Quote:

Because it's obvious that if someone attacks me, I'm automatically involved... Duh! Having said that, I've been attacked in threads where I hadn't said anything or replied anything, so yeah, well.. euhhh... That must be my fault!

eehm right. thats not really what i ment. i just wonder WHY its always you who is under serious attack, or is seriously attacking. (so IC didnt mean to insert a finger)

well, at least you don't have me as your opponent anymore since i retired.. and now im amused by all this. you may continue, or you all may stop. i have no trouble with either option.

People, *please* Let's all *try* to be nice here and to stay on topic a little. Guyver posting a message with 6 smileys is hardly an earth-shaking event. Let's all try and keep focussed instead of looking for a reason to flame eachother. The next posts had better be about that darn SCSI cart...

Quote:

(so IC didnt mean to insert a finger)

Quote:

well, it's obvious that you are always involved. but why would that be.. ?

When I use 'you' in a statement, I mean it directly by pointing out to the person in question. So therefor I must conclude that it is finger pointing imho.

Quote:

People, *please* Let's all *try* to be nice here and to stay on topic a little. Guyver posting a message with 6 smileys is hardly an earth-shaking event.

What I don't understand is why my message is being focussed on, while it was in reply to snout, who posted 2 off-topic messages before me!

Okay people, neither of these two messages have anything to do with a SCSI interface...

Guyver, try reading my post with an open mind. All it states is that I don't have a freaking clue how people can start a friggin flamewar over someone posting a message with 6 smileys...

Quote:

Guyver, try reading my post with an open mind. All it states is that I don't have a freaking clue how people can start a friggin flamewar over someone posting a message with 6 smileys...

I know that's what it stated. If you feel I was lashing out at you, that's not my intention.
I was just adding to what you said, because I'm as confused about this whole thing as you are (and maybe even more).

Also, I'm wondering why IC's last post was deleted/moderated. It did not say anything offensive, and was purely on-topic. Is MRC changing moderation policies again?

>>> SCSI <<<

I have a BERT

And You removed my previous post!

Final sentences on this 'off'topic --> I'll keep my mouth shut from now on. I've had my share in contributing against illnesses in conversation. Trying to relax things. Well, I don't do that anymore. Only on-topic for me from now on Maybe that's the smartest for all of us...

Another note for potential people who will google for "LPE SCSI" words:

It looks like original Bart SCSI controller used Zilog Z5380 SCSI controller chip, which implements ANSI X3.131-1986 specification.

My LPE SCSI is using AMD AM53C80NPC. Similar chips (AM53Cxxxxx) are used in cheap PCI SCSI controllers from Tekram. AMD is not the only one who produces chips with 53C in it. LSI and Simbios are at least two more chip makers with 53C chips...

Since AM53C is a fairly new chip (from early 90s), it probably supercedes Z5380 in features, but because Leonardo reused existing BIOS for Z5380, only standard features are used...

If anyone can find specs for AM53C family of chips, please let me know. I am curious about diferences between AM53C and Z5380. May be BIOS could be improved for AM53C... Like less NOPs and such... As well as R800 support for TurboR machines...

This is all of my speculations for today.

Folks, are you sure that LPE SCSI is a clone of BERT SCSI and not it's predecessor MK Public Domain SCSI?

The bios version is 2.46, and this is the final bios for MK Public Domain SCSI.
BERT had bioses 2.6, 2.7 and 3.0beta...

I know that BERT is based on MK Public Domain SCSI. Does that mean that software (mostly FDISK 3.0) for BERT will work on MK Public Domain clone?

Thanks...

Well, an MK SCSI is upgraded to BERT by simply replacing the BIOS EPROM.

Hehe, so now you are telling me I need the EPROM burner?
In this case which BERT bios should I use? 2.6, 2.7 or 3.0beta?
Or may be I can stick to 2.46?
If all that newer version do is give some performance optimizations, I can live without it

2.7 is good.
3.0beta is the speed-up version, but apparently has stability problems. Do you have this BIOS? I would be interested in taking a look at it.