glenn@suphys.physics.su.OZ.AU (Glenn Geers) (10/11/90)
Hi, just a quick question for someone familiar with ESIX. After having a look through the installation guide for supported disk controllers I am led to believe that it will *not* support the WD1006VSR2 RLL controller (it's not listed - they list WD1003 and WD1007). Is this correct? Thanks in advance, Glenn p.s. We've used Xenix for a while and that has no problem with RLL controllers. We're just looking at cheaper alternatives. glenn@qed.physics.su.oz.au #include <std_disclaimer.h> -- Glenn Geers | "So when it's over, we're back to people. Department of Theoretical Physics | Just to prove that human touch can have The University of Sydney | no equal." Sydney NSW 2006 Australia | - Basia Trzetrzelewska, 'Prime Time TV'
dt4100c@medtron.medtronic.com (Derek Terveer) (11/06/90)
In article <1990Oct10.232255.25221@metro.ucc.su.OZ.AU> glenn@suphys.physics.su.OZ.AU (Glenn Geers) writes: > > just a quick question for someone familiar with ESIX. After having a look > through the installation guide for supported disk controllers I am led to > believe that it will *not* support the WD1006VSR2 RLL controller (it's not > listed - they list WD1003 and WD1007). Is this correct? I have never been able to get rll controllers to work reliably with either rev c or rev d of esix. derek -- Derek "Tigger" Terveer Just the facts, ma'am: det@medtronic.com
kaleb@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov (Kaleb Keithley ) (11/07/90)
In article <1990Nov6.002853.582@medtron.medtronic.com> dt4100c@medtron.medtronic.com (Derek Terveer) writes: >In article <1990Oct10.232255.25221@metro.ucc.su.OZ.AU> glenn@suphys.physics.su.OZ.AU (Glenn Geers) writes: >> >> just a quick question for someone familiar with ESIX. After having a look >> through the installation guide for supported disk controllers I am led to >> believe that it will *not* support the WD1006VSR2 RLL controller (it's not >> listed - they list WD1003 and WD1007). Is this correct? > >I have never been able to get rll controllers to work reliably with either rev c >or rev d of esix. > I have *never* had a problem getting rev. c or rev. d of ESIX to work with my WD1006 1:1 RLL controller. -- Kaleb Keithley Jet Propulsion Labs kaleb@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov "So that's what an invisible barrier looks like!"
glenn@suphys.physics.su.OZ.AU (Glenn Geers) (11/07/90)
From article <1990Nov6.234606.5162@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov>, by kaleb@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov (Kaleb Keithley ): > In article <1990Nov6.002853.582@medtron.medtronic.com> dt4100c@medtron.medtronic.com (Derek Terveer) writes: >>In article <1990Oct10.232255.25221@metro.ucc.su.OZ.AU> glenn@suphys.physics.su.OZ.AU (Glenn Geers) writes: >>> >>> just a quick question for someone familiar with ESIX. After having a look >>> through the installation guide for supported disk controllers I am led to >>> believe that it will *not* support the WD1006VSR2 RLL controller (it's not >>> listed - they list WD1003 and WD1007). Is this correct? >> >>I have never been able to get rll controllers to work reliably with either rev c >>or rev d of esix. >> > > I have *never* had a problem getting rev. c or rev. d of ESIX to work with my > WD1006 1:1 RLL controller. I have had no trouble over the last few weeks with my WD1006vsr2 RLL controller. I've just added a second drive (an old - from my XT clone - 20 Mb Miniscribe) and this is now causing the main drive to lock up. I'm going to fiddle around by changing the interleave on the drive from 1:1 to 2:1 (and maybe 3:1 - I just want storage!) and up the numbers of kernel buffers from 400 to 550. I'm also going to (perhaps) run the 1k filesystem instead of the Berkley ffs. Glenn glenn@qed.physics.su.oz.au -- Glenn Geers | "So when it's over, we're back to people. Department of Theoretical Physics | Just to prove that human touch can have The University of Sydney | no equal." Sydney NSW 2006 Australia | - Basia Trzetrzelewska, 'Prime Time TV'
rli@buster.irby.com (Buster Irby) (11/07/90)
dt4100c@medtron.medtronic.com (Derek Terveer) writes: >In article <1990Oct10.232255.25221@metro.ucc.su.OZ.AU> glenn@suphys.physics.su.OZ.AU (Glenn Geers) writes: >> through the installation guide for supported disk controllers I am led to >> believe that it will *not* support the WD1006VSR2 RLL controller >I have never been able to get rll controllers to work reliably with either rev c >or rev d of esix. Well, I have had no trouble at all. I am running a WD1006SR2 and a Maxtor XT-1140 drive. To make it work, you must use the WD bios on the controller and select the drive parameters there. In spoofing mode the controller will override the standard bios drive parameters. This causes the Maxtor to be 190MB instead of 115MB. You should also do your formatting through the controller instead of through unix. I ran it like that under Esix rev C for 9 months and am currently running ISC Unix 2.2 with no problems. -- Buster Irby buster!rli
john@karnak.cactus.org (John B. Meaders Jr.) (11/07/90)
In article <1990Nov6.002853.582@medtron.medtronic.com> dt4100c@medtron.medtronic.com (Derek Terveer) writes: > >I have never been able to get rll controllers to work reliably with either rev c >or rev d of esix. I have one running under Rev D (2 floppy, 2 disks Western Digital plain jane 16 bit type). My AMI 386 BIOS does let me define my own drive type though so I can set it to ST-251 with 26 sectors instead of 17 sectors. -- 2LT John B. Meaders, Jr. 510 Manchester Ct., Hopewell, VA 23860 Voice: 804-458-2983 Net: john@karnak.cactus.org or john@karnak.sigma.com Uucp: ...!{sequoia,letni,ditka}!karnak!john "Cowabunga dude" - TMNT Disclaimer: These are my opinions, not those of DA or DOD.
davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr) (11/08/90)
In article <1990Nov7.032130.23769@metro.ucc.su.OZ.AU> glenn@suphys.physics.su.OZ.AU (Glenn Geers) writes: | I have had no trouble over the last few weeks with my WD1006vsr2 RLL controller. | I've just added a second drive (an old - from my XT clone - 20 Mb Miniscribe) | and this is now causing the main drive to lock up. SCO has this same problem, and released a fix for it (although they labeled it for 1007). I haven't had a lockup in months, so I call it fixed. Call the vendor and tell them that the setup will run with SCO. The problem was (reported to me) that when the o/s started a seek on one drive and a read on the other, that when the interrupt came back the kernel got confused about which operation was complete. -- bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen) sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me