Article 4163 of alt.sys.pdp10:
Path: news3.best.com!nntp1.ba.best.com!not-for-mail
From: inwap@best.com (Smith and O'Halloran)
Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10
Subject: Re: KL Console Commands
Date: 5 Oct 1998 11:29:58 -0700
Organization: Chez INWAP (people, computers, cats)
Message-ID: <6vb376$a8n$1@shell3.ba.best.com>
References: <6v7mi0$evr$1@strato.ultra.net> <19981004080826.18858.00003043@ng30.aol.com> <6vacmp$bni$1@strato.ultra.net>
Lines: 29
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell3.ba.best.com
X-Trace: 907612205 26087 inwap 206.184.139.134
Xref: news3.best.com alt.sys.pdp10:4163

In article <6vacmp$bni$1@strato.ultra.net>,  <jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote:
>TOPS-20 had a card reader driver?  Not even the -10 had that
>(we had moved the card stuff to the Customer Supported Tape).
>I didn't spend much time on packaging TOPS-20 so I can't say
>what the -20 monitor group (this does not include spoolers)
>supported.  I also didn't review the TOPS-20 SPDs so I can't
>say what configurations were sold.

TOPS-10/TOPS-20 RSX-20F System Reference Manual, AA-BS94A-TK, AD-BS94A-T1
(TOPS-10 version 7.03, TOPS-20 release 6.1, RSX20F version 15-15)
Page 10-24: DH11 DATA BASE, status of up to 128 TTY lines.
Page 10-29: CD-11 DRIVER DATA BASE, status bits for CD-11 card reader.
Page 10-30: LP-20 DRIVER DATA BASE, status of line printer.

I need to clear up a misstatement on my previous post: there was no
plotter or card punch connected to our 1091.  I was, indeed, confused.

We had upgraded the plotter to a Calcomp unit that had an RS-232 interface.
The card punch was a device that had a keyboard and an RS-232 interface. I had
to modify SPROUT to talk to these devices.

We had two Data Products printers; one connected to the KL's BA-10 (left-over
lineprinter controller from the KA), the other had an A/B switch so that it
could connect to the KL's LP-20 or to the KS's LP-11.  The high-speed card
reader was a CD20 connected to the KL's CR-11.
	-Joe
-- 
INWAP.COM is Joe and Sally Smith, John and Chris O'Halloran and our cats
See http://www.inwap.com/ for PDP-10, "ReBoot", "Shadow Raiders"/"War Planets"


Article 4174 of alt.sys.pdp10:
Path: news3.best.com!news1.best.com!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!news.ultranet.com!d3
From: jmfbahciv@aol.com
Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10
Subject: Re: KL Console Commands
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 98 10:40:13 GMT
Organization: UltraNet Communications, Inc.
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <6vfkn8$lh5$2@strato.ultra.net>
References: <6v7mi0$evr$1@strato.ultra.net> <19981004080826.18858.00003043@ng30.aol.com> <6vacmp$bni$1@strato.ultra.net> <6vb376$a8n$1@shell3.ba.best.com> <6vdelk$o1e$3@hirame.wwa.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: d3.dial-16.mbo.ma.ultra.net
X-Complaints-To: abuse@ultra.net
X-Ultra-Time: 7 Oct 1998 11:53:12 GMT
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
Xref: news3.best.com alt.sys.pdp10:4174

In article <6vdelk$o1e$3@hirame.wwa.com>,
   jeverett@wwa.DEFEAT.UCE.BOTS.com (John Everett) wrote:
<snip>

>Once we (ADP) took delivery of our first KS, we installed an LP-11 and I 
>modified LPTSER to support it. I don't recall if we ever gave that code (I 
>think I called it LP1SER) back to DEC.
>

This isn't the first time that I wish somebody had preserved the 
MCO files (not the ones we shipped on the monitor tape) but the 
ones that contained all the MCOs written.  There's a hell of a
lot of documentation and information that's been lost because
somebody dumped "old" stuff.

/BAH


Sigh! - Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.


Article 4210 of alt.sys.pdp10:
Path: news3.best.com!nntp1.ba.best.com!not-for-mail
From: inwap@best.com (Smith and O'Halloran)
Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10
Subject: Re: KL Console Commands
Date: 8 Oct 1998 16:47:01 -0700
Organization: Chez INWAP (people, computers, cats)
Message-ID: <6vjitl$p9b$1@shell3.ba.best.com>
References: <6v7mi0$evr$1@strato.ultra.net> <6vacmp$bni$1@strato.ultra.net> <6vb376$a8n$1@shell3.ba.best.com> <6vdelk$o1e$3@hirame.wwa.com>
Lines: 26
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell3.ba.best.com
X-Trace: 907890425 4680 inwap 206.184.139.134
Xref: news3.best.com alt.sys.pdp10:4210

In article <6vdelk$o1e$3@hirame.wwa.com>,
John Everett <jeverett@wwa.DEFEAT.UCE.BOTS.com> wrote:
>In article <6vb376$a8n$1@shell3.ba.best.com>, inwap@best.com says...
>>
>>We had two Data Products printers; one connected to the KL's BA-10 (left-over
>>lineprinter controller from the KA), the other had an A/B switch so that it
>>could connect to the KL's LP-20 or to the KS's LP-11.
>
>Did your KS really have an LP-11? The reason I ask is because the DEC
>standard KS configuration included an LP-20.

Yeah, but the LP-20 was too expensive.  What we had was a board from
DCA that was an LP-11 clone.  They provided the device driver for it;
I'm not sure, but I think it was called LP1SER.

>Once we (ADP) took delivery of our first KS, we installed an LP-11 and I 
>modified LPTSER to support it. I don't recall if we ever gave that code (I 
>think I called it LP1SER) back to DEC.

I cannot say whether DCA got your code or they re-invented the driver.
It just worked.
	-Joe

-- 
INWAP.COM is Joe and Sally Smith, John and Chris O'Halloran and our cats
See http://www.inwap.com/ for PDP-10, "ReBoot", "Shadow Raiders"/"War Planets"


Article 4178 of alt.sys.pdp10:
Path: news3.best.com!news1.best.com!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!europa.clark.net!206.55.3.15!news.clark.net!not-for-mail
From: gagner@clark.net (Philip Gagner)
Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10
Subject: Re: KL Console Commands
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 13:13:31 GMT
Organization: TWLG
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <361d6717.72552781@news.clark.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980928112124.10870D-100000@bony.umtec.com> <3613e9a8.18494117@news.clark.net> <6uvli1$o2j$1@strato.ultra.net> <3615172c.19558816@news.clark.net> <6v33qo$mr1$1@shell3.ba.best.com> <6v5edo$lrf$1@hirame.wwa.com>
Reply-To: gagner@clark.net
NNTP-Posting-Host: gagner-ppp.clark.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
Xref: news3.best.com alt.sys.pdp10:4178

jeverett@wwa.DEFEAT.UCE.BOTS.com (John Everett) wrote:

>In article <6v33qo$mr1$1@shell3.ba.best.com>, inwap@best.com says...
>>
>>Just about every peripheral that was not a disk, tape or network was on the
>>console front-end.  Lineprinter.  Card Reader and Card Punch.  Hardwired
>>TTYs.  (Excluding, for the moment, devices connected to a KA-compatible
>>I/O bus, such as the BA10 lineprinter and Calcomp plotter interface.)
>
>Okay, maybe I'm just losing my mind, but I was responsible for ALL of the 
>TOPS-10 "unit record" device service routines during the period in which the 
>KL was being introduced. I don't recall ever having to rewrite/modify CDPSRX, 
>CDRSRX, LPTSER, etc., because of any KL specific changes to their 
>interfaces/controllers. Seems to me they responded to the same CONOs/CONIs and 
>DATAOs/DATAIs they did on the KA and KI. Did TOPS-20 do things differently?

Well, you're not losing your mind (at least the above message isn't
sufficent evidence of the hypothesis to make a conclusive judgment)
but the answer is still no. That is, the FE-connected devices did not
(and logically could not) respond to CONO, CONI, DATAO, and DATAI.
What happened was that the pseudo-device trapped through the device
dispatch table into the front end driver (what was it called, FESER
doesn't sound right--DTESER?) and the front end driver pushed it onto
the DTE queue, where eventually it got eaten by RSX20F and later a
successful return was pushed back over the FE, resolving the system
call. So LPTSER, etc, did not have to be rewritten or modified any
more for the FE than they had to be for remote (DC72) lineprinters,
etc. Since the networked devices (DC72/DN8x) were introduced before
the -KL, I don't recall any modifications which were required. Lots of
modifications were required to make the FE code work, though.


Article 4178 of alt.sys.pdp10:
Path: news3.best.com!news1.best.com!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!europa.clark.net!206.55.3.15!news.clark.net!not-for-mail
From: gagner@clark.net (Philip Gagner)
Newsgroups: alt.sys.pdp10
Subject: Re: KL Console Commands
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 13:13:31 GMT
Organization: TWLG
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <361d6717.72552781@news.clark.net>
References: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980928112124.10870D-100000@bony.umtec.com> <3613e9a8.18494117@news.clark.net> <6uvli1$o2j$1@strato.ultra.net> <3615172c.19558816@news.clark.net> <6v33qo$mr1$1@shell3.ba.best.com> <6v5edo$lrf$1@hirame.wwa.com>
Reply-To: gagner@clark.net
NNTP-Posting-Host: gagner-ppp.clark.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
Xref: news3.best.com alt.sys.pdp10:4178

jeverett@wwa.DEFEAT.UCE.BOTS.com (John Everett) wrote:

>In article <6v33qo$mr1$1@shell3.ba.best.com>, inwap@best.com says...
>>
>>Just about every peripheral that was not a disk, tape or network was on the
>>console front-end.  Lineprinter.  Card Reader and Card Punch.  Hardwired
>>TTYs.  (Excluding, for the moment, devices connected to a KA-compatible
>>I/O bus, such as the BA10 lineprinter and Calcomp plotter interface.)
>
>Okay, maybe I'm just losing my mind, but I was responsible for ALL of the 
>TOPS-10 "unit record" device service routines during the period in which the 
>KL was being introduced. I don't recall ever having to rewrite/modify CDPSRX, 
>CDRSRX, LPTSER, etc., because of any KL specific changes to their 
>interfaces/controllers. Seems to me they responded to the same CONOs/CONIs and 
>DATAOs/DATAIs they did on the KA and KI. Did TOPS-20 do things differently?

Well, you're not losing your mind (at least the above message isn't
sufficent evidence of the hypothesis to make a conclusive judgment)
but the answer is still no. That is, the FE-connected devices did not
(and logically could not) respond to CONO, CONI, DATAO, and DATAI.
What happened was that the pseudo-device trapped through the device
dispatch table into the front end driver (what was it called, FESER
doesn't sound right--DTESER?) and the front end driver pushed it onto
the DTE queue, where eventually it got eaten by RSX20F and later a
successful return was pushed back over the FE, resolving the system
call. So LPTSER, etc, did not have to be rewritten or modified any
more for the FE than they had to be for remote (DC72) lineprinters,
etc. Since the networked devices (DC72/DN8x) were introduced before
the -KL, I don't recall any modifications which were required. Lots of
modifications were required to make the FE code work, though.