1-Aug-90 06:47:07-MDT,8253;000000000000

1-Aug-90 06:47:07-MDT,8253;000000000000
Mail-From: KPETERSEN created at 1-Aug-90 06:27:25
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 90 06:27:24 MDT
From: [email protected]
Reply-To: [email protected]
Subject: INFO-CPM Digest V90 #126
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

INFO-CPM Digest Wed, 1 Aug 90 Volume 90 : Issue 126

Today's Topics:
Availability of Apple CPM SW
Speed adjustment on a TM101-4
what disk for an 80tk ds dd Tandon TM101-4 drive
Z-System
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 30 Jul 90 13:47:05 GMT
From: [email protected] (Corey S. Wilner)
Subject: Availability of Apple CPM SW
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

I own an Apple //e computer w/128K RAM and, of course, a Z-80 card.
I used to use Wordstar until Appleworks 3.0 came out and now that I
have access to the 'net', I wanted to find out about Apple CPM stuff
again. Can anyone answer a question or two for me:

1) What is the latest and greatest version of the operating system
that I can get for the Apple. I heard rumors way back when that said
there was going to be a multitasking OS for the Apple?! Also, where
can I get the OS from?

2) What is a good source for Apple CPM software. Does someone have a
catalog of SW available for the Apple out there? Does anyone even care
about supporting the Apple CPM format? Anyone? Anyone?

Thanks in advance.

***********************************************
Corey S. Wilner | Give me a jingle:
Motorola Cellular | ..!uunet!motcid!wilner
708-632-7206 |
***********************************************
NOTE: DO NOT MAIL TO !uunet!motcid!red!wilner
^^^
We have been losing mail that way. To
Japan I believe...no joke!
***********************************************
If after 30 minutes of a card game you don't
know who the rube is, you are!

McAfee's Law of Physical Material Balance:
Matter can be neither created nor destroyed.
However, it can be lost!

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 31 Jul 90 14:13:56 -0400
From: EUDOH%[email protected]
Subject: Speed adjustment on a TM101-4
Message-ID: <5A071F0D35050221-SCTNVE*EUDOH@sctnve>

> Date: Fri, 20 Jul 90 19:21 CDT
> From: LANCE TAGLIAPIETRA <[email protected]>
> Subject: Speed adjustment on a TM101-4
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
>
> Hi,
>
> I have an 80tkds drive, a Tandon TM101-4, which is running a bit too slow.
> I cannot find a speed adjustment on this drive. Can the speed be
> adjusted on this drive? and if so, how is it done.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lance Tagliapietra [email protected] or [email protected]

hi,

well, if you're using Montezuma Micro CP/M, you should be able to change
the drive speeds along with drive type, size, and quantity...through the
configure program that comes with MM CP/M...
it's the one before the one where you change and assign different drive
types, and the menu there is kind of overlayed....

you select the drive A - D and it should give you another menu stating
the above spects on the drive which you can change... it's all done by
the software...

by the way, I have a slightly rebuilt TRS-80 Model 4P with almost anything
I could buy or build for it...

later dude..
A 2....
___________________________________________________________
( -->> [email protected] <<-- Cyber Lab Consultant )
( Computer Operations )
( //!\\ \\\\\\\\ Southern College of Technology )
( // \\ !! )
( //!!!!!\\ //////// \\ Etop Udoh \\ )
( // \\ !! \\ - A2 - \\ )
( // \\ \\\\\\\\ )
( Sometimes you just gotta say "what the f*ck" )
(___________________________________________________________)

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 31 Jul 90 13:47:44 -0400
From: EUDOH%[email protected]
Subject: what disk for an 80tk ds dd Tandon TM101-4 drive
Message-ID: <5A071F0D1F130373-SCTNVE*EUDOH@sctnve>

> > INFO-CPM Digest V90 #123
> > What disk for an 80tk ds dd Tandon TM101-4 drive
> >Well, the subject about says it all. I would like to know where I can get
> >disks which will work in my 96tpi 80tk ds dd Tandon TM101-4 drives which
> >Montezuma Micro CP/M will format to 820K. I just bought a box of Kodak MD"-H
> >disks which are rated at 96tpi, but they do not format, every track fails
> >the verify pass. These disks are made for high density drives (1.2Meg).
> >
> >In the past, I have found Radio Shack 80tk 5.25" disks to work well, and also
> >some brands of 48tpi disks. What is different about the high density disks
> >that they will not work properly on my drives?
>
> Lance Tagliapietra [email protected] or [email protected]

HI,

I started using the 80tk 5.25" drives about 4 or 5 years ago, when a friend
of mine and I bought a pair, just tto see if they would work...
We first used them with Newdos/80, Dosplus, and then finally Montezuma Micro..

We used regular 48tpi disks, and the drives never really complained...
Generic ones are probably the best...not to put anyone down...
Note: if you get bad tracks after formatting with MM CP/M, you can lock out
the bad tracks with the "findbad" program....and you normally just get
a handful of bad tracks.

the only way you can really go wrong with the drive is trying to write a
another format with it, such as a 40 trk format, you can read them fine, but
it is not recommended to write to them also... You overlay every other track
in a sense in other to be able to write the lesser format and it probably
won't do it correctly after a time, or who knows what else could happen....
Already lost one drive because of that....it's like it just slowly went out
of alignment....

later dude...
A 2...
___________________________________________________________
( -->> [email protected] <<-- Cyber Lab Consultant )
( Computer Operations )
( //!\\ \\\\\\\\ Southern College of Technology )
( // \\ !! )
( //!!!!!\\ //////// \\ Etop Udoh \\ )
( // \\ !! \\ - A2 - \\ )
( // \\ \\\\\\\\ )
( Sometimes you just gotta say "what the f*ck" )
(___________________________________________________________)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 27 Jul 90 14:32:30 EST
From: [email protected]
Subject: Z-System

After the Amstrad discuss here, Peter da Silva asked me:

>> What is the Z system? Is it available for non-Amstrad CP/M boxes?

Z-System is an advanced CP/M-compatible operating system with such
features as:

multiple commands on a line
powerful scripting/aliasing capability
search path for requested commands and files
error trapping and recovery
Unix-like TCAP for terminal-independent full-screen operations
command processor shells including history shells
wordprocessor-like command line editing
flow control commands (multilevel IF/THEN/ELSE processing)
reloadable, user-selectable resident commands
named directories
security (great for remote-access systems)

It has been available for many years for CP/M-2.2 machines. Only in the
past two years did we figure out how to get it to run on CP/M-Plus computers
as well. We now have commercial versions that install automatically, can be
reconfigured easily, and even allow the configuration to be changed on the
fly. If you send me a mailing address, I would be happy to send you some
information.

-- Jay Sage

------------------------------

End of INFO-CPM Digest V90 Issue #126
*************************************
4-Aug-90 11:33:06-MDT,14183;000000000000
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 90 11:15:29 MDT
From: [email protected]
Reply-To: [email protected]
Subject: INFO-CPM Digest V90 #127
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

INFO-CPM Digest Sat, 4 Aug 90 Volume 90 : Issue 127

Today's Topics:
CP/M ftp sites?
How to speed up Ampro LB+ SCSI?
Osborne portables
Osborne portables II...
ZCPR 3.3 extended environment?
ZCPR 3.3 FAST ERA/REN/PROT algorithm
ZCPR 3.3 Named Directories
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 1 Aug 90 14:55:53 GMT
From: media-lab!snorkelwacker!spdcc!merk!alliant!linus!nixbur!nixpbe!peun11!josef@EDDIE.MIT.EDU (Moellers)
Subject: CP/M ftp sites?
Message-ID: <josef.649522553@peun11>

In <[email protected]> [email protected] (Magnus Olsson) writes:

>Does anyone know of any ftp sites with CP/M programs? The only one I've
>heard of so far is Simtel20.
^^^^^^^^
.. and still not enough??

--
| Josef Moellers | c/o Nixdorf Computer AG |
| USA: [email protected] | Abt. PXD-S14 |
| !USA: [email protected] | Heinz-Nixdorf-Ring |
| Phone: (+49) 5251 104662 | D-4790 Paderborn |

------------------------------

Date: 31 Jul 90 16:02:55 GMT
From: hpda!hpcuha!aspen!hpcc01!hpbbn!hpbbrd!hpfcmdd!hpfcso!hpldola!hp-lsd!was@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Bill Stubblebine)
Subject: How to speed up Ampro LB+ SCSI?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

I have a question for any Ampro Little Board Z80+ BIOS hackers still left
out there.

My configuration:

Ampro LB Z80+ (w/built-in SCSI interface)
Adaptec ACB4000 (not 4000A) SCSI hard disk controller
Seagate ST-125 20 MB 40 ms hard disk drive
3M MCD-403 40 MB QIC SCSI tape drive
NZ-COM/Z-System

I've used this system for several years. Until recently, I've never had
reason to complain about the speed of the LB+ BIOS SCSI routines talking to
my hard disk because most programs and editor text load within human
tolerance limits, i.e., < ~1-3 seconds.

Recently, I purchased the 3M MCD-403 SCSI tape drive to support backups.
It was a good deal for $129 surplus at Halted Electronics in Sunnyvale.
The tape drive works great, and the Ampro BIOS provides a convenient
virtual machine for accessing the SCSI bus. Within a very short time I was
able to exercise the tape drive's basic features via SCSI.

As I started transferring real data between the hard disk and the tape
drive, I discovered that I could not source or sink data from the hard disk
fast enough to keep the tape drive streaming. (Streaming means keeping the
tape drive motor continuously running during data transfers.) Without
maintaining streaming operation, the tape transport stops, repositions the
tape and starts up again to read or write each physical block on the tape.
Because this extra positioning activity will probably reduce the life of
the tape transport, it looks like I need to speed up the hard disk accesses
slightly.

A few more details on the tape drive. The tape drive reads and writes 8k
byte physical blocks. A single SCSI command can transfer multiple 8k
blocks to or from the tape, but never less than one block. To keep the
tape drive streaming the host needs to request a read, write or seek
operation from the tape drive within 250ms of a prior read, write or seek
operation, otherwise the tape drive motor shuts down automatically.

A few more details on the disk drive and controller. The Adaptec ACB4000
controller formats the ST-125 using 18 512-byte physical sectors (or
logical blocks as the controller manual refers to them) per physical track.
Thus, one physical track on the disk contains 72 logical (128-byte) CP/M
sectors, with four 128-byte CP/M sectors per each 512-byte SCSI logical
block. The Ampro BIOS computes CP/M sector and track numbers based on 64
128-byte sectors per track, and converts the CP/M track/sector numbers into
SCSI Logical Block Addresses (LBAs) as part of processing BIOS read, write
and seek requests. I mention this so that in the following discussion when
I refer to logical sectors, you will know that I am not talking about CP/M
sectors and tracks, but logical 512-byte SCSI logical blocks.

The SCSI logical blocks are physically positioned in relation to each other
on the track based on the interleave factor specified to the Adaptec
controller at format time. The Adaptec controller supports interleave
factors from 1:1 to 9:1, i.e., the fastest interleave (1:1) is when
sequential logical sectors occupy adjacent physical locations on the track,
while the slowest interleave (9:1) has eight physical SCSI sectors between
each logical SCSI sector.

The ST-125 spins at 3600 RPM = 60 RPS => 16.67 ms/ revolution. Thus, the
drive has a basic latency of 16.67/2=8.33 ms, i.e., the average time you
need to wait before the desired physical block arrives under the head,
assuming, of course that the head is positioned over the desired track.

I've spent some time characterizing the hard disk operation. To my
surprise, even with the ST-125 formatted at the slowest interleave (9:1),
the BIOS cannot transfer the contents of a 512-byte SCSI logical sector in
time to read the next SCSI logical sector on the same track nine sectors
away. In fact, careful measurement revealed that after reading a SCSI
sector, at 9:1 interleave the the BIOS **just misses** the next available
logical sector, and has to wait for the next revolution.

For example, after reading physical sector 1, the nearest physical sector
that the BIOS can read on the same track during the same rotation is
physical sector 11 as illustrated below:

One track: <--------------------- 16.67 ms -------------------->
Physical: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Logical: 01 03 05 07 09 11 13 15 17 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18
One sector: <---------- 8.33 ms ------->

I did these experiments using bona fide BIOS calls just as an application
program would. I transferred each 512-byte SCSI block to memory using four
sequential CP/M sector requests starting with the CP/M sector that mapped
onto the first of the four CP/M sectors in the SCSI physical block.
(Believe me, that was an interesting exercise in integer programming.) I
timed the SCSI block transfer starting from just before the first CP/M
sector request till just after the fourth sequential CP/M request. These
were BIOS sector reads and writes - no BDOS overhead was involved.

I realize that reading 4 CP/M sectors per SCSI sector involves overhead in
the BIOS deblocking code. I estimated the overhead of the deblocking code
by measuring the time to transfer a 128 byte CP/M sector I knew was already
buffered in the BIOS deblocker. This took a little less than 1 ms per CP/M
sector - not fast, but also nowhere near the 8ms+ required for the entire
512 SCSI block. The results indicate that the BIOS is taking > ~4ms to
read a measly 512 bytes per physical SCSI sector.

Overall, the net throughput of the Ampro SCSI HD interface seems lower than
it should be. The best it can do is four 128 byte CP/M sectors per 16.6 ms
disk revolution, or 512 bytes/16.6ms. Thus, even with a 1:1 interleave so
that logical sector 2 is right next to logical sector 1, transferring 8k
bytes requires:

(8192/512 sectors)*16.67 ms/sector = 16*16.67 = 266.72 ms

This equates to only 30,713 bytes per second net throughput from
the hard disk - not too impressive in my opinion.

Add to this any randomness in a file's disk allocation involving head seek
time, and I'm out of the ball park for streaming.

If I could speed up the processing of a SCSI logical sector by one or two
milliseconds, I could double the throughput at an interleave of 9:1,
because the BIOS could transfer two SCSI logical sectors per revolution
instead of 1 SCSI sector per revolution as it does now.

If you're still with me, I wonder if anyone has managed to get more than
30.7K bytes per second net throughput to/from the hard disk out of a
co
nfiguration similar to mine. I've read the Ampro BIOS source and the
Adaptec technical manual several times without finding a clue to speeding
things up further. What's the trick?

Bill Stubblebine
Hewlett-Packard Logic Systems Div.
[email protected] (Internet)
(719) 590-5568

------------------------------

Date: 2 Aug 90 02:09:09 GMT
From: [email protected] (william c ray)
Subject: Osborne portables
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

HELP!!!

I work for a VERY poor research lab... we hdon't have enough money to buy
new machines, so we scrounge what we can from surplus... Well, I just came
across 2 (supposedly functional) Osborne portable machines, which from all
appearances have IEEE488 interfaces (wow!)... Trouble is, they don't have
any of the docs, or software (not even boot/OS)... We would love to get these
things functional, to use as data acquisition controllers w/ the IEEE488.

So, does anyone have one of these? Could you *Please* send me copies of
manuals, software, information on these? (I did pick the right group, right?
they are CPM machines aren't they?) We would be more than happy to pay
duplication/postage/etc costs.

thanks
Will Ray
[email protected]
[email protected]

------------------------------

Date: 3 Aug 90 17:34:10 GMT
From: [email protected] (william c ray)
Subject: Osborne portables II...
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

Thanks to the people who have
replied to my query, I now know that there are different types of
osborne portables... well, it seems that I have 2 different versions of
the OS-1 (actually, the plate on the newer of the two lists it as an OCC-1).
So, if anyone has the software for one of these contraptions,
PLEASE (please please please be listening) let me know. I would very much
appreciate copies of anything that can be knownn about, or run on the machine.

thanks Will Ray
[email protected]
[email protected]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 90 08:49:18 edt
From: <[email protected]>
Subject: ZCPR 3.3 extended environment?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

CEO summary:
I have an installation of ZCPR 3.3 that I am trying to get different
utilities running for. However, with SHOW I get the message
"extended environment required" and with ZEX I get "inadequate
facilities". I have everything implemented--RCPs, IOPs, FCPs,
external environment, termcap, named directories, external command
line, external stack, etc. etc. First of all, what is the extended
environment--mine is based on SYSENV.LBR (which seems to be cludgey
at best), where am I supposed to get a proper environment information?

Thanks. [email protected]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 90 09:00:26 edt
From: <[email protected]>
Subject: ZCPR 3.3 FAST ERA/REN/PROT algorithm
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

CEO summary:
I just recently moved from my own (very system dependent) command
processor replacement to ZCPR 3.3. One thing that I noticed is that
commands such as ERA, REN, PROT and any other program that work to
modify the directory can be made to work a lot faster than they
already are. From what I can tell, ERA will first scan the directory
using the search and next functions, and the delete each file
individually with the delete command. This requires that the
directory be scaned once no matter what, and once for each file to be
deleted. The faster way for the simple ERA would to be scan the
directory using the search and next functions, but when I directory
entry is found, print it, change the user to E5 and then to a BIOS
write. BIOS is already set to the correct DMA, track, and sector
because of the read to get that sector there in the first place.
This way the directory is read once (very fast). For more complex
operations such as querying for verification, read the directory
once, perform the queries, and then scan a second time, changing only
the files that the user has allowed to be changed. Has anybody
thought to do this? How about getting it changed (I might be able to
do it myself, but I need info on getting this tested and distributed)?
Thanks. [email protected]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 2 Aug 90 08:53:18 edt
From: <[email protected]>
Subject: ZCPR 3.3 Named Directories
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

CEO summary:
I have been having problems with named directories under ZCPR 3 since
I began installing it. The problem lies with the LDR, and I think I
have discovered where. With the Z3BASE.LIB, I specify the number of
entries that I want (used default of 14) and the size of the buffer
is then 18*entries+1. However, looking into the Z3LIB routines, the
information it provides is the number of 128 byte blocks that the
named directory is. What seems to be happening is that when I load
the named directory, it winds up clobbering the command line. It
seems to me here that something is in conflict, and it is the Z3LIB
(and all programs that use it, including LDR) are wrong. Can someone
please give me some input as to what number should be in the
environment (entries or 128 byte blocks) and how does Z3LIB get the
number of 128 byte blocks of the number of entries.

Thanks. [email protected]

------------------------------

End of INFO-CPM Digest V90 Issue #127
*************************************
8-Aug-90 12:25:17-MDT,8970;000000000000
Mail-From: KPETERSEN created at 8-Aug-90 12:16:54
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 90 12:16:53 MDT
From: [email protected]
Reply-To: [email protected]
Subject: INFO-CPM Digest V90 #128
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

INFO-CPM Digest Wed, 8 Aug 90 Volume 90 : Issue 128

Today's Topics:
CP/M-UG Hamburg
How to speed up Ampro LB+ SCSI? (2 msgs)
KAYPRO 10 forsale
Z80 assembler recommendations
zcpr 3.3 questions
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 3 Aug 90 21:01:40 GMT
From: usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!ira.uka.de!smurf!gopnbg!mcshh!dk3uz@ucsd.edu (Edmund Ramm)
Subject: CP/M-UG Hamburg
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

Das naechste Treffen der CP/M User Group Hamburg findet statt
am Sonnabend, dem 11. August 1990 um 1500h in Torstens Rechen-
zentrum, Parallelstrasse 6a, 2000 Norderstedt. Gaeste sind wie
immer gern gesehen.

Edmund Ramm, DK3UZ, Anderheitsallee 24, 2000 Hamburg 71, +49 40 6425430 voice
uunet!mcsun!unido!mcshh!dk3uz or uunet!mcsun!unido!cosmo!dk3uz
-->

Edmund Ramm, DK3UZ, Anderheitsallee 24, 2000 Hamburg 71, +49 40 6425430 voice
uunet!mcsun!unido!mcshh!dk3uz or uunet!mcsun!unido!cosmo!dk3uz

------------------------------

Date: 6 Aug 90 18:29:22 GMT
From: usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!bu.edu!orc!inews!cadev6!dbraun@ucsd.edu (Doug Braun ~)
Subject: How to speed up Ampro LB+ SCSI?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Bill Stubblebine) writes:
>I have a question for any Ampro Little Board Z80+ BIOS hackers still left
>out there.
>
>My configuration:
>
> Ampro LB Z80+ (w/built-in SCSI interface)
> Adaptec ACB4000 (not 4000A) SCSI hard disk controller
> Seagate ST-125 20 MB 40 ms hard disk drive
> 3M MCD-403 40 MB QIC SCSI tape drive
> NZ-COM/Z-System
>