After spending way to much time on this today, I verified that at
least on the CMD CQD Q-Bus SCSI controller versions that I have if I
wanted the CMD CQD controller to report an MSCP disk size of exactly
891072 blocks to match the SIMH emulated RA81 disk size, I had to soft
resize the capacity of
On 2/20/19 1:25 PM, Glen Slick via cctalk wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 2:24 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
wrote:
Theoretically, the SIMH emulated RA81 and the CMD emulated real
disk RA81 should be the same size because they are both supposed
to be RA81's.
I spent the time to get set up and
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 2:24 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
wrote:
>
> Theoretically, the SIMH emulated RA81 and the CMD emulated real
> disk RA81 should be the same size because they are both supposed
> to be RA81's.
I spent the time to get set up and verified that this assumption is
not
> On Feb 20, 2019, at 2:09 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> ...
> No, that's not what the symptoms say. If you were dealing with geometry
> confusion, you'd fail much earlier. For example, if you were to take a RSTS
> system built on an RP06, and image-copied it to an RM05, it
> On Feb 20, 2019, at 1:43 PM, Charles Anthony via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 9:21 AM Glen Slick via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 8:57 AM Charles Anthony via cctalk
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> However, in the original posters case, the SIMH disk image is being
>>
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 9:21 AM Glen Slick via cctalk
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 8:57 AM Charles Anthony via cctalk
> wrote:
> >
> > However, in the original posters case, the SIMH disk image is being
> copied
> > to the RA81 drive without the benefit of the MSCP controller (if I
> >
> On Feb 20, 2019, at 11:57 AM, Charles Anthony
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 5:38 AM Paul Koning wrote:
>
>
> You're misinterpreting "spare". MSCP exposes the user address space as
> contiguous LBAs, for which it uses 51 sectors per track. The spare sector is
> used to
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 8:57 AM Charles Anthony via cctalk
wrote:
>
> However, in the original posters case, the SIMH disk image is being copied
> to the RA81 drive without the benefit of the MSCP controller (if I
> understand correctly). This would lead to track misalignment and could
> result
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 5:38 AM Paul Koning wrote:
>
>
> You're misinterpreting "spare". MSCP exposes the user address space as
> contiguous LBAs, for which it uses 51 sectors per track. The spare sector
> is used to do bad sector replacement. That is invisible to users, it
> doesn't affect
> On Feb 19, 2019, at 11:55 PM, Glen Slick via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 1:20 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
>>
>> I have a CQD=220A/MT configured for 6 disks and one tape.
>> As for disk types, you can toggle RA ON or OFF on each drive.
>> You can specify one RA
> On Feb 19, 2019, at 10:26 PM, Charles Anthony
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 10:14 AM Paul Koning wrote:
>
> ...
>> So indeed the correct sector count is 51 (the other one is a spare, a
>> technique used by DEC as far back as the RM80).
>>
>
> I am concerned that the spare
On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 1:20 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
wrote:
>
> I have a CQD=220A/MT configured for 6 disks and one tape.
> As for disk types, you can toggle RA ON or OFF on each drive.
> You can specify one RA type that will be in effect for any
> disk with RA ON. Types are: RA70, RA80,
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 10:14 AM Paul Koning wrote:
>
>
> > On Feb 19, 2019, at 11:51 AM, Charles Anthony <
> charles.unix@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > ...
> > Presumably SIMH is returning RA81_LBN (891072) as the device size; this
> is calculated based on the 51 sectors/track. If the h/w is
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 11:22 AM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
wrote:
>
> > I have mostly used CMD CQD-220/TM controllers. As far as I remember
> > they do not have an RA drive emulation option.
>
> I have a 220A/TM and it certainly does. Pages 4-10 thru 4-15
> of the manual, particularly
On 2/19/19 12:37 PM, Glen Slick via cctalk wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 5:39 AM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
>>
>> All sounds like fun, but if the two emulations don't do RA81
>> correctly the information doesn't really do me much good. I
>> certainly can't change the CQD's idea of
> On Feb 19, 2019, at 11:51 AM, Charles Anthony
> wrote:
>
> ...
> Presumably SIMH is returning RA81_LBN (891072) as the device size; this is
> calculated based on the 51 sectors/track. If the h/w is returning a size
> based on 52, then there is a mismatch which could be the source of the
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 5:39 AM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
wrote:
>
> All sounds like fun, but if the two emulations don't do RA81
> correctly the information doesn't really do me much good. I
> certainly can't change the CQD's idea of what an RA81 is.
>
I have mostly used CMD CQD-220/TM
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 6:27 AM Paul Koning wrote:
>
>
> > On Feb 18, 2019, at 11:22 PM, Charles Anthony via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> >> ...
> > Looking at the SIMH code:
> >
> > /*
> >type sec surfcyl tpg gpc RCT LBNs
> >RA81 51(+1) 14
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019, 7:24 AM Paul Koning
>
> > On Feb 18, 2019, at 10:29 PM, Warner Losh via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 6:18 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk <
> > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> >> ...
> >> No, RX50 was a strange DEC format. RX33
> On Feb 18, 2019, at 11:22 PM, Charles Anthony via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>> ...
> Looking at the SIMH code:
>
> /*
>type sec surfcyl tpg gpc RCT LBNs
>RA81 51(+1) 14 125814 1 2856891072
> */
>
> #define RA81_SECT 51
> On Feb 18, 2019, at 10:29 PM, Warner Losh via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 6:18 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>> ...
>> No, RX50 was a strange DEC format. RX33 is a 1.2M floppy.
>
> The RX50 was a single sided 800 block floppy. The
On 2/18/19 10:59 PM, Glen Slick via cctalk wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 5:18 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
>>
>> Well, all I really have are CQD module which does MSCP and TMSCP
>> over SCSI.
>
> Do you have any SCSI tape drives?
Sure. I have a SCSI 9-track and a 1.4" QIC
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 2:24 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On 2/18/19 4:35 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
>
> > It would be interesting if you can post the exact sizes in blocks of the
> SIMH image, and the real disk you copied it to. That would help confirm my
> guess
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 5:18 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
wrote:
>
> Well, all I really have are CQD module which does MSCP and TMSCP
> over SCSI.
Do you have any SCSI tape drives? I have successfully installed RSTS/E
10.1 from install tapes on real PDP-11 hardware using an Exabyte
EXB-8200 8mm
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 6:18 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On 2/18/19 7:39 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
> > TU58, no -- that's not a file structured device on RSTS. RX33 is an
> RX50 in a different physical package if I remember -- 800 block MSCP
> device. That works
On 2/18/19 9:02 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
>
>
>> On Feb 18, 2019, at 8:18 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
>> wrote:
>>
>> On 2/18/19 7:39 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>> TU58, no -- that's not a file structured device on RSTS. RX33 is an RX50
>>> in a different physical package if I
> On Feb 18, 2019, at 8:18 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On 2/18/19 7:39 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
>>
>> ...
>> TU58, no -- that's not a file structured device on RSTS. RX33 is an RX50 in
>> a different physical package if I remember -- 800 block MSCP device. That
>> works
On 2/18/19 7:39 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
>
>
>> On Feb 18, 2019, at 5:24 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
>> wrote:
>>
>> On 2/18/19 4:35 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>> For the case of RSTS, small or large is not a consideration. What matters,
>>> as I mentioned, is that RSTS has a file
> On Feb 18, 2019, at 5:24 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On 2/18/19 4:35 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
>>
>> ...
>> For the case of RSTS, small or large is not a consideration. What matters,
>> as I mentioned, is that RSTS has a file system layout that is dependent on
>> the
On 2/18/19 4:35 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
>
>
>> On Feb 18, 2019, at 3:46 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> SO, to start a wrap up on this topic. I had heard of people
>> copying images made on SIMH to real disks and using them. It
>> now seems there are some serious strings
> On Feb 18, 2019, at 3:46 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>
>
> SO, to start a wrap up on this topic. I had heard of people
> copying images made on SIMH to real disks and using them. It
> now seems there are some serious strings attached to that idea.
> I know it works for
SO, to start a wrap up on this topic. I had heard of people
copying images made on SIMH to real disks and using them. It
now seems there are some serious strings attached to that idea.
I know it works for small disks as I have done it with RL02
and RX/Ry disks. I have one more thing to try
> On Feb 17, 2019, at 2:32 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Feb 16, 2019, at 1:04 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
>> wrote:
>>
>> ...
>> First, my hardware. I have a PDP-11/93 with a CMD SCSI Module and
>> a BA350 with 6 2GB hard drives. The Module is set up to present
> On Feb 16, 2019, at 1:04 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> ...
> First, my hardware. I have a PDP-11/93 with a CMD SCSI Module and
> a BA350 with 6 2GB hard drives. The Module is set up to present RA81
> disks and the first 3 disks have 4 partitions each which should work
>
> On Feb 16, 2019, at 1:04 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> ...
> let's try with a detailed explanation of what I did that didn't seem
> to work.
>
> First, my hardware. I have a PDP-11/93 with a CMD SCSI Module and
> a BA350 with 6 2GB hard drives. The Module is set up to
On 2/16/19 7:55 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
> So, I used SIMH to do an install of a complete OS on an RA81 disk. I
> would like to move this to a real disk and try it on a real PDP-11.
Note that SIMH always writes disc images in little-endian format,
regardless of host platform. If
On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 10:53 AM Charles Anthony
wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 10:04 AM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I used SIMH to build RSTS V9.6 on a simulated RA81 disk. I wrote the
>> disk as a file to a CDR in CD9660 format. I moved the
On 2/16/19 3:57 PM, Zane Healy wrote:
>
>> On Feb 16, 2019, at 10:04 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
>> wrote:
>>
>> OK, as usual, I hac caused confusion and didn't get my point across.
>>
>> let's try with a detailed explanation of what I did that didn't seem
>> to work.
>>
>> First, my
> On Feb 16, 2019, at 10:04 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> OK, as usual, I hac caused confusion and didn't get my point across.
>
> let's try with a detailed explanation of what I did that didn't seem
> to work.
>
> First, my hardware. I have a PDP-11/93 with a CMD SCSI
On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 10:04 AM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>
> I used SIMH to build RSTS V9.6 on a simulated RA81 disk. I wrote the
> disk as a file to a CDR in CD9660 format. I moved the BA350 and the
> CD to a VS3100 running OpenBSD. I was able to mount the
On 2/16/19 12:35 PM, Zane Healy via cctalk wrote:
>
>> On Feb 16, 2019, at 9:10 AM, Lyle Bickley via cctalk
>> wrote:
>>
>> Bill,
>>
>> On Sat, 16 Feb 2019 13:55:10 +
>> Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
>>
>>> So, I used SIMH to do an install of a complete OS on
>>> an RA81 disk. I would
On 2/16/19 7:55 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
So, I used SIMH to do an install of a complete OS on
an RA81 disk. I would like to move this to a real disk
and try it on a real PDP-11. Is there a way to do this
using dd on a BSD machine? I tried but it created a
non bootable system.
> On Feb 16, 2019, at 9:10 AM, Lyle Bickley via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> Bill,
>
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2019 13:55:10 +
> Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
>
>> So, I used SIMH to do an install of a complete OS on
>> an RA81 disk. I would like to move this to a real disk
>> and try it on a real
Bill,
On Sat, 16 Feb 2019 13:55:10 +
Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
> So, I used SIMH to do an install of a complete OS on
> an RA81 disk. I would like to move this to a real disk
> and try it on a real PDP-11. Is there a way to do this
> using dd on a BSD machine? I tried but it
44 matches
Mail list logo