At 12:21 AM 5/25/00 -0400, Carlos Murillo wrote:
> >"High Sierra"???
>
>El Torito.
>The origin? beats me.
I think these formats were developed around the time of beta Win95,
code-named "Chicago". Other projects were named after cities
or puns of cities. I recall other CD formats of Romeo and Joliet
(as in the city in Illinois) that allowed long-style Windows filenames
on older ISO9660 discs. The Unix equivalent trick is Rock Ridge.
Mapquest.com didn't find an El Torito city in the USA, though,
so perhaps they named it after any number of Mexican restaurants.
http://www.cdpage.com/Compact_Disc_Variations/variationsi.html
is a good guide to all this.
- John
Ok, perhaps not quite falling into the '10 year' rule... but this seemed as
good a place to start as any.
I need a Mac capable of running Internet Exploder for a project, which
means some level of "PowerMAC"... A low to mid level unit would do,
probably something along the line of a 7100 or 8100. The AV model would be
nice, but not required...
So, anyone have a unit like this that they would part with? If so, please
drop me a note with asking price and or possible trades.
Thanks;
-jim
---
jimw(a)computergarage.org
The Computer Garage - http://www.computergarage.org
Computer Garage Fax - (503) 646-0174
IE Exploder 4.5 for the Mac can install as PowerPC, 68k, or FAT
(both). I just checked mine; it's a FAT app.
hth,
-dq
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Willing [mailto:jimw@agora.rdrop.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2000 12:47 AM
> To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
> Subject: Wanted: Apple Power Macintosh
>
>
> Ok, perhaps not quite falling into the '10 year' rule... but
> this seemed as
> good a place to start as any.
>
> I need a Mac capable of running Internet Exploder for a project, which
> means some level of "PowerMAC"... A low to mid level unit would do,
> probably something along the line of a 7100 or 8100. The AV
> model would be
> nice, but not required...
>
> So, anyone have a unit like this that they would part with?
> If so, please
> drop me a note with asking price and or possible trades.
>
> Thanks;
> -jim
>
> ---
> jimw(a)computergarage.org
> The Computer Garage - http://www.computergarage.org
> Computer Garage Fax - (503) 646-0174
>
On May 25, 8:18, Pete Turnbull wrote:
> If you want a bootable CD for a PC, you *do* make it ISO 9660 format but
> with an El Torito boot catalog addition
Idiot -- after all that, I forgot to say *how*.
I think Adaptec's CD Creator software will do El Torito. However, if you
have (access to) a Unix (Linux, Solaris, Irix, etc) system, the best way is
to use 'mkisofs' to create the image and then 'cdrecord' or 'cdwrite' to
write it.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
On May 24, 17:45, Chuck McManis wrote:
> In an effort to preserve all my miscellaneous driver floppies I've been
> copying them to CD-rom. I figured I should also do this for my DOS 6.3
> disks but realized that I don't know how to create a bootable DOS 6.3
> system disk from the disk itself. I've considered using dd(1) on unix to
> create just the disk image that I can later use dd to copy back out but
> was wondering if perhaps there was a better way.
As Roger pointed out, you're better to keep a boot floppy (or several
varieties) -- it's more reliable. Bootable CDs require BIOS support which
not all BIOSes have.
On May 25, 0:56, Eric Smith wrote:
> What I use on Linux to back up images of 1440K floppies is:
> dd if=/dev/fd0 of=floppy.img bs=18k
[...]
> There's a DOS program called "rawrite" that can recreate floppies
All true, and Chuck may find it useful to have several floppy images on a
CD, but that won't make the CD bootable.
An IDE CDROM doesn't look the same as an IDE hardrive, as far as the BIOS
is concerned, so 'dd' from a bootable harddrive won't work.
On Wed, 24 May 2000, Richard Erlacher wrote:
> don't know what the appropriate spec for a bootable CD would be. I do
> recall that ISO9660 or whatever it was is NOT the right format.
If you want a bootable CD for a PC, you *do* make it ISO 9660 format but
with an El Torito boot catalog addition (Carlos was right about the name).
As far as I remember, what this actually does is make a CD that has an
image of a boot floppy embedded within it, but if you really want to know
how it works, look in Andy McFadden's CD-R FAQ, or check the standard at
http://www.ptltd.com/techs/specs.html .
The "bootableness" isn't a function of DOS, by the way; it's a function of
the BIOS, and you would make a bootable Linux CD the same way.
On May 24, 20:47, Charles P. Hobbs (SoCalTip) wrote:
> "High Sierra"???
FYI, High Sierra is nothing to do with El Torito -- it's the name of the
format system used prior to the ISO 9660 standard, and from which the ISO
standard was derived.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
>> I've just checked the schematics, and the chip I replaced (on the PROM
>> memory board (which uses 1702s, of course)) was a 3205. Same pinout as
>> the '138, etc.
>> Any idea if that's a renumbered TI part?
>
>The 8205 and 3205 are exactly the same part.
Not according to my intel books, similar but it's like saying a 74ls138 is
the
same as 74hct138... very close. Apparently there was a process difference.
Though intel did at times morph one part/process into another.
Allison
--->Intel's 5V 1K*8 part was the 2758. Other posts have claimed that an
Intel
>2758 is a half-bad 2716, but my fuzzy recollection from that era was that
>the ones I looked at had substantially different die sizes. For half-bad
>parts Intel usually added a suffix to the part number to denote which half
>was bad, and I didn't see such a designation on any of the 2758s I used.
I have samples of both with the same PN large die half bad and small die
1k part.
>> My sense is that they called their 5-volt parts 8708's.
>
>Nope, that required the same supplies as the 2708, since it was
>really the same part.
Both right, same part. Different catalongs and different years.
>Because there *wasn't* an industry standard on the 2K*8 EPROM at the time
>when TI and Intel both announced their parts. I think Intel's move to
>the single 5V supply caught TI completely by surprise.
That and TI cpu of the time (TI9900) was three voltage so any system
was likely to have the needed voltages. What caught TI off guard is
the industry desire for single voltage.
Allison
Greetings all,
I have managed to restore a Lisa 1 from an upgraded Lisa 2. Found some
twiggy drives, front panel and the correct ROM to drive it all. I have even
found a complete set of Lisa Office disks on twiggy diskettes.
Thanks to all who helped in this venture (I know some follow this list).
However, to date I'm having alot of trouble getting the Lisa 1 OS itself.
If anyone has a set/copy I would be interested in hearing from you about
purchase, copying or installing onto ProFile.
Kind regards,
Justin
___________________________________________________________________________
Justin M. Dunlop
email: jd(a)hq.sjaa.com.au
____________________________________________________________________________
>> > I wondered at the time what the difference was between an 8205 and a
>> > 74LS138. Now I know...
>> >
>> > -tony
>>
>> Hi Tony
>> As I recall, the difference was that the Intel parts could
>> stand a much lower negative voltage ( -10V? ) than the general purpose
>
>Well, from what Allison was saying, there's a TI silicon die in that
>8205.
Why would it see -10V??? Your thinking maybe of the 8224 clock gen?
>_Apart_ from the clock lines (and power supplies :-)), I thought all pins
>on the 8080 were at standard TTL levels. Certainly the address bus was,
>which is where you'd be most likely to use a 3-8 decoder.
Yes they are but not much drive, 2 LS loads are it.
>> I recall, the 8205 were also Schottky's.
>
>Possibly. But wether it's a 74138, 74S138 or 74LS138 makes little
>difference on the average 8080 system memory board...
Right on. It was LS part. Also it was introduced when the 8085
was released and not the 8080.
Whats funny is when TI had that 74LS yeild bust in the late 70s
that part became real important to intel.
Allison
> 3205's were part of the 3000 series bit slice family.
>I don't know when they started these but I think it
>was before MDS800's because they used 3001/3002's in
>the floppy disk controller for these. This puts them in
>at least the 8080 or 8008 time frame someplace. Maybe
>even earlier.
Yep. Also the 300x was used to proto the 8080, or so the
story goes. I'd seen a 300x based 8080 (ran at 4mhz then)
once.
Allison
