[Simh] HP2100 MSU BASIC

[Tim Riker]

J. David Bryan wrote:
> On 23 Feb 2008 at 13:05, Tim Riker wrote:
>> Here's a transcript:
>> sim> g 30000
>> CLOCK I/O ADDRESS? 10
>> LOG TTY I/O ADDRESS?  12
>> NUMBER OF CHANNELS? 1
>> CHANNEL 1 TTY I/O ADDRESS? 11
> 
> What's your I/O configuration?  The current version of SIMH only has one 
> TTY device available, but you've listed two different ones above (addresses 
> 11 and 12).

Hmm. I thought it was looking for a printer there My setup:

set cpu 2100
set cpu 32k
set cpu fp
d stop_inst 1
d stop_dev 1
set dpc disable
set dqd disable
set drc disable
set ds disable
set lpt disable
set msc disable
set muxl disable
set clk disable
set ptr disable
set ptp disable
set clk dev=10
set clk enable
set tty dev=11
set lpt dev=12
set lpt enable
attach lpt lpt.out
set ptp dev=13
set ptp enable
attach ptp ptp.out
set ptr dev=14
set ptr enable

> I get a bit farther than that:
> 
>   HELLO-ROOT
>   NAME-I.D.BILL-0
>   CHAN: 1 ACCOUNT 0
>   TIME ON:  1212  12/ 12/ 78
> 
> ...and then things seem to quit talking.

Sweet! How did you set it up?

>> Anyone have docs on this?
> 
> It's mentioned in the LOCUS catalog at Bitsavers:
> 
>   /hp/21xx/locus/22000-90099_LOCUS_catalog_mar77.pdf
> 
> ...on page 2-86.  It says that the system requires "an HP2116B computer 
> with 16K, two to five teleprinters with interface, and time base 
> generator."  So I'm not sure that it'll run on a system with one TTY.

Yes, SIMH is backwards this way. The slot ought to list a card, and not 
have the card list the slot. That way any card or cardset could be 
duplicated. ACCESS can support two MUX sets for example, but I don't 
think SIMH can. Syntax would be different. Perhaps:

set 12 dev tty
attach 12 localhost:2100
set 13 dev tty
attach 13 localhost:2101

and so forth. ie: first say what is in the slot, and then configure the 
slot number, not the device name. While I'm at it, I suppose I'd rather 
see part numbers than names, but that's just me. (ie 12531C instead of TTY)

How do you have simh setup to get past the loop? Or was that test on 
real hardware? I've not tried it on real hardware yet, but that should 
be easy enough at this point.

-- 
Tim Riker - http://Rikers.org/ - TimR at Debian.org
Embedded Linux Technologist - http://eLinux.org/
BZFlag maintainer - http://BZFlag.org/ - for fun!