1 INFO-VAX	Mon, 19 Jun 2000	Volume 2000 : Issue 340       Contents:) Re: Changing tape density of Tz86 to Tz85 ( Re: CMU TCP/IP on a Vax VMS v7.x system?. Re: Disk taking itself offline during install? Re: FW: Fun VMS Facts? Re: Help re: 4000 500  Re: Hotmail  Re: Locked out... Please help ' Re: Pathworks ( AS v7.2a) vs MSDEV VC++ ( Re: Searching for  " in files using dcl.? Re: Storage Works / Snapshots / Maybe it's time to skip OpenVMS ' transferring files to/from vms systems?  Re: VAX on Intel?  Re: VAX on Intel?  Re: VAX on Intel?  Re: VAX on Intel?  Re: VAX on Intel?  Re: VAX on Intel?  Re: VAX on Intel?  Re: VAX on Intel?  Re: VAX on Intel?  Re: VAX on Intel?  Re: Vest problem Re: Vest problem Re: Vest problem Re: Vest problem  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 07:42:33 GMT 3 From: cornelius@eisner.decus.org (George Cornelius) 2 Subject: Re: Changing tape density of Tz86 to Tz85+ Message-ID: <Mec6jSpvckyd@eisner.decus.org>   c In article <035b01bfd5b8$8fdbaae0$020a0a0a@xile.realm>, "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.net> writes: 4 > Weiner, Howie <Howiew@ci.portland.or.unitedstates> > D >> I have a Tz86 tape drive connected to an infoserver 150 via SCSI.C >> I need to create a tape in Tz85 format. The manual mentions that A >> I can use the PARAMS utility to modify the DUP parameter named  >> FORCEDENSITY to TK85 format.  > + > You have a manual for a TF86, not a TZ86.  > N > The recommended procedure is to init the tape on a Tx85, or one of the newerJ > devices where you can specified the tape's density from the front panel. >  > -John  > wb8tyw@qsl.network.   F The TA867 apparently had an equivalent to the FORCEDENSITY setting via8 a switch on the controller card inside the cabinet.  See  E  http://eisner.decus.org/DECUServe/DECnotes/HARDWARE_HELP/1441.HTML .   E I suppose there is a chance there is an equivalent feature in a TZ86.    --8 George Cornelius              cornelius@eisner.decus.org0                               cornelius@mayo.edu   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 22:01:30 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> 1 Subject: Re: CMU TCP/IP on a Vax VMS v7.x system? , Message-ID: <394D7EF8.42FBC26A@videotron.ca>   cpcapeddler1 wrote:  > 
 > Friends, > I > Has anyone gotten CMUIP to work on a VAX v7.x system?  I have tried and G > it calls for some _70 object file that appearently is not included in I > the kit from CMU or isn't created correctly during the install process.   L Yes, I have found one copy on the net with an unofficial hack and recompiledJ to work on VMS 6 and higher, and it works on a Microvax II running VMS 7.2  J Can't remember where I picked it up, but when it starts up, it says it is O clive@baby.bedroom.gen.nz with version 6.6-5K (where the K stands for kludge !)    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 00:56:22 -0400 * From: David A Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>7 Subject: Re: Disk taking itself offline during install? - Message-ID: <394DA7F6.F87F5655@tsoft-inc.com>    David R Barnes wrote:  > F > On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 22:16:32 -0500 Bill Bradford <mrbill@MRBILL.NET>	 > writes: H > > I finally got media (and yes, the VMS Hobbyist license allows you to
 > > freelyE > > copy OS media from others), got the install started, and ran into  > > thisC > > problem.  Replaced the HD, and I still get the problem with the 
 > > second HD  > > as well. > >  > > Here's what happens: > > A > > * Enter name of drive holding the OpenVMS distribution media:  > > DKA400: 7 > > * Is the OpenVMS media ready to be mounted? [N] YES B > > %SYSTEM-I-MOUNTVER, DKA200: is offline.  Mount verification in
 > > progress.  > > B > > Or, the system will properly mount the CD-ROM drive/media, andD > > give me the DKA200: offline message while its extracting OpenVMS  > > library files, for instance. > > F > > Any suggestion of why this might be happening?  When it does, I'veB > > waited for up to 20 minutes before giving up and rebooting the > > box (via the power switch).  > >  > > BillF > I have experienced this on my own 2 VLC's AND my vaxstation 4000/60.G > From what I can determine, there is SOMETHING in the scsi firmware on K > these machines that does NOT like a NON-DEC drive , be it tape or disk(my J > 4000/60 complained the same way when I had a python dat attached and didI > the install).  The funny thing is, if I remove the non dec tape drive , E > the install will work fine.  In the case of the VLC where I tried a G > seagate drive, I removed it and bought a RZ26L for $50.00 instead.  I I > then installed the seagate in my 3100 and did an install to it , put it ; > back into the VLC and it was ok... figure that one out???  >  >                 David Barnes  L Interesting.  I previously said I used the Seagate drives with no problems. M I'll now ammend that to say that I used them in MicroVAX 3100 systems with no P problems, not VAXstations.  I'm sure all my VAXstations are using RZ25, RZ26, orM RZ28 drives, at least for the system disk.  I have used the non-DEC drives in P the VAXstation 4000 models 60 and 90 as data disks.  So, this may be the answer.  P Note that DSP drives should work as well as the RZ drives.  Same thing.  Haven't tested this.  L I've got some RZ25-E drives sitting around.  You could build on this, if youK don't have any other systems, then image backup to the target system disk.  A RZ26, DSP3105, and DSP3107 drives are going rather cheap on EBAY.    Dave   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com6 T-Soft, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 16:30:11 -0500 % From: Chris Scheers <asi@airmail.net>  Subject: Re: FW: Fun VMS Facts? O Message-ID: <2B760A94907CBD11.FF19BC7266FB7277.DD69A60E895A994A@lp.airnews.net>   ! steven.reece@quintiles.com wrote:  > Q > According to "VAX OpenVMS at 20" (1977-1997 ... and beyond) on pages 62 et seq, R > the announcement of clusters by Digital was in 1983, with local area VAXclustersR > in 1986.  This would put them at about v4.5.  The pages before (pp60/61 - VMS toO > OpenVMS: Major Releases) indicate that clusters shipped in v4, September 1984  > (around 40,000 licenses).   G If I remember correctly, LAVCs were introduced in VMS 4.5B.  Initially, E support may have been restricted to the VS2000s, but I don't remember  that for sure.  E FWIW: We had a VAX/780, CI780, HSC50, and RA60s and RA81s running VMS E 3.7.  The hardware was meant to be the basis of a cluster system, but H was delivered before the clustering software was released, so it ran 3.7 with several patches.   G ----------------------------------------------------------------------- $ Chris Scheers, Applied Synergy, Inc.  G 817-237-3360 (Voice)    817-237-3074 (Fax)    Internet: asi@airmail.net    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 21:22:50 -0500 ) From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.net>  Subject: Re: Help re: 4000 5007 Message-ID: <0ca401bfd995$49eaeab0$020a0a0a@xile.realm>   ' Pat <unixguyz@freewwweb.company> wrote:   G > I have registered in Canada and when my # becomes available to the US ? > counterpart supposedly I can get the license and order media.    Sounds good.  K > I can pick up 4 more of these reasonably but none have (or it looks like)  ever > had internal tapes or disks.  K A VAX 4000-500 is a reasonably high power VAX, the main reason that you may I be finding them cheap, is with out the letter "A" on the end of the model H they require "Enterprise" class licenses and the associated "Enterprise"" class priced maintenance contract.  G Those commercial licenses cost more than used VAX 4000-500As with their J associated transferable licenses.  But they are a good deal for a hobbyist$ that is able to find parts for them.  L > I have a dec cdrom to install but have to make a choice on internal dssi ? tapeJ > and disks or scsi external, is there any reason 2nd party scsi tapes and disks  > should not work?  J The DSSI bus is for DSSI devices only.  Do not attempt to put SCSI devicesL on a DSSI chain, no matter how similar they look.  Not compatable and damage
 could result.   D Third party SCSI devices have been found to work on the various SCSIH interfaces.  Not all work though.  For a SCSI CD-ROM to work, it must beK able to support 512 byte sectors.  I currently have a Panasonic KXL-D740 4X L CD-ROM connected to a KZQSA on a VAX 4000-500 and it works fine.  This modelK was sold as a refurbished PCMCIA CD-ROM add on for a wintel lap top.  There K was no mention of SCSI on the advertisement.  So as part of the deal I also  got a SCSI PCMCIA card.   H Used units are available, and if you search the archives of this list atG http://www.deja.com you can find references to other CD-ROM drives that H work, and the mystic rituals that allows third party SCSI devices to get along with VMS.   H In your search you will find out that SCSI is a collection of optionallyI implemented features and that neither of the two "S"s are for "standard".   L > They have 3100s. what I think are external dssi autoloader 8mm, tk50s, andF > varios bits and pieces but "NO" cabling and there seems to be littleL > documentation on dssi cables, I also had to make a power cable as they had lost > them.   G I do not know about 8mm, but there are no DSSI TK50 devices that I know B about.  There is an internal TZ30 drive that is SCSI and uses TK50F (CompacTape) cartridges, and an external TK50Z SCSI device.  All otherH TK50/70 use a special TKQ50 or TKQ70 controller when attached to a Q-BUS machine.  H I have been told that it is no longer possible to purchase new media for TK50 or TK70 drives.    I What ever widgets that you pick up for a hobby VMS system, it is probable H that you can find some one to trade or sell them with if you can not use them your self.     J I do not know about the availability of DSSI cables, but some one may haveK spares that they can dispose of.  Be aware that there are two types of ends  for them.  (I do not know why)  K > The main questions I would have so far is what are the M0 S1 S2 plugs for  onI > the power supply  (mods of some kind) and if I picked up another to try > > clustering what kind of cables to use and cost/availability.  D The "M0 S1 S2" plugs are for synchronizing the power up sequences ofI expansion boxes.  In the case of a cluster, you generally do not want the J expansion boxes to power off when you turn off a system box, so you do not use these plugs.  G This is the case for the systems I have, so I have nothing plugged into  them.   F > Can single ended scsi devices be attached to the UQSSP controllers ?  I You must first understand what a UQSSP controller is before that question  can be answered.  H A UQSSP controller just means that the boot rom recognizes it as certainL types of storage devices.  It does not mean that it supports a specific type7 of disk interconnect such as SCSI or DSSI, SDI, or MFM.   H The only Q-BUS to SCSI adaptors that I know of are single ended devices.K However I do not know of all of the possible Q-BUS SCSI widgets that exist.   E So to answer the question of if a specific UQSSP device can support a J singled ended SCSI device, one first must know what the specific card that is in the device.    -John  wb8tyw@qsl.network   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 19:15:59 -0400 % From: "John Vottero" <John@mvpsi.com>  Subject: Re: Hotmail* Message-ID: <8ijlaa$3mo$1@paxfeed.eni.net>  B It probably happened when they tried to switch from Solaris to NT!  7 "Arne Vajhj" <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> wrote in message # news:394BA97A.FFA2C827@gtech.com... 8 > The danish computerworld online told, that hotmail was2 > unavailable for a long period and that they lost > email for 330000 users.  > ' > Does anyone have details about that ?  > I > AFAIK then the Hotmail backend is on Solaris ! Maybe we have a new Ebay  > ???? >  > Arne   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 10:42:39 GMT = From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-) & Subject: Re: Locked out... Please help0 Message-ID: <009EBAE6.873B3CFC@SendSpamHere.ORG>  ~ In article <791C2856E8FDD211BAFB0008C759919591F95E@exchange01.govnet.gov.fj>, Nivlesh Chandra <NChandra001@itc.gov.fj> writes:K >Hi.. I have installed VMS 7.0 on a alpha system and was playing with it. I E >was locked out since I forgot my system password but then after some I >research was able to find out how to get in by booting in conversational @ >mode and then setting UAFALTERNATE to 1. And since there was noM >sysuafalt.dat file present I was able to get in. Now the problem is that the J >same thing has happenend again and this time I cannot use the above sinceK >there is a sysuafalt.dat file in the system. I tried setting the parameter J >startup when I rebooted using conversational mode to OPAO: but the system/ >gets stuck after giving me the following lines  > + >Error opening primary input file SYS$INPUT @ >Error in device name or inappropriate device type for operation  C Conversationally boot the machine and at the SYSBOOT> prompt enter:  SYSBOOT> SET/STARTUP OPA0: SYSBOOT> CONTINUE   B You'll eventually get a DCL prompt.  I suggest that you then issueB a $ SPAWN, as any errors at the first DCL prompt will kick you out and not let you back in.  * I believe the rest is outlined in the FAQ.  ? Be sure you use OPA0: and not OPAO: as in the text you provided  in the post.   --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 22:58:47 -0400 % From: JM <vmswiz@geonospamcities.com> 0 Subject: Re: Pathworks ( AS v7.2a) vs MSDEV VC++O Message-ID: <7E486A45F90F2C72.54170D068D1C7E47.0F2C97478A13712F@lp.airnews.net>    Larry D Bohan, Jr wrote: > 7 > Does anyone here, have users using the MSDEV VC++ IDE A > (any one of v4.x, 5.x, 6.x) on/against source files residing on + > Pathwork shares, (AS v7.2 in particular).   F Our experience is that ODS-5 drives and AS 7-2a fixes some application? problems, especially applications that wouldn't work on PW V5.    + ADP's PCpayroll application is one example.    			*JM*    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 10:48:44 GMT = From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-) 1 Subject: Re: Searching for  " in files using dcl. 0 Message-ID: <009EBAE7.60D6C79C@SendSpamHere.ORG>  r In article <D680D25E5D2BD411AC060008C7F37BC2095465@wt15.wt.tno.nl>, "Waard, D.G.A. de" <deWaard@WT.TNO.NL> writes: >Hello,  > ' >I have a question for you vms wizards:  > E >How can I locate the position of " (double quote)using dcl lexicals. * >Im trying to do this using the following: > . >a = f$locate(""",line) ; but this won't work. > & >Does anyone know a solution for this? >thanx    2 $ line :== "this line has ""double quotes"" in it" $ write sys$output line  $ dquote[0,8]=%x22 $ a= f$locate(dquote,line)
 $ sh sym a     >ps Im using Alpha VMS 7.2   Shouldn't matter...    --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 04:45:28 GMT * From: young_r@eisner.decus.org (Rob Young)H Subject: Re: Storage Works / Snapshots / Maybe it's time to skip OpenVMS+ Message-ID: <cVxVcTJMSKlp@eisner.decus.org>   r In article <05E9483E465FF40C.DBE5A72396AEDFFB.0693B6D86E224ECB@lp.airnews.net>, kuff@tessco.com (Hal Kuff) writes: >  > G >    What we're looking for is a snapahot via command files or API that G > allows us to only take users offline for 5 mins.... cloning a striped H > mirrorset would defeat the purpose....  Adding mirrors and taking themI > away to convert them to units for mounting would be clumsy and probably  > unscriptable >   A 	It would be scriptable using HSDSA but I believe that is for HSJ  	use only (pretty sure).  ; 	I went back and read your original post .. there is little  	detail here..  " 	Going to make a couple guesses.    - 		1)  You are using older database technology - 			(old but good) that allows FREEZING of the 
 			databases.w  8 		2)  You're not using Oracle as you can perform backups3 			online with that and there would be no downtime.w  < 		3)  Since you are spending now or shortly, you are looking4 			at an ESA1000 (or follow-on) using Fibre Channel.  > 	Yes, this can be done and in the timeframe you are looking atC 	via DCL if the above are true and you have a reasonable number of t 	volumes.  a  ; 	The FREEZE mentioned in 1) causes writes to be flushed if 0: 	it is what I think it is... drop us more info out here or 	drop me an email.   				Robe   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 19:27:56 GMTa! From: Beyonder <beyonder@vrx.net>P0 Subject: transferring files to/from vms systems?' Message-ID: <394D22AD.ADB89299@vrx.net>t  C    What's the easiest way given only serial connection access and a  regular PC? G please don't say pathworks, I don't have it. well, I do, but it's on myS4 alpha and I have no easy way to get it off of there.  H I was thinking kermit or rz/sz stuff, but the problem is I still have to
 get them ontoa6 the vms system in the first place. sort of a catch-22.  G Unless there is source code somewhere (I can ascii upload then compile) C RZ/SZ would be my preferred choice but I have no idea where to findh5 those any more. I haven't seem them in over 10 years.   E I was thinking of writing a basic program but I can't remember how to G READ a file one byte at a time. writing is no problem even if the filesaD get a bit long. ie: on the PC convert the files to ascii then uploadF them at 19200 then have a basic proggy that reads that and converts it back. very slow and painful.   ideas? suggestions?b   B.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 14:49:35 -0400u' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>o Subject: Re: VAX on Intel?( Message-ID: <8ij5cu$7ei$1@pyrite.mv.net>  6 Tim Shoppa <shoppa@trailing-edge.com> wrote in message+ news:394C8C51.3130A66F@trailing-edge.com...  > Bill Todd wrote: > >nK > > Hear, hear!  VMS is better-suited than any other platform to efficient,t6 > > reliable, available, scalable server environments. >h > I agree with you here. >  > >  Give it a decent LinuxdK > > environment for developers who aren't (at least initially) motivated to  > > learn a new platform >b > VMS is (was?)   ; From what people have said here, 'was' is the correct term.x  ;  Posix-compliant for many years now, and this hasn't filledw > all it was hoped to do.o  G From what people have said here and elsewhere, the problem was that the L POSIX compliance satisfied only the letter of the specification (so that VMSE could be considered for boiler-plate requirements that included POSIXlL compliance):  it did not perform well, was not sufficiently complete to makeK Unix people comfortable working in it, and was not well-integrated with thee native VMS environment.y  .   And there was actually a Posix standard thatF > the VMS developers could aim for.  What do they aim for in trying to  > provide a "Linux environment"?  J You'd have to ask someone better versed than I.  However, IBM is providingI such an environment on every system platform they ship (now on OS/390 viaeI its virtual machine facilities and S/390 natively, soon if not already oncH OS/400 and AIX; it started shipping Linux installed on all its NetfinityD IA32 servers a while ago), which likely will constitute a 'reference= implementation' if there isn't already one they're following.p   >mB > In my experience, "Linux environment" means "upgrade your kernelA > with the latest security patches every couple of months".  WhatN> > other desirable Linux-86 features should be imported to VMS?B > Oh, yeah, let's limit file sizes to 2 Gigabytes.  And let's have? > three or four different ways of documenting every program andhB > system call, some of which haven't been maintained for years and6 > in some cases are woefully (dangerously) inaccurate.  L Perhaps you think you're scoring debating points in some way, but you're not@ advancing the discussion.  A decent POSIX implemention (which isL well-defined and reportedly in development again anyway) forms the core of aG Linux environment; most of the rest is likely utility-level rather thanaL system-level work, but again you'd have to ask someone better versed than I.F The point is that there's nothing incompatible VMS design strengths inL creating a Linux facade, and a great deal to be gained (perhaps not for you,F but definitely for VMS as a more generally-viable system) by doing so.   >hF > I'm not saying Linux is bad, I'm just saying that there are a lot of@ > bad things and fundamental design flaws in it, as there are inD > most any Unix or other OS variant.  I'm very much against bringingD > these fundamental flaws into VMS - there's already enough criticalG > VMS system services and applications written in poor language choicespB > like C, and these have their own repercussions.  Look at the way8 > Digital is disavowing Year 2038 support in current VMS" > releases, for example.  In fact, > H >   http://www.openvms.digital.com/openvms/products/year-2000/2038b.html >a@ > indicates that there have already been outside problem reports1 > on Year 2038 issues in the VMS Security Server.l  J And this is C's fault, rather than the fault of whoever chose to write theF program in C *and* not handle dates more generally than the language'sF default mechanisms (so as to match the rest of the OS)?  Perhaps you'dI prefer that VMS not provide a C compiler to lessen the likelihood of such J occurrences - of course, if that had been true, VMS would likely no longer! be around to be discussed at all.a     Do we reallyJ > want all the other fundamental design flaws of Unix to be present in VMS > too?  J No, and there's no reason that VMS can't provide a better Unix environmentK than any Unix - save for the intransigence of people like you.  But my hopeeK is that such intransigence is based on ignorance rather than bigotry, sincea" in that case there's hope for VMS.   - bill   >( > Tim.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 14:49:11 -0400o- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>n Subject: Re: VAX on Intel?, Message-ID: <394D19A6.E14B3E41@videotron.ca>   Bill Todd wrote:K > Compaq needs to make a profit on the endeavor to justify it.  So far, youm4 > have produced no convincing evidence that it can.   M No, the real philosophical question is really: Compaq needs to prioritize the0H pushing of products which are more profitable than others. Unfortunatly,N Compaq is intent on pushing Bill Gates products which yield very little profit0 at the expense of much more profitable products.  J Even if VMS were priced competitively with W2K, I am convinced it would beN more profitable overall than selling a wintel box where all of the margin goes
 to Microsoft.D   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 15:08:37 -0400 ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>p Subject: Re: VAX on Intel?( Message-ID: <8ij6gh$88m$1@pyrite.mv.net>  8 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:394D19A6.E14B3E41@videotron.ca... > Bill Todd wrote:I > > Compaq needs to make a profit on the endeavor to justify it.  So far,u you05 > > have produced no convincing evidence that it can.n > K > No, the real philosophical question is really: Compaq needs to prioritizes theDJ > pushing of products which are more profitable than others. Unfortunatly,I > Compaq is intent on pushing Bill Gates products which yield very little: profit2 > at the expense of much more profitable products. > L > Even if VMS were priced competitively with W2K, I am convinced it would beK > more profitable overall than selling a wintel box where all of the margint goes > to Microsoft.o  I You miss the point:  it would not be profitable at all if none were sold,eH but would still cost Compaq a lot of money to develop/port, stock, train support for, ...   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 15:43:28 -0400e+ From: Tim Shoppa <shoppa@trailing-edge.com>	 Subject: Re: VAX on Intel?1 Message-ID: <394CEE20.2D46DF7C@trailing-edge.com>E   Bill Todd wrote: > 8 > Tim Shoppa <shoppa@trailing-edge.com> wrote in message- > news:394C8C51.3130A66F@trailing-edge.com...8 > > Bill Todd wrote: > > >  Give it a decent LinuxkM > > > environment for developers who aren't (at least initially) motivated to0 > > > learn a new platform1 > >  And there was actually a Posix standard that H > > the VMS developers could aim for.  What do they aim for in trying to" > > provide a "Linux environment"? > 1 > You'd have to ask someone better versed than I.   # You originally made the suggestion!    > > Do we reallyL > > want all the other fundamental design flaws of Unix to be present in VMS > > too? > L > No, and there's no reason that VMS can't provide a better Unix environmentM > than any Unix - save for the intransigence of people like you.  But my hope-M > is that such intransigence is based on ignorance rather than bigotry, sincem$ > in that case there's hope for VMS.  D I've been involved with several major projects where 80x86 Linux wasF removed from the candidate OS list because of the problems I mentioned> (the lack of documented calling standards for important systemD functions was bad, but the real killer was lack of support for files@ larger than 2 Gbytes).  Other Unix-like operating systems didn't= suffer from these problems - in one case we went with AIX, ina! the other case Tru64 on an Alpha.   C I don't think I'm exactly ignorant about Linux - I've built several D major user-interface products around Linux front ends.  I'd say thatB you're the one who needs some experience behind the wheel, writingA applications, that way you'd learn that there's a major amount of.> hype and a lot of vapor there.  As long as you're listening to> the media hype, you'll never learn about the fundamental flaws< which are in many applications fatal for Linux.  Linux is in? many ways still playing catch-up with the major commercial Unixs implementations.   Tim.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 18:04:49 -0500o% From: Chris Scheers <asi@airmail.net>  Subject: Re: VAX on Intel?O Message-ID: <B84D06F830C67EED.A8FCA75BBD995D9E.C7C81CAE89EEE341@lp.airnews.net>    Keith Brown wrote:  ? > I find myself agreeing with you on this Bill. Porting to IA32.@ > should not happen because IA32 will be dead in 3-5 years. IA64> > will cost more that Alpha and won't be as fast (according to4 > Compaq). So what would a port to Intel accomplish?  H I agree that a port to IA32 is probably not worthwhile, but I think that, a port to IA64 would definitely be worth it.  E Whether or not the IA64 hardware costs more or is slower doesn't makefD any difference.  The point is that the IA64 systems are going to getF sold and companies will have them in house.  In many cases, there will: be some excess IA64 systems available for experimentation.  E Right now, to get a company to try VMS, they have to go out and buy a-B VMS compatible system.  Procuring hardware is a major pain in mostG companies.  They just aren't going to do it unless a strong case can befE made for VMS.  They aren't going to make a strong case for VMS unless F they can get some experience on it.  They can't get some experience onE it unless they buy some VMS specific hardware.  It's a vicious cycle.y  H If there is a IA64 port of VMS, it makes it much easier to get your footE in the door since the company is likely to already have hardware theyeA can use to evaluate VMS.  It is not necessary to get approvals too2 purchase special hardware.  This breaks the cycle.  H Hopefully, once it can be demonstrated the VMS solves a problem that hasD been troublesome with platform X, then a purchase of a dedicated VMSE system can be approved.  (Or, if the IA64 platform works well enough, - run VMS there until an upgrade is necessary.)p  H The point of an IA64 port is not that it would be "better" than an AlphaG port.  Rather, an IA64 port would be more accessible and would gain VMS D entry into companies it could not get into otherwise, i.e., a larger
 user base.  G -----------------------------------------------------------------------p$ Chris Scheers, Applied Synergy, Inc.  G 817-237-3360 (Voice)    817-237-3074 (Fax)    Internet: asi@airmail.neta   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 20:33:59 -0400h- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>  Subject: Re: VAX on Intel?, Message-ID: <394D6A75.12A37D17@videotron.ca>   Chris Scheers wrote:G > Whether or not the IA64 hardware costs more or is slower doesn't make F > any difference.  The point is that the IA64 systems are going to get- > sold and companies will have them in house.f  N It is a darn shame that Compaq did not seize on the opportunity to nip IA64 inI the bud by pushing its Alpha big time. Since IA64 is so late and since it?J won't have great performance compared to the 8086, Alpha could have reallyL made itself THE prominent chip. But for as long as Compaq remains a slave to Microsoft, it won't happen.y   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 21:53:51 -0500 7 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net>m Subject: Re: VAX on Intel?- Message-ID: <394D8B3F.D92BF64F@earthlink.net>n   Bill Todd wrote: [Major snip]J > You asked what specific objections other people had to your proposal andM > what they thought ought to be done instead.  I've tried to answer, but it'su > not clear you want to listen.y >  > - bill  A Well, to me it's not clear that YOU are willing to understand theZC situation - you just keep paroting the same lines over and over anda over.-  D Not impressed by the numbers (.45*10^3 OpenVMS systems Vs. >200*10^3@ non-VMS systems)? Then you should seriously consider taking someH business courses focusing on marketing and market analysis (Arne's gonnaG blast me for that one). It's all in the numbers. ...or consider another % career where numbers are meaningless.r  E ...and yes, I _H_A_V_E_ made the case many, many times over, and will06 continue to do so. There's nothing "magical" about it.   Don't believe me?e  F Take a sabbatical from your full-time gig and go out and sell not lessC than 10 OpenVMS systems (new or used - doesn't matter). The biggestbE OpenVMS VARs in Chicago have not accomplished that in over a year andu half. Just ask 'em!v  E THEN see how you feel about price vs. margin. I believe you'll changecG your tune rather radically - and VERY quickly, after prospects tell youeH why you were knocked out of the running, even before the availability of applications was considered.  E Actually, I'd recommend that to ANYone reading this, especially Clair G Grant (who's been known to lurk on this newsgroup) and Richard MarcellohF (who is know NOT to lurk here). If I lack sufficient credibility, then0 perhaps folks will believe their own experience.  E Don't take my word (or anyone else's) for it! Please! Go out there in-  the market and satisfy yourself!   --   David J. Dachterai dba DJE Systems " http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board:+ http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 21:54:49 -050007 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net>r Subject: Re: VAX on Intel?- Message-ID: <394D8B79.FB31859F@earthlink.net>n   Bill Todd wrote: > : > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message( > news:394D19A6.E14B3E41@videotron.ca... > > Bill Todd wrote:K > > > Compaq needs to make a profit on the endeavor to justify it.  So far,  > youl7 > > > have produced no convincing evidence that it can.o > >AM > > No, the real philosophical question is really: Compaq needs to prioritize  > thetL > > pushing of products which are more profitable than others. Unfortunatly,K > > Compaq is intent on pushing Bill Gates products which yield very littlen > profit4 > > at the expense of much more profitable products. > >eN > > Even if VMS were priced competitively with W2K, I am convinced it would beM > > more profitable overall than selling a wintel box where all of the margini > goes > > to Microsoft.  > K > You miss the point:  it would not be profitable at all if none were sold,hJ > but would still cost Compaq a lot of money to develop/port, stock, train > support for, ... >  > - bill   Can you say, "Marketing"?    --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems " http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board:+ http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 01:30:21 -0400 ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>' Subject: Re: VAX on Intel?( Message-ID: <8ikats$cvg$1@pyrite.mv.net>  6 Tim Shoppa <shoppa@trailing-edge.com> wrote in message+ news:394CEE20.2D46DF7C@trailing-edge.com...n > Bill Todd wrote: > > : > > Tim Shoppa <shoppa@trailing-edge.com> wrote in message/ > > news:394C8C51.3130A66F@trailing-edge.com...t > > > Bill Todd wrote: > > > >  Give it a decent LinuxuL > > > > environment for developers who aren't (at least initially) motivated to > > > > learn a new platform3 > > >  And there was actually a Posix standard that6J > > > the VMS developers could aim for.  What do they aim for in trying to$ > > > provide a "Linux environment"? > >n3 > > You'd have to ask someone better versed than I.e >a% > You originally made the suggestion!  >g > > > Do we reallyJ > > > want all the other fundamental design flaws of Unix to be present in VMSe
 > > > too? > >,B > > No, and there's no reason that VMS can't provide a better Unix environmentoJ > > than any Unix - save for the intransigence of people like you.  But my hopeI > > is that such intransigence is based on ignorance rather than bigotry,e sincei& > > in that case there's hope for VMS. > F > I've been involved with several major projects where 80x86 Linux wasH > removed from the candidate OS list because of the problems I mentioned@ > (the lack of documented calling standards for important systemF > functions was bad, but the real killer was lack of support for filesB > larger than 2 Gbytes).  Other Unix-like operating systems didn't? > suffer from these problems - in one case we went with AIX, inl# > the other case Tru64 on an Alpha.e >gE > I don't think I'm exactly ignorant about Linux - I've built severaltF > major user-interface products around Linux front ends.  I'd say thatD > you're the one who needs some experience behind the wheel, writingC > applications, that way you'd learn that there's a major amount ofc@ > hype and a lot of vapor there.  As long as you're listening to@ > the media hype, you'll never learn about the fundamental flaws> > which are in many applications fatal for Linux.  Linux is inA > many ways still playing catch-up with the major commercial Unixn > implementations.  H As I said, I'll leave it to others to confirm or refute at least some ofL your perceptions.  My impression is that, while there may be deficiencies inG some Linux implementations and documentation, there is no impediment tohL creating an industrial-strength, well-documented Linux implementation.  IIRCL Tru64 and much of its commercial competition have committed to running LinuxI applications - though whether that means they'll run binaries on matchinguK hardware or recompiled sources I'm not sure, in addition to the IBM supportnK I've already described - and since much of that already exists, I'd suggestfJ that they have managed to address the kinds of concerns you've raised, and that Compaq can as well.  K For example, while perhaps the most common file system on Linux (ext2) doeseJ not support files exceeding 2 GB in size, this is an implementation ratherB than a design restriction:  the defined Linux *interface* supportsK 2**64-byte files (see llseek), so there's no impediment to creating a LinuxdD environment supporting such files.  If that's a major pillar of yourH argument, I'd say that argument needs re-examination.  And since a greatK many other system calls have on-line documentation, it's possible that yourA2 perceptions in that area are somewhat out of date.   - bill   >m > Tim.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 01:42:58 -0400-' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>- Subject: Re: VAX on Intel?( Message-ID: <8ikblf$d7n$1@pyrite.mv.net>  @ David J. Dachtera <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net> wrote in message' news:394D8B79.FB31859F@earthlink.net...1 > Bill Todd wrote: > >h< > > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message* > > news:394D19A6.E14B3E41@videotron.ca... > > > Bill Todd wrote:H > > > > Compaq needs to make a profit on the endeavor to justify it.  So far, > > you 9 > > > > have produced no convincing evidence that it can.  > > >oD > > > No, the real philosophical question is really: Compaq needs to
 prioritize > > then@ > > > pushing of products which are more profitable than others.
 Unfortunatly,.F > > > Compaq is intent on pushing Bill Gates products which yield very little
 > > profit6 > > > at the expense of much more profitable products. > > >sG > > > Even if VMS were priced competitively with W2K, I am convinced it- would beH > > > more profitable overall than selling a wintel box where all of the margin > > goes > > > to Microsoft.m > >jG > > You miss the point:  it would not be profitable at all if none were  sold,dL > > but would still cost Compaq a lot of money to develop/port, stock, train > > support for, ... > >t
 > > - bill >u > Can you say, "Marketing"?   I Leaving aside the very real issue of whether *Compaq* can say "Marketing" K (at least in any area related to VMS), it's entirely possible that the most I brilliant marketing efforts in the world couldn't move VMS in this marketmK segment.  While it's easy enough for you to assert that VMS would be viablemG there, you're not the one who gets to evaluate that possibility (or gets  fired if s/he decides unwisely).  I As I've said before, your personal enthusiasm is really no substitute foriH convincing evidence of several hundred thousand (as an absolute minimum)G other similarly-motivated VMS enthusiasts who just can't justify a DS10TG purchase but would jump at the chance to buy a less-expensive VMS on IAiL hardware.  Come back when you've gathered such evidence, or expect Compaq to$ continue to ignore your suggestions.   - bill   >n > -- > David J. Dachterat > dba DJE Systemsi$ > http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/ > < > Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board:- > http://home.earthlink.net/~djesys/vms/soho/R   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 15:03:13 -0500n% From: Chris Scheers <asi@airmail.net>l Subject: Re: Vest problem O Message-ID: <48560EFDD1F2F9A9.392AE1A538EBB070.048E2559F2B0F991@lp.airnews.net>o   Terry Marosites wrote:  
 > Hello All ,dN >              I am migrating from a VAX to a Alpha and I am trying to convertM > some .EXE files ,( that I don't have source code for ) using vest . Some ofoL > the programs fails the convert with a remark about the VMS version 1.1 . II > find it hard to believe the programs are that old. But in any case theylI > won't convert using vest, is there a min version that vest and convert?r  C AFAIK, VEST does not have support for VMSLIB, so executables linked-3 against VMSLIB under V3.x or earlier will not work.   D If anyone knows how to add support for VMSLIB to VEST, please let me; know.  I have a V3 executable that I would love to convert.   G I think that VEST may also have trouble with the earlier image headers,mB but running the images through PATCH usually converts the header.   
 Good luck!  G ----------------------------------------------------------------------- $ Chris Scheers, Applied Synergy, Inc.  G 817-237-3360 (Voice)    817-237-3074 (Fax)    Internet: asi@airmail.net:   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 13:05:04 GMTo9 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)e Subject: Re: Vest problemo+ Message-ID: <z33mvxLvCPf0@eisner.decus.org>    In article <1137A4A23A51D311B2D600105A1D5213019AEEA5@seantexch.unitedad.com>, Terry Marosites <TMarosites@unitedad.com> writes:     H >        I am migrating from a VAX to a Alpha and I am trying to convertM > some .EXE files ,( that I don't have source code for ) using vest . Some ofoL > the programs fails the convert with a remark about the VMS version 1.1 . II > find it hard to believe the programs are that old. But in any case theyiI > won't convert using vest, is there a min version that vest and convert?   = VEST was specifically built such that it cannot deal with theb= older image header format that was used prior to VMS V4.0. At = a US DECUS Symposium in 1990 or 1991 Dick Sites and other DEC ? folks asked a bunch of customers whether that was an acceptable0: tradeoff, and we all said yes.  (They asked a lot of other? questions also, related to the not-yet-announced Alpha system.)-  > Having learned a whole lot more about VEST and TIE since then,= I think that tradeoff was correct.  There is a lot of complexe> logic in VEST and TIE to work in many different circumstances,= and some of that could not have been accomplished if they hadl0 to spend the time taking care of pre-4.0 images.  9 I imagine they could have changed their mind if there hado; been customer complaints at the time, but that was 10 years : ago and the people who created VEST and TIE are presumably: all doing something else.  (Dick Sites even works for some other company.)r   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 20:59:06 -0500t) From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.net>o Subject: Re: Vest problemo/ Message-ID: <skqv759je7f140@corp.supernews.com>i  4 Chris Scheers <asi@airmail.network> wrote in messageI news:48560EFDD1F2F9A9.392AE1A538EBB070.048E2559F2B0F991@lp.airnews.net...e  E > AFAIK, VEST does not have support for VMSLIB, so executables linkedv5 > against VMSLIB under V3.x or earlier will not work.  >yF > If anyone knows how to add support for VMSLIB to VEST, please let me= > know.  I have a V3 executable that I would love to convert.l >oI > I think that VEST may also have trouble with the earlier image headers,$C > but running the images through PATCH usually converts the header.n  I You can try one of the dissassemblers on the FREEWARE CD-ROM and then use  the Macro-32 compiler.  K Of course it might be time to just rewrite the routines from their originall specifications.r   -Johne wb8tyw@qsl.network   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 23:09:59 -0400o% From: JM <vmswiz@geonospamcities.com>t Subject: Re: Vest problem O Message-ID: <33ECFA91404D76BD.7A7AB0C57A7C0000.765D5E1FFDFFF773@lp.airnews.net>o   > Terry Marosites wrote: >  > > Hello All ,oE > >   I am migrating from a VAX to a Alpha and I am trying to convertpH > > some .EXE files ,( that I don't have source code for ) using vest .   H One trick I used for some old subroutines that we didn't have source wasH to link them into a shareble image and then vest the shareable image. WeE had .obj's in an .olb, extract them, build a shareable image .exe andoH then vest it. Then you link your very fast native alpha code against theA slower vested subroutines. Good migration tool as you can link inhD replacement routines as you get time to rewrite without touching the9 shareable image. Ignore the "multipley defined" warnings.   : Don't know if this will help you get around your old code.   			*JM*m   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2000.340 ************************