Hey all --
I've had this HP 2100S mini sitting on the bench for a bit, waiting, and I
wanted to go through the power supply and test/reform the capacitors this
past weekend. The processor service docs cover getting the supply out
(which is slightly cumbersome) and I have that step done. But
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 07:51:28PM -0500, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> Yes, RT-11 is a somewhat unusual file system in that it doesn't just
> support contiguous files -- it supports ONLY contiguous files. That makes
> for a very small and very fast file system.
> The only other example I
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 02:21:19PM -0800, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> That limit lasted until MS-DOS 3.31 / PC-DOS 4.00 After that, the limit
> was bumped up to 2GB. (Probably would have been 4GB if they had used an
> UNSIGNED 32 bit number, and given up the option of having negative file
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> File sizes were stored as the last 4 bytes of each DIRectory entry, with a
> signed 32 bit number. So, a file could be from
> -2,147,483,648 to 2,147,483,647
> Unfortunately, they never successfully finished the implementation, so copying
> a
On 2022-01-31 6:19 p.m., Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
On 1/31/22 20:13, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
Yes, RT-11 is a somewhat unusual file system in that it doesn't just
support contiguous files -- it supports ONLY contiguous files. That
On 1/31/22 20:13, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
Yes, RT-11 is a somewhat unusual file system in that it doesn't just
support contiguous files -- it supports ONLY contiguous files. That
makes for a very small and very fast file system.
The
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
Yes, RT-11 is a somewhat unusual file system in that it doesn't just
support contiguous files -- it supports ONLY contiguous files. That
makes for a very small and very fast file system.
The only other example I know of that does this is the
> On Jan 31, 2022, at 7:35 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>> From: Tom Gardner
>
>> You define logical disks by assigning a logical disk unit number to a
>> file on a physical disk. You can then use the logical disk as though it
>> were a physical disk.
>
> To me, 'partition'
> From: Tom Gardner
> You define logical disks by assigning a logical disk unit number to a
> file on a physical disk. You can then use the logical disk as though it
> were a physical disk.
To me, 'partition' implies a contiguous are of the disk; "a file" to me
implies that it
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022, 2:43 PM Noel Chiappa via cctalk
wrote:
> > From: Paul Koning
>
> > When did Unix first get partitions?
>
> 'Partitions' the mechanism, or partitions the term for the mechanism?
>
> The former appeared about V5:
>
>
On 2022-01-31 18:21, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote:
Partitions may have appeared in DOS/Windows for much the same reason;
with 32
KB clusters, FAT16 filesystems were limited to 2GB. I distinctly recall
having to use partitions when I bought a
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
I think the same type of problem happened with the really old FAT-12 to
FAT-16 conversion.
Wasn't FAT-12 limited to something near 31 MB?
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
32 MebiBytes - 1
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, geneb
Note also, that tapes can be partitioned per ANSI T10.
---Chuck
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
I think the same type of problem happened with the really old FAT-12 to
FAT-16 conversion.
Wasn't FAT-12 limited to something near 31 MB?
32 MebiBytes - 1
*chases Fred out of the house
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
I think the same type of problem happened with the really old FAT-12 to
FAT-16 conversion.
Wasn't FAT-12 limited to something near 31 MB?
32 MebiBytes - 1
A somewhat broader search found the 1984 RT-11 System Release Notes with the
following:
1.4.2.4 Logical Disk Subsetting Handler (LD) - The logical disk subsetting
handler lets you define logical disks, which are subsets of physical disks. You
define logical disks by assigning a logical disk
On 1/31/22 2:43 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote:
Partitions may have appeared in DOS/Windows for much the same reason;
with 32 KB clusters, FAT16 filesystems were limited to 2GB.
I think the same type of problem happened with the really old FAT-12 to
FAT-16 conversion.
Wasn't FAT-12
On Mon, 31 Jan 2022, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote:
Partitions may have appeared in DOS/Windows for much the same reason; with 32
KB clusters, FAT16 filesystems were limited to 2GB. I distinctly recall
having to use partitions when I bought a 13GB hard drive for my Windows 95
machine (FAT32 only
> From: Paul Koning
> When did Unix first get partitions?
'Partitions' the mechanism, or partitions the term for the mechanism?
The former appeared about V5:
https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=V5/usr/sys/dmr/rp.c
when an RP03 was added; pre-V7, UNIX filesystems were
FWIW a Google search: "partition
site:http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/pdp11/rt11; returns no relevant hits
prior to 1983
I suspect that ESDI and MFM controllers emulating RL/RK disks are also later
than 1983
Tom
-Original Message-
From: Zane Healy [mailto:heal...@avanthar.com]
The RK02/RK03 (Diablo predecessor to the DEC RK05) were introduced in
1972 so partitioning goes back that far at least.
My guess is it goes back even further.
On 1/31/2022 7:41 PM, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:
OS/8 partitioned RK02 disk packs.
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 2:38 PM Warner Losh via
OS/8 Partitioned the RK05 into 2 (or 4 for the RK05F) partitions due to
the limitations of 12 bit addressing in the 70's.
On 1/31/2022 7:41 PM, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:
OS/8 partitioned RK02 disk packs.
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 2:38 PM Warner Losh via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org>
Partitioning on micros goes back to at least 1979 with CP/M 2.2.
See the CP/M 2.2 alteration guide on bitsavers:
http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/digitalResearch/cpm/2.2/CPM_2.2_Alteration_Guide_1979.pdf
Will
On Jan 31, 2022, at 11:28 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk
wrote:
>
> Both of these are memory partitions. The only OS I can think of predating
> the ones you mentioned is RT-11, the later versions (V2 did not have them).
> When did Unix first get partitions?
>
> paul
Partitions are
The IBM 1620 Monitor IID, partitioned the 1311 into various areas. I
can probably find other old examples.
--Chuck
OS/8 partitioned RK02 disk packs.
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 2:38 PM Warner Losh via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 12:01 PM Tom Gardner via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> > There is a discussion of the origin of the term "partition" in storage
> >
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 12:01 PM Tom Gardner via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> There is a discussion of the origin of the term "partition" in storage
> devices such as HDDs at:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Disk_partitioning#Where_did_the_term_%22p
> artition%22_originate
>
> On Jan 31, 2022, at 2:01 PM, Tom Gardner via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> There is a discussion of the origin of the term "partition" in storage
> devices such as HDDs at:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Disk_partitioning#Where_did_the_term_%22p
> artition%22_originate?
>
> It seems clear it
There is a discussion of the origin of the term "partition" in storage
devices such as HDDs at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Disk_partitioning#Where_did_the_term_%22p
artition%22_originate?
It seems clear it was used in memory well before HDDs but when it got
started there is unclear.
* IBM
> On Jan 31, 2022, at 11:04 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>> From: Bob Smith
>
>> the original UART was designed by DEC, Vince Bastiani was the project
>> lead and designer, Gordon Bell was behind the project, and it may have
>> been his idea.
>
> "Computer Engineering: A DEC View
> From: Bob Smith
> the original UART was designed by DEC, Vince Bastiani was the project
> lead and designer, Gordon Bell was behind the project, and it may have
> been his idea.
"Computer Engineering: A DEC View of Hardware Systems Design" covers this, in
a footnote on pg. 73.
I added descriptions.
On 1/31/2022 3:55 AM, Paul Anderson via cctalk wrote:
While moving some things around I found the following:
7 M8588 Parity Check
6 M8591 Address Receivers
6 M8592 Port Address Interface
4 M8593 MG10 Data Registers
14 M8594 MG10 Data Transceivers
All appear to be
> On Jan 30, 2022, at 4:44 PM, John Forecast via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> ...
> Is it possible that the DMX11 was a CSS product?
Clearly it is; the Option/Module list (1983 edition, from Bitsavers) says so.
It shows the controller and three different 64 port line units, for different
signal
> On Jan 30, 2022, at 2:43 PM, Chris Zach via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> ...
> From what I can see, the the kmc11 was an M8204 single board which is
> different from the 8200 used in the dmc11. I had a DMC11 somewhere.
>
> From the books, the kmc11 had an "lsi11 on board", 1k of 16 bit ram, 1k
While moving some things around I found the following:
7 M8588
6 M8591
6 M8592
4 M8593
14 M8594
All appear to be NOS.
I also found :
G103
G222
G223
M911
Which I did not count, and they seem to be memory related, but I
haven't checked to see which memory they are from. If you have any
35 matches
Mail list logo
