> he happened to drop that he had a A/UX tape that he could not read as his tape
> drive had "gone goo" It turns out to be A/UX 1.1 (!)
I really hope he didn't discover this by attempting to read the tape. If so,
he now has goo on the tape, and it will be extremely difficult to recover.
FWIW, I have an image of A/UX 1.0, made in the days when the only way to get
a copy was to go over to Bubb Road with a disc and have the original A/UX
group clone it for you.
Hello all. I am new to this list, and while I've posted comments before,
that was without formal introduction, so here goes.
I am a 16 year old high school student who works with computer daily. I
perfer to work with older systems (386s are fun!) because they are just
so damned reliable. Mainly, I do software development, but when I have
time, I uhh... can't remember.
Ahh, what the hell...
You can just call me segin.
The real problem with C++ for kernel modules is: the language just sucks.
-- Linus Torvalds
On Aug 19 2006, 9:38, Wolfe, Julian wrote:
> I got the 11/34 up and running, and I loaded XXDP. It fails the trap
> test. The instructions state you should examine the stack pointer
> (777706) which shows it to be a value of 000470. This is supposed to
> tell you the address of the Program Counter, right? So I load address
> 470, and the value is 000330. What instruction is failing? Am I
> reading this right?
Yes, the stack pointer points to the last address used on the stack,
and that will be the value of the PC when it called the error
subroutine, or to put it another way, the address of the next
instruction to be executed had the JSR not been taken. It's failing at
whatever test was just before location 330 -- which is surprisingly
low. You'd need to look at the listing to see what the test was.
Pete Peter Turnbull
University of York
Hello All. I'm new to this list and would like some advice on learning the inner workings of vintage computers. I have some basic experience with electronics and some simple measurement tools (multimeter, logic probe). So far, I've repaired a couple of older machines (Kaypro's, Compaq portables) but this has amounted to swapping dead hard or floppy drives, replacing dead batteries, etc. So here are my questions: (1) Is there a "trainer" system good for learning about microcomputer design and operation, and (2) would an oscilloscope be useful for this purpose, and if so, what Mhz rating is needed to work on older machines? I've noticed the price is directly proportional to this number! Thanks, John R.
>>> I think that this just squeaks in as being on topic.
Granted, this is the on- and off-topic list, vs. cctech as frequently (and
recently!) noted here. But having said that, and at the risk of starting
the you-know-what conversation, I * strongly * disagree with putting
"Pentium" (or anything newer than most computers based on a 286/386) into
the on-topicness of classiccmp. I know this is supposed to be a vaguely
family-friendly list and all, but as for the fucking 10-year-rule, I say
let's fucking throw it away and never fucking bring it up again.
Chronological rules don't work because of Moore's Law.
From: "Jay West" <jwest at classiccmp.org>
> > I seem to recall a supercomputer made by Intel that used Pentiums. I
> > forget the name though, but it was quite a behemoth of a machine from what
> > little I recall (many CPUs).
>Wasn't that "The Connection Machine"?
Nope. Connection Machines were made by Thinking Machines, Inc., and they
don't use Pentiums. They use gobs (up to something like 16k) of proprietary
The ASCI Red supercomputer built by Intel used PPros; see
http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/aries/course/notes/ascii_red.pdf. I think
the compute nodes were pretty off-the-shelf SMP PPro designs, so some might
consider it off-topic.
O.K. - this is pushing it alot, but I'd rather buy from someone I know than
an e-bay unknown.
I'm looking for an UltraSPARC IIi module for Sun Darwin boards
(Ultra 5/10), 333MHz or 360MHz. Thought someone might
have upgraded and have one in their junk box.
$9+ shipping for 333, perhaps more for a 360?