test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

by bdwheele＠indiana.edu

I don't suppose anybody knows where one would dig up old unixes for 8086 or 80286 based PCs? Source would be a big bonus. I've been playing with the bcc compiler and the V7 source and just curious what "real" ports looked like. Thanks! Brian

18 years, 9 months

DEC Rainbow Hard drive.

by jba＠sdf.lonestar.org

> Just because we are on the subject already. > > What is the last version of the firmware ? I can't remember exactly, but the 100A was definitely 4.xx series (maybe 4.12?) while the 100B was definitely 5.xx series (maybe 5.03A). I've never seen different values on any Rainbow, though, suggesting that the boot roms were finalized before manufacturing started and never again updated. Could be wrong, though. Some Rainbow's have different character set ROMs, like the Technical Character Set ROM, but that doesn't change the firmware version on the boot menu. -Jeff jba at sdf.lonestar.org SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org

18 years, 9 months

Mac Beige C3 to HP 98789A SOG monitor?

by cclist＠sydex.com

All, I've been digging through my pile of stuff again and figured that my old HP98789A 17" (Sony) monitor might be a good match my my beige Mac G3. Okay, my next step is to wire up an adapter. The HP is RGB (3 BNC) to sync-on-green. I read that the Power Macs don't support SOG, so I need to combine both the HSYNC and VSYNC with green (a couple of 74HCxx gates should do that; I can steal power from the sync signals). Otherwise, it's connect pin 4 to 7 (S0 to S1) on the Mac video connector to signal that I want "RGB 1024x768". Do I have this right? Does anyone have anything to add before I take out my soldering iron? Cheers, Chuck

18 years, 9 months

8-bitters and multi-whatever

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: 8-bitters and multi-whatever > From: "Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com> > Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:51:12 -0700 > To: "Roy J. Tellason" <rtellason at verizon.net>, > "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > >On 10 Sep 2007 at 16:24, Roy J. Tellason wrote: > > >> I remember seeing that in some sales literature and it always did strike me as >> being more spendy than I wanted or could afford to get into. :-) > >For the purist, Multibus has a lot more going for it than any of the >"hobbyist" buses. If you look at the signal layout, it appears that >some thought actually went into the design. AFAIK, Multibus cards in >some incarnation are still being produced or at least sold. > >And the MDS-800 was built like a battleship. Thats and understatement. If you ever moved a MDS800 it was a battleship. >re: CP/M Networking: > >> What does that take on the software side of things? > >A CP/M add-on called CP/NET. The downside is that it takes valuable >memory. CPnet was less than half the software. You still needed a nios, network bios which was often unser created for the specific IO used to network. >PC's had a number of "cheap" networking setups. I've got one here >called "The $25 Network", basically run through serial (maybe >parallel) ports. There were others, some with low-cost cards, such >as "The Invisible Network". I wonder if a ring could be set up using >the old DOS Interlink. Many of those "cheap" PC networking schemes were found in the 8bit world. The interlink like scheme I'd done for going between my S100 crates back in '81 to solve the problem is limted disk and more than one computer needing a disk. CP/M or most other OSs for non 8080/z80 could easily be fooled into redirecting disk IO to a serial port. Though CP/M was modular enough and most widespread it was most often hacked that way. There is however no rule that says a OS must talk to a disk as storage and once that is clear then it's easy to cobble up a packet protocal that transmits the needed data across a serial or parallel port to a willing and enabled host. Some systems like the big S100 crates or multibus running MPM used the bus and some common memory so that multiple CPUs typically z80 with 128k ram, rom and serial IO plus a bus interface and memory manangement for off board memeory. MPM would be the server and CP/M would be the local cpus that users interacted with. It wasn't seen often as it was expensive to ahve the hardware and the average hobbiest at the time rarely had more than one fully functional system and maybe a SBC of the KIM-1, EVK68, AIM65 or SDK85 level. By '81 I had a NS* Horizon, Netronics explorer8085, an Altair, and two NEC PDA-80(sorta s100) for the 8080/8085/z80 realm alone. Only two had a disk controller but they all ran CP/M. When the NS* got a hard disk since that was a $1K investment at the time sharing that resource with the deprived systems was important as back then I didn't have a swarm of floppy drives. So having read and seen networks in use I figured sensing all that over a fast serial port was not unreasonable and after some thought and a few tries it worked. These days people use PCs for that but I personally would rather program z80 than 80x86. >MS-DOS has had some flavor of networking "hooks" for a very long >time. CD-ROM access is implemented as a networked device. I've >implemented a number of foreign filesystem drivers using networking >where file naming conventions or oddball block sizes weren't amenable >to normal DOS filesystem conventions. Thats PCs. ;) Allison

18 years, 9 months

68k Mac development environments

by derschjo＠msu.edu

Hi all -- I'm looking to do a bit of (simple) development targeting a 68k Mac (or two, or three, or six...) and since I've never done any programming on a Mac before I'm curious if anyone out there has any recommendations for a development environment to use or to avoid. I'd prefer C/C++, but I'm flexible :). I'd like to be able to run my code on a Mac Classic/SE (so I need to be able to compile to 68000 code) but I'll be doing the development itself on a IIfx. In case you're interested, I'm writing the software to build a clock of sorts out of a set of six "classic" form factor Macs I have lying around (two Classics, two SEs and two SE/30s). Each computer will display one digit of the time, and will be synchronized over an Appletalk network to keep the system times in sync. Or so goes the theory. Figure it'll be a fun display to have set up, and a somewhat interesting use for some otherwise-idle Macintosh hardware :). Thanks for any suggestions... - Josh

18 years, 9 months

Shelby HamFest

by steerex＠ccvn.com

Hey guys, What is advertised as the "granddaddy of all hamfests" is coming up, at the end of this month, in Shelby North Carolina. I have never been to this particular event and will likely attend this years festivities. Does anyone else on this list plan on attending? Has anyone attended the Shelby hamfest before? Thanks, SteveRob steerex <at> ccvn <dot> com

18 years, 9 months

Motorola Exormacs - disk cable

by g-wright＠att.net

-------------- Original message from Jules Richardson <julesrichardsonuk at yahoo.co.uk>: -------------- > > We've just acquired a Motorola Exormacs system, which is sadly without its > floppy drive cable (40 pins on the Exormacs side, 50 on the 8" floppy unit > (Exordrive III I believe). > > I suspect the floppy side is just straight-through to the drives, but can > anyone confirm that, and does anyone know the pinout on the system unit side > of things? > > Worst-case we'll have to reverse engineer it, but maybe someone knows (we've > got no floppies for the system and no useful manuals unfortunately) > > cheers > > Jules I have a Disk II here and the cable is 40 pin from the back of the drive to te controller card.. If needed it can open it up and see what happens inside. The boot images are on Bit Savers but not set up yet. I have the URL if needed Still working on the NCR's - Jerry Jerry Wright JLC inc g-wright at att.net

18 years, 9 months

Ancient 8086/80286 unixes?

by classiccmp＠memory-alpha.org.uk

Actually, thinking about it, ISTR that the "Jaguar Blaster" never made it to market (despite being demoed at several electronics shows). Which would certainly explain their scarcity, LOL. Anyone know for sure? TTFN - Pete.

18 years, 9 months

Ancient 8086/80286 unixes?

by classiccmp＠memory-alpha.org.uk

Hi, > And I think there was an ARM-2 development system on an >ISA card. Never seen it, though. There was also an Atari Jaguar on an PCI card, Creative Labs' "Jaguar Blaster". They seem to be pretty thin on the ground though, I'd love to get one.... TTFN - Pete.

18 years, 9 months

Ancient 8086/80286 unixes?

by classiccmp＠memory-alpha.org.uk

Hi, > There's at least the Janus card, which implements a basic Atari ST >on an ISA board ... That name sounds familiar, it's likely the one I was thinking of. One of my friends has one (the one I sold all my ST gear to around '92/'92 as it happens) but even though he's mentioned the name to me several times I'm a bit hazy on it. For some reason "Spectrum" or some (probably incredibly vaguely) similar sounding name also lingers at the back of my mind.... > .... i own the 68000 version, but it seems, there was an 68020 >version available too. I *think* there may also be a "TT-on-a-card"....but don't quote me on that (I've never checked). > A DOS based driver is available, that handles all the I/O handling via >the PC. I always wanted to get that driver ported to OS/2 (running Atari >SW in a OS/2 PM-Window is definitely amazing :)), but never got any >technical information ... I've toyed with the idea of getting one of these cards on several occasions, but since the drivers won't run under NT based operating systems they're not of any use to me whatsoever. :-( TTFN - Pete.

18 years, 9 months

Apple boot disks?

by mcguire＠neurotica.com

Is there anyone here with a running Apple ][-class system who would be willing to cut some boot floppies of Apple DOS 3.3 and/or ProDOS and send them to me? I finally got a good composite video monitor and I'm in need of a diversion. This would be for a ][+ and a //e. Thanks, -Dave -- Dave McGuire Port Charlotte, FL Farewell Ophelia, 9/22/1991 - 7/25/2007

18 years, 9 months

Re-finding more items as I open boxes

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

> ---------- > From: John R. Keys Jr. > Reply To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 2:54 PM > To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org > Subject: Re-finding more items as I open boxes > > Found the following while unpacking in the warehouse: <<<<<clipped>>>>>> > Took some other goodies home to play with like the 20th Annv. MAC,... > --- 20th Anniversary Mac? You booger... I may have to grab it when you're not looking. ;-) --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 90581 Mac OS X 10.1.2 - Darwin Kernel Version 5.2: Fri Dec 7 21:39:35 PST 2001 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

18 years, 9 months

8-bitters and multi-whatever

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: 8-bitters and multi-whatever > From: "Roy J. Tellason" <rtellason at verizon.net> > Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2007 23:49:03 -0400 > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > >So I was poking around at bitsavers after snagging those TI databooks, and >stumbled across some files pertaining to TurboDOS. I'd read about that >before, might even have some manual or other on it someplace, but I've >never had the pleasure. I do have one box that was supposed to be a >multi-user system, that being my TeleVideo 816, which had TurboDOS as an >option but the one I have came with something called MMMOST, which I wasn't >all that impressed with. A guy was talking about sending me a tape but that >never happened. > >I remember hearing about one or two other packages that were similar (never >mind MP/M, which I've also not messed with and don't get the impression I >want to bother with really), but have never had the pleasure of running any >of them. > >A while back I *almost* got a hold of one of those "z80 network in a box" >systems, it wasn't S-100 but something else I can't recall, I think that's >the one I have the book on, but I never did snag it. Multibus, very nice bus and expensive cards. I have a few multibus cards. Intel used it in their MDS800 and a few otehrs as well. >Unfortunately instead of RS232 Televideo has something else going there >(RS422?), not easy to interface too, and they distribute their "network" >out amongst what other Televideo boxes you have, which in my case is none. >I guess with an S-100-based system you could always add more cards, and >somehow or other make it work. > >And speaking of the networking aspect of it, do any of you guys know how they >did it? I recall one time getting a glimpse of some system or other that was >S-100 but also had a set of connectors at thet op of each card, which is >what they used for their inter-processor linking rather than trying to push >it through the bus. The reason for this is not apparent to me. Many ways to do it, using a commmon port or a pool of common memory for in box networking and serial ports as well. There were also ARCnet, pre Ethernet and even Ethernet. >I've also seen some "CP/M networking" stuff referred to that was supposed to >work through serial ports, which pretty many machines had, althogh they >appeared in at least one case to be using diodes to wire-OR RS232 signals, >which doesn't strike me as too terribly robust. And what software support >there was for this wasn't real apparent. That was a poor mans networking. Basically the serial ports were used as CD/CSMA bus and there was some protocal like Ethernet but slower and could use the usually common async chips. I have such a net going for my CP/M crates and all. >I dunno, I've just got this fascination for assorted 8-bit parts talking to >each other through some smallish number of wires, I guess it's easier to >deal with than some of the big iron you guys handle regularly, which I can't >afford to go get never mind housing. And I've seen multiple processors used >in stuff already, as in some musical equipment that passed "event >information" from one chip to the next with only a couple of pins, or the >daisywheel printer that had _four_ 804x procesors in it for different >functions. This is not a new thing. >TurboDOS is neat, and has some good design aspects in it, but there's too >much legacy stuff in there for being able to run CP/M software, stuff I'd >leave out if it were me and too much emphasis on the same old Console / >Printer / Disk Drives in the system, as opposed to something different or >unique. I found the same thing to be the case when I looked at FORTH, too >much of the usual stuff, and that was supposed to have been used in some >control applications? I must've missed something there... ???? Whats the question or point? Allison

18 years, 9 months

what's this?

by chrism3667＠yahoo.com

http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-HARRIS-DISKRITER-COMPUTER- PARTS-REPAIR_W0QQitemZ170147139531QQihZ007QQ categoryZ4193QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem and notice the 2 mangy mutts at the head of the bed. Yup, I sure want to lay my face exactly where they left their fleas, and worse (if you can imagine that). ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase. http://farechase.yahoo.com/

18 years, 9 months

8-bitters and multi-whatever

by rtellason＠verizon.net

So I was poking around at bitsavers after snagging those TI databooks, and stumbled across some files pertaining to TurboDOS. I'd read about that before, might even have some manual or other on it someplace, but I've never had the pleasure. I do have one box that was supposed to be a multi-user system, that being my TeleVideo 816, which had TurboDOS as an option but the one I have came with something called MMMOST, which I wasn't all that impressed with. A guy was talking about sending me a tape but that never happened. I remember hearing about one or two other packages that were similar (never mind MP/M, which I've also not messed with and don't get the impression I want to bother with really), but have never had the pleasure of running any of them. A while back I *almost* got a hold of one of those "z80 network in a box" systems, it wasn't S-100 but something else I can't recall, I think that's the one I have the book on, but I never did snag it. Unfortunately instead of RS232 Televideo has something else going there (RS422?), not easy to interface too, and they distribute their "network" out amongst what other Televideo boxes you have, which in my case is none. I guess with an S-100-based system you could always add more cards, and somehow or other make it work. And speaking of the networking aspect of it, do any of you guys know how they did it? I recall one time getting a glimpse of some system or other that was S-100 but also had a set of connectors at thet op of each card, which is what they used for their inter-processor linking rather than trying to push it through the bus. The reason for this is not apparent to me. I've also seen some "CP/M networking" stuff referred to that was supposed to work through serial ports, which pretty many machines had, althogh they appeared in at least one case to be using diodes to wire-OR RS232 signals, which doesn't strike me as too terribly robust. And what software support there was for this wasn't real apparent. I dunno, I've just got this fascination for assorted 8-bit parts talking to each other through some smallish number of wires, I guess it's easier to deal with than some of the big iron you guys handle regularly, which I can't afford to go get never mind housing. And I've seen multiple processors used in stuff already, as in some musical equipment that passed "event information" from one chip to the next with only a couple of pins, or the daisywheel printer that had _four_ 804x procesors in it for different functions. TurboDOS is neat, and has some good design aspects in it, but there's too much legacy stuff in there for being able to run CP/M software, stuff I'd leave out if it were me and too much emphasis on the same old Console / Printer / Disk Drives in the system, as opposed to something different or unique. I found the same thing to be the case when I looked at FORTH, too much of the usual stuff, and that was supposed to have been used in some control applications? I must've missed something there... -- Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and ablest -- form of life in this section of space, ?a critter that can be killed but can't be tamed. ?--Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters" - Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James M Dakin

18 years, 9 months

7 Vaxen + disks & monitors on Dovebid

by stephane.tsacas＠gmail.com

http://www.dovebid.com/assets/display.asp?itemid=smi26204 Lot n? 2028 Lot of the following: 6-6in Wafer Loader Conversion Kits - Type 3: 3-6in Wafer Loader Conversion Kits - Type 2, 7-Digital - VAX Workstation systems, most with peripherals (visual controllers, monitors, keyboards, printers, cables), 5- 9.1GB SCSI Hard Drives: All items 10 year old condition good working condition when removed from tools 2 years ago. (palletized and ready for loading) (location : Corvallis, OR). -- Stephane Paris, France.

18 years, 9 months

Motorola Exormacs - disk cable

by julesrichardsonuk＠yahoo.co.uk

We've just acquired a Motorola Exormacs system, which is sadly without its floppy drive cable (40 pins on the Exormacs side, 50 on the 8" floppy unit (Exordrive III I believe). I suspect the floppy side is just straight-through to the drives, but can anyone confirm that, and does anyone know the pinout on the system unit side of things? Worst-case we'll have to reverse engineer it, but maybe someone knows (we've got no floppies for the system and no useful manuals unfortunately) cheers Jules

18 years, 9 months

Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?)

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?) > From: "Ethan Dicks" <ethan.dicks at gmail.com> > Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:55:56 -0500 > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > >On 9/10/07, Allison <ajp166 at bellatlantic.net> wrote: >> > "Ethan Dicks" <ethan.dicks at gmail.com wrote: >> > >> >On 9/9/07, Allison <ajp166 at bellatlantic.net> wrote: >> >> One day I plan to get a T11 up and running wtih RT but with non-DEC >> >> drivers for terminal and storage as a small toteable -11. >> > >> >I'd like to hear more about this... >> >> I have a lot on paper plus the ever important T-11 manual. > >Very handy. Required! ;) >> However >> it has stopped at that phase mostly due to other projects having >> my interest. > >Fair enough. I think most of us have a variety of projects cluttering >our foreground task. > >> ... only 8KW ram, 8KW Eprom and a DLART for serial IO. > >Certainly minimal, though today, 28KW of RAM isn't a stretch. At the time I was just hacking and wanted to use the smaller parts I had for simplicity reasons. >> The display is really the harder part at least for portability and power >> consumption. However for this one I was considering packaging along >> the lines of the Kaypro totables and wall power. Part of this recognizes >> the T-11 uses a fair amount of power (Z80 NMOS is similar) and most of >> the parts around it will not be CMOS so battery operation is not easily >> accomplished. > >Understandable. > >> >As for storage, obviously some flavor of FLASH is great for most >> >things... >> >> None of the above for cost or availability reasons. I'd opt for IDE >> using one of the many 40-500mb drives I have. > >That's certainly a larger device than I'd envisioned (my initial idea >was a "pod" the size of a modem or smaller, with an external >display/keyboard/host port). > >> >While textual LCDs are cheaper and easier to interface to, the largest >> >one I've seen is 4x40. A graphical LCD panel with a SED1335 or t6963 >> >of a size of 640x200 would be perfect for 80x25... >> >> I planned on text. However it's possible to get LCDs used for laptops >> but the logic to drive them is non trivial. > >Yes. I have a 640x400 laptop display, with specs, that ran me about >$10 a few years back. If I ever decide to learn VHDL, I might try to >interface it to my IOB6120, but, yes, it takes a bit of work to talk >to those. I ahve three of them, monchrome. They are easy enough to drive but the little "gotchas" are nasty. First one is the display is really two 640x240 segments running in parallel top and bottom so there are two "video" data paths running concurrently unlike a CRT. If your doing bit mapped (1BPP) that's some 40k of total memory to address, oh and that has to really two memories or a funny dual output scheme to feed the display. Doing character only simplifies it some if you don't mind doing some logic twice (font, bit shifter, memory). >> >Back to the T-11, though, if I recall its capabilities correctly, it >> >doesn't have an MMU, and it would be difficult, if not impractical, to >> >design an external one that resembles, say, the MMU on an 11/23... >> >> Correct on the OS and software. However the MMU is very buildable >> and not near as hardware intensive as would seem. For an example >> look at the T-11 interface in the VT240. It takes a few 16x4 >> bipolar rams and some loose logic to implement the paging (2 74189, >> 3 74ls257 and a bit of TTL glue) to make a a compatable (mostly) mapper. > >Interesting. I suppose it couldn't be _too_ complicated, then, since >it one like it does fit on a few square inches of 11/34 CPU board. Basic circuit is the same. >I even happen to have a small pad of 74189s. Same here. > >> One of the things I've given consideration to in recent years is a nonDEC >> and non *nix OS such as CUBIX as that would translate reasonably from >> 6908 to PDP-11. This arises from the fact that RT-11 has a very >> primitive filesystem compared to CP/M and an OS that is not encumbered >> would be easier to work with. > >Hmm... from what I've seen of CUBIX, it sounds feasible for a PDP-11 >host, and it certainly gets around the issue of what OS to distribute, >but I would think that porting CUBIX could be an entirely independent >project (focusing on whatever display and mass-storage interfaces are >available). The OS can be logically seperated from the mass storage and addressed as a series of logical blocks so that going to floppy, IDE or whatever is easy as most do (or can do) 512byte sectors as a consistant thing. That divorces the CHS/LBA thing from the os. > > >So, Allison, does any of this sound like what you had in mind... ? >> >> You envision what sould like a Laptop. I can't easily fabricate that >> but a toteable like Kaypro, Osborne and a few others is very doable. > >I hadn't specifically been requiring a laptop shape, more of a tiny >luggable - on the order of one of the modern Tektronix LCD-screen >digital scopes. totable. ;) >> The basic machine description is a 128kW using 32kx8 static parts (8pcs), >> Boot roms/ODT, MMU, two serial, parallel (PC conpatable for printer) >> and IDE disk. Things like OS in Eprom have surfaced to my idea pool >> to consider especially if it were not RT11 (CUBIX influence). Terminal >> logic would be VK170 (base VT52 on a dual size card) and a monitor in >> the 7-9" size. > >OK. I'm not sure I get the "VK170" reference. Is that some sort of >DEC or 3rd party embedded product? VK170 was a DEC Qbus/Ubus card that did RS232/423 IO and had outputs for RS170 video or Video/Hsync/Vsync and took a parallel keyboard to serial (used LK02 or similar). The bus edge connector was power only so it could even be externally mounted as a minimal VT52 (80x25). It's in the Microcomputer handbooks. >Thanks for sharing your design ideas. They aren't patented. ;) Allison

18 years, 9 months

VT103 (was Re: Reviving DEC RX01 power supply)

by ethan.dicks＠gmail.com

On 9/7/07, Jerome H. Fine <jhfinedp3k at compsys.to> wrote: > >Ethan Dicks wrote: > > >My first -11 hard drive controller was an RLV11 that ran me about > >$100. I dropped into a BA-11N w/KDF11, DLV11J, MSV11-mumble (M8044), > >and LPV11 that all ran me $300 in 1986... > > > Jerome Fine replies: > > I seem to remember that my first... was > a VT103 with a PDP-11/23 inside and a DSD 880/8 floppy / hard drive combo. > The latter was an 8 MB RL01 emulation combined with RX02 (actually RX03 > although DEC never released their version) 1/2 MB SSDD 8" floppy emulation. Nice rig. > At one even shorter period of time, the VT103 backplane had a > PDP-11/73 quad CPU, 4 MB of memory, DHV11 and a Sigma RQD11-EC > controller that supported FOUR * 600 MB ESDI Hitachi hard drives > although it was essential that all of the hard drives were placed > OUTSIDE the VT103 since each required its own fan and all of the > hard drives and their fans also used a separate external power > supply. Wow... that's a lotta stuff for a VT103. I have a VT103 up in the attic. I _might_ be able to squeeze a VT100 case somewhere in my office... these days, though, I'd go with a 3.5" SCSI drive and a Qbus SCSI controller. The real question is, what to choose for CPU and memory. I could easily pull a KDF11B from the shelf, add a meg or two on a quad-height board, and between those three boards, have a running system. What I think I'd prefer, though, is something with a KDJ11. So presuming one is starting from the assumption that you have a VT103 and a Qbus SCSI controller, what are good choices for the remainder of the system? One can assume that 1MB is minimum, but 4MB wouldn't be unwarranted. I kinda fell off the PDP-11 cart in the KDJ11 era, so I'm not as conversant with what's out there, but ISTR that there's the dual-height KDJ11A, and there must be a quad-height KDJ11 of some flavor, with a variety of common accessories, but I couldn't quote chapter and verse. I have an 11/53-level KDJ11 board from a DEC comms controller, with -11 ROMs installed, but it still has S-box handles, and only has, IIRC, 1MB on it. I'm thinking that any sort of 11/83 or 11/93 board is probably going to be priced out of my range, but I'm willing to entertain the idea. I really don't _need_ the speed of an 11/83 or 11/93, but 4MB on board is attractive (if I've got my boards right). Anyone else have any ideas on how to trick out a VT103? -ethan

18 years, 9 months

Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?)

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?) > From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh at aracnet.com> > Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:54:24 -0700 (PDT) > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > >> >As for storage, obviously some flavor of FLASH is great for most >> >things. CF is easy to interface to, and CF cards 1GB and smaller are >> >quite inexpensive. MMC/SD are also inexpensive and even easier to >> >interface to, with a bit more work on the driver side to man the SPI >> >interface. >> >> None of the above for cost or availability reasons. I'd opt for IDE >> using one of the many 40-500mb drives I have. > >I believe converters for IDE to CF cards are pretty cheap, so if you have >IDE, you effectively have CF. True but then I ahve to buy an adaptor and the CF. And I don't get to use up that pile of drives.. ;) >> You envision what sould like a Laptop. I can't easily fabricate that >> but a toteable like Kaypro, Osborne and a few others is very doable. > >You might want to look at some of the "Laptops" that others have built for >things such as the Amiga. It might not be as difficult as you might think. If you have to wirewarp the system board first then create a CRT/LCD driver board yes it gets nasty. If you have RS170 video already then there are screens available. I've traversed this path a few times already and the basic thing is if you have excess money to throw at it then it's easier. >> The basic machine description is a 128kW using 32kx8 static parts (8pcs), >> Boot roms/ODT, MMU, two serial, parallel (PC conpatable for printer) >> and IDE disk. Things like OS in Eprom have surfaced to my idea pool >> to consider especially if it were not RT11 (CUBIX influence). Terminal >> logic would be VK170 (base VT52 on a dual size card) and a monitor in >> the 7-9" size. >> >> Right now it's a static project from the build it perspective but >> as new ideas surface and other projects supply different expereinces >> it morphs some. What I'd have built say 6 years ago and noew would >> be very different. It will eventually get attention as I have parts >> stored away for it. > >Sounds fun. One day I'll just decide to do it.. ;) Allison

18 years, 9 months

Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?)

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?) > From: "Ethan Dicks" <ethan.dicks at gmail.com> > Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:54:54 -0500 > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > >On 9/9/07, Allison <ajp166 at bellatlantic.net> wrote: >> One day I plan to get a T11 up and running wtih RT but with non-DEC >> drivers for terminal and storage as a small toteable -11. > >I'd like to hear more about this, either on-list, if you feel your >ideas are fleshed out enough to share widely, or off-list, if you are >not as far along with the creative process. I have a lot on paper plus the ever important T-11 manual. However it has stopped at that phase mostly due to other projects having my interest. I did some prototyping a few years back with the T11 to see in in action without a lot of DEC hardware around it. I have that but it was never meant to grow and is only 8KW ram, 8KW Eprom and a DLART for serial IO. Since then I've been doing 8085, Z80, Z280, 6809 and 1802 stuff when not building HF and VHF tranceivers. >Ever since I had a PDT-11 (and let it go to another collector, sadly >for me), I've wanted a portable PDP-11. It might or might not be easy >(read inexpensive ;-) to implement an 80x24 LCD, some form of 40x25 >isn't expensive at all since it only takes a 320x200 mono LCD panel. >Of course, one could just have serial out from the basic PDP-11 >design, then worry about a portable display as a secondary project. The display is really the harder part at least for portability and power consumption. However for this one I was considering packaging along the lines of the Kaypro totables and wall power. Part of this recognizes the T-11 uses a fair amount of power (Z80 NMOS is similar) and most of the parts around it will not be CMOS so battery operation is not easily accomplished. >As for storage, obviously some flavor of FLASH is great for most >things. CF is easy to interface to, and CF cards 1GB and smaller are >quite inexpensive. MMC/SD are also inexpensive and even easier to >interface to, with a bit more work on the driver side to man the SPI >interface. None of the above for cost or availability reasons. I'd opt for IDE using one of the many 40-500mb drives I have. >While textual LCDs are cheaper and easier to interface to, the largest >one I've seen is 4x40. A graphical LCD panel with a SED1335 or t6963 >of a size of 640x200 would be perfect for 80x25, and, since the common >graphical LCD controllers are well documented, not difficult to talk >to. One could either attach the graphical display right to the T-11 >bus as a peripheral and do all the work in PDP-11 software, or hang a >microcontroller off of the T-11 via serial, and write some >microcontroller firmware to turn the LCD into an ANSI terminal. I planned on text. However it's possible to get LCDs used for laptops but the logic to drive them is non trivial. >Back to the T-11, though, if I recall its capabilities correctly, it >doesn't have an MMU, and it would be difficult, if not impractical, to >design an external one that resembles, say, the MMU on an 11/23... so >that means RT-11SJ monitor only, correct? (or would FB be possible?) >There's lots of software out there that runs in 56K or less, so I >don't see that as a fatal flaw. Correct on the OS and software. However the MMU is very buildable and not near as hardware intensive as would seem. For an example look at the T-11 interface in the VT240. It takes a few 16x4 bipolar rams and some loose logic to implement the paging (2 74189, 3 74ls257 and a bit of TTL glue) to make a a compatable (mostly) mapper. One of the things I've given consideration to in recent years is a nonDEC and non *nix OS such as CUBIX as that would translate reasonably from 6908 to PDP-11. This arises from the fact that RT-11 has a very primitive filesystem compared to CP/M and an OS that is not encumbered would be easier to work with. >So, Allison, does any of this sound like what you had in mind, or am I >going off in an entirely different direction? You envision what sould like a Laptop. I can't easily fabricate that but a toteable like Kaypro, Osborne and a few others is very doable. The basic machine description is a 128kW using 32kx8 static parts (8pcs), Boot roms/ODT, MMU, two serial, parallel (PC conpatable for printer) and IDE disk. Things like OS in Eprom have surfaced to my idea pool to consider especially if it were not RT11 (CUBIX influence). Terminal logic would be VK170 (base VT52 on a dual size card) and a monitor in the 7-9" size. Right now it's a static project from the build it perspective but as new ideas surface and other projects supply different expereinces it morphs some. What I'd have built say 6 years ago and noew would be very different. It will eventually get attention as I have parts stored away for it. Allison > >-ethan

18 years, 9 months

Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?)

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?) > From: "e.stiebler" <emu at e-bbes.com> > Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:18:26 -0600 > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > >Ethan Dicks wrote: > > If course, if a project were to erupt that was some form of portable >> J-11 design w/1MB or more of SRAM and some local mass storage, I would >> certainly strongly consider building one, even if I had to borrow a >> J-11 chip from one of my two sources. > >But the j-11 are alos very easy to get, as a lot 11/73 boards are >showing even on ebay for dirt cheap. And a SBC-11-+++ would be also a >nice project, getting SCSI or IDE, 4 MBytes of ram, 100 mbit ethernet, ... IF you have the part on Qbus already then a small backplance with other scaled sized parts and it's left to being a programming project. Seriously I already have a BA11VA with 11/23, 235kb ram, IO and RQDX3 in only four dual slots, why bother smaller? For that fact why wreck a J11 CPU board to make a J11 system? Allison

18 years, 9 months

Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?)

by ethan.dicks＠gmail.com

On 9/9/07, Allison <ajp166 at bellatlantic.net> wrote: > One day I plan to get a T11 up and running wtih RT but with non-DEC > drivers for terminal and storage as a small toteable -11. I'd like to hear more about this, either on-list, if you feel your ideas are fleshed out enough to share widely, or off-list, if you are not as far along with the creative process. Ever since I had a PDT-11 (and let it go to another collector, sadly for me), I've wanted a portable PDP-11. It might or might not be easy (read inexpensive ;-) to implement an 80x24 LCD, some form of 40x25 isn't expensive at all since it only takes a 320x200 mono LCD panel. Of course, one could just have serial out from the basic PDP-11 design, then worry about a portable display as a secondary project. As for storage, obviously some flavor of FLASH is great for most things. CF is easy to interface to, and CF cards 1GB and smaller are quite inexpensive. MMC/SD are also inexpensive and even easier to interface to, with a bit more work on the driver side to man the SPI interface. While textual LCDs are cheaper and easier to interface to, the largest one I've seen is 4x40. A graphical LCD panel with a SED1335 or t6963 of a size of 640x200 would be perfect for 80x25, and, since the common graphical LCD controllers are well documented, not difficult to talk to. One could either attach the graphical display right to the T-11 bus as a peripheral and do all the work in PDP-11 software, or hang a microcontroller off of the T-11 via serial, and write some microcontroller firmware to turn the LCD into an ANSI terminal. Back to the T-11, though, if I recall its capabilities correctly, it doesn't have an MMU, and it would be difficult, if not impractical, to design an external one that resembles, say, the MMU on an 11/23... so that means RT-11SJ monitor only, correct? (or would FB be possible?) There's lots of software out there that runs in 56K or less, so I don't see that as a fatal flaw. So, Allison, does any of this sound like what you had in mind, or am I going off in an entirely different direction? -ethan

18 years, 9 months

VT103 (was Re: Reviving DEC RX01 power supply)

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: VT103 (was Re: Reviving DEC RX01 power supply) > From: Roger Ivie <rivie at ridgenet.net> > Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 07:42:28 -0700 (PDT) > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org> > >On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Dave McGuire wrote: >> On Sep 9, 2007, at 5:54 PM, Roger Ivie wrote: >>> >>> I knew a fellow who claimed to have build a MicroVAX II in a VT103. I >>> never saw it and don't know the details, but I believed him. He was >>> some sort of meta-service guy at DEC (i.e., he got called when the >>> normal service guys couldn't figure it out) and I think the machine >>> was on the DEC internal network. IIRC (and I might not), his name was >>> Ozzie Perez and the node name was OZZIE:: >> >> Are you sure that wasn't "Ernie"? That sounds like something my old friend >> and mentor Ernie Perez might have tried. > >Pretty sure it was Ozzie. The big problem with putting a MicroVAX in the VT103 is enough slots for memory and a disk interface. It's certainly doable and when you consider some of the plans floated for 11/73s, why not uVAX. Allison >-- >roger ivie >rivie at ridgenet.net

18 years, 9 months

Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?)

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?) > From: "Ethan Dicks" <ethan.dicks at gmail.com> > Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:43:52 -0500 > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > >On 9/10/07, e.stiebler <emu at e-bbes.com> wrote: >> Ethan Dicks wrote: >> > Back to the T-11, though, if I recall its capabilities correctly, it >> > doesn't have an MMU, and it would be difficult, if not impractical, to >> > design an external one that resembles, say, the MMU on an 11/23... so >> > that means RT-11SJ monitor only, correct? (or would FB be possible?) >> > There's lots of software out there that runs in 56K or less, so I >> > don't see that as a fatal flaw. >> >> Why not just use the J-11, and have it all ? > >I would think that for one thing, T-11 chips are much easier to find >than J-11 chips - DEC used the T-11 in a variety of peripheral cards >and terminals, and such. I personally probably have half-a-dozen T-11 >chips, and two J-11 chips (one Pro380 and one KDJ11 board). T-11 is designed along the lines of 8085 or Z280 and far easier to interface than J-11. That and I have a handful of T-11s out of defunct RQDX1s and VT240s. If all else the T11 is 40pin DIP and far easier to remove and socket for wire wrap than the huge J-11. T-11s appeared as loose parts, RQDXn controller, VT240/241, HSC50 KXT-11 and KXT-21 to name a few. For raw volume it outnumbers the J11. Doesn't hurt that all software design work can be done on any PDP11 but does not rely on features not available on most all -11s. > >If course, if a project were to erupt that was some form of portable >J-11 design w/1MB or more of SRAM and some local mass storage, I would >certainly strongly consider building one, even if I had to borrow a >J-11 chip from one of my two sources. >-ethan J11 and 1MB of sram is not battery friendly unless one is willing to invest in a lot of 74HCxx parts and a big battery. Allison

18 years, 9 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