- test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org - classiccmp.org

ST225 and RLL (was: Re: free DEC M7555 card)

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

From: Glen Goodwin <acme_ent(a)bellsouth.net> >> RLL though RLL may/may_not be reliable with that drive. I have used >ST225s >> with RLL controllers to get ~30mb from them (st225 is 20mb MFM). > >What's your success rate with this? I tried it a couple of times years ago >and encountered some very subtle but nasty data corruption. I used it with one PC based system with excellent results. However, up front I assumed it may be twitchy so I used the best ST225 (minimum surface defects) I had , shortest cables usable, and didn't format it until it was warmed up to operating temp and the controller was a WD1005 (memory test here). I'd never do it with an ST251 as they were flaky in my book even for MFM. I found the best candidate for this was Quantum D540s a 30mb MFM drive. Allison

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

So-Called Real Programmers and FORTRAN

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

From: Carlos Murillo <carlos_murillo(a)epm.net.co> >I went from HP3000 BASIC to UCSD Pascal. I liked it. In retrospect, >the things that suck about Pascal are the argument passing mechanism >and strings. C is better essentially because it lets you manage >memory directly, without predefined string sizes. And it lets you >handle the guts. When I dont want to see the underlying machine Pascal is very nice and has proven very portable. When I need to get at the underlying machine and don't wish to use assembler then C wins usually at the expense of some portability. >(portable) code, and Matlab and FORTRAN rule in that realm. Yes, FORTRAN. :-) Fortran is old but well proven. Allison

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

So-Called Real Programmers and FORTRAN

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> >> From: Allison [mailto:ajp166@bellatlantic.net] > >> I disagree. The UCSD version was an excellent teaching tool but > >> slower than sludge due to the P-code thing. Later implementations > >> namely JRT and Borland were very useful tools. > > > >I'm also of that opinion. I like Pascal, and Modula, and Oberon... > >Chris > > I went from HP3000 BASIC to UCSD Pascal. I liked it. In retrospect, > the things that suck about Pascal are the argument passing mechanism > and strings. C is better essentially because it lets you manage > memory directly, without predefined string sizes. And it lets you > handle the guts. My only problem with Pascal argument passing was the lack of support for missing arcguments (or short lists as some call them). Modula-2 corrected that omission. > But I am not a C programmer in general (except when programming > microcontrollers in RT applications); I write mostly scientific numerical > (portable) code, and Matlab and FORTRAN rule in that realm. Yes, FORTRAN. :-) > My stuff runs under Solaris, AIX, Linux, HPUX, and Win32, using gcc/g77, > HP f77, Sun fortran, xlf. Been working on a utility in F77 myself, just recently... -dq

24 years, 1 month

2
1
0 0

Installation Ease (Was: Re: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> [1] RedHat, and I believe SuSE, offer true walkaway install scripts. > From a RH box, you can use a GUI point&click interface to set up a boot > floppy that will install exactly what you want, How you want it. Insert > floppy, turn on power, go away for ~25 minutes, come back, remove > floppy, reboot. Gorgeous. Slackware 7.0, once you finish answering the up-front questions, runs by itself, although you can also choose a "hand-holding" mode... -dq

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

L@@K R@RE On-topic posting! (SunOS4.0.2)

by alan.pearson＠cramer.com

Sorry to dilute the Unix/Windows/Mac flamewar with a vaguely on-topic posting, but does anyone have, or know of a site where I can get images of the SunOS4.0.2 install floppies (NOT tape) for the Sun 386i? I've got the original disks but they were used to hold "something else" long ago - now I'd like to restore them to their former glory :-) There used to be a set of images on an FTP site in one of the London universities, but they've gone :( Any pointers? Haven't found anything by googling, and I've been looking for a week or so now. This is my last resort, since I'm fully expecting to be flamed to a crisp for showing interest in a Unix variant :-) Cheers Al.

24 years, 1 month

3
2
0 0

9-Track Tape Density Terminaology Query

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

Bob Shannon wrote: > Nothin' says Vintage Computer better than a mini with the switch > register blinking and 10 inch reels of tape jumping back and forth. > > Not even an Altair or Imsai can touch that. (for those of > you who lack room for CPU's that don't fit on a chip) If I could stand and watch a 10-reel merge-sort again, I would just cry. > Now cold-booting from 9-track mag tape, thats pure Vintage Computing > (without the nasty cuts of paper tape)! Now, that one, I did just the other day! -dq

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor, Anything !Windows = Cryptic ?

by nemesis-lists＠icequake.net

Ben Franchuk wrote: > In my view that what I don't like about linux/unix -- the design > of the architecture is still based on very primitive user I/O devices > and a mode of computing that is not realistic today. It's quite realistic if you depend on programs being able to talk to each other, and being able to operate them in a simplistic manner when necessary. For end users, it might be inconvenient (which is why we now have multiple abstractions in the form of desktop environments, GUI programs, and what-have-you), but the mere existence of the capability for a simplistic interface does not force the user to go through that interface. e.g., you can use vi or pico if it suits you, and it's definitely easier for a script to use something like 'ed', but as a user, you're obviously not forced into only using those programs, as there are programs with arguably much more intuitive interfaces to do the same tasks. -- Ryan Underwood, <nemesis at icequake.net>, icq=10317253

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0