Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register
| From | billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.sys.pdp11, comp.sys.dec, vmsnet.pdp-11 |
| Subject | Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems |
| Date | 2011-05-24 16:42 +0000 |
| Organization | Computing Sciences Dept., University of Scranton |
| Message-ID | <9425gcFhnpU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <ireog6$ksn$1@Iltempo.Update.UU.SE> <940bm5Fcc3U1@mid.individual.net> <ireupe$mqj$1@Iltempo.Update.UU.SE> <941ob1Fre1U1@mid.individual.net> <irgfp7$382$1@Iltempo.Update.UU.SE> |
Cross-posted to 3 groups.
In article <irgfp7$382$1@iltempo.update.uu.se>,
Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> writes:
> On 2011-05-24 05.58, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> In article<ireupe$mqj$1@iltempo.update.uu.se>,
>> Johnny Billquist<bqt@softjar.se> writes:
>>> On 2011-05-23 17.16, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>>> In article<ireog6$ksn$1@iltempo.update.uu.se>,
>>>> Johnny Billquist<bqt@softjar.se> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>> In a way, a reimplementation of the PDP-11 OSes might be interesting.
>>>>> But I doubt many people today would see the point in using anything that
>>>>> didn't follow the Unix programming paradigms,
>>>>
>>>> I was waiting for this to come up. I think most people think that
>>>> there are really only two OSes left in the world. MS and Unix.
>>>> BUt, actually, thre are a lot of others out there including some
>>>> that predate MS and might even predate Unix and still have loyal
>>>> followings. (And I am not talking about VMS. :-)
>>>
>>> Well, Windows more or less allows you to follow the Unix paradigm as
>>> well, when it comes to writing programs for the net.
>>
>> Minus the security model. :-)
>
> True. But the security model of Unix itself isn't exactly something to
> boast about. :-)
I'll take it over the MS model anyday.
>
>>> And so do VMS.
>>
>> Minus little things like fork(); :-)
>
> Good point. There are some things that are more of an headache to emulate.
> Still, lots of Unix programs can be compiled and run on VMS systems with
> little, or no change.
Yes, but not the majority of the ones people actually want. :-)
> And Unix programmers can write programs on a VMS
> system without really having to go outside their comfort zone for most
> of the time.
Mostly depends on the complexity of the program. Hello World works
just fine on either. Try UXKermit which falt out requires the
functionality provided by fork() and it is really a trivial program.
or even something like "configure".
> It might not be programs that really take any advantage of
> VMS, but then again, they don't care.
And it is probably why so little of the Unix based Open Source stuff
ever makes it to VMS.
>
>>> And
>>> all other OSes that I know of.
>
> [List of other OSes...]
>
> I don't know for sure how any of those OSes look from a programming
> point of view, but if any work's been done on the core system the last
> 20 years, I wouldn't be surprised if it was to make it more Unix-like.
I can assure you that there have been little if any attempts and probably
no desire for most of them.
Primos. No real development. Probably the worst example except for
the fact that as dead as it is (and for as long as it has been) it
still has a rather large user base. There was a layered system called
Primix but it has not survived as no one appeared to be interested in
it. (Think Eunice. :-)
OS2200. As I said, the only interest was in keeping it compatable
with 1100 Exec from 30 years ago.
One thing these both have in common was that there was a version of
The Software Tools Virtual OS for both of them giving them a Unix-like
API compatable with what Unix was 30 years ago.
ANSI-M/MUMPS. Well, not really an OS per se. It is usually hosted
on Unix, Windows and, yes, VMS. Think DSM!! It is a totally self-
contained system with its own DB built in and there is no desire to
have look, run, or be programmed as anything other than MUMPS. In
all these cases you see the same loyalty I would have had for something
like RSTS if it had grown beyond the limitations of the PDP-11 hard-
ware. Johnny, I get the feeling from reading your posts that you
probably look on RSX the same way.
>
>>> (Hello select(), synchronous I/O, getting errors back which basically
>>> just means that you need to retry, because nothing is wrong, but we just
>>> got interrupted, and random dynamically allocated file descriptors, and
>>> all files are just streams of bytes.)
>>
>> Lot's of systems where that is not necessarily the case. Definitely not
>> the case with VMS.
>
> It's definitely the case with VMS. Yes, the above statements are not
> *neccesarily* true for VMS, but a programmer *can* program with this
> approach on VMS, and almost all programmers today implicitly assumes
> that these statements are truths.
As one who hung out on c.o.v for a long time and worked with VMS
for a couple of decades I have to disagree. The idea that files
are streams of bytes without structure at the lowest level has to
be the most touted problem/shortcoming in Unix among that group.
>
> So, even though you have an OS that offers you other possibilities,
> noone knows, or can use them. (Ok, noone is an oversimplification, but
> you get the idea.)
But with the amount of stuff that was already out there......
And let's look at my list again. MUMPS? How many people use or are
proficient in it? And yet, it has a massive following and has moved
into niches it was never really intended to go to.
And at a smaller level, what about COBOL? No longer taught in any
school I can find as more than an afterthought. (We dropped it as a
subject more than 10 years ago and at that point the department chair
cannot remember the last time it was actually offered. A single
credit's worth of COBOL was included in one course here but even
that was dropped 5 years ago.) And yet still so much in demand
the a company the size of General Dynamics recently advertised an
Internship where the primary function is to learn to program in
COBOL. Why? Because they are still writting and maintaining very
large COBOL systems and academia is not providing people with the
requisite skills so they have to revert back to the methods od the
60's and early 70's and do it themselves.
Not all things are obsolete because one man thinks so, not even
if his name is Gartner.
>
>>>>> no matter if a lot of
>>>>> coding problems would be much easier to solve using some other paradigm.
>>>>
>>>> And if the paradigm actually made things better? One has to wonder
>>>> how many of the people who eventually moved off of RSTS and RSX did
>>>> so because the hardware it ran on was not capable of keeping up with
>>>> the demands of their business. Remember, no one buys an OS for the
>>>> OS, "It's the applications!!"
>>>
>>> Many moved off just because of demands for more computing power, cheaper
>>> hardware,
>>
>> I agree up to here.
>
> Since it was more or less what you wrote. ;-)
>
>>> and perhaps even more because the software they needed to run
>>> didn't run on PDP-11s any more.
>>
>> I would imagine the majority were running applications that were stable
>> and met their corporate needs just fine as they had been running them
>> for decades. The problem was the need to have additional functionality
>> that the hardware (primarily memory) limitations made impossible. If
>> it had been possible to add that functionality I would bet most would
>> have stayed with the OS they were familiar with. And, avoided the cost
>> of not only moving to a new platform but re-writting all their unique
>> application or changing their business model to match some other piece
>> of software's idea of how a business should be run.
>
> Well, in many cases, new requests for more functions, new features, or
> additional applications do come in. And that's when systems get replaced.
But is that replacement because the OS is deficient or because the
hardware running it lacks the capability to handle the expansion?
Simple example. What about RSTS (not the PDP-11) makes X-11 un-doable?
>
> So yes, the current applications are stable and working. But that is not
> enough. If that was all there is, then there wouldn't be any need for
> more computing power either. If the current setup already fulfills the
> needs, that would imply that the current computing power also is
> sufficient, no?
No, not necessarily. Something as simple as the amount of data
that needs to be handled has increased beyond the addressing
capabilities of the host hardware. Best example for this is to
drop back to RT-11. I can put SCSI disks on RT-11. But I have
break them up into a whole lot of really samll partitions. Or,
look at Ultrix-11 or BSD-2.11. What is there about either of
these that would prevent most modern programs from being built
that isn't actually due to a hardware limitation of the platform?
Rhetorical question that is answered by looking at BSD 4.x and
the current crop of BSD's.
>
>>> It all have very little to do with technical competence of the
>>> underlying OS.
>>
>> Oh, I can agree with that. As I said, "It's the applications!!"
>> But, by the same token, the move to a new OS was not because of
>> a shortcoming in the old OS. Unisys has been very successful by
>> making systems that still allow old code to continue to run only
>> with greater resources available (I remember a particular problem
>> I had to solve in my Univac COBOL days that was eventually tracked
>> down specifically to memory availability!! That same code would
>> run on OS2200 today without ever exhibiting the problem I had to
>> fix by modifying the supporting ECL.) IBM has had great success
>> by doing the same for SYSTEM-360 programs.
>
> Yes. It's the typical question of being able to run the applications.
> Rewriting, and porting applications can be both expensive and difficult.
> Cheaper to continue running on the old systems, when possible.
>
> I guess we forgot about one reason why people move off old OSes. Cost of
> running and maintaining old hardware. At some point it might just become
> impractical to continue running on the old machines.
Which is the point I was trying to make. Frequently it is not the
application or the OS that causes the impracticality. It is the
hardware. And thus my interest in seeing RSTS and yes, RSX run on
other platforms. It seems to have worked out quite well for Unisys.
> The PDP-11 was in that aspect perhaps a bit unfortunate, in that there
> was a long gap between when DEC more or less wanted (forced?) people to
> to migrate to VAXen, and before commercial emulators became available.
> Thus forcing a lot of migration to take place, because to viable options
> existed.
Well, it is probably all academic at this point, but, who knows,
maybe there are still enough people out there doing stuff that
there is a remaining need for a port of RSTS or RSX to modern
hardware. It would be fun to do in any case.
>
>>>>> (Then again, a lot of programming today takes place in HLL, which have
>>>>> also adopted to the Unix paradigms, which makes it even harder to use
>>>>> any other OS, not to mention that you'd need to develop compilers and so
>>>>> on, for this reimplemented OS.)
>>>>
>>>> Once you moved to a mchine without the memory limitations of the PDP-11
>>>> you could use any of the GNU Compilers. Or pretty much anything else
>>>> out there today.
>>>
>>> No. You already failed right there. The GNU compilers them self assumes
>>> a whole lot of Unixy things.
>>
>> Hmmm.... Not so sure about that, but even if true I would imagine it
>> would not be a major undertaking to make the needed modifications.
>
> The horrors! I have peeked under the hood of gcc. It's not a piece of
> code I would ever consider easy to modify. :-)
And, depending on the language, there are other alternatives. Heck,
you want C? Any guess how hard it would be to write a new backend
for DECUS-C? :-) And then we also have Algol. :-) And isn't there
a Pascal in the DECUS collection? What other languages are languishing
on tapes in various peoples storage lockers?
>
>> And,
>> there are other options. Again, all of it depends on the model that
>> needs to be used. If all the original code were to be released with a
>> commercial friendly license one could modify the back-end to support
>> the new architecture. If you have to start from scratch then you need
>> to start by finding a suitable compiler (and language). And, speaking
>> of language, even if the original code was released much of it is in
>> PDP-11 Macro and would need to be re-written using the original only
>> as a model. That adds the question of what language do you write it
>> in? Don't get me wrong, I like C. I am good at C. I do not make a
>> lot of the mistakes that C is famous for. But...... I would probably
>> not choose C as the language to use for reasons I should not have to
>> deliniate here!! :-)
>
> Good question. I have no idea what I would write in. I love MACRO-11,
There is an interesting point in itself. Is there really any reason
you can think of that would prevent someone from writting something
that took MACRO-11 and output executable code for some other CPU?
Isn;t that what was done ont he VMS move to Alpha? Wasn't there a
program that could take MACRO-32 and generate Alpha binaries?
> but I'm not sure people in general would want to fool around in
> assembler. And I also agree that C is not always ideal. But I don't know
> what language I would recommend.
PL/I is pretty good. Much of Primos was written in a dialect of it.
Ada? I understand that has become king in Europe. And I am certainly
comfortable coding in it. And with a few decent extensions that can
be found in most dialects anyway Pascal is a pretty good system level
language.
>
>>>> All you would really need to develop would be the
>>>> support libraries. I am still trying to find the time to dig out an
>>>> old version of GCC with the PDP-11 support in it to play with, just
>>>> lack the time.
>>>
>>> Support libraries are also an issue, yes. We need all the Unixy
>>> functions,
>>
>> Eventually. They open up a lot of possibilities. But then, if
>> you are re-writting from scratch it makes it a good time to make
>> the needed changes and additions.
>
> Yes. If we do something from scratch, all the options are there. But
> other programmers will probable have a hard time to understand how to
> use it all. They'd try to write the Unix way, I'm afraid. :-)
People can be taught and can learn. I've programmed in a lot
of different environments. All of them have advantages and
disadvantages. I still believe that if things continue in the
direction they seem to be heading now the time will come when
necessity will require people taking a new look at things like
security and efficiency. Much of what is out there today can,
at best, be patched into something that appears to meet those
requirements. Something done right is always a better bet.
Models and paradigms change constantly. Many things that were
abandoned long ago have come back into vogue today. Why can't
RSTS and RSX be the next examples? ;-)
>
>>> or else it's pretty useless. :-/
>>
>> Do your current RSX users find it useless?
>
> Current RSX users do not have gcc. :-)
But the question really is; Is that a minus or a plus? :-)
> Very few RSX users even program in C (on RSX).
> But the DEC C compiler for RSX does its best to present something that
> is Unix-y, including as much of the standard C libraries as possible.
Isn't the same true of DECUS-C? (I have it here, but never had the
chance to actually set it up and use it. As you said about RSX, I
can say the same about RT-11 and RSTS. Never really did any C other
than playing with Small-C on RT-11.
> Things that are missing is mainly fork(), select() and pipes. And
> anything socket related. But skipping that, you can write a program in
> RSX pretty much the same way as on any Unix system. Not that you take
> any advantage of anything that RSX is good at, but that was my point.
Another reason why I don't necessarily think C is the best choice for
a language to use. Too much baggage.
>
> If you provide a C compiler, you pretty much have to provide something
> that smells like Unix, or else it gets pretty useless, since people
> expect any C environment to also work like a Unix environment.
See above. :-)
>
> > Then why are they
>> still there? Same goes for all those OSes I mentioned above.
>> Again, as much as I like Unix (and I have been doing it since
>> 1980) it is not the only answer to any problem.
>
> It definitely is not, but that was not my point.
>
>>> Heck, gcc even have its built-in versions for a bunch of library
>>> functions, in order to inline them. Making everything even more exciting.
>>
>> Depending on the function, that's probably not really a problem.
>> It is likely that in the long run those same functions might be
>> wanted under RSTS and RSX as well.
>
> They are very Unix-y and C-y. But sure, they are useful. Most functions
> in the C library are useful. They just might not match the paradigms of
> a non-Unix environment.
OK. C is out. :-)
> Most typically, that would be such a simple concept as strings for example.
Well, I would expect that most any language could use (read: would
need) those same string functions. I have a Pascal Compiler from
an 80's Z80 system (Alcor Pascal) that has pretty much all the
standard C String functions.
>
>>>>> However, RSTS/E with a Unix RTS would be cool. :-)
>>>>
>>>> Had that 30 years ago. Like so many ideas it was too far ahead of its
>>>> time and, withered on the vine, all the work was lost and now we will
>>>> have to re-invent the wheel once again.
>>>
>>> Cool. I didn't know that anyone had actually done this, even though it's
>>> such an obvious thing to do.
>>
>> OK, to be honest, it was not what you would call an RTS. :-) I was
>> refering to one of my pet peeves. The Software Tools Virtual Operating
>> System which was probably more of a POSIX-like API than an RTS. But
>> the idea was there. Let Unix software run on non-Unix systems. And
>> the list of supported systems is mind-boggling!!
>
> Ah. Darn. I was thinking of a real RTS. Just copy your Unix binary onto
> your RSTS/E system, set it to use the right RTS, and then just run it.
> That should be very doable (maybe even easy), with the RSTS/E RTS
> design. It's a really cool concept.
I guess the problem with that would be which Unix? :-)
And even among similar OSes that doesn't always work. BSD has
"Linux Compatability" but I have seen more programs that didn't
work under it than did.
Oh well, as I said, it is all really academic as:
1. I don't expect the source to RSTS or RSX to be released.
2. Even if I am wrong about 1. above it is likely to be done
under a license that is not commercially friendly.
3. Given 1. above it is unlikely that any attempt to re-write
RSTS or RSX is ever likely to happen.
4. Even if I am wrong about 3. above it would probably end out
being something as stupid as FreeVMS which in the long run will
be nothing but a DCLish shell running on top of Linux which is
not and never could be any kind of VMS.
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
Back to comp.sys.dec | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-04-04 09:12 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billy@MIX.COM - 2011-04-30 22:27 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-01 10:01 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-01 10:27 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-01 20:53 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-05-01 21:16 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-01 20:54 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-01 21:07 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-02 09:37 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-02 08:39 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-05-02 05:15 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems jjh <jjhudak@gmail.com> - 2011-05-02 18:20 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) - 2011-05-03 08:18 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-03 12:51 -0400
VAXTREK koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) - 2011-05-03 12:50 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Henry Crun <mike@rechtman.com> - 2011-05-03 21:39 +0300
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-03 15:56 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems onedbguru <onedbguru@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-03 15:52 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billig999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2011-05-04 00:07 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> - 2011-05-04 01:16 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2011-05-04 13:01 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> - 2011-05-04 10:19 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) - 2011-05-04 10:58 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2011-05-04 16:33 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> - 2011-05-04 21:51 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems G Cornelius <cornelius@eisner.decus.org> - 2011-05-06 13:08 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> - 2011-05-06 14:47 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@update.uu.se> - 2011-05-06 16:13 -0600
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2011-05-07 21:00 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-07 19:51 -0600
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> - 2011-05-08 07:19 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2011-05-09 17:32 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Rob Brown <mylastname@gmcl.com> - 2011-05-09 09:40 -0600
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-09 09:43 -0600
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems vandys@vsta.org - 2011-05-09 21:47 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-09 16:05 -0600
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems vandys@vsta.org - 2011-05-09 23:05 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-09 17:20 -0600
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems vandys@vsta.org - 2011-05-10 00:12 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-09 19:36 -0600
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-05-10 02:01 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) - 2011-05-10 08:31 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems John Wallace <johnwallace4@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-10 09:56 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) - 2011-05-10 12:50 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems G Cornelius <cornelius@eisner.decus.org> - 2011-05-11 11:04 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-04 10:02 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) - 2011-05-04 12:20 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-05-04 18:10 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems John Wallace <johnwallace4@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-04 12:21 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems MetaEd <metaed@gmail.com> - 2011-05-04 15:06 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-04 20:17 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) - 2011-05-10 08:20 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) - 2011-05-10 08:29 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-10 09:29 -0600
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems G Cornelius <cornelius@eisner.decus.org> - 2011-05-10 12:16 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) - 2011-05-10 12:45 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-10 15:34 -0600
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) - 2011-05-10 12:58 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-10 15:36 -0600
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-03 12:38 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems paramucho@hotmail.com (paramucho) - 2011-05-03 11:28 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-03 12:09 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billy@MIX.COM - 2011-05-23 03:41 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-22 21:51 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems jjh <jjhudak@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 07:47 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2011-05-23 15:04 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-23 15:52 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2011-05-24 00:16 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-23 17:40 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2011-05-24 12:58 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-05-24 14:02 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-24 07:36 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2011-05-24 16:42 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-24 11:17 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2011-05-24 20:07 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2011-05-24 21:07 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-25 03:34 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2011-05-25 15:46 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-25 16:00 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201105.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-05-26 17:50 +0200
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-26 09:53 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201105.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-05-26 22:20 +0200
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2011-05-28 18:01 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2011-05-25 20:58 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-05-26 01:23 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) - 2011-05-26 08:01 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-05-27 00:54 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2011-05-26 16:15 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-05-26 23:56 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2011-05-27 14:37 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-05-27 00:02 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-26 20:17 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2011-05-27 14:51 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-27 12:48 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2011-05-27 14:35 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-25 21:14 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-05-26 01:32 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-26 16:39 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201105.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-05-26 17:50 +0200
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2011-05-24 21:01 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) - 2011-05-26 07:53 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-26 09:59 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201105.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-05-26 10:03 +0200
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems paramucho@hotmail.com (paramucho) - 2011-05-26 14:21 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billy@MIX.COM - 2011-05-26 18:50 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems paramucho@hotmail.com (paramucho) - 2011-05-27 11:58 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billy@MIX.COM - 2011-05-27 17:23 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-26 10:04 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201105.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2011-05-27 03:30 +0200
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) - 2011-05-26 22:17 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-26 20:26 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems John Wallace <johnwallace4@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-30 14:09 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-30 18:15 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems jjh <jjhudak@gmail.com> - 2011-05-31 11:02 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) - 2011-05-31 15:54 -0500
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-05-31 21:37 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-24 22:59 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-25 03:51 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-25 08:36 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Tom Lake" <tlake@twcny.rr.com> - 2011-05-25 13:25 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-25 14:01 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-25 11:44 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2011-05-25 21:20 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Rob Brown <mylastname@gmcl.com> - 2011-05-26 10:53 -0600
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2011-05-26 16:27 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-26 20:27 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-26 16:38 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-26 21:44 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems paramucho@hotmail.com (paramucho) - 2011-05-24 12:02 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-23 10:48 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-23 15:46 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2011-05-24 00:19 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-23 17:43 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-25 14:41 -0400
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billy@MIX.COM - 2011-05-24 02:54 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2011-05-24 13:03 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-24 07:39 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billy@MIX.COM - 2011-05-24 15:10 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2011-05-24 08:48 -0700
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2011-05-24 16:54 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billy@MIX.COM - 2011-05-24 14:42 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2011-05-24 16:56 +0000
Re: Y3K for PDP-11 Operating Systems "Jerome H. Fine" <everyone@nospam.com> - 2011-05-25 14:05 -0400
csiph-web