>When this happens with a floppy drive, it is often due to the data cable
having
>being put on upside down, causing all the active signals to be grounded and
>resulting in the drive being selected all the time. Perhaps a similar
cabling
>issue could cause this with an ST-225?
I had the same idea until I switched the drive ID from 0 to 1.
The BUSY light is now off and remains off on the drive until I tell DISKUTIL
that the drive I want to work with is on channel 1 and not channel 0, at
which point it probes for the drive (if it finds nothing it says the drive
is not ready and asks to specify another drive), the BUSY light comes on and
we get the same issue as before where it knows there's a drive but it can't
format and says the disk is bad. The light WILL go out if the system reset
is toggled which is probably because the controller is reset in the process.
The cabling is keyed on the edge connector side and pin 1 is noted on both
the ribbon cable and the header on the disk controller so there's no
probable chance the wiring is wrong.
I don't see why it could be trying to find an existing error map AFTER I
specify what the factory had printed on it. It would make more sense to
search for that BEFORE it prompted me to specify it.
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a166/ballsandy/Computer%20related/CRW_778
9.jpg) It could be ignoring it like you said but there's no way to try with
a differently formatted disk at this time.
Unsure if WRITE PROTECT is stuck. Seagate's own papers don't even mention a
write protect jumper so I assume it simply does not exist for the drive.
(ftp://ftp.seagate.com/techsuppt/mfm/st225.txt)
I also don't see WRITE PROTECT listed as a pin on the ST506/412 interface
cabling.
According to this website
(http://nemesis.lonestar.org/computers/tandy/hardware/storage/mfm.html) I
finally managed to get hold of a Type 4 hard disk controller for the TRS-80
Model II/16/6000 family of computers (which looks like this:
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a166/ballsandy/Computer%20related/CRW_7791
.jpg)
Sourcing the external drive enclosures for Tandy systems is near impossible
unless you have a lot of spare money handy so I instead did some research
and mounted a Seagate ST-225 INSIDE the computer on a custom made mounting
bracket over the PSU.
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a166/ballsandy/Computer%20related/100_276
9.jpg)
The drive is a known good drive and formats and boots under MS-DOS. In order
to run it under Xenix 1.03 I need to format it again using DISKUTIL. The
controller can see the drive and seems to know it's ready but the problem is
that the utility instantly fails the entire disk the moment you start the
format.
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a166/ballsandy/Computer%20related/CRW_779
0.jpg)
Tried with other ST-412 interface drives (full height, half height and 3.5")
and they all do the exact same thing. Lonestar.org states that the '225
SHOULD be compatible with my controller. I looked up any documentation I
could find and I see nothing about any sort of configuration the controller
that needs to be set to support the drive. It should just plug in and work.
The only thing I seem to find odd is the BUSY light on the drive is stuck on
when the controller is attached which seems suspicious.
Anyone here got a slue how I should be tacking this problem?
Hi all,
This is one I've been working on for a bit without success, and I'm hoping
the community has some ideas to offer.
I'm attempting to recover the Lisa Xenix images on BitSavers so I can boot
up a Lisa for an exhibit. I've managed to get the images onto a Mac IIci
over the network (rather than through the dance of PC to Mac file
formats), but DiskCopy 4.2 doesn't recognize them. I used the boot.dc42
image on LisaEm and got it to boot as far as it will (Ray acknowledges in
the documents that Xenix doesn't work on LisaEm yet), but of course the
emulation is likely written to the image: still, it suggests the images
are likely OK.
I found information that suggested it was necessary to use an older Mac to
generate the correct disk format: I've formatted my 400K disks on a Mac
Plus under System 6.0.3, and run DC on that Mac, too. Still no joy.
Any suggestions? Thanks -- Ian
any stash of MODEM info? Bitsavers not much.... unless I am looking in
wrong places.
We have some we have accumulated set aside here waiting for the day
of a fast scanner but want to thin the stack if it has already been done
elsewhere.
cc me offlist also... I do not always read my digest file.
thanks Ed Sharpe _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org)
On 2013-01-01 19:00, Dave McGuire<mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/31/2012 04:39 PM, Rob Jarratt wrote:
>>> >> Straight 11M (non-plus) does. (fits in 10 actually) Early RSTS/E, like
>> >v8,
>>> >>should, but not 10 and likely not 9. RT11 does.
>> >
>> >BitSavers looks like it has 11M 4.0 in a 19MB virtual tape, here:
>> >http://bitsavers.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/bits/DEC/pdp11/magtapes/rsx11m/
>> >Assuming that is the right one to go for?
>> >
>> >I know next to nothing about RSX, what is the difference between plus and
>> >non-plus?
> Oh jeeze, lots of stuff...I'm quite drunk at the moment, but I seem to
> recall..named directories being a biggie. Johnny (if he's montoring)
> can expound.
Since my name was mentioned...
There are plenty of differences. Virtual terminals for one. Which also
means that only M+ have batch queues. Named directories. Logical names.
Variable send/receive. Secondary pool. Split I/D space support.
Supervisor mode libraries. Accounting. Online reconfiguration. Mixed
massbuses (probably not that big win today, when people run simulators
anyway). Memory is managed slightly differently. I think that only M+
have disk shadowing and disk caching (also perhaps less used in emulated
systems).
Lots of tasks end up having more memory available in M+, which means
they can handle more data, or have more capabilities. This also affects
things like SYSGEN, which in M+ is rather more user friendly.
There are probably more things, if I think some more. But this gives a
fair idea. M+ is basically more.
> I ran 11M (non-plus) on an 11/34 for many years. Rock solid, fast,
> very nice OS.
Agree. 11M is fine. It's just that if you can run M+, I'd recommend it.
But it do require much more of the hardware.
It takes way more memory, and it requires certain features in the CPU,
that 11M do not.
11M can be run on basically any PDP-11, as long as you have atleast
about 56K of memory (Better with more, of course.)
Johnny
I'm still digging. I found more 550 stuff. I think this is everything
that came with the 550. Here's a chance for you 550 owner's to get the
whole set at one shot!
Original DS-DOS box and invoice.
Original Sanyo Easywriter ver 1.3 disk
Original Sanyo disk box with 550 dos ver 2.11 and BASIC 1.25, two
original Sanyo disk for InfoStar (set B disk 2 and 3 of 4; disks 1 and 4
are below), original Sanyo disk for DOS 1.25 and BASIC ver 1.1
Original Sanyo disk box with all three original disk of set A, WordStar
and CalcStar and a backup copy of DS-DOS.
Two card board dummy disks used to protect the floppy drives duing shipment.
Joe
>
>A few weeks ago we were talking about the Sanyo 550 series and someone
mentioned one of the alternates operating systems that supported 80 track
drives in the 550. I said that was DS-DOS by Michtron.
>
> Today I found an old Sanyo disk package with four disks for the 550. One
of them is DS DOS 2.11, one is InfoStar, one is MailMerge/SpellStar and the
other is a disk of misc utilities. The first three are original disks. In
additon, the InfoStar, MailMerge/SpellStar are Sanyo labeled disks that
came with the 550. If anyone wants them, trade me something I can use and
they're all your's.
>
> Joe
Howdy,
I'm looking for a source for a front bezel / plate / panel for a Sun
2/120. Anyone happen to know where I might be able to obtain one?
(I'd also be interested in the correct Mouse / Keyboard that goes with
the Sun 2 series)
I'm slowly working on restoring it, and the panel is the major missing
piece. (I just recently found a replacement power supply, so I hope
to be able to get it to boot shortly...)
Thanks.
Earl
Purely out of curiosity, is anyone aware of the possible existence
of LVD/SE SCSI (e.g. HD68) over UTP (RJ45) extenders? I'm aware
that one normally goes for FC, or a SCSI<=>FC bridge, but those
tend to be rather pricey.
- MG
This was software me my parents used in the 1980s on
our family computer. Does anyone know how and where
to obtain this, for old time's sake?
Thanks in advance.
- MG