HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: brb@falcon.is (Bjorn R. Bjornsson)
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi,comp.sys.sun.hardware
Subject: Re: Maximum SCSI cable length?  (Sun workstation & Disk)
Date: 26 Sep 92 03:44:20 GMT
Followup-To: comp.periphs.scsi
Organization: Gagntaekni/Bijective Tech.

keithl@klic.rain.com (Keith Lofstrom) writes:
>In article <1992Sep24.195246.24575@blaze.cs.jhu.edu> bogstad@blaze.cs.jhu.edu (Bill Bogstad) writes:
>>	I have a user who would like to move the Sun 440 Meg (Seagate 440 3")
>>disk drive that is connected to his ELC into another room due to noise
>>complaints.  I estimate that the cable needed will be about 15'.  I believe
>>that Sun uses single-ended drivers on their SCSI equipment which I
>>understand are limited to a maximum of 6 meters according to the SCSI-2
>>standard.  This is close enough to 15' that I'm worried.  There won't be any
>>other devices on the SCSI bus.

This should work just fine.

>>Has anyone else tried cable lengths this
>>long with this type of equipment?

Absolutely. The Sun-3/50 onboard SCSI interface worked to at least
seven meters with the disks I used at the time (Wren-III and Wren-IV).
However with the SparcStations I've used you can go to exactly 6 meters
(including internal cables).  Anything over that won't work.

>I helped a client hook up an outboard drive to their Sparc IPC, on the same
>chain as a tape and CDROM.  We started with two half-meter cables and the two
>meter cable that came with the hard drive - it didn't work.  The setup DID
>work with the two meter cable alone, or with a one meter cable replacing the
>two meter cable leaving everything else attached.  Yes, everything was
>terminated correctly, and I did check all the cables with an ohmmeter,
>to make sure grounds didn't get swapped in the cable ends.

Whatever the problem was it wasn't the total length of the bus.
It would seem that the 2 meter cable was at fault.  My guess would
be a marginal connection on one the wires of the two meter cable.

>I have had problems on other machines with long cables.  I suspect that the
>maximum length spec is far too optimistic, especially with the faster
>machines.

I've never met an SCSI interface that couldn't go the whole 6 meters.
Faulty cables/connectors, yes.  Malfunctioning units screwing up the bus,
yes.  But you can certainly have a 6 meter SCSI bus if the cables are
good, functioning interfaces, adequate device spacing and proper
termination.

Bjorn R. Bjornsson
brb@falcon.is
From: kev@hpcpbla.bri.hp.com (Kevin Jones)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 09:03:59 GMT
Subject: Re: Where is a source for HP35470A/80A?
Organization: HP Computer Peripherals Bristol, UK
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi

> I've heard good things about these HP DAT drives, but can't
> seem to find a source for them.

Try one of the following distributors:

Company                         State                  Phone
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CRANEL                          OHIO                 614-433-0045
DATALINK                        MINNEAPOLIS          612-944-3462
ANTHEM ELECTRONICS              CALIFORNIA           408-453-1200
DALLAS DIGITAL                  TEXAS                214-422-4842
MESA                            COLUMBIA             301-290-8150
ARROW ELECTRONICS               NY                   516-391-1300

Mail me if you want surface mail addresses for these.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin Jones.                       | Hewlett Packard Ltd,
                                   | Computer Peripherals Bristol,
kev%hpcpbla@hplb.hpl.hp.com        | Filton Road,
                                   | Stoke Gifford,
                                   | Bristol.   BS12 6QZ.
                                   | ENGLAND.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

This response does not represent the official position of, or
statement by, the Hewlett-Packard Company.  The above data is
provided for informational purposes only. It is supplied
without warranty of any kind.
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
From: donyee@athena.mit.edu (Donald Yee)
Subject: Re: SCSI bad sectors?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 21:16:17 GMT

While this running argument between Bill W. and John V is running, may
I interject that it is not just apple that describes a megabyte as
1024^2.  FDISK (presumably by Microsoft) for PC compatibles on partitioning
a new disk uses that definition also.  That is how it all started.  According
to Seagate, my disk, 702 Megabytes unformatted, 601 formatted, comes out to
573 MB according to FDISK.  I asked if something was wrong.  Hence this
thread.

John states that Mega as a base 2 number is worthless in storage but not in
memory.  Don't quite see how that is relevant.  A computer with 32 MB of RAM
could then be called one with 33 MB, just as easily as a disk of that size
could.  Maybe that is just convenience?  When you get above a certain number
it becomes harder to figure out how many MB 608,898,732 bytes is, and then
you just say 609?  Maybe.  But then why does FDISK for the PC use the base
2 Megabyte?  Consistency would be nice.

don
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
From: hammen@vpnet.chi.il.us (Robert Hammen)
Subject: SCSI A/B box?
Organization: VGC Corp. - Minneapolis
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 02:17:23 GMT

Does anyone know of a company that makes an A/B switchbox for SCSI
peripherals? I have seen one, and need another. I called Black Box,
but they claimed not to have one. Does anyone know where I can get
another?

Robert
-- 
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/ Robert Hammen | Systems Engineer | VGC Corp. - Minneapolis	              /	
/ hammen@vpnet.chi.il.us | 70701.2104@compuserve.com | AppleLink: VGC.MPLS    /
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
From: dabl2@nlm.nih.gov (Don A.B. Lindbergh)
Subject: Re: Adaptec1542B & Qemm 6.0 won't work!
Organization: National Library of Medicine
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 14:43:07 GMT

In article <2AD0C2A2.2325@deneva.sdd.trw.com> reimert@mamacass.etdesg.trw.com (Scott P. Reimert) writes:
>In article <9210051142.AA24355@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> e4shwen@eleceng.adelaide.edu.au writes:
>>Posting for a friend:
>>--------------------
>>
>>Not matter how I try,I can not get QEMM 6.0 to work with the 1542B &
>>ASPI4DOS.SYS. It always drop out half way through the "optimize"
>>process,and told me there is a compatiablity problem with the software
>>or hardware.
>>
>>My system is :
>>486/50 w/AMI bios
>>Adpatec 1542B w/ASPI4DOS driver (ver 2.1 beta)

I believe the latest version is 3.0a.  The Adaptec BBS has a program called
UPGRADE.EXE which should get you (your friend) current.  

--Don
dabl2@lhc.nlm.nih.gov

Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
From: bwilliam@iat.holonet.net (Bill Williams)
Subject: Re: Manufacturer Labels on SCSI Disks
Organization: HoloNet (BBS: 510-704-1058)
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 06:11:18 GMT

>>that makes ALMOST as much sense as training wheels on Indy cars... ya,
battery backed ram on a HARD DISK... sheesh.


It makes perfect sense.... EEPROM, flash EPROM, battery backed RAM
are all perfectly acceptable for CD-ROM SCSI devices, Magneto Optical
removables, etc. It is ridiculous to assume the the information ESPECIALLY
THE INQUIRY INFO is usually stored on a hidden track especially because it
is expected to be reportable at boot while the drive is still not fully
spun up, or is otherwise unable to use the normal media. Changing the
inquiry info is EVIL and on Macintoshes, FWB Hard Disk Toolkit, and
Apollyonics SCSI director DEPEND on the information to be normal or the
device will not be properly handled (such products are universal SCSI drivers)

Leave the info alone.

Bill Williams
From: frank@marvin.contex.com (Frank Perdicaro)
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: Re: Dual/multiport SCSI disks?
Date: 29 Sep 92 17:33:09 GMT
Organization: Xyvision Design Systems

In article <1246@falcon.is> brb@falcon.is (Bjorn R. Bjornsson) writes:
>I'm I dreaming or did I see a reference to dual ported SCSI
>disk or storage subsystems on the net a few weeks back?
>
>What I'm asking is this: Does anybody make a disk/subsystem
>with at least two SCSI interfaces?

Yes, Centurfax makes a SCSI switch that can be addressed by two
independent buses.  It does not permit disconnect, so its nearly
useless, except in those stupid, popular PCs and Macs.  Lets one 
[ disk, tape, printer, etc ] be seen by two initiators ( cpus ).

Centurfax is unlikely to sell this thing on the open market.  
But when the technology exists someplace, it exists someplace else.
Look harder, somebody else must have it....
-- 
	 Frank E Perdicaro, Systems Admin, etc.		Xyvision Color Systems
      Legalize guns, drugs and cash...today.		101 Edgewater Drive
   inhouse: frank@marvin, x5572				Wakefield MA
outhouse: frank@contex.com, 617-245-4100x5572		018801285
From: sherwood@fenris.space.ualberta.ca (Sherwood Botsford)
Subject: Re: DAT vs. 8mm
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 17:22:34 GMT


Peter Whittaker writes
> In article <1992Sep29.172311.3867@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>  
sherwood@fenris.space.ualberta.ca (Sherwood Botsford)  
writes:
> >1.  You can get two DAT drives for the price of 1 8mm.
> 
> And still get less capacity than that single 8mm drive.
> 

You're right.  But a dat tape holds a disk full of data.   
The big advantage of having two drives is the ease of  
duplicating tapes, and having a means of reading the tape  
when a drive craps out.

> >2.  There are multiple manufacturers of DAT.  If Exabyte  
> >folds, you are in BIG trouble.
> 
> There are multiple (two, in fact) manufacturers of 8mm  
drives: Exabyte
> (US), and Kubota (Japan).  There are also dozens of  
resellers and VARs,
> all qualified to offer support, maintenance, etc.
>

I didn't know about Kubota. Thanks for the tip. Yes there  
are third party VARs.  My previous experience in the  
computer peripherals market is that support for a product  
will vanish or get very expensive within two years of the  
OEM folding.  Kubota's entry into this market is  
reassuring.  I have more confidence than I had that we will  
be able to read these tapes ten years from now. 

My experience with one third party VAR (Dilog) has been  
less than sterling.
 
As to DAT's, there are currently I think some 9 companies  
that make the actual hardware, and aren't just acting as  
VARs.  Sony may have learned something when they didn't  
license their VHS-Beta technology...

> >3.  The difference in speed on streaming is fairly small   
(~25%) 
> 
> 480KB/s vs 187 KB/s works outo to 25%?  Since when?
> 
Sorry, Page 17 of Exabyte EXB-8200 8mm Cartridge Tape  
Subsystem Product Specification (510005-006) states that  
the 8200 has a sustained transfer rate of 246 KB/sec.  
187/246 is .760163.  I don't think I'm being terribly  
sloppy to call this about 25%


> >4.  The media takes up less room for storage.
> 
> And stores less!  Funny, that!
> 
Ok, An Exabyte cartridge  has dimensions of 4" x 2.6 x .75
That's 7.8 cu.in. At 2.2 GB/cartridge thats 3.5 cuin/GB

A DAT tape measures 3.1" x 2.62 x .31 = 2.5 cu inches.  At 
1.3 Gb (Uncompressed, 60 m tape) that's 1.9 cuin/GB

Above measurements include the plastic storage case.   
Decimals are rounded versions of measurements using a  
normal ruler, calibrated in 1/16"s of an inch.

Above capacities are comparing low end exabyte (8200) to  
low end DAT.

> >5.  Exabytes do not have a reputation for reliability.   
> >MTBF is nowhere near what is claimed.
> 
> 8mm works well for us.
> 
I said that too for the first year we had the Exabyte.  I'm  
packaging mine up today to send back to Dilog for the  
second time in 6 months.

> P.S. I'm not endorsing 8mm over 4mm, but I can't stand to  
see distortions
>      presented as facts.

I can agree with that sentiment wholeheartedly.  And your  
comments pointed out where I had been less than clear.   
Thankyou.
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
From: berliner@rmtc.Central.Sun.COM (Brian Berliner)
Subject: Re: DAT vs. 8mm
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 04:12:16 GMT

In <1992Sep29.114357.3554@mpifr-bonn.mpg.de> mlelstv@specklec.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst) writes:
>Depends on what you need fastest. For fastest backup times the 8mm streamers
>are better since they can sustain a higher transferrate. If you need to
>search through your backups frequently then DATs are better.

I disagree.  Take a look at the specs for the Exabyte 8500 (5GB Exabyte
tape drive).  I have measured a 1.25 minute average seek time to get to any
random piece of data on the tape, regardless of whether you have a single
5GB file on the tape or 2000 smaller files.  These are *not* rewind times
either (which are better), but actual tape file and record skipping
numbers.

How does DAT compare against these numbers?

	-Brian

PS: The biggest drawback that the Exabytes have is that they take so darned
long to get the tape spinning and to unload the tape.  This limits their
usefulness when used with a heavily burdened robotics unit.  Once you get
them spinning, though, they are indeed very *fast*.

These opinions are not those of Sun, of course.
From: pww@bnr.ca (Peter Whittaker)
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: Re: DAT vs. 8mm
Date: 30 Sep 92 12:33:57 GMT
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa

In article <1992Sep29.172311.3867@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> sherwood@fenris.space.ualberta.ca (Sherwood Botsford) writes:
>1.  You can get two DAT drives for the price of 1 8mm.

And still get less capacity than that single 8mm drive.

>2.  There are multiple manufacturers of DAT.  If Exabyte  
>folds, you are in BIG trouble.

There are multiple (two, in fact) manufacturers of 8mm drives: Exabyte
(US), and Kubota (Japan).  There are also dozens of resellers and VARs,
all qualified to offer support, maintenance, etc.

>3.  The difference in speed on streaming is fairly small  (~25%) 

480KB/s vs 187 KB/s works outo to 25%?  Since when?

>4.  The media takes up less room for storage.

And stores less!  Funny, that!

>5.  Exabytes do not have a reputation for reliability.   
>MTBF is nowhere near what is claimed.

8mm works well for us.

pww

P.S. I'm not endorsing 8mm over 4mm, but I can't stand to see distortions
     presented as facts.
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
From: vail@tegra.com (Johnathan Vail)
Subject: Re: Manufacturer Labels on SCSI Disks
Organization: Tegra-Varityper, Inc. Billerica, MA
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 14:32:30 GMT



In article <1992Sep25.215807.21079@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> lenz@ssd.comm.mot.com (Doug Lenz) writes:

   I have sort of a "I wonder how they did that?" kind
   of question.  Some of the bigger catalog houses that
   sell their own brands of disk-subsystems have
   what appear to be generic SCSI disks with customized
   labels.  What I mean is say a company called XXX sells
   a subsystem with a drive by YYY (fill in your favorite
   SCSI manufacturer).  When you boot (in Messy-Dos at 
   least) the controller cards usually display the disk
   label:

	   Found YYY Model ??? 	XXX

   Somehow these companies have put a custom "ad" in the
   disk label.  Are these labels put in by the disk
   manufacturer (mail order company say's "We'll buy
   millions of your disk if you put OUR name in the
   disk label") or is there a way to do this using normal
   SCSI commands.

   Just was wondering (hasn't anybody else wondered?)


The information you see isn't from exactly a "disk label."  At least
not in the sense of Unix disk labels.  There is a SCSI command called
INQUIRY (0x12) where this information comes from.  Where the
information is actually stored varies.  Sometimes it is in the
firmware, sometimes on a "hidden" track and sometimes in EEPROM on the
controller.

Apparently some vendors have a way of changing it for their OEMs.
Usually this is a very closely guarded secret.  I have even see this
used as a "dongle" by OEMs to sell drives for their system at the
greatest markup.

jv

 _____
|     | Johnathan Vail     vail@tegra.com     (508) 663-7435
|Tegra| jv@n1dxg.ampr.org    N1DXG@448.625-(WorldNet)
 -----  MEMBER: League for Programming Freedom (league@prep.ai.mit.edu)
From: mberhan@cup.portal.com (Mike D Berhan)
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: Central Point Backup goes SCSI
Date: Mon,  5 Oct 92 09:37:06 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: world

The subject says it all.  PC Tools v8.0 has just been announced.  Included
with this package you'll find Central Point Backup v8.0 for DOS.  I was a
Beta site and used it at home with my Wangtek 525 on my AHA-1542.  Since I
used to work for Adaptec, I've used several packages that support SCSI like
Sytos Plus, NovaBack, Cheyenne ARCSolo, Backit, etc.  Although each one of
these packages has its own merits (Sytos Plus has merits???), I feel that
Central Point Backup is the best.  When you define your SCSI equipment, here
are the options that are given to you:

- ASPI SCSI Driver
- Adaptec AHA-1540/1542 (ISA)
- Adaptec AHA-1640 (MCA)
- Adaptec AHA-1740/1742/1744 (EISA)

Supports multiple levels of data compression, just about any SCSI tape drive,
on-the-fly virus checking, etc. etc.  Very easy to use.

My only complaint is that PC Tools v8.0 no longer contains the Windows version
of Central Point Backup.  That will come later.  Check it out.

Mike Berhan
mberhan@cup.portal.com
From: mlelstv@specklec.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de (Michael van Elst)
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: Re: DAT vs. 8mm
Date: 6 Oct 92 12:02:59 GMT
Organization: Max-Planck-Institut f"ur Radioastronomie

In <1992Oct5.172234.21917@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> sherwood@fenris.space.ualberta.ca (Sherwood Botsford) writes:
>Sorry, Page 17 of Exabyte EXB-8200 8mm Cartridge Tape  
>Subsystem Product Specification (510005-006) states that  
>the 8200 has a sustained transfer rate of 246 KB/sec.  
>187/246 is .760163.  I don't think I'm being terribly  
>sloppy to call this about 25%

That's the old EXB8200 which costs $2k and holds 2.3GB. The current
model is EXB8500 which costs <$4k and holds 5GB. The EXB8500 does
indeed transfer 500k/s.

>Ok, An Exabyte cartridge  has dimensions of 4" x 2.6 x .75
>That's 7.8 cu.in. At 2.2 GB/cartridge thats 3.5 cuin/GB

The cassette stores 5GB -> 1.75 cuin/GB.

>A DAT tape measures 3.1" x 2.62 x .31 = 2.5 cu inches.  At 
>1.3 Gb (Uncompressed, 60 m tape) that's 1.9 cuin/GB

>Above capacities are comparing low end exabyte (8200) to  
>low end DAT.

Of course, this makes DAT best looking. But high end DAT doesn't
store significantly more than low end DAT. No, data compression
does not count.

Regards,
-- 
Michael van Elst
UUCP:     universe!local-cluster!milky-way!sol!earth!uunet!unido!mpirbn!p554mve
Internet: p554mve@mpirbn.mpifr-bonn.mpg.de
                                "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
From: rogerb@pisco.esd.sgi.com (Roger Brown)
Subject: Wright Flyer Drawing.
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 20:20:25 GMT

I am looking for an AutoCAD drawing file of the Wright Brother's airplane.
Does anyone know where I might get such a beast.  I've checked a several of
the
Autodesk Image Library CD's.  I would prefer a 3D drawing, but 2D would
suffice.

Thanks all.

Roger Brown, P.E.
From: david@talgras.UUCP (David Hoopes)
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: Re: DAT vs. 8mm
Date: 2 Oct 92 13:39:37 GMT
Reply-To: david@talgras.UUCP (David Hoopes)
Organization: Tallgrass Technologies Inc.

In article <1992Sep29.002348.23855@leland.Stanford.EDU> phil@summit.stanford.edu (Phil Constantinou) writes:
>I am trying to decide which form of tape drive to buy.  I have heard
>different stories about DAT and 8mm drives.  I mangage a small LAN and
>am tired of 150 meg backup tapes.  Which drives are most cost effective
>and fastest.  Also, what brands of drives are good and which are bad?
>

Just to make the choice a little more complex, have you considered a
QIC-1350 drive.  They hold 1.3 Gig (uncompressed) and have a higher
transfer rate then any of the DAT or 8mm drives (at least any that I
have seen).  And, they are capable of reading the QIC-150 tapes that
you already have.

Just an idea.


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
David Hoopes                              Tallgrass Technologies Inc. 
david@tallgrass.COM                       11100 W 82nd St.          
Voice: (913) 492-6002 x323                Lenexa, Ks  66214
From: teodor@proxxi.se (Teodor V{{n{nen (proxxi))
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: WANTED: SCSI and SCSI-2 command set list
Date: 3 Oct 92 02:01:10 GMT
Organization: proxxi


HI there !

Excuse me for any crap postings on this group. I have trouble with my postnews
program.

I wonder if there's any list of ALL the commands in SCSI and SCSI-2.
If there is one, mail ftp site, list or company info to me:

Teodor


-- 
Teodor Vaeaenaenen		E-Mail:    teodor@proxxi.se
Voice: +46 8 6693241		SnailMail: Langholmsgatan 7  3rd floor
Data: Not Existing (Yet)        	   S-117 33 STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN
Murphys law: Everything that can f--k up f--ks up.
From: drees@plains.NoDak.edu (Steve Drees)
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: Conner HD with Chinook Case & Apple // SCSI
Date: 5 Oct 92 20:42:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: plains.20963
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network


Can anyone send me some technical specs for a Conner CP-340?

I am attempting to place it in a Chinook CT-30 case and hook it up to an
Apple // scsi card.
-- 
+-----------------------+------------------------------------------------+
|Steve Drees            | keeper of apple2 directory on plains.nodak.edu.|  
|drees@plains.Nodak.Edu | Computer Science senior at UND. Please hire me.| 
| "What about Headman Shabalala? Doesn't anybody care about justice?"-AA |
+-----------------------+------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
From: sherwood@fenris.space.ualberta.ca (Sherwood Botsford)
Subject: Re: DAT vs. 8mm
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 23:20:24 GMT


One of the reasons I like the DAT is we have user file  
systems on 4 different machines.  Everything goes by NFS.   
I find that the speed of NFS and the speed of the DAT go  
well together.

Our Exabyte 8200 (with only 256K of buffer) was constantly  
start/stop.  We averaged only about 75% of capacity on it  
due to the number of gap tracks being written.

The DAT behaves better.

Someone asked about prices:
Low end DAT's seem to be about $1200.  Low end 8mm's (8200)  
about 2500.

High DAT's start about where the low end 8mm's are.   
Exabyte 8500's seem to leave scant change from 5 K$.

My prices are likely out of date, since it's been months  
since I was shopping for tape drives.
Newsgroups: comp.periphs.scsi
From: root@shawn.uucp (Mark Jeghers -- UNIX/X/Motif Contractor)
Subject: Wanted: a TAR for Adaptec 1542/150Meg tape under DOS
Reply-To: root@shawn.uucp (Mark Jeghers -- UNIX/X/Motif Contractor)
Organization: Mark Jeghers -- UNIX/X/Motif Contractor
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 06:22:35 GMT

Okay, here's what I have:

Adaptec 1542B with BIOS disabled, it's disks and tape are only used
by UNIX right now.  UNIX and DOS both boot from partitions on an IDE
disk.  DOS only sees the IDE disks, not the Adaptec's SCSI stuff.

Here is what I want:

To access the Archive 2150S tape drive on the Adaptec 1542B when I'm
running DOS, and to have a DOS-based TAR program that can use this
tape drive.

Please pardon my asking a question that has probably been asked before.

I know I can get the ASPI stuff from Adaptec, but they only support
a proprietary non-TAR backup format.  I want a more open solution.

Thanks in advance!

Mark Jeghers
408/281-4823 [voicemail]

Xref: sparky comp.periphs.scsi:4838 comp.os.os2.misc:32081