On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Stephen Pereira via cctech <
cct...@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> Has anyone here ever seen or ever had fig-FORTH for the 6800 working?
>
In the mid-1980s I know someone with a WaveMate 6800 system. He had
fig-Forth running on FLEX. At the time I was only interested i
The double characters is most likely how you set up you serial. Normally A
Forth will echo your typing so you want to set it for duplex.
You might look at the locations it uses for things like TIB, return stack and
data stack. I suspect at least the return and data stack may be working but it
i
Hi folks,
I know there's not much 6800 activity here, but I figure this would be worth a
try.
Has anyone here ever seen or ever had fig-FORTH for the 6800 working?
I have a SWTPC replica system from Bob Applegate / Corsham Technologies, and I
love it. It came with a complete 64K RAM, as well a
I found a fig-forth listing at:
http://www.forth.org/fig-forth/fig-forth_6800.pdf
I can see that it is waiting for a $0D. See the line after EXPEC3, label.
If you have a monitor running, you should be able to check the TIB for the
return character ( I'n not positive it doesn't trap it out first ).
Yes, after it signs on, I am in a state that anything I type is echoed. When I
type a CR, the cursor goes back all the way to the left, as it should. If I
type CTRL-J for LF, the cursor drops down 2 lines, as it should (because of the
double echo).
Thanks for the tip about inserting DB #0 aft
hi
here it is a page (I am not the author) that summarizes about the 400s series
unfortunately, they need XpressWare v8, which is rather impossible to be found.
https://web-docs.gsi.de/~kraemer/COLLECTION/NCD/www.technogoths.demon.co.uk/tekxp400/node3.html#SECTION00031000
Folks,
Well I seem to be running around in circles. As it takes most of a weekend
to back up the P390 because of various things, I decided there must be a
quicker way. And there is!
1. Set up SD card in SCSI2SD as a single disk physical rather than
split to match the config on the RAID
On 06/23/2018 07:39 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Stephen Pereira via cctech <
> cct...@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>> Has anyone here ever seen or ever had fig-FORTH for the 6800 working?
>>
> In the mid-1980s I know someone with a WaveMate 6800 system. He had
hi
I have for sale, qty=1, SGI Silicon Graphics Phobos G160 for Indigo2 Impact
brand new, still closed in the box, unopened!
located in Italy (in my parent's house)
I will be happy to give it a new home
Things were posted a little out of order. The problem was not in the original
listing. The pdf of the original was correct. The ascii text one, at
sourceforge, had a single error in it.
Anyway, there may be other types of errors in the original but they don't stop
the interpreter or compiler fr
On 06/26/2018 09:37 AM, dwight wrote:
Things were posted a little out of order. The problem was not in the original
listing. The pdf of the original was correct. The ascii text one, at
sourceforge, had a single error in it.
Anyway, there may be other types of errors in the original but they
> On Jun 25, 2018, at 2:20 PM, systems_glitch via cctalk
> wrote:
> I do have a very
> few NOS Cabletron ST-500-01 transceiver/non-intrusive tap kits as well.
What does non-intrusive mean in this context? I thought that thick ethernet
taps always required drilling a hole in the cable.
--
> On Jun 26, 2018, at 9:44 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 06/26/2018 09:37 AM, dwight wrote:
>
> Things were posted a little out of order. The problem was not in the original
> listing. The pdf of the original was correct. The ascii text one, at
> sourceforge, had a s
On 06/26/2018 10:31 AM, Mark J. Blair via cctalk wrote:
What does non-intrusive mean in this context? I thought that thick
ethernet taps always required drilling a hole in the cable.
There are taps that screw onto the N connectors. Thus you have to
intrusively disconnect segments, to insert t
> On Jun 26, 2018, at 1:04 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On 06/26/2018 10:31 AM, Mark J. Blair via cctalk wrote:
>> What does non-intrusive mean in this context? I thought that thick ethernet
>> taps always required drilling a hole in the cable.
>
> There are taps that screw onto
On 06/26/2018 10:04 AM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
> My assumption was that "tap" comes from the second form. I always
> thought there was a different name for the first form. But I believe
> they were less common, hence fall under the "tap" term which is more
> popular.
My impression from
> On Jun 26, 2018, at 1:19 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On 06/26/2018 10:04 AM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
>
>> My assumption was that "tap" comes from the second form. I always
>> thought there was a different name for the first form. But I believe
>> they were less common,
The intrusive part does indeed refer to the "intrusive to continued
service" aspect (e.g. cutting the line, crimping new ends...or at best
unscrewing the N connectors and removing a coupler fitting). I'm not sure
about the lesser insertion loss/impedance bump of vampire taps vs. N
connectors, but t
> From: Paul Koning
> I believe the original concept was just a probe that would poke through
> the cable to contact the center connector. The drill came because the
> cable was too tough to penetrate without it.
No, the original 3 Mbit Ethernet also used a 'drill' (actually, a c
Indeed, the AMP coring tool is more a cutter than a drill, and it doesn't
go all the way to the center conductor, which would short out the segment
as the cutter is metallic. It doesn't screw in though, it has a shoulder
that stops on the seating surface of the vampire tap body. I don't know if
thi
I've confirmed that I now have N connector intrusive taps! These have a N
female connector on each end, like the leftmost transceiver in this picture:
https://oelzant.priv.at/~aoe/images/galleries/hardware/802_3_transceivers/DSC_0927_med.jpg
I seem to recall the CCNA instructor telling us that yo
> On Jun 26, 2018, at 3:07 PM, systems_glitch via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> I've confirmed that I now have N connector intrusive taps! These have a N
> female connector on each end, like the leftmost transceiver in this picture:
>
> https://oelzant.priv.at/~aoe/images/galleries/hardware/802_3_tran
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 3:07 PM, systems_glitch via cctalk
wrote:
> I've confirmed that I now have N connector intrusive taps! These have a N
> female connector on each end, like the leftmost transceiver in this picture:
>
> https://oelzant.priv.at/~aoe/images/galleries/hardware/802_3_transceivers
(re-send due to not reply-all'ing as required)
Sorry, I think that came across wrong due to my wording -- we were told it
wasn't general practice to screw the terminator directly to the intrusive
tap, as you would with a BNC tee on thinnet. We were told to use a jumper
to extend somewhat past the
> On Jun 26, 2018, at 3:23 PM, Ethan Dicks via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 3:07 PM, systems_glitch via cctalk
> wrote:
>> ...
>
>> I seem to recall the CCNA instructor telling us that you weren't really
>> supposed to screw a 50 ohm terminator onto an intrusive tap; I don't
On 06/26/2018 01:13 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
>
>> On Jun 26, 2018, at 1:04 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk
>> wrote:
>>
>> On 06/26/2018 10:31 AM, Mark J. Blair via cctalk wrote:
>>> What does non-intrusive mean in this context? I thought that thick ethernet
>>> taps always required drill
On 06/26/2018 01:19 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
> On 06/26/2018 10:04 AM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
>
>> My assumption was that "tap" comes from the second form. I always
>> thought there was a different name for the first form. But I believe
>> they were less common, hence fall unde
On 06/26/2018 01:07 PM, systems_glitch via cctalk wrote:
I seem to recall the CCNA instructor telling us that you weren't really
supposed to screw a 50 ohm terminator onto an intrusive tap; I don't know
if there's good reason for it or if it was just a general practice.
I'm taking that to mean
On 06/26/2018 03:15 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
> I can only guess that having a terminator too close interferes with or
> weakens the signal too much in some way.
Exactly what would the effect be? I recall putting terminators on
10base2 coax just hanging off one leg of a BNC tee. Really
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 4:37 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On 06/26/2018 03:15 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
>
> > I can only guess that having a terminator too close interferes with or
> > weakens the signal too much in some way.
>
> Exactly what would the effe
> On Jun 26, 2018, at 7:20 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 4:37 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>> On 06/26/2018 03:15 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
>>
>>> I can only guess that having a terminator too close interferes with
So then we're in agreement that screwing the N terminator directly to an
intrusive tap shouldn't make a difference? No need for a jumper off the end
of the tap for the terminator to live on?
As a high school CCNA hopeful, I accepted this as, "it's what you do," and
I hadn't really given it any tho
On 06/26/2018 05:02 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
> There clearly is confusion about what terminators are and how they
> work. It's all perfectly straightforward elementary classic E & M,
> and any halfway decent RF theory textbook will make things clear.
> Even a source as elementary as the
On 06/26/2018 06:20 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote:
On 06/26/2018 03:15 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
I can only guess that having a terminator too close interferes with or
weakens the signal too much in some way.
No, I think it may have something to do with properly
detecting all colli
On 06/26/2018 06:02 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
There clearly is confusion about what terminators are and how they work.
It's all perfectly straightforward elementary classic E & M, and any
halfway decent RF theory textbook will make things clear. Even a source
as elementary as the ARRL
35 matches
Mail list logo
