I have been attempting for some to to write ALL 65536 blocks
>from one RT-11 partition to a second RT-11 partition. Does
anyone know of what is wrong with what I am doing? I am
using V5.03 of RT-11 under the Supnik emulator and I do the
command:
COPY/DEVICE/NOQU DU0:/START:0./END:65535. DU1:/START:0.
However, ONLY 65535 blocks are transferred. On the other hand,
If I do the command:
COPY/DEVICE/NOQU DU0:/START:65524./END:65535. DU1:/START:0.
then TWO blocks are transferred (I put 2 non-zero blocks into DU1:
first),
so I know that that it is possible to read block 65535 from DU0:, but
there
seems no reason why block 65535 is not written to DU1: via the very
first command - especially when there is not even a warning message.
Please do not reply that an RT-11 partition is ONLY 65535 blocks and
that the last legal block is 65534. I have already proven that I can
read
block 65535 from DU0: when I use DUP.SAV, thus so as long as block 65535
can be read, there is absolutely NO reason that DUP.SAV should not allow
me to write the same block into DU1:, but DUP.SAV does not seem to be
able
to do that and moreover does not even provide a warning message that
DUP.SAV will ignore block 65535 when I explicitly direct that block
65535
be written to DU1: In addition, just in case anyone feels that DUP.SAV
really ought not to provide at least a warning message, then try the
command:
COPY/DEVICE/NOQU DU0:/START:1./END:65535. DU1:/START:1.
which does provide the warning message that I suggest is essential so
long
as DUP.SAV prohibits the user from writing block 65535 onto DU1: after
block 65535 has been read from DU0:, even though, in my opinion there
is NOTHING wrong with the command and DUP.SAV should do what the
user has specified.
Can anyone help? Any suggestions other than going into the DUP.SAV
program and fixing this bug?
Sincerely yours,
Jerome Fine
--
To obtain the original e-mail address, please remove
the ten characters which immediately follow the 'at'.
If you attempted to send a reply and the original e-mail
address has been discontinued due a high volume of junk
e-mail, then the semi-permanent e-mail address can be
obtained by replacing the four characters preceding the
'at' with the four digits of the current year.
>From: "Robert Borsuk" <rborsuk(a)colourfull.com>
>
>I think I understand the point but I also respect your views. I can't
>reply to this without being flamed some more. SO to gracefully switch
>the topic. I have a PRO-LOG PM9052 board on my desk that I'm getting
>ready to take the 1702's out of. Anyone know about this board. it has
>PM9052 on it. It looks like some kind of board for buring eproms.
>
>Rob Borsuk
>rborsuk(a)colourfull.com
>
Hi
This is most likely not a burn-in board, it is a memory
board to be used with a larger system. PRO-LOG made many
universal boards for various purposes. These were often
designed into systems to save on engineering time.
Kind of early plug-n-play stuff.
Dwight
This is all spin-mystering. A Rembrandt painting is technically no better
than a modern copy, by a technically competent artist. But it is the age
of the original creation, the materials of the day, and the fact that it
was created "then", rather than "now", that is relevant.
A Mark-8 that was built from materials and techniques of the age is more
valuable that one that someone send out now for manufacture, in my
opinion. Processes, materials and workmanship of today is different than
in past.
That is the very essence of the difference between vintage and current
design.
Do you think an Altair that is remanufactured using todays processes
(which by the way, is completely possible) is more or less valuable than
one that was created in 1976?
> I was under the impression (based on previous classiccmp discussions)
> that the only way to get the bare boards was to use the plans supplied
> in <whichever magazine it was> to etch your own. So how would you
> define original? Etched from the plans or etched from the plans within
> some short period of time from the publication date? Or maybe etched
> from the plans using materials produced at the time of publication? I
> have a couple of really old Radio Shack board etching kits around
> somewhere. I'm sure that I bought them before 1980. Could I turn them
> into gold by using them to etch a couple of Mark-8 boards? ;-) (smiley
> for the humor impared)
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cctalk-admin(a)classiccmp.org
>> [mailto:cctalk-admin@classiccmp.org]On Behalf Of Erik S. Klein
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 10:26 AM
>> To: cctalk(a)classiccmp.org
>> Subject: RE: Mark-8 Minicomputer Kit on E-bay
>>
>>
>> >It took a while for some guys on comp.os.cpm to catch on.
>> >I lurk there now and then. I was not sure whether they
>> >were trolling or truly unaware that there were no original
>> >kits, but then someone else clued them in.
>>
>> Yeah, I guess the only thing that could be original would be the bare
>> boards. Everything else would just have to be contemporary materials,
>> at best.
>>
>> I'm still guessing that the buyer expected to be purchasing an
>> antique, not a recent creation.
>>
>> Erik S. Klein
>> www.vintage-computer.com
I'd like to thank everyone who responded to my original posting
about collecting silicon wafers. Quite a few of you were a bit
puzzled about where the interest lies, so I'll try to explain
how I see it:
These things (silicon microelectronics devices) are made in vast
numbers. A large proportion are packaged and used as intended.
Possibly even larger numbers are destroyed as scrap. Yet they
each represent the collective effort of a vast number of people
and are arguably some of the most complex human artefacts ever
created. Sadly, the few wafers that survive unscathed are usually
put to such ignoble uses as mats for coffee cups or decorative
trinkets.
There is another, older and more established area of collecting
that shares many of the same characteristics - stamp collecting.
1. Stamps are printed in vast numbers
2. They are used and, in most cases, eventually destroyed
3. They are difficult to forge (convincingly)
4. Most are virtually worthless
5. A few a almost priceless
6. Many are beautiful
7. They have an inherent research interest - printing varieties,
flaws, rarities, historical interest etc.
8. They are (usually) considered most valuable unused and even
more valuable in an unbroken sheet.
Silicon has not attained this degree of interest to collectors,
and maybe never will. As fabrication processes shrink ever further
and the number of conducting layers increases, chips become
featureless (on the surface) and increasingly difficult to study.
Neverthless, early devices (on 4" wafers and smaller) are very
accessible.
So my intention is to find as many of these early wafers as I
can and to spend some time studying them - building up a
well-documented collection. I have just bought a toy Intel QX3+
microscope and I'm hoping that this will be good enough to
reveal some of the detail - manufacturer, rev numbers etc. as
well as those interesting signatures frequently sneaked on by
the design team.
My only anxiety is that the general interest in collecting
silicon may take off in a big way before I have managed to build
up a workable stock.
If you have wafers you can supply, I'd be immensely grateful -
though of course, you won't want to part with them now .....
I am searching for the system software that came with the Arche Rival
computer. This is a 386 PC that came out in 1989. The software that was
bundled with it is key, specifically the anti-virus software that was
included (called something like "Virus Free").
If anyone has this then please contact me. There is a bounty on this :)
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Sprokholt [mailto:r.sprokholt@chello.nl]
> Sent: 11 March 2003 6:01 pm
> To: cctech(a)classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: ICL OPD/Merlin Tonto
>
>
> Adrian Vickers wrote:
>
>
> >
> > [2] What's more, I'll even pay more than 75p[3] & a packet of Rolos!
> >
> > [3] or 85p, counting inflation.
> >
> >
>
> I paid 85 pounds for a Merlin Tonto a few weeks ago. Plus 30 pounds
> postage. Inflation is high in the Netherlands.
Ah, but I only want a little bit of it... ;)
> I will not sell my Tonto.
Nor I. In fact, I'm actually going to use it, just as soon as I've
sorted the dialling side out.
> In fact I'm looking for more
> sinclair-clones.
> I already got a CIP03, Robik, HC91, HC2000, Jet, Sintez II, 2
> Olimpiks,
I think I can honestly say, I've not heard of *any* of them!
> TC2048 and TS2068.
Or them!
> A russian spectr 48 is on it's way.
Ah, I've heard of that one, I think.
Are they all ZX80/81/Spectrum clones, or are there any other QL-based
ones?
>From: "Hans Franke" <Hans.Franke(a)mch20.sbs.de>
>
>> > Hmm... Doesn't think this is a computer, eh? Wonder what it *is* then?
It
>> > calculates, and provides a results of those calculations into some kind of
>> > output -- usually on paper.
>
>> Calling an Enigma a computer is really stretching the definition. They
>> are incredibly simple machines - the internal circuitry consists of not
>> much more than a battery, wires, the wheels (fancy rotary switches,
>> basically), a plugboard, and a bunch of lightbulbs.
>
>Well, as far as it goes, a computer needs to be able to:
>
>a) have a stored (changeable) programm
>b) execute instructions conditionaly
>c) do a loop
>sometimes also cited:
>d) a way for input/output
>
>of these basics, the Enigma is only good for the first one,
>since the wheels can be seen as the programm, and they where
>changeable. None of the other two conditions are met, since
>there is no loop and no conditional operations ... well, ok,
>one may see the repetive execution of the ecryption programm
>as a loop, but then the conditional execution is still missing.
Hi Hans
I think this one does have the ability to do a loop.
The rotating wheels constitutes a three level loop.
In fact, it is hard wired to loop.
Lets see:
a. Changing wheels and order changes stored program
b. Hitting different keys causes conditional change of output
c. Wheels generate nested loops
d. Keyboard and display form I/O
It looks like it meets your list.
Dwight
>From: "Bill Kotaska" <bkotaska(a)earthlink.net>
>
>Hello,
>I am new to this group but have been reading the posts occasionally before
>finally joining. The site comes up alot when searching for info on old
>machines. I am interested in any type of old computer especially the single
>board trainer types from the early days of the microprocessors. I have built
>my own trainer based on the Intel 4004/4040 and have started to put a web site
>together with pics and info. It is in the early stages though -
>http://home.earthlink.net/~bkotaska/mcs4_micro.htm .
>
---snip---
Hi
I have a SIM4 but mine doesn't have the nice LCD read out that
yours has. I wrote an assembler as well. Mine is single pass
but I can still do forward references by having the lables self
resolve them selves as their location is assigned. I also have
a simualtor that I wrote. It is built around the SIM4 board.
Most 4004 systems have a lot of hardware dependencies since
not all used things like the 4002's for RAMs or the normal
I/O methods.
Dwight
