[sebhc] Archive disk images/formats

[Dwight K. Elvey]

>From: "Steven Parker" <sp11 at hotmail.com>
>
>Eric says:
>>Cool more disk images!  However, it looks like we've landed
>>on a generic (read "non-distinquishable") disk image format.
>>Even the extension is generic ".disk".
>
>I wanted to get stuff out there quickly to support Dave's work, and get the 
>collection started.
>
>>... how about a just a simple header ...
>
>Let's not rush it .. particularly not until we have an idea of what kind of 
>info we REALLY want.  I'm sure we'd want a bit more, like number of sides 
>and bytes per sector.  On the other hand, I'm still not sure any formats 
>exist that can't be identified purely by file size.  But it's worth more 
>investigation first.
>
>In the meantime, the pure data is what we get from the existing dump 
>utilities, and what Dave needed.
>
>I just added descriptions and a readme file to the archives to indicate that 
>the disk images (at the moment) are all pure data images of Single sided, 40 
>track, 10 sectors per track, 256 bytes per sector disks.

 The current .disk is compatable with my .img format. What ever
someone wants that could convey more information would be fine.
I like the thought that there be a human readble header. This
could be a combination human ASCII with a machine binary or the
Header fields could be defined so that a machine could read it
from the ASCII. Having tailers makes sense for binaries. This way
the size of the tailer could change over time as more info
was needed. If placed at the head, one would need a count to
skip over to find the actual image.
 There are good reasons why each of us would want to convert the
image to a particular format for particular purposes, locally.
Writing converters is usually trivial.
 We should agree on a standardized format for exchange. Any header
should have enough description in it that a computer could read
the header and be able to convert it to the desired format and
back. I think the header( tailer ) should be human as well as
machine readable.
Dwight


>
>>Hopefully, in the not too distant future, a much larger
>>integrated archive of software images will assemble itself,
>>and the H8/H89 images will be part of that.
>
>What are you anticipating having BESIDES H8/H89 disks?
>
>Jack says:
>>When things settle down on a share-able disk image format, I'll add some 
>>disks.
>
>Please don't wait .. I've never seen HDOS 3 myself!  I promise to convert 
>everything we have when we decide on another format.  I just don't want to 
>do it more than once!
>
>To help us in deciding on an eventual format, would everyone please post any 
>existing formats that you know of.  To start things off:
>
>H17:
>  1 side, 40 track, 10 sector, 256 byte (5 1/4 inch, hard sector)
>  1 side, 80 track, 10 sector, 256 byte (5 1/4 inch, hard sector)
>  2 side, 80 track, 10 sector, 256 byte (5 1/4 inch, hard sector)
>H37:
>  2 side, 40 track,  9 sector, 512 byte (5 1/4 inch)
>  2 side, 80 track, 15 sector, 512 byte (5 1/4 inch)
>H47:
>  1 side, 77 track, 26 sector, 128 byte (8 inch)
>
>Additions?  Corrections?
>
>- Steven
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! 
>http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
>
>--
>Delivered by the SEBHC Mailing List
>



--
Delivered by the SEBHC Mailing List