Hi list,
since I am not getting any emails from our classiccmp mailing list anymore
since mid of March, I would like to send this test email and see if it arrives
and gets back to me.
Appologies for the noise created.
Pierre
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 11:55 AM Tony Duell via cctalk
wrote:
> > What is not well known is that the CoCo was actually designed by
> > Motorola, and appeared in their Microprocessor data book as a
> > double-page schematic to promote the 6809!
>
> Wasn't it actually a suggested schematic for the 68
On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 at 18:56, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
>
> I still say the 6809 was the best 8 bit micro ever.
By "micro" here you mean "microprocessor" rather than the more usual
"microcomputer", yes?
Not being an assembly level programmer, I never cared, but this may
interest 6809 fans:
Arg
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 10:15 PM Mike Katz wrote:
>
> This reminded me of an instruction on the Power PC Micro Processor:
> Enforce In-Order Execution of I/O with the assembler code of EIEIO
>
> I considered this to be the Old McDonald of instructions.
Not an instruction, but the common I/O board
The 6809 has an 8 bit Direct Page register. This allows short memory
reference instructions on any 256 byte area in memory.
This would save both program bytes and CPU cycles.
On 12/4/2024 5:08 PM, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote:
On 12/4/24 14:19, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
I'm sorry but you don
> This reminded me of an instruction on the Power PC Micro Processor: Enforce
> In-Order Execution of I/O with the assembler code of EIEIO
>
> I considered this to be the Old McDonald of instructions.
eieio is a classic, but my favourite new Power ISA instruction is xxlxor (a
vector XOR instruc
I liked the index modes, with accumulator and auto increment/decrement.
The multi-byte push and pop off of the U register for block moves was nice.
And of course the best instruction in the chip was Sign Extend B into
A. That instruction was SEX in the Motorola assembler.
CLR B
SEX
was t
On 12/4/24 14:19, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
I'm sorry but you don't need segment registers for
position independent code at all.
Address all data off of the index registers or off the PC
and all branches are relative.
The PDP-11 had short relative jumps, etc. that were +/- 128
words, so s
This reminded me of an instruction on the Power PC Micro Processor:
Enforce In-Order Execution of I/O with the assembler code of EIEIO
I considered this to be the Old McDonald of instructions.
On 12/4/2024 2:24 PM, Tony Duell wrote:
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 8:13 PM Mike Katz wrote:
And of co
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 8:13 PM Mike Katz wrote:
> And of course the best instruction in the chip was Sign Extend B into
> A. That instruction was SEX in the Motorola assembler.
>
> CLRB
> SEX
>
> was the same as
>
> CLRA
> CLRB
>
> But then you could have sex in your code🙂
>
> Hey, w
I'm sorry but you don't need segment registers for position independent
code at all.
Address all data off of the index registers or off the PC and all
branches are relative.
You can even have local stack for data using the U stack register.
OS/9 was all relocatable, position independent code
On 12/4/24 10:49, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
> I still say the 6809 was the best 8 bit micro ever.
Perhaps, but it was also one of the last new 8-bit CPU designs, so
there's that. The die had already been cast in favor of 16 bit CPUs by
the time of its introduction. And it was far more *expensi
On 2024-12-04 12:14 p.m., Nigel Johnson Ham via cctalk wrote:
On 2024-12-04 14:09, Tony Duell wrote:
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 7:06 PM Nigel Johnson Ham via cctalk
wrote:
[6809]
I agree. The user stack pointer was a killer feature.
I like(d) the progam counter relative addressing mode along with
On 2024-12-04 14:09, Tony Duell wrote:
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 7:06 PM Nigel Johnson Ham via cctalk
wrote:
[6809]
I agree. The user stack pointer was a killer feature.
I like(d) the progam counter relative addressing mode along with the
long branch instructions so you could write position-indep
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 7:06 PM Nigel Johnson Ham via cctalk
wrote:
[6809]
> I agree. The user stack pointer was a killer feature.
I like(d) the progam counter relative addressing mode along with the
long branch instructions so you could write position-independant code.
-tony
On 2024-12-04 13:49, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
Tony,
I still say the 6809 was the best 8 bit micro ever.
Though I don't have any 6809 systems here I still have my 6809/6809E
Microprocessor Programming Manual from 1981.
Lately I do more with my PDP-8's then anything recent like the 6809🙂
I remember trying to hack the HP9114 3.5" HP-IL floppy drive to handle
two drives in a single enclosure back in the day.
On 12/4/2024 12:53 PM, Tony Duell wrote:
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 6:49 PM Mike Katz wrote:
Tony,
I still say the 6809 was the best 8 bit micro ever.
No dispute from me on
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 6:49 PM Mike Katz wrote:
>
> Tony,
>
> I still say the 6809 was the best 8 bit micro ever.
No dispute from me on that point :-)
>
> Though I don't have any 6809 systems here I still have my 6809/6809E
> Microprocessor Programming Manual from 1981.
I still have my CoCos a
Tony,
I still say the 6809 was the best 8 bit micro ever.
Though I don't have any 6809 systems here I still have my 6809/6809E
Microprocessor Programming Manual from 1981.
Lately I do more with my PDP-8's then anything recent like the 6809🙂
On 12/4/2024 12:30 PM, Tony Duell wrote:
On Wed,
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 6:24 PM Mike Katz wrote:
>
> Tony,
>
> Thank you for the education. I did some minimal programming of the 6847
> on the CoCo and nothing really on the 6845.
>
> A majority of the 6809 programming that I did was for Gimix, when I
> worked there in the early 1980's.
>
> And t
Tony,
Thank you for the education. I did some minimal programming of the 6847
on the CoCo and nothing really on the 6845.
A majority of the 6809 programming that I did was for Gimix, when I
worked there in the early 1980's.
And then on embedded 6809 based system, also in the early 1980's.
You are correct. The 6845 was monochrome and the 6847 was the color chip.
If you count a maximum of 16 colors as a color chip🙂. 4 Colors with
artifacting in the highest resolution mode.
On 12/4/2024 11:51 AM, Tony Duell wrote:
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 5:46 PM Mike Katz wrote:
The story I
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 5:58 PM Mike Katz wrote:
>
> You are correct. The 6845 was monochrome and the 6847 was the color chip.
The 6845 was called the 'CRT Controller'. It was basically a set of
programmable counters that would address the video RAM, generate sync
signals, latch the address if a
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 5:51 PM Tony Duell wrote:
> The schematic in the datasheet I pointed to also shows the ROMs and a
> pair of 6821 PIAs as in the CoCo.
Sorry that never went to the list. The datasheet I refer to is here :
https://archive.org/details/Motorola_MC6883_Synchronous_Address_Mult
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 5:46 PM Mike Katz wrote:
>
> The story I heard is that Motorola went to Tandy asking them to use their
> 6809 chip.
>
> Tandy said, ok, you design a system for us with a cost of $xxx and we will
> sell it.
>
> Motorola then designed the color computer using the 6883 SAM ch
The story I heard is that Motorola went to Tandy asking them to use
their 6809 chip.
Tandy said, ok, you design a system for us with a cost of $xxx and we
will sell it.
Motorola then designed the color computer using the 6883 SAM chip which
handled almost all of the glue logic for the system
On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 4:50 PM Nigel Johnson Ham via cctalk
wrote:
>
> What is not well known is that the CoCo was actually designed by
> Motorola, and appeared in their Microprocessor data book as a
> double-page schematic to promote the 6809!
Wasn't it actually a suggested schematic for the 688
What is not well known is that the CoCo was actually designed by
Motorola, and appeared in their Microprocessor data book as a
double-page schematic to promote the 6809!
cheers,
Nigel
On 2024-12-04 11:46, Tony Duell via cctalk wrote:
On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 8:42 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk
wro
On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 8:42 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk
wrote:
>
> They seem to have upgraded the video output!
Is it a CoCo or the Videotex terminal?
The latter was never sold in the UK for obvious reasons, but looking
at the service manual for it, it does seem to have the same video
circuitry as
They seem to have upgraded the video output!
I found the picture on the front page of this web site humorous. It's a
place that sells old Jeep parts. Note the computer surfing the web.
https://www.kaiserwillys.com/
I found the picture on the front page of this web site humorous. It's a place
that sells old Jeep parts. Note the computer surfing the web.
https://www.kaiserwillys.com/
Will
Sorry!
73 Eugene W2HX
My Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@w2hx/videos
-Original Message-
From: Lee Courtney via cctalk
Sent: Sunday, March 3, 2024 5:03 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Cc: Lee Courtney
Subject: [cctalk] Re: Decwriter III self test iss
s <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> Cc: W2HX
> Subject: [cctalk] Decwriter III self test issue?
>
> Hi all,
>
> I recently acquired a very nice decwriter III and it seems in good nick.
> However, the self test "hangs" on the return direction of the second line.
l: https://www.youtube.com/@w2hx/videos
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: W2HX via cctalk
> Sent: Thursday, February 29, 2024 6:53 PM
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> Cc: W2HX
> Subject: [cctalk] Decwriter III
ruary 29, 2024 6:53 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Cc: W2HX
Subject: [cctalk] Decwriter III self test issue?
Hi all,
I recently acquired a very nice decwriter III and it seems in good nick.
However, the self test "hangs" on the return direction of the second l
Hi all,
I recently acquired a very nice decwriter III and it seems in good nick.
However, the self test "hangs" on the return direction of the second line. Here
is a video on it:
https://youtu.be/pj6rk5Dlnbk
Anyone have any ideas where to look? In local mode, it appears to work
p
Answering my own question for posterity:
> However, test 1, the RAM test, should show long flashes of the green LED if
> RAM
> is bad. I was prepared to see all long flashes which might implicate the
> buffers or address decoder, but instead it won't blink the LED at all in tha
ms.
I connected the debug harness and test 0, the initial "dead board" test, does
show CPU accesses on the red LED and slowly flashes the green LED, so the CPU
at least is alive and can access the test EPROM.
However, test 1, the RAM test, should show long flashes of the green LED if RAM
I see it (and I observed the same thing - just rejoined after having
subscription problems stretching back to May, and didn't see any
traffic).
-ethan
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 12:09 PM Kevin McQuiggin via cctalk
wrote:
>
> Pardon the test message, I have just re-subscribed to the li
I see your test message!
On Fri, 2022-09-16 at 08:06 -0700, Kevin McQuiggin via cctalk wrote:
> Pardon the test message, I have just re-subscribed to the list but have seen
> no traffic on it for a couple of days.
>
> Kevin McQuiggin
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 5:09 PM Kevin McQuiggin via cctalk
wrote:
>
> Pardon the test message, I have just re-subscribed to the list but have seen
> no traffic on it for a couple of days.
QSL
-tony
0x06
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022, 9:09 AM Kevin McQuiggin via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> Pardon the test message, I have just re-subscribed to the list but have
> seen no traffic on it for a couple of days.
>
> Kevin McQuiggin
Pardon the test message, I have just re-subscribed to the list but have seen no
traffic on it for a couple of days.
Kevin McQuiggin
On 7/24/22 03:02, Rob Jarratt via cctalk wrote:
I am trying to work out why my PDP 11/24 CPU is not working. To do so I want
to use my logic analyser on the F-11 chips. I have a regular 40-pin test
clip, but it doesn't make a good contact with the pins on the F-11 chips.
The test clips I
I am trying to work out why my PDP 11/24 CPU is not working. To do so I want
to use my logic analyser on the F-11 chips. I have a regular 40-pin test
clip, but it doesn't make a good contact with the pins on the F-11 chips.
The test clips I have are made for regular DIP chips where the legs
If you scroll thru the other auctions, these aren't the only ones with
interesting material. There is a lot of other equipment and items.
I scrolled and saw meters and power supplies for instance. The sad
thing that this shows is how poor a choice of an agent this operation is
in attracting
On 7/14/22 2:37 AM, Mark Linimon via cctalk wrote:
Closing this Friday the 15th (sorry for noticing this late). At the
University of Texas in downtown Austin.
I have no association with the University, etc.
https://swicoauctions.com/online/26/item/110345
I'd pay the current bid of $11 for
Closing this Friday the 15th (sorry for noticing this late). At the
University of Texas in downtown Austin.
I have no association with the University, etc.
https://swicoauctions.com/online/26/item/110345
https://swicoauctions.com/online/26/item/110400
https://swicoauctions.com/online/26/it
tly acquired another PDP-8/E and wanted to test basic CPU functions
> > and memory before I added peripherals. There are some available short
> > "memory tests" online, but most don't have have the flexibility to test
> > multiple data patterns by design.
> >
>
Another PDP-8E? You are very lucky :)
On 4/6/2022 1:06 PM, Lyle Bickley via cctalk wrote:
I recently acquired another PDP-8/E and wanted to test basic CPU functions and
memory before I added peripherals. There are some available short "memory
tests" online, but most don'
Continuing the debugging of my recently acquired PDP-8/E, I wrote an address
test that's easy to enter from the front panel:
---
# PDP8 Quick Address Test
# Pass 1: Loads locations 23- with their own address.
# Pass 2: Tests each location for the correct address. If
# it fails (address
I recently acquired another PDP-8/E and wanted to test basic CPU functions and
memory before I added peripherals. There are some available short "memory
tests" online, but most don't have have the flexibility to test multiple data
patterns by design.
The test below does a class
essage --
>From: "Bill Gunshannon via cctech"
>To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
>Sent: Thursday, 17 Mar, 2022 At 14:32
>Subject: Re: Does anyone/museum test disk packs?
>On 3/17/22 09:33, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
>Modern disks still have a filtration system and airf
-- Original Message --
From: "Bill Gunshannon via cctech"
To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
Sent: Thursday, 17 Mar, 2022 At 14:32
Subject: Re: Does anyone/museum test disk packs?
On 3/17/22 09:33, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
Modern disks still have a filtration system and airflow
On 3/17/22 09:33, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
Modern disks still have a filtration system and airflow within the disk.
Air usually gets sucked from the edge then through the spindle and out
the center. In this case I think the spinning created a lower pressure
area where the heads were, result
Modern disks still have a filtration system and airflow within the disk.
Air usually gets sucked from the edge then through the spindle and out
the center. In this case I think the spinning created a lower pressure
area where the heads were, resulting in the heads flying too low.
I'll re-look
> On Mar 16, 2022, at 10:28 PM, Chris Zach via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>> I vividly recall a log by an operator who had a bad CDC 844 pack who
>> proceeded to destroy 5 drives and 3 additional packs. It was detailed
>> enough that it read like Gerard Hoffnung's "Bricklayer's Story".
>
> When I was
At 08:25 PM 3/16/2022, John Herron via cctalk wrote:
>I was visiting a new thrift store and saw a disk pack they had. I joked
>that mine are just fun display/conversation pieces.
Wait you bought it, right? Was it $2?
- John
I vividly recall a log by an operator who had a bad CDC 844 pack who
proceeded to destroy 5 drives and 3 additional packs. It was detailed
enough that it read like Gerard Hoffnung's "Bricklayer's Story".
When I was testing one of my RL02 drives I had a head skid on the disk.
Problem was the air
On 3/16/22 18:25, John Herron via cctalk wrote:
> I was visiting a new thrift store and saw a disk pack they had. I joked
> that mine are just fun display/conversation pieces.
>
> Do the giant drives suffer the same head crash issues that a bad zip disk
> can do or are these safe if someone actual
I was visiting a new thrift store and saw a disk pack they had. I joked
that mine are just fun display/conversation pieces.
Do the giant drives suffer the same head crash issues that a bad zip disk
can do or are these safe if someone actually wanted to see what was on them?
Does anyone on this list know of a company or individual that does work
(maintenance or anything) on these older 3065 test systems. The internal
brain and drives are all HP 1000 stuff. A900 control unit and HP-IB
drives. I have a user that needs help installing a drive and software on
one. If
On 3/15/21 7:23 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote:
> From: Guy Sotomayor
> the LOADALL instructions including all of it's warts (and its inability
> to switch back from protected mode)
Good to have that confirmed (for the 286; apparently it works in the 386).
The 386 loadall inst
> From: Guy Sotomayor
> the LOADALL instructions including all of it's warts (and its inability
> to switch back from protected mode)
Good to have that confirmed (for the 286; apparently it works in the 386).
> the other way to get back to real mode from protected mode is via a
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 at 19:37, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk
wrote:
>
> At the time I was fairly familiar with the LOADALL instruction. I had
> modified PC/AT Xenix to use the LOADALL instruction to allow for running
> Xenix programs and multiple DOS programs simultaneously.
Incidentally, I believe th
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
> > I should also note, that the other way to get back to real mode from
> > protected mode is via a triple-fault. What gets me (and I railed on
> > Intel when I worked there for a time) that it still existing in the
> > architecture even though
see a path forward in the immediate future.
So we in engineering decided that the best CPU was the Moto 68K and we
wrapped up a test board and started cutting some code for it.
Bill Davidow was on our BOD and when he got wind of our efforts, he
nearly went through the roof. When we defended our d
In contrast, Apple chose to abandon compatability with all previously
existing software
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
When they stopped selling Apple II's when Lisa was released.
Yes, exactly.
I was referring to the switch to 68000 (Lisa and then Mac), rather than
trying t
On 3/14/21 1:42 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
In contrast, Apple chose to abandon compatability with all previously existing
software
When they stopped selling Apple II's when Lisa was released.
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
There were many heated discussions in various task forces (this was of course
IBM) about the next generation OS (to become OS/2) about the '286.?? First
and foremost was how to be able to run DOS programs on the '286. Over very
vocal oppositi
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 at 19:37, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk
wrote:
> There were many heated discussions in various task forces (this was of
> course IBM) about the next generation OS (to become OS/2) about the
> '286. First and foremost was how to be able to run DOS programs on the
> '286. Over very
On 3/14/21 11:09 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 04:32:20PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki via cctalk wrote:
On Sun, 7 Mar 2021, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote:
The 286 can exit protected mode with the LOADALL instruction.
[...]
The existence of LOADALL (used for in-cir
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 04:32:20PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki via cctalk wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Mar 2021, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote:
>>> The 286 can exit protected mode with the LOADALL instruction.
[...]
> The existence of LOADALL (used for in-circuit emulation, a predecessor
> technique to modern J
I should update people on this as I have made progress today. I found two
broken tracks from the 8742 peripheral controller to the ASICs. One of the
ASICs sends a RESET to the 286. When I repaired that track suddenly the
protected mode test started to pass. Now I have other errors which are
almost
On Sun, 7 Mar 2021, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote:
> > The 286 can exit protected mode with the LOADALL instruction.
>
> Really? So why all the hullabaloo about Triple Faults:
>
> http://www.rcollins.org/Productivity/TripleFault.html
>
> back in the day; and why did IBM set up the keyboar
> From: Jim Stephens
> The 286 can exit protected mode with the LOADALL instruction.
Really? So why all the hullabaloo about Triple Faults:
http://www.rcollins.org/Productivity/TripleFault.html
back in the day; and why did IBM set up the keyboard controller so it could
send a RESET si
> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk On Behalf Of Fred Cisin via
> cctalk
> Sent: 06 March 2021 23:17
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
>
> Subject: Re: 80286 Protected Mode Test
>
> A stupid idea:
> Could the test require, and be f
> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk On Behalf Of Chuck Guzis via
> cctalk
> Sent: 07 March 2021 00:08
> To: Sean Conner via cctalk
> Subject: Re: 80286 Protected Mode Test
>
> On 3/6/21 3:10 PM, Sean Conner via cctalk wrote:
>
> > There might be
tive 80286 I can't imagine it passing a lot of the bios
test code at all if it was internally damaged.
Any POST card (port 80) handy? Maybe some hints there?
thanks
Jim
On 3/6/21 3:10 PM, Sean Conner via cctalk wrote:
> There might be damage to the keyboard controller that could cause the
> issue. Once the 80286 is in protected mode, there is no way to get out of
> protected mode except via the RESET signal. If I remember correctly, you
> could program the ke
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard Pope
> Sent: 06 March 2021 23:20
> To: r...@jarratt.me.uk; Rob Jarratt ; General
> Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> Subject: Re: 80286 Protected Mode Test
>
> Rob,
> There is probably hidden damage to the
DECstation 220 (Olivetti M250E) which is failing POST on a "simple
test of the 80286 protected mode". It says in a service manual I have that
for this test the CPU is set in the protected mode, the machine status word
is checked to see whether it indicates the protected mode and then exits
prot
A stupid idea:
Could the test require, and be failing, access to memory above 1M?
On Sat, 6 Mar 2021, Rob Jarratt via cctalk wrote:
I have a DECstation 220 (Olivetti M250E) which is failing POST on a "simple
test of the 80286 protected mode". It says in a service manual I have tha
It was thus said that the Great Rob Jarratt via cctalk once stated:
> I have a DECstation 220 (Olivetti M250E) which is failing POST on a "simple
> test of the 80286 protected mode". It says in a service manual I have that
> for this test the CPU is set in the protected mode,
I have a DECstation 220 (Olivetti M250E) which is failing POST on a "simple
test of the 80286 protected mode". It says in a service manual I have that
for this test the CPU is set in the protected mode, the machine status word
is checked to see whether it indicates the protected mod
Test, please ignore.
I have been recovering a set of Tektronix 4041 tapes that I received from
Stan Griffiths in 2000 in a box with Tektronix 4051 tapes. The 4041
tapes included EZ-TEST Volume 1 and Volume 2, but the first file on EZ-TEST
Volume 1 tape was damaged due to the original drive belt removing the oxide
On 7/9/20 7:02 PM, Robert Armstrong via cctech wrote:
I have an 11/04 with an RK11-D. I have a couple of RK05s, but I
wanted to test the controller before I start working on the drives.
The PDP11 Diagnostic Handbook says that ZRKJ?? "checks only the
drive-independent logic of the
I have an 11/04 with an RK11-D. I have a couple of RK05s, but I
wanted to test the controller before I start working on the drives. The
PDP11 Diagnostic Handbook says that ZRKJ?? "checks only the
drive-independent logic of the RK11 controller. no drive is needed..."
I assumed
G4AJQ/VA3MCU
Amateur Radio, the origin of the open-source concept!
Skype: TILBURY2591 nw.john...@ieee.org
On 09/07/2020 20:02, Robert Armstrong via cctech wrote:
> I have an 11/04 with an RK11-D. I have a couple of RK05s, but I
> wanted to test the controller before I start working on
> On Jul 9, 2020, at 5:02 PM, Robert Armstrong via cctech
> wrote:
> I have an 11/04 with an RK11-D. I have a couple of RK05s, but I wanted to
> test the controller before I start working on the drives. The PDP11
> Diagnostic Handbook says that ZRKJ?? "checks only t
According to a manual a friend has, the DECstation 220 outputs a diagnostic
code on the parallel port. If I have interpreted it correctly the code being
output by my machine is "Test for shutdown return". Does anyone know what
that might mean?
Regards
Rob
I and others were having some problems with our floppy drives. Since I couldn't
find a diagnostic program for the Ohio Scientific I wrote one.
http://www.pdp8online.com/osi/osi-floppy-test.shtml
With some floppy testing info here
http://www.pdp8online.com/osi/floppy-repair.shtml
If you try it l
Test failed. Please call Jim West on Support Desk
---8<---Corte aqui---8<---
http://www.tabajara-labs.blogspot.com
http://www.tabalabs.com.br
---8<---Corte aqui---8<---
Em seg., 10 de fev. de 2020 às 20:08, jwest--- via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> escreveu:
> test
>
>
test
; Cheers,
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>>> On 1/28/2020 7:02 PM, Lyle Bickley via cctalk wrote:
>>> I was browsing around in the back of Anchor Electronics a couple of days
>>> ago and came across some clean (but dusty) vintage HP test gear - and
>>> several
there were no attached
> photographs.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dan
>
>
> On 1/28/2020 7:02 PM, Lyle Bickley via cctalk wrote:
> > I was browsing around in the back of Anchor Electronics a couple of days
> > ago and came across some clean (but dusty) vintage HP
I was browsing around in the back of Anchor Electronics a couple of days ago
and came across some clean (but dusty) vintage HP test gear - and several very
cool large variable resistors. I've attached some pictures of both.
BTW: Those of us in Silicon Valley are fans of Anchor - because
On 01/25/2020 10:48 AM, jwest--- via cctalk wrote:
test
Glad to see you got it back running!
Thanks,
Jon
1 - 100 of 395 matches
Mail list logo
