test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

Origin of "partition" in storage devices

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> 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 might not be contiguous? Or are files contiguous in the RT-11 filesystem? (I know there were filesystems which supported contiguous files.) This reminds me of the swapping/paging area in Windows 95/98 (maybe other versions too), which was kept in a file, and therefore might be scattered all over the physical disk. (Norton disk optimizer would coalesce the swap/paging area to a contiguous area of the disk.) Noel

4 years

KMC11/DMC11 folllow up

by bobsmithofd＠gmail.com

KMC11 - Paul K cited the docs. It was a bit different from DMC CPU board in both cycle time and in the use of ram versus prom. Both boards/products used the 4bit Alu but I don't call that bit slice, as the 2901 is more of a bit slice. KMC and DMC are Harvard architecture based devices, as is the 11/60 CPU. DMC and KMC benefited from the microcode work of Harvey Schlesinger, Bob Rosenbaum, Richie Larry, and I think Clarise joined the team in 77. Can't recall her last name. DMC had (when I left the project and it had been shipping for a year or two) a 300NS cycle time, while the KMC had a 240NS cycle time thanks to the instruction register I had suggested to remi as we were thinking of a RAM based device because PROMS were a royal pain with 2 and 3 code changes a day. This change allowed the machine to begin to access the next instruction as one was executing - there are no interrupts in either board. bob

4 years

Origin of "partition" in storage devices

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> 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 limited to 2^16 blocks, so the 406*10*20 blocks of an RP03 had to be split up into partitions (called 'sections' or 'pseudo-disks' in the documentation) to make all of it useable. The latter? No idea... 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 came in with Windows 95 OSR2). Noel

4 years

Origin of "partition" in storage devices

by tom94022＠comcast.net

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 unit number to a file on a physical disk. You can then use the logical disk as though it were a physical disk. AA-5286F-TC-T1_RT-11_System_Release_Notes_Jul84.pdf (bitsavers.org) <http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/pdp11/rt11/v5.1_Jul84/AA-5286F-TC-T1_RT-11…> p15/102 Suggests DEC had not yet adopted the term ?partition? for a segment of a disk Tom -----Original Message----- From: Tom Gardner [mailto:tom94022 at comcast.net] 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:healyzh at avanthar.com> mailto:healyzh at avanthar.com] Sent: Monday, January 31, 2022 12:40 PM To: Paul Koning; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: <mailto:t.gardner at computer.org> t.gardner at computer.org; Tom Gardner Subject: Re: Origin of "partition" in storage devices On Jan 31, 2022, at 11:28 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk < <mailto:cctalk at classiccmp.org> cctalk at classiccmp.org> 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 pretty important in RT-11 v5.x, after all, there is the partition size limit, so you have to have multiple partitions for almost any HD, except very small ones. Let?s not forget hardware enforced partitioning, the WEQSD/04 ESDI controller comes to mind. It see?s a single large ESDI HD as a single disk, but you can partition it on the controller, and the OS sees each partition as a separate physical disk. I seem to remember some MFM controllers that made the MFM drive appear to be RL01/RL02 or RK05 packs. Zane

4 years

Pdp 8 panel parts for trade

by tdk.knight＠gmail.com

Anyone got any 8i switch or panel parts they Wana trade for any of these? Got 6 3 pin spring loaded rockers appear to test good might need some deoxot not sure came off the 8e below 8 of the 8e m rocker paddles orange and redish orange https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Eprlv8d3TmSPFJ3rCHIJTFkQOyAZesCM/view?usp=… Some are missing the plastic pivot dimples 8m with out it's switches The rotory it's bit weird but possibly usable. Dunno enough about them. It's center hole is ovaled a bit might gotten bashed. Might have some usefull bits still https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1EpAag1J5r6RAR8ln_fprrdCEiOnJx5kq I've got some other bits that might be usefull as well from the 8i to anyone I'm looking for 5 more rockers with or with out the 8i paddles Or some 8i paddles I've got 5 brown and 10 white ones that I wanted to find when I rescued my poor 8i outs the mud Or any other parts that might be usefull

4 years

What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's products?

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> 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 seem to recall reading that Ken Olsen was involved in doing early modem work (presumably on Whirlwind), but maybe my memory is failing, and it was someone else (like Bell, or someone). Too busy to research it at the moment... Noel

4 years

MG10 parts

by useddec＠gmail.com

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 interest please contact me off list. Thanks, Paul

4 years

What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's products?

by jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu

> From: Chris Zach > Maybe that is the dhv11. The DH11, DHV11 and DHU11 are all very similar, although not 100.00% program compatible. (The DHQ11 can be set to exactly emulate either the DHV11 or DHU11.) So, all provide DMA output, but not DMA input. Differences with the DH11 include two full word registers for DMA address, hardware ^S/^Q support, built-in diagnostics, etc. The DHV11 and DHU11 differ in hardware echo, output FIFO, a fix for the infamous DH11 input silo level bug, etc. Noel

4 years

ISO: Canon Scanner Driver

by silent700＠gmail.com

In order to further the effort of scanning and preserving ALL of the things, I picked up a Canon Microfilm Scanner 300 for $cheap. It has a SCSI interface and doesn't work with anything past Windows XP, but that's not a problem. What is a problem is that Canon's link to the XP driver is a big 4 0 4: https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/support/details/scanners/… By any chance, does someone out there have this driver? The filename in question is "300350DRIT_V11.exe". You can google that name and end up either back at Canon's site or in Malware Hell ("just download this Chrome plugin to get your driver!"). Note that this is not the Canon Microfilm Scanner 300-II, which is a USB device and uses a different driver. Thanks for any leads... jt

4 years

cctalk Digest, Vol 88, Issue 30

by bobsmithofd＠gmail.com

IIRC, John Mac was the designer for the DHQ/DHV. If my memory is correct, after DH was done, John had the idea of a mix and match synchronous/Async mux and came up with those designs. I dont remember who was on his team. COMMS 11 group had led (farmed out) the designs of the Sync version of a UART called USynRT in some parlance SIg 2652 and SMC 5027 IIFC. I ran the Signetics contract tech side. A fresh MIT PhD was the Sig POC, and there are more stories about that. I cant recall his name at this juncture. bob On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 1:00 PM <cctalk-request at classiccmp.org> wrote: > > Send cctalk mailing list submissions to > cctalk at classiccmp.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www.classiccmp.org/mailman/listinfo/cctalk > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > cctalk-request at classiccmp.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > cctalk-owner at classiccmp.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of cctalk digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's > products? (Noel Chiappa) > 2. Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's > products? (Paul Koning) > 3. Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's > products? (Chris Zach) > 4. Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's > products? (Glen Slick) > 5. Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's > products? (Noel Chiappa) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 15:58:53 -0500 (EST) > From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > Cc: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu > Subject: Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's > products? > Message-ID: <20220129205853.15EEA18C07B at mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > > > From: Paul Koning > > > DH-11 is unusual in that it has DMA in both directions > > McNamara's DH11? (I don't know of another DECdevice of that name.) Per: > > http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/unibus/EK-ODH11-OP-002_DH11_Asynchronous_1… > > it's DMA on output only; the input side has a FIFO that has to be emptied by the CPU. > > Noel > > PS: I am familiar with the term 'terminal concentrator' from the networking > world, but as a generic term, not the name of a particular product. (Although > Cisco's first boxes may have included a terminal concentrator, so named.) > > Noel > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 17:12:41 -0500 > From: Paul Koning <paulkoning at comcast.net> > To: Noel Chiappa <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu>, "cctalk at classiccmp.org" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Subject: Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's > products? > Message-ID: <684F1FCF-A6E6-4F3C-AC39-ADA1504FC9E1 at comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > > > > On Jan 29, 2022, at 3:58 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > >> From: Paul Koning > > > >> DH-11 is unusual in that it has DMA in both directions > > > > McNamara's DH11? (I don't know of another DECdevice of that name.) Per: > > > > http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/unibus/EK-ODH11-OP-002_DH11_Asynchronous_1… > > > > it's DMA on output only; the input side has a FIFO that has to be emptied by the CPU. > > Oh. That's amazing, all these years I thought it had DMA both ways. Clearly not. I wonder how I got that misunderstanding. > > paul > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 18:49:06 -0500 > From: Chris Zach <cz at alembic.crystel.com> > To: Paul Koning <paulkoning at comcast.net>, "General Discussion: > On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org>, Paul Koning via > cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>, Noel Chiappa > <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu>, "cctalk at classiccmp.org" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Subject: Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's > products? > Message-ID: <24F062E4-8B26-4EB3-A573-B47C69A53B67 at alembic.crystel.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > Maybe that is the dhv11. Or the dv11 I'll look it up tomorrow > > On January 29, 2022 5:12:41 PM EST, Paul Koning via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > > >> On Jan 29, 2022, at 3:58 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote: > >> > >>> From: Paul Koning > >> > >>> DH-11 is unusual in that it has DMA in both directions > >> > >> McNamara's DH11? (I don't know of another DECdevice of that name.) Per: > >> > >> http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/unibus/EK-ODH11-OP-002_DH11_Asynchronous_1… > >> > >> it's DMA on output only; the input side has a FIFO that has to be emptied by the CPU. > > > >Oh. That's amazing, all these years I thought it had DMA both ways. Clearly not. I wonder how I got that misunderstanding. > > > > paul > > > > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 16:47:27 -0800 > From: Glen Slick <glen.slick at gmail.com> > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Subject: Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's > products? > Message-ID: > <CAM2UOwL2hi2Crm7ovphGd+UZFPePV+vUzoduan7a2a5Xo+eimw at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/qbus/EK-DHQ11-UG-002.pdf > DHQ11 User Guide, EK-DHQ11-UG.002 > > The main application of the M3107 DHQ11 is for interactive terminal > handling; it can also be used for data concentration and real-time > processing. It has two programming modes, DHV11 and DHU11. The > register sets in these modes are compatible with those of the DHV11 > and DHU11 respectively. The preferred mode of operation is DHU11 mode. > The main features of the DHQ11 are: > > ? For transmission: DMA transfers; or for each line, program transfers > to a 1 character transmit buffer in DHV11 mode, or to a 64-character > transmit FIFO in DHU11 mode > > ? For receive: a 256-entry FIFO buffer for received characters, > dataset status changes, and diagnostic information > > The M3118 CXA16 and the M3119 CXA08 have the same programming > interface as the M3107 DHQ11 > > > The M3108 DSV11 can do DMA transfers in both directions, although it > is a synchronous interface, not asynchronous. > > http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/qbus/EK-DSV11-TM-001_Jan87.pdf > DSV11 Technical Manual, EK-DSV11-TM-001 > > Functional Description (Section 1.5). The DSV11 supports a range of > synchronous protocols on the serial interface, and transfers data to > and from the host by DMA transfer. This section describes the way in > which the DSV11 handles data. > > On Sat, Jan 29, 2022 at 3:49 PM Chris Zach via cctalk > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > Maybe that is the dhv11. Or the dv11 I'll look it up tomorrow > > > > On January 29, 2022 5:12:41 PM EST, Paul Koning via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> On Jan 29, 2022, at 3:58 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote: > > >> > > >>> From: Paul Koning > > >> > > >>> DH-11 is unusual in that it has DMA in both directions > > >> > > >> McNamara's DH11? (I don't know of another DECdevice of that name.) Per: > > >> > > >> http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/unibus/EK-ODH11-OP-002_DH11_Asynchronous_1… > > >> > > >> it's DMA on output only; the input side has a FIFO that has to be emptied by the CPU. > > > > > >Oh. That's amazing, all these years I thought it had DMA both ways. Clearly not. I wonder how I got that misunderstanding. > > > > > > paul > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2022 09:26:46 -0500 (EST) > From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa) > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > Cc: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu > Subject: Re: What was a Terminal Concentration Device in DEC's > products? > Message-ID: <20220130142646.5614818C074 at mercury.lcs.mit.edu> > > > From: Chris Zach > > > Maybe that is the dhv11. > > The DH11, DHV11 and DHU11 are all very similar, although not 100.00% program compatible. > (The DHQ11 can be set to exactly emulate either the DHV11 or DHU11.) So, all provide > DMA output, but not DMA input. > > Differences with the DH11 include two full word registers for DMA address, > hardware ^S/^Q support, built-in diagnostics, etc. The DHV11 and DHU11 differ > in hardware echo, output FIFO, a fix for the infamous DH11 input silo level > bug, etc. > > Noel > > > End of cctalk Digest, Vol 88, Issue 30 > **************************************

4 years

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

test-drb