Jump to content
IGNORED

conflict between mac/65 and dosxl


mutil8

Recommended Posts

running into an issue with mac/65 3.6 and dosxl using indus gt drive.

when booting up 800xl with mac/65 cartridge and indus drive with dosxl (dos that game with indus drive), computer hangs up or dumps into basic.

seems to work fine with atari dos 2.5 in drive. 

Is mac/65 3.6 not compatible with dosxl?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What version of Dos XL are you using?  I can't comment on V3.6 of mac/65, but my V1.01 boots up fine with Dos XL 2.30.  If I type DOS, then I go to the Dos XL menu.  There are manuals and images for Dos XL at archive.org.  There is also a lot of mac/65 stuff at

 

https://www.atariwiki.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Mac65#section-Mac65-MAC653.619880107  (and also for some for Dos XL)

 

Are you using Synchromesh?  If so, try without it.  I'd be very surprised if V3.6 has issues with a later version of Dos XL (like 2.30).

 

Edit:  two other thoughts, even though it boots with Dos 2.5.  I'd run a ram test on your XL.  Clean the cartridge contacts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hint, after making your bootable work disk, copy the .sup file (for supercart mem) to it and rename it .sys, then reboot

I do think it best to do as slx says and read the book, and hope I haven't performed a disservice by giving you a quick possible answer.

Edited by _The Doctor__
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I spent a couple hours tonight having various issues - then found these posts when I called it a night.

 

I am using dosxl 2.20 no syncromesh

found this in atariwiki: The Synchromesh software is supplied as part of DOS XL 2.35I

 

So maybe next step is I need to get a more recent copy of dos xl?

I am suprised there is any issue since both mac/65 and dos xl were made by OSS.

 

Tonight I was attempting to resolve issue by using atari dos 2.5. Did not go well. Appears 2.5 is not fully compatible with the indus drive.

When trying to load files or even just get a disk directory using dos 2.5 I would get an error 139.

 

The indus manual does mention using atari dos 2.0 - So I am thinking the indus drive was designed before dos 2.5,  and that dos 2.5 introduced a compatability issue.

Anyway I guess I will get newer version of dos xl. another solution would be to simply switch back to using 1050 disk drive.

 

I also have sparta dos, however searching around I found an old thread that describes compatability issues with sparta dos and the indus drive.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is starting to sound like there is an issue with your Indus (not compatibility).  Booting with your 1050 is a good idea.  If this boots up OK with the 1050, then to me, that points to an issue with the Indus or a possible alignment difference between the drives.  There is also a very slight chance of the disk(s) being corrupted -- especially the Dos XL disk.  The job of a drive is just to read/write sectors, so I think that the possibility of the Indus being incompatible with the software is not very likely.

 

Do you have another SIO device like an SIO2PC, SIO2SD, S-Drive, etc.?  That way you could boot with an ATR and avoid all the mechanics or other potential issues with the drives.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mutil8 said:

So maybe next step is I need to get a more recent copy of dos xl?

 

Here you go: DOS XL v2.35I1 (1983)(Indus Systems)(US)[!].atr

 

3 hours ago, mutil8 said:

Tonight I was attempting to resolve issue by using atari dos 2.5. Did not go well. Appears 2.5 is not fully compatible with the indus drive.

When trying to load files or even just get a disk directory using dos 2.5 I would get an error 139.

Your disk might also be formatted in double density which is not supported by any of the original Atari DOSes.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just tested Mac/65 V3.6 with Dos XL 2.20, 2.30, and 2.35.  2.20 and 2.35 were from the original Indus System Disks.  They all boot up perfectly in the Altirra emulator.  (A quick way to test things!)  It even boots up without incident with Dos XL 2.42 -- WARP Dos for the Happy drives. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Larry said:

I just tested Mac/65 V3.6 with Dos XL 2.20, 2.30, and 2.35.  2.20 and 2.35 were from the original Indus System Disks.  They all boot up perfectly in the Altirra emulator.  (A quick way to test things!)  It even boots up without incident with Dos XL 2.42 -- WARP Dos for the Happy drives. 

thats interesting. setup I am using currently is 800xl with oss multi cart in it (has mac/65 basic xl and a couple others, selected by jumper in back of cart, I only use mac/65) and of course the indus drive.

I would be curious if anyone could test the following: boot system with indus drive containing atari dos 2.5, go to dos menu and select a) disk directory. When I do this I get an error 139 at the bottom of directory list.

Also did test load of a basic program and got error 139. 

 

I just did a simple re test before I head out for the day:

 

boot 800xl dosxl (original dosxl disk that comes with indus drive) with OSS 4 in cart set to mac/65 installed. boot doesnt complete - hangs up at blue screen. 

replace disk with atari dos 2.5 and reboot. mac/65 comes up fine. type DOS to go to dos 2.5 menu and do A) disk directory. directory comes up, ending with an error 139.

(this is exactly same as before, just not sure if I was explaining clearly). To me this seems like compatability issue.

 

As for other sio devices yes I have a fuji net i just ordered. I have not set it up yet, been trying to focus on basic hardware and getting used to 6502 atari (I was primarily apple II programmer way back in the day).

 

I will take another run at this tonight hopefully. May just consist of hooking 1050 back up and using that. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WITHOUT using any cartridges, using plain vanilla DOS disks of various types and files saved on them, use the drive and do menus directories etc. Make sure to use both single and double density formatted disks to ensure the drive is fully functional.

If you still see errors it's definitely the drive.

Edited by _The Doctor__
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, _The Doctor__ said:

WITHOUT using any cartridges, using plain vanilla DOS disks of various types and files saved on them, use the drive and do menus directories etc. Make sure to use both single and double density formatted disks to ensure the drive is fully functional.

If you still see errors it's definitely the drive.

without cartridge:

using dosxl 2.20 everything works fine - disk directory, formating, copying disk etc.

using atari dos 2.5 most commands result in error- 139

It still seems to me the indus drive is functioning fine, can anyone test indus drive with atari dos 2.5 and NOT get error- 139?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mutil8

I use indus all the time with 2.5 and others I don't get errors

error 138 is a device timeout

Error-139 is Device NAK.

causes of this error which can be trying to access a bad disk sector or one not present on the disk when using 2.5 , since you know the disk is good, you can have a bad SIO cable or bad disk drive.. modes of failure could be alignment, dirty head, timing, electronic fault, bad format, bad disk, etc.

Edited by _The Doctor__
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, _The Doctor__ said:

@mutil8

I use indus all the time with 2.5 and others I don't get errors

error 138 is a device timeout

Error-139 is Device NAK.

causes of this error which can be trying to access a bad disk sector or one not present on the disk when using 2.5 , since you know the disk is good, you can have a bad SIO cable or bad disk drive.. modes of failure could be alignment, dirty head, timing, electronic fault, bad format, bad disk, etc.

doesnt make sense to me that the drive works fine with dosxl and not with dos 2.5

I even tried formating a new disk using dos 2.5 still got error 139

 

I will do some more testing tomorrow.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the drive normally shows 1C for me, meaning drive id 1, Dual (or enhanced density)

It's the drive ID and ...

      "A" for 810/1050 compatible single density,

      "B" for 815 compatible double density,

      "C" for 1050 compatible dual density.

in the display...

then of course it switches over to track numbers while booting etc.. all the normal things

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, mutil8 said:

doesnt make sense to me that the drive works fine with dosxl and not with dos 2.5

I even tried formating a new disk using dos 2.5 still got error 139

 

I will do some more testing tomorrow.

 

Well, it might make some sense if you have the original Indus Dos XL system disk, but your Dos 2.5 disk is from another drive -- such as your 1050.  Commercial disks are generally the "gold standard" for proper alignment, timing, etc.  There are several utilities that you can use, but you are going to need to get your FujiNet operational, unless you have another means of using ATR's. 

 

Here's what I would do:

Format a good disk on your Indus using Dos XL (since you indicate it is OK).  You aren't using HD disks are you?

Download a copy of Dos 2.5 from Atarimania.com

Boot the ATR

Set your Indus to D2: or unmount the ATR from the D1: slot

Write the new Dos 2.5 files to the disk you formatted with Dos XL/Indus

Boot the new Dos 2.5 disk using the Indus as D1:

 

Atarimania (Atari 400 800 XL XE)>Utilities then SEARCH for 1050 will yield some utility ATR's that can be useful for further diagnostics.  In addition, there are many more disk utilities that can be useful in checking timing, reading sectors, etc.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Rybags said:

NAK 139 can be one of a lot of things.  Illegal command is another.

illegal commands from known good DOS disks doesn't make sense unless there is SIO errors of some kind that get by. According to the poster he's using standard DOS 2.5 and XL etc. they haven't caused error 139 issues in all these years with iNdus drives so there has to be a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DjayBee said:

Are you sure that this is 815-compatible DD?

 

815-DD is incompatible to any other DD for Atari 8-Bit due to inverted data bits.

it's what's written the manual, we are quite aware it's just double density. The drive also isn't double sided either like an 815. So double negative, however if I correct the Manual then someone will quote the manual saying the information is incorrect. Half a dozen of this or 6 of the other.

I suppose one could test their claim and use a real 815 disk that is double density and Single sided and see if it does handle it one way or another, seeing that such images are now available.

Another added bonus is the way at some places in the manual they call Enhanced density / Dual density as being 1050 DOUBLE density. Yeah it's that good.

Edited by _The Doctor__
Link to comment
Share on other sites

will an 815 read a standard single sided double density disk I don't have one so If you own a real one try it and let us know. Then try vice versa with your real 815 and iNdus drive.

 

I bet some of you have both with the latest firmware/roms in the real hardware. Probably a mute point but sometimes that's what it takes to definitively show how it is.

 

I do not own an 815 today, and never tested it's disks in an iNdus that I recall. Most of us don't have 815's, they are not common.

 

I suspect iNdus didn't have one either but simply wrote 815 as an Atari comparison term and assumed they were standard double density. That of course is also and assumption because the iNdus can be programmed to emulate other drives such as the US doubler drives.

 

Maybe they had a utility disk that programmed the drive to operate in inverted data translation mode and never released it. Lots of possibilities

 

Edited by _The Doctor__
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...