Arnold Metselaar and a lot of other people (THANKS!) wrote:
> Manuel Bilderbeek wrote:
> > 1 - Why isn't the terminator needed after all? Did I
> > have a bad cable before? (When I got the "SCSI Bus is down // Host > > > self test
>failed"-error)
Arnold wrote:
> Possibly the hardiest also has a terminator built in and two terminators
> on one end of the bus is about as bad none at all. You may have had a
> bad cable before, maybe you can still test it.
I'm pretty sure there aren't any terminators on the harddisk.
See Loy Lin wrote:
> I don't know, I never did experiment with terminators, I got one on
> both sides of the cable. The BERT-'manual' speaks of 'possible damage
> if not placed right' or something.
Ok. Fact is, that my harddisk is not found with the terminator at the
end of the cable, so I can't do anything else.
Alwin Henseler wrote:
> I've used only 1 terminator with my Gouda HD interface (only
> interface + 160 MB. IBM drive, ROM v1.51, I think) as well, and this
> didn't give any big problem. I've had occasional disk errors (not
Where was this terminal? Are you referring to the internal terminator in
the interface?
> ready, disk I/O error), that always went okay after a retry.
I have had some of these errors too, but very rarely. (Hmm, this may be
bad English).
> Adding a second terminator at the other end of the cable (at the HD
> side) didn't change that behaviour at all.
As I said, in my case the harddisk can't be found anymore.
> Cable lenght is a big factor in this; with a VERY short cable (few
> cm.'s), terminators are don't cares, with longer cables (say >30
> cm.), proper termination can make the difference between no problem
> at all, or a lot of troubles (I used some 60-70 cm. cable).
I use about 50 cm cable now.
> And _some_ SCSI devices have active termination, meaning they can
> sense somehow where/when termination is needed, and activate
> termination if necessary. (I don't think such a 160 MB. IBM drive can
> do that)
Me neither.
Laurens Holst wrote:
> The terminator IS needed but some interfaces can handle them even if they
> are set incorrectly.
Why doesn't it work WITH terminator then?
> > 2 - Why doesn't the extended partitiontable work?
> > (Because I have Novaxis 1.00 ROM?)
benjamin B wrote:
> I guess so. My IBM 160Mb hd works fine on extended partitions. Not that
> you'll need it with a 160Mb hd.
I agree. But there are no other disadvantages or differences?
What's the difference between Old (PC) and Old (MSX)? (I used Old (MSX))
Alwin Henseler wrote:
> If you have only version 1.00, try upgrading the ROM in any case...
What are the differences then? By the way, Erik Maas said that my ROM
can't be 1.00 since I have the SET UP menu in it... But the ROM reports
1.00.... And I get 100kB/s, which seems to be normal for new ROMs too.
> > 3 - If I upgrade to Novaxis 1.51, can I keep all the
> > partitions, and all info on the HD? Or do I need to reinstall
> > everything?
Trunks wrote:
> Hmmmm... I'd like to say that you can keep them, but you'll have to do
>some changes on the partition table MANUALLY, not using NFDISK.
Can anyone help me with this, or at least give me instructions??
> The better way is to re-make the partition table, and install all the
>stuff after.
I DON'T WANT THAT!! Just installed everything... Don't want to redo it!
Alwin Henseler wrote:
> I think the never Novaxis ROM's WOULD recognise partitions
> used/created with older ROMs, but you know it: no guarantees.
Who knows it?
> > 4 - What causes the bad sectors, and why does SCANDISK
> > report less bad sectors than HDCHECK? (Are they random, maybe?) Why
> > only on the much better IBM drive?
Arnold wrote:
> Bad sectors can be caused by failures in the manufacturing process or by
> extreme shocks or dust moisture afterwards. I guess some sectors can
> work well at some times but not at others. This gives enough
> possibilities for different results with different programs/runs.
> Programs may give it another try and HDCHECK may be more strict in this
> respect.
But maybe the errors were random, caused by a bad cable connection or
something. Or powerdrops...
By the way, I also ran HDCHECK on partitions B and C, and it found NO
errors at all! And 42 on partition A! How odd!
See Loy Lin wrote:
> Harddisks always have a certain amount of bad sectors. In the
> factory, a table is made (the Bad-sector list), which disables those
> bad sectors. This bad-sector list is used by the SCSI-controller in
> the harddisk itself, so a user (the computer) doesn't (have to) know
> about these sectors.
Ah, I see! Thanks.
> I've also got IBM harddisks of 160 MB myself (the IBM KZ/P and KZ/C
> right?) and if I look in the FDisk-menu the total capacity is about
I have a KZ/P, according to NFDISK and the ROM.
> 157/159 MB so the usable capacity is lower than the 160 MB.
You are right!
> I don't know the program SCANDISK, but I'm familiar with HDCHECK.
> When I used it, I got 0 bad sectors!!
As me, on partitions B and C!
> Maybe you only see the bad sectors on the IBM because the bad-sector
> list is erased or not functioning anymore.
I don't think so, afaik it's never low-level formatted.
Benjamin B wrote:
> How many times have you dropped the disk between the time ran scandisk
> and hdcheck ? :)
:-) 0 times!
> > 5 - Did I handle the BAD sectors in a good way? Or are
> > there better methods?
Trunks wrote:
> Format it PHISICALLY. It will take some minutes, but it's the best way.
But I have no tool for that, and it would erase the bad sector table (if
there is any).
> > 6 - What is the FORMAT command for, since I can't format a partition
> > with it? (Or is that the task of NFDISK?)
See Loy Lin wrote: (Alwin something similar, as did trunks)
> For write protect /disable the partition. You can format
> (reinitialize?) the partition with (N)FDISK. With the BERT, the
> information in the data-sectors is not destroyed, only the file-
> system.
But why do I get an error then? (Not a DOS disk, or Disk Write
Protected, depending on which option I choose)
> > 7 - Where can I find a manual of NFDISK?
Alwin Henseler wrote:
> I received a on-disk manual for NFDISK v1.0 with the interface, and
> several pages of paper manual about it.
See Loy Lin wrote:
> My Novaxis manual has 5 pages about NFdisk. I don't know if you have that
> manual...
It wasn't in the box I got my interface in. Can anyone put something on
the web about it? (OCR?) Or send me copies, or whatever?
> > 8 - What is the difference between all those types of partitiontables?
(I mean: you can choose between Old (MSX), Old (PC) and Extended in
NFDISK1.2.)
Trunks wrote:
> The same ;)
Well, I guess not, since you can use more than 32 partitions with the
Extended. But what about the others? They haven't put it in there for
nothing, I guess!
> > 9 - Why are the Disk I/O errors (e.g. in Multi Mente) gone in a retry?
Arnold wrote:
> You have been lucky.
Trunks wrote:
> Because... the sectors... are not very well, and sometimes they work.
Well, they're gone EVERYTIME after a retry!
Benjamin B wrote:
> Are you running on 7Mhz. The manual says the interface might become unstable
> running on 7Mhz, especially on Philips computers. No problems are reported
> on MSX Turbo R though
No, I wasn't running on 7MHz, nor on a Philips. I was runnning it on my
heavily modified Sony HB-G900P (see my homepage for details).
See Loy Lin wrote:
> ??
> My disk never gives I/O errors.
> Maybe HDCHECK did pass that sector, but the sector is still unreliable?
Could be. But I don't remember if it was on the partition I already
checked with HDCHECK.
> > 11 - Are the speeds I got with HDSPEED reasonable?
> > What is the speed with a new Novaxis ROM? And what on 7MHz? (Twice as
> > big?) And with both 7MHz and new ROM?
Now, Alwin wrote that it has to switch back to 3.5 MHz... Is this true?
Erik Maas wrote the speed would indeed be doubled! What is it?
Alwin wrote:
> If floppydrives get to 12-15 KB's/second, who cares whether your HD
> works 8 times, or 15 times faster than that?
I do! I want to take full advantage of the 7MHz!
> Anyway: 7 MHz. and the Gouda (Novaxis) SCSI interface just don't go
> well together. Frankly I wouldn't know why not, such controllers &
> HD's are made for far higher data rates, so I suppose it's a pure
> software-problem.
Can anyone give info on this?
> The software is THE problem with the Novaxis SCSI interface.
> For instance:
> If you only have one HD connected, with a SCSI-ID that is SOMETHING
> else than the interface, the intelligent way would be to scan all
> ID's on the SCSI bus at boot time, and make a drive-letter for every
> useable partition you find.
> Not so with the Novaxis interface: you have to set a 'target-ID' for
> the HD, set a 'host-ID' for the interface, and if the target-ID isn't
> right, the interface will make you wait loooonnngg after every reset,
> and doesn't initialise any drives.
That's right. If I have to wait, I just KNOW the Target ID setting isn't
right anymore (somehow), so I reset, press DEL for setup, and put it
right again. Save and Quit and presto!
> There is LOTS of such shortcomings like this. When all is okay, it
> works okay, and fairly fast, but if things aren't entirely right, it
> works SHIT.
Well, I got it running pretty fast, after I got the new cable.
> Apparantly the Bert and Mega-SCSI do better in this respect.
I wouldn't know...
By the way, DOSSCAN reported 105kB/s, and HDSPEED 98kB/s...
Benjamin B wrote:
> I don't know. It will certainly run faster, but.. as the manual says: it
> might be unstable
What do they mean with unstable?
Laurens Holst wrote:
> Yes, almost twice as big with 7MHz (really notiable. Anyway, the upgrade to
> 7MHz is something EVERYONE whould have, the increase in speed is remarkable.
> I only run on 3.5MHz if some hardware or software requires it - SCC music
> for example).
Ok, if it works then!
About some general remarks: ------
See Loy Lin wrote:
> Also, I once tried to run SCC-MUSIXX with START.COM. And... this gave
> the same error. Harddisk wasn't accessible anymore.
Ok, I won't try it. The entire program doesn't work on my MSX anyway...
(Still don't know why!)
I still haven't got a list of programs/games that would work with it!
Now some new questions:
- If I start my harddisk and after a while start my MSX (when I haevn't
got them on for a while), the Please wait --' changes in please wait ---
and then holds.... And holds and holds. But the MSX is not crashed. I
can still push CAPS lock with effect. This only happens with the SCSI
interface in my slotexpander. But when I remove my FM-PAC from the
slotexpander it DOES boot ok! And after 15 minutes or so, I can put back
the FM-PAC in the expander, boot and it again runs fine! And so it does
for the rest of the day...
What could be the problem? Does the MSX power supply have to warm up? Or
can't the slotexpander give enough power to the SCSI interface or
something?
(The harddisk is on a seperate power supply in a PC-case)
Thanks for reading this shit..! Sorry for the very long message.
Grtjs, Manuel
****
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put
in the body (not subject) "unsubscribe msx [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the
quotes :-) Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] (www.stack.nl/~wiebe/mailinglist/)
****
