Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #163878 > unrolled thread
| Started by | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-05-23 16:40 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-05-25 15:07 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 598 — 36 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-23 16:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-24 14:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-05-24 14:22 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-24 16:39 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-25 07:47 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-25 13:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-25 13:30 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-25 16:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 16:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 16:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-26 12:07 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 16:22 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-28 13:17 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:29 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising mausg@mail.com - 2016-05-29 10:03 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 07:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 15:16 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-31 17:44 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-31 19:22 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-01 07:41 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 10:49 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 06:36 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-29 15:30 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 07:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 14:24 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 06:54 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 06:50 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Larry <lelmore76@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 15:29 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 08:45 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-25 17:58 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-25 22:04 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-26 00:31 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-26 10:07 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-29 17:55 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-26 15:57 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-26 20:00 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-27 11:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-27 15:49 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 20:28 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-28 13:18 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-28 17:53 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-29 13:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 16:33 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 18:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-05-31 14:10 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-01 12:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 22:19 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-01 07:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 12:08 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-01 11:10 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-01 10:22 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:51 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 14:22 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:11 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 02:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-01 17:03 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 11:31 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-02 15:09 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:41 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 15:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 10:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:18 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:26 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:16 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:43 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-04 11:08 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:14 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:59 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-05 16:39 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 17:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 10:20 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-06 09:04 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-06 10:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-07 08:59 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-08 15:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-08 15:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-08 10:34 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-08 11:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-09 16:01 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:39 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:00 -0700
Dynamic adaptive resource management (was: PL/I advertising "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2016-06-09 08:45 -0700
Re: Dynamic adaptive resource management (was: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-07 08:36 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:17 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 15:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 23:39 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:05 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 10:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:18 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-07 12:24 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:32 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 22:41 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-08 11:54 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 02:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 07:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:36 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 09:58 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 10:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:21 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 09:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 10:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 10:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:09 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 21:40 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 21:03 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 21:00 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-08 06:08 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-09 09:39 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 22:33 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 20:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 05:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-09 07:33 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 09:39 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 12:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:02 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-07 12:19 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:54 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 09:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 15:10 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 17:58 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 22:31 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 20:37 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 14:09 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 14:32 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:18 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 13:57 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-03 06:59 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 08:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 11:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-01 12:59 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-01 17:43 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-06-01 13:35 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-02 08:13 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-06-02 02:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-24 11:30 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-24 17:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-24 20:21 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-24 18:26 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2016-06-24 21:01 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-25 05:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-25 07:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-25 14:32 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:07 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-27 21:17 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-28 08:39 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-28 17:23 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-27 19:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-27 19:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-27 23:16 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-25 07:24 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-25 07:45 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-25 08:02 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:12 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-28 10:35 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-28 14:27 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-28 12:04 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-28 15:21 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-28 21:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-29 12:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-29 08:25 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-29 08:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-29 17:42 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-25 07:31 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-25 07:02 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 12:12 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 16:28 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-26 13:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-27 15:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-06-28 22:40 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 22:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-28 20:25 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-29 10:08 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-06-29 19:27 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 18:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-29 17:52 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 23:04 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-30 18:27 +0000
PDP-10 ZORK [was Re: PL/I advertising] Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:20 -0400
Re: PDP-10 ZORK [was Re: PL/I advertising] sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-06-28 00:22 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-01 13:47 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:46 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-01 17:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-01 16:09 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-02 12:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 15:17 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-02 20:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 13:51 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 22:16 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:43 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-02 20:24 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 13:48 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-02 20:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-03 07:50 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 10:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 11:38 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 11:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-03 21:10 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 11:28 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 12:59 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 05:44 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 05:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 10:16 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 07:37 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-03 17:16 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-04 06:16 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 07:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-04 08:52 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 14:06 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:46 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:03 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-05 17:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:39 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:30 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:27 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2016-06-05 10:04 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:47 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 20:20 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-03 09:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 10:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-04 15:40 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 16:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-04 17:59 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 19:06 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 12:31 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 14:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 13:24 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 18:44 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:07 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 22:22 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-03 17:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:37 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 14:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 21:21 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-03 17:04 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 10:54 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 15:03 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-04 12:08 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-04 16:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-05 10:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:47 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:51 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 13:06 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 16:05 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 15:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:11 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 06:12 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 09:45 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 07:42 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 13:24 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 10:01 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 18:48 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 14:29 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 14:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 19:47 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 07:58 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:30 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 10:13 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 10:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 12:04 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 11:27 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 12:45 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 11:48 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:08 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 13:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 14:57 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:17 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:21 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 14:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 09:51 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Robert Swindells <rjs@fdy2.co.uk> - 2016-06-07 20:59 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-08 07:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Robert Swindells <rjs@fdy2.co.uk> - 2016-06-08 12:00 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 15:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-07 18:08 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-08 12:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-08 09:45 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-08 19:06 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 18:17 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:50 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 09:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-05 12:39 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-05 12:28 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 16:02 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:27 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 21:02 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-05 03:04 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-04 22:42 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 07:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:07 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:28 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:39 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:39 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:51 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 22:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 18:21 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 23:02 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-04 23:57 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 07:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-05 09:25 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:05 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 20:18 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 22:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 05:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-09 07:03 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-05 17:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:32 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 13:04 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:11 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:08 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:13 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 10:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 18:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-05 17:53 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 12:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:45 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:32 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-08 11:53 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 22:06 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 14:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:31 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-07 13:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 15:34 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-08 00:28 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 20:10 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-04 13:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 15:39 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:01 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-03 21:21 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 11:14 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:45 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-03 15:12 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 12:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:05 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:09 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-09 17:27 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-10 06:58 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-10 11:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-16 17:07 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:44 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:50 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-31 16:09 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 16:15 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-01 13:49 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 17:34 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 12:47 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:23 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:19 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:12 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rob Doyle <radioengr@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 02:15 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 18:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-02 15:18 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 20:17 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:54 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 22:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 14:08 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-31 16:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-02 19:19 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:37 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-17 16:52 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-09 17:45 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:56 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-02 19:21 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 09:41 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> - 2016-05-31 13:37 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-31 12:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> - 2016-05-31 16:29 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 07:04 -0400
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-01 13:15 -0700
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-06-01 15:38 -0500
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:44 -0700
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 16:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 16:22 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-26 20:32 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-26 18:50 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 11:01 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-27 13:36 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-27 15:33 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-27 16:07 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-27 19:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-27 19:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-27 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-28 20:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 14:39 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 14:37 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:28 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 10:51 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-27 06:56 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-27 15:51 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 20:25 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-27 05:43 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 05:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 15:26 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 11:50 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:39 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-26 12:23 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 15:56 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:21 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 05:38 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-29 17:53 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 18:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-30 07:20 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-30 14:27 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-30 22:29 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-30 22:22 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:03 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 15:07 -0700
Page 23 of 30 — ← Prev page 1 … 21 22 [23] 24 25 … 30 Next page →
| From | "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 11:14 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <nirla7$pbg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #164333 |
"Questor" <usenet@only.tnx> wrote in message news:5750739e.11401875@nntp2.rawbw.com... > > What languages would you suggest for writing an operating system and > associated > utilities? Fortran? COBOL? If you wish to work at the low level (where _REAL_ computing science exists, for then you study real computers) then design your own language and produce your OS in that. PS. Do the synchronisation primitives of ADA really come into their own now that we have multi-processor chips?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM0005345F163D82CA@aca40481.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164333 |
Questor wrote: > On Tue, 31 May 2016 22:19:30 -0400, "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> > wrote: >>In article <I3l3z.297993$9J6.283238@fx25.iad>, scott@slp53.sl.home >>says... >>> >>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>> >On Sun, 29 May 2016 16:33:20 +0200, Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> >>> >wrote: >>> >>But as you state above, DEC people never really trusted the >>> >>in-house compilers. >>> > >>> >This is simply false. DEC s/w development was done almost exclusively on >>> >in-house compilers, and there wasn't any mistrust of them. Almost all products >>> >were written in either the respective assembly language or BLISS. I say >>> >"almost," because although I am not aware of any, there may have been some odd >>> >product DEC sold that was written in something else. >>> > >>> >>> It all sounds to be a bit of a muddle (MDL) :-). >> >>If everything was written in assembly language that would suggest that >>there was indeed distrust of the compilers, or at least some reason for >>not using them. > > What languages would you suggest for writing an operating system and associated > utilities? Fortran? COBOL? > > There are very good reasons for writing everything in assembly that have nothing > to do with distrust of compilers. > > In the case of TOPS-10 and TOPS-20, they were both mature products by the > mid-1970s. No. the first TOPS-20 ship was mid-70s. Most of the CUSPs and all of the lanuguages required the use of PA1050. <snip> /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 16:45 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uoh82d-2h2.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #164402 |
In article <PM0005345F163D82CA@aca40481.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >Questor wrote: >> On Tue, 31 May 2016 22:19:30 -0400, "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>In article <I3l3z.297993$9J6.283238@fx25.iad>, scott@slp53.sl.home >>>says... >>>> >>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>>> >On Sun, 29 May 2016 16:33:20 +0200, Morten Reistad ><first@last.name.invalid> >>>> >wrote: >>>> >>But as you state above, DEC people never really trusted the >>>> >>in-house compilers. >>>> > >>>> >This is simply false. DEC s/w development was done almost exclusively on >>>> >in-house compilers, and there wasn't any mistrust of them. Almost all >products >>>> >were written in either the respective assembly language or BLISS. I say >>>> >"almost," because although I am not aware of any, there may have been >some odd >>>> >product DEC sold that was written in something else. >>>> > >>>> >>>> It all sounds to be a bit of a muddle (MDL) :-). >>> >>>If everything was written in assembly language that would suggest that >>>there was indeed distrust of the compilers, or at least some reason for >>>not using them. >> >> What languages would you suggest for writing an operating system and >associated >> utilities? Fortran? COBOL? >> >> There are very good reasons for writing everything in assembly that have >nothing >> to do with distrust of compilers. >> >> In the case of TOPS-10 and TOPS-20, they were both mature products by the >> mid-1970s. > >No. the first TOPS-20 ship was mid-70s. Most of the CUSPs and all of >the lanuguages required the use of PA1050. So, by the time tops20 was designed there was the pdp10 to rely in, with tops10. Even bliss. Unix went that way, and largely because of that stood out as a winner for posterity. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 15:12 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mddtwham6hw.fsf@panix5.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #164420 |
Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> writes:
> In article <PM0005345F163D82CA@aca40481.ipt.aol.com>,
> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote:
>> Questor wrote:
>>> In the case of TOPS-10 and TOPS-20, they were both mature products by the
>>> mid-1970s.
>> No. the first TOPS-20 ship was mid-70s. Most of the CUSPs and all of
>> the lanuguages required the use of PA1050.
> So, by the time tops20 was designed there was the pdp10 to rely in, with
> tops10. Even bliss.
There's a gap in the history here.
TOPS-20 was released in 1975, on the new KL-10 processor. (Tops-10 came out
for that processor in 1974.) In that sense, Barb is telling the truth, but
she's left out the fact that TOPS-20 was adapted from a third party OS for the
PDP-10 (KA-10 processor) with a pager add-on from the same third party: Bolt,
Beranek & Newman's TENEX.
PA1050 was the name of the package in TENEX for running DEC's user applications
(CUSPs, in DEC parlance). It trapped the Tops-10 monitor calls and emulated
them as far as necessary to execute things like the FORTRAN compiler and other
useful items. The name itself comes from the designation for a PDP-10 with the
full feature operating system, which DEC designated a 10/50. (There were in
the catalog 10/10, 10/20, 10/30, and 10/40 configurations; it appears to be the
case that only the 10/40 and 10/50, and the dual-processor 10/55, were ever sold.)
DEC eventually ported TENEX to the second generation KI-10 processor, with a
vastly inferior pager; in order to get performance from TENEX, sites found that
they had to purchase the DECsystem-1077 dual-processor configuration.
The KL-10 processor itself began as a reaction to the KI-10 at the Stanford
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, where they were running a multiprocessor
hybrid KA-10/166 (i.e., a PDP-10 married to a PDP-6) and wanted a faster system
than the KI-10 promised to be. This was designated the SuperFoonly, and
occasioned the creation of a CAD package called SUDS--the Stanford University
Drawing Subsystem. DEC licensed SUDS and purchased the design and the grad
student who maintained the software (Dick Helliwell), and ported TENEX to the
new processor with processor-specific changes (project codenamed SNARK >
KRANS > SNARK > TOPS-20, probably with other stops along the way).
By the late 70s very few system utilties (CUSP is a Tops-10 term, not used in
TOPS-20 documentation) were still using PA1050, having been moved to using the
TENEX/TOPS-20 JSYS monitor call instruction (opcode 104) instead of the whole
series of instructions (opcodes 040-077) used in Tops-10 and its derivatives
(and with different function assignments in ITS at MIT).
So in one sense Barb is correct, and in another Questor is.
--
Rich Alderson news@alderson.users.panix.com
the russet leaves of an autumn oak/inspire once again the failed poet/
to take up his pen/and essay to place his meagre words upon the page...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-03 12:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <878tymcai0.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #164432 |
Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> writes: > PA1050 was the name of the package in TENEX for running DEC's user > applications (CUSPs, in DEC parlance). It trapped the Tops-10 monitor > calls and emulated them as far as necessary to execute things like the > FORTRAN compiler and other useful items. The name itself comes from > the designation for a PDP-10 with the full feature operating system, > which DEC designated a 10/50. (There were in the catalog 10/10, > 10/20, 10/30, and 10/40 configurations; it appears to be the case that > only the 10/40 and 10/50, and the dual-processor 10/55, were ever > sold.) as I've mentioned some of the CTSS people went to Project Mac on 5th flr of 545tech sq to do Multics .... and others went to the IBM science center on the 4th floor and did virtual machines, internal network, etc. http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech The initially wanted a 360/50 to modify the hardware to support virtual memory ... but had to settle for 360/40 because so many of the 50s were going to the FAA air traffic controller project. They implemented cp40 & CMS to run in virtual machine ... but CMS monitor started out being able to run "stand-alone" on the real 360/40. When 360/67 eventually came along with virtual memory hardware standard ... cp40 morphs into cp67 ... with CMS running in virtual machine (but still able to run on real 360, it wasn't until vm370 when they inserted check in CMS to not run unless it was running in a virtual machine). Very early on in CMS, they added enough OS system services simulation to support compilers and their runtime execution environments ... and other useful things. There was joke early in MVS, that the 64kbyte OS/360 simulation in CMS was more cost effective than the 8mbyte OS/360 simulation in MVS. Later on, when the vm370/cms group was out in Burlington Mall they significantly expanded the OS system services simulation ... including native read/write of OS/360 format disks. However, before it was able to be released, the burlington mall group was shutdown, primary person responsible disappears into the DEC VMS group ... and the implementation disappears w/o a trace (possibly everything that was in Burlington got wiped). earlier reference to POK getting vm370/cms product killed because they needed the people transferred to POK for MVS/XA http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#44 PL/I advertising http://manana.garlic.com/~lynn/2016d.html#47 PL/I advertising other trivia, first install of cp67/cms outside science center was at Lincoln Labs (univ I was at was the 3rd in Jan1968). Lincoln Labs wrote a CMS library for the IBM 2250 graphics display for use with Fortran applications. At the univ., I modified the CMS editor to interface with the Lincoln Labs. 2250 library to drive large graphics display https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_2250 -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00053473AABB4C03@aca202a8.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164432 |
Rich Alderson wrote: > Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> writes: > >> In article <PM0005345F163D82CA@aca40481.ipt.aol.com>, >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > >>> Questor wrote: > >>>> In the case of TOPS-10 and TOPS-20, they were both mature products by the >>>> mid-1970s. > >>> No. the first TOPS-20 ship was mid-70s. Most of the CUSPs and all of >>> the lanuguages required the use of PA1050. > >> So, by the time tops20 was designed there was the pdp10 to rely in, with >> tops10. Even bliss. > > There's a gap in the history here. > > TOPS-20 was released in 1975, on the new KL-10 processor. (Tops-10 came out > for that processor in 1974.) In that sense, Barb is telling the truth, but > she's left out the fact that TOPS-20 was adapted from a third party OS for the > PDP-10 (KA-10 processor) with a pager add-on from the same third party: Bolt, > Beranek & Newman's TENEX. > > PA1050 was the name of the package in TENEX for running DEC's user applications > (CUSPs, in DEC parlance). It trapped the Tops-10 monitor calls and emulated > them as far as necessary to execute things like the FORTRAN compiler and other > useful items. The name itself comes from the designation for a PDP-10 with the > full feature operating system, which DEC designated a 10/50. (There were in > the catalog 10/10, 10/20, 10/30, and 10/40 configurations; it appears to be the > case that only the 10/40 and 10/50, and the dual-processor 10/55, were ever sold.) > > DEC eventually ported TENEX to the second generation KI-10 processor, with a > vastly inferior pager; in order to get performance from TENEX, sites found that > they had to purchase the DECsystem-1077 dual-processor configuration. > > The KL-10 processor itself began as a reaction to the KI-10 at the Stanford > Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, where they were running a multiprocessor > hybrid KA-10/166 (i.e., a PDP-10 married to a PDP-6) and wanted a faster system > than the KI-10 promised to be. This was designated the SuperFoonly, and > occasioned the creation of a CAD package called SUDS--the Stanford University > Drawing Subsystem. DEC licensed SUDS and purchased the design and the grad > student who maintained the software (Dick Helliwell), and ported TENEX to the > new processor with processor-specific changes (project codenamed SNARK > > KRANS > SNARK > TOPS-20, probably with other stops along the way). > > By the late 70s very few system utilties (CUSP is a Tops-10 term, not used in > TOPS-20 documentation) were still using PA1050, having been moved to using the > TENEX/TOPS-20 JSYS monitor call instruction (opcode 104) instead of the whole > series of instructions (opcodes 040-077) used in Tops-10 and its derivatives > (and with different function assignments in ITS at MIT). > > So in one sense Barb is correct, and in another Questor is. The TOPS-20 5-10 year plan was to transform all the software which used PA1050 to native-mode but scheduling and relunctance slowed that transformation down. In order to ship TOPS-20 on the "first" KL, PA1050 was required so that the system could provide comuting services similar to the other OSes' product lines. DEC couldn't pass the Navy tests for FORTRAN and COBOL on TOPS-20 without the PA1050 transition functionality. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-04 16:05 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <bq3b2d-bub.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #164474 |
In article <PM00053473AABB4C03@aca202a8.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >Rich Alderson wrote: >> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> writes: >> >>> In article <PM0005345F163D82CA@aca40481.ipt.aol.com>, >>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >> >>>> Questor wrote: >> >>>>> In the case of TOPS-10 and TOPS-20, they were both mature products by the >>>>> mid-1970s. >> >>>> No. the first TOPS-20 ship was mid-70s. Most of the CUSPs and all of >>>> the lanuguages required the use of PA1050. >> >>> So, by the time tops20 was designed there was the pdp10 to rely in, with >>> tops10. Even bliss. >> >> There's a gap in the history here. >> >> TOPS-20 was released in 1975, on the new KL-10 processor. (Tops-10 came out >> for that processor in 1974.) In that sense, Barb is telling the truth, but >> she's left out the fact that TOPS-20 was adapted from a third party OS for >the >> PDP-10 (KA-10 processor) with a pager add-on from the same third party: >Bolt, >> Beranek & Newman's TENEX. >> >> PA1050 was the name of the package in TENEX for running DEC's user >applications >> (CUSPs, in DEC parlance). It trapped the Tops-10 monitor calls and emulated >> them as far as necessary to execute things like the FORTRAN compiler and >other >> useful items. The name itself comes from the designation for a PDP-10 with >the >> full feature operating system, which DEC designated a 10/50. (There were in >> the catalog 10/10, 10/20, 10/30, and 10/40 configurations; it appears to be >the >> case that only the 10/40 and 10/50, and the dual-processor 10/55, were ever >sold.) >> >> DEC eventually ported TENEX to the second generation KI-10 processor, with a >> vastly inferior pager; in order to get performance from TENEX, sites found >that >> they had to purchase the DECsystem-1077 dual-processor configuration. >> >> The KL-10 processor itself began as a reaction to the KI-10 at the Stanford >> Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, where they were running a multiprocessor >> hybrid KA-10/166 (i.e., a PDP-10 married to a PDP-6) and wanted a faster >system >> than the KI-10 promised to be. This was designated the SuperFoonly, and >> occasioned the creation of a CAD package called SUDS--the Stanford >University >> Drawing Subsystem. DEC licensed SUDS and purchased the design and the grad >> student who maintained the software (Dick Helliwell), and ported TENEX to >the >> new processor with processor-specific changes (project codenamed SNARK > >> KRANS > SNARK > TOPS-20, probably with other stops along the way). >> >> By the late 70s very few system utilties (CUSP is a Tops-10 term, not used >in >> TOPS-20 documentation) were still using PA1050, having been moved to using >the >> TENEX/TOPS-20 JSYS monitor call instruction (opcode 104) instead of the >whole >> series of instructions (opcodes 040-077) used in Tops-10 and its derivatives >> (and with different function assignments in ITS at MIT). >> >> So in one sense Barb is correct, and in another Questor is. > >The TOPS-20 5-10 year plan was to transform all the software which >used PA1050 to native-mode but scheduling and relunctance slowed that >transformation down. In order to ship TOPS-20 on the "first" KL, >PA1050 was required so that the system could provide comuting >services similar to the other OSes' product lines. > >DEC couldn't pass the Navy tests for FORTRAN and COBOL on TOPS-20 >without the PA1050 transition functionality. PA1050 was a very good solution. You should have relied on it even heavier. These comments are not only hindsight. I commented on this when I first met the Tops20 computer in 1978. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | usenet@only.tnx (Questor) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5753d4dd.26132486@nntp2.rawbw.com> |
| In reply to | #164493 |
On Sat, 4 Jun 2016 16:05:31 +0200, Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: >PA1050 was a very good solution. You should have relied on it even >heavier. PA1050 was stopgap measure. TOPS-20 had much better memory, process, and file-system models than TOPS-10. Continued reliance on PA1050 instead of native mode software would have meant being unable to use any of these improvements. Emulating TOPS-10 UUOs instead of using TOPS-20 JSYS also resulted in degraded performance.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM0005348864916541@aca41e70.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164493 |
Morten Reistad wrote: > In article <PM00053473AABB4C03@aca202a8.ipt.aol.com>, > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>Rich Alderson wrote: >>> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> writes: >>> >>>> In article <PM0005345F163D82CA@aca40481.ipt.aol.com>, >>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>> >>>>> Questor wrote: >>> >>>>>> In the case of TOPS-10 and TOPS-20, they were both mature products by the >>>>>> mid-1970s. >>> >>>>> No. the first TOPS-20 ship was mid-70s. Most of the CUSPs and all of >>>>> the lanuguages required the use of PA1050. >>> >>>> So, by the time tops20 was designed there was the pdp10 to rely in, with >>>> tops10. Even bliss. >>> >>> There's a gap in the history here. >>> >>> TOPS-20 was released in 1975, on the new KL-10 processor. (Tops-10 came out >>> for that processor in 1974.) In that sense, Barb is telling the truth, but >>> she's left out the fact that TOPS-20 was adapted from a third party OS for >>the >>> PDP-10 (KA-10 processor) with a pager add-on from the same third party: >>Bolt, >>> Beranek & Newman's TENEX. >>> >>> PA1050 was the name of the package in TENEX for running DEC's user >>applications >>> (CUSPs, in DEC parlance). It trapped the Tops-10 monitor calls and emulated >>> them as far as necessary to execute things like the FORTRAN compiler and >>other >>> useful items. The name itself comes from the designation for a PDP-10 with >>the >>> full feature operating system, which DEC designated a 10/50. (There were in >>> the catalog 10/10, 10/20, 10/30, and 10/40 configurations; it appears to be >>the >>> case that only the 10/40 and 10/50, and the dual-processor 10/55, were ever >>sold.) >>> >>> DEC eventually ported TENEX to the second generation KI-10 processor, with a >>> vastly inferior pager; in order to get performance from TENEX, sites found >>that >>> they had to purchase the DECsystem-1077 dual-processor configuration. >>> >>> The KL-10 processor itself began as a reaction to the KI-10 at the Stanford >>> Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, where they were running a multiprocessor >>> hybrid KA-10/166 (i.e., a PDP-10 married to a PDP-6) and wanted a faster >>system >>> than the KI-10 promised to be. This was designated the SuperFoonly, and >>> occasioned the creation of a CAD package called SUDS--the Stanford >>University >>> Drawing Subsystem. DEC licensed SUDS and purchased the design and the grad >>> student who maintained the software (Dick Helliwell), and ported TENEX to >>the >>> new processor with processor-specific changes (project codenamed SNARK > >>> KRANS > SNARK > TOPS-20, probably with other stops along the way). >>> >>> By the late 70s very few system utilties (CUSP is a Tops-10 term, not used >>in >>> TOPS-20 documentation) were still using PA1050, having been moved to using >>the >>> TENEX/TOPS-20 JSYS monitor call instruction (opcode 104) instead of the >>whole >>> series of instructions (opcodes 040-077) used in Tops-10 and its derivatives >>> (and with different function assignments in ITS at MIT). >>> >>> So in one sense Barb is correct, and in another Questor is. >> >>The TOPS-20 5-10 year plan was to transform all the software which >>used PA1050 to native-mode but scheduling and relunctance slowed that >>transformation down. In order to ship TOPS-20 on the "first" KL, >>PA1050 was required so that the system could provide comuting >>services similar to the other OSes' product lines. >> >>DEC couldn't pass the Navy tests for FORTRAN and COBOL on TOPS-20 >>without the PA1050 transition functionality. > > PA1050 was a very good solution. You should have relied on it even > heavier. It was a transition tool with the goal of eliminating using it. However, software development for the sake of software improvements didn't occur often. All of the effort was in making new hardware work well. > > These comments are not only hindsight. I commented on this when I > first met the Tops20 computer in 1978. That's around the time GALAXY became native...perhaps a tad earlier. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM000534739188B2BA@aca202a8.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164420 |
Morten Reistad wrote: > In article <PM0005345F163D82CA@aca40481.ipt.aol.com>, > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>Questor wrote: >>> On Tue, 31 May 2016 22:19:30 -0400, "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>In article <I3l3z.297993$9J6.283238@fx25.iad>, scott@slp53.sl.home >>>>says... >>>>> >>>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>>>> >On Sun, 29 May 2016 16:33:20 +0200, Morten Reistad >><first@last.name.invalid> >>>>> >wrote: >>>>> >>But as you state above, DEC people never really trusted the >>>>> >>in-house compilers. >>>>> > >>>>> >This is simply false. DEC s/w development was done almost exclusively on >>>>> >in-house compilers, and there wasn't any mistrust of them. Almost all >>products >>>>> >were written in either the respective assembly language or BLISS. I say >>>>> >"almost," because although I am not aware of any, there may have been >>some odd >>>>> >product DEC sold that was written in something else. >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> It all sounds to be a bit of a muddle (MDL) :-). >>>> >>>>If everything was written in assembly language that would suggest that >>>>there was indeed distrust of the compilers, or at least some reason for >>>>not using them. >>> >>> What languages would you suggest for writing an operating system and >>associated >>> utilities? Fortran? COBOL? >>> >>> There are very good reasons for writing everything in assembly that have >>nothing >>> to do with distrust of compilers. >>> >>> In the case of TOPS-10 and TOPS-20, they were both mature products by the >>> mid-1970s. >> >>No. the first TOPS-20 ship was mid-70s. Most of the CUSPs and all of >>the lanuguages required the use of PA1050. > > So, by the time tops20 was designed there was the pdp10 to rely in, with > tops10. Even bliss. Huh? BBN started the development which would later be shipped as TOPS-20. They had ex-DEC and MIT developers who _talked_ to each other. I doubt BLISS was considered back then because of the constraints CMU put on development, maintenance and distribution of the language. I don't know; the guy to ask is /rcc. > > Unix went that way, and largely because of that stood out as a winner > for posterity. Unix had the luxury of being able to use DEC's development hard/software which had already gone through cycles of development, field test and shipping. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-04 16:09 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <d14b2d-bub.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #164475 |
In article <PM000534739188B2BA@aca202a8.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >Morten Reistad wrote: >> In article <PM0005345F163D82CA@aca40481.ipt.aol.com>, >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>Questor wrote: >>>> On Tue, 31 May 2016 22:19:30 -0400, "J. Clarke" ><j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>>In article <I3l3z.297993$9J6.283238@fx25.iad>, scott@slp53.sl.home >>>>>says... >>>>>> >>>>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>>>>> >On Sun, 29 May 2016 16:33:20 +0200, Morten Reistad >>><first@last.name.invalid> >>>>>> >wrote: >>>>>> >>But as you state above, DEC people never really trusted the >>>>>> >>in-house compilers. >>>>>> > >>>>>> >This is simply false. DEC s/w development was done almost exclusively >on >>>>>> >in-house compilers, and there wasn't any mistrust of them. Almost all >>>products >>>>>> >were written in either the respective assembly language or BLISS. I >say >>>>>> >"almost," because although I am not aware of any, there may have been >>>some odd >>>>>> >product DEC sold that was written in something else. >>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>>> It all sounds to be a bit of a muddle (MDL) :-). >>>>> >>>>>If everything was written in assembly language that would suggest that >>>>>there was indeed distrust of the compilers, or at least some reason for >>>>>not using them. >>>> >>>> What languages would you suggest for writing an operating system and >>>associated >>>> utilities? Fortran? COBOL? >>>> >>>> There are very good reasons for writing everything in assembly that have >>>nothing >>>> to do with distrust of compilers. >>>> >>>> In the case of TOPS-10 and TOPS-20, they were both mature products by the >>>> mid-1970s. >>> >>>No. the first TOPS-20 ship was mid-70s. Most of the CUSPs and all of >>>the lanuguages required the use of PA1050. >> >> So, by the time tops20 was designed there was the pdp10 to rely in, with >> tops10. Even bliss. > >Huh? BBN started the development which would later be shipped as >TOPS-20. They had ex-DEC and MIT developers who _talked_ to each >other. I doubt BLISS was considered back then because of the >constraints CMU put on development, maintenance and distribution of the >language. I don't know; the guy to ask is /rcc. Or a small pl/1. Anything to avoid the internal pissing games. >> Unix went that way, and largely because of that stood out as a winner >> for posterity. > >Unix had the luxury of being able to use DEC's development hard/software >which had already gone through cycles of development, field test and >shipping. No, Barb. Bell didn't use a single DEC tool for the software of unix. It was all in-house. OK; perhaps some initial steps on the PDP7, but they were self-hosting pretty fast. For the C unix they were self-hosting all the time. A remarkable feat, if you ask me. (Yes, they started on the assembly-based unix on the pdp7, but I count that as self-hosting). -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM000534884E398147@aca41e70.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164494 |
Morten Reistad wrote: > In article <PM000534739188B2BA@aca202a8.ipt.aol.com>, > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>Morten Reistad wrote: >>> In article <PM0005345F163D82CA@aca40481.ipt.aol.com>, >>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>>Questor wrote: >>>>> On Tue, 31 May 2016 22:19:30 -0400, "J. Clarke" >><j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>In article <I3l3z.297993$9J6.283238@fx25.iad>, scott@slp53.sl.home >>>>>>says... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>>>>>> >On Sun, 29 May 2016 16:33:20 +0200, Morten Reistad >>>><first@last.name.invalid> >>>>>>> >wrote: >>>>>>> >>But as you state above, DEC people never really trusted the >>>>>>> >>in-house compilers. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >This is simply false. DEC s/w development was done almost exclusively >>on >>>>>>> >in-house compilers, and there wasn't any mistrust of them. Almost all >>>>products >>>>>>> >were written in either the respective assembly language or BLISS. I >>say >>>>>>> >"almost," because although I am not aware of any, there may have been >>>>some odd >>>>>>> >product DEC sold that was written in something else. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It all sounds to be a bit of a muddle (MDL) :-). >>>>>> >>>>>>If everything was written in assembly language that would suggest that >>>>>>there was indeed distrust of the compilers, or at least some reason for >>>>>>not using them. >>>>> >>>>> What languages would you suggest for writing an operating system and >>>>associated >>>>> utilities? Fortran? COBOL? >>>>> >>>>> There are very good reasons for writing everything in assembly that have >>>>nothing >>>>> to do with distrust of compilers. >>>>> >>>>> In the case of TOPS-10 and TOPS-20, they were both mature products by the >>>>> mid-1970s. >>>> >>>>No. the first TOPS-20 ship was mid-70s. Most of the CUSPs and all of >>>>the lanuguages required the use of PA1050. >>> >>> So, by the time tops20 was designed there was the pdp10 to rely in, with >>> tops10. Even bliss. >> >>Huh? BBN started the development which would later be shipped as >>TOPS-20. They had ex-DEC and MIT developers who _talked_ to each >>other. I doubt BLISS was considered back then because of the >>constraints CMU put on development, maintenance and distribution of the >>language. I don't know; the guy to ask is /rcc. > > Or a small pl/1. Anything to avoid the internal pissing games. > >>> Unix went that way, and largely because of that stood out as a winner >>> for posterity. >> >>Unix had the luxury of being able to use DEC's development hard/software >>which had already gone through cycles of development, field test and >>shipping. > > No, Barb. Bell didn't use a single DEC tool for the software of unix. > It was all in-house. OK; perhaps some initial steps on the PDP7, but > they were self-hosting pretty fast. Of course they did. They even started with a system which had already been debugged, tested, maintained and shipped as a system. They didn't pick up pieces of hardware, cobble it together, debug the hardware, write the code for the hardware and diagnostics. > > For the C unix they were self-hosting all the time. A remarkable > feat, if you ask me. (Yes, they started on the assembly-based unix on > the pdp7, but I count that as self-hosting). I understand what kind of work was done. DEC did it with each and every piece of hardware they manufactured in audlen days. A real cold start of a computer system is a fascinating. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-09 17:27 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mddporqaw8g.fsf@panix5.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #164475 |
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
> Morten Reistad wrote:
>> Unix went that way, and largely because of that stood out as a winner
>> for posterity.
> Unix had the luxury of being able to use DEC's development hard/software
> which had already gone through cycles of development, field test and
> shipping.
Barb, whoever told you that the Bell Labs guys used any DEC tools was
misinformed. The early history of Unix is well documented in internal papers
which were released to the public in the 1970s, when memories were still fresh.
The PDP-7 which they used had no software associated with it; it had been the
engine in a graphics workstation, and no further development was done on it
as a DEC box.
Thompson wrote a cross-assembler which ran on the GE 635 under GECOS; in this,
he wrote a skeleton monitor and assembler which booted on the PDP-7.
Everything after that was self-hosted or cross-assembled for the next platform
(PDP-11). Thompson's assembler looks nothing like a DEC product in terms of
constant syntax, symbol table layout, etc. etc. etc.
Since we have the only running PDP-7 in the world at the museum, we have been
watching from the sidelines as Unix v0 has been restored by typing in from Nth
generation Xerox copies of assembly listings by Warren Toomey in Australia and
an international band of adventurers including Bob Supnik. We are thinking
about how to emulate the RB09 disk which was attached to that Bell Labs PDP-7
so that we can run Unix on our PDP-7.
--
Rich Alderson news@alderson.users.panix.com
the russet leaves of an autumn oak/inspire once again the failed poet/
to take up his pen/and essay to place his meagre words upon the page...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-10 06:58 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <952153077.487248972.418000.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #164862 |
Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> wrote: > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: > >> Morten Reistad wrote: > >>> Unix went that way, and largely because of that stood out as a winner >>> for posterity. > >> Unix had the luxury of being able to use DEC's development hard/software >> which had already gone through cycles of development, field test and >> shipping. > > Barb, whoever told you that the Bell Labs guys used any DEC tools was > misinformed. The early history of Unix is well documented in internal papers > which were released to the public in the 1970s, when memories were still fresh. > > The PDP-7 which they used had no software associated with it; it had been the > engine in a graphics workstation, and no further development was done on it > as a DEC box. > > Thompson wrote a cross-assembler which ran on the GE 635 under GECOS; in this, > he wrote a skeleton monitor and assembler which booted on the PDP-7. > Everything after that was self-hosted or cross-assembled for the next platform > (PDP-11). Thompson's assembler looks nothing like a DEC product in terms of > constant syntax, symbol table layout, etc. etc. etc. > > Since we have the only running PDP-7 in the world at the museum, we have been > watching from the sidelines as Unix v0 has been restored by typing in from Nth > generation Xerox copies of assembly listings by Warren Toomey in Australia and > an international band of adventurers including Bob Supnik. Wonderful! How's it going? We are thinking > about how to emulate the RB09 disk which was attached to that Bell Labs PDP-7 > so that we can run Unix on our PDP-7. > -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-10 11:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM000534EAEFAB5006@aca4465f.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164862 |
Rich Alderson wrote: > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: > >> Morten Reistad wrote: > >>> Unix went that way, and largely because of that stood out as a winner >>> for posterity. > >> Unix had the luxury of being able to use DEC's development hard/software >> which had already gone through cycles of development, field test and >> shipping. > > Barb, whoever told you that the Bell Labs guys used any DEC tools was > misinformed. The early history of Unix is well documented in internal papers > which were released to the public in the 1970s, when memories were still fresh. > > The PDP-7 which they used had no software associated with it; it had been the > engine in a graphics workstation, and no further development was done on it > as a DEC box. <snip> I was talking about hardware and all the software required to create it and fix it. I don't think Bell Labs made the PDP-7 nor wrote the diags or anything which was required to get the machine set up and working. This is what DEC did and how it made it's profits. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 17:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mdd4m8s3krn.fsf@panix5.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #164880 |
jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
> Rich Alderson wrote:
>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
>>> Morten Reistad wrote:
>>>> Unix went that way, and largely because of that stood out as a winner
>>>> for posterity.
>>> Unix had the luxury of being able to use DEC's development hard/software
>>> which had already gone through cycles of development, field test and
>>> shipping.
>> Barb, whoever told you that the Bell Labs guys used any DEC tools was
>> misinformed. The early history of Unix is well documented in internal
>> papers which were released to the public in the 1970s, when memories were
>> still fresh.
>> The PDP-7 which they used had no software associated with it; it had been
>> the engine in a graphics workstation, and no further development was done on
>> it as a DEC box.
> <snip>
> I was talking about hardware and all the software required to create it
> and fix it. I don't think Bell Labs made the PDP-7 nor wrote
> the diags or anything which was required to get the machine set up
> and working.
> This is what DEC did and how it made it's profits.
OK, that I will agree with. Your earlier wording made it sound as though you
were saying that the original Unix development work was done using DEC-provided
tools. By the time they got hold of the machine, it had already been retired
from its original purpose at the Labs.
--
Rich Alderson news@alderson.users.panix.com
the russet leaves of an autumn oak/inspire once again the failed poet/
to take up his pen/and essay to place his meagre words upon the page...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00053578AC6BBDFE@aca40e04.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #165340 |
Rich Alderson wrote: > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: > >> Rich Alderson wrote: >>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: > >>>> Morten Reistad wrote: > >>>>> Unix went that way, and largely because of that stood out as a winner >>>>> for posterity. > >>>> Unix had the luxury of being able to use DEC's development hard/software >>>> which had already gone through cycles of development, field test and >>>> shipping. > >>> Barb, whoever told you that the Bell Labs guys used any DEC tools was >>> misinformed. The early history of Unix is well documented in internal >>> papers which were released to the public in the 1970s, when memories were >>> still fresh. > >>> The PDP-7 which they used had no software associated with it; it had been >>> the engine in a graphics workstation, and no further development was done on >>> it as a DEC box. > >> <snip> > >> I was talking about hardware and all the software required to create it >> and fix it. I don't think Bell Labs made the PDP-7 nor wrote >> the diags or anything which was required to get the machine set up >> and working. > >> This is what DEC did and how it made it's profits. > > OK, that I will agree with. Your earlier wording made it sound as though you > were saying that the original Unix development work was done using DEC-provided > tools. By the time they got hold of the machine, it had already been retired > from its original purpose at the Labs. I was trying to describe everything which was required to ship a PDP-7 system: from the product plan of a new CPU to the software which made it work before a customer touched it. this is not a simple thing. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | usenet@only.tnx (Questor) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5753d4c9.26112347@nntp2.rawbw.com> |
| In reply to | #164402 |
On 3 Jun 2016 13:16:10 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >Questor wrote: >> On Tue, 31 May 2016 22:19:30 -0400, "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>In article <I3l3z.297993$9J6.283238@fx25.iad>, scott@slp53.sl.home >>>says... >>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>>> >On Sun, 29 May 2016 16:33:20 +0200, Morten Reistad ><first@last.name.invalid> >>>> >wrote: >>>> >>But as you state above, DEC people never really trusted the >>>> >>in-house compilers. >>>> > >>>> >This is simply false. DEC s/w development was done almost exclusively on >>>> >in-house compilers, and there wasn't any mistrust of them. Almost all >products >>>> >were written in either the respective assembly language or BLISS. I say >>>> >"almost," because although I am not aware of any, there may have been >some odd >>>> >product DEC sold that was written in something else. >>>> >>>> It all sounds to be a bit of a muddle (MDL) :-). >>> >>>If everything was written in assembly language that would suggest that >>>there was indeed distrust of the compilers, or at least some reason for >>>not using them. >> >> What languages would you suggest for writing an operating system and >associated >> utilities? Fortran? COBOL? >> >> There are very good reasons for writing everything in assembly that have >nothing >> to do with distrust of compilers. >> >> In the case of TOPS-10 and TOPS-20, they were both mature products by the >> mid-1970s. > >No. the first TOPS-20 ship was mid-70s. Most of the CUSPs and all of >the lanuguages required the use of PA1050. Irrelevant to my point, which was that at the time TOPS-10 and TOPS-20 were written, there essentially weren't any HLL alternatives to assembly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM00053487EBCFABCD@aca41e70.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #164538 |
Questor wrote: > On 3 Jun 2016 13:16:10 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>Questor wrote: >>> On Tue, 31 May 2016 22:19:30 -0400, "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>In article <I3l3z.297993$9J6.283238@fx25.iad>, scott@slp53.sl.home >>>>says... >>>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>>>> >On Sun, 29 May 2016 16:33:20 +0200, Morten Reistad >><first@last.name.invalid> >>>>> >wrote: >>>>> >>But as you state above, DEC people never really trusted the >>>>> >>in-house compilers. >>>>> > >>>>> >This is simply false. DEC s/w development was done almost exclusively on >>>>> >in-house compilers, and there wasn't any mistrust of them. Almost all >>products >>>>> >were written in either the respective assembly language or BLISS. I say >>>>> >"almost," because although I am not aware of any, there may have been >>some odd >>>>> >product DEC sold that was written in something else. >>>>> >>>>> It all sounds to be a bit of a muddle (MDL) :-). >>>> >>>>If everything was written in assembly language that would suggest that >>>>there was indeed distrust of the compilers, or at least some reason for >>>>not using them. >>> >>> What languages would you suggest for writing an operating system and >>associated >>> utilities? Fortran? COBOL? >>> >>> There are very good reasons for writing everything in assembly that have >>nothing >>> to do with distrust of compilers. >>> >>> In the case of TOPS-10 and TOPS-20, they were both mature products by the >>> mid-1970s. >> >>No. the first TOPS-20 ship was mid-70s. Most of the CUSPs and all of >>the lanuguages required the use of PA1050. > > Irrelevant to my point, which was that at the time TOPS-10 and TOPS-20 were > written, there essentially weren't any HLL alternatives to assembly. TOPS-20 was an infant, not a mature, product in the mid-70s. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | usenet@only.tnx (Questor) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <575734bf.21124205@nntp2.rawbw.com> |
| In reply to | #164581 |
On 5 Jun 2016 14:31:22 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >Questor wrote: >> On 3 Jun 2016 13:16:10 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>Questor wrote: >>>> On Tue, 31 May 2016 22:19:30 -0400, "J. Clarke" ><j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>>In article <I3l3z.297993$9J6.283238@fx25.iad>, scott@slp53.sl.home >>>>>says... >>>>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes: >>>>>> >On Sun, 29 May 2016 16:33:20 +0200, Morten Reistad >>><first@last.name.invalid> >>>>>> >wrote: >>>>>> >>But as you state above, DEC people never really trusted the >>>>>> >>in-house compilers. >>>>>> > >>>>>> >This is simply false. DEC s/w development was done almost exclusively >on >>>>>> >in-house compilers, and there wasn't any mistrust of them. Almost all >>>products >>>>>> >were written in either the respective assembly language or BLISS. I >say >>>>>> >"almost," because although I am not aware of any, there may have been >>>some odd >>>>>> >product DEC sold that was written in something else. >>>>>> >>>>>> It all sounds to be a bit of a muddle (MDL) :-). >>>>> >>>>>If everything was written in assembly language that would suggest that >>>>>there was indeed distrust of the compilers, or at least some reason for >>>>>not using them. >>>> >>>> What languages would you suggest for writing an operating system and >>>associated >>>> utilities? Fortran? COBOL? >>>> >>>> There are very good reasons for writing everything in assembly that have >>>nothing >>>> to do with distrust of compilers. >>>> >>>> In the case of TOPS-10 and TOPS-20, they were both mature products by the >>>> mid-1970s. >>> >>>No. the first TOPS-20 ship was mid-70s. Most of the CUSPs and all of >>>the lanuguages required the use of PA1050. >> >> Irrelevant to my point, which was that at the time TOPS-10 and TOPS-20 were >> written, there essentially weren't any HLL alternatives to assembly. > >TOPS-20 was an infant, not a mature, product in the mid-70s. Still irrelevant. And age is not the same as maturity, as you have amply demonstrated.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 23 of 30 — ← Prev page 1 … 21 22 [23] 24 25 … 30 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web