Slashdot Mirror


Need Help Salvaging Data From an Old Xenix System

Milo_Mindbender writes "I've recently gotten ahold of an old Altos 586 Xenix system (a late '80s Microsoft flavor of Unix) that has one of the first multi-user BBS systems in the US on it, and I want to salvage the historical BBS posts off it. I'm wondering if anyone remembers what format Xenix used on the 10MB (yes MB) IDE hard drive and if it can still be read on a modern Linux system. This system is quite old, has no removable media or ethernet and just barely works. The only other way to get data off is a slow serial port. I've got a controller that should work with the disk, but don't want to tear this old machine apart without some hope that it will work. Anyone know?"

60 of 325 comments (clear)

  1. I'd do it the slow but secure way. by Securityemo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even if it would take weeks. You're handling a historical relic, don't want to mess it up.

    --
    Emotions! In your brain!
    1. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by jgardia · · Score: 5, Informative

      exactly, 10mb at 9600bps will take only 2-3 hours.

    2. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No way it would take weeks. Even if the serial port was only 300 bit per second and he had to copy the whole 10MB disk through it this would take 10*1024*1024*8/300/3600=77.6 hours.
      Mid-80s I'd expect at least five-digit bps rates - at 14400bps this would take 1.6 hours

      so for G*ds sake, JUST USE THE SERIAL PORT

      I'd understand if he was talking about a terabyte via serial but 10 megabytes...

      But the real important question is: what to do with the salvaged data? If he'd want to post them online he might get in seriously shark-infected legal waters. Not everything I'd have posted in a BBS with a defined usergroup I gave permission to put on the internet without access control.

    3. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by nurb432 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I agree, I'm sure its minimal to read Xenix file formats for the data, but the risks of old components giving up the ghost are far to high. If it works now, just do it via serial port and be patient. Only if its in the process of dying would i take it apart.

      As an aside, i find it an odd odd claim that the 'first multi user BBS' would be on a 8086... Considering i did it on an 8bit machine long before the ix86 was on the market, and on a VAX before that. ( and wasn't chicago's Z80 powered cbbs multi line at one point? ) Still, sounds like it is worthy of saving for the sake of history, but it's not as special as you might think....

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    4. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by HBI · · Score: 2, Informative

      I would be shocked if you couldn't get 38400 or even 57600 out of a null modem cable. Assuming a buffered chip at the receiving end - 16550 type.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    5. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by HBI · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would expect a 16450 in something with an IDE drive. Though the smallest IDE drive I ever saw was a 40MB one. 10MB makes me think MFM. So you might be right on that.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    6. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by budgenator · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Xenix was a 16 bit Unix variant pretty much SRVR3 style,
      SCSI or IDE but not both on the same system,
      Bourne shell but no Bash,
      probably TCL but no Perl,
      more but not less are the things that pop inti my mind.
      The file system topography is a nightmare of symlinks and the interesting user files are probably in /usr rather in /home or /srv.
      The first thing I would try is to set up a serial link between the two machines and tar the filesystem pipe it through the serial port to the Linux box and capture it to a file there or multi-volume
        to the floppy disk, then just un-tar it and have fun on the copy; if that didn't work I get serious and dd the whole disk through the serial port. last resort would be to remove the hard-drive and try to mount -txenix it on a linux box.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    7. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by Ambient+Sheep · · Score: 5, Informative

      A 16550 in the early 1980s? I'm sorry, but I think not.

      I wrote a lot of serial comms drivers back in those days, and I don't think I even /heard/ of a 16550 until the very late 80s. First one I actually met was probably in my brand new 486DX33 box I got in 1992, although to be honest I don't remember for sure. I didn't code for one until about 1994, and that was on an embedded system, as you still couldn't guarantee that all PCs would have them rather than 16450s or even 8250s.

      Also bear in mind that the original 16550s were broken so you couldn't use the FIFO feature (which was the whole point of the thing) properly; that wasn't fixed until the 16550A came along.

    8. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How on earth is pointing out that the 16550 didn't exist in the early 1980s deserving of a "Troll" mod?

      First one I've ever got in all the years I've been here, so I'm utterly confused.

      Ah, don't worry about it - it's most likely some jealous high-UID kid with mod points waving his iPenis around - there's a lot of them on Slashdot these days, you know. They think that since they've never known a world without the Internet, anything that came before is irrelevant, and anyone that has first-hand knowledge that has the temerity to post about it is an "old fart" that needs to be quashed.

      That's why I pretty much post as AC here these days - the general lack of "nerdiness" on their part makes it almost certain that anything I'd say would get at least one downmod, should I write about anything of which they have no knowledge or that challenges their prejudices.

    9. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by j741 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yup. 2-3 hours is about right.

      Data volume for 10MB = 83886080 bits
            10 Mega Bytes * (1024 Kilo Bytes / Mega Byte) * (1024 Bytes / Kilo Byte) * (8 bits / Byte)

      Time to transfer 83886080 bits at 9600bps = just over 2.4 hours
            83886080 bits / (9600 bits/second) / (60 seconds/minute) / (60 minutes/hour)

      --
      - James
    10. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by BitterOak · · Score: 4, Informative

      exactly, 10mb at 9600bps will take only 2-3 hours.

      Yep, and since your computer is a 586, there's a good chance the serial port will do 192kbps which even faster still. If you want to transfer binary files, I'd suggest using the zmodem protocol. Since your Xenix system was running a BBS, it almost certainly has software installed that will do zmodem file transfers.

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    11. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by djlowe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then there's the matter of making a cable for X-on/X-off... and the plucky archivist can proceed

      Wow, that brings back memories... since X-on/X-off is software flow control over serial communications, making a cable was a simple matter: Tie together the hardware flow control transmit/request signal lines together and loop them back to the receive lines on the same connector and so ensure that they'd always be high on each side... and then let the software handle it from there...

      I still have a soldering iron and solder in my service toolkit, which is in the trunk of my car - but I haven't used them in more than 15 years at this point. Hell, I can't remember the last time I used anything from my toolkit except for screwdrivers and needlenose pliers, but I still keep it around, just in case... I still have a serial breakout box, too *grin*

      I did service for a customer that had an Altos system, and after they remodeled their offices, had to add some terminals in the reception area. They insisted that it be neat, and so, I ran the cable into the walls, mounted old work boxes to the sheetrock (measuring everything so that they lined up with the electical outlets, of course), and then soldered DB-25 female connectors onto the cable, mounting them to stainless steel wallplates that had DB-25 cutouts... labeled the wallplates, and the cables on the far end, then made "patch cables" to go from the wallplates to the terminals. Neat, clean - and I had a blast doing it.

      And from that point on, I always tried to make any cabling I installed not only work properly, but be as neat as possible and documented as well.

      Regards,

      dj

    12. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by yuhong · · Score: 2, Informative

      More precisely, I remember reading that the 16550 was introduced with IBM PS/2s in 1987. At first the FIFO was buggy, but NS soon released a 'A' version which was good. The 16450 was used in the IBM PC/AT, and the 8250 was used in the original PC.

    13. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by igb · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As a minor point, SVR2 and SVR3 machines can't have symlinks, as the filesystem didn't include the functionality. What's referred to as `ufs' on, say, a Sun today is the Berkeley ffs or fffs; ufs in the context of Xenix is what's now sometimes called s5fs, which is a thinly veiled version of the Sixth and Seventh edition filesystem. I think there were 512 byte and 1 kilobyte versions. The correct way to shift the data off will be with uucp. SVR2 and SVR3 both shipped with HoneyDanBer uucp, and it'll interwork with modern equivalents; g protocol is the best bet. cpio and uucp should be enough to move the data.

    14. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by dullnev · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yep, and since your computer is a 586.....

      The model is 586, but that's not the cpu in the beast. I know it's asking a lot but how about RTFA? Or even taking note of the date - late 80s. And when was the Pentium cpu (aka 586) first manufactured? 1993. Turn in your geek card fool!

    15. Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way. by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Altos 586 was called that because it has five user ports and the processor is an 8086.

      Yes. Microsoft produced a version of Unix that supports 5 users in 512K of memory. That's how much my Altos 586 has.

      I am elated to see the Altos 586 featured in an article on Slashdot.

  2. Use the serial port ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    ... I mean, why not? Yeah, it's slow, but you only have 10 meg of data!

    1. Re:Use the serial port ... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Given the speed of hard disks from that era, I'd imagine that removing the disk, putting it in another machine, copying it, and then putting it back would take about as long as copying via the serial port. It's also worth noting that the machine has 5 serial ports, so if you're really in a hurry you can probably dump different bits of the filesystem in parallel over several ports (if the disk will handle that concurrent reads even at serial line speed).

      10MB is a really small amount of data to copy via a serial link. Back in the early '90s I had an 8086 PC with 5.25" disks and my father had a 386 laptop which took 3.5" disks. The only way of copying games between them was via a serial link. The 8086 machine could handle 115Kb/s, meaning that the entire transfer would only take about 10 minutes. We usually ran it at about half this speed though, because our crappy serial cable didn't have the hardware error checking pins connected, so we needed to use software parity and reducing the line speed made things more reliable.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Use the serial port ... by farrellj · · Score: 3, Informative

      Geepers, people...a non-Compaq 8086 system from that era would almost certainly have an ST-506 interface hard drive, not IDE! Those old hard drives were built like tanks, and tend to keep their data. If you can't get the system running, you can probably dig up some old 286 system, or even a *Pentium* system, and plug an 8 or 16 ST506 hard drive card, like the old Western Digital W8006, and access the data that way. A ST-506 drive will have three cables connecting it...one for power, one (the fat ribbon cable) for control, and the last one (skinny ribbon cable) for data. JUST MAKE SURE THAT THE PIN 1s LINED UP OTHERWISE YOU CAN BLOW THE DRIVE, CONTROLLER, AND MAYBE EVEN THE COMPUTER. If the cable is not "keyed", that is, has a vertical piece of plastic to make sure pin 1 connects to pin 1 on the edge connector, you have to figure out which is pin 1 on the cable...If it is a grey cable with a red strip on one side, that is pin 1, which should connect to the edge connector side that has the notch in it. If you have a braided, multi-color cable...sorry, you will have to figure it out yourself.

      Of course, if you really want to be paranoid, and have the money, contact an old hard drive recovery company like On-Track, and they should be able to hoover all of the data off for you, and give it to you in an easy to read format.

      ttyl
                Farrell

      --
      CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
  3. cu by jzu · · Score: 2, Informative
    UUCP had a command called cu (call up) which is what you need. From "apt-cache show cu" on Debian/Ubuntu:

    The cu command is used to call up another system and act as a dial in terminal. It can also do simple file transfers with no error checking. cu is part of the UUCP source but has been split into its own package because it can be useful even if you do not do uucp.

    1. Re:cu by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Informative

      He needs to use uucp, not cu. UUCP stands for "Unix to Unix Copy" and it means exactly what it says. Yes, there is a uucp command in the UUCP package.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    2. Re:cu by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Informative

      There is a pretty good chance that kermit is available for that system. I would go with kermit file transfers over uucp any day it being easier to set up, has decent error detection and better feedback for the average user.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    3. Re:cu by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's Xenix. Ancient Xenix. Kermit wasn't commercial software, it was (and is) freeware. (http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/) Finding a way to compile and transfer Kermit to such an ancient system would take some serious archeological research, and some luck, because I certainly wouldn't expect to find it in Xenix from the days when Microsoft published it.

      Given that it's only 10 Megabytes, "cu" or "uucp" it over the serial port twice and compare the results. Then, when you're entirely confident, consider using your controller in a newer system to do a modern Linux or UNIX "dd" of the entire disk image. I'd be fascinated to know what filesystem that ancient OS used, and if there are drivers available in a modern Linux to actually read it directly. Perhaps someone here or on an old Xenix support group would know.

      There's also an odd source of SCO expertise that may be helpful, since SCO took over Xenix: the forums over at www.groklaw.net.

    4. Re:cu by brusk · · Score: 4, Informative

      Fairly recent Xenix binaries of Kermit exist: http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ck80binaries.html#sco

      --
      .sig withheld by request
    5. Re:cu by bhtooefr · · Score: 2, Informative

      Except it's early 80's (1983,) and it appears to be Version 7.

      Which is Ancient Unix, although barely.

  4. UUCP by John+Hasler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It'll take a few hours at 9600 baud. It's your best bet. Let it run over night and the job is done.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  5. audio by nadaou · · Score: 4, Insightful

    if the thing has a pc speaker you can (with a bit of work) and a noisy export via modulated audio.

    of course if you have access to a serial port controller that's easily the simplest method.

    --
    ~.~
    I'm a peripheral visionary.
    1. Re:audio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      if the thing has a pc speaker you can (with a bit of work) and a noisy export via modulated audio.

      Alternatively, he could uuencode all the data, cat it to tty, take photos of the monitor and then OCR it.

      of course if you have access to a serial port controller that's easily the simplest method.

      Let's be realistic -- where's the fun in doing it like that?

  6. yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Xenix used their "sco xenix" filesystem. The Xenix filesystem is supported under the mount utility in modern 2.6 linux kernels
    by Anonymous Coward

  7. NO DISASSEMBLE ALTOS! by NNKK · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously, don't go there, not until you get the data off via the serial port (or flatly establish that you _can't_).

    You are dealing with a system that is lucky to be functional _at all_ after 25+ years, and presumably got heavy use while it was active. Corrosion, brittle plastics, dust worked into dangerous areas, etc..

    If it's working now, taking it apart stands a good chance of breaking something that is difficult or impossible to fully repair, and you don't want to go there until the information is preserved.

    1. Re:NO DISASSEMBLE ALTOS! by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hard drives almost always die due to bearing failure at this age, more specifically, lubricants turning to glue essentially.

      If that hasn't happened, he's probably pretty safe, its probably all gone!

      Either way, removing the drive to put in something else most certainly increases the chances of problems, and while unlikely, the Xenix driver in Linux may have some quirks dealing with an FS that old. The Xenix driver certainly isn't one of the more well tested fs drivers.

      With what really is an archological find from a geek perspective, I wouldn't take any risks at all, and like everyone else suggests, if the system is bootable, serial it off FIRST, as an image if at all possible. Verify the image is valid and consistent on a Linux machine before you do anything else to the original hardware.

      What actually hasn't been hit on yet and to me is a big one ... if it boots, don't turn the damn thing off!

      Get some of the hard disk lube moving around, or start working some dry capacitors and you're likely not to have a high number of boots left, especially if this thing has been sitting for an extended period of time.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  8. Re:No Removable Media? by NNKK · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This assumes that a 25-year-old 5.25" floppy drive still works, not to mention that the floppies are actually physically and/or track-compatible with anything he might have around. Both may be quite a leap.

  9. Serial port. by mrbill1234 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hmm, well 'Xenix' is actually an old SCO product which SCO originally bought off Microsoft, but it was then licensed to several other vendors - but as has been said here, your best bet is the serial port. Either use UUCP, or if you have a compiler on the host - compile up a simple xmodem/ymodem/zmodem binary and transfer like that. Worst case scenario, tar up all the data, compress it (it would have old style unix compress -.Z), uuencode it (if you don't have uuencode, you can download it -it's just a shell script I recall), split it up into chunks, then just cat each individual chunk onto another host and reverse the process to decode it all back into a tar file. You might want to checksum each bit too (sum should be on old Xenix systems).

    I think removing the disk and mounting it on another host should be your absolute last resort.

    1. Re:Serial port. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hmm, well 'Xenix' is actually an old SCO product which SCO originally bought off Microsoft

      Not exactly. Microsoft bought the code from AT&T then hired SCO to port it to 16-bit systems. SCO did the development under contract and Microsoft did the marketing.

      If it runs Xenix 3 or later, it supports FAT, so copying to a floppy might be an option (if you have another machine with a 5.25" disk drive.

      Compress is probably not worth bothering with. It's a 10MHz 8086. The time taken to compress the files is likely to be more than the time saved copying them.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  10. Make a disk image by jdimpson · · Score: 2, Informative

    If the system isn't bootable, and you have the right drive controller, carefully connect the old drive to a new system and use something like "ddrescue" ( http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Ddrescue) or "dd_rescue" ( http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Dd_rescue) to take a disk image. Both those programs try to recover from bad blocks, whereas standard dd usually will error out. (Personally, I'd make an image even if the system is bootable.)

    With the disk image extracted, you can pack the hardware away or do whatever with it. Then you can focus on finding (or writing) tools to read the disk image. If you find that there is a Linux filesystem driver, you can use the loopback behaviour (see the man pages for "mount" or "losetup") to treat the disk image as if it were a drive. If you don't find a driver, perhaps you'll find some specialty command-line tools that can extract information, or documentation to write your own. At worst, you could use the "strings" command to read any text found on the image. Since you're working against an image, you can take your time, experiment with ad hoc techniques, make mistakes (remember to make backups), and try again and again.

  11. Altos 586 by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 5, Informative

    What a great machine. The Altos 586 was the first machine I used to run my BBS (which has run nonstop since 1988 and is still online today) before SCO Xenix and later Linux arrived on the scene. It was an insanely cool computer.

    Anyway, even if there were an operating system available today that is still capable of parsing the Xenix filesystem, you wouldn't be able to get to it because the disk is attached to the system I/O board using an ST506 controller. Good luck finding a modern computer with one of those in it.

    You're going to have to move that data off the machine the way we did it back in the days when an Altos was a modern computer. Plug a null modem cable into that serial port and use UUCP to get the data moved. Or if the machine has rzsz installed, you might be able to get away with using Zmodem instead.

    --
    Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
    1. Re:Altos 586 by sjames · · Score: 2, Informative

      Even if you could find a relic ST506 card, it would be ISA. You can't find that either. Then try to find a driver...

  12. Reading the disk will be tricky. by shippo · · Score: 2, Informative

    This takes me back....

    Firstly, I'm sure that there were never 10MB IDE drives. The drive will either be ST506, ESDI or possibly even SCSI.

    Secondly Xenix would create several filesystems within the Xenix partition, using its own separate partition table. As far as I'm aware no mechanism to read these tables was ever added to the Linux kernel.

    1. Re:Reading the disk will be tricky. by charlie · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ... However, as I remember from back when I worked at SCO (years before the name and some assets were sold to the lunatics from Utah), Xenix filesystem and partition table support was rolled into SCO UNIX SVR3.2/386. And Open Desktop. And ODT came with a proper working TCP/IP stack. It's probably overkill, but once you've tried using uucp to get the files off the BBS, you might want to pull the ST506 drive (presumably an MFM-encoded one, not RLL-encoded) and stick it into a shiny new 386 with, say, 4Mb of RAM and a 40Mb disk with SCO UNIX installed. That should enable you to mount the filesystems and export them via NFS. It's a lot of work, though.

  13. Re:No Removable Media? by Der+PC · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, the floppy drive has a higher probability of working than the hard drive, although it will need some cleaning :)

    The floppies can be anything... hard sector, soft sector... You'll have to verify it (xref the floppy mfg number to the manuals).

    Given patience, you may even make hard sector floppies from old softsector ones.

    The hard drive however is NOT an IDE drive. IDE wasn't designed until 1986, and wasn't widely marketed until a year or two later. The drive is either an MFM or RLL drive. Fifteen years ago you might have found an abundance of controllers that could handle these drives, but you'd still be hard pressed reading the data.

    I recommend that you get the Altos up and running, and transfer via the serial port to another machine. You should be able to get 9600 baud, and with any luck (although I'd doubt it) you might be able to push it to 19200.

    --
    This signature is DRM protected. By the DMCA, you are not allowed to counteract or oppose to it.
  14. Pre-March 1989 publications may be easier by davidwr · · Score: 4, Informative

    If the information was in a "public" forum, one visible with the access level generally granted to members of the general public, it's probably considered a "publication."

    If they were "published" prior to March 1, 1989 but not registered with the copyright office AND not marked (c) they might be in the public domain. See a lawyer.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Pre-March 1989 publications may be easier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If they were "published" prior to March 1, 1989 but not registered with the copyright office AND not marked (c) they might be in the public domain. See a lawyer.

      No need to bring a lawyer into this. Everything is still copyright unless explicitly put into the public domain. The Berne convention(s) went into effect 1971.

      Also, there's no longer any need to register or mark with a copyright notice to have copyright protection (see previous), though that does allow recovery of damages and more for infringment under US copyrght. SEE: www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html for more details.

      If the information was in a "public" forum, one visible with the access level generally granted to members of the general public, it's probably considered a "publication."

      Chancey at best, but generally true. It's considered "best fit" a la usenet. The most anyone upset about having their deathless prose made public in another venue is probably being able to have it removed from view- which would be the polite thing to do sans lawyer, anyway.

    2. Re:Pre-March 1989 publications may be easier by davidwr · · Score: 2, Informative

      No need to bring a lawyer into this. Everything is still copyright unless explicitly put into the public domain. The Berne convention(s) went into effect 1971.

      The Berne Convention went into effect in the United States in March 1989. I just assumed the BBS in question was US-based.

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  15. Not meant to be funny... by MrBandersnatch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Screendump.

    "WTF?"? Assuming most of the data is ASCII/ANSI, cat it to the screen, preferably with pagination (it will ease the conversion if pagination is used). Place a high res camera in front of the screen and photograph/video record the data then run the photos through OCR...voila! (of course if video is used you'll want to just grab 1 occurrence of each page...if you've just done a cat without pagination this is going to make the conversion a lot harder).

    Of course the above sounds stupid but with hardware that age you want to do everything possible to capture the data as fast as possible. Depending on how much data you're talking about you might be able to do the above faster than transferring the data via serial.

    Oopps, time for me to climb back into my box.

    1. Re:Not meant to be funny... by toygeek · · Score: 2, Funny

      If you're not sure how to do this, I suggest renting and watching "Firewall" with Harrison Ford. You just need an iPod and a fax machine to tear into. There's a full tutorial in the movie. Works like a charm every time! Oh, and you'll need some tape.

  16. UUCP info you need by Kjellander · · Score: 5, Informative

    Setting up UUCP on Xenix
    Setting up UUCP on Linux

    If you really want to try to read the disk it is probably UFS which you can read from Linux.

    Hope this helps.

    1. Re:UUCP info you need by tumutbound · · Score: 2, Informative

      If it's Xenix, then it probably predates UFS. I'd expect the original V7 UNIX file system.

  17. Is this worth it? by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The porn from that era just wasn't as good as you remember it to be. Perhaps you're better off with the good memories that you have. The reality can only diminish them. Leave the data on that old machine and you'll be happier.

    --
    Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
  18. My two cents by Ken+Hall · · Score: 2, Informative

    I worked on these way back when. I'm surprised it still works. I agree with the above, you have two options:

    1) tar up the whole filesystem (if it will fit), and use uucp to move it via serial port. Make a null-modem cable and ship it across. Be careful to get the flow control right. Some of the old machines had serial ports that couldn't keep up with 9600 baud, so needed RTS/CTS or DTR flow control to avoid overruns.

    2) It should have the ability to make FAT format floppies. Do it piecemeal, if you can find a 1.2 MB 5-1/4 drive for a PC anymore.

    The filesystem is XENIX format, not FAT. If I recall, it's similar to the original SVRX filesystem. It MIGHT mount under Linux, but I'd be more afraid of an incompatible controller frying the drive. I don't recall these machines used IDE, I could have sworn they predate IDE, and the drive would have been either the old Shugart interface, or some kind of SCSI. The Altos machines I used had either a 10MB or 40 MB Shugart, and those were the BIG sealed units. IDE didn't come in till 3-1/2" drives, and I believe the later Altos machines had at best 5-1/4 drives either ESDI or SCSI.

    1. Re:My two cents by KenSeymour · · Score: 2, Informative

      I worked on equipment of that vintage. It is possible it has mtools installed on it to read and write FAT
      floppy disks.

      You could create one big tar file, then use split to chop it into floppy sized pieces. Then the trick would be
      finding a 5 1/4 floppy drive and matching controller to plug into a modern machine.

      I had the dubious pleasure of working with Trusted Xenix, which resembled SELinux today. It required a '286 or above
      because it depended on 286 protected mode and took up about 12 MB on the hard drive.

      --
      "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them." -- Albert Einstein
  19. File systems were simpler back then by bradm · · Score: 4, Informative

    Ah, the Altos systems. 8800 series, then 486, then 586. They used up numbers years before Intel got to them (the Altos 486 had an Intel 80186 in it, and 4 serial ports). Often paired with Wyse terminals. Anybody else remember "business basic"?

    It's almost certainly an ST506 drive; you will be very hard pressed to connect it to a PCI era system; probably can only get as far as AT bus machine.

    In any case, if you do manage to image the drive, the filesystem will be based on either Unix version 7, Unix System V, or the Berkeley Fast File System. It wasn't until Linux rolled along that we started to seriously fork into lots of file system variants. It's most likely the basic System V file system, which is well documented, and pretty simple stuff.

    The posters above are correct, however. You really should try the serial port approach first. I'd go for cu over uucp - getting uucp running can be quite an exercise in itself. And you'll want either tar or cpio; probably tar, but watchout for version and format incompatibilities there as well.

    You can also just cat the data out a serial port, and capture it as a session log on the other end. That's likely to be the easiest solution, and perhaps more reliable than any other.

    You haven't said what the nature of the data is, but after this much time laying dormant, you are likely to have substantial challenges at the application level interpreting the data as well.

    1. Re:File systems were simpler back then by demonlapin · · Score: 2, Informative

      On the random chance this is not a troll, cat is the command in Unix to display the contents of one or more files. It can be redirected to output to anywhere you like, e.g. a serial port.

    2. Re:File systems were simpler back then by dotgain · · Score: 2, Funny
      Thanks for that. The other day I suggested to someone here he keeps a "/bin/cat swear jar" on his desk. Whenever you use /bin/cat for something other than concatenating files, but a dollar in the jar.

      His crime was cat *.txt | grep "somePhrase" and wanted to know he could report which file and line number the matches were found on. First suggestion was get rid of the damn cat!

  20. tar over serial? by ZorinLynx · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can use tar and serial ports.

    Once you get the systems connected via serial, you can do something like this on the Xenix box:

    tar cf /dev/serialdevice0 /home (or whatever directory you want to move)

    then on the Linux box on the other end:

    tar xpf /dev/ttyS0

    will unpack the data. Tar hasn't changed much in decades, and works very well through pipes like this. Good luck. :)

    1. Re:tar over serial? by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I agree, a tar pipe is the best way to go, but do a drive image, not the data itself first.

      Then do the data afterwords, just in case there are some sort of problem with the image.

      This is computer archeology essentially, doing your absolute best to maintain the original data in its exact form will result in the most history being saved.

      Then you can do other cool things like trying to get it to boot in emulators and suck to manipulate the system without the possibility of damaging the original device

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  21. Are you sure it's an IDE drive? More likely MFM by laing · · Score: 4, Informative
    As I recall, IDE drives first appeared with about 200MB of capacity. They replaced RLL drives which maxed out at about 140MB. Before RLL there was MFM (same electrical interface, different coding). If it's a 10MB drive, it's probably a Seagate ST506/412 (I had one on my CP/M box). You'll need an MFM controller in anything you hook it up to. You'll also need a BIOS that has a proper disk parameter table for the drive geometry. One problem that you're going to have is that all MFM controllers use ISA bus interfaces. (First there was ISA, then EISA, VLB, then PCI, then PCI-X and finally PCIe.) I haven't seen a computer manufactured with an ISA bus slot for well over 10 years.

    IMHO you should use the serial port to move whatever data you want moved. Your chances of success with other methods are low.

  22. Not all MFM controllers are compatible by linebackn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I worked with a lot of MFM (ST506 interface) drives back in the day, and from my experience it was very unlikely that different models of MFM controller cards could read the drives from one another. If I installed a newer MFM disk controller card in a machine or moved the drive to a different machine with a different MFM controller, I would almost always have to re-low level format the drive before I could even run DOS format. (And mine were just FAT16 so the file system was never the issue)

    So even if you have another MFM controller card, unless it is the exact same model of card it is unlikely that you could read sectors off of the drive. Their underlying low-level formats seemed to differ.

    I also actually had the pleasure of briefly using an older model Altos 8600. That model had a bunch of serial ports for dumb terminals, an 8 inch floppy drive and an *8 inch* 40 meg Quantum Q2040 hard drive. I still have the 8" Microsoft Xenix floppy disks.

  23. Another interesting way to skin this cat.. by mswhippingboy · · Score: 2, Informative

    You can try porting the entire system over to a virtual machine, using dd to copy the entire system, then booting it up in qemu... Here's a link to someone who's had success with this approach... http://virtuallyfun.blogspot.com/2007/05/running-xenix-on-qemu.html Good luck!

    --
    Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an oncoming train.
  24. no way! the best way is... by Kwirl · · Score: 3, Funny

    these people are all wrong...just take it to Best Buy! the Geek Squad could save the data for you fo' sure!

  25. Re:Xenix had tar by MrKaos · · Score: 2, Informative

    Oh... if I recall correctly, it also had compress, so you can probably tar | compress > /dev/serialportdevice

    Uh, you would have to uuencode it first, so

    tar | compress | uuencode > /dev/serialportdevice

    should work

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.