Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!rutgers!pyrnj!pyrite!bill From: bill@pyrite.nj.pyramid.com (Bill Pechter) Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386 Subject: Re: Does ESIX still not support RLL? Message-ID: <517@pyrite.nj.pyramid.com> Date: 25 Apr 91 15:58:02 GMT References: <1991Apr21.155642.1586@shambala.uucp> <1991Apr22.210543.27730@thyme.jpl.nasa.gov> <3080@cirrusl.UUCP> <513@pyrite.nj.pyramid.com> <3087@cirrusl.UUCP> Reply-To: bill@pyrite.UUCP (Bill Pechter) Lines: 30 In article <3087@cirrusl.UUCP> Rahul Dhesi writes: > >I wrote: > > How can ESIX even know whether the controller uses RLL? How can > anybody find this out without ripping the disk apart and analyzing > the bit-patterns stored on the platter? Once again, (no flame intended) all the MFM controllers I've seen use no more than 17 sectors per track. All the RLL, ARLL, and other types use more than 17. So Esix has no way of knowing how you encode the data on the disk... it does expect up to 17 sectors/track on standard PC controllers for ST412/506 controllers. The method of writing bit patterns is totally hidden from the OS. That IS a controller function. You're correct. However, they're very careful to say that they don't support anything other than MFM type ST412/506 controllers. They are just saying buyer beware to all of us with non WD1002/3 type controllers for ST412 drives. I'm checking with Perstor about my controller revs and it's suitability with ESIX. Bill -- Bill Pechter | "The postmaster always pings twice." Pyramid Technology | bill@pyrite.nj.pyramid.com 10 Woodbridge Center Drive | rutgers!pyrnj!pyrite!bill Woodbridge, NJ 07095 (908)602-6308 | pyramid!pyrnj!pyrite!bill