test-drb May 2008

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

199 participants
350 discussions

by tshoppa＠wmata.com

Andrew wrote: > I am interested in PAL / GAL programming and would > like to buy a book on the subject. Does anyone have > any recommendation(s)? Alternatively, there may > be websites with PAL / GAL programming how to > guides. Those would be useful > too. I have a rough idea using PALASM but it has been > a long time since I have used anything like it. Since you mentioned it... and since this IS classiccmp... The first version of PALASM I used was back in 1984 or 1985, and it ran on a VAX and a PDP-11. If I recall correctly, it came as Fortran source code and was from MMI, the big seller (at the time) of PAL's. The MMI databooks of the era were very good at convincing old stuck-in-the-mud-types like me that PAL's were a huge improvement over discrete logic, showing how logic equations map into blowing diodes, and blowing diodes in a PAL results in exactly the function you wanted to begin with. If I google for pages with MMI, PALASM, and Fortran, I see several pages that would help you go this route. As a practical matter, for a modern board, you'd probably use gate arrays for all but the most straightforward decoding to do it really modern. Tim.

16 years, 7 months

Emulation vs. "the real thing" was: Re: Minimal CP-M SBC design

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: Emulation vs. "the real thing" was: Re: Minimal CP-M SBC design > From: "Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com> > Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 10:00:33 -0700 > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > >Allison wrote: > >> Where it works, I want to emulate a PDP1, or replace a PDP-11. Where >> it doesn't work so well is when I want to run VMS on a MicroVAX with >> performance in the NVAX realm. > >As you stated, it depends upon what you want to do. > >22Nice was written in response to those, who, back in 1986 still had >x80 CP/M systems and were looking to migrate to the PC. It was the >answer to the question "...But how do I get my old <fill in the >application name> to work>?" The goal was not emulation of a Z80/8080 >per se, but finding a way to make the transition to the MS-DOS world >as seamless as possible. We didn't care about the >Osborne/Kaypro/whatever experience or the CP/M experience, only how >to get people going on a new platform. By and large, it worked >pretty well, with no drivers, TSRs or knowledge about CP/M. You >renamed your .COM files, ran GENCOM on them and you were off and >running. The SUBMIT capability, for example, was deeemd superflous, >as the MS-DOS BAT capability was better in just about every way and >simple enough to adapt to. (The first versions of 22Nice ran on a >Compupro 85/88 S-100 machine, but that's another story). > >22Disk was written solely as a way to get files to 22Nice. We'd >considered just making the package read-only, but "in for a penny, in >for a pound" thinking produced that bit of creeping featurism. > >To a CP/M purist, this approach (not providing an isolated emulated >Z80 that you could load CP/M into) was probably heresy, but it worked >well enough and accomplished the goal. The rise of better PC >software eventually relegated 22Nice to the back burner, as that was >seen as the ultimate objective. Well not a purist. I've been using myz80 since around 94ish on PCs for appliactions coding and other stuff. Sicne then I've added Dave Dunfields Altair/Horizon Em,ulator that has a few things I use. Also 22nice as well. However I didnt' ened it to port old z80 apps to the PC I found enough PC stuff to do the same or better that I didn't need that. >I'd be lost without uC emulators today--they provide a convenient >quick code check without the labor of trying to figure out what the >heck is going on in that little block of plastic. But my reason for >using an emulator there is very different from that of using 22Nice-- >I'm not interested in getting rid of the uC, but getting *to* it. ;) Like Blackfin or PIC. >I'll use an emulator to satisfy my curiosity for hard-to-get old >hardware. I've used the SIMH 1620 emulator to scratch an itch in my >brain about some code I wrote 40+ years ago, but I would never >confuse that with the actual experience of using a 1620 with the >blinkenlights, parity checks, clackety console typewriter and >glacially slow execution. Nor do I have the will or resources to >resurrect or construct my own CADET. Nor do I want one in my office. ;) In somce ases MYz80 is far mroe capable or SIMH or any of the many others as I can besitting anywhere running the sim on a small laptop that I'd have any way rather than dragging my PX8 along as well. >Sometimes, I'll use an emulator to figure out how some old piece of >software worked, such as WPS-I on an old DECStation. The emulator in >this case is better than the real thing, because I can modify the >emulator code to show me what's happening internally. This would be >at least very difficult on the real hardware--even if I really had it >at hand. Yes, it's a debugger and tool. >This gets back to why I questioned the lack of diskette drives on a >"real" Z80 design running CP/M. It seemed to me that if one is after >an "experience" and is willing to go to considerable lengths to get >it, that it should be as accurate and complete as possible. While 3D >computer simulation of skydiving can be made to be very accurate, >there's nothing like jumping out of a real aircraft for realism. >Having noiseless, crashproof RAM-drives just wouldn't do it for me. ;) Having had noisy crash prone drives ( and still having many) if I want to build to explore some part/hack of CP/M it's usually not writing yafd (yet another floppy driver). CF allows me to build and pay attention to other things that might be more hardware and software intensive. Examples over the years is low DC power systems, page mappers and the memory management software. Both hard to do in a sim but the sim can help in creating the code. >It all depends upon what your objective is. It always do. ;) Allison >Cheers, >Chuck

16 years, 7 months

book on PAL/GAL programming?

by cclist＠sydex.com

> Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 13:27:51 +0000 > From: Ethan Dicks > I still build a lot of hobby projects with GALs (like PALs, but > with much more flexible input and output configurations) - I > don't think I've built a Spare Time Gizmos product yet that didn't > have at least one 16V8 or 22V10. Gate Arrays might be handy for > larger projects, but you can still pack a *lot* into a 20 or 24-pin > GAL. If someone were just starting out with GAL/PALs, wouldn't PEEL be the best choice rather than fuse-programmed devices? At least you'd get a second chance if you flubbed your first try--and they're basically the same packaging. Cheers, Chuck

16 years, 7 months

Do you have a Tektronix 4010? Want a screen capture for it?

by legalize＠xmission.com

Hi, While looking at the service manual for the Tektronix 4010/4010-1 and 4014/4014-1 terminals, I came up with an idea for creating a screen capture card for them using the principles from the Tektronix 4631 hard copy unit for the terminals. This would give you the ability to capture a pixel image from the Tektronix terminal's display tube. How many people would be interested in such a project? -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/download/index.html> Legalize Adulthood! <http://blogs.xmission.com/legalize/>

16 years, 7 months

RT-11 V4 & V5 manuals online?

by brad＠heeltoe.com

Hi I have hard copies of V4 and V5 RT-11 manuals. I'd like to keep the V5 manuals but I'd like to get rid of the V4 manuals. Have they all been scanned and are on line? I looked on manx and bitsavers and I found a few v4 manuals but not everything. Should I figure out what I have which is not on line and scan that? Or am I wasting my time? For instance, I just scanned (as a test of 2 sided) AA-5285F-TC, which is already online, but I can't find AA-K724A-TC (BASIC-11/RT-11 Installation and release notes, for V4 RT-11) so I assume that is not scanned. I just don't want to pitch these if they are not available (which is hard to believe, as I think what I have is very common) -brad

16 years, 7 months

Emulation vs. "the real thing" was: Re: Minimal CP-M SBC design

by cclist＠sydex.com

Allison wrote: > Where it works, I want to emulate a PDP1, or replace a PDP-11. Where > it doesn't work so well is when I want to run VMS on a MicroVAX with > performance in the NVAX realm. As you stated, it depends upon what you want to do. 22Nice was written in response to those, who, back in 1986 still had x80 CP/M systems and were looking to migrate to the PC. It was the answer to the question "...But how do I get my old <fill in the application name> to work>?" The goal was not emulation of a Z80/8080 per se, but finding a way to make the transition to the MS-DOS world as seamless as possible. We didn't care about the Osborne/Kaypro/whatever experience or the CP/M experience, only how to get people going on a new platform. By and large, it worked pretty well, with no drivers, TSRs or knowledge about CP/M. You renamed your .COM files, ran GENCOM on them and you were off and running. The SUBMIT capability, for example, was deeemd superflous, as the MS-DOS BAT capability was better in just about every way and simple enough to adapt to. (The first versions of 22Nice ran on a Compupro 85/88 S-100 machine, but that's another story). 22Disk was written solely as a way to get files to 22Nice. We'd considered just making the package read-only, but "in for a penny, in for a pound" thinking produced that bit of creeping featurism. To a CP/M purist, this approach (not providing an isolated emulated Z80 that you could load CP/M into) was probably heresy, but it worked well enough and accomplished the goal. The rise of better PC software eventually relegated 22Nice to the back burner, as that was seen as the ultimate objective. I'd be lost without uC emulators today--they provide a convenient quick code check without the labor of trying to figure out what the heck is going on in that little block of plastic. But my reason for using an emulator there is very different from that of using 22Nice-- I'm not interested in getting rid of the uC, but getting *to* it. I'll use an emulator to satisfy my curiosity for hard-to-get old hardware. I've used the SIMH 1620 emulator to scratch an itch in my brain about some code I wrote 40+ years ago, but I would never confuse that with the actual experience of using a 1620 with the blinkenlights, parity checks, clackety console typewriter and glacially slow execution. Nor do I have the will or resources to resurrect or construct my own CADET. Nor do I want one in my office. Sometimes, I'll use an emulator to figure out how some old piece of software worked, such as WPS-I on an old DECStation. The emulator in this case is better than the real thing, because I can modify the emulator code to show me what's happening internally. This would be at least very difficult on the real hardware--even if I really had it at hand. This gets back to why I questioned the lack of diskette drives on a "real" Z80 design running CP/M. It seemed to me that if one is after an "experience" and is willing to go to considerable lengths to get it, that it should be as accurate and complete as possible. While 3D computer simulation of skydiving can be made to be very accurate, there's nothing like jumping out of a real aircraft for realism. Having noiseless, crashproof RAM-drives just wouldn't do it for me. It all depends upon what your objective is. Cheers, Chuck

16 years, 7 months

Mac LC3 in Maine/North Carolina

by mtapley＠swri.edu

Mac collectors, I was contacted by Kathy or Rick, who are moving from Maine to North Carolina and would like to find a good home for their Macintosh LC III and printer. Included are: >Macintosh LC III >StyleWriter >MouseStick II > >I have the original system disks & manuals as well as the following >software/games: > >Stellar 7 >PGA Tour Golf >Word Muchers >Where in the World is Carmen San Diego >Kings Quest V >Casino Game Pack >Math Blaster > >Also have some user manuals: Norton Utilities, Mac for Dummies, SAM >User Manual, 1001 Hints/Tips for Macs They are willing to ship. They can be contacted at kreaton(at)roadrunner.com for a while, but that address will likely change (and it may take a few weeks for the new one to appear). If you can't contact them there, try me at mtapley(at)swri.edu and I'll do my best to forward the message. -- - Mark, 210-379-4635 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Large Asteroids headed toward planets inhabited by beings that don't have technology adequate to stop them: Think of it as Evolution in Fast-Forward.

16 years, 7 months

Cracking open a Compudyne case

by ibgator56＠verizon.net

Hello, I say this old post about your Compudyne case. Do you still have it? All the best, Robert

16 years, 7 months

Support for RT-11

by jhfinedp3k＠compsys.to

An old client has requested help with hardware and software support for some very old PDP-11 systems running RT-11. The best solution may be to use E11 rather than fixing some of the old hardware. Another reason that using E11 would probably be the best solution is that there may be reports that take up to a day to produce using real DEC hardware. Since my estimate with E11 for a current 3 GHz CPU is about 100 times the speed of a PDP-11/93, these reports would take less than 30 minutes. An RT-11 license will also need to be purchased. Does anyone have an e-mail address for Mentec? I contacted John Wilson a few weeks ago, but have not had a response. Sincerely yours, Jerome Fine

16 years, 7 months

HP 4952A Software

by gordon.oliver＠optusnet.com.au

Kenn, I saw you advice regarding the HO4952A software and the LIF floppy format and as a hp4952A owner, I'm wondering if you know anywhere I could get a copy of the utilities floppy? Gordon Oliver Australia

16 years, 7 months

← Newer
1
...
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
...
35
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

test-drb May 2008