On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 7:23 AM Paul Koning via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>
> > On Oct 18, 2018, at 4:31 AM, Christian Corti via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 17 Oct 2018, Clem Cole wrote:
> >> As Paul W pointed out correctly, the TK50 and its children in
> On Oct 18, 2018, at 4:31 AM, Christian Corti via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2018, Clem Cole wrote:
>> As Paul W pointed out correctly, the TK50 and its children in the DLT*
>> family all used a fixed format 512 byte *blocks on the tape*.This
>
> And that is wrong. The TK50
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018, Clem Cole wrote:
As Paul W pointed out correctly, the TK50 and its children in the DLT*
family all used a fixed format 512 byte *blocks on the tape*.This
And that is wrong. The TK50 clearly uses variable block sizes. For
example, have a look at a RSX11 or VMS tape:
I took most of this off line, but I'll try to close down the discussion, so
we can get back to TUHS history.
Please be careful of your wording as it is easy to get confused
particularly if you never used the original 1/2" tape system you might not
understand the actual terms. The term for
> On Oct 17, 2018, at 10:50 AM, Ethan Dicks via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 8:15 AM emanuel stiebler via cctalk
> wrote:
>> there were
>> TK50Z as an external drive, on "SCSI"
>
> I have one - for a MicroVAX 2000. I rarely used it.
>
>> TK50 on QBUS with an TQK50
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 8:15 AM emanuel stiebler via cctalk
wrote:
> there were
> TK50Z as an external drive, on "SCSI"
I have one - for a MicroVAX 2000. I rarely used it.
> TK50 on QBUS with an TQK50 controller which really didn't stream to often
We had one in the 1980s. You are right. It
On 2018-10-16 20:37, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
>
>
>> On Oct 16, 2018, at 1:23 PM, William Pechter via cctalk
>> wrote:
>>
>> DEC Tape II was the serial driven TU58.
>> The TK50 was CompacTape or something like that. It was the predecessor of a
>> number of square tapes...
>>
>> See DLT
On 10/16/18, William Pechter wrote:
> DEC Tape II was the serial driven TU58.
> The TK50 was CompacTape or something like that. It was the predecessor of a
> number of square tapes...
>
> See DLT on Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Linear_Tape
>
My mistake. Yes, I was thinking
On 10/15/18, Clem Cole wrote:
> #$%^ - they >>weren't<< like DECtape from a reliability standpoint ...
> ᐧ
The original DECtape was extremely reliable. Not so the TK50.
Calling it "DECtape II" was an insult to the original DECtape. The
problem wasn't so much the drive itself, but the
inalski
> To: Clem Cole
> Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society , cctalk@classiccmp.org
> Sent: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 13:14
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] Ultrix Tape: Block Size?
>
> On 10/15/18, Clem Cole wrote:
> > #$%^ - they >>weren't<< like DECtape from a reliability
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 12:57 PM Paul Winalski
wrote:
> The block size is almost certainly 512 bytes.
>
Which is what I said - the block siize is set by the HW.
But ... the issue is trying to get the TK-50 to stream. Hence the
traditional unix: dd ibs=64K obs=XXX | tar xvfp - trick.
This will
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 1:49 PM Paul Koning via cctalk
wrote:
> > On Oct 16, 2018, at 1:23 PM, William Pechter via cctalk
> > wrote:
> >
> > DEC Tape II was the serial driven TU58.
> > The TK50 was CompacTape or something like that. It was the predecessor of
> > a number of square tapes...
>
/en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Linear_Tape
>
> Bill
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Paul Winalski
> To: Clem Cole
> Cc: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society , cctalk@classiccmp.org
> Sent: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 13:14
> Subject: Re: [TUHS] Ultrix Tape: Block Size?
>
> On 10
: The Eunuchs Hysterical Society , cctalk@classiccmp.org
Sent: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 13:14
Subject: Re: [TUHS] Ultrix Tape: Block Size?
On 10/15/18, Clem Cole wrote:
> #$%^ - they >>weren't<< like DECtape from a reliability standpoint ...
> ᐧ
The original DECtape was extremely reliable
#$%^ - they >>weren't<< like DECtape from a reliability standpoint ...
ᐧ
On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 5:00 PM Clem Cole wrote:
> Be careful, TK-50 is different than 9-track. It's a streamer tape like
> QIC, 4mm and 8mm. The blocking is done under the covers by the HW and the
> blovk size if just
Be careful, TK-50 is different than 9-track. It's a streamer tape like
QIC, 4mm and 8mm. The blocking is done under the covers by the HW and the
blovk size if just how a DMA is done. I recommend that you pre-fetch the
read with dd or double-dd setting ibs=64k, obs=20b and conv=sync and pipe
I'm glad you corrected because when they worked, they were awesome. When
they didn't, life had a lot of swearing in it... And when I was sysadmin
for the MicroVAX II that had them, I swore like a sailor
Warner
On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 3:04 PM Clem Cole wrote:
> #$%^ - they >>weren't<< like
17 matches
Mail list logo
