test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: Minimal CP-M SBC design > From: "Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com> > Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 11:27:50 -0700 > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > >> Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 12:29:24 -0400 >> From: Dave McGuire > >> I dunno Chuck...the only reason more CP/M systems weren't ROM- >> resident back in the day was due to convention, not technical >> restrictions. I (personally) don't think there's anything >> non-"period" about ROM-ing CP/M. > >It's not the ROM-ing of CP/M that disturbs me, but rather the >"disklessness" of the thing. Wasn't the whole idea of CP/M >originally to give you something to manage files on your floppy >drives? I mean, that's what the bulk of the code in CP/M is for-- >heaven knows, the support for other I/O is nothing to write home >about. It would not be diskless only floppy less. > >If one wants to enjoy a "vintage" experience, what sense is there in >being diskless? At any rate, even something as simple as a WD1770- >type controller added to the design would give that capability with a >minimum of support "glue". IF you really want to enjoy the vintage experience you can include a floppy controller but be warned...They are a PAIN to use and program. The most important detail is the unless you include DMA (more parts) the cpu does all the heavy lifiting in real time and that requires tight code or some hardware tricks (more parts). It stops getting simple real fast. Then there are the various floppies with their interface quirks. IDE and CF have simple interfaces, they do not have to be written or read in real time, they are obtailable. FYI reading and writing in real time for a 5.25" DD floppy (seriously anything less than 360K is useless) requires the CPU to fetch/put a byte every 16uS without delay and in somecase the worst case timing for that is 14us. Write a simple routine in Z80 at 4mhz that does that, reliabily. Forget using 1.44MB floppies as doing that in under 8uS is out of the question without a 8mhz Z80, fast ram to support it, fast Eprom and all the other nice things that go with faster. FYI: at 4ux a CPU cycle is .25uS and the shortest instruction is nop at 4 cycles (no wait states) or 1us and a DJNZ is around 7/10 cycles or 1.75uS to 2.5uS... the timing picture is tight. Also there is the problem of getting some FDCs like the 1770,2793 and other more highly integrated chips that aren't 44 pin QFP. >Alternatively, one could stay diskless and add a sound-effects module >to emulate the "chunk" and "grrr" of a head-load and seek--and the >"thunk-click" of a drive door being opened and a floppy inserted. How many more parts do you think you need for that? >I still don't have the hang of this "vintage" thing yet, probably >because I'm vintage myself. Please forgive my density... ;) having built my first Altair in january 1975 and prior to that for work an 8008 when it was new.. what me vintage? Allison

17 years, 11 months

IBM 129 manual

by paul0926＠comcast.net

I just got my hands on an old IBM 129 keypunch. It seems to power on, but I have no idea how to operate or test it. Anyone know there there might be a manual? I tried all the usual sources (bitsavers, etc) with no luck. I found some old keypunch manuals, but not for this particular model. Thanks. Paul

17 years, 11 months

Classic Gaming Expo cancelled

by evan＠snarc.net

http://www.cgexpo.com/ Nothing to do with me, just passing along the message.

17 years, 11 months

Minimal CP-M SBC design

by cclist＠sydex.com

> Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 10:59:35 -0700 (PDT) > From: "Eric Smith" > The lead pitch of shrink DIP packages is 0.070 inch (1.78 mm). I > haven't seen any 0.050 (1.27 mm) inch DIPs. Shrink DIPs were popular > with Japanese semi companies, but never caught on very well with US > companies, most of which skipped those and went straight to PLCC and > PQFP packages. Right you are--I dug out a couple of shrink DIPs and they are indeed 0.070 inch. Unless you're going right to PCB, these are a real pain to deal with today--hard to find sockets, odd spacing, etc. I think I've still got a couple of 64180s in this package kicking around somewhere. Thanks for the correction. Cheers, Chuck

17 years, 11 months

any STD bus users or developers?

by cclist＠sydex.com

> PCBs with edge connectors really drive the costs up because specialized > prototype boards are required or if you manufacture the PCBs using edge > connectors and gold fingers are extra. It's very strange--at one time Radio Shack (under their "Archer" brand) sold 22/44 position edge-connector prototyping cards, in phenolic, rather than FR4 and with tinned, rather than gold-plated fingers. Vector had similar prototype cards as well. It's kind of hard to believe that they're all gone now, since at one time, they were very common. Cheers, Chuck

17 years, 11 months

Retro DIY CPUs

by cclist＠sydex.com

Speaking of Z80 build-it-yourself boards, has anyone had any experience with the Russian PDP-11 clone chips, e.g. KH1801BM4? How difficult are they to obtain and how compatible are they with the real thing? The photos of ones that I've seen have date codes in the 90s, so they can't be that rare. Cheers, Chuck

17 years, 11 months

Serial cable mysteries

by lynchaj＠yahoo.com

Hi, I am working on a home brew SBC and am trying to build a serial cable for it. Are there any RS-232 serial port gurus who could help me plumb out a custom cable? The SBC serial connection works but as it currently is configured it only works as 3 wire serial with no flow control (ie, RD, TD, & GND pins). I would very much like to make the serial cable and SBC support hardware flow control. Having the DSR/DTR pins connected should allow it. However the PC is expecting CTS/RTS hardware flow control. My SBC UART is wired so that the RD, TD, DTR, DSR, and GND pins are brought to the serial connector. I probably should have brought CTS & RTS out but it is too late to change it now. I have wired a cable like this which works for 3 wire serial (no flow control) PC DB25 (9 to 25 pin cable) SBC (25 pin female) 2 TD----------------------RD 3 RD----------------------TD 7 GND---------------------GND 6 DSR---------------------DTR 20 DTR---------------------DSR Obviously this cable does not support hardware flow control because when I try to connect with hardware flow control enabled, I can see the SBC boot message on the terminal screen but cannot send characters from the PC to the SBC. So I have been experimenting trying to figure out how to fix this. I got the data sheet for the 16C550 and a serial port breakout box. After much combinations, I discovered that if I connect a jumper between the PC serial port pins 5 (PC CTS) and pin 20 (SBC DSR) then the serial port *DOES* support hardware flow control. At least it appears to. I get the feeling though that I am mixing dissimilar control signals and it is confusing me. My question is, does the above configuration with the PC CTS and SBC DSR connected really use hardware flow control or is it just "faking out" the PC and/or SBC UART? As a follow on, are both sides actually getting hardware flow control or is it just one side or the other? This is my new and improved serial cable with *appears* to support hardware flow control. Is there any way to test this? PC DB25 (9 to 25 pin cable) SBC (25 pin female) 2 TD----------------------RD 3 RD----------------------TD 7 GND---------------------GND 6 DSR---------------------DTR 20 DTR----+----------------DSR 5 CTS----+ Thanks in advance for any help! Andrew Lynch

17 years, 11 months

Minimal CP-M SBC design

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: Minimal CP-M SBC design > From: Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> > Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 12:29:24 -0400 > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org> > >On May 9, 2008, at 12:36 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: >>> There is no requriement to boot the system from "disk" >>> and making that change can make bring up simpler. >> >> But that's where the "authentic" aspect fails me. Why run a >> "vintage" CP/M system without the experience a disk drive gives you? >> You'll be deprived of the "BDOS Err on B:" messages. What fun is >> that? >> >> One might as well run an emulation program on a PeeCee. I wouldn't >> be at all surpised to find that someone's done it for the iPod Touch-- >> there already exists a NEC 9801 emulator for that platform. > > I dunno Chuck...the only reason more CP/M systems weren't ROM- >resident back in the day was due to convention, not technical >restrictions. I (personally) don't think there's anything >non-"period" about ROM-ing CP/M. Worked for the PX8 and likely a few others. Actually the real and most likely reason is you needed 8k or so of rom and back when Eprom (or enough eprom) that size was a bit later and even then expensive for a while. However by around 84ish 8 and 16k parts were getting reasonable and that is plenty enough space. Besides booting from rom is like booting from disk, the differnce is the rom is read only and doesn't rotate. Oh it is simpler. As to "BDOS Err on B:" you can still have that if the system only boots from rom and still expects a floppy drive (or other removable media). Personally that is one of the error messages that I can do without. ;) Allison > > -Dave >> > > >-- >Dave McGuire >Port Charlotte, FL >

17 years, 11 months

Minimal CP-M SBC design

by lynchaj＠yahoo.com

> Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 12:29:24 -0400 > From: Dave McGuire > I dunno Chuck...the only reason more CP/M systems weren't ROM- > resident back in the day was due to convention, not technical > restrictions. I (personally) don't think there's anything > non-"period" about ROM-ing CP/M. It's not the ROM-ing of CP/M that disturbs me, but rather the "disklessness" of the thing. Wasn't the whole idea of CP/M originally to give you something to manage files on your floppy drives? I mean, that's what the bulk of the code in CP/M is for-- heaven knows, the support for other I/O is nothing to write home about. If one wants to enjoy a "vintage" experience, what sense is there in being diskless? At any rate, even something as simple as a WD1770- type controller added to the design would give that capability with a minimum of support "glue". Alternatively, one could stay diskless and add a sound-effects module to emulate the "chunk" and "grrr" of a head-load and seek--and the "thunk-click" of a drive door being opened and a floppy inserted. I still don't have the hang of this "vintage" thing yet, probably because I'm vintage myself. Please forgive my density... Cheers, Chuck -----REPLY----- Hi Chuck, I hear what you are saying and agree there is something just very disconcerting about diskless CP/M computers. However, CP/M in the CBIOS is really just about block devices and the OS really could care less whether you attach a 8" SSSD floppy, a CF drive or a ROM. It is all the same to the BDOS. My goal here is to *eventually* allow expansion to include IDE and floppy drives. As a matter of fact, the CBIOS does support IDE hard disks already but requires the interface IO card and the ECB backplane to attach it to the SBC. I have an IDE hard disk with CP/M format and some programs on it. My goal with the SBC using ROM/RAM drives was to allow something minimal to operate as a SBC and have some functionality with the option to expand to as desired. I am trying for a modular, low cost approach with easy to build increments. Assuming I get this SBC respun and into manufacturing my next project is to redo my ECB backplane as a PCB. After that will be the disk IO board and bus debuggers which are also made from prototype boards. My Test Prototype home brew computer was built entirely with prototype boards and point to point wiring. It supported IDE drives and even had a NEC765 FDC circuit built in. I wrote some software but never got around to test the FDC part since the machine started experiencing reliability problems which I think trace back to poor grounding and power distribution issues. The new PCB SBC version seems much more solid than the prototype did. The SBC is something which works but gives only limited functionality. If that is enough, people can stop there. If they want more they can plug it into the ECB backplane and add peripheral cards. So far only two peripheral cards exist; the disk IO card and the bus debugger. Hopefully more in the future. I have some ideas kicking around in my head but am concentrating on the SBC for now. Thanks and have a nice weekend! Andrew Lynch

17 years, 11 months

IBM 129 manual

by aek＠bitsavers.org

> Anyone know there there > might be a manual? docs now up under http://bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/cardProc/129

17 years, 11 months

Minimal CP-M SBC design

by cclist＠sydex.com

> Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 07:50:46 -0400 > From: Allison > I can make the boot process easier as you can plop the rom in > mappable space. The usual arguement is can you get a Z180 > in a package most people are willing to deal with (64pin dip)? I wouldn't want to deal with the DIP as it's a "skinny" DIP with 0.050 pin spacing, unlike, say, the 68K. While it probably makes little difference on a PCB, it requires an adapter if you're prototyping--and sockets are hard to find. It's easier to use the 68 pin PLCC to keep the spacing--smaller footprint too. > The latter is the shadow rom many have refered to. I usualy do that. > And make the rom BIG so not only can I map it in when I want but also > access part of it (ROMDRIVE). I believe the Amstrad Joyce uses the printer controller to force the necessary boot code onto the Z80 bus. (Tony?) At least I've never seen a boot ROM on a Joyce PCB. > There is no requriement to boot the system from "disk" > and making that change can make bring up simpler. But that's where the "authentic" aspect fails me. Why run a "vintage" CP/M system without the experience a disk drive gives you? You'll be deprived of the "BDOS Err on B:" messages. What fun is that? One might as well run an emulation program on a PeeCee. I wouldn't be at all surpised to find that someone's done it for the iPod Touch-- there already exists a NEC 9801 emulator for that platform. > Deblocking is not too mysterious. The real missing bit in the > Alteraion guide is how the BDOS telegraphs the need to preread > and when to skip it. Page 14, section 12 entitled "Sector Blocking and Deblocking" in the Alteration Guide covers it pretty well. I remember being relieved to find the information after I struggled with 1.4 not having any such mechanism. I don't think it was in 2.0 either, but I can check if anyone's curious. Cheers, Chuck

17 years, 11 months

IMSAI Drive [Imsai original dual 8" disk drive system notes]

by Watzman＠neo.rr.com

The drives used in the original IMSAI disk system were Calcomp 140's (this was with the 2-board IFM/FIB disk controller set). In later versions that supported double density (with the later DIO/PDS 2-board disk controller set), these were changed to identical looking (but electrically different) Calcomp 142's. I have the original Calcomp OEM and service manuals here .... and I have them both in hard copy and as scanned PDF files (someone really lucked out .....). [The drives used by DEC were made for them by Calcomp and had the same faceplate, but I am not sure if they were the same drives or not ... I don't think that they were, but I'm not sure of that.] In the early chassis, Imsai used a Calcomp "PLO" phase locked loop data separator board for each drive (e.g. two of them ... it was a PC board about 4" x 6"). In later chassis, they figured out how to use one single PLO board for both drives. In still later implementations, the PLO was eliminated entirely and data separation was done in the disk controller back in the computer (this did not happen until the DIO/PDS controller replaced the IFM/FIB controller). Also, there was a "short" chassis (early) and a "long" chassis (late). Originally, the chassis had terrible cooling, and a cooling mod kit was developed that consisted of some die-cut cardboard vents and baffles as well as an added fan. The short chassis was too short to house the fan, so when the cooling mod was retrofitted, the fan went on the OUTSIDE back of the case. The later "long" chassis was 2" deeper and had the fan on the inside. In addition to the original Calcomp manuals, I also have an original IMSAI manual on the disk SYSTEM (the original IFM/FIB controller version, not the later DIO/PDS controller version). Unfortunately, I have never scanned that to PDF (it's a bound manual ... I'd have to destroy it). Note that in the original 2-board disk controller, the IFM board went through a lot of revisions, and versions earlier than Rev. 6 were junk. The IFM board is a complete 8080 compute system with it's own 8080 CPU, RAM (2111's, I think) and ROM (two 2708's, I think). I have source code for the IFM firmware, I believe. This board did DMA into the "main" 8080 system memory. It was, for the time, a very elegant design. Unfortunately, it was slow, it REQUIRED the full original CP/M interleave of 6 to work. It was (and therefore is) possible to replace the IFM/FIB controller with a single density Tarbell controller (Western Digital 1771), I did this in a few systems. The result was a MUCH better disk system. In this mod, the PLO board(s) were removed entirely, raw unseparated clock and data were fed back to the [Tarbell single density] controller and the system was 6x faster (could work with no interleave at all), more reliable, lower power and one board instead of two. To do this you put a dip plug into the socket on the Calcomp drives where the PLO had plugged in, that was the only change to the disk box, which connected to the main IMSAI (or other computer) with a 25-conductor flat ribbon cable (DB-25 at both ends). Then you needed a custom cable from a DB-25 socket on the back of the IMSAI to the Tarbell controller, and custom wiring of the Tarbell controller, which was not much more than a "disk controller prototype board" to begin with. I MAY still have my notes on the Tarbell jumpering for that configuration. The may, in fact, be in the PDF file I created of the Tarbell single density manual that was posted on Howard Harte's site.

17 years, 11 months

Vintage Algorist

by dm561＠torfree.net

--------------Original Message: Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 17:53:43 -0700 From: "Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com> Subject: Vintage Algorist http://www.apple.com/science/profiles/hebert/?sr=hotnewshttp://www.app le.com/science/profiles/hebert/?sr=hotnews Describes a fellow in Paris who started with an IBM 704 and moved on to various bits of vintage iron to create art. (He uses a Mac now). Tony will appreciate the mention of the HP 98xx series. Cheers, Chuck --------------Reply/Comment: Not "art," but along the same lines and more practical: http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/08/etch-a-sketch-clock-automatically-draws-… m

17 years, 11 months

WTB: SMC COM81C17 UARTS

by tiggerlasv＠aim.com

Looking for a few SMC COM81C17 UARTS, to repair some vintage computer equipment. This is a 20-pin UART. I don't believe anyone ever made a pin-compatible substitute. Direct replacement only; not interested in any type of kludge. ;-) Shoot me an e-mail if you have some, along with a price. Thanks for your time. . . . T

17 years, 11 months

Vintage Algorist

by cclist＠sydex.com

http://www.apple.com/science/profiles/hebert/?sr=hotnewshttp://www.app le.com/science/profiles/hebert/?sr=hotnews Describes a fellow in Paris who started with an IBM 704 and moved on to various bits of vintage iron to create art. (He uses a Mac now). Tony will appreciate the mention of the HP 98xx series. Cheers, Chuck

17 years, 11 months

any STD bus users or developers?

by lynchaj＠yahoo.com

-----Original Message----- From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Jonas Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:49 PM To: cctech Subject: any STD bus users or developers? I'm getting the itch to get back to Z80 stuff. Has anyone used the STD bus, or have any parts? I have a few card cages and cards but never enough I/O cards! In the least, I was planning on using the STD bus just for expansion cards to a single board computer. -- Jeffrey Jonas -----REPLY----- Hi Jeff, Have you considered STE or ECB bus rather than the STD bus? STD is a fine bus no doubt but as it uses edge connectors, building prototype boards is more difficult I think. STE and ECB bus use a plain DIN 41612 connectors and can be attached to a plain PCB or prototype board. There are still companies supporting the STE bus (ARCOM and others) and some of the parts are still available. I have found that the selection of the PCB form and bus interface is one of the most difficult selections and factors involved in building homebrew computers. PCBs with edge connectors really drive the costs up because specialized prototype boards are required or if you manufacture the PCBs using edge connectors and gold fingers are extra. Thanks! Andrew Lynch

17 years, 11 months

Zilog Zeus

by mknoth＠earthlink.net

Hi Tony, thanks for responding! Would you feel comfortable to copy the distribution tape or create a TAR hard disk backup? It would be a great help. I'm working on emulating a Zeus system based on the East German P8000 towers. It would be very interesting to find out how similar this system actually is to your system. As a background - the East Germans could not get their hands on a Zeus system directly due to US export control laws. However, they seem to 've got it anyway - and so their own Z80, Z8000 ICs as well. Did they actually copy the system from somewhere and reverse engineered it or did they write it from scratch no match exactly the original. Those tapes/disk would be great for reference. Cheers, Matt Tony Duell ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk wrote: > >No real info, alas... > >Zeus was supposedly an acronym for Zilog Enhanced Unix System , or >something similar > >I ahve a Zilog S8000 Model 30 (the large-ish tower machine built in >slices with an SMD hard disk and QIC tape drive). I should have the >(inary) distriution tape for that somewhere, and I hope the hard disk is >still readable (I've not used it for some time, it was fine last time I >used it, and I locked the heads afterwards...). But no source code, or >even full shcemaitcs (YET!). > >-tony

17 years, 11 months

Interconnecting classic computers

by cclist＠sydex.com

Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 17:32:28 -0400 (EDT) From: der Mouse > I think there must be - below some minimum power, pretty much anything > must go in most bands; otherwise, things like spark plugs in car > engines would be illegal because they splatter a little power all > across the RF spectrum. (Not much power, but pretty much clear across > the band.) Do you mean that you folks outside of the US were spared Ron Popiel and "Mr. Microphone"?! Surely you had his "pocket fisherman"... "It makes the perfect Christmas gift!" Yes, the US does permit unlicensed very low power transmission on the radio broadcast bands. I don't recall if there is a specific power mentioned or simply a propogation distance. Right now, I'm listening to the Beeb World Service on a radio in the bedroom, thanks to a low- power FM transmitter attached to the server downstairs. I don't know if there's a similar provision in UK law, but it might be worth investigating... Cheers, Chuck

17 years, 11 months

Casio CFX-40

by Randy.Ferrell＠gd-ais.com

I am looking for any working or not cfw-40s. If you have any or any contacts please let me know? Thanks Randy Ferrell I use it daily for enbedded programming.

17 years, 11 months

PDP-8E diagnostic help needed

by Mark＠Misty.com

Hi, I've got a PDP-8E which I've almost got working. Can anyone here help me figure out this remaining problem? As I examine memory, the address lights count up to 01111, then go back to 00000, instead of 10000. I can manually enter an address higher than 1111, but the 10000 and 100000 bits don't stick -- they go low, as soon as I hit the examine switch to step to the next memory location. I can manually load an address 1000000 or 10000000, and hit examine to see 1000001, 1000010, 1000011, etc..., but once I reach 1001111, it's back to 1000000. It was recommended to me that it might be the carry between E52 and E37, or the E38 input multiplexer for bit 7 (on M8300), so last night I socketed and replaced all three of those ICs, but I still see the same symptoms. I have extender boards, so can access M8300 during operation. I measured the carry line between E52 and E37 go low when I reach 1111, but the light for line 10000 doesn't light on the front panel on the next address, and I see the data from memory location 0000, 0001, etc. repeated, displayed as I continue to step through memory locations, as described above. Of course, if someone has a spare M8300 they would be willing to sell me, that's another option. Mark -- Mark G. Thomas (Mark at Misty.com) voice: 215-591-3695 http://mail-cleaner.com/

17 years, 11 months

Zilog Zeus

by mknoth＠earthlink.net

Al, this is really cool! Basically the complete system documentation. Would there be a chance that somebody put a dump of the Zeus system at this place? Thanks!, Matt >>used it, and I locked the heads afterwards...). But no source code, or > >even full shcemaitcs (YET!). > >are the documents in >http://bitsavers.org/pdf/zilog/s8000 useful

17 years, 11 months

Zilog Zeus

by aek＠bitsavers.org

>used it, and I locked the heads afterwards...). But no source code, or >even full shcemaitcs (YET!). are the documents in http://bitsavers.org/pdf/zilog/s8000 useful?

17 years, 11 months

PDP-8E diagnostic help needed

by gerhard.kreuzer＠liftoff.at

Hi Mark, I have a spare board here in Austria, but its not tested. If you want to have it for test your system, let me know. We will find some smart deal for the shipping costs, I am shure. With best regards Gerhard

17 years, 11 months

IMSAI Drive

by cclist＠sydex.com

> Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 17:07:25 -0700 (PDT) > From: William Maddox > >From what I can see of it, the doors look a lot like the doors on the > Calcomp disk drives used by DEC for the RX01. If you send me a better > picture of it, or check the labelling on the drives, I might be able to > verify this. There is a fellow in town who quite likely has a scrap > drive -- I've seen a lot of the later RX02s that have been scrapped for > motors and heads in his shop. I've still got the docs for the IMSAI floppy box somewhere and can check to make sure, but I believe the drives are Calcomp 103. Miserable things, compared to the Shugart units. Cheers, Chuck

17 years, 11 months

Zilog Zeus

by evan＠snarc.net

>>> Gaaah, it's coming back to haunt me! The NJ Computer Museum has a Zilog System 8000 model 21 Just to clarify, Jeff means the MARCH user group's museum, where we host VCF East, etc. ... we've never called ourselves the "NJ Computer Museum". But, he's correct about the Zeus! It was donated by an individual member a couple of years ago.

17 years, 11 months

Jump to page:

2026

2025

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