Now, I don't want to go off chasing another rabbit, but there is one point
about published documents that I would like to make. That's that I think a
complete document should be archived as a complete document. Lack of this
unity is the reason or at least a majorly contributing factor in why the
LINUX documentation is so screwed up, out of sync with itself, and out of
sync with the software to which it applies. If people can fiddle with
individual pieces of a document in its "library" then it's not long before
it's corrupted. That's a positive feature for the single-document
indivisible archive approach I prefer. Once you have possession of a copy,
you're at liberty to fiddle with it all you want, but not at the source.
I spent the better part of a year trying to get complete documents from
Sunsite and other loci when I had the urge to learn about LINUX. It seemed
that EVERY PARAGRAPH was a separate file . . . what a PAIN. There I sat,
50 computers, 35 TB of storage available half a dozen available DS3's for
internet traffic, and I had to type one character for every ten I
downloaded, or so it seemed.
There's got to be a better way. Please tell me what it is.
Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: Max Eskin <max82(a)surfree.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Monday, June 07, 1999 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: Disk Drive Documents
>I'll respond to several parts of this thread at once...
>
>>> >will serve everyone. In this case, that means plain ASCII for the
text.
>>> >For the images or graphics, that's a bit trickier, but GIF format is
about
>>> >the widest deployed graphics format out there.
>
>I recommend PostScript at least as an option, since it's inside every
>laser printer and many inkjets. If the system can display GIFs, it's
>probably capable of displaying most modern formats. If it can't, the GIF
>file likely would have to be converted to PS for printing anyway.
>
>>> Well, I don't, and for the reason that lowest common denominator means
the
>>> lowest efficiency for the most people. I want to make it easy and
>>> accessible to as many people as possible. Based on statistics, that
means
>
>It's not about 'many people' at all. You're catering to a technical
>audience that is capable of making sense of the datasheets.
>
>>> that the only OS that really matters is . . . now say it along with me
. .
>
>How many shares of MICROS~1 stock do you own?
>
>>> As far as I'm concerned, what's most important is that the documents be
>>> stored as complete, separate, and single files. They should not be
broken
>>> up into pages or chapters or text in one part and graphics in another in
the
>
>Why is that? If necessary, they can be put together with tar or PKZIP
>(though you probably are only familiar with WinZip). If you're after
>neatness, don't bother. Again, an audience that knows what to do with
>datasheets can figure it out.
>
>>A PDF file can't change that. If you want to re-draw all the images in
>>some CAD system, go ahead. But if you're just going to scan them, all you
>>end up with is bitmaps, no matter what file format you eventually store
>>them in.
>
>If it's a circuit schematic, it may be possible to design a program to
>interpret the bitmap and make an object-oriented graphics file (or use an
>existing one - Photoshop-like programs may have the proper filters).
>
>--Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com)
> http://scivault.hypermart.net: Ignorance is Impotence - Knowledge is
Power
>
First of all, I don't know much about publication formats for documents to
be published. I do know that Acrobat format is VERY convenient for the
folks who publish documents. It's much more compact, of course, if the
graphics are reduced in density, from 2780 or whatever DPI they use in the
printing trade, but in general it's something they put out because it's
relatively cheap and easy for the publisher. Of course it can be quite
involved and still be cheap and easy when compared with distributing 100k
physical data books, 15-40 volumes, averaging 800 pages each or some such.
That's why they so happily put the PDF's on a CD and give that away instead
of the 250 lbs of books.
Having said that, I've scanned and reproduced, even edited quite a bit of
graphic material, and, having been raised by a parent who worked in the
printing industry for 40+ years, and having worked there myself a bit, I am
not completely out of touch with what has to happen to create a
distributable file. It's just the needs of the "right" people that elude
me. I've got equipment/software to read and utilize PDF. I can view and
process other types of files to lesser extent, but I guess that still makes
it possible. I don't know how to search for a text string in PCL or
PostScript, nor do I want to learn, since nobody seems to want to do that
either.
I've already got what I need, in that I own the documents, so I don't need
to distribute them. I just know what a pain it is to have to fix an XYZ 320
when you don't have doc's to show you the way. For that reason I'm willing
to make my materials available. I've even found a web site which will host
these files in a location where they'll be exposed to many users of
"old-time" machines. What's more, PDF is my preferred format mainly because
I have already found a volunteer who's got the tools and will apply them to
generating the documents in PDF. If someone wants to make them into another
format, I suppose the TIFF's which are what many scanners put out as a raw
bitmap file, can be made available for OCR or re-editing and re-layout. I'm
not likely to do that myself, though.
If someone has suggestions as to how the needs of Non-PDF users can be met,
Now's the time, I guess . . .
Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: Pete Turnbull <pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Monday, June 07, 1999 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: Disk Drive Documents
>Leaving aside some of the vitriol, Sellam, Tony and Dick have made some
>valid points about document format.
>
>These documents and others like them are of interest mainly to people who
>collect old machines; whether there are more Windows users who die every
>day than there are users of computer systems desiring but inherently unable
>to view PDF files is totally irrelevant -- the vast majority of those
>Windows users aren't interested in these documents. On the other hand,
>there are lots of people like us who use classic machines day-to-day. For
>example, until recently, the machine I used most often was an Acorn
>Archimedes. It certainly has graphics and comms capabilities, but it can't
>view PDF. (There is now a viewer, but it's too big, too slow, and too
>restricted to be useful on my Arc). Even now, I don't use Windows, and I
>know many other users who don't. There are several UNIX OSs out there that
>don't have PDF viewers, and a few that only run old versions of Acroread
>(there was a lot of complaining about a year ago that AIX didn't have a PDF
>viewer). Furthermore, I'm sure that many enthusiasts might well use the
>internet, say at work, to download "stuff", that then gets copied for use
>on a classic machine elsewhere. Finally, as far as machines are concerned,
>not all of them can use cheap large-capacity hard drives, so size *is* an
>issue.
>
>All of this suggests that Word documents are a complete non-starter, and
>however convenient PDF is in some ways, it shouldn't be the *only* format
>provided. I think we're all agreed on that? I'd also submit that
>PostScript is less useful than either. There are few systems that can
>handle PostScript but not PDF; all can handle ASCII+GIF; it can be a real
>pain extracting individual pages from PostScript, especially the
>almost-DSC-compliant PS produced by Microsloth. Even printing it can be
>problematic.
>
>PDF is nice because it can preserve the original layout, with diagrams in
>the right places etc, but for many purposes having the diagrams separate
>(and viewed in a separate window) is actually a nicer way of working --
>depending on purpose and personal preference. For the latter scheme,
>there's little wrong with flat ASCII text files and some GIFs. Stream TIFF
>might theoretically be better suited to scanned diagrams, but isn't so well
>supported as GIF. As for the size of the raster image, it can be scrolled
>or scaled on any reasonable graphics system I've ever seen -- and that's
>exactly what happens anyway when a scanned image is put in a PDF file and
>displayed or printed. If the images are separate, anyone who wants can
>print one separately, blown up to the size they want (resolution
>permitting) and printed out separately to pin on the wall over the bench.
> You can't do that with Acroread.
>
>There are plenty of document formats that don't keep everything in one
>file. Why should that be a requirement? There are probably more systems
>that use directories or folders than single files. Tar/zip for
>distribution is fine for these.
>
>As Sellam said, you'll never get a concensus about a single format that all
>of the interested parties can access. I don't agree that means you should
>use only the lowest common denominator; I think it means you should provide
>two (or more) formats. I'll download the PDF if it's available[1], but
>I'll surely download the ASCII too. Of course, I'm assuming that one is
>more-or-less as easy to produce as the other, if you have the originals.
>
>[1] unless I discover that the "text" within it isn't OCRed or typed, but
>scanned bitmaps, in which case I'll likely throw it away again.
>
>--
>
>Pete Peter Turnbull
> Dept. of Computer Science
> University of York
please look at the comments below.
Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: Max Eskin <max82(a)surfree.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Monday, June 07, 1999 7:26 PM
Subject: Re: Disk Drive Documents
>On Mon, 7 Jun 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote:
>>I spent the better part of a year trying to get complete documents from
>>Sunsite and other loci when I had the urge to learn about LINUX. It
seemed
>>that EVERY PARAGRAPH was a separate file . . . what a PAIN. There I sat,
>>50 computers, 35 TB of storage available half a dozen available DS3's for
>>internet traffic, and I had to type one character for every ten I
>>downloaded, or so it seemed.
>>
>>There's got to be a better way. Please tell me what it is.
>
>Well, you could get a Linux CD or book, which will have all of these for
>you. However, I'm not sure which documents you're referring to. I've had
>no related problems. There is also another issue, and that is that from
>what I've found, the docs are useless 'learning about Linux'. They are
>useful if you need command syntax, or if there is some specific thing that
>you need to do and documentation exists for it. I found a book called
>'UNIX Shell Programming' to be an invaluable resource. I do dislike Linux
>books because they are usually either printed versions of the e-docs, or
>very superficial. Check your library for a book on UNIX.
I did that, and as you say, they're generally just reductions to CD of the
published e-docs, except that they're permanently mixed together out of
logical or chronological sequence, so you can't track progress of a given
feature set. I wasn't after info on UNIX, I was after info on LINUX.
However that's not what THIS thread is about.
>This, however, has little to do with the disk drive documentation. Nobody
>will try to modify it, and since it will be tech manuals, I hardly think
>that there will be a dilemma as to which file to download. Your all-in-one
>approach does have merits, but as people have said, it's clumsy. A better
>choice would be to either tar/zip the files together or simply put all
>related files into one directory, so that when one needs to get a manual,
>one just does 'get *' at the FTP prompt.
I'm not sure clumsy is what it is, but it's inherently solvable if not
elegant. If I can break out parts of the document into PCL, then I can do
that into POSTSCRIPT as well, and so can you. If the guy down the hall
can't, he can ask for help.
>--Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com)
> http://scivault.hypermart.net: Ignorance is Impotence - Knowledge is
Power
>
There is one other aspect to consider in making a public archive of these
documents, and that is that this is not my information, nor is it public
domain. So far, no one has mentioned that there is likely still a copyright
on the documents. I suppose permission will have to be obtained from the
copyright owner. It's likely, since most of these companies, e.g. Seagate,
Siemens, Mitsubishi, Xerox (bought Shugart Associates. (?)) are big users of
PDF format for some of the reasons previously stated, probably have a
preference for PDF. It's too soon to speculate on what these companies will
do.
Please see my commments embedded below.
Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Sunday, June 06, 1999 9:27 PM
Subject: Re: Disk Drive Documents
>On Sun, 6 Jun 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote:
>
>> In any case, I'll agree that each of us will have an approach to "using"
our
>> computer which may not suit someone else, and those who have a preferred
>> format for openly presented technical data should make their preferences
>> known. The people who actually prepare the data and present it for use
will
>> probably have the final say, though and there's no guarantee that I will
>> have any more to say in the final choice than you.
>
>Well, I definitely agree with Tony on this.
On which point, Sam?
>The fact is you're never going to get consensus amongst everyone on what
>format the file should be in. So in this case, if the intent is to create
>a public archive, you must go with the least common denominator, which
>will serve everyone. In this case, that means plain ASCII for the text.
>For the images or graphics, that's a bit trickier, but GIF format is about
>the widest deployed graphics format out there.
Well, I don't, and for the reason that lowest common denominator means the
lowest efficiency for the most people. I want to make it easy and
accessible to as many people as possible. Based on statistics, that means
that the only OS that really matters is . . . now say it along with me . .
.
I don't anticipate getting complete agreement from everyone. What has to be
considered is (1) What do the owners of the data have to say? (2) What are
the people willing to do the work willing to do? (3) Where are these
documents to be stored and presented to the public and how much space will
they allow for this purpose? (4) What will satisfy the needs and preferences
of MOST of the people having access to the documents? The weight assigned
to the answers will probably be in about this order as well.
As far as I'm concerned, what's most important is that the documents be
stored as complete, separate, and single files. They should not be broken
up into pages or chapters or text in one part and graphics in another in the
stupid, Stupid, STUPID way much of the LINUX documentation is published.
Further, while GIF format is probably OK for your vacation pictures or the
latest centerfold, I don't find it particularly advantageous for presenting
line-art drawings because common viewers don't have a standard presentation
format for them. They come in a size matched to some raster image and if
your display matches it, great, else too bad. Again I prefer the PDF, not
only because it is what most people can get and use for free, but because it
is a single format useable in common for both text and graphics.
>Sellam Alternate e-mail:
dastar(a)siconic.com
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
>Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out.
>
> Coming this October 2-3: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0!
> See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
> [Last web site update: 05/25/99]
>
Hi,
I'm using my Compass again. :)
I have the GRiD 1520 (I think that's the model) disassembled on the
kitchen table beside me.
It does, I repeat, it *does* have a hard drive in it. Either it is very,
very quiet, or it wasn't spinning up before. Could be why it didn't pass
the "test".
I've located the battery, too. Looks to be non-rechargable, and it's
soldered to the motherboard. Looks like a pink capacitor. TL-5101.
Anyone know the specs on this?
The hard drive is from JVC. I didn't even know that JVC made hard drives.
"Manufactured by Victor Company of Japan, Limited". It's labeled "20 MEG
HD" on the outside of the metal case. It's a model JD3824G00-2. There is
one error listed, on cylinder 155, head 0, sector 4.
The hard drive is a very slim 3.5" unit, with a 26-pin connector going
into it. Those 26 pins _include_ the power. What kind of drive is this?
The floppy drive definitely works. I plugged it into my Amiga 1200 and
viewed some JPEGs from it.
The little modem board (?) is from USRobotics.
The AC adapter actually slides out of the case. It has battery terminals
on its inside end. Obviously the battery pack must fit into the same
space when the machine is on the move. There's some other kind of
connector on the end of the AC adapter, too, but I don't know what that's
for. Also, why is there an external 16VDC connector if the battery slides
into the case?
The CPU is a HARRIS (says INTEL lower down) CG80C286-10.
There are four monstrous square FARADAY chips near the CPU, 21 pins to a
side. FE3000A/M79V004, FE3030/M73HB002, FE3010/M92H801, FE3020/M73HB001.
There's a 40-pin ceramic DIP labeled "256K RAM". Could be video RAM, I
suppose, but it's far away from the video board and plasma display
connecions. There's a socket next to it, of the same physical size.
There are four banks of RAM on little boards, kind of like SIMMs but not.
The board edges seem to be soldered to the motherboard. There are four
empty spaces for more of these things. 30 pins each. Or is that what
30-pin SIMMs are supposed to look like? :)
Some chips have GRiD labels.
The chip which I presume to be the main video chip is a square YAMAHA
beast, 21 pins per side, with labels "7822851/V6366B-J/6102B-J".
Possibly most importantly, there are modifications inside. On the
motherboard, at position U83, there is a piggybacked 20-pin chip, with
some cut pins and wire leading to the chip below it (only one) and to U72
and U73. There's another piggybacked 14-pin chip at U26, and a couple of
other patches here and there. I thought a machine beaing the GRiD name
would be beyond these kinds of patches. :)
Anyway, I ended up doing the full disassembly by accident. I was trying
to figure out how to open the case, and the only obvious screws were the
ones under the carrying handle. I unscrewed two of those and "jingle
jingle jingle" some metal pieces fell from their moorings and started
drifting around inside. Oh joy.
Turns out they were under the battery compartment. Turns out I needed to
disassemble EVERYTHING to get under there and put the pieces back in
place. Turns out they were the springs that hold the handle in one of two
positions.
Now I hope I can get the darn thing together again. I didn't take notes,
and there are tons of screws all over the place.
--
Doug Spence
ds_spenc(a)alcor.concordia.ca
http://alcor.concordia.ca/~ds_spenc/
On Jun 7, 18:30, Max Eskin wrote:
> I recommend PostScript at least as an option, since it's inside every
> laser printer and many inkjets.
obNitPick: My laserprinter doesn't have PostScript, only PCL. Lots of
lasers don't, and not many inkjets, at least in my experience. I drive my
laserjet from a PostScript raster engine (not Ghostscript) running on one
of my unix machines.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
For anyone that cares...
This weekend I fired up my new (old) HP 9000/840S minicomputer.
The 840S is a fairly large minicomputer circa 1987. This particular unit is
fully loaded with 24MB of RAM (I think 12MB was standard), 36 serial ports,
4 HPIB interface cards, a SCSI card, and a LAN interface. The system is 3
1/2' tall, 2 1/2' wide, and 3' deep. I weighs between 350 and 400 pounds.
The CPU has an emormous transformer in the base with a number of primary
windings. This allows it to be configured for a number of different line
voltages including: 110, 120, 220, 240, and 208. Fortunately, there is a
wiring diagram printed inside the power distribution panel and the jumpers
were all color coded. I set it up for 240 since that's what my voltmeter
indicated at the outlet.
I had previously removed all the cards from the CPU (there are approx 25
cards). I turned the machine on and tested each of the 3 power suplies.
There is a "System Monitor" module that runs the control panel and it also
provides test points for all the system voltages. When I checked them, they
were all pretty close to the voltages indicated on panel.
I reinstalled all the cards and connected a terminal to the console port.
Flipped the breaker and the machine came alive! The CPU did it's self test
and everything seemed to work just fine. After a few moments, it indicated
a BOOT error as would be expected without a boot device attached.
The system came with a pair of HP 7937 hard drives mounted in rolling
cabinet. The drives are approx 14 tall, 14" wide, and 30" deep. They weigh
between 80 and 100 pounds each and have a capacity of approx 500MB.
A cursory inspection of the drives found that the heads had not been locked
in the "ship" position. I didn't know what kinda treatment they had
received so, I just crossed my fingers and fired them up.
There was a loud squeel from the drives as they spooled up. That was
obviously a bad sign :-(
I spent the entire afternoon Saturday and most of the morning on Sunday
working on the HDs. After removing them from the cabinet and disassembling
them on the kitchen table, I discovered what was making the horrific
noises. The motor, that spins the fan, also spins the HD through a belt
drive. When the motor started up, some of the old insulation got caught in
the belt and gummed it up pretty good. That particular foam insulation
turns to a sticky, gooey, black mess when it ages and the S*** was all over
the place.
After several hours, up to my elbows in Acetone, I managed to get
everything cleaned up and completely reassembled the units (OH my aching
back). Now I was ready to try it again.
I applied to power to the first HD and it spun up without the horrible
noises it made previously. The only problem was the LEDS, on the front
panel, indicated a "Servo" ERROR. I cycled the power on the unit several
times (allowing it to spin down) and about 30% of the time I could get a
green LED (disk OK). I applied power to the second HD and got similar
results although it failed the POST more often.
So, I attached the first HD to the CPU and was ready to go. I had to cycle
the HD several times to get a green indication and then I turned on the
CPU. After several moments, it went through the boot sequence... Yipee!.
During the BOOT, FSCK detected numerous faults in the HD and several of the
scripts in the ETC/RC directory could not execute. Obviously, the HDs were
having difficulties. After about 15 minutes, I finally got an "(un)welcome"
screen and login prompt. It said "Property of the US government... blah,
blah, USC code XXX... blah, blah, you're going to jail".
Since I didn't know the ROOT password, I was at a dead end but, at least it
did boot!
I rebooted the system and tried to restart in single user mode hoping, I
could find a way in to the system. Alas, I cannot get the system to boot
again. I think FSCK probably tried to fix the HD, during the previous boot,
and now it doesn't work at all :-(
I had intended to register the system with HP and get the OS upgrade
anyway. Thankfully, they're offering HPUX 10.2 for free so, it won't cost
me anything for the software.
With any luck, I'll be able to reformat the HDs and clear up the problems
they were having. I'll let y'all know what happens.
See Ya,
Steve Robertson <steverob(a)hotoffice.com>
<Linux != X. In other words there are text-based linux boxes around (ones
<which plain can't display a graphical image, but which could print it).
<Care to suggest a viewer for that system.
Ghostscript, I used it to push PDF, PS, EPS to ly LQ570 and it's runable on
DOS, WIN31, W9X and all flavors of unix.
<What about Xenix on a PC/AT or on a Tandy 6000. Or PNX (on any model
<PERQ). Or Uniplus+ on a Plessey Mantra. Or Zeus on a Zilog S8000.
Ghostscript source...
<All the world is _NOT A PC_...
True and most of it has a hard time with FTP/LYNX/Pine and an IP stack.
Get it posted, convert to other formats as needed.
Allison
Leaving aside some of the vitriol, Sellam, Tony and Dick have made some
valid points about document format.
These documents and others like them are of interest mainly to people who
collect old machines; whether there are more Windows users who die every
day than there are users of computer systems desiring but inherently unable
to view PDF files is totally irrelevant -- the vast majority of those
Windows users aren't interested in these documents. On the other hand,
there are lots of people like us who use classic machines day-to-day. For
example, until recently, the machine I used most often was an Acorn
Archimedes. It certainly has graphics and comms capabilities, but it can't
view PDF. (There is now a viewer, but it's too big, too slow, and too
restricted to be useful on my Arc). Even now, I don't use Windows, and I
know many other users who don't. There are several UNIX OSs out there that
don't have PDF viewers, and a few that only run old versions of Acroread
(there was a lot of complaining about a year ago that AIX didn't have a PDF
viewer). Furthermore, I'm sure that many enthusiasts might well use the
internet, say at work, to download "stuff", that then gets copied for use
on a classic machine elsewhere. Finally, as far as machines are concerned,
not all of them can use cheap large-capacity hard drives, so size *is* an
issue.
All of this suggests that Word documents are a complete non-starter, and
however convenient PDF is in some ways, it shouldn't be the *only* format
provided. I think we're all agreed on that? I'd also submit that
PostScript is less useful than either. There are few systems that can
handle PostScript but not PDF; all can handle ASCII+GIF; it can be a real
pain extracting individual pages from PostScript, especially the
almost-DSC-compliant PS produced by Microsloth. Even printing it can be
problematic.
PDF is nice because it can preserve the original layout, with diagrams in
the right places etc, but for many purposes having the diagrams separate
(and viewed in a separate window) is actually a nicer way of working --
depending on purpose and personal preference. For the latter scheme,
there's little wrong with flat ASCII text files and some GIFs. Stream TIFF
might theoretically be better suited to scanned diagrams, but isn't so well
supported as GIF. As for the size of the raster image, it can be scrolled
or scaled on any reasonable graphics system I've ever seen -- and that's
exactly what happens anyway when a scanned image is put in a PDF file and
displayed or printed. If the images are separate, anyone who wants can
print one separately, blown up to the size they want (resolution
permitting) and printed out separately to pin on the wall over the bench.
You can't do that with Acroread.
There are plenty of document formats that don't keep everything in one
file. Why should that be a requirement? There are probably more systems
that use directories or folders than single files. Tar/zip for
distribution is fine for these.
As Sellam said, you'll never get a concensus about a single format that all
of the interested parties can access. I don't agree that means you should
use only the lowest common denominator; I think it means you should provide
two (or more) formats. I'll download the PDF if it's available[1], but
I'll surely download the ASCII too. Of course, I'm assuming that one is
more-or-less as easy to produce as the other, if you have the originals.
[1] unless I discover that the "text" within it isn't OCRed or typed, but
scanned bitmaps, in which case I'll likely throw it away again.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
Hey!
I just put some Compass pics and info on my web page.
A bit of a rush job this afternoon, because I just got the message telling
me of the Impending Death of my Account. :/
Anyway, thunder storms rolling in, so I'd better log out. I hope the page
looks OK.
Time to sign up with a commercial provider. <s>
--
Doug Spence
ds_spenc(a)alcor.concordia.ca
http://alcor.concordia.ca/~ds_spenc/
