Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
21
All of those OSX installers you tried, "see" they're on a non-native OS9 eMac and so the OS9 drivers option is simply not presented.

Yeah, that's exactly what I figured. Another approach I considered was to maybe try using the IdentityTool described here: http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?topic=2141.0
That might have done the trick and could be a new how-to technique, but the Box link on that thread is broken. Also, given the minor difference between my RevB emac and the one released 6 months earlier which IS native OS9 capable, isn't this something I could spoof using OF commands? I don't really need the answer to that now, but researching OF tricks was going to be my next attempt.
22
All of those OSX installers you tried, "see" they're on a non-native OS9 eMac and so the OS9 drivers option is simply not presented.
It's just one of the little fun things you get to overcome when you defy Apple's wisdom.
The "Install OS 9 Drivers" option can appear on my Power Mac G5 and Intel Mac running Tiger or Leopard. It might depend on the drive. I think it works at least for FireWire drives and disk images.
23
@vaccinemedia I was re-reading your update posts and wondered about the .hqx method you abandoned. Were you at one point getting an output patched ROM file with a .hqx extension?? And if so, what about then converting it to Mac binary format again (un-binhex the file). Shouldn't that result in a single, properly written ROM file?

Aaaaaahhhhhh! It's been a while since I used OS9 back in the day. I never recognised the .hqx extension so I never thought about using Stuffit Expander to expand the ROM. Instead I spent way too many hours with the separate files using ResEdit trying to make a full ROM again. Yes I'm assuming what you are suggesting may well work! The thing is... I abandoned the idea and instead decided to leave MorphOS out of the equation. The goal was to have as many operating systems on a brand new 128GB SSD using an IDE to M.2 adapter. Each additional OS install was removing the OS9 Drivers so I left that bit til last and left out MorphOS which was not playing nice with the multiboot setup at all.

I ended up with: OS9 / OS 10.4 (with classic) / OS 10.5 / Debian 12 / Adelie Linux / Lubuntu 16 Remix / OpenBSD 7.4

******** BTW! ********
I nearly forgot! You CAN partition a HD with OS9 drivers installed using a Tiger install CD using the terminal using a command like this:
diskutil partitonDisk /dev/disk0 OS9Drivers HFS+ macos9 35G JHFS+ macosx 35G

The above partitions the first HD with 2x 35GB partitions and installs OS9 drivers
24
Sometimes it's difficult to see the forest fir the trees…

The root of the problem is very simple and basic. All of those OSX installers you tried, "see" they're on a non-native OS9 eMac and so the OS9 drivers option is simply not presented.
It's just one of the little fun things you get to overcome when you defy Apple's wisdom.
25
Both the Wallstreet/PDQ and Lombard have CardBus controllers, whatever the name of the OF device is. I do not know whether they are electronically the same interface, but that would be likely.

The optical drive is PATA (well, technically it is ATAPI over ATA); the expansion bay also supports floppy drives (right?) and  batteries, and those are not ATA, so there are either additional pins or carried over another interface.

I believe the cardbus on the PDQ is a slightly different model number in OpenFirmware, as well. I have never quite figured out what all the system takes into account when choosing drivers - name, model, "compatible", etc. I would assume that a PCMCIA connected CF card in True IDE mode would work on just about anything without software drivers - it's just an ATA/IDE connection over the computer's PCI bus. I can reason that cardbus may expect drivers, even if it's dropping into the PCMCIA compatibility for the CF card adapter. I don't know, though. Either way, something is majorly different with how OpenFirmware handles the two because it will not boot off of the Lombard's card slot even if I try to force it.


The physical connections between the expansion bays and modules are different from Wallstreet/PDQ to Lombard/Pismo, not just the physical dimensions of the modules. Apple did not have a floppy drive for the latter, and I don't know if any third parties did. By looks alone, I'm assuming that these are only an ATAPI connection while the former may be some sort of SCSI bridge if it isn't just the pins for both floppies and ATAPI put together in one connector. I have only seen CD, DVD, hard drives, and Batteries (different connector in the same bay). I have read about Zip drives and VST SuperDisks, but I don't know if those were ever made for the Lombards and Pismos or just the Wallstreets and PDQs.

I'm going to disassemble my DVD drives a bit to take a look when I get home from work.

26
Facing a similar challenge with my rev.B 1Ghz eMac Combo (no native os 9), and coming to this thread a year late, certain steps were ambiguous to me but I found a solution and wanted to post a followup here to confirm and clarify for others who might be looking for help. . .

My setup is simple: eMac 1GHz combo drive, with a big HDD (500Gb)

My problem is the catch 22:
1. Mac OS9 Lives CD (for unsupported G4) boots fine, but Disk Setup cannot partition more than 130Mb of my big drive
and
2. No OSX install that I have found shows me the "Install OS9 Drivers" checkbox option in Disk Utility.

So I am stuck unable to take full advantage of the large drive, multi-partitioned for dual boot.

After reading a LOT of threads, it seems #2 comes up for people enough to acknowledge it. I understand the option should be there when selecting the whole drive (not a volume within) and that it must be done FIRST (i.e. "Initialize" FIRST as made so very clear above). However, there's just no initialize option in the OSX Disk Utility after trying multiple versions of OSX installs. Furthermore, every screenshot I ever see that includes the "Install OS9 Drivers" checkbox has it on the Partition tab. I have tried Panther, Tiger and Leopard disks (booting each from install discs) and for me at least, I have never seen the OS9 drivers option under any circumstance. Yes, even the "Use a Leopard Disc" advice failed in my case.

Poised to try using a Terminal and "diskutil partitionDisk /dev/disk0 OS9Drivers HFS+ macos9 120G. . ." command to force the drivers to install, I decided to try one last thing before that with the insight above: The MacOS9Lives CD boots and auto-launches the Drive Setup version 1.92 (even though the 9.22 image has the newer 2.1 version).

My solution:
Boot from the MacOS9Lives for Unsupported G4 disc. Close the auto-launched Drive Setup. Navigate to the CD and mount the .img disk image file that is used for installing OS9. Go into the mounted volume, find Utilities and open drive setup in there!

This version of Drive Setup let me properly initialize and partition my 500Gb drive. Of course, it installs the OS9 drivers and I was able to install OS9 on one of my partitions which boots fine, leaving the other partitioned volumes for OSX or whatever I want. Then, I booted from Tiger disc and installed OSX 10.4 on one of the other partitions--and I am off to the races!

Of course, I have disabled spotlight. It seems to default boot OSX, but holding ALT lets me select OS9 whenever I like. Dual Boot working.

This resolved my catch-22. I hope it works for others that are mystified by the missing checkbox for "Install OS9 Drivers" and confirms you are not going crazy! Others like you are not seeing the option either. This is real and it's very frustrating, but here is a workaround.
27
Both the Wallstreet/PDQ and Lombard have CardBus controllers, whatever the name of the OF device is. I do not know whether they are electronically the same interface, but that would be likely.

The optical drive is PATA (well, technically it is ATAPI over ATA); the expansion bay also supports floppy drives (right?) and  batteries, and those are not ATA, so there are either additional pins or carried over another interface.
28
Well, just as I said in the other thread, if you offer 'no brainer' unlimited access to all of your resources, this is what you might get in the end  ;)

@aBc, start watermarking your images.
If I really cared all that much about images that I post (and have posted) here, I would have already watermarked them (and possibly added copyright / trademark information as well) before posting them. To me, for the most part my images are quick tabletop grabshots intended to help or to illustrate certain things hopefully for the good of all. If some turn up in rather odd places like the last three examples posted above, that’s completely laughable and somewhat entertaining to me.

And if I honestly cared to legally pursue any copyright infringement or ownership rights in any court of law - concerning images that I do post to this site, well there is the… place, time and date stamp of this site for evidence. However such legal wranglings for me are simply not worth the time nor effort, really.

[Now my professional, original works might be another story entirely. But those are not posted here or elsewhere on the internet.]

Seems to me that the choice here to watermark or not, is up to the individual. Does it really need to be more complicated than that? I’m more concerned that this Forum receive a mention or reference for any posted images of mine (or of other members) possibly used elsewhere.


AND You are killing me Knez, instead of all my above keystrokes (while you were posting) I could've simply "Liked" your post above. So now I've posted this anyway! :P



Original image, circa 1982 (Before Photoshop!)
High resolution 40 x 60 digital output prints of this image,
available from the MacOS9Lives.com online gift shop.
(I am joking. No such gift shop exists, yet.) ::)
29
Re. forum.
It would be cool if we could edit our own content (attached pictures) without time limit.

I would love to add watermarks to my images attached to older posts so that they do not appear elswhere without proper reference. (see @aBc recent post in masochist thread)

See my answer in said thread :)
30
Editing posts retroactively is a bit sensitive. We've had issues here back in the days where angry users would edit every post they ever made, more or less destroying every thread they ever was involved in, hence the editing function is time restricted now. Not sure if we'd revert back to the old ways of doing so.

On the topic of resource copying or plagiarism, we've had more or less everything ever uploaded to Macintosh Garden stolen by Macintosh Repository which scrapes the entirety of the garden every week or so. Taking screenshots and everything and posting it with a edited upload link so it looks like the Repo is the original source. So I know how it feels to have your work stolen and re-branded as somebody else's.

The best thing to do is to inform people of the original source of the content and invite them to participate there (as in here). No watermark will ever be enough to solve the issue nowadays with "AI" around. And you can always crop out watermarks.

Just my two cents.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10