"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> writes:
>On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 17:02:16 GMT
>scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:
>> >On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 16:17:43 +0200
>> >Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 2023-10-12 14:15, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> >> > On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 13:31:58 +0200
>> >> > Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> But the bare hands/bear hands comment is in Adventure. Which obviously
>> >> >> is just a silly comment and don't result in anything else/more.
>> >> >
>> >> > Oh wow - I never saw that one despite fart ooh many hours
>> >> > playing it on the 370 and covering vast amounts of line printer paper
>> >> > with hand drawn maps.
>> >>
>> >> I went and checked in the 350 point version (looking at the code and
>> >
>> > That's the version I first met on the 370.
>>
>> I have two versions, one in fortran dated march 11, 1977. No bear.
>>
>
>Well (SWIDT?)

Here's one of the march 77 versions:

https://github.com/osgcc/colossal-cave-adventure/tree/master

"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> writes:
>On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 17:02:16 GMT
>scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:
>> >On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 16:17:43 +0200
>> >Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 2023-10-12 14:15, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> >> > On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 13:31:58 +0200
>> >> > Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> But the bare hands/bear hands comment is in Adventure. Which obviously
>> >> >> is just a silly comment and don't result in anything else/more.
>> >> >
>> >> > Oh wow - I never saw that one despite fart ooh many hours
>> >> > playing it on the 370 and covering vast amounts of line printer paper
>> >> > with hand drawn maps.
>> >>
>> >> I went and checked in the 350 point version (looking at the code and
>> >
>> > That's the version I first met on the 370.
>>
>> I have two versions, one in fortran dated march 11, 1977. No bear.
>>
>
And the C version is here:

https://gitlab.com/esr/open-adventure/-/tree/master

On 2023-10-12 19:02, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:
>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 16:17:43 +0200
>> Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-10-12 14:15, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 13:31:58 +0200
>>>> Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> But the bare hands/bear hands comment is in Adventure. Which obviously
>>>>> is just a silly comment and don't result in anything else/more.
>>>>
>>>> Oh wow - I never saw that one despite fart ooh many hours
>>>> playing it on the 370 and covering vast amounts of line printer paper
>>>> with hand drawn maps.
>>>
>>> I went and checked in the 350 point version (looking at the code and
>>
>> That's the version I first met on the 370.
>
> I have two versions, one in fortran dated march 11, 1977. No bear.

The version I'm looking at is in Fortran-77 from October 1977. Bear is
in there.
RKB.FTN, in case you have the same sources...

If there is no Bear, how do you deal with the Troll?

Johnny

On 2023-10-12 23:20, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> writes:
>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 17:02:16 GMT
>> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>>
>>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:
>>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 16:17:43 +0200
>>>> Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2023-10-12 14:15, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 13:31:58 +0200
>>>>>> Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But the bare hands/bear hands comment is in Adventure. Which obviously
>>>>>>> is just a silly comment and don't result in anything else/more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh wow - I never saw that one despite fart ooh many hours
>>>>>> playing it on the 370 and covering vast amounts of line printer paper
>>>>>> with hand drawn maps.
>>>>>
>>>>> I went and checked in the 350 point version (looking at the code and
>>>>
>>>> That's the version I first met on the 370.
>>>
>>> I have two versions, one in fortran dated march 11, 1977. No bear.
>>>
>>
>> Well (SWIDT?)
>
> Here's one of the march 77 versions:
>
> https://github.com/osgcc/colossal-cave-adventure/tree/master

Wow. That looks like pre-Don Wood.

There aren't even any scoring that I can find in there, and it's
definitely pre-350 point version.

Johnny

On 2023-10-12 20:06, D.J. wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 16:13:56 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
> <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 16:17:43 +0200
>> Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-10-12 14:15, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 13:31:58 +0200
>>>> Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> But the bare hands/bear hands comment is in Adventure. Which obviously
>>>>> is just a silly comment and don't result in anything else/more.
>>>>
>>>> Oh wow - I never saw that one despite fart ooh many hours
>>>> playing it on the 370 and covering vast amounts of line printer paper
>>>> with hand drawn maps.
>>>
>>> I went and checked in the 350 point version (looking at the code and
>>
>> That's the version I first met on the 370.
>
> The one I had on my Amiga A1000, named ADVEN, had none of the animals
> mentioned. Did have a grue in the house's chimney. The text, I had a
> binary reader program, that it was converted from fortran source. I
> forget the max score and the machine they said it had been converted
> from. The score was probably 350. I think it came on a Fred Fish disk.

No. That's DUNGEON (aka ZORK) and not AVENTURE.

Johnny

On 2023-10-13 00:18, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> On 2023-10-12 19:02, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> writes:
>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 16:17:43 +0200
>>> Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2023-10-12 14:15, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 13:31:58 +0200
>>>>> Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> But the bare hands/bear hands comment is in Adventure. Which
>>>>>> obviously
>>>>>> is just a silly comment and don't result in anything else/more.
>>>>>
>>>>>     Oh wow - I never saw that one despite fart ooh many hours
>>>>> playing it on the 370 and covering vast amounts of line printer paper
>>>>> with hand drawn maps.
>>>>
>>>> I went and checked in the 350 point version (looking at the code and
>>>
>>>     That's the version I first met on the 370.
>>
>> I have two versions, one in fortran dated march 11, 1977.  No bear.
>
> The version I'm looking at is in Fortran-77 from October 1977. Bear is
> in there.
> RKB.FTN, in case you have the same sources...

D'oh. It's actually FORTRAN IV.

> If there is no Bear, how do you deal with the Troll?

Now that I've seen that code, there is no Troll in there either. And no
bridge. And not a bunch of other stuff that is in the 350 point version.

Johnny

Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> wrote:

> I was given a bunch of hardware & software manuals and got to design &
> implement my own monitor, device drivers, interrupt handlers, error
> recovery, storage management, etc. The univ. shutdown datacenter on
> weekends and I would have the place dedicated (although monday morning
> classes were a little hard with 48hrs w/o sleep). Within a few weeks, I
> had 2000 card assembler program. Within a year of taking intro class,
> the 360/67 had arrived and I was hired fulltime responsible for os/360
> (tss/360 never came to production fruition, so ran as 360/65).

Why didn’t you build it on top of BOS?

--
Pete

Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> wrote:
> On 10/9/2023 12:00 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
>> Carl Claunch’s Blog http://rescue1130.blogspot.com has had a few posts
>> about his attempts to fix an IBM 1053 (same mechanism as a selectric) used
>> as an 1130 console. I never realized there was so much to those things.
>
> A few years ago, I bought a Selectric typewriter at a garage sale. It
> sat in my garage for a couple of years, until my wife made me throw it
> out. Having read these blog posts, I see that I would never have been
> able to get it working.
>
>
>

Similar for me. I thought I’d use it for *something*. I even had a
typewriter repair guy clean and adjust it. Finally, after a couple of
years, I got tired of looking at it and got rid of it. Worked fine, but
never used.

--
Pete

Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> Why didn’t you build it on top of BOS?

Had Assembler options that generated two versions of MPIO; 1) BPS
stand-alone (low-level; device drivers, interrupt handlers, etc) and 2)
OS/360 with system services, I/O macros.

Under OS/360 on 360/30, the BPS stand-alone version took 30mins to
assemble, while the OS/360 version took an hour to assemble ... nearly
all difference was each OS/360 DCB macro took 5mins to assemble.

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

On 2023-10-13, Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> wrote:

> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>> Why didn’t you build it on top of BOS?
>
> Had Assembler options that generated two versions of MPIO; 1) BPS
> stand-alone (low-level; device drivers, interrupt handlers, etc) and 2)
> OS/360 with system services, I/O macros.
>
> Under OS/360 on 360/30, the BPS stand-alone version took 30mins to
> assemble, while the OS/360 version took an hour to assemble ... nearly
> all difference was each OS/360 DCB macro took 5mins to assemble.

Yeah, those DCB macros were a bear. Univac adopted a version of them
in OS/3 on the 90/30. The assembler looked a lot like the 360 assembler.
There was a rumour going around that someone found the source code for
the 360 assembler in the trunk of a car. Another rumour is that IBM
wanted it found. :-)

I had written my own assembler for the Univac 9300, and it fulfilled
my design goal of running twice as fast as the standard assembler,
while providing nice extra features like a literal cross-reference
and warnings if a string constant overruns an explicit length.
I saw no reason not to write an OS/3 assembler when the time came,
and I enjoyed similar speed-ups. By the end it was working well
enough to use for sysgens.

When it takes half an hour or more just to assemble a program,
and programmers have rock-bottom priority on the machine, being
able to do your work in half the time means you get a lot more
done in the scraps of time that the operators give you.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | They offer a huge range of
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | world-class vulnerabilities
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | that only Microsoft can provide.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- druck <news@druck.org.uk>

On Fri, 13 Oct 2023 00:40:51 +0200, Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se>
wrote:
>On 2023-10-12 20:06, D.J. wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 16:13:56 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
>> <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 16:17:43 +0200
>>> Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2023-10-12 14:15, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 13:31:58 +0200
>>>>> Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> But the bare hands/bear hands comment is in Adventure. Which obviously
>>>>>> is just a silly comment and don't result in anything else/more.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh wow - I never saw that one despite fart ooh many hours
>>>>> playing it on the 370 and covering vast amounts of line printer paper
>>>>> with hand drawn maps.
>>>>
>>>> I went and checked in the 350 point version (looking at the code and
>>>
>>> That's the version I first met on the 370.
>>
>> The one I had on my Amiga A1000, named ADVEN, had none of the animals
>> mentioned. Did have a grue in the house's chimney. The text, I had a
>> binary reader program, that it was converted from fortran source. I
>> forget the max score and the machine they said it had been converted
>> from. The score was probably 350. I think it came on a Fred Fish disk.
>
>No. That's DUNGEON (aka ZORK) and not AVENTURE.

Could be, but the filename was ADVEN.
--
Jim

On Fri, 13 Oct 2023 00:40:51 +0200, Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se>
wrote:
>On 2023-10-12 20:06, D.J. wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 16:13:56 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
>> <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 16:17:43 +0200
>>> Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2023-10-12 14:15, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 13:31:58 +0200
>>>>> Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> But the bare hands/bear hands comment is in Adventure. Which obviously
>>>>>> is just a silly comment and don't result in anything else/more.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh wow - I never saw that one despite fart ooh many hours
>>>>> playing it on the 370 and covering vast amounts of line printer paper
>>>>> with hand drawn maps.
>>>>
>>>> I went and checked in the 350 point version (looking at the code and
>>>
>>> That's the version I first met on the 370.
>>
>> The one I had on my Amiga A1000, named ADVEN, had none of the animals
>> mentioned. Did have a grue in the house's chimney. The text, I had a
>> binary reader program, that it was converted from fortran source. I
>> forget the max score and the machine they said it had been converted
>> from. The score was probably 350. I think it came on a Fred Fish disk.
>
>No. That's DUNGEON (aka ZORK) and not AVENTURE.
>
> Johnny

Probably time for me to post these again.

I have Adventure for Windows. With a graphic showing what is in the
zip.

https://crestofastar.drivein-jim.net/articles/394/adventure-walk-throughs-for-windows

And the Adventure map for a Tandy Model 1.

https://crestofastar.drivein-jim.net/articles/393/adventure-map-for-trs-80-model-1

--
Jim

Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
> Yeah, those DCB macros were a bear. Univac adopted a version of them
> in OS/3 on the 90/30. The assembler looked a lot like the 360 assembler.
> There was a rumour going around that someone found the source code for
> the 360 assembler in the trunk of a car. Another rumour is that IBM
> wanted it found. :-)

folklore is that person writing the assembler op-code lookup was told
that it had to be done in 256bytes (so assembler could run in minimum
memory 360) ... as a result had to sequentially read a dataset of
op-codes for each statement. Some time later, assembler got huge
speed-up by having op-codes part of the assembler.

Within year of taking intro class, the 360/67 arrived and I was hired
fulltime responsible for os/360 (tss/360 never came production fruition
so ran as 360/65 with os/360). non-resident SVCs had to fit in 2k
.... as a result things like file open/close had to stream through an
enormous number of 2k pieces.

student fortran jobs had run well under a second on 709 tape->tape.
Initially on os/360 they ran well over a minute. I installed HASP and it
cut the time in half. I would reworked STAGE2 SYSGENs so could run in
production job stream and ordering of datasets and PDS members optimized
for arm seek and multi-track search, cutting elapsed time another 2/3rds
to 12.9secs. Student fortran never got better than 709 until I installed
Univ. of Waterloo's WATFOR.

archived (a.f.c.) post with part of SHARE presentation I gave on
performance work (both os/360 and some work playing with CP/67).
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#18

CP/67 I started out cutting pathlengths for running OS/360 in virtual
machine. Stand alone ran 322secs, CP67 initially ran 856secs (CP67
534secs CPU). After a couple months I had cut it to 435secs (CP67
113secs CPU, 421secs CPU reduction).

I then redid dasd i/o. Originally FIFO queuing & single 4k page transfer
at time. I redid all 2314 I/O to ordered seek queueing and multiple 4k
page transfers in single I/O optimized for transfer per revolution
(paging "DRUM" was originally about 70 4k transfers/sec, got it up to
peak around 270 ... nearly channel transfer capacity).

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> wrote:
> student fortran jobs had run well under a second on 709 tape->tape.
> Initially on os/360 they ran well over a minute. I installed HASP and it
> cut the time in half. I would reworked STAGE2 SYSGENs so could run in
> production job stream and ordering of datasets and PDS members optimized
> for arm seek and multi-track search, cutting elapsed time another 2/3rds
> to 12.9secs. Student fortran never got better than 709 until I installed
> Univ. of Waterloo's WATFOR.

I did similar with DOS, and sped up student COBOL jobs immensely.
Split-cylinder for compiler work files made a huge difference.

--
Pete

On 2023-10-13 17:20, D.J. wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2023 00:40:51 +0200, Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se>
> wrote:
>> On 2023-10-12 20:06, D.J. wrote:
>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 16:13:56 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
>>> <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 16:17:43 +0200
>>>> Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2023-10-12 14:15, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 13:31:58 +0200
>>>>>> Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But the bare hands/bear hands comment is in Adventure. Which obviously
>>>>>>> is just a silly comment and don't result in anything else/more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh wow - I never saw that one despite fart ooh many hours
>>>>>> playing it on the 370 and covering vast amounts of line printer paper
>>>>>> with hand drawn maps.
>>>>>
>>>>> I went and checked in the 350 point version (looking at the code and
>>>>
>>>> That's the version I first met on the 370.
>>>
>>> The one I had on my Amiga A1000, named ADVEN, had none of the animals
>>> mentioned. Did have a grue in the house's chimney. The text, I had a
>>> binary reader program, that it was converted from fortran source. I
>>> forget the max score and the machine they said it had been converted
>>> from. The score was probably 350. I think it came on a Fred Fish disk.
>>
>> No. That's DUNGEON (aka ZORK) and not AVENTURE.
>
> Could be, but the filename was ADVEN.

Well, filenames can easily be changed to whatever. But the White House
with the chimney, and the grues lurking in the darkness is all
DUNGEON/ZORK. None of it exists in Adventure.

Johnny

Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> I did similar with DOS, and sped up student COBOL jobs immensely.
> Split-cylinder for compiler work files made a huge difference.

student fortran tended to be 30-50 statements ... OS/360 3step fortgclg,
almost all job step overhead (speeded up by careful ordering of mostly
datasets and PDS members), with a little bit of compiled output to
linkedit step output to execution step;

WATFOR was single execution step (around 12secs before speedup, 4secs
after speedup) for a card tray of batched jobs feed from HASP (say 40-70
jobs) ... which were handled as stream ... WATFOR clocked/rated at
20,000 cards/min on 360/65 (w/HASP), 333cards/sec. So 4secs single
jobstep overhead plus 2000/333, around 6-7secs for tray of cards ... or
around total 10-11secs avg for batched tray of student fortran (40-70
jobs)

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

.... topic drift, CICS was similar to WATFOR in countermeasure to extreme
heavyweight OS/360 overhead. Single step monitor that started, opened
all its files, and then did its best to run with minimal further use of
OS/360 system services. At the univ. the library got an ONR grant to do
online catalog and used part of the money for IBM 2321 datacell. It was
also selected to be betatest for the original CICS product and CICS
debugging got added to my tasks. CICS also did its own task and storage
management.

other CICS lore
http://www.yelavich.com/history/toc.htm
http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev196803.htm
http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev196901.htm
http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev197001.htm
http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev197003.htm
http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev197901.htm
http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev198001.htm
http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev199203.htm
http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev200402.htm

Note one of the OS/360 issues was how terrible storage management was. A
decade ago, I was asked if I could tract down the decisions to add
virtual memory to all 370s. I found a staff member for executive making
decision. Basically, typically MVT regions had to be specified four
times larger than actually used ... as a result a 1mbyte 370/165 only
ran with four concurrent regions, insufficient to keep system busy and
justified. Going to a 16mbyte virtual memory for "MVT", would allow
increasing concurrent regions by factor of four times with little or no
paging (somewhat akin to running MVT in a CP67 16mbyte virtual
machine). Old archived (a.f.c.) post
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011d.html#73

Abovee also references Simpson (HASP fame) doing "RASP" ... a virtual
memory MFT II, that also had a page-mapped filesystem. It wasn't picked
up, Simpson then leaves IBM and joins Amdahl ... re-implementing "RASP"
from scratch in coding "clean-room" (IBM legal action only found a
couple short code sequences that could be considered similar).

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

> other CICS lore
> http://www.yelavich.com/history/toc.htm
> http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev196803.htm
> http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev196901.htm
> http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev197001.htm
> http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev197003.htm
> http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev197901.htm
> http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev198001.htm
> http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev199203.htm
> http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev200402.htm

Lynn, note that this has apparently not existed at the indicated
URL for some years. The newest I can find in Wayback is 2013:

https://web.archive.org/web/20090331103628/http://www.yelavich.com/history/toc.htm

More recent crawls of that domain name are for (apparently) Bob's
grandson's gaming site, or a parking page.

De

drb@ihatespam.msu.edu (Dennis Boone) writes:
> Lynn, note that this has apparently not existed at the indicated
> URL for some years. The newest I can find in Wayback is 2013:
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20090331103628/http://www.yelavich.com/history/toc.htm
>
> More recent crawls of that domain name are for (apparently) Bob's
> grandson's gaming site, or a parking page.

mea culpa, other CICS lore
https://web.archive.org/web/20050409124902/http://www.yelavich.com/cicshist.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20071124013919/http://www.yelavich.com/history/toc.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20060325095552/http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev196803.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20060325095234/http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev196901.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20090106064214/http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev197001.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20081201133432/http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev197003.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20060325095346/http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev197901.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20071021041229/http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev198001.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20070322221728/http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev199203.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20060325095613/http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev200401.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20090107054344/http://www.yelavich.com/history/ev200402.htm

--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> schrieb:
> Now even terminal emulators
> are the refuge of a few die-hards like me.

xterm ist not a terminal emulator?

On 2023-10-22 20:13, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> schrieb:
>> Now even terminal emulators
>> are the refuge of a few die-hards like me.
>
> xterm ist not a terminal emulator?

It is. And most people have no clue it exists...

Johnny

On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 18:13:47 -0000 (UTC)
Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:

> xterm ist not a terminal emulator?

Yes but urxvt is a better one.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

On 2023-10-23 10:09, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 18:13:47 -0000 (UTC)
> Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>
>> xterm ist not a terminal emulator?
>
> Yes but urxvt is a better one.

Define "better"... ;-)

I bet urxvt looks fancier, have snassy menus, and a ton of functions.
And I also bet it's VT100 emulation have bugs.

Johnny

On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 14:09:31 +0200, Johnny Billquist wrote:

> On 2023-10-23 10:09, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 18:13:47 -0000 (UTC) Thomas Koenig
>> <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
>>
>>> xterm ist not a terminal emulator?
>>
>> Yes but urxvt is a better one.
>
> Define "better"... ;-)
>
> I bet urxvt looks fancier, have snassy menus, and a ton of functions.
> And I also bet it's VT100 emulation have bugs.

I have a script for running xterm to VMS, and it works very well. I'll
stick with xterm.

--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 14:09:31 +0200
Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:

> On 2023-10-23 10:09, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> > On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 18:13:47 -0000 (UTC)
> > Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
> >
> >> xterm ist not a terminal emulator?
> >
> > Yes but urxvt is a better one.
>
> Define "better"... ;-)

Unicode, tabs and also less memory use than xterm.

> I bet urxvt looks fancier, have snassy menus, and a ton of functions.

Nope, no menus and it lacks functionality that's in xterm, it
doesn't do Tectronix 4014 emulation only vt102.

> And I also bet it's VT100 emulation have bugs.

I'm sure it does.

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency