From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

On 11/10/2021 5:40 PM, philo wrote:

I was recently given a Quadra running OS-8.

Though I could put it on-line, I was more curious about setting up a printer.

To my amazement I was able to use my networked laser printer. Though the printer is 15 years newer than the computer   ...because of Postscript
it worked!

I also have some SE's but no networking on them.

I had them up in my attic fro 15 years and brought them down recently as
I was given a bunch old old Mac HD's


AFAIK the SE will only recognize a 20, 40 or 80 meg drive.


Out the the many drives I had, I found a total of three that stayed
working after several boot-ups.

One drive was HFS+ but one was the original Mac FS.


Though there are plenty of ways to read an HJFS+ drive from Windows or
Linux, I had to transfer the files from the Mac FS machine to the HFS
machine via floppy.

--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <smjav8$5tq$1@gioia.aioe.org>, philo <philo@privacy.net>
wrote:

I also have some SE's but no networking on them.

yes they very definitely do.

*every* mac ever made has networking and in fact, macs were the first mainstream computers include it, without any additional hardware.

localtalk is built in. ethernet cards were an optional extra, either
with an internal pds card or via an external adapter or network bridge.

I had them up in my attic fro 15 years and brought them down recently as
I was given a bunch old old Mac HD's

AFAIK the SE will only recognize a 20, 40 or 80 meg drive.

very much wrong.

a mac se will recognize up to 2 gigabyte hard drives, and with system
7.5, up to 4 gigabytes.

Out the the many drives I had, I found a total of three that stayed
working after several boot-ups.

drives can still work and not be bootable.

One drive was HFS+ but one was the original Mac FS.

none were the original mac fs, known as mfs. that was for 400k floppies.

you probably mean hfs, which replaced mfs to support the larger
capacity 800k floppies and hard drives, before the mac se was released.

some very, very early hard drives were mfs only because the predated
hfs and were mostly a clusterfuck to use.

hfs+ came much later, with mac os 8.1, which won't work on a mac se.

Though there are plenty of ways to read an HJFS+ drive from Windows or Linux, I had to transfer the files from the Mac FS machine to the HFS machine via floppy.

that's what networks are for.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

On 11/11/2021 15:36, nospam wrote:

In article <smjav8$5tq$1@gioia.aioe.org>, philo <philo@privacy.net>
wrote:

I also have some SE's but no networking on them.

yes they very definitely do.

*every* mac ever made has networking and in fact, macs were the first mainstream computers include it, without any additional hardware.

localtalk is built in. ethernet cards were an optional extra, either
with an internal pds card or via an external adapter or network bridge.

I'm fairly sure I can remember needing appletalk adaptors when trying to network three Apple Plus machines round about 1987 ish...

--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <z9ydndyDor2DohD8nZ2dnUU78WHNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, David
Kennedy <davidkennedy@nospamherethankyou.invalid> wrote:

I also have some SE's but no networking on them.

yes they very definitely do.

*every* mac ever made has networking and in fact, macs were the first mainstream computers include it, without any additional hardware.

localtalk is built in. ethernet cards were an optional extra, either
with an internal pds card or via an external adapter or network bridge.

I'm fairly sure I can remember needing appletalk adaptors when trying to network three Apple Plus machines round about 1987 ish...

exactly the point.

those appletalk adapters, more accurately called localtalk adapters,
was all that was needed because networking was built into every mac.

they were simple passive devices that went between the mac and the
localtalk cables, just like an aui adapter did for ethernet (thicknet, (coax/thinnet/10b-2, 10b-t), token ring, etc.

<https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Apple_LocalTa lk_box_interior_1.jpg/1024px-Apple_LocalTalk_box_interior_1.jpg>

phonenet was a more popular option because it used ordinary telephone
cord, which meant existing wiring in the walls could be used without
needing to run additional cables, making it a less expensive and far
more convenient option.

i remember carrying phonenet adapters and rj-11 phone cord in my laptop
bag so that i could instantly set up a network with several other users
at any time, anywhere. instant lan parties.

ethernet required either a card in the internal pds slot of the mac se
or an external ethernet adapter that looked a lot like a phonenet
adapter and connected to the existing localtalk port. asante and
farralon made both, as well as others.

there were also ethernet/localtalk bridges to bridge both localtalk and ethernet. i had a mac ii with several ethernet cards for a fairly
complex network setup.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

On 11/11/2021 16:42, nospam wrote:

In article <z9ydndyDor2DohD8nZ2dnUU78WHNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, David
Kennedy <davidkennedy@nospamherethankyou.invalid> wrote:

I also have some SE's but no networking on them.

yes they very definitely do.

*every* mac ever made has networking and in fact, macs were the first
mainstream computers include it, without any additional hardware.

localtalk is built in. ethernet cards were an optional extra, either
with an internal pds card or via an external adapter or network bridge.

I'm fairly sure I can remember needing appletalk adaptors when trying to
network three Apple Plus machines round about 1987 ish...

exactly the point.

those appletalk adapters, more accurately called localtalk adapters,
was all that was needed because networking was built into every mac.

they were simple passive devices that went between the mac and the
localtalk cables, just like an aui adapter did for ethernet (thicknet, (coax/thinnet/10b-2, 10b-t), token ring, etc.

<https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Apple_LocalTa lk_box_interior_1.jpg/1024px-Apple_LocalTalk_box_interior_1.jpg>

phonenet was a more popular option because it used ordinary telephone
cord, which meant existing wiring in the walls could be used without
needing to run additional cables, making it a less expensive and far
more convenient option.

i remember carrying phonenet adapters and rj-11 phone cord in my laptop
bag so that i could instantly set up a network with several other users
at any time, anywhere. instant lan parties.

ethernet required either a card in the internal pds slot of the mac se
or an external ethernet adapter that looked a lot like a phonenet
adapter and connected to the existing localtalk port. asante and
farralon made both, as well as others.

there were also ethernet/localtalk bridges to bridge both localtalk and ethernet. i had a mac ii with several ethernet cards for a fairly
complex network setup.

I remember having them; the rest blurs into the mists of time now...

I do recall how bloody useful it was when it came to returning to the office and simply plugging into everything with the Mac Portable!

Still got it somewhere, wonder if it still works?
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <z9ydndyDor2DohD8nZ2dnUU78WHNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, davidkennedygm@gmail.invalid wrote:

On 11/11/2021 15:36, nospam wrote:

In article <smjav8$5tq$1@gioia.aioe.org>, philo <philo@privacy.net>
wrote:

I also have some SE's but no networking on them.

yes they very definitely do.

*every* mac ever made has networking and in fact, macs were the first mainstream computers include it, without any additional hardware.

localtalk is built in. ethernet cards were an optional extra, either
with an internal pds card or via an external adapter or network bridge.

I'm fairly sure I can remember needing appletalk adaptors when trying to network three Apple Plus machines round about 1987 ish...

I'm posting this using an etherwave adapter, which is a localtalk to
ethernet bridge, I have it plugged into the serial port for the modem. The device is plug and play but only if you have a MacIP server, because it
won't do DHCP... such a device would work on any mac that can support
appletalk (I believe even the 512k can). I've used it with a classic and
an SE. Pretty sure if want to do TCP/IP with a modern router you need an ethernet card.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <WI6dnfWwq8T-0xD8nZ2dnUU78fWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, David
Kennedy <davidkennedy@nospamherethankyou.invalid> wrote:

I remember having them; the rest blurs into the mists of time now...

it does, but it's fun to reminisce to a time when things were much
simpler.

I do recall how bloody useful it was when it came to returning to the office and simply plugging into everything with the Mac Portable!

the mac that had the wrong name...

Still got it somewhere, wonder if it still works?

the battery is almost certainly dead.

it was a lead-acid battery, much like the ones in a modern ups.

the mac portable was designed to run off the battery, even when
connected to mains, which only served to charge the battery, not power
the unit, so a dead battery is going to be a problem.

i'm not sure where you can find a replacement battery, but you can
always connect an external battery, making the non-portable mac even
less portable. be sure to get the correct voltage.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <denodster-1111211219250001@192.168.2.200>, Denodster <denodster@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm posting this using an etherwave adapter, which is a localtalk to
ethernet bridge, I have it plugged into the serial port for the modem. The device is plug and play but only if you have a MacIP server, because it
won't do DHCP... such a device would work on any mac that can support appletalk (I believe even the 512k can). I've used it with a classic and
an SE.

bootp should work, or configure a static address.

Pretty sure if want to do TCP/IP with a modern router you need an
ethernet card.

tcp worked over localtalk. an ethernet card was obviously quite a bit
faster, but it was not needed.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

On 11/11/21 9:36 AM, nospam wrote:

In article <smjav8$5tq$1@gioia.aioe.org>, philo <philo@privacy.net>
wrote:

I also have some SE's but no networking on them.

yes they very definitely do.

*every* mac ever made has networking and in fact, macs were the first mainstream computers include it, without any additional hardware.

localtalk is built in. ethernet cards were an optional extra, either
with an internal pds card or via an external adapter or network bridge.

OS has networking but I have no hardware for it.

I had them up in my attic fro 15 years and brought them down recently as
I was given a bunch old old Mac HD's

AFAIK the SE will only recognize a 20, 40 or 80 meg drive.

very much wrong.

a mac se will recognize up to 2 gigabyte hard drives, and with system
7.5, up to 4 gigabytes.

Out the the many drives I had, I found a total of three that stayed
working after several boot-ups.

drives can still work and not be bootable.

Indeed. maybe the drives I had could be recognized but the only drives
it would boot from were either 20, 40 0r *)

One drive was HFS+ but one was the original Mac FS.

none were the original mac fs, known as mfs. that was for 400k floppies.

you probably mean hfs, which replaced mfs to support the larger
capacity 800k floppies and hard drives, before the mac se was released.

some very, very early hard drives were mfs only because the predated
hfs and were mostly a clusterfuck to use.

hfs+ came much later, with mac os 8.1, which won't work on a mac se.

gparted (on my linux machine) could recognize HFS /HFS+ drives but the
one SE had a drive that gparted could not identify.


I assume it must have been MFS (FWIF, it's 20 meg)


I guess I've got a real collector's item
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

On 11/11/21 10:04 AM, David Kennedy wrote:

On 11/11/2021 15:36, nospam wrote:

In article <smjav8$5tq$1@gioia.aioe.org>, philo <philo@privacy.net>
wrote:

I also have some SE's but no networking on them.

yes they very definitely do.

*every* mac ever made has networking and in fact, macs were the first
mainstream computers include it, without any additional hardware.

localtalk is built in. ethernet cards were an optional extra, either
with an internal pds card or via an external adapter or network bridge.

I'm fairly sure I can remember needing appletalk adaptors when trying to network three Apple Plus machines round about 1987 ish...

I have an adapter that will work with my Quadra but nothing for the SE
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <smkbdd$1pae$2@gioia.aioe.org>, philo <philo@privacy.net>
wrote:

I have an adapter that will work with my Quadra but nothing for the SE

sounds like an aaui adapter:

<https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/Asante-aaui.jpg>

<https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dc/Apple_AAUI_tr ansceiver_and_cable.jpg/1024px-Apple_AAUI_transceiver_and_cable.jpg>

quadras were the first macs to have onboard ethernet, with choice of
cabling via an apple aui adapter.

at some point, the industry and apple went 10base-t.

there are other options for the se, but if you don't have any, it's
moot.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <smkbb5$1pae$1@gioia.aioe.org>, philo <philo@privacy.net>
wrote:

One drive was HFS+ but one was the original Mac FS.

none were the original mac fs, known as mfs. that was for 400k floppies.

you probably mean hfs, which replaced mfs to support the larger
capacity 800k floppies and hard drives, before the mac se was released.

some very, very early hard drives were mfs only because the predated
hfs and were mostly a clusterfuck to use.

hfs+ came much later, with mac os 8.1, which won't work on a mac se.

gparted (on my linux machine) could recognize HFS /HFS+ drives but the
one SE had a drive that gparted could not identify.

is it readable on the mac? if not, it could be corrupted.

I assume it must have been MFS (FWIF, it's 20 meg)

it is not mfs.

mfs, aka macintosh file system, was a flat file system, which wasn't an
issue with 400k floppy disks because they were too small to hold very
many files for it to be a major limitation. mac os at that time could
create folders, but they were just an illusion.

mfs was very short-lived and soon replaced in late 1985 with hfs, aka hierarchical file system, with the 800k floppy disk and the apple 20
megabyte hard drive. hfs was a true hierarchical file system, thus its
name.

formatting 400k floppies defaulted to mfs.
formatting 800k floppies & hard drives (apple or third party) was hfs.

it was possible to override that and format an 800k floppy as mfs or a
400k as hfs, but there was no reason to do so, other than testing
purposes.

hard drives were always hfs, until 1998 when hfs+ was introduced.

I guess I've got a real collector's item

unless it's a clear case, no.

<https://technabob.com/blog/2010/12/03/rare-transparent-macintosh-se/>
From what I can tell, only about 10 of these machines were ever
made, and they lived within the walls of Apple. Now, if you¹ve got
deep enough pockets, you could be the proud owner of one of
these extreme rarities. Apparently, these machines were built for
the Macintosh R&D team at Apple to verify the placement of internal
components, and never were intended for production.

This particular see-through Mac SE is being offered over on eBay with
a starting bid of a whopping $25,000 (USD). For that price, you could
buy a pretty nice car. Or 50 iPads. And this transparent Macintosh
doesn¹t even boot up properly. The guy selling it says it¹ll boot off
of the 800k floppy drive only. And being such a rarity, I¹d doubt
that cracking it open and fixing the hard drive would be good for
its resale value.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

On 11/11/2021 17:20, nospam wrote:

In article <WI6dnfWwq8T-0xD8nZ2dnUU78fWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, David
Kennedy <davidkennedy@nospamherethankyou.invalid> wrote:

I remember having them; the rest blurs into the mists of time now...

it does, but it's fun to reminisce to a time when things were much
simpler.

And a 20Meg HD was the business...

I do recall how bloody useful it was when it came to returning to the office >> and simply plugging into everything with the Mac Portable!

the mac that had the wrong name...

Still got it somewhere, wonder if it still works?

the battery is almost certainly dead.

it was a lead-acid battery, much like the ones in a modern ups.

the mac portable was designed to run off the battery, even when
connected to mains, which only served to charge the battery, not power
the unit, so a dead battery is going to be a problem.

i'm not sure where you can find a replacement battery, but you can
always connect an external battery, making the non-portable mac even
less portable. be sure to get the correct voltage.

Once I find it I'll give t a try
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <smkbdd$1pae$2@gioia.aioe.org>, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote: >On 11/11/21 10:04 AM, David Kennedy wrote:

On 11/11/2021 15:36, nospam wrote:

In article <smjav8$5tq$1@gioia.aioe.org>, philo <philo@privacy.net>
wrote:

I also have some SE's but no networking on them.

yes they very definitely do.

*every* mac ever made has networking and in fact, macs were the first
mainstream computers include it, without any additional hardware.

localtalk is built in. ethernet cards were an optional extra, either
with an internal pds card or via an external adapter or network bridge.

I'm fairly sure I can remember needing appletalk adaptors when trying to
network three Apple Plus machines round about 1987 ish...

I have an adapter that will work with my Quadra but nothing for the SE

I don't know how easy they are to find now, but I've used a Cayman GatorBox
CS to bridge an Apple IIGS and a Color Classic to Linux servers running netatalk. I think I even had them talking to a G4 Mac mini when the Mac was running Tiger. Other LocalTalk-to-Ethernet bridges might work, but the
trick with getting older hardware talking to newer hardware is EtherTalk support. Linux still supports EtherTalk if you have the right kernel
modules compiled, but IIRC Mac OS X dropped EtherTalk support after 10.4.

_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <5LBjJ.49931$SR4.6229@fx43.iad>, Scott Alfter <scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us> wrote:

I don't know how easy they are to find now, but I've used a Cayman GatorBox CS to bridge an Apple IIGS and a Color Classic to Linux servers running netatalk. I think I even had them talking to a G4 Mac mini when the Mac was running Tiger. Other LocalTalk-to-Ethernet bridges might work, but the
trick with getting older hardware talking to newer hardware is EtherTalk support. Linux still supports EtherTalk if you have the right kernel
modules compiled, but IIRC Mac OS X dropped EtherTalk support after 10.4.

or just use a vintage mac. :)
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

On 11/11/21 7:00 PM, nospam wrote:

In article <smkbb5$1pae$1@gioia.aioe.org>, philo <philo@privacy.net>
wrote:

One drive was HFS+ but one was the original Mac FS.

none were the original mac fs, known as mfs. that was for 400k floppies. >>>
you probably mean hfs, which replaced mfs to support the larger
capacity 800k floppies and hard drives, before the mac se was released.

some very, very early hard drives were mfs only because the predated
hfs and were mostly a clusterfuck to use.

hfs+ came much later, with mac os 8.1, which won't work on a mac se.

gparted (on my linux machine) could recognize HFS /HFS+ drives but the
one SE had a drive that gparted could not identify.

is it readable on the mac? if not, it could be corrupted.

I assume it must have been MFS (FWIF, it's 20 meg)

it is not mfs.

To correct my typo in a previous post of mine, the only drives I had
that would boot on the SE's were 20 meg 40 meg or 80 meg



Both of the SE's I have work fine and I am using drives that have OS-7.1
or OS 7.5

I can read most of the drives on my Linux machine using gparted and all
but one are identified as HFS or HFS+

One drive however is not recognized by gparted nor is it recognized on
my Windows machine with various utilities for reading Mac drives.

Since it is evidently not an HFS or an HFS+ drive I surmised that it was


If you say it is not MFS...my question however is what file system is on it?


Ergo:

I surmised the drive was MFS as it was NOT HFS or HFS+


MFS supports hard drives up to 20 megs.
The drive was 20 megs.
(all other drives were 40 meg or 80 megs)


MFS support was removed with OS7.6.1
All the machines were OS 7.1 or 7.5

snip,

--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <smn7pg$1qht$1@gioia.aioe.org>, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:

snip

One drive however is not recognized by gparted nor is it recognized on
my Windows machine with various utilities for reading Mac drives.

Since it is evidently not an HFS or an HFS+ drive I surmised that it was

If you say it is not MFS...my question however is what file system is on it?

did ever have a machine set up to run apple unix? I believe that had it's
own filesystem.

Ergo:

I surmised the drive was MFS as it was NOT HFS or HFS+

MFS supports hard drives up to 20 megs.
The drive was 20 megs.
(all other drives were 40 meg or 80 megs)

MFS support was removed with OS7.6.1
All the machines were OS 7.1 or 7.5

snip,

--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

On 11/12/21 22:09, Denodster wrote:

In article <smn7pg$1qht$1@gioia.aioe.org>, philo <philo@privacy.net> wrote:

snip

One drive however is not recognized by gparted nor is it recognized on
my Windows machine with various utilities for reading Mac drives.

Since it is evidently not an HFS or an HFS+ drive I surmised that it was

If you say it is not MFS...my question however is what file system is on it? >>

did ever have a machine set up to run apple unix? I believe that had it's
own filesystem.

The machine was not running apple unix

BTW: After having been using Linux for over 20 years, I did get to try
some real Unix.
Had to do a data recovery from an SCO server.
That was sure fun!

Ergo:

I surmised the drive was MFS as it was NOT HFS or HFS+


MFS supports hard drives up to 20 megs.
The drive was 20 megs.
(all other drives were 40 meg or 80 megs)


MFS support was removed with OS7.6.1
All the machines were OS 7.1 or 7.5

snip,

--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <smn7pg$1qht$1@gioia.aioe.org>, philo <philo@privacy.net>
wrote:

To correct my typo in a previous post of mine, the only drives I had
that would boot on the SE's were 20 meg 40 meg or 80 meg

that's because those were common capacities when the se was released.

the se, as well as other macs of that era, supported up to 2 gig hard
drives, unless it's running 7.5, where the maximum was 4 gig.

Since it is evidently not an HFS or an HFS+ drive I surmised that it was

it is definitely not mfs. full stop.

mfs was not suitable for hard drives for several reasons, mainly that
it was a flat file system, did not scale well and that hfs was better
in every way.

If you say it is not MFS...my question however is what file system is on it?

hfs if it was used with a mac.

if it's an external drive, it could have been used with a different
computer platform and be another format, but then it wouldn't be usable
with the mac, at least not easily.

if you have a disk utility with the ability to read raw disk blocks,
post the first 64 bytes of the first 4 blocks (0..3). they're 512 byte
blocks, but only the beginning of each one is of interest.

MFS supports hard drives up to 20 megs.

technically true, but that doesn't change anything.

mfs was *not* used for hard drives (with one exception, see below).

mfs was designed for and used for floppies, specifically, the 400k
floppy in the original 128k and 512k macs.

mfs was replaced with hfs in late 1985, roughly 1.5 years after the mac
was first introduced, when apple released their 20 mb hard drive and
800k floppy drive.

mac hard drives were always hfs, up until 1998, when hfs was replaced
by hfs+ in macos 8.1, which could not run at all on a mac se.

the sole exception were a couple of third party hard drives in 1984-85, designed for the original mac 128k/512k, before hfs existed. they used
a 5.25" mechanism, were 5-10 meg in capacity. they were also large,
noisy, and very, very slow due to mfs, shitty drivers and a slow
hardware interface. floppy disks were faster (seriously).

those drives were not compatible with a mac se, so it's not your
situation.

the only good thing was a truly massive power supply (5a, maybe more, i
don't remember) that could be used for all sorts of other projects,
long after the drive was useless.

the entire left side of the enclosure was the power supply: <http://www.peterjsucy.com/History/1985/EarlyHardDrive.jpg>

The drive was 20 megs.
(all other drives were 40 meg or 80 megs)

as i said, that was a common capacity when the se was a current model.

MFS support was removed with OS7.6.1

significant limitations to mfs support began with system 7.0.

mfs became read-only in system 7.6.1, with all support removed in macos
8.

<https://web.archive.org/web/20071012140146/http://docs.info.apple.com/a rticle.html?artnum=9502>

All the machines were OS 7.1 or 7.5

that definitely means it's hfs. see above.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <denodster-1211212309250001@192.168.2.200>, Denodster <denodster@gmail.com> wrote:

did ever have a machine set up to run apple unix? I believe that had it's
own filesystem.

it did, however, a/ux was not supported on a mac se.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

If the drive is HFS , why does Gparted and all the Mac reading Windows utilities say the partition type is unknown?

The drive is working.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <37cdbba28f957500d95f5677f424b5f2@news.novabbs.com>, philo <philo@news.novabbs.com> wrote:

If the drive is HFS , why does Gparted and all the Mac reading Windows utilities say the partition type is unknown?

without seeing it, i can only guess.

is it readable on a mac??

if not, it's most likely directory corruption. it could also be
unformatted. it's *not* mfs.

post the first 64 bytes of the first four blocks.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In comp.sys.mac.vintage, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

Denodster <denodster@gmail.com> wrote:

did ever have a machine set up to run apple unix? I believe that had it's
own filesystem.

It was not the usual HFS filesystem, but I'm pretty sure it was a
fairly standard (for the day) Unix "UFS" filesystem.

it did, however, a/ux was not supported on a mac se.

Not a plain SE, no. SE/30 was the minimum. A/UX required a 68030 with coprocessor or a 68040. The list of supported devices is here:

https://archive.org/details/bitsavers_applemacaulationGuide1992_3096342/page/n13/mode/2up

Although you have to know that at the time that was written, there were
only two Quadra models (700 and 900). A/UX 2.x did not work on the
Quadras. A/UX 1.x I think only ran on the II / IIfx.

I've run A/UX on IIsi and IIci, and I still have an image of my A/UX
hard disk.

When I tried to mount the disk on Linux, the "mount" command succeeded,
but the files were not readable. I suspect more "Linux support for the filesystem has issues" than "filesystem was odd" issues.

mount -t ufs -o ro,ufstype=old /dev/sda3 /mnt/mo

Looks good in syslog:

Feb 7 16:19:19 miniq kernel: ufs_read_super: fs is active

But then, trying to copy files I got a slew of filesystem errors in syslog (lines wrapped, first few errors only):

Feb 7 16:20:42 miniq kernel: UFS-fs error (device 08:03):
ufs_readdir: bad entry in directory #3635, size 42949673472: reclen %%
4 != 0 - offset=512, inode=611254264, reclen=9838, namlen=65532
Feb 7 16:20:44 miniq kernel: UFS-fs error (device 08:03):
ufs_readdir: bad entry in directory #3644, size 25769804288: reclen %%
4 != 0 - offset=512, inode=1314258944, reclen=12078, namlen=16
Feb 7 16:20:46 miniq kernel: UFS-fs error (device 08:03):
ufs_readdir: bad entry in directory #3650, size 47244640768: reclen %%
4 != 0 - offset=512, inode=1069135, reclen=22607, namlen=24632
Feb 7 16:21:04 miniq kernel: UFS-fs error (device 08:03):
ufs_readdir: bad entry in directory #8971, size 38654706176: reclen %%
4 != 0 - offset=512, inode=1853126944, reclen=28518, namlen=2637

Elijah
------
archive.org search does not like "a/ux" (use "a ux" with quotes)
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

On 11/13/21 6:25 PM, nospam wrote:

In article <37cdbba28f957500d95f5677f424b5f2@news.novabbs.com>, philo <philo@news.novabbs.com> wrote:

If the drive is HFS , why does Gparted and all the Mac reading Windows
utilities say the partition type is unknown?

without seeing it, i can only guess.

is it readable on a mac??

if not, it's most likely directory corruption. it could also be
unformatted. it's *not* mfs.

post the first 64 bytes of the first four blocks.

I think I have it figured out, and you are right, it has to be HFS.

I just pulled the machine back out of storage and booted it up.

It was not running OS-7 it's running OS 6.0.4



What I did not know was that there were two versions of HFS prior to HFS+


This evidently is the first version which supports up to 2 gig drives.
The 2nd version starting with OS 7.5 (I believe) supports 4 Gig drives.


What I have therefore surmised is that the Linux and Windows Mac-reading utilities must simply not recognize early HFS.


The drive is not corrupted because I just now ran a diagnostic and it
checked OK



--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <smsah6$rnh$1@gioia.aioe.org>, philo <philo@privacy.net>
wrote:

I think I have it figured out, and you are right, it has to be HFS.

yep.

I just pulled the machine back out of storage and booted it up.

It was not running OS-7 it's running OS 6.0.4

that's not surprising for a mac se.

the mac se originally shipped with system 4.0 and supports up to 7.5.5.

What I did not know was that there were two versions of HFS prior to HFS+

there is only one version of hfs.

This evidently is the first version which supports up to 2 gig drives.
The 2nd version starting with OS 7.5 (I believe) supports 4 Gig drives.

hfs supports up to 2 terabyte drives.

the 2 gig limitation was mac os through 7.1.

system 7.5 added support for 4 gb.

the limit was increased to 2 tb for macs that originally shipped with
system 7.5.2 (or later) or has pci slots. the mac se is neither.

What I have therefore surmised is that the Linux and Windows Mac-reading utilities must simply not recognize early HFS.

there is no 'early hfs'.

hfs was replaced with hfs+ in 1998, but that's a different (although
similar) file system.

The drive is not corrupted because I just now ran a diagnostic and it checked OK

what diagnostic did you use?

the only one that will reliably find and repair directory corruption is
alsoft diskwarrior.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

You need to read Apple's knowledge base.
It clearly states that HFS was modified once and semi-clearly states twice. HFS+ first came out with OS8
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <362bb29106bc080325f526848f2c9118@news.novabbs.com>, philo <philo@news.novabbs.com> wrote:

You need to read Apple's knowledge base.

you need to stop trying to tell me about mac os (or apple in general).
i've been writing mac software since 1984, moving to ios about 12 years
ago.

It clearly states that HFS was modified once and semi-clearly states twice.

citation required.

there were minor changes to hfs+, not hfs.

HFS+ first came out with OS8

nope. hfs+ appeared with mac os 8.1.

you might want to re-read whatever it is you supposedly read.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

Since you do not how to search the Apple knowledge base, I will no longer be reading your replies.
Though you ended up wrong again as usual, I did at least learn somethig about MFS.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <4127633d81a5b92b1a7096b874974bab@news.novabbs.com>, philo <philo@news.novabbs.com> wrote:

Since you do not how to search the Apple knowledge base, I will no longer be reading your replies.

as expected, you can't back up your claims and resort to attacks.

post the kb article that states there was more than one version of hfs
or admit you're wrong.

Though you ended up wrong again as usual,

nope. it's *you* who has consistently been wrong, including this.

I did at least learn somethig about
MFS.

only because i explained it to you.
--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <121120211746166994%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

In article <5LBjJ.49931$SR4.6229@fx43.iad>, Scott Alfter ><scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us> wrote:

I don't know how easy they are to find now, but I've used a Cayman GatorBox >> CS to bridge an Apple IIGS and a Color Classic to Linux servers running
netatalk. I think I even had them talking to a G4 Mac mini when the Mac was >> running Tiger. Other LocalTalk-to-Ethernet bridges might work, but the
trick with getting older hardware talking to newer hardware is EtherTalk
support. Linux still supports EtherTalk if you have the right kernel
modules compiled, but IIRC Mac OS X dropped EtherTalk support after 10.4.

or just use a vintage mac. :)

I have a Quadra 610 that could take the GatorBox's place, but it takes more space. :)

...or if you're referring to hardware and not software, the reason for connecting to the Linux box and not an old Mac is that most of my files live there. At one point, I was using cc65 to cross-compile software that the
IIGS could then copy over and run...not a bad way at all to do that, as you
can take advantage of modern editors, version control, etc.

_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

--- Synchronet 3.19a-Linux NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

Am 11.11.21 um 18:27 schrieb nospam:

Pretty sure if want to do TCP/IP with a modern router you need an
ethernet card.

tcp worked over localtalk. an ethernet card was obviously quite a bit
faster, but it was not needed.

But dont forget SLIP. Without any adapter. All you needed was a serial
cable to a second computer with WIFI or whatever to the internet.
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald@gmail.com> wrote:

Am 11.11.21 um 18:27 schrieb nospam:

Pretty sure if want to do TCP/IP with a modern router you need an
ethernet card.

tcp worked over localtalk. an ethernet card was obviously quite a bit
faster, but it was not needed.

But dont forget SLIP. Without any adapter. All you needed was a serial
cable to a second computer with WIFI or whatever to the internet.

SLIP is cumbersome to configure. PPP is easier. Also, I'm not aware about a SLIP implementation running on System 7.

To use IP over LocalTalk you need additional software to tunnel IP in
AppleTalk packets. Personally, I'm using older Cisco Routers for that purpose. There never have been LocalTalk interfaces for those, though.

To connect LocalTalk and Ethernet network segments, you need either a Mac with both ports, or a hardware bridge. Unfortunately, those are becoming rare.
--

:wq! PoC

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

poc@pocnet.net wrote:

To connect LocalTalk and Ethernet network segments, you need either a Mac with
both ports, or a hardware bridge. Unfortunately, those are becoming rare.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I have a Cayman GatorBox CS in storage that does that. I used it mainly to connect an Apple IIGS to a Netatalk server running on a Linux box, but I
think I might've gotten some sort of IP connectivity on a Quadra 610 or
Color Classic with it as well.
--
_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet? --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.vintage

In article <keki0iFtqhpU1@mid.individual.net>, poc@pocnet.net wrote:

Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald@gmail.com> wrote:

Am 11.11.21 um 18:27 schrieb nospam:

Pretty sure if want to do TCP/IP with a modern router you need an
ethernet card.

tcp worked over localtalk. an ethernet card was obviously quite a bit
faster, but it was not needed.

But dont forget SLIP. Without any adapter. All you needed was a serial cable to a second computer with WIFI or whatever to the internet.

SLIP is cumbersome to configure. PPP is easier. Also, I'm not aware about a SLIP implementation running on System 7.

To use IP over LocalTalk you need additional software to tunnel IP in AppleTalk packets. Personally, I'm using older Cisco Routers for that purpose.
There never have been LocalTalk interfaces for those, though.

To connect LocalTalk and Ethernet network segments, you need either a Mac with
both ports, or a hardware bridge. Unfortunately, those are becoming rare.

I've got a Cisco 2800 series running my appletalk zone, It works well with
my Farallon Etherwave serial to ethernet adapter. Saves my PDS slot for
other uses.
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114