#: 9794 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 14-Mar-91 18:50:36 Sb: #Non Coco os9 Fm: Denise Tomlinson 71021,3274 To: Sysop (X) Are there modules that will run under a Coco in Lib 11? Same microprossessor it looks like? There is 1 Reply. #: 9798 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 14-Mar-91 19:24:02 Sb: #9794-Non Coco os9 Fm: Kevin Darling 76703,4227 To: Denise Tomlinson 71021,3274 (X) Denise - yah, non-coco OS9 programs should run fine on the CoCo (6809 ones, that is). best - kev #: 9941 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 24-Mar-91 14:02:47 Sb: 6809 processors Fm: Denise Tomlinson 71021,3274 To: All Are there good programs in Lib 11 for the Color Computer Level 2? Someone told me that most os9 programs that are made for the 6809 processor would run on my Coco ok? Thanks, Denise #: 11695 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 09-Aug-91 21:58:41 Sb: #X10 Fm: Hugo Bueno 71211,3662 To: 76703,4230 (X) Pete, I'm sending you this message a second time, looks like you didn't get it the first time (maybe I screwed up you ID). Anyway... Would it be OK for me to upload your X10 software package on Delphi? People are clamoring for it. Hugo There are 2 Replies. #: 11707 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 10-Aug-91 10:19:15 Sb: #11695-X10 Fm: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 To: Hugo Bueno 71211,3662 Pete got your first request. (You can tell by the (X) by his user id. He's traveling so his replies have been a bit delayed. Steve #: 11727 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 12-Aug-91 06:46:45 Sb: #11695-X10 Fm: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 To: Hugo Bueno 71211,3662 Hugo... As long as is distributed in BOTH of its original packages, then I guess putting it on the 'other' place is alright. I know a number of their authors have shared things over here. Pete #: 11763 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 13-Aug-91 19:07:04 Sb: #11727-#X10 Fm: Hugo Bueno 71211,3662 To: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 (X) OK then. I'll upload both the source and binaries to Delphi with a statement saying that both archives should be kept together. By the way, will the sources compile easily on any of the new 68000 machines? Hugo There is 1 Reply. #: 11774 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 14-Aug-91 08:16:43 Sb: #11763-#X10 Fm: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 To: Hugo Bueno 71211,3662 (X) Hugo - Fine... but also indicate that users only NEED to use the binary ar file to get running... the other is just source ad relocatables. Pete There is 1 Reply. #: 11779 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 14-Aug-91 20:06:20 Sb: #11774-#X10 Fm: Hugo Bueno 71211,3662 To: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 (X) No problem. I'll identify both archives so that even a beginner would understand! :-) By the way, I just love this X10 stuff. I'm planning my next module purchase... Hugo There is 1 Reply. #: 11783 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 14-Aug-91 23:06:17 Sb: #11779-#X10 Fm: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 To: Hugo Bueno 71211,3662 (X) Me too.... I have been running some form of an X10 system since around 1979. Pete There is 1 Reply. #: 11789 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 15-Aug-91 08:11:39 Sb: #11783-#X10 Fm: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 To: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 (X) I just dusted off the X10 controller myself .... the nasties hit us this weekend netting a bunch of Lisa's jewelry. Lisa's a case (understandably), the cat's neurotic (the only eye witness) and I'm flat out pissed! Perhaps the X10 program will give the house a more 'lived in ' look. Steve There are 3 Replies. #: 11792 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 15-Aug-91 08:50:59 Sb: #11789-X10 Fm: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 To: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 (X) Ugh! What a horrible incentive to have to drag out the X10! Condolences... we've been lucky thus far. Mebbee the X10's partially responsible? Pete #: 11793 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 15-Aug-91 17:49:13 Sb: #11789-#X10 Fm: Bill Dickhaus 70325,523 To: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 (X) Steve, Sorry to hear it! I've been using my X10 to switch half a dozen lights and a radio off and on all day and night, for the last 3 or 4 years. It used to drive my roomates crazy! Now that I've got my own place, it only drives my dad nuts when I'm out of town and he stops by to feed my cat. Nothing like sitting quietly, watching TV, and having the stereo pop on with some loud rock and roll! I like to think, though, that its all been worth it, and has kept the "nasties" away (fingers crossed). Bill There is 1 Reply. #: 11800 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 16-Aug-91 07:29:11 Sb: #11793-X10 Fm: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 To: Bill Dickhaus 70325,523 (X) Thanks for the condolences (you tooo Pete!). IT's a pretty un-nerving experience to say the least. We'll be adding a few more x10 modules shortly. Good thing out of this? Lisa finally feels the computer is earning it's keep! :-) Steve #: 11796 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 15-Aug-91 21:39:14 Sb: #11789-#X10 Fm: Steve Ostrom 74730,345 To: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 (X) Perhaps the x10 stuff could be combined with the Radio Shack x-10 based alarm system. I saw it was $100 here in Canada. It isnt as full featured as many systems, but there are several components to it. I am considering whether to go this route or to change from a coco pnp controller to one of the tw523 (?) modules and dedicate a coco1. The Circuit Cellar Ink is a good magazine to check out x10 and CEBus info by the way. This is published out of New England and has a bbs at 203-871-1988 There is 1 Reply. #: 11801 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 16-Aug-91 07:30:03 Sb: #11796-X10 Fm: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 To: Steve Ostrom 74730,345 Good thought, Steve. We'll be looking into options, that's for sure! Steve #: 11840 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 19-Aug-91 17:13:35 Sb: #YACC Fm: JAMES RICHARDSON 75126,3337 To: ANYBODY Help, I'm trying to find a public domain version of YACC that will run on my old 6809 system. I downloaded the bison.ar (73270,3124) for the 68K and after about three weeks of compatibility problems, gave up on trying to use that version. However, the documentation on how to use a Yacc type product was quite good. Anyhow, is there anybody out there who knows of a YACC program available on Compuserve that will work (with little to no effort) on by 6809 (Microware C Compiler). Jim There is 1 Reply. #: 11844 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 20-Aug-91 00:00:02 Sb: #11840-#YACC Fm: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 To: JAMES RICHARDSON 75126,3337 (X) Jim - I'm sorry to report that I haven't seen a functional 6809 yacc/bison. There's a lot to do in a 64k address space... perhaps too much without swapping. Pete There is 1 Reply. #: 11856 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 20-Aug-91 16:49:43 Sb: #11844-YACC Fm: JAMES RICHARDSON 75126,3337 To: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 (X) PETE, THANKS FOR THE REPLY. I BELIEVE A YACC/BISON LOOK ALIKE COULD BE DESIGNED FOR THE 6809 64K ADDRESS SPACE, MAINLY BECAUSE WHEN I TRIED TO REWORK BISON FROM THE 68K GROUP, I JUST SHORTENED SOME OF THE ARRAYS AND WAS ABLE TO FIT IT INTO MY MEMORY. THE PROBLEM I RAN INTO WAS THAT THE SYSTEM, AS DOWNLOADED, SEEMS TO BE INCOMPLETE OR JUST WRONG. THE TEST PROGRAM I RAN ON MY REWORKED BISON GENERATED A C SOURCE THAT WOULD NOT COMPILE BEACUSE TOKENS WERE NOT BEING #DEFINED. AS FAR AS I CAN TELL THIS IS AN CODING ERROR ON BISON PART. AT THIS POINT I JUST GAVE UP. BY THE WAY, THE TEST PROGRAM I RAN AGAINST BISON WAS THE ONE THEY USED AS AN EXAMPLE IN THE BISON DOC'S. JIM #: 12177 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 11-Sep-91 07:54:57 Sb: #80/40 tracks Fm: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 To: Kev 76703,4227 (X) Kev, Blame Mark for this one ... he said you had all the answers! :-) I have a heap of 80 track 5.25 floppies in CoCo format, that I need to get to 40 track DSDD 5.25 format. (I don't have a 5.25 80 track drive). Barry (who only has 80 track drives) has offered to convert the disk for me. He'll be using his new TC70 to accomlish this task. First question: Can an 80 track drive be set up to read/write to a 40 track diskette? If so ... what values need to be dmoded? Steve There is 1 Reply. #: 12179 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 11-Sep-91 09:23:11 Sb: #12177-#80/40 tracks Fm: Kevin Darling 76703,4227 To: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 (X) Steve, Woof . An 80tk drive can certainly read a 40tk disk... nothing special needs to be done to do that. The driver figures it out when it reads LSN 0. Writing can also be done, tho I'd backup the resulting disks on the 40tk drive to make sure you have a good strong copy. I'd also format the disks on the 40tk drive. This is from my own experience; others may have other views :-) We'll soon find out. Grin. - kev There is 1 Reply. #: 12184 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 11-Sep-91 19:10:40 Sb: #12179-#80/40 tracks Fm: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 To: Kevin Darling 76703,4227 (X) For reasons I'll happily explain on demand, you really don't want to write on a 40 tracker while in your 80 track drive. It may appear fine, until you stick it back in a 40 tracker.... Pete There are 2 Replies. #: 12187 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 11-Sep-91 20:39:11 Sb: #12184-#80/40 tracks Fm: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 To: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 (X) Soooooooooo ... What I'm hearing is I can't get there from here? Am I doomed to adding an 80 track drive to my setup? Steve There are 2 Replies. #: 12189 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 11-Sep-91 20:54:42 Sb: #12187-#80/40 tracks Fm: James Jones 76257,562 To: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 (X) You can read and write 40 track disks on an 80 track drive...MOST of the time. What you DO NOT want to do is write on a 40 track disk that's been written on with a 40 track drive with an 80 track disk. Say what?! I'll be clear this time. :-) Consider this (as REM would say): you format a 40-track disk on a 40-track drive. Formatting it requires writing on it... at least writing E5E5E5E5...all over it, and a allocation bitmap, and LSN 0, and a mostly empty root directory. OK, you take this disk over to an 80-track drive. It reads it just fine... and then you write on it. The 80-track drive has a read/write head half as wide as a 40-track drive--makes sense, right? So, the 80-track drive is really only writing, where it writes, on half the space the 40-track drive wrote on. Everything is hunky-dory... ..until you bring the disk back to a 40-track drive and try to read it. In the spots the 80-track drive wrote on, it's half the old stuff that the 40track drive wrote and half the new stuff that the 80-track drive wrote. The 40-track drive gets heavily confused, and it's read error time. So, the rule is this: if an 80-track drive EVER writes on a 40-track disk, the ONLY drives that can write on it are 80-track drives. If that's inconvenient or won't work for what you want to do, you'll need both kinds of disk for writing purposes. There is 1 Reply. #: 12223 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 13-Sep-91 07:13:26 Sb: #12189-80/40 tracks Fm: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 To: James Jones 76257,562 (X) Ok ... sounds as if I need to do some hardware shopping. Owell ... I accepted this hobby, black hole and all! :-) Steve #: 12199 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 12-Sep-91 00:13:03 Sb: #12187-#80/40 tracks Fm: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 To: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 (X) Steve, Eh? You'll need an 80 tracker to read 80's and 40's. A 40 tracker is only good for 40's (and 35's, of course). Reason why? Well, in order to get 80 tracks in the same space as 40, they had to cut down both the intertrack gap size and the track width, so an 80 track head cuts a narrower swath (magnetically). Imagine that this is a 40 track 'data' track: 4040404040404040404040404040404040404040 4040404040404040404040404040404040404040 4040404040404040404040404040404040404040 And this is an 80 tracker's data: 8080808080808080808080808080808080808080 If you wrote on a diskette that had been perviously treated (written; formatted) by a 40 tracker, you'd get this: 404040404040404040404040404040404040404040 808080808080808080808080808080808080808080 404040404040404040404040404040404040404040 In other words, the 80 track narrow data track would be imposed upon the existing wider 40 track path. You're okay if you only read this with the narrower 80 track head, which will reject the side garbage that's leftover from the 40 track data. HOWEVER, if you reinsert this in a 40 track drive and try to read it, the wider 40 track head MAY see both the new 80 track written data and the older, corrupt, 40 track data... it's really a hairy issue of luck and (mis)alignment if it works. In the process, it may render the disk unreadable by anything but the 80 track drive. While some of this was simplified for the sake of explanation, this is basically the problem. Pete There is 1 Reply. #: 12224 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 13-Sep-91 07:17:33 Sb: #12199-#80/40 tracks Fm: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 To: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 (X) As the little red headed girl would say, "Gotit dude!" I'll be scouting around from an 80 tracker. Mayhaps we have something laying around the equipment room at the office I cn borrow for the task. Thank god I have a /d1 descriptor already in my boot that I could dmode up to the proper parameters. My system has been struck with the a terminal case of the BLOB. No way, no how can I come up with a different bootfile that what I currently have.\ Can OSK be too far off in my future? Thanks for the explanation (you too James!). Steve There are 2 Replies. #: 12232 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 13-Sep-91 10:49:09 Sb: #12224-80/40 tracks Fm: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 To: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 (X) De nada, dude. Pete #: 12242 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 14-Sep-91 08:21:41 Sb: #12224-80/40 tracks Fm: Robert A. Hengstebeck 76417,2751 To: Steve Wegert 76703,4255 (X) I put in an 80 track disk drive, in my system years ago it seems. And it wouldn't work. I found out after taking it to Ron Schmidts of L R Techs fame, that it was really a 1.2 meg drive. Fortunately, I was able to trade it for a 720K drive, and everybody was happy. So the word for the wise is .....etc. #: 12190 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 11-Sep-91 21:10:13 Sb: #12184-80/40 tracks Fm: Kevin Darling 76703,4227 To: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 (X) Ooops. You're right. He should probably format the disk in the 80tk drive, yes? I mean, if this is the only way to get copies over. Be better if someone had both kinds of drives, of cuss. #: 12627 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 16-Oct-91 08:15:57 Sb: #6809-based OS-9 machine Fm: David Betz 76704,47 To: all This is probably going to sound like a rather strange request, but I'd like to find a 6809-based single board computer that can support floppies and probably a hard disk (SCSI prefered) that will run OS-9. I know I can get lots of neat 68K based boards (the TC70 and MM-1 being the most obvious), but I've got lots of 68K based machines and would like to get one based on the 6809. I know about the TC-9, but it requires lots of *stuff* to be added to support floppies and a hard disk. If nothing else, it requires a CoCo hard/floppy controller and I can't even find one of those for my CoCo3! Besides, I want to stay away from the rats nest that results from interfacing several different products together. Anyone know of a manufacturer of 6809 based single board computers that support OS-9? I don't care about CoCo compatibility and I'd be happy to have just an RS-232 port for the console. I don't need any video support or a direct keyboard interface, just a simple CPU, a couple of serial ports, and a floppy/hard disk interface. Does such a beast exist? Thanks David Betz There is 1 Reply. #: 12630 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 16-Oct-91 13:48:10 Sb: #12627-#6809-based OS-9 machine Fm: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 To: David Betz 76704,47 (X) David - I don't know of any that also support hard disks. We did some dealing with a firm in the Southeast that makes 6809 & 68K SBC's, and if there were demand they'd build them, but it sounds like you're talking about a quantity of one deal. If you have access to copies of 68 Micro Journal, that's where most of the manufacturers used to advertise. I can't recall the vendors name at the moment, although I'd know it if I heard it. Pete There is 1 Reply. #: 12631 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 16-Oct-91 16:07:23 Sb: #12630-6809-based OS-9 machine Fm: David Betz 76704,47 To: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 Thanks! Is '68 Micro Journal' still published? Any idea how to contact the publisher? #: 12634 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 17-Oct-91 14:50:34 Sb: #12631-6809-based OS-9 machine Fm: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 To: David Betz 76704,47 (X) David - I think 68mj is out of print..... Mine are all gone.... perhaps Kevin has some back issues he can refer to. Pete #: 12635 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 18-Oct-91 10:26:34 Sb: #12627-#6809-based OS-9 machine Fm: Ed Gresick 76576,3312 To: David Betz 76704,47 (X) David, Give Fred Brown at Peripheral Technologies a call. Eons ago, he produced a vanilla 6809 board that ran OS9. I think he may still have a few left in stock. They may meet your requirements. He can be reached at 404-984-0742. Ed Gresick - DELMAR CO m There are 2 Replies. #: 12637 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 18-Oct-91 12:50:42 Sb: #12635-6809-based OS-9 machine Fm: Pete Lyall 76703,4230 To: Ed Gresick 76576,3312 Thanks Ed! That's who I was trying to remember. Fred is also a hell of a nice guy as well. Pete #: 12638 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 18-Oct-91 15:05:58 Sb: #12635-6809-based OS-9 machine Fm: David Betz 76704,47 To: Ed Gresick 76576,3312 Thanks, Ed! #: 13031 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 13-Nov-91 19:32:54 Sb: #Non-CoCo 6809's? Fm: Erich Schulman 75140,3175 To: ALL What 6809-based computer systems other than the CoCo exist, whether they run OS-9 or not? There is 1 Reply. #: 13032 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 13-Nov-91 19:41:02 Sb: #13031-Non-CoCo 6809's? Fm: Jim Sutemeier 70673,1754 To: Erich Schulman 75140,3175 The 6809 GIMIX Computer, from what I've read, predates the CoCo and it's OS9 system. I read somewhere when 6809/CoCo/OS9 started populating the OS9 SIG's, the GIMIX people complained about those new upstarts (grin) Now, 6809/OS9/CoCo people over on Delphi are complaining about the "new" OSK users, and how OSK seems to be taking a larger share of 'their' Operating System. {Wasn't there a saying that history repeats itself???? jim Sutemeier #: 13041 S11/OS9/6809 (Non-CoCo) 14-Nov-91 00:18:08 Sb: #13032-Non-CoCo 6809's? Fm: Erich Schulman 75140,3175 To: Jim Sutemeier 70673,1754 (X) I heard about the GIMIX a time or two but I never knew that it used a 6809. For that matter, about all I know about it is that it exists. I have no objections to OSK coming of age. I just wish, however, that uploaded files that are not in a Lib (or Delphi topic (esp. New Uploads)) specifically set aside for OSK be denoted as such in the description. Just like all the "(C3)"'s you see appended to the Group Names for old files in Delphi's CoCo SIG denoting that the group is for the CoCo 3 only. I've already wasted time and money downloading some things that I can't do anything with only because I didn't know it was OSK until I read the documentation. Since Delphi allows descriptions to run on for multiple screens, typing an extra 3 letters at the beginning or end isn't that much to ask for. Not really even for CIS's 549-char limit on descriptions either.