23 Jul
2002
23 Jul
'02
4:59 a.m.
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002; "Glen Goodwin" <acme_ent(a)bellsouth.net> wrote:
I have two Seagate ST-225 drives and a WD1002SWX2A
controller. Both drives
have previously lived in XT-class DOS-based PCs. One of the drives is
bootable, the other is not.
What I need to do is set both drives up in the same PC, booting from the
bootable drive (duh) so that I can extract the data from the non-bootable
drive. The object of the game is to move the data to a modern
(Duron-based) system. I can't boot from a floppy disk drive due to a fault
in the motherboard, but I do have a SCSI controller and hard drive in the
XT system. I can move the SCSI drive to the newer system once I can get to
the data on the non-bootable ST-225.
What is the proper configuration for the ST-225 drives and the WD
controller?
I've got two WD1002S-WX2 controllers in front of me. one ie Rev E, the other
Rev F. I'll assume that is close enough for government work.
Towards the back of the card is J1. You will need a ribbon cable with
a 34 pin header connector to plug into J1. There should be two other
connectors on the cable and this will plug into both drives. The drive
connectors should already have a 'key tab' in them that lines up with
the notch on the drive's circuit boards.
Left of J1 is J2, a 20 pin header connector. You will need a ribbon cable
to plug into J2 and that will connect to the bootable drive.
Left of J2 is J3, also a 20 pin header connector. You will need another
ribbon cable to plug into J3 and that will connect to the non-bootable
drive.
Between the two boards there are some differences in the setup, i.e. the
jumpers in place on the board. First is W6 near the back of the board.
First board has a jumper on 1-2, the other on 2-3. Also right at the
back of the board is a 16 pin header connector. It is labeled SW1.
I suppose some versions may have a dip switch instead. Watch the numbering,
it is numbered 1 2 3 4 8 7 6 5. First board has jumpers on 3 and 5, the
other board has 3 & 5 open. I have no documentation on these particular
boards, so no idea what those jumpers are for.
Years ago, I was able to find documentation (pdf files) on similar controllers
on the web. It may still be available.
One thing that comes to mind here is the drive interleave. The controller
you have is 3:1 interleave. So I have to ask. If your drive(s) were
formatted on a controller with a different interleave, are you going to
be able to access the data on this controller?
Since I haven't messed with an MFM drive in a long time, that is a question
for someone else on the list that has worked with them more recently.
HTH
Mike
23 Jul
23 Jul
9:06 a.m.
There is also the matter of termination
Only the last drive on the 34-pin controller cable
needs a resistorpacket installed somewhere on the
HD-controllerboard
If both drives have terminators things could go wrong
if none has terminators things will go wrong
IRCC the 34-pin controller cable had no twist
and each drive had its own datacable (20-pin)
Sipke de Wal
---------------------------------------------------
http://xgistor.ath.cx
---------------------------------------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: <Mzthompson(a)aol.com>
To: <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: ST-225 help needed
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002; "Glen Goodwin"
<acme_ent(a)bellsouth.net> wrote:
I have two Seagate ST-225 drives and a
WD1002SWX2A controller. Both drives
have previously lived in XT-class DOS-based PCs. One of the drives is
bootable, the other is not.
What I need to do is set both drives up in the same PC, booting from the
bootable drive (duh) so that I can extract the data from the non-bootable
drive. The object of the game is to move the data to a modern
(Duron-based) system. I can't boot from a floppy disk drive due to a fault
in the motherboard, but I do have a SCSI controller and hard drive in the
XT system. I can move the SCSI drive to the newer system once I can get to
the data on the non-bootable ST-225.
What is the proper configuration for the ST-225 drives and the WD
controller?
I've got two WD1002S-WX2 controllers in front of me. one ie Rev E, the other
Rev F. I'll assume that is close enough for government work.
Towards the back of the card is J1. You will need a ribbon cable with
a 34 pin header connector to plug into J1. There should be two other
connectors on the cable and this will plug into both drives. The drive
connectors should already have a 'key tab' in them that lines up with
the notch on the drive's circuit boards.
Left of J1 is J2, a 20 pin header connector. You will need a ribbon cable
to plug into J2 and that will connect to the bootable drive.
Left of J2 is J3, also a 20 pin header connector. You will need another
ribbon cable to plug into J3 and that will connect to the non-bootable
drive.
Between the two boards there are some differences in the setup, i.e. the
jumpers in place on the board. First is W6 near the back of the board.
First board has a jumper on 1-2, the other on 2-3. Also right at the
back of the board is a 16 pin header connector. It is labeled SW1.
I suppose some versions may have a dip switch instead. Watch the numbering,
it is numbered 1 2 3 4 8 7 6 5. First board has jumpers on 3 and 5, the
other board has 3 & 5 open. I have no documentation on these particular
boards, so no idea what those jumpers are for.
Years ago, I was able to find documentation (pdf files) on similar controllers
on the web. It may still be available.
One thing that comes to mind here is the drive interleave. The controller
you have is 3:1 interleave. So I have to ask. If your drive(s) were
formatted on a controller with a different interleave, are you going to
be able to access the data on this controller?
Since I haven't messed with an MFM drive in a long time, that is a question
for someone else on the list that has worked with them more recently.
HTH
Mike 
12:40 p.m.
--- Sipke de Wal <sipke(a)wxs.nl> wrote:
IRCC the 34-pin controller cable had no twist
and each drive had its own datacable (20-pin)
In PeeCees with Western Digital controllers, a twist
on the 34-pin daisy-chain cable was common, but as
has been mentioned, it is not the same twist that was
used for floppies.
If you strap the drives for 0 and 1, you don't
need/want the twist. Most PeeCees had both drives
strapped to 1 and the twist turned the farthest
drive to "0".
One or the other, but not both.
-ethan
P.S. - DEC, of course, did it differently... it's
entirely possible to hose yourself by moving ST506/ST412
drives from PeeCees onto an RQDX3 without moving
any jumpers - unlike a PeeCee, the RQDX can blow away
critial portions of the lower tracks if you have two
drives responding to the same select - the hardware
is fine, but you'll have to reprep the drive. I'm
pretty sure I've done this to myself at least once.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com
5:03 p.m.
--- Sipke de Wal <sipke(a)wxs.nl> wrote:
> IRCC the 34-pin controller cable had no twist
> and each drive had its own datacable (20-pin)
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Ethan Dicks
wrote:
In PeeCees with Western Digital controllers, a twist
on the 34-pin daisy-chain cable was common, but as
has been mentioned, it is not the same twist that was
used for floppies.
If you strap the drives for 0 and 1, you don't
need/want the twist. Most PeeCees had both drives
strapped to 1 and the twist turned the farthest
drive to "0".
One or the other, but not both.
A generic PC can be done with a twisted cable (as mentioned: different
twist than the floppy cable), or could be done with jumpers.
_IBM_ XT (NOT generic) used a twisted cable. ALWAYS.
The reason why IBM used twisted cables instead of jumpers?
Because they could NOT count on their filed technicians or sales
representatives being able to get the jumpers right. So they jumpered all
of the drives the same, and relied on the cable for drive selection.
In their early days of the PC, IBM had worse field staff than Radio Shack
did!
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
5:19 p.m.
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) wrote:
In their early days of the PC, IBM had worse field
staff than Radio Shack
did!
Oh, man. Oh, Fred, you tempt me most foully.
I work with IBM field service pretty regularly. It's a good thing,
for the sake of comparison, that Radio Shack is getting worse.
Those guys ARE very good at what they know. They really suck at
knowing when they're clueless.
Doc, who always assumes he's clueless
24 Jul
24 Jul
8:33 a.m.
New subject: IBM field service was Re: ST-225 help needed
At 07:02 PM 7/23/02 -0700, Fred wrote:
In their early days of the PC, IBM had worse field
staff than Radio Shack
did!
Wow! That's hard to beleive! Especially since RS had no field service AFIK and the
service in the "Service Centers" was utterly worthlss!
Joe
9:46 a.m.
New subject: IBM field service was Re: ST-225 help needed
>In their early days of the PC, IBM had worse field
staff than Radio Shack
>did!
On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Joe wrote:
Wow! That's hard to beleive! Especially since
RS had no field service AFIK and the service in the "Service Centers" was
utterly worthlss!
Before I offend any more people, I'd better be a lot clearer about my
statement!
1. I said "In their early days of the PC" (20 years ago!). I was NOT
referring to how they were before the PC, nor anything "recent" .
2. I meant their PC staff, NOT referring to any of their mainframe or
mini people. (often significantly different!)
3. I misused the word "field" to include all of their operations that
were NOT "factory", including their "service technicians" at their
retail
sites, and "field service center"s.
4. I unfairly lumped in with IBM's people all of the non-IBM people who
REPRESENTED them, including Computerland, "IBM sales centers".
If you bought an IBM drive for an IBM XT, the People installing it on
behalf of IBM would be likely to pinch the cable, and the only reason they
got the cable on the right way around was the keying; the only reason
they got the drive select right was the cable twist; they often
(usually?) did NOT get the termination right. I saw a "technician" at an
"IBM Product Center" trying to connect an XT hard disk using a floppy
cable (AFTER the twist), including trying to cut a new notch in the card
edge!
(BTW, RS WOULD sometimes send somebody out to the customer's site for
Model 2 and Tandy 10 systems)
10:07 a.m.
New subject: IBM field service was Re: ST-225 help needed
That's cause the IBM field service guys spent too much time typing to fellow
friends and co-workers on their wireless XT handhelds.... man those things
were cool!!!!!!!!!!!!
Curt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe" <rigdonj(a)cfl.rr.com>
To: <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 11:40 AM
Subject: IBM field service was Re: ST-225 help needed
At 07:02 PM 7/23/02 -0700, Fred wrote:
AFIK
and the service in the "Service Centers" was utterly worthlss!
In their early days of the PC, IBM had worse field
staff than Radio Shack
did!
Wow! That's hard to beleive! Especially since RS had no field service
Joe
23 Jul
23 Jul
5:50 p.m.
Ethan Dicks wrote:
P.S. - DEC, of course, did it differently... it's
entirely possible to hose yourself by moving ST506/ST412
drives from PeeCees onto an RQDX3 without moving
any jumpers - unlike a PeeCee, the RQDX can blow away
critial portions of the lower tracks if you have two
drives responding to the same select - the hardware
is fine, but you'll have to reprep the drive. I'm
pretty sure I've done this to myself at least once.
Jerome Fine replies:
It also happens with the RQDX1 and probably the RQDX2,
but only when you use the BA23 box. In that case, DU0:
must be set as DS3 and DU1 must be set as DS4. If you
happen the use 2 * RD52 hard drives and set both as DS3,
then you will find out very quickly that a FORMAT operation
for BOTH drives is the next operation that is required. My
knowledge was also acquired from personal experience.
Fortunately, if you use the BA123 box with the standard I/O
distribution board specifically made for the BA123, all hard
drives use DS3.
Sincerely yours,
Jerome Fine
--
If you attempted to send a reply and the original e-mail
address has been discontinued due a high volume of junk
e-mail, then the semi-permanent e-mail address can be
obtained by replacing the four characters preceding the
'at' with the four digits of the current year.
8:24 p.m.
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Jerome H. Fine wrote:
Fortunately, if you use the BA123 box with the
standard I/O distribution
board specifically made for the BA123, all hard drives use DS3.
Speaking of which, should a BA123 have a write protect/operator-panel for
each drive installed in the system? My BA123 has 3 drives, but only two
such panels are installed.
-Toth
8:54 p.m.
On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Tothwolf wrote:
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Jerome H. Fine wrote:
All four of the BA123s I've been close enough to play with had one
panel per drive.
Doc
Fortunately, if you use the BA123 box with the
standard I/O distribution
board specifically made for the BA123, all hard drives use DS3.
Speaking of which, should a BA123 have a write protect/operator-panel for
each drive installed in the system? My BA123 has 3 drives, but only two
such panels are installed. 
8:04 p.m.
New subject: Sun IPC OS?
What do you all recommend I run on my Sun IPC machines for an OS? I've never
messed with them before, myself. Just got some new harddrives for them,
eager to try them out.
Thanks!
Tarsi
10:49 p.m.
New subject: Sun IPC OS?
On 2002.07.22 06:57 Tarsi wrote:
What do you all recommend I run on my Sun IPC machines
for an OS?
NetBSD if it has to be a free *ix, because it runs well on that
hardware
and it is a good, nice and clean *ix. I use a SPARC ELC (same age) with
NetBSD for toasting CDRs. (Wait for NetBSD 1.6. It will be released
soon.)
SunOS 4 if you happen to have a copy / license, because this is the
"native" OS for this hardware. It is somewhat "old", but still a good
bais for your work.
I don't have any experience with OpenBSD, so I can't say more about it.
It may do as well as NetBSD.
Linux will do too, but to my experience it creeps on Sun4c machines and
is / was buggy as hell.
--
tsch??,
Jochen
Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/
24 Jul
24 Jul
3:30 a.m.
New subject: Sun IPC OS?
At 09:41 AM 7/24/02 +0200, you wrote:
On 2002.07.22 06:57 Tarsi wrote:
I second this if you want to run a free Unix.
What do you all recommend I run on my Sun IPC
machines for an OS?
NetBSD if it has to be a free *ix, because it runs well on that
hardware
and it is a good, nice and clean *ix. I use a SPARC ELC (same age) with
NetBSD for toasting CDRs. (Wait for NetBSD 1.6. It will be released
soon.) SunOS 4 if you happen to have a copy / license, because
this is the
"native" OS for this hardware. It is somewhat "old", but still a good
bais for your work.
I don't have any experience with OpenBSD, so I can't say more about it.
It may do as well as NetBSD.
Linux will do too, but to my experience it creeps on Sun4c machines and
is / was buggy as hell.
I second the commentary on Linux. However, regarding the use of Sun OS 4.1,
I disagree. While SunOS 4.x is interesting because of its usage of
NeWS (something like displaypostscript), it is hopelessly behind, not Y2K
compliant and there is no support. You will have trouble building the
newer GNU utilities. If the machines have at least 32MB RAM (64MB is
better), you can run Solaris 2.6 on them, which is still supported,
comprehensive patches are still being released and is Y2K compliant and
furthermore, 2.6-specific pre-built packages can still be found at
www.sunfreeware.com. 2.7 will also run, but it will be hopelessly slow.
The only reason to use Sun 4.x is if you have interesting hardware
for which only 4.x drivers were released (I have one such system
with a GPIB interface; I only have 4.x drivers, so I've added a second
HD with 4.1.4 in it).
carlos.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Carlos E. Murillo-Sanchez carlos_murillo(a)nospammers.ieee.org
4:48 a.m.
New subject: Sun IPC OS?
On Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 08:29:45AM -0400, Carlos Murillo wrote:
I second the commentary on Linux.
Hehehe. ;-)
[The audience should know that I am not that Linux friendly...]
However, regarding the use of Sun OS 4.1, I disagree.
While SunOS 4.x is interesting because of its usage of
NeWS (something like displaypostscript), it is hopelessly behind, not Y2K
compliant and there is no support.
There are some patches. I know a Sun 3
collector (http:www.sun3zoo.de)
who has Y2K patches for sun3(x) SunOS 4. I am sure you can get them
for SPARC as well. SunOS 4 in general is not that behind, as it was
quite modern at its days. (Shared libs, lots of SysV extensions, ...)
You will have trouble building the newer GNU
utilities.
You will have trouble building GNU stuff on anything other than Linux,
or at least a x86 / litle endian / 32 bit machine with gcc.
you can run Solaris 2.6 on them,
Yes. But SunOS
4 is more "classic" and we are on the classic computers
mailing list... ;-)
--
tsch??,
Jochen
Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/
5:11 a.m.
New subject: Sun IPC OS?
Jochen Kunz said:
That's good to know... I have a copy of SunOS 4.1.4 for the day I get a sun
old enough to put it on :)
That's not true. I've built a significant portion of the GNU stuff on IRIX
6.5.x, Solaris 2.5-2.8, HPUX 10.20 and 11i, and AIX 4.3.2, in addition to the
usual suspects like Linux and FreeBSD. Usually pretty painlessly, too, though
things occasionally need a little tweaking. Generally not more then 10
minutes of extra fiddling...
- Dan Wright
(dtwright(a)uiuc.edu)
(http://www.uiuc.edu/~dtwright)
-] ------------------------------ [-] -------------------------------- [-
``Weave a circle round him thrice, / And close your eyes with holy dread,
For he on honeydew hath fed, / and drunk the milk of Paradise.''
Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Kubla Khan
However,
regarding the use of Sun OS 4.1, I disagree.
While SunOS 4.x is interesting because of its usage of
NeWS (something like displaypostscript), it is hopelessly behind, not Y2K
compliant and there is no support.
There are some patches. I know a Sun 3
collector (http:www.sun3zoo.de)
who has Y2K patches for sun3(x) SunOS 4. I am sure you can get them
for SPARC as well. SunOS 4 in general is not that behind, as it was
quite modern at its days. (Shared libs, lots of SysV extensions, ...)
You will have
trouble building the newer GNU utilities.
You will have trouble building GNU stuff
on anything other than Linux,
or at least a x86 / litle endian / 32 bit machine with gcc. 
5:17 a.m.
New subject: Sun IPC OS?
> > You will have trouble building the newer GNU
utilities.
> You will have trouble building GNU stuff on
anything other than Linux,
> or at least a x86 / litle endian / 32 bit machine with gcc.
That's not true. I've built a significant
portion of the GNU stuff on IRIX
6.5.x, Solaris 2.5-2.8, HPUX 10.20 and 11i, and AIX 4.3.2, in addition to the
usual suspects like Linux and FreeBSD.
I've had trouble on AIX 4.1, though.
--
----------------------------- personal page: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --
Cameron Kaiser, Point Loma Nazarene University * ckaiser(a)stockholm.ptloma.edu
-- The best defense against logic is ignorance. -------------------------------
5:40 a.m.
New subject: Sun IPC OS?
On Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 09:09:49AM -0500, Dan Wright wrote:
GCC or the
"native" compiler of the *ix? (e.g. MIPS Pro on IRIX?)
I must admit that it is not that bad than my statemant above may
sound. But I have build a lot of GNU stuff (including lage parts
GNOME) on my Alpha running Tru64 5.1 with the DEC/Comcrap/HPaq
C compiler and sometimes it was really nasty.
--
tsch??,
Jochen
Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/
You will have
trouble building GNU stuff on anything other than Linux,
or at least a x86 / litle endian / 32 bit machine with gcc.
That's not true.
I've built a significant portion of the GNU stuff on IRIX
6.5.x, Solaris 2.5-2.8, HPUX 10.20 and 11i, and AIX 4.3.2,
11:41 a.m.
New subject: Sun IPC OS?
Jochen Kunz said:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 09:09:49AM -0500, Dan Wright
wrote:
GCC or the
"native" compiler of the *ix? (e.g. MIPS Pro on IRIX?)
Native, usually.
You will
have trouble building GNU stuff on anything other than Linux,
or at least a x86 / litle endian / 32 bit machine with gcc.
That's not true.
I've built a significant portion of the GNU stuff on IRIX
6.5.x, Solaris 2.5-2.8, HPUX 10.20 and 11i, and AIX 4.3.2,
I must admit that it is not that bad than my statemant above may
sound. But I have build a lot of GNU stuff (including lage parts
GNOME) on my Alpha running Tru64 5.1 with the DEC/Comcrap/HPaq
C compiler and sometimes it was really nasty.
I used to test new (to me) UNIX computers by getting them to run
Enlightenment. That is a lot of fun ;) the most painful part of the process
is usually not the GNU stuff, but getting a non-broken (i.e., not mangled by
the vendor) version of X installed...
--
tsch??,
Jochen
Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/
- Dan Wright
(dtwright(a)uiuc.edu)
(http://www.uiuc.edu/~dtwright)
-] ------------------------------ [-] -------------------------------- [-
``Weave a circle round him thrice, / And close your eyes with holy dread,
For he on honeydew hath fed, / and drunk the milk of Paradise.''
Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Kubla Khan
25 Jul
25 Jul
12:20 a.m.
New subject: Sun IPC OS?
On Sun, 21 Jul 2002, Tarsi wrote:
What do you all recommend I run on my Sun IPC machines
for an OS? I've never
messed with them before, myself. Just got some new harddrives for them,
eager to try them out.
Thanks!
Tarsi
NetBSD.
--
-Linc Fessenden
In the Beginning there was nothing, which exploded - Yeah right...
3:47 a.m.
New subject: Sun IPC OS?
Fun OSes:
SunOS (4 or 2.x for an older Sparc)
NetBSD (Runs on *anything*)
OpenBSD (Similar to NetBSD in it's support of Sparc)
Linux (Debian has a nice Sparc distro. Older versions of Redhat, too)
OpenStep (Hard to find, use the original MacOS X :)
Amoeba (Like linux/beowulf)
Inferno (Runs on Solaris 2.6?)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tarsi" <tarsi(a)binhost.com>
To: <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 12:57 AM
Subject: Sun IPC OS?
What do you all recommend I run on my Sun IPC machines
for an OS? I've
never
messed with them before, myself. Just got some new
harddrives for them,
eager to try them out.
Thanks!
Tarsi
8039
days inactive
8041
days old
20 comments
16 participants
participants (16)
-
carlos_murillo＠epm.net.co -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
curt＠atari-history.com -
doc＠mdrconsult.com -
dtwright＠uiuc.edu -
erd_6502＠yahoo.com -
jbmcb＠hotmail.com -
jhfinepw4z＠compsys.to -
jkunz＠unixag-kl.fh-kl.de -
lincoln.fessenden＠verizon.net -
Mzthompson＠aol.com -
rigdonj＠cfl.rr.com -
sipke＠wxs.nl -
spectre＠stockholm.ptloma.edu -
tarsi＠binhost.com -
tothwolf＠concentric.net