2.9 TS-11 Driver Blues (and other complaints)

[dave at uwvax.UUCP]

Ah, yes, once again, Berkeley didn't test their distribution.  I couldn't
even compile a system with a TS-11, mch.s bombed with some undefined
constants (at least it was commented)!  Using the versatec seems to crash
the system, too.

By the way, how do you make 'ps' work?  Will the 2.8 ps work?
We got one system running in 2 days (without the versatec and with a TE-16),
but can't do a 'ps'.  I haven't looked at the code yet, but I seem to
remember our resident 11/70 person (now gone) had to hack it up on 2.8
to get it work.

Next complaint....  the distribution standalone does *not* boot off of a TE-16,
despite what the documentation says.  This isn't surprising, 2.8 didn't work
either.  Does it boot off of a TS-11?  Luckily I have a system running on
a floppy (2.8) so I don't *need* to run standalone from the TS-11.

I guess 2.9 is still easier to get going than 2.8, but it doesn't come close
to 4.2.  The 'Bringing up 4.2' manual is even correct and complete!  The 2.9
manual doesn't even show manual bootstraps from any tapedrive other than a TM.

And another....  We are missing include files (mbuf.h and other networking .h
files).  These are needed by syslocal.c to compile with UCB_NET turned
on.  Without this option, I still had to change the Makefile so it would
compile.  Can I get these include files from someone out there?  We are
really hoping to get our 11/70 on our local net.

One plus, the job control works. What more can I say?
-- 
Dave Cohrs @ wisconsin
...!{allegra,heurikon,ihnp4,seismo,sfwin,ucbvax,uwm-evax}!uwvax!dave
dave at wisc-rsch.arpa