From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 9 14:02:34 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A8E9106566B for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2012 14:02:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions@herveybayaustralia.com.au) Received: from mail.unitedinsong.com.au (mail.unitedinsong.com.au [150.101.178.33]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85C1D8FC14 for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2012 14:02:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from laptop1.herveybayaustralia.com.au (laptop1.herveybayaustralia.com.au [192.168.0.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.unitedinsong.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3220D5C22 for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 00:16:09 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <4F82EBF7.1050702@herveybayaustralia.com.au> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 00:02:31 +1000 From: Da Rock User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20111109 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <000301cd1412$b39c1550$1ad43ff0$@net> <000801cd141b$01c9fe60$055dfb20$@net> <000001cd1465$f8d56740$ea8035c0$@net> <000b01cd1595$a8c55ef0$fa501cd0$@net> <4f82ec6b.0EU1Qc3X9OJZStzI%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <20354.52727.340223.760020@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <001601cd1656$97de28d0$c79a7a70$@net> In-Reply-To: <001601cd1656$97de28d0$c79a7a70$@net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Token Ring (really- and why) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 14:02:34 -0000 On 04/09/12 23:42, Jay West wrote: > It was written.... > ------------------- >> Might it not be both more historically accurate, and a great deal >> easier, to just use the version of FreeBSD that corresponds to the >> historical era being re-created? > And skip feature, performance, and security improvements made since? > ------------------- > > Not in this case on the former, and the latter - agreed. > > The real historical part and focus of the exhibit isn't the FreeBSD machine. > It's a dual bay HP2000 Timeshare BASIC machine. It has been restored to > pristine cosmetic and electrical running condition (2000/Access) and that's > the focus of the exhibit. > > One neat feature of the HP2000, even though it was a dedicated basic > interpreter environment, it had the ability to submit jobs to HASP/MVS. MVS > could run the code and direct output back to files on the HP2000, output to > devices on that system, etc. It's a really neat add-on feature of the > display/project to include and demonstrate that functionality. Given that a > full blown VM/360 system isn't in the picture, we've used Hercules. One > issue is cobbling together some hardware glue to deal with the interface > between the HP and the "IBM", basically emulating a sync modem and 2780 > device on the Hercules side. That is mostly within my skillset. The other > issue is that there needs to also be some terminal interaction on the "IBM" > side, so we have a 3174 establishment controller with some 3179 terms and a > 3290 gas plasma 4-session display. The 3174 attaches to the host (Hercules) > via token ring. I had this all working perfectly with FreeBSD 7x, but when > upgrading FreeBSD we lost token ring support. I could stay on an older > version of FreeBSD, but then I am stuck with pretty old versions of Hercules > (there are problems with newer versions of Hercules compiling under older > versions of FreeBSD, some needed features are lacking in older versions of > Hercules, etc.). So now you have the gory details as to "why". Yes, there > are a few other possible ways to "skin this cat", but I have researched them > all and found various issues both subjective and objective with going those > alternate routes, hence my desire for native TR support. > > So back to the topic at hand. I pulled the oltr code from 7x svn and dropped > it onto an 8x machine I had available for testing, added the requisites to > sys/conf/files.i386, and make buildkernel attempts to fly. It appears the > main reason that oltr was dropped at release 8 was that it had > IFF_NEEDSGIANT which has been deprecated for MP Safe. Additionally, some of > the functions in cpufunc.h (outbv and inbv) are no longer present in the > exact same form. Outbv and inbv I can probably easily adjust, but I'm out of > my league in the "ins& outs" of removing the need for giant locks. I > figured it wouldn't be as simple as just moving the code :) I'll beat my > head against it as time permits, thanks for any input. I've been following this thread with a kind of bizarre fascination (or more accurately perhaps it should be the fascination of the bizarre?). Perhaps you should put those questions to the hackers@ list? Or even net@? Where is this exhibit? Is there somewhere I can follow your progress with this interesting diorama? I'd be fascinated to see this in operation :)