23 May
2014
23 May
'14
7:03 a.m.
On May 23, 2014, at 2:04 AM, Chuck Guzis <cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
On 05/22/2014 10:17 PM, Glen Slick wrote:
Yes, and that is critical. As you observed. it has to be the original length, otherwise
odd length blocks are corrupted.
paul
If I have this correct, I think the difference
between standard SIMH
.TAP format and E11 format is that E11 format does not pad blocks to
an even boundary in the file, while the SIMH format does, however in
both formats the block length in the block header in the file reflects
the original block length.
So if I understand correctly--and from this:
http://simh.trailing-edge.com/docs/simh_magtape.pdf
A block byte count is always a 32-bit little-endian quantity that occurs on an even byte
address boundary (i.e. aligned to 16 bits). The block byte count itself always represents
the actual byte count of the block read and not the padded length of the block.
Do I have this right?