22 Jul
2002
22 Jul
'02
6:20 a.m.
Hope someone can help . . .
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?
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Glen
0/0
If I am not for myself, then who will be for me?
And if not now, when?
-- Pirkei Avot
22 Jul
22 Jul
10:55 a.m.
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Glen Goodwin wrote:
Hope someone can help . . .
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?
Is the WD controller the same one that the drives running on in the XT?
If not, it is possible that you will not be able to boot/read the
drives.
Assuming that this is not a problem, and assuming that you are using a
cable with a twist, both drives should be set as the second DS and the
bootable one should be connected beyond the twist. Be sure that you
connect the proper 20 pin connectors to the appropriate drives. Set
the BIOS to no hard drives and let the BIOS on the controller handle
the drives. Boot 'er up.
Hopefully, you will be able to write to a floppy, or it might be
difficult to save your data from the data disk.
- don
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Glen
0/0
If I am not for myself, then who will be for me?
And if not now, when?
-- Pirkei Avot
1:24 p.m.
can you take a digital pic or scan the front of the card? I can't find ANY
references to that controller anywhere :(
At 11:19 AM 7/22/02 -0400, you wrote:
Hope someone can help . . .
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.
2:10 p.m.
I have two copies of the manual. The proper number is WD1002S-WX2.
Joe
At 03:39 PM 7/22/02 -0700, you wrote:
can you take a digital pic or scan the front of the
card? I can't find ANY
references to that controller anywhere :(
At 11:19 AM 7/22/02 -0400, you wrote:
Hope someone can help . . .
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.
3:38 p.m.
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Joe wrote:
I have two copies of the manual. The proper number
is WD1002S-WX2.
Joe
There is also a WD1002S-WX2A, Joe. Don't know what the differences are,
if any, but I have the manual for the WX2A version.
- don
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.
7:59 p.m.
Yeah, I meant WD1002S-WX2A. My point was that there is a - in the middle of the part
number and that might be why he couldn't find it when he searched for it.
joe
At 05:37 PM 7/22/02 -0700, you wrote:
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Joe wrote:
I have two copies of the manual. The proper
number is WD1002S-WX2.
Joe
There is also a WD1002S-WX2A, Joe. Don't know what the differences are,
if any, but I have the manual for the WX2A version.
- don
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.
5:48 p.m.
http://www.aquascape.com/theref/controllers/layouts/cs_wd1002s-wx2.html
this will give you the setup for your card :)
2:10 p.m.
New subject: Adaptec ACB-4070 was Re: ST-225 help needed
Does anyone have a Setup and Installation manual for an Adaptec ACB-4070 bridge board?
Adaptec has dropped support of these and it's no longer on the web. Does anyone know
if I can simply replace this and the MFM drive that's connected to it with a regular
SCSI drive? My SB-180 uses this board and a Tulin TL 226 drive and the drive is dying.
Joe
3:52 p.m.
New subject: Adaptec ACB-4070 was Re: ST-225 help needed
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Joe wrote:
Does anyone have a Setup and Installation manual
for an Adaptec
ACB-4070 bridge board? Adaptec has dropped support of these and it's
no longer on the web. Does anyone know if I can simply replace this
and the MFM drive that's connected to it with a regular SCSI drive?
My SB-180 uses this board and a Tulin TL 226 drive and the drive is dying.
Joe
The ACB-4000 Series User Manual is about 1/2" thick, Joe, and is not
partitioned by specific models. But, I see no reason why a regular SCSI
drive could not be installed in lieu of the ACB-4070 and ST-411/506
interface drive. Seems to me that I have gone the other way once.
- don
4:28 p.m.
New subject: Adaptec ACB-4070 was Re: ST-225 help needed
--- Don Maslin <donm(a)cts.com> wrote:
The ACB-4000 Series User Manual is about 1/2"
thick, Joe, and is not
partitioned by specific models. But, I see no reason why a regular SCSI
drive could not be installed in lieu of the ACB-4070 and ST-411/506
interface drive. Seems to me that I have gone the other way once.
My experiences with Adaptec bridge controllers is that they don't
support an IDENT packet, so the host has to "know" the geometry,
meaning that _you_ will have to know the geometry of the embedded
SCSI drive and tell the host since it will not think to ask the
drive itself.
Additionally, whatever (low level) formatting software comes with the host
might or not might not work with an embedded drive. Modern drives will
ignore harmful commands, so it's not a risk to the drive, but if there
is a canned procedure for installing the OS (old variants of UNIX come
to mind), it might or might not succeed with an embedded drive if it
was written to expect an ACB-4xxx.
Finally, most Adaptec bridge controllers I know of did support multiple
LUNs. Some SCSI drives won't like being probed for LUNs and may return
a hit for every LUN probed (I've seen that happen with some drives on
an Amiga 3000 which optionally supports multiple LUNs per target ID)
If none of the above differences trip you up, then you should have no
problem using an embedded SCSI drive in place of your ACB-4070.
-ethan
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com
6:54 p.m.
New subject: Adaptec ACB-4070 was Re: ST-225 help needed
At 06:26 PM 7/22/02 -0700, Ethan wrote:
--- Don Maslin <donm(a)cts.com> wrote:
That's correct according to what I've been able to find out.
so the host has to "know" the geometry,
The ACB-4000 Series User Manual is about
1/2" thick, Joe, and is not
partitioned by specific models. But, I see no reason why a regular SCSI
drive could not be installed in lieu of the ACB-4070 and ST-411/506
interface drive. Seems to me that I have gone the other way once.
My experiences with Adaptec bridge controllers is that they don't
support an IDENT packet, meaning that _you_ will have to know the geometry of
the embedded
SCSI drive and tell the host since it will not think to ask the
drive itself.
Hmmm. But how do you tell it the geometry? The User's manual for the system
indicated that there are only two drives that work with this system. I wonder if
that's because the geometry is hard coded into the HD setup program?
Additionally, whatever (low level) formatting software comes with the host
might or not might not work with an embedded drive. Modern drives will
ignore harmful commands, so it's not a risk to the drive, but if there
is a canned procedure for installing the OS (old variants of UNIX come
to mind), it might or might not succeed with an embedded drive if it
was written to expect an ACB-4xxx.
That's what I'm afraid of.
Finally, most Adaptec bridge controllers I know of did support multiple
LUNs. Some SCSI drives won't like being probed for LUNs and may return
a hit for every LUN probed (I've seen that happen with some drives on
an Amiga 3000 which optionally supports multiple LUNs per target ID)
Wonderfull! More problems.
If none of the above differences trip you up, then you should have no
problem using an embedded SCSI drive in place of your ACB-4070.
I think that should have been <B>IF</B>!
Joe
-ethan
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com
7:14 p.m.
New subject: Adaptec ACB-4070 was Re: ST-225 help needed
--- Joe <rigdonj(a)cfl.rr.com> wrote:
It all depends on how modern your target box is (from a software
standpoint). In the case of UNIX, the low level format is typically
optional, but a newfs (and possibly a disklabel operation) isn't.
Same goes for AmigaDOS - if you can write to every sector, you can
bypass the low level format and go right to partitioning (either with
a mountlist for older versions of the OS, or with a more modern disk
tool, presuming your driver supports RDB (Rigid Disk Blocks)).
It's only a problem for certain embedded SCSI drives. The solution
under AmigaDOS, presuming you *don't* have an Adaptec bridge controller
or a multi-LUN SCSI CD-ROM disc changer is to disable LUN support in
the driver - the "modern" model is one target ID, one LUN (typically
'0'). Even the Adaptec can be set up with one LUN - only put one
ST506/ST412 drive on it. The difference is that since the Adaptec
won't respond to IDENT, it can't mis-report how many LUNs are populated.
I don't know about that - mostly, stuff should work fine. I just
wanted to point out a few places where things are substantially
different between using a bridge controller and having an embedded
SCSI drive. I presume much the same is true for the Emuled MD-21
ESDI bridge controller that was common back in the days of Sun3
(MC680x0) hardware... I've seen them but never had to format drives
on them. Once they are formatted and partitioned, they should behave
much the same as an embedded drive - the trick is getting past the
setup software.
-ethan
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com
At 06:26 PM 7/22/02 -0700, Ethan wrote:
I figured, but I didn't want to come right out and make a blanket
statement and have someone who knows lots more than me quote chapter
and verse of a very late model board that I've never heard of.
--- Don Maslin <donm(a)cts.com> wrote:
That's correct according to what I've been able to find out. ...I see no reason why a regular SCSI
drive could not be installed in lieu of the ACB-4070 and ST-411/506
interface drive.
My experiences with Adaptec bridge controllers is that they don't
support an IDENT packet, so the host has to "know" the geometry,
That entirely depends on the software/firmware on the host.
meaning that _you_ will have to know the geometry
of the embedded
SCSI drive and tell the host since it will not think to ask the
drive itself.
Hmmm. But how do you tell it the geometry? The User's manual for the system indicated that
there are only two
drives that work with this system. I wonder if that's because the
geometry is hard coded into the HD setup program?
Very likely. In the case of the Amiga and SunOS (4.x), with which I have
lots of experience, you edit a text file (a mountlist for AmigaDOS and
format.dat for SunOS) and throughly describe the geometry to the SCSI
driver. The OS then uses that information to place various filesystem
goodies on cylinder boundaries for efficiency (switching heads is a lot
less time consuming than moving them).
Additionally,
whatever (low level) formatting software comes with the
host might or not might not work with an embedded drive... if there
is a canned procedure for installing the OS (old variants of UNIX come
to mind), it might or might not succeed with an embedded drive if it
was written to expect an ACB-4xxx.
That's what I'm afraid of. Finally, most
Adaptec bridge controllers I know of did support multiple
LUNs. Some SCSI drives won't like being probed for LUNs and may return
a hit for every LUN probed (I've seen that happen with some drives on
an Amiga 3000 which optionally supports multiple LUNs per target ID)
Wonderfull! More problems. If none of the
above differences trip you up, then you should have no
problem using an embedded SCSI drive in place of your ACB-4070.
I think that should have been <B>IF</B>! 
23 Jul
23 Jul
12:10 p.m.
New subject: Adaptec ACB-4070 was Re: ST-225 help needed
Yep! I have that manual. Now ... where? That may take a day or two.
The 4070 is an RLL adapter, IIRC. The 4010 was the MFM version, methinks.
BTW, it may be just the speed control on the drive. If it drifts off, the
existing format may not "fit" the time window the controller allows.
regards,
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe <rigdonj(a)cfl.rr.com>
To: <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 7:11 PM
Subject: Adaptec ACB-4070 was Re: ST-225 help needed
Does anyone have a Setup and Installation manual
for an Adaptec ACB-4070
bridge board? Adaptec has dropped support of these and
it's no longer on the
web. Does anyone know if I can simply replace this and the MFM drive that's
connected to it with a regular SCSI drive? My SB-180 uses this board and a
Tulin TL 226 drive and the drive is dying.
Joe
1:05 p.m.
New subject: (no subject)
Wow... A Mac XL cpu on ebay for $20 'Buy it Now'...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2041176168
;)
- Mike: dogas(a)bellsouth.net
22 Jul
22 Jul
4:06 p.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 977 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20020722/1dc2ba51/at…
8001
days inactive
8002
days old
14 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
acme_ent＠bellsouth.net -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
dogas＠bellsouth.net -
donm＠cts.com -
edick＠idcomm.com -
erd_6502＠yahoo.com -
geoffr＠zipcon.net -
rigdonj＠cfl.rr.com