*start*
03377 00024 US 
Date: 20 Sept. 1982 3:02 pm PDT (Monday)
From: Stewart.PA
Subject: C documentation (books)
To: VoiceProject^
Reply-To: Stewart

No specific action recommended.

---------------------------

Mail-from: Arpanet host SANDIA rcvd at 20-SEP-82 1410-PDT
Mail-from: ARPANET site OFFICE-8 rcvd at 20-Sep-82 1500-MDT
Date: 20 Sep 1982 1359-PDT
Sender: WMARTIN at OFFICE-8
Subject: Summary of responses -- Books on "C" and UNIX
From: WMartin at Office-8 (Will Martin)
To: Info-Vax at SANDIA, Works at RUTGERS
Message-ID: <[OFFICE-8]20-Sep-82 13:59:35.WMARTIN>

I am very late in distributing this summary of responses to my
inquiry in late July regarding references to UNIX and "C" other
than the standard documentation and the Kernighan & Ritchie "C"
book.  Sorry about that...  Anyway, here it is:

Quite a few people (including the authors!)  pointed to A USER
GUIDE TO THE UNIX SYSTEM, by Rebecca Thomas and Jean Yates.
Independent evaluations rated it "Absolutely first-rate",
"Great", "Excellent for the beginner", "Nice, "Easy to read",
etc.  No one seemed to dislike it.  The authors mentioned that
they were working on four more UNIX and XENIX books now, and
planning two others, aimed at business users and programmers.
This book is intended as an introductory book for
non-programmers, by the way.  It is published by
Osborne-McGraw-Hill.

Several people pointed to an article in the ACM SigPlan Notices,
Vol 16 (12), Dec '81, by P. A. Fitzhorn and G. R. Johnson -- "C:
Toward a Concise Syntactic Description".  One mentioned that it
discussed ambiguities and problems.  He also mentioned an earlier
article in the same journal: SigPlan Notices, Vol 15 (3),
[March?]  '80, no author mentioned -- "Type Syntax in the
Language 'C'".

I received a copy of a long review of Richard L. Gauthier's USING
THE UNIX SYSTEM (Reston Pub. Co., Reston, VA 1982, $18.95) from
W. H. Huggins, via the CSNet.  (Also a review of the Thomas &
Yates book, which he praised -- I'll forward a copy of these
reviews to anyone who asks and to whom I can mail.)  The most
succinct summary of the Gauthier book is "a disaster in its
execution"; the objective was laudable but the language and
production resulted in a poor product.

A number of respondents mentioned C NOTES from Yourdon; no author
specified.

Alan R. Feuer's THE C PUZZLE BOOK (Prentice Hall, 1982, $16.95)
was described as a companion workbook for the Kernighan & Ritchie
"C" book.  One contributor, who teaches "C", recommended it as
"excellent".

The Bell System Technical Journal special UNIX issue (July-Aug
'78) is still available direct from the Labs for $2.00 each,
according to a couple people; some bookstores are selling it at
$5.00.  We had acquired a pile of these prior to my inquiry, but
I had forgotten to mention that in my original message.

A highly-praised but somewhat peripheral document is DEC's manual
for VAX-VMS v3.0 "C", PROGRAMMING IN VAX-11 C, (DEC order code
AA-L370A-TE).  This is a paperbound book, and describes a "C"
much like the Berkeley "C".  It was recommended as a "stellar
documentation job".

Last comes news of a new UNIX book by Steve Bourne, to be
published by Addison-Wesley about January '83.  No other info yet
available.

Hope this is of help to you, and my thanks to all who responded.

Will Martin
------------------------------------------------------------

*start*
00328 00024 US 
Date: 22 Sept. 1982 2:27 pm PDT (Wednesday)
From: ornstein.PA
Subject: Campbell Presentation
To: Swinehart, Stewart
cc: Taylor, ornstein

Thanks guys. I think it went very well and Bob says he was particularly
interested in Voice. I'll hang onto the slides so next time we'll be a bit more
prepared.

S.
*start*
01209 00024 US 
Date: 22 Sept. 1982 5:16 pm PDT (Wednesday)
From: ornstein.PA
Subject: Tromso conference
To: Swinehart, Stewart
cc: ornstein

Reminder points:

1. it will be held in Tromso, Norway on 18-22 July 1983

2. Five copies of the full length paper (maximum of 20 double spaced typewritten
pages) should be received no later that 1 December 1982.

3. authors will be notified of accceptance by 15 February 1983

4. Final papers are due on 15 May 1983
- - - - - - - 

I think we should seriously consider this even though we won't have any
significant completed work to report - because it has as a specific topic entitled
"Communication plans for personal computing" - n.b. PLANS.

I talked to Taylor about this problem and he says we should talk to Butler and
see what he thinks. If Butler says "sure, what the hell", then the next question is
- do either of you really want to do it. (I guess if neither of you wants to do it, I
MIGHT consider it). Even if the answer is yep, we want to -  we still have to be
sure SDD won't be unhappy before we can go ahead.


Let's try to settle this soon. I'll talk to Butler ASAP. Please try to decide whether
and which of you might be interested.

S.

*start*
01564 00024 US 
Date: 23 Sept. 1982 10:08 am PDT (Thursday)
From: ornstein.PA
Subject: To Tromso or not to Tromso?
To: Lampson
cc: ornstein, VoiceProject^
Reply-To: ornstein

Hi Butler,

The problem is that the Voice Project doesn't yet have any palpable "results" to
report - it's still describing "proposed" system design, work in progress, and
plans. So writing a paper now conflicts with my (and Taylor's) general
inclination to wait until one really has something to show. We're getting close,
and if the paper were due say next spring, it would be OK - we might not have
any real results to report about new functionality, but we could at least describe
all the tools and experimental apparatus that will be in place by then. But if
we're going for Tromso, we have to start writing immediately (as I see the
deadlines).

So what is your opinion? I tend to be slightly negative - for the reason stated -
although otherwise Tromso looks like a great place for the deserving guys
(Swinehart/Stewart) to have a paper. If you have a definite opinion - pls. let me
know pronto as we need to decide soon. Give a call if you want to talk about it.

It's starting to feel somewhat exciting (at last) as the time nears for actually
placing our first call using the server. Sometime thereafter we should be able to
store/retreive messages - i.e. the very basics. When that happens, it means lots of
neat tools are in place and things should start to move more rapidly. The
possibilities for outlandish, surprising, and fun uses are stunning.

Let me know,

S.

*start*
00564 00024 US 
Date: 23 Sept. 1982 10:13 am PDT (Thursday)
From: ornstein.PA
Subject: Meeting
To: VoiceProject^
Reply-To: ornstein

Let us get together next Tuesday at 1 PM in the Alcove to review the bidding
and see what stands between us and our first Thrush placed call (and maybe
Bluejay storage and retrieval). It seems time to agree together just where we've
got to, establish some near term goal(s), and determine what is most pressing to
do to get there.

I think we're all here then. Let me know if anyone has a problem with that
time. 

Severo

*start*
00445 00024 US 
Date: 23 Sept. 1982 2:49 pm PDT (Thursday)
From: ornstein.PA
Subject: Termination
To: Boggs
cc: Stewart, Swinehart, ornstein

The 1.5 MB Ethernet is in and marked with yellow periodically. It follows the
regular CSL net, is in three pieces (Darrah knows where the breaks are), and
needs termination and connecting together. You said you would do that - so
......when you can...... We're ready and awaiting.

Thanks,

S.

*start*
00441 00024 US 
Date: 27 Sept. 1982 2:25 pm PDT (Monday)
From: Taft.PA
Subject: New Gateway.run
To: Boggs
cc: Stewart, Ornstein, Swinehart, Taft

I have built and installed a new Gateway.run on Dahlia (the voice gateway).  I
believe I have fixed the bug in routing table addresses that caused the Mesa Pup
package (e.g., in Cedar) to get confused about what network it was running on. 
However, I have not actually tested this.
	Ed

*start*
00798 00024 US 
Date: 29 Sept. 1982 11:54 am PDT (Wednesday)
From: ornstein.PA
Subject: ETT Parts Questions
To: Stewart
cc: ornstein

I'm trying to make up a fairly complete parts list - not only for Mike for more
immediate ordering but also for eventual garage use for production. So I want to
list all the parts I know about for the PC version.

1. Do you know if it is correct to assume that the number of by-pass caps for the
PC board will likely be different?

2. Are the resistor and capacitor sizes shown on the platform explanations in
dwgs. 03 and 05 correct?

3. What sort of diode do you want in the power reset (dwg 03)?

4. Am I correct in leaving off not only the LED but also the 339 ohm series
resistor? And did the LS38 driver get properly omitted from the PC version?   

*start*
00390 00024 US 
Date: 29 Sept. 1982 11:58 am PDT (Wednesday)
From: ornstein.PA
Subject: Re: 150 ns. 64-K Rams
In-reply-to: Your message of 29 Sept. 1982 7:53 am PDT (Wednesday)
To: DBrown
cc: ornstein, Stewart

OK great. I may be gone when they come (I'll be gone all next week). If so,
would you please give them to Larry Stewart to try out. He'll be expecting them.

Thanks,

S.

*start*
01102 00024 US 
Date: 30 Sept. 1982 11:00 pm PDT (Thursday)
From: Stewart.PA
Subject: Name That Bell
To: Whimsy^
Reply-To: Stewart.PA

[From Telecom-Digest]
Sender: John Covert <RSX-DEV at DEC-MARLBORO>
[From MIS Week - Sept. 29, 1982]

The North American Telephone Association, composed of many equipment
vendors who want to sell to independent phone companies and to AT&T's
purchasing division, has a Washington office which every other week
publishes a "Washington Update."

Last week, dispensing with serious reporting for a moment of levity,
Update revealed that "an ambitious soul, believed to be employed
somewhere in the Bell System" has come up with nicknames for the seven
regional holding companies that will be formed from the divested 22
Bell operating companies.

In the Northeast region will be Yankee Bell; in the Mid-Atlantic
region, Liberty Bell; in the Midwest, Cow Bell; in the South, Southern
Belle; in the Rockies and the West, Buffalo Bell; in the Southwest,
Taco Bell; and in California, Tinker Bell.

[Taco Bell is already a registered name for a Taco stand. --JSol]


*start*
00988 00024 US 
Date: 1 Oct. 1982 5:14 pm PDT (Friday)
From: ornstein.PA
Subject: Resource Limitations
To: Swinehart
cc: Taylor, ornstein, Stewart

I had promised Bob I'd try to write him a short memo/paragraph about how the
Voice project is progressing (or will progress) more slowly with only the limited
manpower we presently have on it. I really think this is true - especially over
the next year as the groundwork gets into place and a spectrum of experimental
uses becomes possible. Perhaps people will hack a bit, but (givenm their other
preoccupations) not in much depth and I am convinced that we could move
ahead alot faster with at least one more person. Besides this is a very hot,
competitive area and Xerox should be really pouring on the coal.

I have run out of time to shape up such a paragraph before I leave and ask you,
assuming you believe it, to construct one for him. I think he needs it relatively
soon.

Thanks and apologies for dumping this on you.

S.

*start*
00372 00024 US 
Date: 1 Oct. 1982 5:26 pm PDT (Friday)
From: ornstein.PA
Subject: EAP Parts List
To: Stewart
cc: ornstein

Larry,

It is on my Ivy directory as EAPParts.bravo. I never got back to it. I believe it
correctly includes the first two pages completely. My copy of the dwgs, with
parts I'd included marked off, is on my terminal table.

Good luck,

S. 

*start*
03149 00024 US 
Date: 1 Oct. 1982 5:33 pm PDT (Friday)
From: ornstein.PA
Subject: Etherphone Situation
To: Overton
cc: Stewart, ornstein


Mike:

The check prints for the Etherphone Digital board came yesterday. I decided to
wait for you to come back - not only because we need your experience and
understanding of how best to do this, but because both Larry and I are super
busy - and mostly, I wouldn't trust it if you weren't involved - any mistake is
too costly. Unfortunately I'll be gone when you return but I'll be back Oct. 11. If
you want to wait until I get back, I'll help you with checking the prints.

There are two changes that are needed, both, I hope, minor. One has to do with
a subtle 8088 bug we discovered last week, the other is a tiny 1 wire fix because
of something we forgot. Larry will describe them to you.

Now about other things, on June 20 I sent out the following msg.

- - - - - - - -
Date: 30 June 1982 4:59 pm PDT (Wednesday)
From: ornstein.PA
Subject: Parts Cost for Etherphone
To: Stewart, Swinehart
cc: VoiceProject^, Overton
Reply-To: ornstein

Mike and I just sat down and made a very rough overall cut as follows:

Digital board			$50
Analog Board		$50
IC's for Digital board	$320
Sockets for Digital board	$50
IC's for Analog Board	$150
Power Supply		$80
Connectors (and cables)	$50
Transceiver			$100
Mike and Spkr		$30
Handset			$50
Metalwork			$50

TOTAL			$980

Pretty close to our $1K original guess - but then this is something of a guess too.
IC parts are based on the real stuff for Digital board and the expensive items on
the Analog board. Is my wild guess at the Handset cost reasonable? Other items -
e.g. mike and spkr?

We have $20K of capital we can spend. Thought is to spend as much as
reasonable of it now (to beat later possible cuts). The layout and other onetime
charges can be expensed, no problem. So I suggest we order parts (IC's, sockets,
transceivers, connectors, everything we're reasonably sure of that we'll use -
maybe even handsets if we can settle on reasonable ones) for 15 units now. Plan
to build at least 10 units - perhaps 12 - depending on how it works out in detail.
If our cost estimate is right, that should leave us $5K in our capital account for
buffer. How does that seem?

S.

- - - - - - - -

I don't remember what has been done about all this but it is time to order
anything we now can for the 15 units that we haven't already ordered. Maybe
you could try to sort out where we stand. An up-to-date (Sept 30) parts list for
the PC version of the digital board IC's etc. is included herewith. I have partly
completeed the parts list for the Analog board and Larry will try to finish it up
while I'm gone. Before ordering any substantial amount of stuff (i.e. if it's going
to be more than a few hundred dollars) we'll need to check with Jim Mitchell to
be sure it is OK - given present budget restrictions.

I'm also leaving on your desk with this a record of what's been taken of this pile
of stuff that's come in. I hope it's complete. 

Welcome back to the madhouse. I hope all went well in England. See you next
Monday.

Severo 
*start*
00609 00024 US 
Date: 3 Oct. 1982 2:45 pm PDT (Sunday)
From: Swinehart.PA
Subject: New LarkComm.df
To: Stewart
cc: Swinehart

Repairs bug in authentication when Lark is being server.  Adds a new parameter
type B (a pair of bytes in byte order -- in other words, don't swab when
marshalling) to the things RPCFir is willing to do.

See ...>LarkSW>LarkSimImpl.c for a working dummy implementation connecting to
...>Thrush>Lark.mesa and ...>Thrush>LarkSmarts.mesa.  My version of these
interfaces is wrong in at least one way (the tone generation stuff), which I'd like
to get you to show me soon.

Dan

*start*
00279 00024 US 
Date: 4 Oct. 1982 9:41 pm PDT (Monday)
From: Stewart.PA
Subject: New LarkComm
To: VoiceProject^.pa

Changed DISLC.c PupImpl.c RPCPktIO.c to, respectively, fix the packet length bug, fix CloseLevelOneSocket, and reduce the RPC process stack size.
	-Larry

*start*
00237 00024 US 
Date: 4 Oct. 1982 9:42 pm PDT (Monday)
From: Stewart.PA
Subject: New C compiler
To: VoiceProject^.pa

Added new switch /Z, which drops out a call to StkChk on every procedure entry.  No '_ before StkChk.
	-Larry

*start*
00377 00024 US 
Date: 5 Oct. 1982 12:28 am PDT (Tuesday)
From: Swinehart.PA
Subject: New DoCC, C compiler
To: Stewart
cc: Swinehart

Added /Z and /L switches to DoCC:
	/Z is passed on to CC
	/L produces line.cm instead of rem.cm.

Produced another CC.run, from kosher (ugh) files.

Updated the kosher sources on [indigo]<callup>.

CTools.df should fetch the latest.



*start*
01447 00024 US 
Date: 7 Oct. 1982 10:05 am PDT (Thursday)
From: Stewart.PA
Subject: Stitchweld Work Request
To: Quan.pa
cc: RRicci, VoiceProject^ 

XEROX	STITCHWELD WORK ORDER	(submitt one order per board)

To Engineering Support	Engrg Sprt Appvl		LOG NO.	

				Priority*		* 1=Hi, 2=Nor, 3=Low

Submitted By: L. Stewart	Ext. 4477	MS 35-2-88  Date 7 Oct. 1982 

Organization CSL	 Project Voice	 Budget Center 50

Board Type ETT	Rev Ai	Date Required 10/14/82

Serial No. 002    New [   ]  or  Rework From Bd Rev Ah [ X ] (check one)

Special Instructions: 

Retrieve File	[   ]    or    Load Dump File [ X ]  (check one) 	

ETT-Rev-Ai.ad from
	[Indigo]<Voice>ETP>ETT-Rev-Ai.dm


Work Performed:					Date Completed     /    /

	Continuity Check:	(     ) Pins @ 0.5 units/pin =	(     ) Units.
	Trace Cuts:		(     ) Cuts @ 2 units/cut =	(     ) Units.
	New Welds:		(     ) Welds @ 1 unit/weld =	(     ) Units.
	IC Removal:		(     ) Removals @ 1 unit/IC =	(     ) Units.
	Weld Removal:	(     ) Welds @ 2 units/weld =	(     ) Units.
	Rework Welds:	(     ) Welds @ 1 unit/Weld =	(     ) Units.
	IC Insertions:	(     ) IC's @ 2 units/IC =		(     ) Units.
							   Total:	(     ) Units.
	Other (describe):


			Total:	(	) Units @ ($ 	)/unit =  ($ 		)
				(   	) Hours @ ($ 	)/hr. =   ($  	)

							Total This Job:  ($		)

[Iris]<Quan>StitchweldOrder2.form

*start*
01447 00024 US 
Date: 7 Oct. 1982 10:05 am PDT (Thursday)
From: Stewart.PA
Subject: Stitchweld Work Request
To: Quan.pa
cc: RRicci, VoiceProject^ 

XEROX	STITCHWELD WORK ORDER	(submitt one order per board)

To Engineering Support	Engrg Sprt Appvl		LOG NO.	

				Priority*		* 1=Hi, 2=Nor, 3=Low

Submitted By: L. Stewart	Ext. 4477	MS 35-2-88  Date 7 Oct. 1982 

Organization CSL	 Project Voice	 Budget Center 50

Board Type ETT	Rev Ai	Date Required 10/14/82

Serial No. 003    New [   ]  or  Rework From Bd Rev Ah [ X ] (check one)

Special Instructions: 

Retrieve File	[   ]    or    Load Dump File [ X ]  (check one) 	

ETT-Rev-Ai.ad from
	[Indigo]<Voice>ETP>ETT-Rev-Ai.dm


Work Performed:					Date Completed     /    /

	Continuity Check:	(     ) Pins @ 0.5 units/pin =	(     ) Units.
	Trace Cuts:		(     ) Cuts @ 2 units/cut =	(     ) Units.
	New Welds:		(     ) Welds @ 1 unit/weld =	(     ) Units.
	IC Removal:		(     ) Removals @ 1 unit/IC =	(     ) Units.
	Weld Removal:	(     ) Welds @ 2 units/weld =	(     ) Units.
	Rework Welds:	(     ) Welds @ 1 unit/Weld =	(     ) Units.
	IC Insertions:	(     ) IC's @ 2 units/IC =		(     ) Units.
							   Total:	(     ) Units.
	Other (describe):


			Total:	(	) Units @ ($ 	)/unit =  ($ 		)
				(   	) Hours @ ($ 	)/hr. =   ($  	)

							Total This Job:  ($		)

[Iris]<Quan>StitchweldOrder2.form

*start*
01447 00024 US 
Date: 7 Oct. 1982 10:06 am PDT (Thursday)
From: Stewart.PA
Subject: Stitchweld Work Request
To: Quan.pa
cc: RRicci, VoiceProject^ 

XEROX	STITCHWELD WORK ORDER	(submitt one order per board)

To Engineering Support	Engrg Sprt Appvl		LOG NO.	

				Priority*		* 1=Hi, 2=Nor, 3=Low

Submitted By: L. Stewart	Ext. 4477	MS 35-2-88  Date 7 Oct. 1982 

Organization CSL	 Project Voice	 Budget Center 50

Board Type ETT	Rev Ai	Date Required 10/14/82

Serial No. 004    New [   ]  or  Rework From Bd Rev Ah [ X ] (check one)

Special Instructions: 

Retrieve File	[   ]    or    Load Dump File [ X ]  (check one) 	

ETT-Rev-Ai.ad from
	[Indigo]<Voice>ETP>ETT-Rev-Ai.dm


Work Performed:					Date Completed     /    /

	Continuity Check:	(     ) Pins @ 0.5 units/pin =	(     ) Units.
	Trace Cuts:		(     ) Cuts @ 2 units/cut =	(     ) Units.
	New Welds:		(     ) Welds @ 1 unit/weld =	(     ) Units.
	IC Removal:		(     ) Removals @ 1 unit/IC =	(     ) Units.
	Weld Removal:	(     ) Welds @ 2 units/weld =	(     ) Units.
	Rework Welds:	(     ) Welds @ 1 unit/Weld =	(     ) Units.
	IC Insertions:	(     ) IC's @ 2 units/IC =		(     ) Units.
							   Total:	(     ) Units.
	Other (describe):


			Total:	(	) Units @ ($ 	)/unit =  ($ 		)
				(   	) Hours @ ($ 	)/hr. =   ($  	)

							Total This Job:  ($		)

[Iris]<Quan>StitchweldOrder2.form

*start*
00518 00024 US 
Date:  7-Oct-82 11:19:09 PDT (Thursday)
From: Quan.PA
Subject: Re: Stitchweld Work Request
In-reply-to: Stewart's message of 7 Oct. 1982 10:05 am PDT (Thursday)
To: Stewart
cc: Quan, RRicci, VoiceProject^
Reply-To: Quan.PA

Larry,

I have assigned Stitchweld Log No. 047, 048, & 049 to your ETT-Rev-Ai board reworks, Serial No. 002, 003 & 004 respectively. 

There should be no problem meeting your date required of 14 Oct.  Becky should be able to start on your boards tomorrow morning.

Dick
*start*
00345 00024 US 
Date:  7 OCT 1982 1952-PDT
From: STEWART.PA
Subject: rpc packet format
To:   swinehart
cc:   stewart

It is my impression that the return packet for a call does not include the
procedure index anymore.

call packet:
word 0: proc index in interface
word 1...  arguments

reply:
word 0... results

Is this correct?
	-Larry
*start*
00452 00024 US 
Date: 8 Oct. 1982 8:16 am PDT (Friday)
From: Swinehart.PA
Subject: Re: rpc packet format
In-reply-to: Your message of 7 OCT 1982 1952-PDT
To: STEWART
cc: swinehart

Right, the index word is not reserved in the return packet.  Actually, there are
four additional words prior to "word 0" that specify the interface used for the
call, and those ARE reserved in the return packet, even though they are not
used for anything there.

*start*
01701 00024 US 
Date: 9 Oct. 1982 12:47 am PDT (Saturday)
From: Stewart.PA
Subject: EnqueueReceived
To: Birrell, Swinehart
cc: Stewart

Best I can tell, this procedure has slipped through the cracks in 3.4.  There doesn't seem to be any way to call it.  I don't see how to use broadcast binding in 3.4.

EnqueueReceived is PUBLIC in RPCPktIO, but it is not contained in any DEFINITIONS file that I found.  (It is no longer in RPCPrivate.)

I think that we could get EnqueueReceived by IMPORTING either RPCPktIO or EthernetOneDriver (the modules), but I doubt if either is exported from the boot file.

If we only had the frame handle...

I tried using the runtime system to get it:

&8 _ BBInterp.ParseExpr["RPCPktIO"]
{tree for: RPCPktIO}
&9 _ BBInterp.EvalExpr[&8,NIL]
ERROR PageFaultImpl.AddressFault}--] from PageFaultImpl.MemoryFault
computation suspended, switching to Action Area C...
aborted
&10 _ &8
{tree for: RPCPktIO}
&11 _ BBContext.GetDefaultGlobalContext[]
^[world: 7310536B^, headLF: NIL, headGF: 7535740B^, active: TRUE]
&12 _ BBEval.NewEvalHead[context: &11, helpFatal: NIL]
^[context: 11436766B^, data: NIL, helpFatal: NIL, helpWrongType: NIL, helpId: NIL, helpSelector: NIL, helpDefault: NIL, specials: NIL]
&13 _ BBInterp.EvalExpr[&8,&12]
[rtns: {tv for: {globalFrame: RPCPktIO}}, numRtns: 1]
&14 _ RTTBridge.GFHFromTV[&13.rtns]
50564B@
&15 _ &14?
is of type PrincOps.GlobalFrameHandle: TYPE = POINTER TO PrincOps.GlobalFrame

Voila.
This could be put into BroadcastBindingImpl (ugly) and I think that this frame handle could be used to call Enqueue received:

frame _ RTTBridge.GFHFromTV[BBInterp.EvalExpr[. . .].rtns];
frame.EnqueueReceived[packet];   --  yes?

-Larry

*start*
00527 00024 US 
Date:  9 OCT 1982 0126-PDT
From: STEWART.PA
Subject: 3.4 Teleload.df
To:   Swinehart
cc:   Stewart

I build most of my Lark/Cedar stuff in 3.4 before finding the problem
with broadcast binding.  If you feel it advisable to stay in 3.3
until logical Holloween, we can restore things.  Don't delver
Voice>ep until you decide!  The 3.3 stuff is down there somewhere
amongst the old versions.  I'll be around Sat. afternoon.

Meadowlark is reinstalled.  I think it works  (it etherloads 
anyway.).

	-Larry
*start*
01176 00024 US 
Date: 9 Oct. 1982 8:41 am PDT (Saturday)
From: Swinehart.PA
Subject: Re: 3.4 Teleload.df
In-reply-to: Your message of 9 OCT 1982 0126-PDT
To: STEWART
cc: Swinehart

I have remained in 3.3 so far.  Logical Halloween feels REAL close, depending
on how hard it is to build ringing/ringback and connection specification logic,
so probably should stay in 3.3 until that's going -- 3.4.1 sounds like a better deal,
anyway?  Susan's code inserts comments wherever Lark needs to be told to do
something.  I'm trying to get to the point where I can talk to Lark in the style
indicated in my old interface.  My version of her basic call placement logic
seems to be nearly working.

I'm going to be gone through the middle of the day, returning later in the
afternoon for some amount of time.  Would be neat if we could have a blue
telephone on Severo's desk Monday morning.  Probably not worth killing
ourselves to do it, though.

Mayhaps Andrew has exported EnqueueAgain instead of EnqueueReceived?
EnqueueAgain has a diagnostic layer around the basic queueing procedure.  That
would work, too.  I haven't checked, though, and it sounds like a long shot.

Dan

*start*
00475 00024 US 
Date: 11 Oct. 1982 8:37 am PDT (Monday)
From: Swinehart.PA
Subject: Meadowlark won't boot.
To: Stewart
cc: Swinehart

Noticed it Saturday.  At least, it won't print anything on DLS line or
directly-attached terminal.  Should I get Bart to call the phoneys or what?

If we [sic] hadn't changed the LarkX interfaces, and if Meadowlark would boot,
it would be Halloween in Thrushland!  Hand out a quarterterm exam to those
turkeys and get in here!

Dan

*start*
00772 00024 US 
Date: 11 Oct. 1982 10:03 am PDT (Monday)
From: Birrell.pa
Subject: Re: EnqueueReceived
In-reply-to: Stewart's message of 9 Oct. 1982 12:47 am PDT (Saturday)
To: Stewart
cc: Birrell, Swinehart

I either didn't know, or had forgotten, that you were using
RPCPrivate.EnqueueRecvd.  I was treating that as a private interface between
RPC and the Ethernet driver, which I had to change because of problems in
Cedar start-up.

Since all modules are actually exported by the boot file, you can access it for
now (until we can set up some more public facility, or canonize your
broadcast/requeue mechanism) by importing the module:

DIRECTORY
...
RPCPktIO USING[ EnqueueRecvd], ......

IMPORTS .... RPCPktIO .....

... RPCPktIO.EnqueueRecvd[...]


Andrew

*start*
00306 00024 US 
Date: 11 Oct. 1982 1:43 pm PDT (Monday)
From: Stewart.PA
Subject: Re: EnqueueReceived
In-reply-to: Birrell's message of 11 Oct. 1982 10:03 am PDT (Monday)
To: Birrell
cc: Stewart, Swinehart

See [Indigo]<Voice>Thrush>New>RPCBcstListenImpl.mesa.  It works fine via Bugbane.
	-Larry

*start*
00616 00024 US 
Date: 12 Oct. 1982 8:44 am PDT (Tuesday)
From: Birrell.pa
Subject: Re: EnqueueReceived
In-reply-to: Stewart's message of 11 Oct. 1982 1:43 pm PDT (Monday)
To: Stewart
cc: Swinehart

Fine.  But somehow,

pktIO: POINTER TO FRAME[RPCPktIO] = LOOPHOLE[RTTBridge.GFHFromTV[
	BBInterp.EvalExpr[
		BBInterp.ParseExpr["RPCPktIO"], BBEval.NewEvalHead[
			context: BBContext.GetDefaultGlobalContext[], helpFatal:
NIL]].rtns]];
enqueueProc: PROC[b: BufferDefs.PupBuffer] RETURNS[BOOLEAN] =
pktIO.EnqueueRecvd;

...... seems like overkill, when all you need to write is "RPCPktIO.EnqueueRecvd".

Andrew