mechjgh@tness7.UUCP (Greg Hackney ) (04/16/88)
I could use some Xenix installation advice...
When installing Xenix, the hdinit program gives this error:
Error on Fixed Disk (minor 0), blkno = 0, cmd = 0001 status = 0041
Sector =0, Cylinder/head = 0/0
I WAS running Xenix-86 on a PC6300 with a Seagate ST225 20MB hard disk,
and a Western Digital 1002 controller, worked fine.
I got a new 386 machine, and put the 20MB drive on it, and am NOW trying
to run it with a Western Digital 1003 (WA2) controller. Any ideas?
Do I have to get a later version of Xenix to be compatible with the
controller?
--
Greg
{ihnp4 | bellcore}!tness1!rootjack@turnkey.TCC.COM (Jack F. Vogel) (04/21/88)
In article <689@tness7.UUCP> mechjgh@tness7.UUCP (Greg Hackney ) writes: > >When installing Xenix, the hdinit program gives this error: >Error on Fixed Disk (minor 0), blkno = 0, cmd = 0001 status = 0041 >Sector =0, Cylinder/head = 0/0 This message tells you that Xenix is failing to write on the very first sector of the disk and if it can't do that you are SOL as far as installation goes. >I WAS running Xenix-86 on a PC6300 with a Seagate ST225 20MB hard disk, >and a Western Digital 1002 controller, worked fine. There is a world of difference between Xenix-86 and Xenix-[23]86 and between Disk I/O in the respective hardware. Your drive may work with DOS but it is not at all surprising that it doesn't work with Xenix. >I got a new 386 machine, and put the 20MB drive on it, and am NOW trying >to run it with a Western Digital 1003 (WA2) controller. Any ideas? >Do I have to get a later version of Xenix to be compatible with the >controller? How can someone go to all the expense of buying a 386 box and then put an ST225 drive in it!!?! Also you aren't trying to run Xenix-86 on it too are you??? If that is the case it may well not be compatable with the 1003, but you would be mad not to run Xenix386 anyway. My recommendation would be that now that you have spent $X000 on a state of the art box the least you could do is pay a few hundred for an AT-class drive (~40Meg) and run an OS that will utilize your hardware!!! Best of luck, -- Jack F. Vogel Turnkey Computer Consultants, Costa Mesa, CA UUCP: ...{nosc|uunet}!turnkey!jack Internet: jack@turnkey.TCC.COM
mechjgh@tness7.UUCP (Greg Hackney ) (04/25/88)
In article <187@turnkey.TCC.COM> jack@turnkey.TCC.COM (Jack F. Vogel) writes: >How can someone go to all the expense of buying a 386 box and then put an >ST225 drive in it!!?! Someone could be broke. :-) Actually, the box came with an 80MB drive. I put the 20MB in for some extra storage space. Couldn't see throwing it out in the street yet. >Also you aren't trying to run Xenix-86 on it too are you??? >My recommendation would be that now that you have spent $X000 >on a state of the art box the least you could do is pay a few hundred >for an AT-class drive (~40Meg) and run an OS that >will utilize your hardware!!! Just messing around until the 386 software arrives. The insanity is due to having a new box with nothing but DOS to run on it.
wtr@moss.ATT.COM (04/26/88)
In article <187@turnkey.TCC.COM> jack@turnkey.TCC.COM (Jack F. Vogel) writes: >How can someone go to all the expense of buying a ^^^^^^^ >386 box and then put an ST225 drive in it!!?! >Also you aren't trying to run Xenix-86 on it too are you??? My >recommendation would be that now that you have spent $X000 on a >state of the art box the least you could do is pay a few hundred >for an AT-class drive (~40Meg) and run an OS that >will utilize >your hardware!!! Okay, Jack, it's time for a small lesson..... <flames: ala Aesop> Once upon a time there was a poor hacker, who lived with his two wicked yuppie step-siblings. The yuppies drove their BMW's to all the parties, but our hacker had to stay at home and work, because he was saving his pennies. One evening, our hacker's fairy godmother came to him and said: "Yo! Dude! Here be-eth thoust 386 clone for sale, cheap!" So our hero succummed to temptation and purchased the box, although it exausted his funds and he could not go out the the party with his evil yuppie step-siblings. He knew that the rest of his system was degrading the 386 performance, but he also knew that he could work hard and upgrade when he had the dough. (Perhaps by selling a couple of used BMW's, cheap ;-) MORAL: Not all of us have large bank accounts, nor company funds to buy whatever we please! A "few hundred" is still alot of money, especially after laying out the cash for a new box. If **I** had the money, why, I would stop f*&^in around with this clone mess, **I'd** go get a new Sun, or a BIG Vax, I mean, whats a monthly electricity bill when you got a few hundred here, a few hundred there! <flames off> What I think would have been appropriate here would have been suggestions on what constitute good buys for a 386 box. Fast disks, cache controllers, location, availability, PRICE. What gives you the biggest bang for your buck? That way, we poor folks here may look at our cash flow (or lack thereof ;-) and make these decisions. read the keywords: "need some installation ADVICE" ===================================================================== Bill Rankin Bell Labs, Whippany NJ (201) 386-4154 (cornet 232) email address: ...![ ihnp4 ulysses cbosgd allegra ]!moss!wtr ...![ ihnp4 cbosgd akgua watmath ]!clyde!wtr =====================================================================
pjh@mccc.UUCP (Pete Holsberg) (04/30/88)
In article <25409@clyde.ATT.COM> wtr@moss.UUCP (Bill Rankin) writes:
...
...read the keywords: "need some installation ADVICE"
...
I can't tell you what to buy, but I CAN tell you that the Micropolis
1335 drive with a DTC 5380 (maybe 5280) controller tests VERY slow, as
reported by the InfoWorld benchmark program. And the 1335 is reputed to
be a 28 ms drive!palowoda@megatest.UUCP (Bob Palowoda) (05/02/88)
in article <609@mccc.UUCP>, pjh@mccc.UUCP (Pete Holsberg) says: > > In article <25409@clyde.ATT.COM> wtr@moss.UUCP (Bill Rankin) writes: > ... > ...read the keywords: "need some installation ADVICE" > ... > > I can't tell you what to buy, but I CAN tell you that the Micropolis > 1335 drive with a DTC 5380 (maybe 5280) controller tests VERY slow, as > reported by the InfoWorld benchmark program. And the 1335 is reputed to > be a 28 ms drive! Interesting my DTC controller seems to be slow also. I started using a benchmark program Coretest. It on a Vertex V150 it reports 280K/Bytes/sec, 23ms random track access, and 6ms track to track access, under MSDOS. I just ran the same benchmark on a friends PC with and OMTI RLL controller with a CDC and it reports 720K/Bytes/sec 23ms and 4ms. Opps forgot to mention my DTC is also RLL. The OMTI could format 1 to 1. That's about 5x increase in data throughput at approximately the same price. Does anyone have any benchmark tests to measure disk IO on SCO Xenix? Also has anyone used RLL with SCO Xenix? If so what controllers and/or drives. Any help would be appreciated. ---Bob
jtara@m2-net.UUCP (Jon Tara) (05/06/88)
In article <496@megatest.UUCP>, palowoda@megatest.UUCP (Bob Palowoda) writes: > > Interesting my DTC controller seems to be slow also. I started using > a benchmark program Coretest. It on a Vertex V150 it reports 280K/Bytes/sec, > 23ms random track access, and 6ms track to track access, under MSDOS. > I just ran the same benchmark on a friends PC with and OMTI RLL controller > with a CDC and it reports 720K/Bytes/sec 23ms and 4ms. Opps forgot to mention my DTC is also RLL. The OMTI could format 1 to 1. That's about 5x increase > in data throughput at approximately the same price. Does anyone have any > benchmark tests to measure disk IO on SCO Xenix? Also has anyone used > RLL with SCO Xenix? If so what controllers and/or drives. Any help would > be appreciated. I have an OMTI 8627, which does ST506 RLL, as well as ESDI. With a Vertex V170 in an AT at 9.5 mHz, Coretest gives it 658k/sec and 28 msec. With the "high speed I/O" jumper off, it's much lower - maybe 250k. I upgraded to a 386, and a CDC Wren III ESDI drive. Much to my horror, throughput went DOWN! The best I can do is about 500K/sec, with 17msec access. Initially, I could only get the thing to run on the 386 by turning the high speed I/O off (that's done by INSTALLING a jumper...) or by slowing down the AT bus to 1/3 the 20 mHz processor speed, instead of 1/2. Eventually, I discovered that it would work reliably with a 10mHz bus by turning on the Chips & Technologies 82C206 'EMR Bit' option. Loading the 8627 BIOS extension into 32-bit RAM improves it to about 550K/sec, but works only sporadically, when wait states are added to main memory - apparently there's some time-critical code. The theoretical maximum would be about 1.1MB/sec (36 sectors x 512 x 60 rev/sec.). The theretical maximum with RLL is 798k/sec, so the controller's getting just about all there is to get for RLL, but doing a pretty poor job with ESDI. So, what does this have to do with Xenix? Well, SCO recently came out with a seperate version, called '386ESDI' (or 286ESDI) which supports this board. It supposedly has additional instructions to take advantage of ESDI drives (the OMTI, that is.) But OMTI has discountined the 8627, and is now coming out with seperate models supporting 1:1 for MFM, RLL, and ESDI, but no more combined models. And guess what? They're all Western Digital compatible, so they'll need the NORMAL version of Xenix... They're claiming much better performance from the yet-to-be-released ESDI controller. Does anyone know of an ESDI controller, available now and that will work with Xenix that can get me close to that magic 1.1MB/sec? -- jtara%m-net@umix.cc.umich.edu ihnp4!dwon!m-net!jtara "If this is all a dream, I can't wait to see what it's like when I wake up." - Explorers
jack@turnkey.TCC.COM (Jack F. Vogel) (05/08/88)
In article <25409@clyde.ATT.COM> wtr@moss.UUCP (Bill Rankin) writes: > >In article <187@turnkey.TCC.COM> jack@turnkey.TCC.COM (Jack F. >Vogel) writes: >>How can someone go to all the expense of buying a >>386 box and then put an ST225 drive in it!!?! > >Okay, Jack, it's time for a small lesson..... > ><flames: ala Aesop> > [Bill's fairy-tale flames omitted] > Ohhh, beat me, hurt me :-} :-}, us "evil yuppie step-siblings" not only spend our time going off to parties in our 'beamers', we're all into S&M too!!! :-} :-} Sorry to disillusion you Bill, but I drive a Nissan and run a 286 machine! My reason is that for the same money I can more completely outfit a system than with a 386 system. That was also my point in the original followup. But that's OK, I enjoy a flame that I can chuckle along with. >read the keywords: "need some installation ADVICE" If you look at the context of the original posting he did not ask about hardware suggestions, he wanted advise on installing Xenix86 on his present hardware. Also I am now virtually certain that the problem was an imcompat- ability between the 1003 controller and Xenix86. I know that you can actually run Xenix286 on an ST225 drive. Best regards, -- Jack F. Vogel Turnkey Computer Consultants, Costa Mesa, CA UUCP: ...{nosc|uunet}!turnkey!jack Internet: jack@turnkey.TCC.COM