Importing binary files without removable storage nor non-bundled software (was: TKermitFTP
5 Jan
2005
5 Jan
'05
9:34 a.m.
On Jan 5 2005, 14:27, Fred Cisin wrote:
QDOS?
Dunno, I don't have quite such old versions :-) My old copy of "The
MS-DOS Bible" says "every version" -- it means 3.30 and older --
disallows binary reads from devices. The same message is at 5254 in
MS-DOS 3.30 (ditto in PC-DOS 3.30), at 4CA0 in 3.21, and 4CCC in
IBM-DOS 4.01 (from a Compaq). I can't read my MS-DOS 2.10 and 2.11
disks on the hardware I have here. "Binary reads from a device are not
allowed" is the message at 8753 in DR-DOS 3.41.
All the ones that I could boot (ie all but 2.10/2.11) print the message
and then exit when you try COPY /B CON: dummy .
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
> > In the case of DOS 6.22, the message
"Cannot do binary reads from
a
>
device" is at offset 970F in COMMAND.COM
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005, Tom Jennings
wrote:
Sheesh, it only took them 10 years to declare it
impossible and
test for the error.
Well, ...
in DOS 4.00, it is at offset 7CCC. It may have been there since 
5 Jan
5 Jan
9:55 a.m.
New subject: Importing binary files without removable storage nor non-bundled software (was: TKermitFTP
> On Tue, 4 Jan 2005, Tom Jennings wrote:
>> Sheesh, it only took them 10 years to declare it impossible and
>> test for the error.
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Pete Turnbull wrote:
All the ones that I could boot (ie all but 2.10/2.11)
print the message
and then exit when you try COPY /B CON: dummy .
Hmm. It's clearly obvious that when personal memory, and 30+ lbs.
of documentation disagree, the printed manuals are all in error.
(I do recall some combo of copying binary files and simply not
getting desire results, but I'll chalk it up to illusion and
hallucinations.)
(I"m still awaiting my fabled LSD flashbacks, they would be much
more interesting than this.)
10:35 a.m.
New subject: Importing binary files without removable storage nor non-bundled software (was: TKermitFTP
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Tom Jennings wrote:
(I"m still awaiting my fabled LSD flashbacks,
they would be much
more interesting than this.)
Sorry if it's a disappointment, but they're hardly ever anywhere
near as weird as current reality!
2:19 p.m.
New subject: Importing binary files without removable storage nor non-bundled software (was: TKermitFTP
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Pete Turnbull wrote:
Dunno, I don't have quite such old versions :-)
My old copy of "The
MS-DOS Bible" says "every version" -- it means 3.30 and older --
disallows binary reads from devices. The same message is at 5254 in
MS-DOS 3.30 (ditto in PC-DOS 3.30), at 4CA0 in 3.21, and 4CCC in
IBM-DOS 4.01 (from a Compaq). I can't read my MS-DOS 2.10 and 2.11
disks on the hardware I have here. "Binary reads from a device are not
allowed" is the message at 8753 in DR-DOS 3.41.
The question I haven't seen answered yet is, "Well, why the hell not???"
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business || Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage Computers ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com || at http://marketplace.vintage.org ]
2:34 p.m.
New subject: Importing binary files without removable storage nor non-bundled software (was: TKermitFTP
At 10:19 PM 1/5/2005, Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
The question I haven't seen answered yet is,
"Well, why the hell not???"
Because of the CTRL/Z issue, and not having a standard character
device method of knowing when to stop reading?
- John
2:35 p.m.
Vintage Computer Festival declared on Wednesday 05 January 2005 11:19 pm:
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Pete Turnbull wrote:
Well, my guess would be that it has no way to determine the EOF coming
over the line, as it can't just "check the file length", unless there's
a ^Z there to indicate it. Thus, ASCII mode is needed.
Pat
--
Purdue University ITAP/RCS --- http://www.itap.purdue.edu/rcs/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
Dunno, I don't have quite such old versions
:-) My old copy of "The
MS-DOS Bible" says "every version" -- it means 3.30 and older --
disallows binary reads from devices. The same message is at 5254 in
MS-DOS 3.30 (ditto in PC-DOS 3.30), at 4CA0 in 3.21, and 4CCC in
IBM-DOS 4.01 (from a Compaq). I can't read my MS-DOS 2.10 and 2.11
disks on the hardware I have here. "Binary reads from a device are
not allowed" is the message at 8753 in DR-DOS 3.41.
The question I haven't seen answered yet is, "Well, why the hell
not???"
3:43 p.m.
New subject: Importing binary files without removable storage nor non-bundled software (was: TKermitFTP
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Patrick Finnegan wrote:
Vintage Computer Festival declared on Wednesday 05
January 2005 11:19 pm:
And the programmers were not smart enough to figure a way around this
because...why?
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business || Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage Computers ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com || at http://marketplace.vintage.org ]
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Pete Turnbull wrote:
Well, my guess would be that it has no way to determine the EOF coming
over the line, as it can't just "check the file length", unless
there's
a ^Z there to indicate it. Thus, ASCII mode is needed. Dunno, I don't have quite such old versions
:-) My old copy of "The
MS-DOS Bible" says "every version" -- it means 3.30 and older --
disallows binary reads from devices. The same message is at 5254 in
MS-DOS 3.30 (ditto in PC-DOS 3.30), at 4CA0 in 3.21, and 4CCC in
IBM-DOS 4.01 (from a Compaq). I can't read my MS-DOS 2.10 and 2.11
disks on the hardware I have here. "Binary reads from a device are
not allowed" is the message at 8753 in DR-DOS 3.41.
The question I haven't seen answered yet is, "Well, why the hell
not???" 
3:50 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vintage Computer Festival" <vcf(a)siconic.com>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 11:43 PM
Subject: Re: Importing binary files without removable storage nor
non-bundled software (was: TKermitFTP
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Patrick Finnegan wrote:
Programmers did have a work around. The answer for decades has been hex.
Many times I transfered software to both DOS and CP/M by using hex files.
Randy
www.s100-manuals.com
Vintage Computer Festival declared on Wednesday
05 January 2005 11:19 pm:
And the programmers were not smart enough to figure a way around this
because...why?
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer
Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger
http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business || Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage
mputers ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com || at
http://marketplace.vintage.org ] On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Pete Turnbull wrote:
Well, my guess would be that it has no way to determine the EOF coming
over the line, as it can't just "check the file length", unless
there's
a ^Z there to indicate it. Thus, ASCII mode is needed. Dunno, I don't have quite such old versions
:-) My old copy of "The
MS-DOS Bible" says "every version" -- it means 3.30 and older --
disallows binary reads from devices. The same message is at 5254 in
MS-DOS 3.30 (ditto in PC-DOS 3.30), at 4CA0 in 3.21, and 4CCC in
IBM-DOS 4.01 (from a Compaq). I can't read my MS-DOS 2.10 and 2.11
disks on the hardware I have here. "Binary reads from a device are
not allowed" is the message at 8753 in DR-DOS 3.41.
The question I haven't seen answered yet is, "Well, why the hell
not???"
6 Jan
6 Jan
2:50 a.m.
New subject: Importing binary files without removable storage nor non-bundled software (was: TKermitFTP
At 11:43 PM 1/5/2005, you wrote:
And the programmers were not smart enough to figure a
way around this
because...why?
It's been a while, but MS-DOS derived its programming models from CP/M,
not Unix. If it's just expecting ASCII, you can use a meta-character
(like CTRL/Z) in the stream to know when to stop (or CTRL/S CTRL/Q to
pause and resume a handshaked char stream, for that matter), or you
need a programming model that includes a way to send the notion of
"end of file" outside the band of the simple stream of bytes (as well
as handling other flow-of-control outside of band).
Low-level DOS didn't have a low-level model like that at first. Maybe
it was added later. Maybe it never was. Certainly DOS, as the shell,
needed to maintain compatibility with the original method. Perhaps
someone else can describe if or when it was added to later models
of character devices in DOS or Windows, and whether it shows up
in the shell. (I do remember using several Unix-like DOS command
shell replacements to get around cruft like this. To this day,
a Cygwin shell resides on my Win2000 desktop.)
Sure, Unix is very good at copying binary or ASCII, and that's where your
expectation comes from. When you "cat >file", you enter a meta-char
like CTRL/D to tell the shell you want to stop entering chars to the file
(you're at end of file), and it sends the proper out-of-band message
to "cat", as opposed to sending it the actual CTRL/D.
It sends it through a function that receives more info than just
bytes. For example, the heart of a simplified "cat" program looks like:
while( (c = getc( rptr )) != EOF ) {
putchar( c );
}
where EOF is an int, usually -1, not a valid char. In English,
"read a char, write the char, until EOF."
I don't pretend to be a Unix or low-level MS-DOS expert who can
quote chapter and verse, but I think this is the gist of it.
- John
6:18 a.m.
New subject: Importing binary files without removable storage nor non-bundled software (was: TKermitFTP
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
Because it is not theoretically possible, given the limitations of
IBM feces serial ports and the usual serial environment. There's
simply no way to get the information (file size, or EOF) from one
system to the other and preserve the trivial unstructured
character stream.
That's what protocols like XMODEM etc do; create an information
structure with which to send meta data.
Well, my guess
would be that it has no way to determine the EOF coming
over the line, as it can't just "check the file length", unless
there's
a ^Z there to indicate it. Thus, ASCII mode is needed.
And the programmers were not smart enough to figure a way around this
because...why?
6:09 a.m.
New subject: Importing binary files without removable storage nor non-bundled software (was: TKermitFTP
> "Binary reads from a device are not
> allowed" is the message at 8753 in DR-DOS 3.41.
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
The question I haven't seen answered yet is,
"Well, why the hell not???"
The real answer is: there is no out-of-band signalling, so one of
the 128 in-band symbols (SUB, 26 decimal) is chosen to mean "END
OF FILE". It's borrowed from CP/M-80; I don't know where DR got
it; it seems un-DEC-ish.
("Out of band" signalling is, for RS-232 et al, the hardware
handshake lines. No one likes them, everyone complains like
babies, so they have essentially been deprecated.)
The practical answer is: COMMAND.COM does something to the effect:
while ( byte available from the COM port)
read byte
is it Control-Z?
TERMINATE COPY COMMAND
is it Null?
--> bit bucket
is it Character MSDOS Doesn't Like?
--> bit bucket
...
copy byte to file
is DISK FULL?
TERMINATE COPY COMMAND
continue
10:09 a.m.
New subject: Importing binary files without removable storage nor non-bundled
> "Binary reads from a device are not
> allowed" is the message at 8753 in DR-DOS 3.41.
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
The question I haven't seen answered yet is,
"Well, why the hell not???"
The real answer is: there is no out-of-band signalling, so one of the 128 in-band symbols (SUB, 26 decimal) is chosen to
mean "END
OF FILE". It's borrowed from CP/M-80; I don't know where DR got
it; it seems un-DEC-ish.
("Out of band" signalling is, for RS-232 et al, the hardware
handshake lines. No one likes them, everyone complains like
babies, so they have essentially been deprecated.)
That's mainly because they are not hardware handshake lines, at least not
for things like that. They were status lines between a terminal and the
local modem, not the device at the other end of the link. Using them for
flow cotnrol is actually contrary to the RS232 standard (or at least the
one I saw).
I suppose using the for end-of-file (which could be taken to be similar
to loss-of-carrier or something) would sort-of comply with the standards,
but I doubt that was ever done.
Problem is that if you use them as they were originally intended then
you'll have problems because nobody else does that. I remember bitterly
doing battle with the HP82164 RS232 interface. This seems to have been
designed by someboy who has read the standard but has never seen a
real-world 'RS232' device. I seem to remember some very odd pin-swaps to
get it working...
-tony
7 Jan
7 Jan
10:21 a.m.
New subject: Importing binary files without removable storage nor non-bundled software (was: TKermitFTP
> disks on the hardware I have here. "Binary
reads from a device are not
> allowed" is the message at 8753 in DR-DOS 3.41.
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005,
Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
The question I haven't seen answered yet is,
"Well, why the hell not???"
Because the ONLY data that it has to determine EOF is the incoming data
stream.
Following in Gary Kildall's footsteps, they chose to use ^Z as an EOF
marker, thereby permanently disabling the capability of using the device
for inputting anything that contains byte 1Ah
When I was writing XenoComm-Parallel, I would have preferred to do it as a
device driver, so that the user could use COPY. Instead, I had to write a
small stand-alone program.
To be able to sense EOF reauires setting aside one bit pattern for an EOF
character,
using a sequence of bytes (how do you transfer the HELP file that lists
them?)
using user intervention ("press the ANY key when it is done")
using a hardware signal outside of the data stream.
I seriously considered using a time-out to trigger EOF detection! (a
generally BAD idea)
My usual machine for internet access just croaked (bad checksum in
NTVDM.EXE), so, I'm using a Chembook notebook that has several
broken keyboard keys, (so I'll have plenty of spelling errs), while I
figure
out how to boot the machine well enough
to fix it.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
11:23 p.m.
New subject: Importing binary files without removable storage nor non-bundled software (was: TKermitFTP
My usual machine for internet access just croaked (bad
checksum in
NTVDM.EXE), so, I'm using a Chembook notebook that has several
I'm *amazed* how many people on this list still struggle on with Windows.
I would have thought most people with the geeky proclivities that would
lead them into playing with old computers would all be running one of the
many free OSes.
Gordon.
9 Jan
9 Jan
7:28 a.m.
New subject: geek OS
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 gordonjcp(a)gjcp.net wrote:
I'm *amazed* how many people on this list still
struggle on with Windows.
I would have thought most people with the geeky proclivities that would
lead them into playing with old computers would all be running one of the
many free OSes.
Windows is appropriate in places, there's many good software
packages for it, but I otherwise agree you, especiially for anyone
with more than pedestrian demands.
I just sink further into geekdom, and after getting bamboozled by
the increasing complexity and featuritis of linux (SuSE 9.2) (*)
"went back" to freeBSD. (It's > 10 years old... :-)
I found that since the last time I used it (mid 90's) it's MUCH
nicer. Supports all the crappy hardware I have (Sony VAIO vx89),
boots 2X faster, imported, transformed all my data, and tuned for
the new OS in three days.
I'm running fvwm2 (over KDE), gained 200 MEGABYTES FREE MEMORY!,
and sacrificed *nothing* in the way of convenience. Nothing.
I installed it with the three-floppy kernel and an ethernet to the
world (at UCI.EDU, fat pipe to freebsd.org). Practically painless.
Geek onward!
(*) somehow Yast got confused; can't ID the OS version, couldn't
figure out how to do online updates any more. Spent a few hous
over a few weeks trying to track down just how yast determines it,
realized there was a lengthening list of problems knowable, but
unwilling, to solve. CVS for updates is at least debuggable. Big
linux distros are getting more and more baroque as they try to
"compete" with W$.
8:26 a.m.
New subject: geek OS
On Sun, 2005-01-09 at 13:28 -0800, Tom Jennings wrote:
Windows is appropriate in places,
Yeah, the
trash can. :P
there's many good software
packages for it,
Definately (spuhlyng?) true. But GPL apps *are* catching up -
just look
at OpenOffice 2 betas... They're progressing very very fast :)
I just sink further into geekdom, and after getting
bamboozled by
the increasing complexity and featuritis of linux (SuSE 9.2) (*)
"went back" to freeBSD. (It's > 10 years old... :-)
I do not want
to start a distro war. But I like the two deb-based
distros Ubuntu and, well, Debian :)
Kickass package management, you start with a base system and install
what you need. (apt-get install x-window-system build-essential gnome
openoffice-org gives you a good system) Ubuntu fits an entire desktop
system, with automatic updates, on *one CD*. And GNOME runs *fast*
nowadays. (though, not quite fast enough for me - a lot of my hardware
is ontopic here. I run Fluxbox, you should give it a spin.)
I'm running fvwm2 (over KDE), gained 200 MEGABYTES
FREE MEMORY!,
and sacrificed *nothing* in the way of convenience. Nothing.
Well, you *are* a
geek, remember... You don't need a big DE, newbies do.
My 73-year-old grandmother is very happy with GNOME.
Most of what KDE loads probably stands in swap anyways. Still quite big.
I installed it with the three-floppy kernel and an
ethernet to the
world (at UCI.EDU, fat pipe to freebsd.org). Practically painless.
Ditto with
Debian, though I think the floppy count is higher. But if
you've got a server running Linux nearby, netboot! One floppy, and you
have the full, semi-graphical installer. (The Debian installer is no
longer as horrid as the myth that surrounds it. Yes, at one point, it
truly was horrid.)
Geek onward!
As if I intended to just stop? :)
Big
linux distros are getting more and more baroque as they try to
"compete" with W$.
Absolutely. That's why I stay clear of them. But
the one userfriendly
distro I recommend and endorse is Ubuntu, a newcomer, but wow... It's
beautiful both technically and visually. I suggest you give it a spoon.
--
Tore S Bekkedal <toresbe(a)ifi.uio.no>
The light at the end of the tunnel is Cherenkov Radiation
9:32 a.m.
New subject: geek OS
In message <1105309578.8243.47.camel@fortran>
Tore S Bekkedal <toresbe(a)ifi.uio.no> wrote:
On Sun, 2005-01-09 at 13:28 -0800, Tom Jennings
wrote:
At the risk of being flamed to death, the NT-based versions (especially
Win2k) aren't too bad. Certainly loads better than the 9x series. Linux still
beats the crap out of it in terms of raw speed and usability on older
hardware, but W2K isn't too bad for general software development. I wouldn't
recommend putting a '2K box online unless it was behind a firewall
(preferably a NAT) and had all the security patches installed.
Windows is appropriate in places,
Yeah,
the trash can. :P I do not want to start a distro war. But I like the
two deb-based
distros Ubuntu and, well, Debian :)
I tried Debian for a good two months, then went back to Slackware.
Kickass package management, you start with a base
system and install
what you need. (apt-get install x-window-system build-essential gnome
openoffice-org gives you a good system) Ubuntu fits an entire desktop
system, with automatic updates, on *one CD*. And GNOME runs *fast*
nowadays. (though, not quite fast enough for me - a lot of my hardware
is ontopic here.
My primary Linux dev system is a Panasonic CF-25 Toughbook - Pentium 133 CPU,
10" TFT (vibration-proofed), 3GB shock-mounted hard drive, 32MB RAM, CD and
FDD (either the FDD or CD can be installed, but you have to power down to
swap them). I put Win98SE on there too, primarily because 2k really doesn't
work well on a P133...
I run Fluxbox, you should give it a spin.)
I might have to grab a copy of that to play with on my Toughbook.
Absolutely. That's why I stay clear of them. But
the one userfriendly
distro I recommend and endorse is Ubuntu, a newcomer, but wow... It's
beautiful both technically and visually. I suggest you give it a spoon.
I've got a 6GB hard drive on order for the Toughbook - I'll have to give
Ubuntu a shot when it arrives. After I've swapped the keyboard assembly over,
that is - a few of the key guides appear to have worn out (or been soaked in
cola) and now the keys are binding on the guides :-/
BTW, anyone got a spare 64MB 144-pin EDO SODIMM?
Later,
--
Phil. | Acorn Risc PC600 Mk3, SA202, 64MB, 6GB,
philpem(a)philpem.me.uk | ViewFinder, 10BaseT Ethernet, 2-slice,
http://www.philpem.me.uk/ | 48xCD, ARCINv6c IDE, SCSI
... One way to better your lot is to do a lot better...
12:55 p.m.
New subject: geek OS
> I'm running fvwm2 (over KDE), gained 200
MEGABYTES FREE MEMORY!,
> and sacrificed *nothing* in the way of convenience. Nothing.
Well, you *are* a geek, remember... You don't need
a big DE, newbies do.
My 73-year-old grandmother is very happy with GNOME.
Most of what KDE loads probably stands in swap anyways. Still quite big.
This is the part I really hate about Linux distro's. At work they
seem to think we want to run either KDE or GNOME, and those are the
only two options when logging into a system. Sorry, I want to run
either MWM (talk about sick and twisted), or a pre-V1 version of
Afterstep that I was originally running on an RS/6000 350 workstation
at work 8+ years ago! As a result I just login under the failsafe
mode without a window manager and fire up what *I* want. I did run
Enlightenment for a few years at work, but since I'm running my Unix
desktop via VNC these days I prefer a much lighter weight solution.
Last time I loaded a system at home with Linux, I opted for Debian.
At least with it, it is possible to do an installation without quite
so much garbage. Still ever since I moved my Mac to Mac OS X last
year, I've not had much need for a Linux box at home.
Zane
--
--
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
| | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| PDP-10 Emulation and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
9:29 a.m.
New subject: geek OS
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 13:28:55 -0800 (PST), Tom Jennings <tomj(a)wps.com> wrote:
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 gordonjcp(a)gjcp.net wrote:
As the other's have sometimes you have to run windows. I can't afford
a high end mac, so I need to use windows. Openoffice can't deal with
some excel files and last time I looked any powerpoint documents. I
get these on a regular basis. They seem to be quite happy to buy
licenses, having just about 5,000 dell machines with XP. I don't have
any say in this.
It is also a lot easier to put songs on my ipod and other bits on my
phone on windows then it is on linux. That's without even speaking
about games.
Then again the main programs I use are ZOC and Cygwin/X., connected to
the Suns and Vaxen humming away, heating up my flat and really
annoying the missus. "Why do you need all those computers on when you
only ever use one !"
.
I would also say that this machine XP pro, has not crashed and has
behaved it self. I would say the last time it was even rebooted was
october when I got a bigger hard drive.
I'm *amazed* how many people on this list
still struggle on with Windows.
I would have thought most people with the geeky proclivities that would
lead them into playing with old computers would all be running one of the
many free OSes.
10 Jan
10 Jan
6:07 a.m.
New subject: geek OS
Rumor has it that Dan Williams may have mentioned these words:
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 13:28:55 -0800 (PST), Tom Jennings
<tomj(a)wps.com> wrote:
As I have to, at both work and home. Work: Peachtree. Other than that, I
SSH into all of my linux servers. ;-) Home: MPEG transcoding software from
my TiVo to SVCD. Linux just doesn't have the (inexpensive) software yet.
Good stuff is $$$$$, free stuff isn't worth dealing with.
On Sat, 8 Jan 2005 gordonjcp(a)gjcp.net wrote:
> I'm *amazed* how many people on this list still struggle on with Windows.
> I would have thought most people with the geeky proclivities that would
> lead them into playing with old computers would all be running one of the
> many free OSes.
As the other's have sometimes you have to run windows. Openoffice can't deal with
some excel files and last time I looked any powerpoint documents.
OO 1.1.x has opened every excel file I threw at it so far; but that's not
saying much; I don't deal with very high-end spreadsheets. And now that I
have my serial cable & floppy emulation software set up for my Tandy 200, I
want to see how well it opens SYLK files from MultiPlan... hehehe -- It's
interesting how it opens more MicroSoft formats than M$... ;-)
It's *supposed* to work well with powerpoint, but I never use them, so I
can't say how well it does it.
OpenOffice 1.9.(mumble) is out in beta form - it's supposed to be even
closer yet, and has a GUI database as well. I don't know if it supports
Access databases... haven't installed it yet. (Tonite at home.)
That's without even speaking about games.
That's why most people still run Winders.
Win2K, all security patches, no firewall, running Mozilla Firefox & Eudora
(but sometimes use Mutt directly on the servers) -- scan for spyware every
2-3 *weeks* (only come up positive every 3rd scan or so) and have no
problems at all. Granted, I wouldn't recommand a "non-geek" do this. ;-)
=-=-=-=
Everyone's talking 'distro' (this 'Ubuntu' sounds interesting --
methinks I
need to check it out) -- if you want to use a distro that *runs* from CD,
try Knoppix. It boots, you try it out, make sure all the stuff works, then
pull the CD & reboot -- no changes to the system.
[[ and I certainly don't want to 'war' about it either - they all have
their strengths and weaknesses! ]]
For my laptop, I went the "Other Way." www.linuxfromscratch.org -- I
compiled *everything* for my Crusoe processor, and lemme tell ya, it's
*fast*. From boot, including FVWM 2.5.(mumble), Apache, Coldfusion 4.5 (I
need to support it), PostgreSQL, and total memory used is under 80Meg.
Granted, it took me a month of spare time to get the way I like it... but
damn, do I like it. ;-) If you want to speed things up and have multiple
Linux boxen available, check out distcc -- distributed compiling across
several boxen; it works well, too.
The wife runs linux -- despite the fact she's the "Anti-Geek" (I installed
a basic RedHat 9 - she couldn't install Winders either if she tried...), my
next door neighbor just installed it & was surprised how easy it was - He'd
heard the horror stories, but thought it was just as easy as installing
windows. ;-)
It's getting there...
Laterz,
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
--
Roger "Merch" Merchberger | "Profile, don't speculate."
SysAdmin, Iceberg Computers | Daniel J. Bernstein
zmerch(a)30below.com |
10:32 p.m.
New subject: geek OS
Roger Merchberger wrote:
As I have to, at both work and home. Work: Peachtree.
Other than that, I
SSH into all of my linux servers. ;-) Home: MPEG transcoding software
from my TiVo to SVCD. Linux just doesn't have the (inexpensive) software
yet. Good stuff is $$$$$, free stuff isn't worth dealing with.
Are you on crack? Mencoder does the job admirably.
Gordon JC Pearce
11 Jan
11 Jan
2:25 a.m.
New subject: geek OS
Roger Merchberger wrote:
I've got to agree with Roger, the free encoders just aren't worth
messing with. The interesting thing is that $50 gets you TMPGEnc
Plus on Windows, which is one of the best encoders around. Given the
choice between that and the Compressor (Pro Apple software) on my G5
PowerMac, and I'll take TMPGEnc Plus, at least for VCD or SVCD. I
have used Compressor to do Anamorphic Widescreen home movies, and for
MPEG2, it is probably better.
Zane
--
--
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
| | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| PDP-10 Emulation and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
As I have to, at both work and home. Work:
Peachtree. Other than
that, I SSH into all of my linux servers. ;-) Home: MPEG
transcoding software from my TiVo to SVCD. Linux just doesn't have
the (inexpensive) software yet. Good stuff is $$$$$, free stuff
isn't worth dealing with.
Are you on crack? Mencoder does the job admirably.
Gordon JC Pearce
3:11 a.m.
New subject: geek OS
On Tuesday 11 January 2005 11:25, Zane H. Healy wrote:
And I'll have to agree with Gordon. I've used mecnoder to transcode
several things from MJPEG (what my video capture card spits out) to
MPEG4/DivX. It usually works flawlessly. The only bear is getting it
set up the first time (and figuring out the command line). But once
you've got "a Clue", it works great.
Of course, by now we've drifted WAY off topic...
Pat
--
Purdue University ITAP/RCS --- http://www.itap.purdue.edu/rcs/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
Roger
Merchberger wrote:
I've got to agree with Roger, the free encoders just aren't worth
messing with. The interesting thing is that $50 gets you TMPGEnc As I have to, at both work and home. Work:
Peachtree. Other than
that, I SSH into all of my linux servers. ;-) Home: MPEG
transcoding software from my TiVo to SVCD. Linux just doesn't have
the (inexpensive) software yet. Good stuff is $$$$$, free stuff
isn't worth dealing with.
Are you on crack? Mencoder does the job admirably.
Gordon JC Pearce
5:08 a.m.
New subject: geek OS
{{{
Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
>Roger Merchberger wrote:
>>As I have to, at both work and home. Work: Peachtree. Other than that, I
>>SSH into all of my linux servers. ;-) Home: MPEG transcoding software
>>from my TiVo to SVCD. Linux just doesn't have the (inexpensive) software
>>yet. Good stuff is $$$$$, free stuff isn't worth dealing with.
>
>Are you on crack? Mencoder does the job admirably.
Having never even smoked pot, I *should* be offended by that... but I won't.
'Course, having been xcoding MPEGs from my TiVo for almost 4 years, and
having seen the output of Mencoder compared to TMPGEnc, I *should* be
offended by that...
As I do *many* shows (for my wife, mainly) I also rely heavily on AviSynth
-- a most excellent tool for assembling, resizing (it even supports Lanczos
resizing, and has plugins for *everything*), and scripting -- and as it's
all text, I have a custom GUI Python program for determining the commercial
breaks & final bandwidth to just fill an SVCD,
And is there a decent tool similar to VirtualDub that can help me *find*
the commercial breaks to cut them?
=== Just because your tool works good *for you* certainly does not mean
it's not suitable for me due to a drug habit.
}}}
and rumor has it that Zane H. Healy may have mentioned these words:
I've got to agree with Roger, the free encoders
just aren't worth messing
with. The interesting thing is that $50 gets you TMPGEnc Plus on Windows,
which is one of the best encoders around. Given the choice between that
and the Compressor (Pro Apple software) on my G5 PowerMac, and I'll take
TMPGEnc Plus, at least for VCD or SVCD. I have used Compressor to do
Anamorphic Widescreen home movies, and for MPEG2, it is probably better.
SVCD is MPEG2 -- and I've put TMPGEnc head-to-head with Premiere 6.0, and I
saw little difference; certainly not to justify the difference in price.
Once I found and learned AviSynth, I'll put the combo of the 2 against
darned near anything for speed, ease of use and quality.
AviSynth is one of those tools that it takes a bit'o'learning to use, but
once you do, resizing, deinterlacing, decimating & whatnot are childs play.
Anyway, that's all I have to say. Thanks, Zane!
Laterz,
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
--
Roger "Merch" Merchberger | "Bugs of a feather flock together."
sysadmin, Iceberg Computers | Russell Nelson
zmerch(a)30below.com |
6:21 a.m.
New subject: Zendex ZX-564 and ZBX-288 multibus SCSI
Does anyone have one of these board sets?
--tnx
--tom
6:24 a.m.
New subject: Zendex ZX-564 and ZBX-288 multibus SCSI
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005, Tom Uban wrote:
Does anyone have one of these board sets?
I have a Zendex Multibus system but I have no idea if it has the board set
in it.
And for what it's worth, Zendex still exists (near me in Dublin,
California).
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business || Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage Computers ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com || at http://marketplace.vintage.org ]
6:42 a.m.
New subject: Zendex ZX-564 and ZBX-288 multibus SCSI
At 12:24 PM 1/11/2005 -0800, you wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005, Tom Uban wrote:
Would you please check? If so, are you willing to part with it?
Does anyone have one of these board sets?
I have a Zendex Multibus system but I have no idea if it has the board set
in it. And for what it's worth, Zendex still exists (near
me in Dublin,
California).
I noticed that they seem to still have a web page and all, but I was
hoping not to have to buy new product...
--tnx
--tom
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business || Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage Computers ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com || at http://marketplace.vintage.org ]
9 Jan
9 Jan
9:37 a.m.
New subject: geek OS
Tom Jennings wrote:
I installed it with the three-floppy kernel and an
ethernet to the
world (at UCI.EDU, fat pipe to freebsd.org). Practically painless.
Geek onward!
Umm it is not so painless if have the skinny dial up line to the net.
I just installed new version 4.8 from CD/R from Free-Bytes and the
harderst part was finding 3 floppies that still work. Still since I
plan to do some CPLD design ( BASED of TTL logic ) I still have to use
windows. NOW FPLA/CPLD software sure has bloated over the last few years
so now you can't seem to do any design work from a GUI setup.
12:50 p.m.
New subject: Using crap hardware (was: Importing binary files without removable storage nor non-bundled software (was: TKermitFTP
> My usual machine for internet access just croaked
(bad checksum in
> NTVDM.EXE), so, I'm using a Chembook notebook that has several
On Sat, 8
Jan 2005 gordonjcp(a)gjcp.net wrote:
I'm *amazed* how many people on this list still
struggle on with Windows.
I would have thought most people with the geeky proclivities that would
lead them into playing with old computers would all be running one of the
many free OSes.
guilty as charged. but with an explanation. . . .
The POS Chembook belongs to my employer. I am not authorized to modify
it. They think that it is still worth "thousands of dollars". When the
keyboard went bad, it was cheaper for me to replace the whole machine with
a used Dell Latitude CP than to get a replacement keyboard. I kept the
Dell MOSTLY matching the Chembook to use as an internet terminal with
the crappy MICROS~1 stuff that I "had to" keep on the machine.
For my own stuff, I have mostly 8088 and 286 machines (with lots of
different drives), and hardly any of them even have modems or serial
ports. With some of the other crap that is keeping me busy, I've been
getting rid of stuff, even most of XenoSoft.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com
5 Jan
5 Jan
3:08 p.m.
New subject: Imlac PDS-1 success!
After 3 years of part-time debugging, I've gotten my Imlac PDS-1 booting
original software!
I got an Imlac PDS-1 shortly after VCF East 1.0 and began to study the
documentation and
tinker with the machine. This was an original 4K word PDS-1 'Alpha' Imlac
(meaning it does
not have long vector support, and an odd non-linear display mapping designed
for text).
This PDS-1 had seen some modifications in it past lives. The original 4K
core memory was
one of the weak points, and had been 'upgraded' to use 8K words of static
ram. But for several
reasons the machine was unable to address the top 4K.
Additionally the main CPU was rather unstalble, often crashing even when
running 2 or 3 instruction
loops. The quality of the logic power supplies was very poor, with high 120
hz ripple. This made
me think the power supply needed to be re-capped, etc. There was also an
excessive amount of
high frequency noise as the original Imlac Engineers had left out the usual
decoupling caps from 99%
of the the logic for both processors (display and main CPU).
After some power supply work, and several weeks of evenings of soldering
small caps to the boards
to tame the logic supplies the machine was able to run hand-toggled programs
on the main CPU.
The Display Processor was another story. Any attempts to draw short vectors
with a -y displacement
produced +y axis vectors. This was chased down to an original Imlac option
board that expands the
display processors address space from 4K to 8K. With that option pulled (as
the machine could only address 4K anyway) I finally got the machine to
reliably display the HELLO test pattern.
But the basic stability problem soon returned. One recent evening I got a
little lucky and found
that the linear regulator for the +5 volt supply was dropping out of
regulation due to a high frequency
oscillation on one of the pins of the regulator IC. This was repaired, and
I once again had a solid
machine to work on.
I discovered that for the main CPU to address 8K several modifications were
needed, I had to
change some wire-pairs in the external programmers console box (which
already had the 8K
address switch and indicators), as well as debug the logic on the SRAM
modification that added
the extra bits to the memory address and program counter registers.
Imlac's hardware engineers also decided that the transistors driving the
console lamps did not need
base current limiting resistors, so they pull a TTL output to ground when
lit. This nailed the new
address bit low as far as the rest of the machine was concerned. A set of
TTL buffers restored
the new address bit with an absolute minimum of modifications.
Dallas NV SRAMS replaced the srams, so the 'appearance' of core memory
returned. At this point
I thought I had a solid 8K machine, except for the display processor anyway.
A plug-in replacement for the stock Imlac serial I/O board (110 baud!) was
designed and slipped
into the correct slot, with the ability to load Imlac software (stand-alone)
from eeprom.
But the machine would not boot correctly. I discovered that the bootstrap
loader was having
problems with the 4K address boundry, and indirect address transfers were
not correctly setting
the high order memory address bit.
More debugging of the sram modifications brought me to a missing connection,
and now I really
had a working 8K word Imlac main CPU with a 4K display processor.
Even after this it would not boot correctly, until I tweaked my serial
interface hack slightly, and
tested several binary images from Tom Uban's liberary.
Then early tonight I successfully loaded and ran a terminal emulation
program. It took well over
150 hours of on-again, off-again debugging, but seeing a page full of green
flickering vector text
was worth every moment.
And there is nothing like a 16 bit mimi with real incandescent bulbs
flickering on the panel!
I've still got some debugging and repair to do, and then the cosmetic
restoration of the display
and keyboard section will begin. I imagine that in about a year more, I'll
have the machine in
a very cherry state, excepting that the original core has been replaced.
But even that upgrade
is 'vintage' (having been done in the early 1980's). So maybe the upgrade
was not completed
until 2005, but thats a minor detail really.
I've restored five or six machines from the 1960's (this Imlac is circa
1969), but by far this
has been the most envolved job yet. Most other machines need a repair or
two and then
worked fine, but this Imlac has been a very different experiance.
Some may argue that I should have removed the sram mods and re-installed the
original core.
Alas, the original core (which I have) was never very reliable, and some of
the Imlac software of
the most interest to me requires 8K. There is also a (good) argument that
the modification to
sram is very much a part of the machine to preserve and has been in the
machine for over 15 years.
Perhaps some day soon I'll be using this Imlac as the system console on one
of my HP 2116's.
That would be just about the 'right' amount of blinking lights, for a single
user system anyway.
3:49 p.m.
New subject: Imlac PDS-1 success!
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005, Bob Shannon wrote:
After 3 years of part-time debugging, I've gotten
my Imlac PDS-1 booting
original software!
Bob,
Congratulations. This sounds like it was quite the epic restoration.
Very well done.
I hope someday to have the time (and miraculously develop the skills) to
get mine up and running.
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business || Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage Computers ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com || at http://marketplace.vintage.org ]
6 Jan
6 Jan
3:34 a.m.
New subject: Imlac PDS-1 success!
I hope someday to have the time (and miraculously
develop the skills) to get mine up and running.
Bob is building quite a reputation.
Personally, I hope to someday have the _money_ to bring
one of my computers to Mr. Shannon's caring attention.
John A.
1:26 p.m.
New subject: Imlac PDS-1 success!
I've still got a large pile of spare parts.
I'd be happy to help you get yours running.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vintage Computer Festival" <vcf(a)siconic.com>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 12:49 AM
Subject: Re: Imlac PDS-1 success!
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005, Bob Shannon wrote:
After 3 years of part-time debugging, I've
gotten my Imlac PDS-1 booting
original software!
Bob,
Congratulations. This sounds like it was quite the epic restoration.
Very well done.
I hope someday to have the time (and miraculously develop the skills) to
get mine up and running.
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer
Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger
http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business || Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage
mputers ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com || at
http://marketplace.vintage.org ]
1:29 p.m.
New subject: Imlac PDS-1 success!
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005, Bob Shannon wrote:
I've still got a large pile of spare parts.
I'd be happy to help you get yours running.
I'd like to take up your offer as soon as I get a bunch of projects out of
the way. With any luck, I'll be ready to start on this by the Summer.
Thanks!
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business || Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage Computers ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com || at http://marketplace.vintage.org ]
5 Jan
5 Jan
8:31 p.m.
New subject: Imlac PDS-1 success!
After 3 years of part-time debugging, I've gotten
my Imlac PDS-1 booting
original software!
I'll join Sellam with the congrats! That's the sort of level of debugging
I want to get to too, but lack the background knowledge of working
electronics. I think I need to get my paws on a copy of 'the art of
electronics' and dig out my old science fair 200-in-one kit :)
Nice one!
--
adrian/witchy
Binary Dinosaurs creator/curator
www.binarydinosaurs.co.uk - the UKs biggest home computer collection?
6 Jan
6 Jan
12:19 a.m.
New subject: Imlac PDS-1 success!
Bob Shannon wrote:
After 3 years of part-time debugging, I've gotten
my Imlac PDS-1 booting
original software!
Wow! Superb job! Congrats! :-)
<snip>
The Display Processor was another story. Any attempts
to draw short
vectors with a -y displacement
produced +y axis vectors. This was chased down to an original Imlac
option board that expands the
display processors address space from 4K to 8K. With that option pulled
(as the machine could only address 4K anyway) I finally got the machine
to reliably display the HELLO test pattern.
Did you manage to debug that option board also?
But the basic stability problem soon returned. One recent evening I got
a little lucky and found
that the linear regulator for the +5 volt supply was dropping out of
regulation due to a high frequency
oscillation on one of the pins of the regulator IC. This was repaired,
and I once again had a solid
machine to work on.
How did you repair this? Did you replace the 7805 (I presume) or did you
put a bypass cap at the input?
<snip>
Imlac's hardware engineers also decided that the
transistors driving the
console lamps did not need
base current limiting resistors, so they pull a TTL output to ground
when lit. This nailed the new
address bit low as far as the rest of the machine was concerned. A set
of TTL buffers restored
the new address bit with an absolute minimum of modifications.
So the TTL buffers were borked?
Dallas NV SRAMS replaced the srams, so the 'appearance' of core memory
returned. At this point
I thought I had a solid 8K machine, except for the display processor
anyway.
A plug-in replacement for the stock Imlac serial I/O board (110 baud!)
was designed and slipped
into the correct slot, with the ability to load Imlac software
Wow. You design this board yourself or did you copy from the original
schematics?
All in all, very impressive debugging/detective work. Congrats again!
/wai-sun
1:51 p.m.
New subject: Imlac PDS-1 success!
Wai-Sun Chia asked:
<snip>
Not yet. I have 2 spares for this board, each slightly different from the
one that was installed. None of them 'work' correctly, but I suspect
that this may be due to other problems the machine had (that are now
corrected).
I've not installed or re-tested the 8K display extensions since resolving
the
last issues that got the machine booting 4K Imlac programs.
Currently I'm working my way through the available software and seeing
whats what. Then I'll jump back onto the display procesor so I can run
the 8K debugger.
7805!? Thats funny.
No, the main 5 volt supply uses a 723 linear regulator controller that
drives
a stack of 2N3055 power transistors to deliver 15 amps at +5 volts.
The 'quick fix' for the regulator board was to swap it with a working spare.
I'll replace the regulator chip in the other board in time, and perhaps add
a
small cap to the feedback pin for HF bypass to ground.
This will prevent any noise from the logic from pushing the regulation
feedback
loop into oscillation.
I designed the serial board, but trust me, this is not rocket science.
Mainly
I copied a small bit of interface logic from the original schematics, then I
tacked on a modern microcontroller and wrote a little code.
This is now I'm now able to reach inside and flick a switch to boot the CPU
The Display
Processor was another story. Any attempts to draw short
vectors with a -y displacement
produced +y axis vectors. This was chased down to an original Imlac
option board that expands the
display processors address space from 4K to 8K. With that option pulled
(as the machine could only address 4K anyway) I finally got the machine
to reliably display the HELLO test pattern.
Did you manage to debug that option board also? But the basic
stability problem soon returned. One recent evening I got
a little lucky and found
that the linear regulator for the +5 volt supply was dropping out of
regulation due to a high frequency
oscillation on one of the pins of the regulator IC. This was repaired,
and I once again had a solid
machine to work on.
How did you repair this? Did you replace the 7805 (I presume) or did you
put a bypass cap at the input? <snip>
No, the 'stock' buffers (2 sections of a 7404 in series) work fine, but
there
was no display buffers for PC.3 and MA.3 (Imlacs have their bits numbered
backwards!).
These were needed, but omitted from the design of the SRAM / 8K extensions
added back in the early 1980's. Essentially the conversion and memory
extension
never worked exactly right, and the machine was stored that way for many
years.
I had to add a tiny board with a 7408 between the MA.3 and PC.3 signals
and the display console connector to buffer these bits.
I really can't beleive Imlac omitted the base current limiters for the
console
lamp dirver transistors.
Later model Imlac's had LED panels, so I'd guess that this extra level of
buffering is not needed on a PDS-1D.
<snip>
Imlac's hardware engineers also decided that
the transistors driving the
console lamps did not need
base current limiting resistors, so they pull a TTL output to ground when
lit. This nailed the new
address bit low as far as the rest of the machine was concerned. A set
of TTL buffers restored
the new address bit with an absolute minimum of modifications.
So the TTL buffers were borked? A plug-in
replacement for the stock Imlac serial I/O board (110 baud!)
was designed and slipped
into the correct slot, with the ability to load Imlac software
Wow. You design this board yourself or did you copy from the original
schematics? from a binary image stored right on the serial
interface board itself, then
flick the switch back for a 'normal' serial
interface, that now has modern
baud rates and crystal controlled timing.
All in all, very impressive debugging/detective work.
Congrats again!
/wai-sun
Thanks!
As many people on the list with HP's know, I'm always willing to help others
get their machines running.
If anyone is in the general Boston area and needs a hand, let me know what
I can do to help.
6:15 a.m.
New subject: Imlac PDS-1 success!
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005, Bob Shannon wrote:
After some power supply work, and several weeks of
evenings of soldering
small caps to the boards
to tame the logic supplies the machine was able to run hand-toggled programs
on the main CPU.
Now that's debugging!
I discovered that the bootstrap
loader was having
problems with the 4K address boundry, and indirect address transfers were not
correctly setting
the high order memory address bit.
Indirect addressing -- when instruction sets were interesting!
Congratulations!
7238
days inactive
7244
days old
37 comments
21 participants
participants (21)
-
allain＠panix.com -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
bshannon＠tiac.net -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
gordon＠gjcp.net -
gordonjcp＠gjcp.net -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
jfoust＠threedee.com -
pat＠computer-refuge.org -
pete＠dunnington.u-net.com -
philpem＠dsl.pipex.com -
randy＠s100-manuals.com -
tomj＠wps.com -
toresbe＠ifi.uio.no -
uban＠ubanproductions.com -
vcf＠siconic.com -
waisun.chia＠hp.com -
williams.dan＠gmail.com -
witchy＠binarydinosaurs.co.uk -
zmerch＠30below.com