there was a simple form of tags to allow help files
> >to have sections.
> Standford may have written code. That is only a small part of
> shipping a complete _commercial_ computer package. Stanford
> proved it could be done and honed techniques to make the feature
> usable. That is a long way from getting a couple of hundred thousand
> pages of well-written and well-organized documention into
> bits-on-demand. The old doc prep publication techniques can't
> be used.

The fact remains, Barb, that Stanford wrote a tree-structured HELP system
for TOPS-20 and some HELP files that used that system. Digital did
nothing of the sort.

Now, by today's standards, the Stanford HELP system was primitive. It had
just one level of subtopics; nothing like modern-day hyperlinks. But it
was still more advanced than a HELP command that just aliased into the
TYPE command.

Tim Shoppa

lukematon,
13.2.2004 klo 15.43.2513.2.2004
vastaanottaja
hsne...@austin.rr.com (HarrisNewman) wrote in message news:<73dff34c.04021...@posting.google.com>...

> I don't see any listing for the Data General Operating system lines
> such as RDOS, AOS and AOS/VS.

It's a DEC-Centric view of the OS world. It's not a wrong view, but it's
hardly a complete view.

I dabbled enough with DG Novas/Eclipses and a number of other also-rans,
to the point where I realize that they were much more than just clones
of TOPS-10 - OS/8 - RT-11 - RSX-11 - VMS etc, but they really weren't
all that different.

Contrast with the IBM mainframe and mini OS's, which are a world apart.

Tim.

Al Kossow

lukematon,
13.2.2004 klo 16.54.3613.2.2004
vastaanottaja
> It's a DEC-Centric view of the OS world. It's not a wrong view, but it's
> hardly a complete view.

Probably because of the ease of finding DEC info on the web.

It appears that it will be necessary to send him names and dates of other
systems if we want to see them added.

I'd be interested in knowing more of the TENEX early history. Were there
any connections between it and the BBN PDP-1 Timesharing system?

There's also the whole Stanford side of the 36 bit OS family.

--

Turns out there are some connections between ITS and the MIT PDP-1 Timesharing
system (the way DDT was used, for example)


Phil Budne

lukematon,
13.2.2004 klo 18.37.0313.2.2004
vastaanottaja
In article <c0jh2s$68a$1...@spies.com>, Al Kossow <a...@spies.com> wrote:
>I'd be interested in knowing more of the TENEX early history. Were there
>any connections between it and the BBN PDP-1 Timesharing system?

Berkeley's Project Genie for the SDS 930/940 is supposed to have been
influential in the design of TENEX. I think the word "FORK" comes
from the '940 system, and was the genesis for command completion as
well.

I have some links at

http://www.ultimate.com/phil/pdp10/

But I'd love to learn more about what the Genie environment was like...

An offshoot of Project Genie was the Berkeley Computer Company. Many
BCC folks were hired by PARC, they wanted a PDP-10, but since Xerox
had bought SDS (renamed XDS) they were offered a Sigma 7. Instead
they built MAXC, a PDP-10 clone which ran TENEX. Alan Kay wrote:

"We decided it would take three years to do a good operating system for a
Sigma 7, while we could build an entire PDP-10 in just one year."

(this from the MAXC section of my PDP-10 page)

>There's also the whole Stanford side of the 36 bit OS family.

I think Stanford (along with MIT and BB&N) also had a PDP-1
timesharing system, so they started with 18 bits as well. I've never
seen any description of the Stanford PDP-1 software.

At the command line WAITS bore a strong resemblence to early PDP-6/10
monitors (except for the SIXBIT PPN's). I never saw the WAITS
display, but it was supposed to be years ahead of it's time.

Brian Harvey

lukematon,
13.2.2004 klo 19.36.1113.2.2004
vastaanottaja
bu...@csa.bu.edu (Phil Budne) writes:
>At the command line WAITS bore a strong resemblence to early PDP-6/10
>monitors (except for the SIXBIT PPN's). I never saw the WAITS
>display, but it was supposed to be years ahead of it's time.

I wrote a DECUS paper about the WAITS display support:

``Increasing Programmer Power at Stanford with Display Terminals,''
Proceedings of Digital Equipment Computer Users Society conference,
Spring, 1975.

Al Kossow

lukematon,
13.2.2004 klo 19.57.5913.2.2004
vastaanottaja
From article <c0jn2v$q6k$1...@news3.bu.edu>, by bu...@csa.bu.edu (Phil Budne):

>
> Berkeley's Project Genie for the SDS 930/940 is supposed to have been
> influential in the design of TENEX. I think the word "FORK" comes
> from the '940 system, and was the genesis for command completion as
> well.
>
> I have some links at
>
> http://www.ultimate.com/phil/pdp10/
>
> But I'd love to learn more about what the Genie environment was like...
>

I have a LOT of information on GENIE and the BCC 500 system at

www.bitsavers.org/pdf/sds/ucbProjGenie and
www.bitsavers.org/pdf/bcc

Software has survived from both systems. Bob Supnik has started an
SDS 940 system simulation for SIMH. A simulation of the BCC 500 would
be pretty complicated ( it has dedicated scheduler and paging and I/O
cpus..)

Steve Russell and John McCarthy are still around, I need to talk to
them about Stanford's PDP-1D system....

There were at least three different timsharing systems built on PDP-1's
The one at BBN, Jack Dennis' system at MIT, and the PDP-1D system at
Stanford.


William H. Maddox III

lukematon,
13.2.2004 klo 21.16.1513.2.2004
vastaanottaja

I visited SAIL sometime around 1984 and was shown a display system that
drove multiple bitmapped displays via video feeds from a centralized
controller. It used a head-per-track disk in which each screen was
refreshed from its own track. By that time, the disk had actually been
replaced by a semiconductor replacement, but the old disk was still on
display for the curious such as myself. The PDP-10 had a separate write
channel and just wrote data to the disk to update the displays. I vaguely
remember it being called the Data Disk Display. By the time I saw it,
the disk had actually been replaced by a semiconductor memory, but the old
disk was still kept around for its historical interest. Is this the system
to which you refer? I recall it had a neat feature in that you could
superimpose the display on ordinary video from a camera or broadcast TV,
all done at the analog video level of course.

--Bill

Brian Harvey

lukematon,
14.2.2004 klo 1.59.0114.2.2004
vastaanottaja
"William H. Maddox III" <NOSPAMmaddox@NOSPAMtransmetaDOTCOM> writes:
> [...] I vaguely
>remember it being called the Data Disk Display. [...] Is this the system

>to which you refer? I recall it had a neat feature in that you could
>superimpose the display on ordinary video from a camera or broadcast TV,
>all done at the analog video level of course.

Yes, that's the one. Besides the Data Disk, there were a few III vector
display terminals, used for crucial applications such as Spacewar. :-)
In my time we still used the actual Data Disk, although several of its
tracks were damaged so that the display would be unreadable because of
streaks off to the right from whatever pixels were supposed to be on.
There were more DD terminals than disk tracks, so not all could be used
at the same time; the binding of DD channels to terminals was done in
software when you started typing at a vacant terminal. If you were really
desperate, a special escape sequence would request one of the unreadable
channels, normally unassigned.

You couldn't superimpose a DD channel on broadcast TV; those were either/or.
But you could superimpose a local camera on a DD channel because the
camera could get its sync signal from the DD video generator. (But you
could arrange to switch to a TV channel until your program finished
running and returned to the monitor prompt.) The speakers next to the
terminals were also software-switched, so you could get the audio from
your TV channel, or a selection of radio stations. And you could arrange
to peek at (and even type into) someone else's DD channel; this was
especially useful for the system staff when some user asked for help.

But the video switch, imho, wasn't the most visionary part of the display
support. That was the window system. Applications could divide the
screen into text and/or graphics windows that would be indepenently
scrolled, etc., by the monitor. And intra-line editing (think GNU
Readline library) was provided automatically, so it was available in
all application programs, even ones that were written for vanilla
TOPS-10 terminals. These things didn't require the DD/III hardware, but
could be provided on semi-standard RS232 displays. ("Semi" because we
also had an extended character set with such crucial non-ASCII characters
as lambda.) Around 1976, Marty Frost and I exported the WAITS display
support (along with such frills as sixbit-character PPNs) to an otherwise
off-the-shelf TOPS-10 monitor at IRCAM in Paris.

John Sauter

lukematon,
14.2.2004 klo 8.59.1914.2.2004
vastaanottaja
Phil Budne wrote (excerpted):

I think Stanford (along with MIT and BB&N) also had a PDP-1
timesharing system, so they started with 18 bits as well. I've never
seen any description of the Stanford PDP-1 software.

John Sauter responded:

I was one of the junior programmers on STSS, the Stanford
Time-Sharing System. Besides the PDP-1, it depended on
two crucial pieces of hardware. One was the Vermont Research
drum that could swap 4096 18-bit words in 30 millieconds
with no latency. This was a head-per track drum which
could address individual words. You could program it
to simultaneously read one track while writing another,
in which case it would read a word from core memory,
write it to the drum, read a word from the other track
of the drum and write it back to that same address
of memory. Tracks were 4096 words long and
wrapped, so a single revolution would write out
the current user and read in another.

The other peice of critical hardware was the Philco
displays, which served as text and graphics
user consoles. They were similar to the III
displays used by SAIL when we got our PDP-6.

Phil Budne wrote (excerpted);

At the command line WAITS bore a strong resemblence to early PDP-6/10
monitors (except for the SIXBIT PPN's). I never saw the WAITS
display, but it was supposed to be years ahead of it's time.

John Sauter responded:

I believe WAITS took the sixbit PPNs from SAIL. I was
SAIL's first system programmer, and one of the first things
I did was implement sixbit PPNs. I was [1,JBS], and my
files were always first on the backup tape.
John Sauter (J_Sa...@Empire.Net)

Brian Harvey

lukematon,
14.2.2004 klo 9.28.0614.2.2004
vastaanottaja
J_Sa...@Empire.Net writes:
>I believe WAITS took the sixbit PPNs from SAIL.

Eh? "WAITS" was just a name (invented late in its life, like "TOPS-10") for
the SAIL operating system. Western Artificial Intelligence Timesharing System.

P.S. Did you have anything to do with "Ellis D. Kropotochev and Zeus, His
Marvellous Timesharing System"?

Rob Warnock

lukematon,
14.2.2004 klo 9.57.4514.2.2004
vastaanottaja
John Everett <jeve...@earthlink.DEFEAT.UCE.BOTS.net> wrote:
+---------------

| The operating system that became TOPS-10 actually began as the PDP-6
| Monitor in 1964. It developed in stages and at some point (perhaps
| actually in 1969) it acquired the TOPS-10 name.
+---------------

Nope. Later than 1970, for sure, since when we [Emory Univ.] got our
KA-10 [serial #127] in May 1970, the operating system [4S72, IIRC]
was still being called simply "the PDP-10 Monitor".


-Rob

-----
Rob Warnock <rp...@rpw3.org>
627 26th Avenue <URL:http://rpw3.org/>
San Mateo, CA 94403 (650)572-2607

John Sauter

lukematon,
14.2.2004 klo 10.44.1114.2.2004
vastaanottaja
Brian Harvey wrote:

Eh? "WAITS" was just a name (invented late in its life, like
"TOPS-10") for the SAIL operating system. Western Artificial
Intelligence Timesharing System.

P.S. Did you have anything to do with "Ellis D. Kropotochev and Zeus,
His Marvellous Timesharing System"?

John Sauter responded:

Sorry, I confused WAITS with LOTS. The brain rots after
enough years.

Gary Feldman (if my brain isn't rotting again) filmed that
about the time I started hanging around the Artificial
Intelligence project. The child he carries is his own.
I don't recall Zeus; I suppose it is a fictionalization
of STSS.
John Sauter (J_Sa...@Empire.Net)


Peter da Silva

lukematon,
14.2.2004 klo 14.16.4814.2.2004
vastaanottaja
In article <c0kgvl$lv0$1...@abbenay.CS.Berkeley.EDU>,

Brian Harvey <b...@cs.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>And intra-line editing (think GNU
>Readline library) was provided automatically, so it was available in
>all application programs, even ones that were written for vanilla
>TOPS-10 terminals.

That's the way to do it. Linking GNU Readline in with every
application has always struck me as being such a startling idea
that I can no conceive of the confusion of mind that would have
lead to it. It should be in the terminal/pseudoterminal driver.

Alas, nobody seems to have done anything really interesting in that
area in decades. The terminal in TOPS is far smarter than any other
OS I've worked on (UNIX, VMS, anything) and even the BSD UNIX driver
at Berkeley around 1980 had more capability than the ones in any
shipped *BSD (let alone the joke in System V).

I'm not sure why the full Berkeley tty/pty driver never got out, maybe
it was dependent on the Bussiplexor.

Mark Crispin

lukematon,
14.2.2004 klo 15.14.4514.2.2004
vastaanottaja
On Sat, 14 Feb 2004, John Sauter wrote:
> > P.S. Did you have anything to do with "Ellis D. Kropotochev and Zeus,
> > His Marvellous Timesharing System"?
> Gary Feldman (if my brain isn't rotting again) filmed that
> about the time I started hanging around the Artificial
> Intelligence project. The child he carries is his own.
> I don't recall Zeus; I suppose it is a fictionalization
> of STSS.

I had that movie transferred to video about 20 years ago. Three original
video transfers were made (at my expense): two in U-Matic (3/4") and one
in Beta I. One of the U-Matic copies was left with the Stanford CS
department. I still have the other two originals.

I don't know if Stanford CS still has either the videotape or the 16mm
film print. I would be happy to make a copy for them if they asked, or a
copy for anyone else if Stanford would give permission.

Mark Crispin

lukematon,
14.2.2004 klo 15.17.2614.2.2004
vastaanottaja
On Sat, 14 Feb 2004, Peter da Silva wrote:
> Alas, nobody seems to have done anything really interesting in that
> area in decades. The terminal in TOPS is far smarter than any other
> OS I've worked on (UNIX, VMS, anything) and even the BSD UNIX driver
> at Berkeley around 1980 had more capability than the ones in any
> shipped *BSD (let alone the joke in System V).

Since other ideas of the PDP-10 are being rediscovered, maybe it is time
for this one to be rediscovered.

The terminal service to re-discover is WAITS; not ITS or TOPS-10/20.

Al Kossow

lukematon,
14.2.2004 klo 20.06.3914.2.2004
vastaanottaja
From article <Pine.LNX.4.60.04...@shiva1.cac.washington.edu>, by Mark Crispin <m...@CAC.Washington.EDU>:

> The terminal service to re-discover is WAITS; not ITS or TOPS-10/20.
>

Are there documents for this, or other parts of the system that could be made
available on bitsavers?

nospam

lukematon,
15.2.2004 klo 2.00.1015.2.2004
vastaanottaja
in article c0lb9m$n18$1...@abbenay.CS.Berkeley.EDU, Brian Harvey at

b...@cs.berkeley.edu wrote on 15/02/2004 01:28:

> J_Sa...@Empire.Net writes:
>> I believe WAITS took the sixbit PPNs from SAIL.
>
> Eh? "WAITS" was just a name (invented late in its life, like "TOPS-10") for
> the SAIL operating system. Western Artificial Intelligence Timesharing
> System.

I had always believed it was West coast Alternative to Incompatible
Timesharing System since that the only named I'd heard it called

I'd never heard it called "Western Artificial Intelligence Timesharing
System" before.

mark:)

Michael Roach

lukematon,
15.2.2004 klo 12.07.1515.2.2004
vastaanottaja
In article <d8ab5055.04021...@posting.google.com>,

Patrick Mulvany <pa...@firedrake.org> wrote:
>never...@panix.com.invalid (Michael Roach) wrote in message news:<c0e0ca$77$1...@reader2.panix.com>...
>> AMOS ran on the WD-16 processor, a re-microcoding of the LSI-11 chip
>> set. It's assembly language is similar to that of the PDP-11 line. An
>> AMOS emulator (as well as old Alpha Micro documentation) can be found at
>> http://www, .otterway.com/am100 . The latest version (0.3n) runs out of
>> the box under Cygwin, and the earlier 0.3c version runs out of the box
>> under NetBSD for Intel 32 bit machines.
>>
>> AMOS was later moved to the 68000 line as AMOS32. Information on AMOS32
>> can be fount at http://www.alphamicro.com . Their latest product, the
>> AM-8000, actually runs under control of a 680x0 emulator running on an
>> AMD processor. Some native code is used but this machine is much faster
>> than previous Alpha Micros.
>>
>> Programs written in AlphaBASIC (Alpha Micro's Business BASIC-like
>> language) on the original machine back in 1977 will still compile and
>> run on the latest offerings.
>
>Updated diagram with more information on AMOS, AMOS/L and AMOS 32 as
>well as some other changes. (v0.3.5)

Thanks for that, I forgot about AMOS/L as Alpha Micro's OS for their
first 68000 based product. The processor board (AM100/L) ran on a
proprietary 16 bit version of the S-100 buss. AMOS/L could also run on
their later hardware offerings: proprietary single-board and VME based
systems.

>A general question do you think I should include emulators as well as
>OSes in the tree. AMOS emulator and VAX-11 RSX are stepping stones but
>not strictly OSes. My personal preference is to include them but
>colour code them.

If it was my project, I would make it a separate effort with OSs known
to run under particular emulators listed under those emulators. What to
do about hardware emulation, though?
--
Who needs friends when you can sit alone in your room and drink?

Paul Repacholi

lukematon,
15.2.2004 klo 9.38.2215.2.2004
vastaanottaja
John Everett <jeve...@earthlink.DEFEAT.UCE.BOTS.net> writes:

...

> While all this was going on Jim Flemming and I were working on a
> real-time monitor project, which never saw the light of day. By the
> time David Stone came up with the TOPS-10 name, Jim and I were both
> in the Monitor Group and Chris was off doing other things.

Any idea where Chris is now?

>>> The operating system that became TOPS-10 actually began as the
>>> PDP-6 Monitor in 1964. It developed in stages and at some point
>>> (perhaps actually in 1969) it acquired the TOPS-10 name.

>>Yes. I am looking for the listing of the predecessor to SCNSER, "as
>>modified for UWA", but fear it may have been junked.

> Yes, I recalll that there was a predecessor to SCNSER, and although
> I've been wracking my brain I can't come up with the name of the
> module. A google search hasn't helped, but did confirm my above
> assertion that TH, CW, and TW designed the Level D disk service.

Have a look at the old sources on trailing-edge. But I think the one
I'm thinking of is WAY older, '66 or there abouts. It may even have
been 8 code. Problem is, it could be in the 100+ boxes of docs in the
ACMS collection, the UCC, or the UCC section of the store.

Paul Repacholi

lukematon,
15.2.2004 klo 9.34.4915.2.2004
vastaanottaja
rp...@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) writes:

> John Everett <jeve...@earthlink.DEFEAT.UCE.BOTS.net> wrote:
> +---------------
> | The operating system that became TOPS-10 actually began as the PDP-6
> | Monitor in 1964. It developed in stages and at some point (perhaps
> | actually in 1969) it acquired the TOPS-10 name.
> +---------------

> Nope. Later than 1970, for sure, since when we [Emory Univ.] got our
> KA-10 [serial #127] in May 1970, the operating system [4S72, IIRC]
> was still being called simply "the PDP-10 Monitor".

That would be about right. 4.72 is the last version og the 4.x
monitors I belive.

Have you looked at the old one on Tim's site?

Patrick Mulvany

lukematon,
15.2.2004 klo 19.13.5315.2.2004
vastaanottaja
"Wolfgang Houben" <cas...@houben.com> wrote in message news:<c0e38h$163u$1...@ulysses.news.tiscali.de>...
> "Paul Repacholi" <pr...@prep.synonet.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:87ad3p7...@prep.synonet.com...
> > jmfb...@aol.com writes:
> >
> > > VMS's grandfather was RSX-11M (probably not RSX-11M+ but I'd lost
> > > track of the source evolutions by that time).
> >
> > Right. RSX-11M+/TRAX *post* dated VMS v1! It also wrote its
> > own death warrent by outperforming it on the 74s...
>
> What about RSX-11D / IAS? Was there some connection to the VMS-People?
>
> Wolfgang Houben
> castor at houben dot com

I have done some more updates to my diagram and posted a new version
(v0.3.6).

http://firedrake.org/paddy

Added SSP and Added dates to most of OS/400. But not got any info on
what OSes System/3 was running.
Added IAS (Dates are a bit sketchy currently)
I have RSX-11M+ branching from RSX-11M v3.2 (c.1979) after the start
of VMS (1978).
I have RSX-11D and RSX-11M running parallel from 1974 to Late 1970's.

Was RSX-11S based on RSX-11M or RSX-11M+ or neither? I have very
little info on RSX-11S at the moment. Similarly with Micro/RSX.

Slowly adding more info to the diagram so please bare with me. Please
tell me if you see anything that you consider wrong, as all comments
would be useful.

Thanks again.

Paddy

Rich Alderson

lukematon,
15.2.2004 klo 20.08.5515.2.2004
vastaanottaja
John Sauter <J_Sa...@Empire.Net> writes:

> Sorry, I confused WAITS with LOTS. The brain rots after enough years.

LOTS, of course, used Tops-20, so the issue of PPNs, SIXBIT or otherwise,
never arose. ;-)

--
Rich Alderson | /"\ ASCII ribbon |
ne...@alderson.users.panix.com | \ / campaign against |
"You get what anybody gets. You get a lifetime." | x HTML mail and |
--Death, of the Endless | / \ postings |

Rich Alderson

lukematon,
15.2.2004 klo 20.11.4915.2.2004
vastaanottaja
Paul Repacholi <pr...@prep.synonet.com> writes:

> rp...@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) writes:

>> John Everett <jeve...@earthlink.DEFEAT.UCE.BOTS.net> wrote:
>> +---------------
>> | The operating system that became TOPS-10 actually began as the PDP-6
>> | Monitor in 1964. It developed in stages and at some point (perhaps
>> | actually in 1969) it acquired the TOPS-10 name.
>> +---------------

>> Nope. Later than 1970, for sure, since when we [Emory Univ.] got our
>> KA-10 [serial #127] in May 1970, the operating system [4S72, IIRC]
>> was still being called simply "the PDP-10 Monitor".

> That would be about right. 4.72 is the last version og the 4.x
> monitors I belive.

Didn't the Tops-10 name some along with the KI, as the PDP-10 morphed into the
DECsystem-10?

Brian Harvey

lukematon,
15.2.2004 klo 22.38.4415.2.2004
vastaanottaja
a...@spies.com (Al Kossow) writes:
>> The terminal service to re-discover is WAITS; not ITS or TOPS-10/20.
>
>Are there documents for this, or other parts of the system that could be made
>available on bitsavers?

Well, I got started today, but I'm learning (this is my first try) that
massaging the OCR program output is only slightly less painful than
typing it in from scratch, so only seven manual pages so far... but
to whet your appetite, here they are in PDF (to accommodate the occasional
Greek letter):

http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~bh/moncom-ch2.pdf

Brian Harvey

lukematon,
15.2.2004 klo 22.41.1615.2.2004
vastaanottaja
nospam <x...@wedontwantyourspam.com> writes:
>I had always believed it was West coast Alternative to Incompatible
>Timesharing System since that the only named I'd heard it called
>
> I'd never heard it called "Western Artificial Intelligence Timesharing
>System" before.

Now that you mention it, I think there were a few different antiacronyms
for WAITS. Sort of like WMBR (in-joke, sorry).

jmfb...@aol.com

lukematon,
16.2.2004 klo 7.03.5616.2.2004
vastaanottaja
In article <d8ab5055.04021...@posting.google.com>,

pa...@firedrake.org (Patrick Mulvany) wrote:
>"Wolfgang Houben" <cas...@houben.com> wrote in message
news:<c0e38h$163u$1...@ulysses.news.tiscali.de>...
>> "Paul Repacholi" <pr...@prep.synonet.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>> news:87ad3p7...@prep.synonet.com...
>> > jmfb...@aol.com writes:
>> >
>> > > VMS's grandfather was RSX-11M (probably not RSX-11M+ but I'd lost
>> > > track of the source evolutions by that time).
>> >
>> > Right. RSX-11M+/TRAX *post* dated VMS v1! It also wrote its
>> > own death warrent by outperforming it on the 74s...
>>
>> What about RSX-11D / IAS? Was there some connection to the VMS-People?
>>
>> Wolfgang Houben
>> castor at houben dot com
>
>I have done some more updates to my diagram and posted a new version
>(v0.3.6).
>
>http://firedrake.org/paddy
>
>Added SSP and Added dates to most of OS/400. But not got any info on
>what OSes System/3 was running.
>Added IAS (Dates are a bit sketchy currently)

HINT: Read the sources. Our standards evolved so that a date
stamp, initials, and description of the change went into the
edit history.

>I have RSX-11M+ branching from RSX-11M v3.2 (c.1979)

NO. Earilier.

> ..after the start


>of VMS (1978).
>I have RSX-11D and RSX-11M running parallel from 1974 to Late 1970's.

No. Earlier. I told you. In 1971 I was typing documents for
11D, 11M and 11S. M+ started around 72..maybe 73. I don't recall
when the sources got split off.


>
>Was RSX-11S based on RSX-11M or RSX-11M+ or neither?

Neither. RSX has a multiple personality disorder. M, S, and
D were each completely split off after very bloody fights
occurred. In this corner we had the arugment that nobody
wanted the feature and in the other corner we had the argument
that people did want the feature. As a result, the pros had
to snarf a set of sources in order to get the project done and
not taint the antis set of sources with awful things such as
disk device drivers and controller code.

> .. I have very


>little info on RSX-11S at the moment.

Read the sources.

> ..Similarly with Micro/RSX.


>
>Slowly adding more info to the diagram so please bare with me. Please
>tell me if you see anything that you consider wrong, as all comments
>would be useful.
>
>Thanks again.

Again, if you're trying do date DEC stuff, read the edit histories
of the sources. In cases like TOPS-10, our edit history was kept
in hand written 3-ring binders, most of which were distributed
via the nnn.MCO file, where nnn=version number of the monitor.

I don't know how the -11 source management evolved. If you want
to know all the dates and shit, I'd ask Ron McClean (a.k.a. Tiger
and/or Bugs).

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

Michael Thompson

lukematon,
16.2.2004 klo 8.53.3316.2.2004
vastaanottaja
Don't forget RSX20-F, the KL10 front end software.

In article <d8ab5055.04021...@posting.google.com>,
pa...@firedrake.org says...

bob

lukematon,
16.2.2004 klo 9.15.5316.2.2004
vastaanottaja
referrying to Barb's RSX date notes -
My resollection of the RSX variants and RT11 are along the lines of
Barb's date suggestions.
I was on 1-2, and one of my tasks was to see if the install instructions
made sense. I did installs on a bunch of those products, and OS8, RTS8,
between 74 and 77. I don't recall the release versions.
bob

Antonio Carlini

lukematon,
16.2.2004 klo 9.39.5416.2.2004
vastaanottaja
jmfb...@aol.com wrote:

>>Added IAS (Dates are a bit sketchy currently)
>
> HINT: Read the sources. Our standards evolved so that a date
> stamp, initials, and description of the change went into the
> edit history.

I thought the IAS stuff was famous for having been completely lost?

Were source listings (or even sources) available for everything?
When I used RT-11 we had only the minimal comment-stripped stuff
that was needed for SYSGEN. Were listings/sources available for
the PDP-11 stuff? (From what people say, sources were available
for PDP-10 stuff and presumably most things that shipped
earlier too).

> No. Earlier. I told you. In 1971 I was typing documents for
> 11D, 11M and 11S. M+ started around 72..maybe 73. I don't recall
> when the sources got split off.

Surely the "official" date has to be when a version first ships
to a customer? Otherwise you'll have a range of dates from the first
amendment that contributed to version N (but was not in N-1) up to
whenever the product was released. Drawing the inheritance lines
requires reading the sources (perhaps with some direction from
those who were there). But even that won't catch feature FOO
being added because "OS FEE has it and it's neat) but where
the implementation was done from scratch.

Antonio

--

---------------
Antonio Carlini arca...@iee.org

Michael Roach

lukematon,
16.2.2004 klo 11.31.2416.2.2004
vastaanottaja
In article <mddn07j...@panix5.panix.com>,

Rich Alderson <ne...@alderson.users.panix.com> wrote:
>Didn't the Tops-10 name some along with the KI, as the PDP-10 morphed into the
>DECsystem-10?

I thought I used TOPS-10 5.07 on a KA in the early to mid 70's, but when
I look at some of my old listings, I see "Monitor NEWPORT-MESA 507A" on
the banner pages.
--
"All snakes who wish to remain in Ireland will please raise their right
hands."
-- Saint Patrick

Al Kossow

lukematon,
16.2.2004 klo 12.07.3916.2.2004
vastaanottaja
From article <KC4Yb.6819$vo1....@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net>, by Antonio Carlini <arca...@iee.org>:

>
> I thought the IAS stuff was famous for having been completely lost?
>

I bought a set of fairly late IAS tapes on eBay last year.

> Were source listings (or even sources) available for everything?

Monitor sources were distributed with the large distribution kits.
Utility sources were optional.

Unfortunately, I don't know of any surviving RSX distributions earlier
than 3.x (late 70's) There was an 11S distribution tape on eBay recently,
but it sold for hundreds of dollars.

I've also been told that DEC lost the RSX sources
sometime in the late 80's.

>> No. Earlier. I told you. In 1971 I was typing documents for
>> 11D, 11M and 11S. M+ started around 72..maybe 73. I don't recall
>> when the sources got split off.
>

That seems REALLY early for M+
M+ 1.0 didn't ship until the late 70's

Al Kossow

lukematon,
16.2.2004 klo 12.55.1916.2.2004
vastaanottaja
From article <c0qtcr$a3h$1...@spies.com>, by a...@spies.com (Al Kossow):

I did a bit of digging in my fiche collection, and Micro RSX 1.0 was
released in 1984

It also reminded me that the RSX11M documentation is actually RSX11M/S
documentation. 11S is a subset of 11M for small memory footprints

RSX20F is also derived from the RSX11M monitor sources


Mark Crispin

lukematon,
16.2.2004 klo 21.44.0516.2.2004