1 INFO-VAX	Mon, 10 Dec 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 686       Contents:- Re: a few ?'s for the VAXperts re 6k machines - Re: a few ?'s for the VAXperts re 6k machines - Re: a few ?'s for the VAXperts re 6k machines  Activity on list$ Re: Alpha vs. Itanic:  facts vs. FUD$ Re: Alpha vs. Itanic:  facts vs. FUD# RE: Alpha vs. Itanic: facts vs. FUD # Re: Alpha vs. Itanic: facts vs. FUD : ANNOUNCE: TechuDoc Now Available for OpenVMS VAX and Alpha Apache & protecting OSU scripts # Re: Apache & protecting OSU scripts " Re: Can't mount disk more details. Re: CNET OpenVMS Survey at 312= Compaq Ads - a ray of hope (Re: Compaq now a takeover target) A Re: Compaq Ads - a ray of hope (Re: Compaq now a takeover target) A Re: Compaq Ads - a ray of hope (Re: Compaq now a takeover target) A Re: Compaq Ads - a ray of hope (Re: Compaq now a takeover target)  Re: Compaq after merger-failure   Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target  Re: Compaq now a takeover target Re: Compilers and Alpha  Re: Compilers and Alpha  Re: Compilers and Alpha  Re: Compilers and Alpha  Crash Notification1 Current timetable for HP/CPQ shareholder voting ? 5 Re: Current timetable for HP/CPQ shareholder voting ? 5 Re: Current timetable for HP/CPQ shareholder voting ? 5 Re: Current timetable for HP/CPQ shareholder voting ? P different standards (was: RE: Compaq Can Survive -- Maybe Even Thrive-- Without  Re: disk shadowing* EDT limits (was: RE: RECALL does not work) Re: gnu tar for VMS  Re: gnu tar for VMS I Re: Here is your VMS alternative ... another patch for you windoze admins 4 Re: How to implement Login Fails for Open VMS on VAX: re: How to tell if foreign command (SET COMMAND) is known?" Re: HP Foundations - let them know" Re: HP Foundations - let them know" Re: HP Foundations - let them know" Re: HP Foundations - let them know Re: IBM VMS and Oracle Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com % Re: Installing ssh server on OpenVMS? ) Re: Is autogen needed for new added disks ) Re: Is autogen needed for new added disks ; Re: Is there a place to find VMS Source Listing CD mounted? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact? 3 Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?  LAT and DecNet phase V6 Looking for .CLD files for some standard VMS  commands: Re: Looking for .CLD files for some standard VMS  commands: Re: Looking for .CLD files for some standard VMS  commands: Re: Looking for .CLD files for some standard VMS  commands: Re: Looking for .CLD files for some standard VMS  commands: Re: Looking for .CLD files for some standard VMS  commands$ Re: manuals (was Linus' view on VMS)$ Re: manuals (was Linus' view on VMS)( Re: manuals (was RE: Linus' view on VMS)( RE: manuals (was RE: Linus' view on VMS)( Re: manuals (was RE: Linus' view on VMS)( Re: manuals (was RE: Linus' view on VMS)( RE: manuals (was RE: Linus' view on VMS)( Re: manuals (was RE: Linus' view on VMS)5 Merger still possible if Compaq disposes PC business? 9 Re: Merger still possible if Compaq disposes PC business? 3 Mistake alert (was Re: Compaq after merger-failure) H Re: New York City meeting - Porting OpenVMS to Itanium - you are invited NTP server with UCX 4.2  Re: NTP server with UCX 4.2 9 Re: Packard Foundation Tells Merger Urgers to "Paq it In" ! Re: Point at the end of Logicals? ! Re: Point at the end of Logicals?  Re: RECALL does not work Re: RECALL does not work- recursive $SETIMR ; Alpha:works / Vax:crashes = Troubleshooting the mailing list? - was: Re: Activity on list 5 Re: Tru64.org Flash Poll on Merger "Pearl Harbor Day" 5 Re: Tru64.org Flash Poll on Merger "Pearl Harbor Day" 5 Re: Tru64.org Flash Poll on Merger "Pearl Harbor Day"  Re: Unix for HELP ... Examples?  Re: Unix for HELP ... Examples?  Re: Unix for HELP ... Examples?  VAX/VMS simulator progress? Re: Writing a device driver: virtual/physical address questions   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:26:17 GMT 2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)6 Subject: Re: a few ?'s for the VAXperts re 6k machines1 Message-ID: <Jm5R7.361$BK1.6929@news.cpqcorp.net>   e In article <9uu2qi$pil$1@ronco.freenet.columbus.oh.us>, "Robert Schaefer" <rschaefe@gcfn.org> writes: 7 :My machine has processors from different sources, with M :different serial numbers and eeprom versions.  I know I can change them, and F :it boots just fine (aside form the error msg) as is, but is there anyM :advantage to one eeprom version or another?  Should I just upgrade them both ? :to the latest version, or is it tied to a hardware revision?     B   I'd use the most current version of the firmware, but there haveG   certainly been a few cases were new firmware requires a hardware ECO.   ? :Is anyone keeping an archive of the various eeprom versions?     @   Compaq generally only stocks the most current, but -- where it6   matters -- an archive copy can usually be retrieved.   :Also, will different . :class processors work in the same computer?    F   Not together.  Upgrades are often possible, but sometimes an upgradeI   will require a certain revision of an I/O controller or backplane, etc. D   (IIRC, one of the upper-end VAX 6000 series platforms had specificF   requirements in this area -- the VAX 6000 series model 500? upgrade B   had a minimum revision of the backplane required.  Again, IIRC.)   :As in if I pop two '400 cpus K :into my 6320 will I get a bastard 632420 with possibly only two processors ? :eligable to be the primary, or will I get a non-booting box?     H   Most Alpha systems require the same processor generation and the same D   MHz for correct operation of SMP.  Don't mix them, in other words.  B   The VAX 6000 model 400 processor modules are roughly double the B   performance of the model 300 processor modules -- 3.8 vs 7 VUPs.#   I'd retire the model 300 modules.    :AnotherL :sort-of related question-- is it possible to make a bit-identical image of,G :say, a TK70 tape; something like `dd' with unix?  I'd like to save the J :eeprom image I end up overwriting just to keep the bits from fading away.  C   There are dd ports around, and there are tapecopy tools and such.   M :One last question before I quit bugging you...  Will one hobbyist PAK boot a / :cluster, or will I need a PAK for each member?   A   You will will need to replicate every PAK in every license file D   present on each system, when you have multiple licensing databases   present within a cluster.   F   A list of questions would be easier to parse and to respond to than A   is a stream-of-conciousness paragraph.  No offense is intended.   N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:52:06 -0000 = From: "David McKenzie" <david.mckenzie@spitfire0.demon.co.uk> 6 Subject: Re: a few ?'s for the VAXperts re 6k machinesB Message-ID: <1008010348.16304.0.nnrp-01.c1edba74@news.demon.co.uk>   To add to Hoff's comments   L IIRC the backplane changed between the 6400 and the 6500. This was about theL same time the XMICD? changed from loading the firmware from to to loading it from ROM   -- David McKenzie Charon Consulting (Australia) ( david.mckenzie@mig.spitfire0.demon.co.uk   (But who wants a Mig?)   ! ? "Hoff Hoffman" <hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam> wrote in message + news:Jm5R7.361$BK1.6929@news.cpqcorp.net... K > In article <9uu2qi$pil$1@ronco.freenet.columbus.oh.us>, "Robert Schaefer"  <rschaefe@gcfn.org> writes: 9 > :My machine has processors from different sources, with K > :different serial numbers and eeprom versions.  I know I can change them,  and H > :it boots just fine (aside form the error msg) as is, but is there anyJ > :advantage to one eeprom version or another?  Should I just upgrade them both? > :to the latest version, or is it tied to a hardware revision?  > D >   I'd use the most current version of the firmware, but there haveI >   certainly been a few cases were new firmware requires a hardware ECO.  > ? > :Is anyone keeping an archive of the various eeprom versions?  > B >   Compaq generally only stocks the most current, but -- where it8 >   matters -- an archive copy can usually be retrieved. >  > :Also, will different . > :class processors work in the same computer? > H >   Not together.  Upgrades are often possible, but sometimes an upgradeK >   will require a certain revision of an I/O controller or backplane, etc. F >   (IIRC, one of the upper-end VAX 6000 series platforms had specificG >   requirements in this area -- the VAX 6000 series model 500? upgrade D >   had a minimum revision of the backplane required.  Again, IIRC.) >  > :As in if I pop two '400 cpus B > :into my 6320 will I get a bastard 632420 with possibly only two
 processors? > :eligable to be the primary, or will I get a non-booting box?  > I >   Most Alpha systems require the same processor generation and the same F >   MHz for correct operation of SMP.  Don't mix them, in other words. > C >   The VAX 6000 model 400 processor modules are roughly double the D >   performance of the model 300 processor modules -- 3.8 vs 7 VUPs.% >   I'd retire the model 300 modules.  > 
 > :AnotherJ > :sort-of related question-- is it possible to make a bit-identical image of, I > :say, a TK70 tape; something like `dd' with unix?  I'd like to save the L > :eeprom image I end up overwriting just to keep the bits from fading away. > E >   There are dd ports around, and there are tapecopy tools and such.  > H > :One last question before I quit bugging you...  Will one hobbyist PAK boot a1 > :cluster, or will I need a PAK for each member?  > C >   You will will need to replicate every PAK in every license file F >   present on each system, when you have multiple licensing databases >   present within a cluster.  > G >   A list of questions would be easier to parse and to respond to than C >   is a stream-of-conciousness paragraph.  No offense is intended.  > ( >  ---------------------------- #include' <rtfaq.h> ----------------------------- L >       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com, >  --------------------------- pure personal# opinion --------------------------- 1 >    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering  hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com >    ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:57:01 +0100 (MET) 9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> 6 Subject: Re: a few ?'s for the VAXperts re 6k machines; Message-ID: <01KBPR863WDK9138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>    > -- > David McKenzie > Charon Consulting (Australia) * > david.mckenzie@mig.spitfire0.demon.co.uk >  > (But who wants a Mig?)   Doesn't Larry Ellison have one?   G A note on your .sig separator:  As someone once pointed out to me, you  G should add a space to it, as some email softwire (elm?) look for "-- "  F (but not just "--") to denote the start of a signature block (I think @ there is an option to suppress the display of such or whatever).   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:55:35 +0100 ( From: "Bruin, J.M. de" <Bruin@WT.TNO.NL> Subject: Activity on list C Message-ID: <EC85E7391071D511AC140008C7F37BC24DECCA@wt15.wt.tno.nl>   D I haven't been getting any mails from this for a couple of days now.P I've taken a look at the comp.os.vms list on groups.google.com and there I see a bunch of postings.A It seems there has been a lack of mails to me since December 5th.   # Anyone suffering the same problems?    Mark  K --------------------------------------------------------------------------- H Mark de Bruin                                   Voice : +31 15 269 69 05H TNO Automotive                                  Fax   : +31 15 257 21 04K Crash Safety Centre Laboratories                GSM   : +31 653 44 21 45    G Innovations, Communication & Information        E-mail: bruin@wt.tno.nl 7 Room: GBS 1.1                                   URL   :  http://www.automotive.tno.nlI P.O. Box 6033                                           http://www.tno.nl  2600 JA Delft  The Netherlands     ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 08:14:54 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) - Subject: Re: Alpha vs. Itanic:  facts vs. FUD 3 Message-ID: <kpwSuY+tYw+i@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ` In article <9uqp8f$2m45$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:5 > In article <Vp2bIl+S4hMV@eisner.encompasserve.org>, 2 >  koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: > |>  M > |>    As I recall, it wasn't the hardware on PC's that was so unimpressive, K > |>    was was the so-called OS.  Good for running Leasure Suit Larry, but L > |>    who would seriously try to do real work?  Most PC's didn't even ship) > |>    with a useable disk backup media.  > |>   > J > Not meaning to defend MSDOS or anything, but given the technology of theI > day, what was wrong with floppies??  Worked fine for IBM on the SYS/34,  > SYS/36, etc. >   D    Anything that requires more than 2 media to do a full disk backup?    is not liekly to get automated, and therefor likely to fail.   +    That's from experience, not ivory tower.    ------------------------------   Date: 10 Dec 2001 17:42:07 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - Subject: Re: Alpha vs. Itanic:  facts vs. FUD + Message-ID: <9v2s5f$hnu$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>   3 In article <kpwSuY+tYw+i@eisner.encompasserve.org>, 0  koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:c |> In article <9uqp8f$2m45$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: 8 |> > In article <Vp2bIl+S4hMV@eisner.encompasserve.org>,5 |> >  koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:  |> > |> P |> > |>    As I recall, it wasn't the hardware on PC's that was so unimpressive,N |> > |>    was was the so-called OS.  Good for running Leasure Suit Larry, butO |> > |>    who would seriously try to do real work?  Most PC's didn't even ship , |> > |>    with a useable disk backup media. |> > |>  |> >  M |> > Not meaning to defend MSDOS or anything, but given the technology of the L |> > day, what was wrong with floppies??  Worked fine for IBM on the SYS/34, |> > SYS/36, etc.  |> >   |>  G |>    Anything that requires more than 2 media to do a full disk backup B |>    is not liekly to get automated, and therefor likely to fail.  H You've never seen any of the old IBM boxes with the 8" floppy cassettes,G have you??  Even here in the early days secretaries religiously (no punrG intended) ran FastBack with it's box of 70-80 floppies every day.  Like G I said, given the technology of the day, floppies worked.  Even I still D have boxes of 5.25" backup sets gathering dust in the attic. (Yes, IJ actually found two of them while looking for some old pictures last week.)   |> D. |>    That's from experience, not ivory tower.  A Not everybody who works in education today has spent their entireeA careers there.  And like it or not, the computing requirements ino? this department are no different than the requirements for most @ businesses.  The only difference is I have to accomplish it with> a much samller budget.  Tends to make one very imaginative and innovative.A   bill   -- oJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   t   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:27:07 -0500o* From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>, Subject: RE: Alpha vs. Itanic: facts vs. FUD- Message-ID: <0033000044311006000002L062*@MHS>p  H =0A> |>    As I recall, it wasn't the hardware on PC's that was so unim=	 pressive,a! > |>    was was the so-called OS.g  H But a good OS on top of marginal hardware doth not a robust system make= .n  H But on the other hand I do think that putting a video driver inside the=  H kernel (no OS names, please) should be grounds for involuntary commitme= nt as H it indicates that coding was done with a clear intent to endanger other= s. :^)    WWWebb   -----Original Message-----/ From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETo' Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 9:16 AMiB To: Webb, William W Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET, Subject: RE: Alpha vs. Itanic: facts vs. FUD    H In article <9uqp8f$2m45$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu = (Bill H Gunshannon) writes: > In article <Vp2bIl+S4hMV@eisner.encompasserve.org= >,2 >  koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: > |>H > |>    As I recall, it wasn't the hardware on PC's that was so unimpre= ssive,H > |>    was was the so-called OS.  Good for running Leasure Suit Larry,=  butH > |>    who would seriously try to do real work?  Most PC's didn't even=  ship ) > |>    with a useable disk backup media.  > |> >tH > Not meaning to defend MSDOS or anything, but given the technology of = thenH > day, what was wrong with floppies??  Worked fine for IBM on the SYS/3= 4, > SYS/36, etc. >i  D    Anything that requires more than 2 media to do a full disk backup?    is not liekly to get automated, and therefor likely to fail.   ,    That's from experience, not ivory tower.=   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:29:07 -0500y5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>u, Subject: Re: Alpha vs. Itanic: facts vs. FUD1 Message-ID: <Gz4R7.351$BK1.7066@news.cpqcorp.net>   B WILLIAM WEBB wrote in message <0033000044311006000002L062*@MHS>...  ? > |>    As I recall, it wasn't the hardware on PC's that was soh
 unimpressive, ! > |>    was was the so-called OS.u  H But a good OS on top of marginal hardware doth not a robust system make.  G But on the other hand I do think that putting a video driver inside the L kernel (no OS names, please) should be grounds for involuntary commitment asI it indicates that coding was done with a clear intent to endanger others.u :^)i    I Hmmm.  The GPX controller on VWS was almost entirely kernel mode code, ascJ was a significant part of the rest of the code.  The terminal emulator, in! fact ran at IPL 2 in kernel mode.   H You make choices based on what you are good at (the VWS developers, wereH almost without exception, system code developers), and what you need for performance.  G X11 has abysmal performance that has only been overcome by raw hardwaredJ performance, but I can point to more than a few "direct X" and "direct GL": attempts on X11 systems to achieve performance objectives.  K The original NT plan for GDI was chuckled at roundly by graphics types whenD first announcedtI (I was at the first NT developers conference where we told them they weres
 dreaming).   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:29:20 +0000n From: <info@techudoc.com>lC Subject: ANNOUNCE: TechuDoc Now Available for OpenVMS VAX and AlphaMA Message-ID: <1007997069.1017.0.nnrp-14.9e98bc8a@news.demon.co.uk>L  7   TechuDoc is now available for OpenVMS VAX and Alpha. s    %   Please see: http://www.techudoc.comf.   A free temporary trial license is available.    2   TechuDoc is a document preparation program that 5   will directly produce PDF Portable Document Format  6   documents. The documents are written, with the text 4   editor of your choice, to contain text and markup 2   code which label the structural elements of the 6   document, such as chapters, paragraphs, and tables. 6   That source file is then converted by TechuDoc into 1   a PDF document that can be reliably viewed and a   printed anywhere.   5   The document markup tags are of the form <keyword>  6   to start a keyword and </keyword> to end a keyword. 6   For example, <b> will start bold text and </b> will    end bold text.    2   TechuDoc supports all the standard built-in PDF 4   fonts plus the addition of New Century Schoolbook 8   as a built-in font type. Documents created with these 8   fonts are small and compact, as no embedded fonts are 9   required. In addition, you can specify any Adobe Type1 15   font and embed that font in your document, thereby a9   ensuring it will appear the same on any other system.     6   TechuDoc supports a wide range of operating systems 7   and platforms, which include; Windows 95/98/2000/NT, r6   Linux Intel and Alpha, Sun Solaris, and OpenVMS VAX    and Alpha.   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:27:57 GMTn3 From: "Tom Wade" <t.wade@vms.eurokom.ie.removespam>n( Subject: Apache & protecting OSU scripts- Message-ID: <1%0R7.2579$_3.10313@news.iol.ie>   
 Greetings,   I am running the following:t   OpenVMS V7.3
 Apache V1.1-1t
 Multinet 4.3Ar  E I am trying to get a CGI script that was working under OSU going with L Apache.  I can activate the script OK, but the bit I am having problems with is the protection.  K The documentation for Apache suggests that protection is activated on a perlB directory basis, but I only want to protect certain scripts in the4 WWW_ROOT:[BIN], not all of them.  How do I do this ?  H Also, can someone recommend a good book on Apache that is at least aware* that the OpenVMS operating system exists ?   Thanks     --L ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --L Tom Wade    | EMail: T.Wade@vms.eurokom.ie.removespam  (all domain mailers).G EuroKom     | X400:  g=tom;s=wade;o=eurokom;p=eurokom;a=eirmail400;c=ie & 30, Dale Rd | Tel:   +353 (1) 278-7878& Stillorgan  | Fax:   +353 (1) 278-78793 Co Dublin   | Disclaimer:  This is not a disclaimery@ Ireland     | Tip:         "Friends don't let friends do Unix !"   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 08:52:31 -0800( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski), Subject: Re: Apache & protecting OSU scripts= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0112100852.6898f319@posting.google.com>d  h "Tom Wade" <t.wade@vms.eurokom.ie.removespam> wrote in message news:<1%0R7.2579$_3.10313@news.iol.ie>... > Greetings, >  > I am running the following:  >  > OpenVMS V7.3 > Apache V1.1-1l > Multinet 4.3A  > G > I am trying to get a CGI script that was working under OSU going withmN > Apache.  I can activate the script OK, but the bit I am having problems with > is the protection. > M > The documentation for Apache suggests that protection is activated on a per.D > directory basis, but I only want to protect certain scripts in the6 > WWW_ROOT:[BIN], not all of them.  How do I do this ? > J > Also, can someone recommend a good book on Apache that is at least aware, > that the OpenVMS operating system exists ? >   E try setting up ACL's for each individual file you want to protect ...    ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 09:46:05 -0600 From: briggs@encompasserve.org+ Subject: Re: Can't mount disk more details. 3 Message-ID: <6kct0U8LNyEh@eisner.encompasserve.org>w  T In article <sStVH6Ue3nAp@eisner.encompasserve.org>, briggs@encompasserve.org writes:  @ I missed the increment on the loop variable in both loops in theB following procedure.  Thanks, Jan for catching that.  The OP wants* to see a fixed-up version.  So here it is.  > Since this code is likely to run quite slowly, I've also added5 some output so that you'll know it's actually workingD  @ It is still untested.  Make sure you have that /PHYSICAL backup.  = $! PATCH.COM -- patch block 'FH' on disk 'baddisk', replacing 1 $! the file attributes with something more seemlyC $c< $!	! Step 1:  Read the damaged header.  Just read a block at' $!	!          a time until we get theren0 $!	!	   We read FH blocks and remember the last.. $	IF F$TRNLNM("DISK") .NES. "" THEN CLOSE DISK $	OPEN DISK baddisk /READd	 $	LBN = 0wE $	WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "Retrieving damaged header for [000000]000000.DIR"t $ LOOP:2 $	READ DISK BLOCKn  $	IF LBN .EQ. FH THEN GOTO GOTIT $	LBN = LBN + 1c" $	IF LBN/500 * 500 .EQ. LBN THEN -1 	    WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "Scanning past block ", LBNe $	GOTO LOOPb $  $ GOTIT: $	CLOSE DISK $wB $!	Step 2:  Repair the header.  RMS record attributes are 32 bytes= $!	         starting at byte 20 (bit 160) in the file header.r4 $!		 The hex values below are cribbed from an intact $!		 000000.DIR on my system $! $	BLOCK[160,32] = %X02000802 $	BLOCK[192,32] = %X00070000 $	BLOCK[224,32] = %X00040000 $	BLOCK[256,32] = %X00000000 $	BLOCK[288,32] = %X00000200 $	BLOCK[320,32] = %X00000000 $	BLOCK[352,32] = %X00000000 $	BLOCK[384,32] = %X00000000 s $sB $!	! Step 2:  Reposition at the damaged header.  (Note that when IB $!	!          tested using WRITE /UPDATE, that wrote on the _next_? $!	!          record.  Hence this second sequential loop to getc+ $!	!          us positioned for the write). ) $!	!	   We read and discard FH - 1 blocks   $	OPEN DISK BADDISK /READ /WRITE	 $	LBN = 0o $	WRITE SYS$OUTPUT ""e- $	WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "Repositioning for update"s $ LOOP2: $	IF LBN .EQ. FH THEN GOTO DOITn $	READ DISK GARBAGEe $	LBN = LBN + 1m" $	IF LBN/500 * 500 .EQ. LBN THEN -1 	    WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "Scanning past block ", LBN) $	GOTO LOOP2 $ + $!	! Step 3:  Write over the damaged headerg $ DOIT:a $6 $	WRITE /SYMBOL DISK BLOCK $	CLOSE DISK $e $!	! And we're done. $	WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "Success" $	EXIT  
 	John Briggs	p   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:42:34 -0800 ' From: David Mathog <mathog@caltech.edu>,' Subject: Re: CNET OpenVMS Survey at 312d+ Message-ID: <3C14E5FA.20EA6A11@caltech.edu>h   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:d >3 > Whether CPQ or HWP monitors7 > this survey I haven't a clue  ; That's ok - neither do they.  (Referring to management, nots
 engineering.)    Regards,   David Mathog mathog@caltech.edu   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:59:47 -0500g& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>F Subject: Compaq Ads - a ray of hope (Re: Compaq now a takeover target)/ Message-ID: <u19fulsurkpre2@corp.supernews.com>i  ? "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in messagec# news:E8WQ7.335$7y.2026@rwcrnsc54... H > IBM (a company for whom I have a lot of respect) does an excellent job > marketing its products.c  H If the latest Compaq ad (rotting lettuce on the loading dock) is the wayI Compaq advertising is heading then Compaq finally gets it and is going tonJ start marketing it knows how to solve business problems.  They are finally8 marketing like IBM.  Lets hope this is not a fluke ad...   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:21:26 -0500O- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>-J Subject: Re: Compaq Ads - a ray of hope (Re: Compaq now a takeover target), Message-ID: <3C14EF14.D984EF3E@videotron.ca>   Jeff Killeen wrote:dJ > If the latest Compaq ad (rotting lettuce on the loading dock) is the wayK > Compaq advertising is heading then Compaq finally gets it and is going to L > start marketing it knows how to solve business problems.  They are finally: > marketing like IBM.  Lets hope this is not a fluke ad...  L There is one tiny problem with that ad. the Ipaq is really cute and has someN fancy attachements for it. However, until Compaq produces a ruggedized versionJ of it, it won't really cut it in the lettuce wharehouses to allow folks to access the data real-time.  M The few companies that do produce ruggedized devices have the market cornereds9 already because they have been there for many many years.e   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:54:17 +0100o1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>dJ Subject: Re: Compaq Ads - a ray of hope (Re: Compaq now a takeover target)5 Message-ID: <3C14F6C9.CA4E0918@swissonline.delete.ch>    Jeff Killeen wrote:f > A > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in messages% > news:E8WQ7.335$7y.2026@rwcrnsc54...sJ > > IBM (a company for whom I have a lot of respect) does an excellent job > > marketing its products.f > J > If the latest Compaq ad (rotting lettuce on the loading dock) is the wayK > Compaq advertising is heading then Compaq finally gets it and is going to L > start marketing it knows how to solve business problems.  They are finally: > marketing like IBM.  Lets hope this is not a fluke ad...  + Nor a subconscious message about Compaq ...n - rotting HEADS of lettuce ...? - product sitting on the loading dock unable to go anywhere ...   B Also I guess we could say that Compaq has its own little "business problem" right now  ;-)      Still, it is something ...   John McL   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:14:58 -05000& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>J Subject: Re: Compaq Ads - a ray of hope (Re: Compaq now a takeover target)/ Message-ID: <u19ut4o2s1rs62@corp.supernews.com>r  F True but I don't think the intended audience will notice.  It wasn't a commercial for iPaqs...)  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3C14EF14.D984EF3E@videotron.ca... > Jeff Killeen wrote: L > > If the latest Compaq ad (rotting lettuce on the loading dock) is the wayJ > > Compaq advertising is heading then Compaq finally gets it and is going toF > > start marketing it knows how to solve business problems.  They are finally>< > > marketing like IBM.  Lets hope this is not a fluke ad... > I > There is one tiny problem with that ad. the Ipaq is really cute and hasa someH > fancy attachements for it. However, until Compaq produces a ruggedized versionyL > of it, it won't really cut it in the lettuce wharehouses to allow folks to > access the data real-time. > F > The few companies that do produce ruggedized devices have the market cornered; > already because they have been there for many many years.l   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 08:35:32 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)n( Subject: Re: Compaq after merger-failure3 Message-ID: <oZXf6YTm2aCM@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  \ In article <3C125BCA.2416EB45@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: > 9 > Could Compaq really revive Tru64 with any credibility ?@ >   E    Doesn't Compaq already resell SCO?  With that and Linux, why wouldt"    they need a third UNIX for IPF?   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:31:32 -0500s& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targetu. Message-ID: <u19e9mif71139@corp.supernews.com>  7 "IsraelRT" <israelrt@optushome.com.au> wrote in message.2 news:lud51u4fpgt7g0m4nl0e26rcii7c45olog@4ax.com...  F > The takeover could even be by Dell if the anti-trust legislators can > be bought off .k  I Highly unlikely - Dell's business model would break very very badly if itiG tried to integrate Compaq into its operation.  Compaq and Dell had verytF different business models as PC vendors.  Compaq's model in theory wasI friendly towards the likes of Tandem and Digital.  Dell's model would notn  allow for that type of overhead.  6 Compaq's model is technology and now service value add  3 Dell's model is price and order execution value addh  L I do agree Compaq is a take over target but likely only for IBM or Sun.  SunH is unlikely because McNealy's ego would override the business advantage.L IBM will only make the play if they believe it would give the Linux strategy9 a big boost be controlling the IA32/IA64 server market...u   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:35:35 GMT 4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover target - Message-ID: <HS2R7.29887$Yy.335494@rwcrnsc53>c  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3C143C93.DB04A96B@videotron.ca... > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote: C > > Tru64 UNIX is a horse of a different color. Compaq has an, umm,t interesting & > > issue to deal with in this regard! >nE > Compaq has burned its bridges. Considering its past ineptude to fixs
 enterpriseE > image problems, is there any reason why we could expect winkler and:
 friends toE > change their tunes and make a convincing gesture to give tru64 somea > credibility again ?s >- > F > What about Winkler and friends starting to court Tru64 customers and pitchingG > them IA64 Windows solutions to replace their old legacy Tru64 stuff ?S  I Ummm, that would go over like the proverbial turd in a bunchbowl with the=E Tru64 crowd. They probably do not want to dumb down to a less capables	 platform.   J I seem to recall that Wes Melling tried to ram a similar strategy down theJ throats of the VMS user base. The "Affinity" organ transplant was rejected by the unwilling host!   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:37:56 GMTE4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targetC* Message-ID: <UU2R7.2349$7y.8832@rwcrnsc54>  - "cjt" <cheljuba@prodigy.net> wrote in messagen% news:3C144277.CE2B5CE8@prodigy.net...e > JF Mezei wrote:a > >  > > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:hE > > > Tru64 UNIX is a horse of a different color. Compaq has an, umm,h interesting ( > > > issue to deal with in this regard! > >rG > > Compaq has burned its bridges. Considering its past ineptude to fix 
 enterpriseG > > image problems, is there any reason why we could expect winkler ande
 friends toG > > change their tunes and make a convincing gesture to give tru64 some  > > credibility again ?o > >nH > > What about Winkler and friends starting to court Tru64 customers and pitchingI > > them IA64 Windows solutions to replace their old legacy Tru64 stuff ?  >y( > I think Sun will clean up as a result.  B Sun may profit because CPQ is clueless when it comes to aggressiveI in-your-face marketing. (Kinda like the US Republican party, who gets the-4 tar kicked out of it time and again by the US Left).  K Our friends at IBM will really clean up, though. AIX 5L ain't no Tru64 buut:> its more than adequate. And Power4 is a very capable platform.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:38:09 -05000& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover target . Message-ID: <u19em742ehd1b@corp.supernews.com>  L It is far more likely that Blackmore will take over if a senior executive is given the post.r  I If the merger fails Capellas walk away with a $675 million dollar parting,@ gift which will given some time to find the "better answers" and, "inspiration technology" to "invent" plan B.  L The most serious wreckage the Capellas will need to most recover from is theJ criminal damage that has been done to Tru64's reputation at least with the  non-Compaq Unix ISV community...    : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3C12CDD2.A46C6665@videotron.ca... > IsraelRT wrote:cG > > Once the merger is cancelled, Compaq is likely to go belly-up or at1 > > least be taken over .h >hL > If the merger fails, Capellas will go on a long extended vacation, WinklerG > will take over, and he will probably sell the Tandem and VMS stuff top whoevereI > wants them, and then concentrate on making his Wintel stuff profitable.p >sL > He can pitch it to Wall Street as Compaq coming back to the focus that hadL > made it succesfull and getting rid of all thsoe distractions that had hurtH > Compaq and prevented it from keeping up with competitors such as Dell.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:52:42 -0500 & From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targetl. Message-ID: <u19fhjm72il08@corp.supernews.com>  7 "IsraelRT" <israelrt@optushome.com.au> wrote in messagee2 news:71061u8e79i92jp85nt4ca8qnmkb48i6vi@4ax.com...  > > He has not been able to make it profitable for sometime now.E > With the global economy now relentlessly nose diving, Compaq has not. > chance at all of returning to profitability.  G Surprisingly the $675 million that is suppose to result from the mergerpB being called off may be the most profitable thing Compaq has done.  K It is a _fact_ that Compaq has cut over a billion dollars a year in ongoingeF operations costs.  That is _before_ any Alpha related cost savings are factored in.  G Take the HP money, the supposed Intel money, the reduction in operatingdL costs, and the predicted upturn in revenue in Q3 and Q4 - and bozo the clown? would likely show at least a fair profit with Compaq next year.b  F There will be those who will claim Compaq faces a deep revenue decline* rather than any upturn - time will tell...   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:55:42 -0500e& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targetn/ Message-ID: <u19fn157kg3a5f@corp.supernews.com>r  K I wouldn't take as being fact, or even informed speculation, what some seemNK to believe is the level of influence Winkler has or even if this represents H his current thinking.  One should take note of where Blackmore and where2 Winkler are suppose to go if the merger happens...  > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message/ news:3C13B351.83C0C47B@swissonline.delete.ch...i >t >f > JoAnn DiFrancesco wrote: > >e> > > "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message* > > news:3C13A0F7.5AC4F39D@videotron.ca... > > > IsraelRT wrote:iD > > > > He has not been able to make it profitable for sometime now.K > > > > With the global economy now relentlessly nose diving, Compaq has noi4 > > > > chance at all of returning to profitability. > > >tK > > > Winkler can argue that the reason his PC business isn't profitable is  thatJ > > > Compaq is constantly distracted and dragged down by those old legacy	 products.sL > > > But getting rid of those legacy products, Compaq could then become the leader+ > > > in the wintel business it used to be.d > >.I > > Yeah, that's the ticket! Become a leader selling Wintel desktops at aw loss!u > >; > > What a concept!0 > > - > > What a load of ill-considered codswallop!o > > L > > While I appreciate the sophomoric humour in this suggestion, I'd sure as. > > heck like to see some facts to back it up. > >e. > > Thus far, the claim is totally groundless. >  >eG > JF is not claiming this but suggesting that Winkler might try this onu@ > the basis of his track-record for supporting the continued bigC > involvement in PCs even when it is glaringly obvious that PCs arer > "profit-curtailing". >n >s > John   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:19:17 +0100e$ From: "Dr. Dweeb" <Dweeb@nospam.com>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targett1 Message-ID: <Pj5R7.120$t84.11487@news.get2net.dk>U  L Add would Scott be acting rationally or in the best interests of shareholder
 value ????   Dweeb.1 "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote in messageg( news:u19e9mif71139@corp.supernews.com... > 9 > "IsraelRT" <israelrt@optushome.com.au> wrote in messaget4 > news:lud51u4fpgt7g0m4nl0e26rcii7c45olog@4ax.com... > H > > The takeover could even be by Dell if the anti-trust legislators can > > be bought off .t >OK > Highly unlikely - Dell's business model would break very very badly if ituI > tried to integrate Compaq into its operation.  Compaq and Dell had very H > different business models as PC vendors.  Compaq's model in theory wasK > friendly towards the likes of Tandem and Digital.  Dell's model would note" > allow for that type of overhead. >e8 > Compaq's model is technology and now service value add >i5 > Dell's model is price and order execution value addn >eI > I do agree Compaq is a take over target but likely only for IBM or Sun.e SunxJ > is unlikely because McNealy's ego would override the business advantage.E > IBM will only make the play if they believe it would give the Linuxk strategy; > a big boost be controlling the IA32/IA64 server market.... >  >P >H >M >  >c >l   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:10:03 -0500n- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>g) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover target , Message-ID: <3C14EC69.CC74481F@videotron.ca>   Jeff Killeen wrote:rH > different business models as PC vendors.  Compaq's model in theory wasK > friendly towards the likes of Tandem and Digital.  Dell's model would not0" > allow for that type of overhead.  L With VMS now a very small market niche, I think that the Dell model might inM fact work very well. Have a central 800 number to get your VMS orders in, andOL they build your alpha and ship it a few days later.  OK, so they may not useM Fedex to ship something as big as a wildfire, but it would turn out the same.f  M Consider that Compaq's local sales offices are just hurdles a customer has toIL get over in order to get VMS stuff. They have been programmed to push wintel
 to customers.2    8 > Compaq's model is technology and now service value add  K Compaq doesn't have a business model. It is stuck between the "distributer,CH reseller, retailer" bloated business model and Dell's far more efficientL direct sales model. If Compaq starts to go direct, it will really offend itsU legacy distribution system. Compaq is stuck on the fence between those two paradigms.   6 >> Dell's model is price and order execution value add  M Dell's model is efficiency and low overhead, low inventory, which is achieved$O by dealing directly with customers and removing all middlemen except transport.Q  N > IBM will only make the play if they believe it would give the Linux strategy; > a big boost be controlling the IA32/IA64 server market...     N If IBM is to buy Compaq, it will quickly cannabalise its PC operation and justL keep the juicy stuff such as VMS, Tandem and the IP for alpha and Tru64. IBMA might take the clustering for Tru64 and put it into Linux or AIX.-  K If IBM were to release clustering for Linux, consider what this would do togK poor HP stuck wth their HP-UX. HP woudl really be relegated to a wintel boxF' maker without a serious entry for Unix.n   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:12:43 +0100 ( From: Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover target % Message-ID: <3C14DEFB.27749B2@gmx.de>e   "Terry C. Shannon" schrieb:-D > Sun may profit because CPQ is clueless when it comes to aggressiveK > in-your-face marketing. (Kinda like the US Republican party, who gets thea6 > tar kicked out of it time and again by the US Left).  F I thought the US Republican party gets the tar kicked out because they7 are simply clueless (no particular field preferred ;-).y  A CPQ has probably the "box maker" problem: they started by cloning A something, and learned to marked their cloned product as equal tooG something else (just less priced). Now, with DEC's heritage, they would G have to market it as superiour (but more pricy) to something else (e.g.pB a Windows NT based server) in order to succeed. This seems to be aH severe problem for many marketing oriented people, who were used to sellG refrigerators to the Eskimos, and now face the task to sell them stovesc) ;-). They'll lose their face when trying.a   --   Bernd Paysan7 "If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"K http://www.jwdt.com/~paysan/   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:46:13 +0100r1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>s) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targett5 Message-ID: <3C14F4E5.F87B9E1E@swissonline.delete.ch>n   Jeff Killeen wrote:t > 9 > "IsraelRT" <israelrt@optushome.com.au> wrote in message 4 > news:71061u8e79i92jp85nt4ca8qnmkb48i6vi@4ax.com... > @ > > He has not been able to make it profitable for sometime now.G > > With the global economy now relentlessly nose diving, Compaq has no 0 > > chance at all of returning to profitability. > I > Surprisingly the $675 million that is suppose to result from the mergeryD > being called off may be the most profitable thing Compaq has done. > M > It is a _fact_ that Compaq has cut over a billion dollars a year in ongoingeH > operations costs.  That is _before_ any Alpha related cost savings are > factored in. > I > Take the HP money, the supposed Intel money, the reduction in operating N > costs, and the predicted upturn in revenue in Q3 and Q4 - and bozo the clownA > would likely show at least a fair profit with Compaq next year.a     Not so fast ... !n  F Under the terms of the merger the $675 million is payable if the otherB party gets into bed with someone else either during these talks orF within 12 months.  Basically the shareholders can turn the merger downD but unless a company sells more than 40% of its fair market value orB somehow otherwise loses more than 60% of control (as might ocur ifE another party made a partial takeover), then that $657 million is not  paid.   C The full text from the joint statement is included below but I havewG split the "or"s and "and"s from the ends of certain paragraphs in order  to make them clearer.s    F I also challenge you on "the supposed Intel" money.  There was no signD of any payment by Intel in the Q3 financial statements and it is notG known if they paid anything at all.  There might have been a (tax-free)eF swap of staff and expertise from Compaq in exchange for the removal of: costs of about $360 million per year on Alpha development.  D (IIRC this was the figure given in the documents about Compaq buyingH Digital for the esimated cost of ALpha during 2002.  I would hav thoughtH they would have revised them but no, Compaq quoted some figure from that document quite recently.)e  A The predicted upturn in revenue in Q3 and Q4 can probably also benE rejected.  Q3 has passed, with a drop in revenue of $900 million fromkE the previous quarter.  One of the major objections of HP families andeA trusts was that Compaq's estimated income for next year should be F revised downwards by a significant factor (to something less than halfG IIRC) due to Compaq's poor performance in Q3 of this year.  (As a point F of interest, that $900 million drop in revenue translated to a drop of  almost $260 million in INCOME !)  D Now if you'd said "Bozo the clown would LIKE TO show at least a fairH profit with Compaq next year." then we'd probably agree in general termsC but we'd all have our own ideas of who in Compaq is Bozo the clown.R     John McLeane    5 -----------------------------------------------------eG Extract from the joint statement submitted to the SEC and available vias EDGARv    F Under the terms of the merger agreement, HP must pay a termination feeE of $675 million to Compaq if all of the following conditions are met:n  @ (a)  between September 4, 2001 and the termination of the mergerH agreement there has been public disclosure of an acquisition proposal byE a third party with respect to HP of the type described in the sectione@ entitled "HP and Compaq Prohibited from Soliciting Other Offers"F beginning on page 74 of this joint proxy statement/prospectus; and theF merger agreement has been terminated on either of the following bases:  D (A) the merger has not been completed by May 31, 2002 (or August 30,F 2002 if the merger is not completed as a result of a failure to obtain? required antitrust approvals or the existence of a governmentaleE regulation or order having the effect of making the completion of thes) merger illegal or otherwise prohibited); o   or  F (B)    - HP shareowners failed to approve the issuance of shares of HP= common stock in connection with the merger at a meeting of HPx. shareowners or an adjournment of that meeting;    and  &  either of the following has occurred:  H (a) - within 12 months following termination of the merger agreement, HP@ is the subject of an acquisition of the type described below; or  H (b) - within 12 months following termination of the merger agreement, HPF enters into an agreement contemplating the acquisition of it in any of? the manners described below and, within 24 months following theC? termination of the merger agreement, an acquisition of the typer described below is completed.e  > The termination fee must be paid within two days following the acquisition of HP.    G (This is the "below" mentioned in the paragrpah before the last - John)p  H  Under the terms of the merger agreement, an acquisition of either HP orH Compaq, as applicable, for the purposes of these termination provisions, is any of the following:  G  (i)   a merger, consolidation, business combination, recapitalization,eF liquidation, dissolution or similar transaction involving it, pursuantD to which its shareowners immediately preceding such transaction holdC less than 60% of the aggregate equity interests in the surviving orr8 resulting entity, or direct parent, of such transaction;  H (ii)  a sale or other disposition by the party of assets representing inA excess of 40% of the aggregate fair market value of its business,  immediately prior to such sale;n    or   D (iii)  the acquisition by any person or group, including by way of a@ tender offer or an exchange offer or issuance by it, directly orD indirectly, of beneficial ownership or a right to acquire beneficialH ownership of shares representing in excess of 40% of the voting power of1 the then outstanding shares of its capital stock.y  H Payment of the termination fee is not in lieu of damages incurred in theA event of breach of the merger agreement. If the party entitled toyD payment of the termination fee has to make a claim against the otherG party and such claim results in a judgment against the other party, thegC party required to pay the termination fee will also have to pay thenG other party's reasonable costs and expenses in connection with the suite5 together with interest on the unpaid termination fee.r   .....d   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:51:23 +0100 1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>c) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targetm5 Message-ID: <3C14F61B.2E31D4D5@swissonline.delete.ch>6   Jeff Killeen wrote:n > M > I wouldn't take as being fact, or even informed speculation, what some seemcM > to believe is the level of influence Winkler has or even if this represents,J > his current thinking.  One should take note of where Blackmore and where4 > Winkler are suppose to go if the merger happens... >    Yes, one should.  < Here's the extract from the joint statement (reformatted for read-ability)...  C "HP is negotiating to enter into employment agreements with certaineF executive officers of Compaq, including Mr. Capellas and the following other executive officers:u@ - Peter Blackmore, Executive Vice President, Worldwide Sales and	 Services,oE - Jeff Clarke, Senior Vice President, Finance and Administration, andw Chief Financial Officer,C - Michael Winkler, Executive Vice President, Global Business Units,wH - Shane Robison, Senior Vice President, Technology, and Chief Technology Officer, andE - Robert Napier, Senior Vice President, Global Information Solutions,s and Chief Information Officer."a  G And you don't think Winkler will have a substantial amount of the power., to control what is sold where and to whom ??     John McL   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:02:41 -0500o& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targete/ Message-ID: <u19u633d9aa956@corp.supernews.com>t  > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message/ news:3C14F4E5.F87B9E1E@swissonline.delete.ch...  > Not so fast ... !a >gH > Under the terms of the merger the $675 million is payable if the otherD > party gets into bed with someone else either during these talks orH > within 12 months.  Basically the shareholders can turn the merger downF > but unless a company sells more than 40% of its fair market value orD > somehow otherwise loses more than 60% of control (as might ocur ifG > another party made a partial takeover), then that $657 million is not- > paid.h   I stand corrected.  5 > I also challenge you on "the supposed Intel" money.   $ Note - I said "supposed" Intel money  C > The predicted upturn in revenue in Q3 and Q4 can probably also berG > rejected.  Q3 has passed, with a drop in revenue of $900 million fromo > the previous quarter.   2 Q3 and Q4 2002 - I was talking about 2002 profits.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:13:08 -0500m& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targetc/ Message-ID: <u19upm78em2g32@corp.supernews.com>r  > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message/ news:3C14F61B.2E31D4D5@swissonline.delete.ch...  >e > Jeff Killeen wrote:i > >rJ > > I wouldn't take as being fact, or even informed speculation, what some seemD > > to believe is the level of influence Winkler has or even if this
 representsL > > his current thinking.  One should take note of where Blackmore and where6 > > Winkler are suppose to go if the merger happens... >- > Yes, one should. >0> > Here's the extract from the joint statement (reformatted for > read-ability)... >aE > "HP is negotiating to enter into employment agreements with certainoH > executive officers of Compaq, including Mr. Capellas and the following > other executive officers:fB > - Peter Blackmore, Executive Vice President, Worldwide Sales and > Services, G > - Jeff Clarke, Senior Vice President, Finance and Administration, andm > Chief Financial Officer,E > - Michael Winkler, Executive Vice President, Global Business Units,3J > - Shane Robison, Senior Vice President, Technology, and Chief Technology > Officer, andG > - Robert Napier, Senior Vice President, Global Information Solutions,D! > and Chief Information Officer."o >iI > And you don't think Winkler will have a substantial amount of the power . > to control what is sold where and to whom ??  % John check out the leadership team...a  E http://www.compaq.com/newsroom/pr/attachments/hpcompaq_factsheet.htmlt  G ...the titles you list above are their current Compaq positions and notsI their HP roles.  Winkler is going to oversee the global supply chain.  ItuE appears to me he would be out of the primary product decision loop...e   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:23:44 GMTs2 From: "Stephen Fuld" <s.fuld.pleaseremove@att.net>) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover target J Message-ID: <Q47R7.217769$3d2.10030571@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>  H ""Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr"" <winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>C wrote in message news:00A0647F.E2CAD561@SSRL04.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU...t >yL > Most of the advertising for MicroTimes, the magazine that I wrote a column forrL > in 1998-2001, came from garage or storefront PC operations.  MicroTimes is nowoI > out of business (after over 20 years).  Name-brand PCs got so cheap (oru cameD > with such  big rebates from MSN or AOL) that the garage operations couldn'tK > compete. Not enough big vendors are left to buy many ads either.  No ads,o > no magazine. >tI > (I was writing about freeware, mostly Linux/xBSD, but I'd slip in plugsa for H > VMS and appropriate slams against Microsoft whenever I could.  No more bullyi > pulpit.  *sigh* )o  J As a dedicated MicroTimes give me a minute to lament its passing.  The endL must have come suddenly as the Oct. issue (the last one I saw) sure had lotsB of ads. And Alan, your columns were especially a highlight for me.I Informative without all the "anyone who doesn't use Linux and Perl is tookD stupid to live" hype that seems to accompany some of the open source information. Thank You.o  K Somehow, ComputerUser continues to hang on.  Perhaps you can get them to bee your pulpit?   --  - Stephen Fuld +    e-mail address disguised to prevent spamg   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:37:01 +0100 (MET)s9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>s) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targetd; Message-ID: <01KBPQKYN2LU9138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>o  J > Somehow, ComputerUser continues to hang on.  Perhaps you can get them to > be your pulpit?   G Unintentional pun: pulp-IT, as in wood pulp used to make old-fashioned k8 paper journals and IT as in information technology.  :-)   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:51:59 +0100-1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>F) Subject: Re: Compaq now a takeover targetj5 Message-ID: <3C15044F.BFDF3CAE@swissonline.delete.ch>1   Jeff Killeen wrote:n > @ > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message1 > news:3C14F61B.2E31D4D5@swissonline.delete.ch...s > >l > > Jeff Killeen wrote:l > > >'L > > > I wouldn't take as being fact, or even informed speculation, what some > seemF > > > to believe is the level of influence Winkler has or even if this > representsN > > > his current thinking.  One should take note of where Blackmore and where8 > > > Winkler are suppose to go if the merger happens... > >n > > Yes, one should. > > @ > > Here's the extract from the joint statement (reformatted for > > read-ability)... > > G > > "HP is negotiating to enter into employment agreements with certainrJ > > executive officers of Compaq, including Mr. Capellas and the following > > other executive officers:qD > > - Peter Blackmore, Executive Vice President, Worldwide Sales and
 > > Services,aI > > - Jeff Clarke, Senior Vice President, Finance and Administration, andd > > Chief Financial Officer,G > > - Michael Winkler, Executive Vice President, Global Business Units,cL > > - Shane Robison, Senior Vice President, Technology, and Chief Technology > > Officer, andI > > - Robert Napier, Senior Vice President, Global Information Solutions, # > > and Chief Information Officer."h > >oK > > And you don't think Winkler will have a substantial amount of the powere0 > > to control what is sold where and to whom ?? > ' > John check out the leadership team...A > G > http://www.compaq.com/newsroom/pr/attachments/hpcompaq_factsheet.htmle > I > ...the titles you list above are their current Compaq positions and not K > their HP roles.  Winkler is going to oversee the global supply chain.  It G > appears to me he would be out of the primary product decision loop...h     I stand corrected ...H     John   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:36:19 -0500 3 From: "Duane Smith" <Duane.Smith@nospam.compaq.com>-  Subject: Re: Compilers and Alpha1 Message-ID: <UD4R7.352$BK1.6984@news.cpqcorp.net>x  G While the initial announcement in June implied that all compiler people4I would end up at Intel, this is just not true. There are senior members ofiG GEM and senior members of the compiler teams staying with Compaq. Thesel* engineering teams will be responsible for:  J 1. addressing problems and questions with the current compiler releases on Alpha   I 2. producing eco kits or new releases of the Alpha compilers as necessaryr  I 3. working with Intel to have Compaq features added to the Intel compilert  A 4. working with Intel to produce Compaq branded compilers for IPF   J As Steve said, the support for EV7 will be shipping in compilers availableL in March 2002. We were all surprised by the announcement made last June. TheI compiler group is committed to keeping our customers happy and to meetinge their needs.   Duane Smithn  $ Compaq Compilers Engineering Manager      : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message% news:3C1138FA.4D803A1@videotron.ca...wC > With Compaq no longer having compilers of its own, but with Alphaa tentativelyoD > getting a couple more boosts/changes, it is fair to state that the	 compilers I > available on alpha-VMS will no longer get tweaked to generate code thatl takess* > advantage of the new features of alpha ? >eJ > What about EV7 ? Will Compaq still update its Alpha compilers for EV7 or is it L > too late with the ex-digital compiler engineers having been sold as slaves to	 > Intel ?4 >vI > Without updated compilers, it is fair to state that a proportion of them alpha L > enhancements that are still supposeldy to come will not be taken advantage of,eK > thereby further narrowing the gap between alpha and that intel ia64 thingh ?i   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:46:35 +0100 (MET)l9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>h  Subject: Re: Compilers and Alpha; Message-ID: <01KBPKLG7D789138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>h  I > While the initial announcement in June implied that all compiler peopleoK > would end up at Intel, this is just not true. There are senior members ofrI > GEM and senior members of the compiler teams staying with Compaq. Theset, > engineering teams will be responsible for: > L > 1. addressing problems and questions with the current compiler releases on > Alpha  > K > 2. producing eco kits or new releases of the Alpha compilers as necessaryt > K > 3. working with Intel to have Compaq features added to the Intel compilerl > C > 4. working with Intel to produce Compaq branded compilers for IPFe   Can we add this?  D 5. working with Oracle to (continue to) provide support for various (    languages in SQL$PRE for use with Rdb   > TheeK > compiler group is committed to keeping our customers happy and to meetingo > their needs.  
 Nice to hear.i   ------------------------------   Date: 10 Dec 2001 15:56:05 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)y  Subject: Re: Compilers and Alpha+ Message-ID: <9v2lul$fok$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>a  8 In article <oee21us2pjf1p36fsgspfit2e3014kpaac@4ax.com>,.  Steve Lionel <Steve.Lionel@intel.com> writes: |>H |> "Sold as slaves to Intel"?  I don't think you'll find anyone here who, |> would recognize that as applying to them. |> a  F I don't know, it was previously stated here that the transfer may haveE included some restrictions on where the employee could seek alternatesD employment if he chose not to work for Intel.  Without total freedom5 to go where they please they sound like slaves to me.t   bill   -- sJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   h   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 10:49:44 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)m  Subject: Re: Compilers and Alpha3 Message-ID: <0Yp+OJg8pl8C@eisner.encompasserve.org>   _ In article <9v2lul$fok$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:e: > In article <oee21us2pjf1p36fsgspfit2e3014kpaac@4ax.com>,0 >  Steve Lionel <Steve.Lionel@intel.com> writes: > |>J > |> "Sold as slaves to Intel"?  I don't think you'll find anyone here who. > |> would recognize that as applying to them. > |> v > H > I don't know, it was previously stated here that the transfer may haveG > included some restrictions on where the employee could seek alternatedF > employment if he chose not to work for Intel.  Without total freedom7 > to go where they please they sound like slaves to me.o  C Perhaps Pennsylvania is different, but around New England that sortyB of restriction would be impossible unless the employee signed some agreement to that effect.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:45:32 -0800g. From: Jack Trachtman <Jack.Trachtman@vmmc.org> Subject: Crash Notification ( Message-ID: <3C1502CC.6CFF8EA3@vmmc.org>  5 At the end of SYSTARTUP_VMS.COM, I have myself paged.s  D I'd like to differentiate between a normal boot and a crash restart.  @ What can I look at from within DCL to see if this is a normal or a crash restart? Thanks   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:34:26 GMTrG From: Simon Clubley <simon_clubley@remove_me.altavista.co.uk-Earth.UFP>o: Subject: Current timetable for HP/CPQ shareholder voting ?6 Message-ID: <CR2R7.55932$xS6.89471@www.newsranger.com>  F Is it known what the current timescale for the shareholder vote is andD what the timescale is for the various steps that lead to that vote ?  G I had gotten the impression at the time of the merger announcement that G voting arrangments should be underway by now. Is this wrong or is CarlyiE trying to extend the timescale in order to try and get more support ?h  E If (and at the moment, that's a big if) the merger is approved by thetA shareholders, what is the likely timescale to be for the start oft integrated HP/CPQ operations ?   Simon.   -- o@ Simon Clubley, simon_clubley@remove_me.altavista.co.uk-Earth.UFPK In the task of removing Microsoft from the marketplace, I have discovered aiE truly remarkable plan, but this signature is too small to contain it.r   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:41:41 GMTi4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>> Subject: Re: Current timetable for HP/CPQ shareholder voting ?* Message-ID: <pY2R7.2358$7y.9233@rwcrnsc54>  L "Simon Clubley" <simon_clubley@remove_me.altavista.co.uk-Earth.UFP> wrote in8 message news:CR2R7.55932$xS6.89471@www.newsranger.com...H > Is it known what the current timescale for the shareholder vote is andF > what the timescale is for the various steps that lead to that vote ? >tI > I had gotten the impression at the time of the merger announcement thatiI > voting arrangments should be underway by now. Is this wrong or is CarlyaG > trying to extend the timescale in order to try and get more support ?s > G > If (and at the moment, that's a big if) the merger is approved by theeC > shareholders, what is the likely timescale to be for the start ofc  > integrated HP/CPQ operations ? >i  I I don't know when the voting was to have taken place, but the CPQ and HWPmC timelines called for a consummation by early April and an immediatenJ integration and consolidation. They planned to hit the ground running with the new company.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:11:43 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>s> Subject: Re: Current timetable for HP/CPQ shareholder voting ?+ Message-ID: <3C14ECCD.A14BA3A@videotron.ca>    Simon Clubley wrote:I > voting arrangments should be underway by now. Is this wrong or is CarlyaG > trying to extend the timescale in order to try and get more support ?e  L Problem is that as time passes, I have a feeling that support is going down.C The longer she waits, the more the opposition has a chance to grow.   M I would not be surprised at all if Carly was trying to find an honourable waypK out of the merger while infliucting as much harm onto Compaq as possible tod disable its competitor.p   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:29:54 +0100t1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>d> Subject: Re: Current timetable for HP/CPQ shareholder voting ?5 Message-ID: <3C14FF22.E7B12E1B@swissonline.delete.ch>l   Simon Clubley wrote: > H > Is it known what the current timescale for the shareholder vote is andF > what the timescale is for the various steps that lead to that vote ? > I > I had gotten the impression at the time of the merger announcement thatiI > voting arrangments should be underway by now. Is this wrong or is CarlySG > trying to extend the timescale in order to try and get more support ?o > G > If (and at the moment, that's a big if) the merger is approved by the C > shareholders, what is the likely timescale to be for the start ofs  > integrated HP/CPQ operations ? >   D I think I read somewhere that the HP stockholder vote will be at theH meeting probably in February next year.  I have no idea how much time isG required to get the proxy voting forms out to people, back in again and-0 counted so they can be presented at the meeting.  F After Friday's events Walter Hewlett has engaged some company to lobbyF proxy voters against the merger so I guess things may start soon.  AndA of course there can be the hiatus over Xmas/New_year to take intot	 account.    F I posted an extract from the Compaq proxy last week and that was takenG from a HP submission to the SEC.  If you are desperate to see what theyy; look like you'll have to wade through all the SEC material.t     John McLeane   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:24:45 +0100 (MET) 9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>eY Subject: different standards (was: RE: Compaq Can Survive -- Maybe Even Thrive-- Without t; Message-ID: <01KBPBEBC1S89138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>n  L > > Der Spiegel is often compared to Time and Newsweek, but it's about three > > times as thick.  :-) > K > For the American audience, photos in Der Spiegel would merit an "R" movie-K > rating.  Us silly Americas might get the idea that *all* women in Germanyl9 > are bare-breasted, with a black stripe over their eyes!t  H Yes, different cultures, different standards.  I notice that many movie D critics are picking up that the film Amelie is R in the States and, H depending on the country, something like G or PG in Europe (it's "6 and G above" in Germany).  Similar case: Shakespeare in Love: 6 and above in  A Germany, no age restrictions in the Netherlands, R in the States.e  C On the other hand, some hard-core violent action films are "18 and k6 above" here and might be PG or whatever in the States.  I Would you rather have your kids see people making love or people killing n1 each other?  What would you rather happen to you.a   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:09:49 -0500 0 From: "Rob L Lyons" <rob.lyons@resilientsys.com> Subject: Re: disk shadowing + Message-ID: <9v2j75$qoc$1@bob.news.rcn.net>e  T Kenneth <chehon@net-yan.com> wrote in message news:9uvvfu$24sd$1@news.net-yan.com...J > I am using 2 X AS8400 running VMS7.2-1 cluster with host base shadowing.I > When I shudown one node, the other node will perform a disk merge. ThisnN > would not be a prblem if it only perform the minimerge, however, some of theN > disks will perform a full merge and will create extensive addtional IO. I amL > using HSJ50 for all disks and have checked the characteristic and flag for: > the device and all the disk are have the "wlg" flag set.  K You should be able to avoid merges completely if you are shutting down withc? the REMOVE NODE option of the shutdown procedure.  Or you couldtO dismount/system all the application disks and eliminate all but the system diskl plus maybe a page/swap device.  K > The problem is why one disks can perform minimerge sometime but sometimesoI > not? Is there any thing I can do to make them do minimerge everything IeL > shutdown the system? Can I stop the merging in the middle and schedule the > merge off the peak hours?r  X When a write history log does not hold enough data to satisfy the minimerge requirementsJ it can indicate that the disk is overloaded with too many I/Os per second.  	 Rob Lyonsw
 Consultant High Availability SystemsD   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:26:05 +0100 (MET) 9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>o3 Subject: EDT limits (was: RE: RECALL does not work)n; Message-ID: <01KBPPYQYF7W9138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>   I > And I did a limited test with a small file > 255 characters per record.oF > Even though EDT claims to truncate these records, it appears that itG > only does so for display purposes, writing the complete records on an  > EXIT.   E If the long lines are already there, fine.  But one can't manipulate sH longer lines.  This, the 65535 limit on number of lines and the lack of < a learn feature I see as the only real disadvantages of EDT.  A With regard to the length of lines, it is rare that I need to do rH anything with an editor on a file with such long lines.  With regard to F the number of lines, not quite so rare, though usually limited to the H beginning of the file as mentioned, so also not a problem.  Personally, H I rarely run into situations where learning a sequence of keystrokes is  worth the time to set it up.  9 For those not familiar with EDT, what do I like about it?s  9 It displays non-printable characters in an intuitive way.-   It is fast.1   It is a mature product.M  I There is none of the annoying lack of synchronisation between keystrokes :6 and display which TPU has even on a very fast machine.  " It is easily usable in batch mode.  I its command language is terse but powerful (not QUITE TECO-like, but you  
 get the idea)t  I I have to admit, though, that I have little experience with TPU and even k# less with its DECwindows interface.t   ------------------------------   Date: 9 Dec 2001 23:13:58 -08001) From: P.Young@unsw.EDU.AU (Patrick Young)a Subject: Re: gnu tar for VMS= Message-ID: <55f85d77.0112092313.3498dc81@posting.google.com>3  ~ David Schwartz <salsagroupie.removethispart@bigfoot.com> wrote in message news:<m6j31uk1fnspoq1m1b9r9t6gto91u6pf9a@4ax.com>...C > a test (-t) or extract (-x), after partially processing the file:e > B > ----------     0/0        101 Dec 31 16:00:00 1969 ././@LongLink4 > tar: directory checksum error for <long file path>  J VMSTAR does not know about the GNU specific extensions such as "@MaNgLeD@"' file names or the ././@LongLink method.n  F VMSTAR uses the original (POSIX) specification of 100 character names,D so the behaviour you see is not a bug as such. There is no "correct"D defined behaviour in this case. As an example, tar under Tru-64 willA create the file with a truncated name after complaining about thet /./@LongLink entry.t  B If at all possible you may wish to shorten your combined file/path? lengths to less than 100 characters so as your tar archives are ( compatible with non-GNU versions of tar.  D If there is _enough demand_? I might take a look at adding this (GNU specific) feature to VMSTAR.   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:59:06 GMTs2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) Subject: Re: gnu tar for VMS1 Message-ID: <eZ4R7.355$BK1.7037@news.cpqcorp.net>   y In article <m6j31uk1fnspoq1m1b9r9t6gto91u6pf9a@4ax.com>, David Schwartz <salsagroupie.removethispart@bigfoot.com> writes:iG :I have some very large tarfiles that are not readable by VMS tar. I'vehB :tried downloading a "new" vmstar from the Compaq OpenVMS freewareC :site, and also gotten the latest VMS tar (V3.4-1) from the ProcesshF :Software VMS archive. All fail with the same error, when doing eitherB :a test (-t) or extract (-x), after partially processing the file:  C   Applications expecting to address over 2 GB using (only) native CpG   functions likely won't work correctly due to the longword size limit -#   within the OpenVMS C off_t field.1  F   IIRC, it's off_t that hoses up tar -- there are a couple of longword.   fields lurking within common file functions.  F   I've passed along some (trivial) C code that bypasses this limit to F   a couple of folks (and some ISVs), and there is work within OpenVMS E   and the C groups to promote off_t to a quadword field.  A couple ofeI   the engineers here in OpenVMS -- including myself -- have been looking lH   at extending the tar utility to compensate for this, but we have been J   a little busy with the engineering work for EV7, with the Itanium port, 5   with new OpenVMS releases, and with other projects.n  D   I've queued a discussion of this for the next OpenVMS FAQ, as the /   topic has been raised several times recently.   C   As a start, please see the OpenVMS Ask The Wizard topics (6916), sH   (6884), and (1550) for further details on the limits, for C code that H   allows you to bypass this, and on some related file system operations 
   details.  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:53:26 +0100a( From: Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.ch>R Subject: Re: Here is your VMS alternative ... another patch for you windoze admins- Message-ID: <VA.000004e1.e3fd8bdb@bluewin.ch>   I In article <20011209.104246.1505193512.9762@verizon.net>, Art Rice wrote: D > In article <d7791aa1.0112081242.6507b961@posting.google.com>, "Bob( > Ceculski" <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote: > L > > Here is the 57th windoze security patch of the year ... I don't know howH > > those windoze admins get any work done since they have to constantly	 > > patch-= > > their 80 million pc boxes every other day of the year ...l > > 9 > > http://www.informationweek.com/story/IWK20011207S0043j > > > > >  SECURITY: Another Week, Another Outlook Flaw Dec. 7, 2001 > >   G > > This flaw is in the way Outlook Web Access handles script messages. < > > Microsoft rates the problem "medium." By George V. Hulme > >  r > < major snippage>o > K > The other problem is:  They don't apply the patches so that they can keep 6 > their business running, leaving them open to attack. > J One other problem is that various fixes have introduced problems, so many I folks play the game of wait and see what happens to others. My favourite sK phrase from my own NT support days went something like "Many donated their c  systems to bring you this news". ___o
 Paul Sture Switzerlando   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 08:08:38 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)u= Subject: Re: How to implement Login Fails for Open VMS on VAX 3 Message-ID: <yvQ6OIMShLQc@eisner.encompasserve.org>n  W In article <3C10D972.3020503@tzora.co.il>, Mike Rechtman <rechtman@tzora.co.il> writes: ; > STARTUP runs under the SYSTEM account. It may start, but n > will not run properlys> > (esp. things like SPAWN, SUBMIT) if the account is disabled.> > This may have changed in different versions, but definitely  > was a way to lock- > out a system.>  D    Nonsense.  We've been booting and running a system for years with    SYSTEM disuser'ed.t   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:36:33 +0100r/ From: Nigel Arnot <sysmgr@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk>iC Subject: re: How to tell if foreign command (SET COMMAND) is known?c7 Message-ID: <00A064F7.61FF50D3.10@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk>    > ? > I define several foreign commands via SET COMMAND .CLD files.G > F > Aside from actually trying it, how can I tell if a command is known?  B Actually trying it is the best way. Don't forget that the parse isH done in DCL prior to the image EXE being run, so that if you guarantee a parse failure the test is fast.-   $ ASS NL: SYS$ERROR  $ ASS NL: SYS$OUTPUT $ XXX /ZZZNOSUCHQUAL p $ ERR = $STATUSK $ DEASS SYS$ERROR: $ DEASS SYS$OUTPUTG $ IF ERR.EQ.%X38090 THEN GOTO SETCOM   !%DCL-W-IVVERB unrecognised verb<M $ IF ERR.EQ.%X38240 THEN GOTO OK       !%DCL-W-IVQUAL unrecognised qualifier t $! $! this can't happen?! $ EXIT 4 $SETCOM: $ SET COMMAND [wherever]XXX.CLD  $OK: $! we now know XXX is installed  $ XXX /whatever ...t  M The assigns prevent ugly error messages appearing, because you're *expecting*sB a failure. You might need $ON modification as well, although thoseN status codes are warnings not errors so the default DCL action is to continue.   > = > Is there an equivalent to SHOW SYMBOL for foreign commands?f  H There's a utility VERB for dumping command tables, but it's user-written= code (not supported by Compaq). For the above, it's overkill.    	Yours, 
 		Nigel Arnotr- 		NRA@MAXWELL.PH.KCL.AC.UK                   y  7 		"In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded."-   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:26:48 -0500h5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>t+ Subject: Re: HP Foundations - let them know>1 Message-ID: <Lp5R7.362$BK1.7070@news.cpqcorp.net>p   Paul Sture wrote in message ... A >In article <3C1193A3.53645447@fsi.net>, David J. Dachtera wrote:o >> Fred Kleinsorge wrote:  >> >I >> > So Bill, have you spoken to a "significant portion of our enterprisee >> > customer base"? >> >7 >> > Or does that mean you, and 3 other guys in c.o.v.?s >>> >> Geez, Fred! I truly believed you knew better than that. I'm >> disappointed... >>I >> Seems to me "a significant portion of its enterprise customer base" istE >> represented by regular posters here including, but not limited to,hI >> Cerner, Abbott Labs, Sunquest, Nortel, Argonne, Comdisco, to name mosttD >> of the few that I am aware of outside of the DoD and the academicF >> community. I'll let the posts that have gone through this newsgroup >> group speak for themselves. >>G >And I'll just add major banks, stock brokers and their exchanges, maild@ >order companies, car/truck manufacturers, travel agent software= >suppliers, and an occasional insurance company to that list.i    C I'll repeat this again.  Not even the majority of "writers" to thissJ conference have posted anything nearly as negative as Bill, or even simpleE agreement with Bill.  It is pretty much Bill and a handful of others.-  K That isn't to say that there are not people here who are concerned, or evenCK unhappy about recent events.  However, I continue to get private mail, from/J those who do not want to be added to Bill's "anyone who disagree's with me8 is an idiot" list - supporting OpenVMS, and it's future.  I The fact is that this, like almost all newsgroups, is read by more peoplesJ that written.  Bill, is the most outspoken critic of Compaq in this forum.J His view is that until he receives an apology, a confession, resignations,K and the revival of Alpha - is that Compaq (and as a side effect VMS) shouldgJ be destroyed.  He has no vested interest in either the survival or successB of Compaq or VMS, and as far as I can tell is not a customer, or aD consultant to a Compaq customer.  He would not seem to me to be in aI position to "speak for" or to even know who a "substantial portion of our  enterprise customer base" are.  J In the middle of a industry wide slump in system sales, he would attributeJ all of our problems to the decision regarding Alpha.  On the other hand, IJ continue to see the internal large "wins" messages for new VMS sales, thatK would seem to counter that (and no, we do not make such wins public without1 the customer wishing it to be).f  H I have every reason to believe that OpenVMS will emerge from this in theH best shape and position that it has been in for years.  We will have theJ same robust and trusted O/S, and we will have it on a platform that shouldG provide competetive performance, with lower costs.  We will continue torI support VAX and Alpha.  My direct contact with several customers has beenrJ very positive.  The indirect evidence I have from others who are in direct1 contact with customers and ISVs is also positive.r  G I see no value in continuing to dwell on "why" the current decision wasnK made.  I myself do not share Bills beliefs on the subject.  There is little-K reason to believe that even if all Bills beliefs/accusations are true, thatnF there is anything that can reverse our course, and revive Alpha.  MoreL likely is that if Bill were to somehow succeed in his negative campain, thatL it would mean that OpenVMS customers would decline to a point below critical: mass for anything except maintenance mode and end of life.   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 18:38:21 +0100G From: Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>m+ Subject: Re: HP Foundations - let them know H Message-ID: <y4ofl7kmb6.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>  7 "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> writes:   K > The fact is that this, like almost all newsgroups, is read by more people L > that written.  Bill, is the most outspoken critic of Compaq in this forum.L > His view is that until he receives an apology, a confession, resignations,M > and the revival of Alpha - is that Compaq (and as a side effect VMS) shouldi > be destroyed.e  F Is that so? I read his posts as saying, "with regard to killing Alpha,H Compaq's management is lying about the basis for its decision, and brokeD prior commitments." I have to agree with that - I find his arguments9 convincing, and have not seen a serious rebuttal of them.   H That doesn't mean I would like to see VMS dead, or even dislike the ideaF of it running on IA64 (whether the port is a good thing by itself willK depend on Intel delivering competitive performance from future processors).eG Nonetheless, this year's events tells me to trust Compaq, as a company,1G even less than before. And that includes, as an aside, its behaviour asuG a partner in an EC-funded project which fits perfectly to the behaviourv0 it has exhibited in the matter under discussion.   	Jan   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:59:16 -0500e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> + Subject: Re: HP Foundations - let them known, Message-ID: <3C14F7EF.B177A59E@videotron.ca>   Fred Kleinsorge wrote:M > That isn't to say that there are not people here who are concerned, or eveneM > unhappy about recent events.  However, I continue to get private mail, fromeL > those who do not want to be added to Bill's "anyone who disagree's with me: > is an idiot" list - supporting OpenVMS, and it's future.  K If someone does not wish to support Bill in his  Bill vs Jeff battle of thesM words, it does not automatically mean that the person disagrees with Bill ande agrees with Jeff.   L > His view is that until he receives an apology, a confession, resignations,M > and the revival of Alpha - is that Compaq (and as a side effect VMS) shouldv > be destroyed.   D Sorry, I do not see Mr Todd's posts that way. I view them as "Compaq& destroying itself with its decisions".  H But you know what, I am starting to think that something dramatic shouldL happen to Compaq because I thing it is the only for it to either wake up andN drop its fixation on wintel or sell its non-wintel stuff to someone who cares.  L > In the middle of a industry wide slump in system sales, he would attribute6 > all of our problems to the decision regarding Alpha.    N In the middle of an industry slump, renegging on previous commitments and thenI announcing you will happily cease to exist (HP takeover) and then happilyeL announcing the death of Tru64 is not the way to maintain customer confidence< in the company or its products , especially during a slump.    >  On the other hand, ItI > continue to see the internal large "wins" messages for new VMS sales, ta  M I bet you are not seing the lossses because Compaq simply doesn't track them. L Seing one side of the coin isn't very good, especially when you consider theN possibility that the other side may be much bigger than the side you are being shown as a Compaq employee.u    J > I have every reason to believe that OpenVMS will emerge from this in theJ > best shape and position that it has been in for years.  We will have theL > same robust and trusted O/S, and we will have it on a platform that should5 > provide competetive performance, with lower costs.    J Will VMS ever have competitive performance with Unixes running on the sameM platform ?  And while the box on which VMS runs may have the same performance-I as another IA64 based box, do not forget the possibility that IBM or even<F Apple may have Power machines that outperform that bloated IA64 thing.  V And don't forget that Sun may be able to provide better price-performance than Compaq.  E For years, the 8086 provided better price performance than Alpha, andvL companies didn't mind building farms of many many many PCs loaded on shelves' to get the performance that was needed.m  M So if SUN can sell you a multi processor Sparc that ha similar performance as N your fancy IA64 but at a lesser price, do you still think that IA64 will allow you to have lower prices ?   > We will continue toe > support VAX and Alpha.    K And it is that part of the business that will give VMS some remaining life.t Not the port to IA64.i  I > I see no value in continuing to dwell on "why" the current decision was  > made.u  L From the customer's point of view, the Compaq excuses were very lame and hadK absolutely no credibility. So when a Compaq employee tries to justify thosesH excuses, you can expect customers to react negatively to that attempt at supporting Compaq's decision.   E If you just say "I have to live with the decision taken by the Compaq1N management" and not try to justify it you would not get the likes of Bill Todd5 pointing out to you how lame the Compaq excuses were.v  J Excuse the harsh wording, but compaq employees looks like prostitutes whenB they try to help Compaq justify a very bad decision for customers.    N > likely is that if Bill were to somehow succeed in his negative campain, thatN > it would mean that OpenVMS customers would decline to a point below critical< > mass for anything except maintenance mode and end of life.  J This is where I really disagree with your accusation. Not everyone has theG time to gather all the hints and fact and tidbits to help draw "the bigiI picture" and see what Compaq really intends to do. So people like Mr ToddaK provide a warning to customers to open their eye and ears because somethingi fishy is going on.  N The decline of VMS will be totally self-inflicted by Compaq.  Bill Todd didn'tH make the decision to kill Alpha, True64 or MPE. He and others are merelyI pointing how how those decisions do not augur well for the last remaining N Digital product. When Compaq and HP took those decisions, they would have beenJ fully aware of the negative impact it would have on the image of VMS.  AndG they were fully aware that many customers like Todd and others would be G badmouthing Compaq/HP for those decisions. Yet they chose to make those  decisions anyways. y  K 1- Since they accept that folks such as Mr Todd would be badmouthing CompaqtH due to those decisions, you have no business accusing Mr Todd of hurtingN Compaq's sales. Compaq fully factored in that badmouthing due to the unpopularT decisions Compaq took would have negative impact on sales and image of the products.  N 2-When a company makes an unpopular decision, does it have the right to accuseH customers of being the cause of reduced sales because such customers areF publicly voicing their negative opinions of the company's decisions ?   M CUSTOMERS ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPAQ'S SELF-INFLICTED WOUNDS. Go complain N to your Winkler groupies inside of Compaq before you start accusing customers'2 public opinions of being the cause of lower sales.  M If at all, you should be thanking the likes such as Mr Todd because you couldeK use those arguments and the fact that customers are publicly complaining to I get your higher-ups to start to use that ammunition to battle the Winkler N groupies to start to get some visibility for true enterprise systems and shove aside the wintel crap.  N But then again, Compaq is fully aware that the nature of the VMS customer baseL is such that when you screw them, they leave. And Compaq is fully aware thatL many customers will consider the recent decisions to be "Compaq screwing theK customer". So Compaq doesn't really care about losing those customers. I am M sure that it has secured sufficient commitment from some key larger customersMJ to ensure adequate revenus to sustain Winkler's PC business, so it doesn't# mine losing the marginal customers.b   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:46:40 +0100o1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>r+ Subject: Re: HP Foundations - let them knows5 Message-ID: <3C150310.43B0405A@swissonline.delete.ch>i   JF Mezei wrote:e >  > Fred Kleinsorge wrote:O > > That isn't to say that there are not people here who are concerned, or evenhO > > unhappy about recent events.  However, I continue to get private mail, fromoN > > those who do not want to be added to Bill's "anyone who disagree's with me< > > is an idiot" list - supporting OpenVMS, and it's future. > M > If someone does not wish to support Bill in his  Bill vs Jeff battle of the-O > words, it does not automatically mean that the person disagrees with Bill and  > agrees with Jeff.i > N > > His view is that until he receives an apology, a confession, resignations,O > > and the revival of Alpha - is that Compaq (and as a side effect VMS) shouldR > > be destroyed.  > F > Sorry, I do not see Mr Todd's posts that way. I view them as "Compaq( > destroying itself with its decisions". > J > But you know what, I am starting to think that something dramatic shouldN > happen to Compaq because I thing it is the only for it to either wake up andP > drop its fixation on wintel or sell its non-wintel stuff to someone who cares. > N > > In the middle of a industry wide slump in system sales, he would attribute8 > > all of our problems to the decision regarding Alpha. > P > In the middle of an industry slump, renegging on previous commitments and thenK > announcing you will happily cease to exist (HP takeover) and then happily N > announcing the death of Tru64 is not the way to maintain customer confidence= > in the company or its products , especially during a slump.r >  > >  On the other hand, IhK > > continue to see the internal large "wins" messages for new VMS sales, th > O > I bet you are not seing the lossses because Compaq simply doesn't track them.iN > Seing one side of the coin isn't very good, especially when you consider theP > possibility that the other side may be much bigger than the side you are being > shown as a Compaq employee.e > L > > I have every reason to believe that OpenVMS will emerge from this in theL > > best shape and position that it has been in for years.  We will have theN > > same robust and trusted O/S, and we will have it on a platform that should6 > > provide competetive performance, with lower costs. > L > Will VMS ever have competitive performance with Unixes running on the sameO > platform ?  And while the box on which VMS runs may have the same performancenK > as another IA64 based box, do not forget the possibility that IBM or even H > Apple may have Power machines that outperform that bloated IA64 thing. > X > And don't forget that Sun may be able to provide better price-performance than Compaq. > G > For years, the 8086 provided better price performance than Alpha, and-N > companies didn't mind building farms of many many many PCs loaded on shelves) > to get the performance that was needed.o > O > So if SUN can sell you a multi processor Sparc that ha similar performance askP > your fancy IA64 but at a lesser price, do you still think that IA64 will allow > you to have lower prices ? >  > > We will continue toc > > support VAX and Alpha. > M > And it is that part of the business that will give VMS some remaining life.e > Not the port to IA64.t > K > > I see no value in continuing to dwell on "why" the current decision was 	 > > made.Y > N > From the customer's point of view, the Compaq excuses were very lame and hadM > absolutely no credibility. So when a Compaq employee tries to justify those<J > excuses, you can expect customers to react negatively to that attempt at > supporting Compaq's decision.  > G > If you just say "I have to live with the decision taken by the CompaqXP > management" and not try to justify it you would not get the likes of Bill Todd7 > pointing out to you how lame the Compaq excuses were.t > L > Excuse the harsh wording, but compaq employees looks like prostitutes whenD > they try to help Compaq justify a very bad decision for customers. > P > > likely is that if Bill were to somehow succeed in his negative campain, thatP > > it would mean that OpenVMS customers would decline to a point below critical> > > mass for anything except maintenance mode and end of life. > L > This is where I really disagree with your accusation. Not everyone has theI > time to gather all the hints and fact and tidbits to help draw "the big K > picture" and see what Compaq really intends to do. So people like Mr ToddHM > provide a warning to customers to open their eye and ears because somethingt > fishy is going on. > P > The decline of VMS will be totally self-inflicted by Compaq.  Bill Todd didn'tJ > make the decision to kill Alpha, True64 or MPE. He and others are merelyK > pointing how how those decisions do not augur well for the last remainingaP > Digital product. When Compaq and HP took those decisions, they would have beenL > fully aware of the negative impact it would have on the image of VMS.  AndI > they were fully aware that many customers like Todd and others would be I > badmouthing Compaq/HP for those decisions. Yet they chose to make thosee > decisions anyways. > M > 1- Since they accept that folks such as Mr Todd would be badmouthing Compaq J > due to those decisions, you have no business accusing Mr Todd of hurtingP > Compaq's sales. Compaq fully factored in that badmouthing due to the unpopularV > decisions Compaq took would have negative impact on sales and image of the products. > P > 2-When a company makes an unpopular decision, does it have the right to accuseJ > customers of being the cause of reduced sales because such customers areG > publicly voicing their negative opinions of the company's decisions ?  > O > CUSTOMERS ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPAQ'S SELF-INFLICTED WOUNDS. Go complaintP > to your Winkler groupies inside of Compaq before you start accusing customers'4 > public opinions of being the cause of lower sales. > O > If at all, you should be thanking the likes such as Mr Todd because you could"M > use those arguments and the fact that customers are publicly complaining tooK > get your higher-ups to start to use that ammunition to battle the WinkleroP > groupies to start to get some visibility for true enterprise systems and shove > aside the wintel crap. > P > But then again, Compaq is fully aware that the nature of the VMS customer baseN > is such that when you screw them, they leave. And Compaq is fully aware thatN > many customers will consider the recent decisions to be "Compaq screwing theM > customer". So Compaq doesn't really care about losing those customers. I am O > sure that it has secured sufficient commitment from some key larger customers.L > to ensure adequate revenus to sustain Winkler's PC business, so it doesn't% > mine losing the marginal customers.e  
 Well said JF.n  " I'll just add a small point or two  F - with regard to Fred's 'However, I continue to get private mail, fromG those who do not want to be added to Bill's "anyone who disagree's withrC me is an idiot" list - supporting OpenVMS, and it's future.'  It isiC simply that anyone who argues with Bill (and some others of us) hadi5 better have the evidence to support their assertions.   E - if the sales that Fred refers to are new sites and not existing VMSeF who are updating or expanding, I'm intrigued as to how they discoveredH VMS and where they have found any information.  I can understand some ofF Defense hearing about VMS via the COE stuff but other people ??   Gee,A if this is what can be done without telling anyone about VMS justgG imagine what a little bit of marketing ^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h promotion mighte achieve.    D And yes, I completely agree with JF that most of the problems are ofH Compaq's own doing.  Making this public should, in theory, force them toA lift their game, and the crazy thing is that on all the availabler? financial evidence this would be in Compaq's own best interest.      John McLeano   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:10:00 -0500t% From: "John Vottero" <John@mvpsi.com>- Subject: Re: IBM VMS and Oracle0/ Message-ID: <u19nipkbmen453@news.supernews.com>j  : "Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message- news:$kF+EgtuhvR$@eisner.encompasserve.org...y@ > In article <u1856ma2jbjk98@news.supernews.com>, "John Vottero" <John@mvpsi.com> writes:H > > It might make more sense for Oracle to buy VMS.  I think that Oracle wants,J > > to sell people orange boxes that are just "database servers".  Why not have > > VMS under the skin?i >iH > Because they don't want to alienate all their other platform partners.  L I think Larry Ellison's view is that partners should worry about pissing him off, not the other way around.   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 02:43:08 -0800) From: dewaard@wt.tno.nl (Dannie de Waard)s Subject: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com= Message-ID: <2ecc4670.0112100243.399a1332@posting.google.com>g  4 Why am I not receiving any more mail from this list?   Dannie de Waardl   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 08:31:28 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)i. Subject: Re: Installing ssh server on OpenVMS?3 Message-ID: <vRs7$BzR+Fnq@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  e In article <9urhkt$g3g$1@pulp.srv.ualberta.ca>, Kevin.Beauchamp@ualberta.ca (Kevin Beauchamp) writes:d > Hello: > C > I'm in the process of finding out what is involved in getting ssh   > running on my OpenVMS box(es).  A    Why not just use an IP stack like Multinet, which ships with a $    commercial implementation of SSH?   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:39:35 +0000i( From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1>2 Subject: Re: Is autogen needed for new added disks) Message-ID: <3C1490E7.C435524B@127.0.0.1>l   "Thomas H. Pauli" wrote: > J > no, you don't need to run AUTOGEN for that. Just use MCR SYSMAN IO AUTO.  A I would actually recommend using AUTOGEN with FEEDBACK because IOaD structures for so many disks when mounted and used will probably use more system resources.   -- h( Regards, Nic Clews CSC Computer Sciences nclews at csc dot como   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:11:22 GMTs2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)2 Subject: Re: Is autogen needed for new added disks1 Message-ID: <K85R7.357$BK1.7022@news.cpqcorp.net>f  S In article <9uvuk5$244r$1@news.net-yan.com>, "Kenneth" <chehon@net-yan.com> writes:iD :We have just add 70 disks to the system, 2 X AS8400 Cluster runningI :VMS7.2-1, do we need to to a autogen when the disks are firstly install  A :or we only need to do the autogen after a typical usage of time?      Short answer: yes.  F   I would clean out any cruft lurking in MODPARAMS.DAT and then invokeD   AUTOGEN periodically -- at increasing intervals -- until the load #   stabilizes, and I'd use feedback.n  I   If you can't remember the last time you invoked AUTOGEN or if you make tK   large changes to the local hardware configuration (as is the case here), t3   I'd invoke AUTOGEN at the next (feasible) time.  e  K   Not only does AUTOGEN tune the system, but it also configures the OpenVMSlK   system for reasonable performance immediately after OpenVMS installation lD   or after a substational system reconfiguration -- it gets you to a   baseline configuration.q  J   I'd not usually request AUTOGEN use feedback data after an installation 0   or after a substantial system reconfiguration.  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:29:59 GMTe2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)D Subject: Re: Is there a place to find VMS Source Listing CD mounted?1 Message-ID: <bq5R7.363$BK1.7015@news.cpqcorp.net>   T In article <9uuppf$f0r$1@news.chatlink.com>, "Headman" <headman@aaahawk.com> writes:M :Is there a place to find VMS Source Listing CD (EDT and utilities) privatelye	 :mounted?c  A   We (OpenVMS Engineering) certainly have them privately mounted.c  B   These disks are available for purchase, though (AFAIK) there areA   constraints on serving and releasing the contents of the disks.   B   If you prefer, I can have a sales representative and some other A   corporate folks contact you directly and help you resolve your     particular request.6  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:09:42 -0500S& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?/ Message-ID: <u19d0t6383dh14@corp.supernews.com>n  5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messagea8 news:h3jQ7.132818$YD.11488352@news2.aus1.giganews.com...  L > So while we can't establish *exactly* what profits Tru64 made, we can make ax > *very* educated guess.  K > You're going to have to accept that people with a reason to be interestede inK > such things are going to draw conclusions based on the best evidence theyl5 > have available to them, whether you like it or not.   L I don't have an issue with people drawing conclusions - but in your case youH seem to often state "educated guesses" as fact.  They are still educated _guesses_...   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:17:12 -0500h& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?/ Message-ID: <u19deukg9sql24@corp.supernews.com>o  . "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message6 news:QspQ7.20973$pa1.7423310@news3.rdc1.on.home.com... >s@ > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message1 > news:3C11D2EE.F5F92DB9@swissonline.delete.ch...  > >i > >wL > > As for your question about why VMS is not being promoted if it brings inJ > > so much money, I can only repeat the words that Terry has used on more$ > > than one occasion - Why indeed ? > >h > >g >f> > Does the phrase "executive management moron" strike a chord? > F > Compaq would rather sell Wintel server farms that are a nightmare toH > administer, than to sell their customers what is appropriate for their > business needs.o  D As I originally said there likely would be one of two answers to theK question of why would Compaq management keeps these numbers quiet when theya' are touting profit numbers elsewhere...   J Possible answer #1) Each morning when Capellas, Blackmore, and Winkler flyL their black helicopters into their secret underground HQ in Houston they areH told by Bill Gates and Andy Grove they can't say anything positive aboutD OVMS or Alpha.  They all stand in front of two large screens and areI instructed to keep this information secret at all costs.  It must be keptcE secrete even if it means depressing the company stock and costing thec0 executives personally on their performance plan.  L Possible answer #2) Alpha servers aren't anywhere near as profitable as some* people keep repeating in this newsgroup...   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:19:18 -0500 & From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?/ Message-ID: <u19dip2aj2j974@corp.supernews.com>l  5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messagen< news:pXrQ7.173026$uB.21297134@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...  L > Do most people really want to do business with a vendor they distrust that > much?e  J Beyond 5-10 really vocal people in c.o.v. where is the data on that _deep_	 distrust?    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:21:04 GMTo* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?B Message-ID: <4F2R7.316983$dk.21027228@bin1.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  1 "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote in messageo) news:u19d0t6383dh14@corp.supernews.com... 7 > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message : > news:h3jQ7.132818$YD.11488352@news2.aus1.giganews.com... > I > > So while we can't establish *exactly* what profits Tru64 made, we canl make > aa > > *very* educated guess. >aB > > You're going to have to accept that people with a reason to be
 interested > inH > > such things are going to draw conclusions based on the best evidence they7 > > have available to them, whether you like it or not.f >mJ > I don't have an issue with people drawing conclusions - but in your case youiJ > seem to often state "educated guesses" as fact.  They are still educated > _guesses_...  H I suggest you re-read my posts:  I'm very careful explaing exactly how IK arrive at the conclusions I draw, though don't always go through the entire E process in every post when it has already been made clear previously.o  I The main problems you have had appear to have been lack of agreement with.K said conclusions.  As I've said before, you're welcome to dispute them *if*u? you can marshall comparable evidence to support different ones.i   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:24:28 GMTe* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?B Message-ID: <gI2R7.137977$tf5.7237319@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  1 "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote in messaget) news:u19dip2aj2j974@corp.supernews.com...l7 > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messagen> > news:pXrQ7.173026$uB.21297134@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... >nI > > Do most people really want to do business with a vendor they distrust  that	 > > much?d >hL > Beyond 5-10 really vocal people in c.o.v. where is the data on that _deep_ > distrust?   K It's implicit in the need to write in detailed penalty clauses to cover allnH the possible kinds of non-performance on 'commitments' that might occur:J are you completely incapable of understanding statements in the context of3 the (included) material that they're responding to?e   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:27:02 GMTd* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?B Message-ID: <GK2R7.138000$tf5.7238282@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  1 "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote in messagei) news:u19deukg9sql24@corp.supernews.com...  >e0 > "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message8 > news:QspQ7.20973$pa1.7423310@news3.rdc1.on.home.com... > >dB > > "John McLean" <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch> wrote in message3 > > news:3C11D2EE.F5F92DB9@swissonline.delete.ch...  > > >n > > > K > > > As for your question about why VMS is not being promoted if it brings  inL > > > so much money, I can only repeat the words that Terry has used on more& > > > than one occasion - Why indeed ? > > >  > > >s > >e@ > > Does the phrase "executive management moron" strike a chord? > >UH > > Compaq would rather sell Wintel server farms that are a nightmare toJ > > administer, than to sell their customers what is appropriate for their > > business needs.e >rF > As I originally said there likely would be one of two answers to theH > question of why would Compaq management keeps these numbers quiet when they) > are touting profit numbers elsewhere...l >iL > Possible answer #1) Each morning when Capellas, Blackmore, and Winkler flyJ > their black helicopters into their secret underground HQ in Houston they areoJ > told by Bill Gates and Andy Grove they can't say anything positive aboutF > OVMS or Alpha.  They all stand in front of two large screens and areK > instructed to keep this information secret at all costs.  It must be kepthG > secrete even if it means depressing the company stock and costing thei2 > executives personally on their performance plan. >oI > Possible answer #2) Alpha servers aren't anywhere near as profitable asg some, > people keep repeating in this newsgroup...  J And as usual you're missing the far more obvious explanation:  that CompaqJ management simply has preferences for what it wishes to sell and spins its numbers accordingly.   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:44:54 GMT 4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?. Message-ID: <q%2R7.27545$ER5.315810@rwcrnsc52>  G "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message news:GK2R7.138000n >dL > And as usual you're missing the far more obvious explanation:  that CompaqL > management simply has preferences for what it wishes to sell and spins its > numbers accordingly. >n  J I think it's safe to say that different factions of Compaq management haveL their own preferences as to what they want to sell. And I note with interestH that a whole bunch of mid to high level Windoze loyalists were purged in 1FQ01.  @ Hmmm... wonder if we'll see a good old fashioned Power Struggle?   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:12:49 +0000m% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>d< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?8 Message-ID: <cag91uofj0oh3bq4vvkls6oa39nf0cm3nr@4ax.com>  D On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:17:12 -0500, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote:    E >As I originally said there likely would be one of two answers to thesL >question of why would Compaq management keeps these numbers quiet when they( >are touting profit numbers elsewhere... > K >Possible answer #1) Each morning when Capellas, Blackmore, and Winkler flyeM >their black helicopters into their secret underground HQ in Houston they areu  C Even Peter Kastner (Aberdeen Group) agreed here that it was an open E secret the ex-DEC business keeps Compaq afloat. Why don't you go tellI him about black helicopters?  F The logic is very, very, very simple. Senior Compaq management believeF that VMS (and ultimately all Unix and all other non Wintel systems) isB on the way out. Therefore it *doesn't matter* how profitable it isD because they believe they will lose it anyway. So you cannibalize it and keep quiet.u   Iy -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:46:33 -0500 & From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?/ Message-ID: <u19imbc6mgpnda@corp.supernews.com>u  / A very key, and IMO a very false, assumption...   5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messageq< news:GK2R7.138000$tf5.7238282@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...L > And as usual you're missing the far more obvious explanation:  that CompaqL > management simply has preferences for what it wishes to sell and spins its > numbers accordingly.  H Given the pressure management is under to show results, at the potentialK risk of loss of their jobs, that would make no rational business sense.  IfFJ those OVMS profit numbers are as good as claimed here hiding them would beF neither in their personal interest or the interest of the stock price.  H And Bill you are missing the point - which was the point of the originalL posting - folks who think that Compaq management is hiding the truth becauseJ they have these deep technology biases means that they also believe CompaqJ management would risk their own career, and be willing to damage the stockD price, just because they are hell bent about a particular technology
 viewpoint.  L Allow me to offer this food for thought - while every corporate leader comesH to the job with biases when corporate leaders reach a certain level in aJ company their primary focus becomes shareholder value.  The only exceptionD to that is companies that are not controlled by larger institutionalI investors.  In other words folks these people do not think like technicalsJ professionals.  If you want a proof point - prior to 1998 Compaq made mostJ its Intel server profits from Novell and NOT Microsoft.  It is a myth thatG the Intel server division was a lap dog to Microsoft.  When shareholder-H value was seen as no longer being achievable with Novell Compaq switched gears.  J What I perceive happening in these newsgroups is a _valid_ perception thatG Compaq is not truly loyal to OVMS and other related technologies.  ThattK perception is correct because I don't think Compaq management would supportcL in the long term any technology that was loosing both money and marketshare.E Just like they repositioned their IA32 server business from Novell torK Microsoft they would reposition any product line that lost both marketshare"J and profits.  If Linux took over dominance they would switch tomorrow from Microsoft to Linux.t  L WHAT I BELIEVE HAS HAPPENED IS SOME HAVE MADE THE VERY FALSE ASSUMPTION thatI because Compaq management does not seem to be true believers in OVMS that-H then they must be true believers in some other technology with the usualC example being WinTel.  The assumption is just that - an assumption.4L Technical folks think that if you don't believe in one technology there mustI be because you another technology.   Compaq corporate leadership are true-9 believers in the financials and not any given technology.s  L DO NOT ASSUME THAT BECAUSE COMPAQ ISN'T A TRUE BELIEVER IN ONE TECHNOLOGY ITK MUST BE A TRUE BELIEVER IN ANOTHER.  THAT IS A FALSE ASSUMPTION.  THERE AREl* OTHER VALID REASONS WHY THAT COULD HAPPEN.  H Now the more interesting question is once you can get by the evil WinTelK black helicopter conspiracy at Compaq is - what does it mean doing business L with a company that isn't driven by being a true believer in any technology.L That is where the trust issues come in.  But when pondering that trust issueJ keep in mind that few large technology companies, and soon it may be none,J are true believers in any given technology anymore - few, if any, are leftI that behave like Digital did in the 1980's.  Compaq is a creature of whatE> the business is becoming.  They are a symptom and the cause...   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:49:53 -0500s& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?/ Message-ID: <u19isjnr72uk17@corp.supernews.com>-  5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messageM< news:gI2R7.137977$tf5.7237319@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... >R3 > "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote in message + > news:u19dip2aj2j974@corp.supernews.com...a9 > > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messagen@ > > news:pXrQ7.173026$uB.21297134@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com... > >4K > > > Do most people really want to do business with a vendor they distrustf > that > > > much?  > >lG > > Beyond 5-10 really vocal people in c.o.v. where is the data on thatr _deep_
 > > distrust?a >uI > It's implicit in the need to write in detailed penalty clauses to covery alltJ > the possible kinds of non-performance on 'commitments' that might occur:L > are you completely incapable of understanding statements in the context of5 > the (included) material that they're responding to?   < I was questioning quantity of individuals who feel this way.  B BTW - I see that need as a fact of life in doing business with anyJ technology company these days.  Remember I am person saying to everyone goL out and get "Golden Blanket" agreements as soon as Compaq will write them...   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:14:57 -0500 & From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?/ Message-ID: <u19kbj99ipq2e4@corp.supernews.com>-  5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messagee< news:4F2R7.316983$dk.21027228@bin1.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...  J > I suggest you re-read my posts:  I'm very careful explaing exactly how IF > arrive at the conclusions I draw, though don't always go through the entireG > process in every post when it has already been made clear previously.f >@K > The main problems you have had appear to have been lack of agreement withMH > said conclusions.  As I've said before, you're welcome to dispute them *if*A > you can marshall comparable evidence to support different ones.@  J Bill Bill Bill - I am not going to get suckered into attempting to prove aH negative debate with you.  I have carefully avoided getting into debatesK where I have to prove Compaq is _not_ doing something.  I also have avoidedhI judgement call debates.  I have offered alternate POV's which I stand by. H Sometimes those are based on the same data points you are observing.  In@ other cases it is based on different data points.  In this casesF (profitability of OVMS) it is based on different data points.  My dataJ points are what would be in the highly illogical behavior of management ifL OVMS profitability was that robust.  It is illogical behavior that is not inG the best interest of the corporation - but even more importantly not inoJ their personal self interest.  FWIW I find people rarely act against their own self interests.e  J I strongly suspect that OVMS is profitable but it is not a gold mine otherI Compaq management would be highlighting it to the financial world as cash9" cow like HP highlights printers...   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:28:48 -0500D& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?/ Message-ID: <u19l5ld7jfktd0@corp.supernews.com>   2 "Alan Greig" <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote in message2 news:cag91uofj0oh3bq4vvkls6oa39nf0cm3nr@4ax.com...E > Even Peter Kastner (Aberdeen Group) agreed here that it was an open G > secret the ex-DEC business keeps Compaq afloat. Why don't you go tellr > him about black helicopters?  # That includes services and storage.   H > The logic is very, very, very simple. Senior Compaq management believeH > that VMS (and ultimately all Unix and all other non Wintel systems) isD > on the way out. Therefore it *doesn't matter* how profitable it isF > because they believe they will lose it anyway. So you cannibalize it > and keep quiet.s  I Actually what Compaq management believes is that platforms as high margin.A product lines are on the way out and that it is value service andaJ integration that will add the value needed to generate the margins need toF keep Compaq profitable.  Everything I have seen from Compaq, includingK routine internal communications, demonstrates a very strong belief in Unix. I People keep missing this.  Capellas was being 100 percent consistent withiI his statements and actions over the last 18 months when he said that Unix L drove a large part of the merger.  He has been so consistent in his messagesI that for Compaq to be a enterprise players it must have a successful Unixd strategy and market share...   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:31:38 GMTu* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?B Message-ID: <uz4R7.208554$8q.20250959@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  1 "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote in messageb) news:u19imbc6mgpnda@corp.supernews.com...a1 > A very key, and IMO a very false, assumption...a >i7 > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messaget> > news:GK2R7.138000$tf5.7238282@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...G > > And as usual you're missing the far more obvious explanation:  thats CompaqJ > > management simply has preferences for what it wishes to sell and spins itsr > > numbers accordingly. > J > Given the pressure management is under to show results, at the potentialI > risk of loss of their jobs, that would make no rational business sense.I  G End of argument:  it's already clear that Compaq's management takes (orgK avoids taking) steps in a manner that makes no rational business sense on a. regular basis.     IfL > those OVMS profit numbers are as good as claimed here hiding them would beH > neither in their personal interest or the interest of the stock price.  J You keep acting as if 'those ['claimed'] OVMS profit numbers' came from meL and not from Compaq itself:  I suggest you ask Terry and Rob where they came/ from and adjust your understanding accordingly.>   ...c  H > Allow me to offer this food for thought - while every corporate leader comeskJ > to the job with biases when corporate leaders reach a certain level in a8 > company their primary focus becomes shareholder value.  B Oh, is that a 'fact'?  Sure sounds as if you presented it as such.  A Allow me to offer this alternative nourishment:  Capellas saw hiswH predecessor get the boot because he expanded his focus beyond the CompaqK Classic business at a time when that business was in trouble.  He is intenteI on not making the same mistake - even if it means trashing the higher-endoJ business inherited from DEC in a failing attempt to save the Classic area.  L Or do you really believe Capellas places shareholder value above keeping his job?   ...n  L > keep in mind that few large technology companies, and soon it may be none,L > are true believers in any given technology anymore - few, if any, are leftK > that behave like Digital did in the 1980's.  Compaq is a creature of whatw@ > the business is becoming.  They are a symptom and the cause...  L You obviously don't understand how DEC worked back when it worked well.  ItsI *strength* was that it didn't place all its eggs in any single technology'I basket, but rather developed multiple good technologies and let them bothuK complement and compete with each other.  IBM did the same, and while it hasoJ had variations in top-management quality over the years it managed largely& to hang onto that concept, unlike DEC.  J Behaving like DEC did until the mid-'80s may be *exactly* what is requiredA to regain market share - and in any event Compaq seems completelysI incompetent to adopt 'me too' approaches (first to Dell's business model,e. now supposedly to IBM's) so what else is left?   - bill   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 15:21:27 -0000= From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]>e< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?6 Message-ID: <20011210152127.32199.qmail@gacracker.org>  < On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote:   <snip>  K >I strongly suspect that OVMS is profitable but it is not a gold mine otheroJ >Compaq management would be highlighting it to the financial world as cash# >cow like HP highlights printers...-  K Assuming for a moment that VMS is highly profitable, would that change yourlE view of the management? Would you then agree with the numerous c.o.v.gI posters that believe (opinion of course) that Q management is incompetent1 and Wintel-obsessed?  J It doesn't take a conspiracy involving black helicopters if the managementG don't really want VMS, all they need is a little creative accounting tosH avoid emphasising the profitability of a product they just wish would go away.a     Doc. -- d6 The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.K ~ Phineas Taylor Barnum.                              http://vmsbox.cjb.nety   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:07:06 -0500l& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?/ Message-ID: <u19ndlfe87pj1a@corp.supernews.com>   J "Doc.Cypher" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message0 news:20011210152127.32199.qmail@gacracker.org...> > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote: >e > <snip> >sG > >I strongly suspect that OVMS is profitable but it is not a gold mines other L > >Compaq management would be highlighting it to the financial world as cash% > >cow like HP highlights printers...o >bH > Assuming for a moment that VMS is highly profitable, would that change your > view of the management?s  K I would agree that they are incompetent - while not some what agreeing they B are incompetent there are very plausible explanations beyond being WinTel-obsessed.    5 > incompetent you then agree with the numerous c.o.v.tK > posters that believe (opinion of course) that Q management is incompetents > and Wintel-obsessed?  D Yes I but IMO what has happened is because most of us believe from aK technology standpoint OVMS is the superior OS rather than looking inward atoD OVMS factors that limited it in the market place some have jumped on theories about Q management.  L > It doesn't take a conspiracy involving black helicopters if the managementI > don't really want VMS, all they need is a little creative accounting to-J > avoid emphasising the profitability of a product they just wish would go > away.s  I Actually this would be on the level of black helicopters - not only wouldfL you have to believe that Compaq management is doing this, that no one inside@ the corporation is providing credible leaks to press and analystJ communities, and that the whole of both (technology and financial) analyst communities are in on it.   K Don't you think by now if the institutional investors in Compaq caught wind J that there were these cash cows in Compaq they would be pressing Compaq to' focus on them and dump the access unit?l  K Don't you think right now that if these cash cows existed Carly and MichaelaI would be running them up the flagpole to counter the argument that the HPiI printer division alone is now going to have to shoulder the cash cow load I for an even bigger company?  Don't you think Carly and Michael see the HPIL deal sinking as a likely career ending event?  The whole argument being made@ to the HP shareholders is Compaq brings no winners to the party.  2 argument are just too many forces are play here...   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:09:45 +0100f$ From: "Dr. Dweeb" <Dweeb@nospam.com>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?1 Message-ID: <Xb5R7.118$t84.10588@news.get2net.dk>C   Jeff,B  K Jeff never answers my posts, mostly because he cannot.  I bet he bats 0 foru 4  on the test below.r  6 How many F500 companies have you actually worked for ?% How many Wall Street merchant banks ?i How many stock exchanges ?> How many EXECUTIVE/Senior management positions have you held ?  H Since the value for all of these in my case is larger than zero, I wouldF proffer the observation based on my experience of the last 20 years inK several countries and on multiple continents, that you clearly have no clueeL how big companies function or how Wall Street operates or indeed the methods? by which these entities feed each other.  I would suggest that,6  I "while every corporate leader comes to the job with biases when corporatetF leaders reach a certain level in a company their primary focus becomes shareholder value."y  G is a statement based on ignorance and the navet born of a second ratesK business school.  While we would like to think that this is the way that itw9 works, it doesn't.  Disappointing but none the less true.s  K I chose the above statement as indicative, but there are many more in whichhK you presuppose that people are rational.  Many people are not rational, andmH some of them sit in positions of power.  While on average, people act inD their own self interest, this is not necessarily consistent with theJ interest of the company for whom they work.  There are lots of reasons for this.    Dweeb.  1 "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote in messagee) news:u19imbc6mgpnda@corp.supernews.com... 1 > A very key, and IMO a very false, assumption...  >a7 > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messaget> > news:GK2R7.138000$tf5.7238282@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...G > > And as usual you're missing the far more obvious explanation:  thatj CompaqJ > > management simply has preferences for what it wishes to sell and spins itsf > > numbers accordingly. >hJ > Given the pressure management is under to show results, at the potentialI > risk of loss of their jobs, that would make no rational business sense.l IfL > those OVMS profit numbers are as good as claimed here hiding them would beH > neither in their personal interest or the interest of the stock price. >kJ > And Bill you are missing the point - which was the point of the originalF > posting - folks who think that Compaq management is hiding the truth becauseaL > they have these deep technology biases means that they also believe CompaqL > management would risk their own career, and be willing to damage the stockF > price, just because they are hell bent about a particular technology > viewpoint. > H > Allow me to offer this food for thought - while every corporate leader comesiJ > to the job with biases when corporate leaders reach a certain level in aL > company their primary focus becomes shareholder value.  The only exceptionF > to that is companies that are not controlled by larger institutionalK > investors.  In other words folks these people do not think like technicalrL > professionals.  If you want a proof point - prior to 1998 Compaq made mostL > its Intel server profits from Novell and NOT Microsoft.  It is a myth thatI > the Intel server division was a lap dog to Microsoft.  When shareholdersJ > value was seen as no longer being achievable with Novell Compaq switched > gears. > L > What I perceive happening in these newsgroups is a _valid_ perception thatI > Compaq is not truly loyal to OVMS and other related technologies.  ThatcE > perception is correct because I don't think Compaq management woulde supportnA > in the long term any technology that was loosing both money andT marketshare.G > Just like they repositioned their IA32 server business from Novell toAA > Microsoft they would reposition any product line that lost bothN marketshareUL > and profits.  If Linux took over dominance they would switch tomorrow from > Microsoft to Linux.t >cI > WHAT I BELIEVE HAS HAPPENED IS SOME HAVE MADE THE VERY FALSE ASSUMPTIONt thatK > because Compaq management does not seem to be true believers in OVMS thatsJ > then they must be true believers in some other technology with the usualE > example being WinTel.  The assumption is just that - an assumption.eI > Technical folks think that if you don't believe in one technology theree mustK > be because you another technology.   Compaq corporate leadership are trueg; > believers in the financials and not any given technology.- >-K > DO NOT ASSUME THAT BECAUSE COMPAQ ISN'T A TRUE BELIEVER IN ONE TECHNOLOGYI ITI > MUST BE A TRUE BELIEVER IN ANOTHER.  THAT IS A FALSE ASSUMPTION.  THEREg ARE , > OTHER VALID REASONS WHY THAT COULD HAPPEN. >dJ > Now the more interesting question is once you can get by the evil WinTelD > black helicopter conspiracy at Compaq is - what does it mean doing businessB > with a company that isn't driven by being a true believer in any technology.@H > That is where the trust issues come in.  But when pondering that trust issue1L > keep in mind that few large technology companies, and soon it may be none,L > are true believers in any given technology anymore - few, if any, are leftK > that behave like Digital did in the 1980's.  Compaq is a creature of what @ > the business is becoming.  They are a symptom and the cause... >e >  >t >  >  >s   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:25:42 -0500 & From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?/ Message-ID: <u19ogdjt0jcdd3@corp.supernews.com>y  5 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in messagee< news:uz4R7.208554$8q.20250959@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...L > You keep acting as if 'those ['claimed'] OVMS profit numbers' came from meI > and not from Compaq itself:  I suggest you ask Terry and Rob where they- came1 > from and adjust your understanding accordingly.0  : The 1.5 Billion number cam from you (adding Tru64 and NSK)  J > > Allow me to offer this food for thought - while every corporate leader > comescL > > to the job with biases when corporate leaders reach a certain level in a: > > company their primary focus becomes shareholder value. >oD > Oh, is that a 'fact'?  Sure sounds as if you presented it as such.  I True - but history has shown insitutional investors correct it when it isc not the case  C > Allow me to offer this alternative nourishment:  Capellas saw hisoJ > predecessor get the boot because he expanded his focus beyond the CompaqF > Classic business at a time when that business was in trouble.  He is intentK > on not making the same mistake - even if it means trashing the higher-endaL > business inherited from DEC in a failing attempt to save the Classic area.  & Of course you are entitled to this POV  . My read is runs counter to his 180 day letter.  J > Or do you really believe Capellas places shareholder value above keeping hisn > job?  E I believe Compaq has shown shareholder value equals keeping your job.o  H > > keep in mind that few large technology companies, and soon it may be none,sI > > are true believers in any given technology anymore - few, if any, are  leftH > > that behave like Digital did in the 1980's.  Compaq is a creature of whatB > > the business is becoming.  They are a symptom and the cause... > I > You obviously don't understand how DEC worked back when it worked well.   I No that is your assumption as to what I was saying.  In the context of myfK coment it was that Digital was loyal to technology paths way beyond what welB are seeing today.  Re: below - no where did I suggest "one basket"   > ItslK > *strength* was that it didn't place all its eggs in any single technology-K > basket, but rather developed multiple good technologies and let them bothII > complement and compete with each other.  IBM did the same, and while itg has L > had variations in top-management quality over the years it managed largely( > to hang onto that concept, unlike DEC.  L Surprise we both agree that Digital prior to the mid-1980's was successfully2 because of Ken Olsen's product hot house approach.  L One of my postings you previously trashed is Digital's downfall started withD Jack Shields desire to really consolidate product lines with his oneF platform from the desktop to the data center strategy.  If Digital hadB understood its roots it would have exploited the PDP-11 (and otherJ technologies) in the 1980's to cut off that other 16-bit OS gaining marketL acceptance known as MS-DOS.  You are talking with someone more than you know. believes diversity is what made Digital great.  D Be careful Bill I have been working closely with Digital since 1970.  L > Behaving like DEC did until the mid-'80s may be *exactly* what is requiredC > to regain market share - and in any event Compaq seems completelygK > incompetent to adopt 'me too' approaches (first to Dell's business model, 0 > now supposedly to IBM's) so what else is left?  G As previously stated the Dell model will not work for Compaq and Compaqt$ management knows it will not work...   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 10:44:56 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)t< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?3 Message-ID: <YsJkhn1PI9BR@eisner.encompasserve.org>1  X In article <u19kbj99ipq2e4@corp.supernews.com>, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> writes:  L > I strongly suspect that OVMS is profitable but it is not a gold mine otherK > Compaq management would be highlighting it to the financial world as cash9$ > cow like HP highlights printers...  5 They might be defensive in advance to responses like:B  A 	That company is making lots of their money from a dying product.8  ? 	That proves the company is not making money on (Unix/NT) whichu 	is where the growth will be.s   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:58:50 -0500t- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> < Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?, Message-ID: <3C14E9C9.13310A90@videotron.ca>   Jeff Killeen wrote:uL > Possible answer #1) Each morning when Capellas, Blackmore, and Winkler flyN > their black helicopters into their secret underground HQ in Houston they areJ > told by Bill Gates and Andy Grove they can't say anything positive aboutF > OVMS or Alpha.  They all stand in front of two large screens and areK > instructed to keep this information secret at all costs.  It must be keptnG > secrete even if it means depressing the company stock and costing them2 > executives personally on their performance plan.  L You do realise that you have just broken you NDA on this, do you ? Bad thingF will happen to you. Those men in black can be very bad to your health.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:59:33 -0500n- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>h< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?, Message-ID: <3C14E9F4.4DA69C1F@videotron.ca>   Jeff Killeen wrote:tL > Beyond 5-10 really vocal people in c.o.v. where is the data on that _deep_ > distrust?p  H Would you agree that most remaining Compaq customers will not think very% highly of Compaq's recent decisions ?e   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 16:26:30 -0000= From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]>l< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?5 Message-ID: <20011210162630.3176.qmail@gacracker.org>o  < On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote:  K >"Doc.Cypher" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in messagel1 >news:20011210152127.32199.qmail@gacracker.org... ? >> On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote:  >>	 >> <snip>  >>H >> >I strongly suspect that OVMS is profitable but it is not a gold mineK >> >other Compaq management would be highlighting it to the financial worldh/ >> >as cash cow like HP highlights printers... h >>I >> Assuming for a moment that VMS is highly profitable, would that changei  >> your view of the management?  >eL >I would agree that they are incompetent - while not some what agreeing theyC >are incompetent there are very plausible explanations beyond beingh >WinTel-obsessed.r >i >a6 >> incompetent you then agree with the numerous c.o.v.L >> posters that believe (opinion of course) that Q management is incompetent >> and Wintel-obsessed?  >tE >Yes I but IMO what has happened is because most of us believe from aDL >technology standpoint OVMS is the superior OS rather than looking inward atE >OVMS factors that limited it in the market place some have jumped on  >theories about Q management.9  G What else is there? After all, a very modest marketing campaign for VMScC managed to increase the sales. Compaq didn't continue this. Is thatuI competent behaviour? Is it indicative of any form of neutrality or favour  towards the operating system?   M >> It doesn't take a conspiracy involving black helicopters if the managementpJ >> don't really want VMS, all they need is a little creative accounting toK >> avoid emphasising the profitability of a product they just wish would go 	 >> away. t > J >Actually this would be on the level of black helicopters - not only wouldM >you have to believe that Compaq management is doing this, that no one inside A >the corporation is providing credible leaks to press and analyst K >communities, and that the whole of both (technology and financial) analysth >communities are in on it.  J I subscribe to the view that anal-ysts only see the Q as a Wintel company.K After all, they hardly advertise the fact that they sell VMS systems to the0A military. I'd expect that to go down quite well with Wall Street.o  L >Don't you think by now if the institutional investors in Compaq caught windK >that there were these cash cows in Compaq they would be pressing Compaq tot( >focus on them and dump the access unit?  J Classic Compaq was a nicely profitable company, I suspect many - includingK institutional investors - hope for a return to that. That means a return totI the original focus of the company, or it certainly appears that way to an 	 outsider.n  L >Don't you think right now that if these cash cows existed Carly and MichaelJ >would be running them up the flagpole to counter the argument that the HPJ >printer division alone is now going to have to shoulder the cash cow load >for an even bigger company?  I Without getting back to the black helicopters which you are so fond of, I I suspect that Carly and Curly view VMS as a legacy OS. They *expect* it tolK shrink away over time and don't think it can support the company long-term.sJ I, and many others here, believe it can thrive if properly marketed as the best general-purpose OS around.h  - >Don't you think Carly and Michael see the HPS. >deal sinking as a likely career ending event?  J Personally, I hope it is. I'm only familiar with the rumours of discontentH regarding Carly's reign, on the other hand I've direct experience of VMSJ systems being viewed unfavourably because of Compaq's attitude towards theH OS. There is much talk of emulating IBM, and with regards to support andH commitment to products I believe that only new management for Compaq can
 achieve that.t   >The whole argument being madeA >to the HP shareholders is Compaq brings no winners to the party.p  D I don't see many people in c.o.v. saying it brings winners to the HP management team.  3 >argument are just too many forces are play here...w  E There certainly are a large number of forces in play here. However, IhF suspect Carly and Curly want to be number one at something. The mergerK achieves that in the PC space, although I suspect it would only be a matterw- of time before Dell regained the crown there.t     Doc. -- p6 The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.K ~ Phineas Taylor Barnum.                              http://vmsbox.cjb.netg   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:31:54 -0500 & From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?/ Message-ID: <u19sci8demkm43@corp.supernews.com>   J "Doc.Cypher" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message/ news:20011210162630.3176.qmail@gacracker.org...e> > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com> wrote:G > >Yes I but IMO what has happened is because most of us believe from aBK > >technology standpoint OVMS is the superior OS rather than looking inwardo atG > >OVMS factors that limited it in the market place some have jumped ond > >theories about Q management.h >  > What else is there?k  L This is likely high heresy in c.o.v. but because of the tradeoffs required II don't not believe it is possible to produce a universal OS that will haverK leadership across all major markets.  The very thing we value about OVMS is H its weakness - a well architect and engineered (technology) OS that whenJ extended remains very consistent with it past.  The tradeoffs one makes inI their go to market strategy is "cost" versus "technology" versus "time toeG market".  OVMS has not compromised "technology" in the name of "time to J market" as Windows has.  OVMS has not compromised "technology" in the nameL of "cost" as Unix has.  There are both "cost" and "time to market" tradeoffsI one IMO has to make to achieve a well architect and engineered OS that is   extended consistently over time.  K OVMS could never be what is great about if it took on attempting to deliver,L leadership in cost or time to market.  What I suspect some in c.o.v. haven'tJ internalized is that no matter what Digital/Compaq management did IMO theyK couldn't have made OVMS a universal platform without fundamentally changinga the gestalt of OVMS.  K There are many things that Digital/Compaq management did that made it worse G but OVMS couldn't remain what it is and have been a mass market OS likeeJ Windows or Unix.  It would have either had cost problems or time to market> problems.  Digital should have pursued a multi-OS strategy and multi-platform strategy...   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:43:40 -0500 & From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?/ Message-ID: <u19t2febpcfj1b@corp.supernews.com>   J "Doc.Cypher" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message/ news:20011210162630.3176.qmail@gacracker.org...t  L > I, and many others here, believe it can thrive if properly marketed as the! > best general-purpose OS around.o  J That is where we disagree because of my last posting.  To be graphic aboutI it - the general purpose market means having to compete with whores and IrL don't think OVMS can remain what it is and play the game of compromise one's. self in the name of "cost" or "time to market"  G > There certainly are a large number of forces in play here. However, I H > suspect Carly and Curly want to be number one at something. The mergerF > achieves that in the PC space, although I suspect it would only be a matter/ > of time before Dell regained the crown there.d  I No mystery at all there - they have been very very public about what theyeJ want to be number one at.  IBM will be number one at delivering integratedB proprietary solutions.  HP/Compaq will be number one at deliveringL integrated open (Unix/Windows/Linux/Internet) solutions.  They have repeatedI it over and over again that they want to be the open systems foil to IBM.  That is NOT Dell's strategy.  I The black helicopter crowd might read the above as ah ha that proves they I are against OVMS because they want to be the open systems company!  OK if B you feel that way but please read what I wrote before you responseL open=Unix/Windows/Linux/Internet and NOT open=Windows.  (Yes I know how open Windows is)...   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:48:43 -0500c& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?/ Message-ID: <u19tc4khu3ur6e@corp.supernews.com>h  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3C14E9F4.4DA69C1F@videotron.ca... > Jeff Killeen wrote: G > > Beyond 5-10 really vocal people in c.o.v. where is the data on thatm _deep_
 > > distrust?h >mJ > Would you agree that most remaining Compaq customers will not think very' > highly of Compaq's recent decisions ?h  K Nope - I suspect the Intel customers have no opinion other than Quick BladesL servers are just right for the data center.  I know that the NSK folks wouldL rather be on Intel.  I haven't run into one of them yet who wishes they wereK on Alpha.  I also suspect that Compaq did a good job with the management of L the companies that generate most of the OVMS profits and Compaq has 18 monthK window to prove it will work.  Finally I have yet to run into a happy Tru64M person these days.  I FYI - I think the attitude of the NSK folks is they see this as being theAH last conversion whereas Alpha always ran the risk of another conversion.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:17:21 +0100 1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>p< Subject: Re: It you say it often enough does it become fact?5 Message-ID: <3C14FC31.373B036D@swissonline.delete.ch>n   Jeff Killeen wrote:h    L > I strongly suspect that OVMS is profitable but it is not a gold mine otherK > Compaq management would be highlighting it to the financial world as cashr$ > cow like HP highlights printers...  H If the world was a logical place and if various people didn't have theirG eye on what *might* happen in some distant future (or perhaps what theyr1 hope will happen), then your argument would hold.s  - It isn't; they do; so your argument fails ...1  F It seems so difficult to ignore the fact that the high end has broughtH in almost 60% of the total income in the last 3 complete years while theC low end (PCs) has brought in just 2%, but somehow Compaq manage to.>  C Sure the PCs returned a higher revenue (almost 50% of total revenuewC compared to 34%) but margins on PCs are very thin and that does noteD translate into income.  (Cautionary note:  Winkler usually refers toA revenue when he talks about the financials for the PC side of thea< business. If you ever get the chance, ask him about income.)  G Even for the first 3 quarters of this year "Access" (ie. PCs) had totaloC revenue of $11.5 billion but the expenses on PCs was $11.9 billion,eF meaning a loss of about $400 million.  Enterprise had lower revenue atD $8 billion but made income of $102 million. (To complete the pictureG Global Services had revenue of $5.7 billion but expenses were only $4.9e# billion so they made $800 million.)   @ Again PCs produced more revenue, but they had higher costs whichE cancelled any advantage.  (And please don't think that Global SevicesnD can survive without the high-end.  Most of Compaq's consulting takes place in that area.)    B Windows might be the way of the future ... but then again Linux isB continuing to make inroads into the territory that Windows wants. E Wouldn't Compaq be smarter to stick with the profitable lines for nowsE (especially in these tough times) but keep a presence in both Windowsl% and Linux to see how things pan out ?i     John McLean    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:40:46 -0000 1 From: "Chris Townley" <news@townleyc.demon.co.uk>s Subject: LAT and DecNet phase V B Message-ID: <1008009694.15962.0.nnrp-01.d4e45fa5@news.demon.co.uk>  L Maybe I am being a bit stupid, but how do I get LAT running a phase V alpha.  H Standalone DEC PSW 433AU running VMS 7.3 hobbyist, with DECNET plus, and! TCPIP 5.1 installed from scratch.a  K I have set up a phase IV address, but only get invalid device errors when Io run LAT$SYSTARTUP   H I have searched the FAQ and the Docs, but cannot find the relevant bits.6 Could somebody please point me in the right direction.   TIAr   --
 Chris Townleyb chris@townleyc.demon.co.uk townleyc@spicers.ltd.ukc   ------------------------------   Date: 9 Dec 2001 23:15:43 -0800p' From: piet@timmers-it.nl (Piet Timmers)m? Subject: Looking for .CLD files for some standard VMS  commandsm= Message-ID: <be44b12d.0112092315.4eb8a1db@posting.google.com>i   Hi all,   K I wonder if there is sombody outhere that can help me to the .CLD files forwD the standard VMS commands DIRECTORY, PURGE, DELETE etc. Any would be appreciated.   Regardsu   Piet   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:04:22 +0100w, From: "Bart Zorn" <B.Zorn@TrueBit.nospam.nl>C Subject: Re: Looking for .CLD files for some standard VMS  commands * Message-ID: <9v1qat$420$1@news1.xs4all.nl>  4 "Piet Timmers" <piet@timmers-it.nl> wrote in message7 news:be44b12d.0112092315.4eb8a1db@posting.google.com... 	 > Hi all,t > I > I wonder if there is sombody outhere that can help me to the .CLD fileso foraF > the standard VMS commands DIRECTORY, PURGE, DELETE etc. Any would be > appreciated. >o	 > Regardsl >i > Piet  F Have a look at http://www.openvms.compaq.com/freeware/freeware50/verb/H With this tool you can extract any .CLD file from DCLTABLES or any other) image which contains command definitions!e   Regards,  	 Bart Zorno   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:37:16 +0010 ' From: <paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.au>lC Subject: Re: Looking for .CLD files for some standard VMS  commands.5 Message-ID: <01KBPQMJAAIA001BXH@tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au>   C >I wonder if there is sombody outhere that can help me to the .CLD :
 >files forE >the standard VMS commands DIRECTORY, PURGE, DELETE etc. Any would ben
 >appreciated.e   What are you trying to do?  F Yes, there are ways, but I would hate to offer them unless you really  know what you are doing.  @ Can't you do what you might be trying to by re-defining symbols?   Regards, Paddy   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:04:10 +0010.' From: <paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.au>tC Subject: Re: Looking for .CLD files for some standard VMS  commandsm5 Message-ID: <01KBPRJW4R2A001ADC@tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au>a   Bart Zorn wrote:  5 >"Piet Timmers" <piet@timmers-it.nl> wrote in message-8 >news:be44b12d.0112092315.4eb8a1db@posting.google.com...
 >> Hi all, >>J >> I wonder if there is sombody outhere that can help me to the .CLD files >forG >> the standard VMS commands DIRECTORY, PURGE, DELETE etc. Any would bee >> appreciated.s  G >Have a look at http://www.openvms.compaq.com/freeware/freeware50/verb/hI >With this tool you can extract any .CLD file from DCLTABLES or any other * >image which contains command definitions! 0s Bart,h  L I posted just before you did.  In this instance I gave a negative comment.  J There was a previous poster, in another thread, who wanted something like % VERB and I was happy to offer a site.s  E The impression I got here was that Piet wanted to tailor some of the nE standard DCLTABLES verbs.  I believe this is dangerous and should be u discouraged.  L Sometimes verbs act differently in interactive or batch mode.  E.g. Fortran E and the linker provide outputs in batch, not interactively.  In this 1L respect, I unashamedly provide symbols which replace the verbs to alter the K behaviour in SYLOGIN.  I would never advocate changing SET COMMAND for VMS FL commands (which VERB does allow you to do).  The symbols can be very easily 0 "played with" in your login.com, or SYLOGIN.com.   Regards, Paddy   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:43:22 GMTo- From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network>-C Subject: Re: Looking for .CLD files for some standard VMS  commandss* Message-ID: <3C14A5D4.1060306@qsl.network>   Piet Timmers wrote:   	 > Hi all,g > M > I wonder if there is sombody outhere that can help me to the .CLD files fornF > the standard VMS commands DIRECTORY, PURGE, DELETE etc. Any would be > appreciated.    I The .CLD files that are used to build the OpenVMS supplied DCLTABLES are qH different based on what version of OpenVMS you are running and possibly 3 what layered products that you have on your system.s  G Changing them is very risky, and your changes may need to be reapplied nG after ECO kits and software upgrades.  And before reapplying them, you  = must apply your changes to the then current .CLD definitions.t   Can you let us know what the real problem is?  Are you trying to enhance them, or do you have a damaged installation and are trying to repair it?t     The version of OpenVMS, the architecture, and specifically all layered products and ECO kits installed on the system can be very important to give you any usefull information.t     -John  wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Onlyc   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:16:27 +0300 4 From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" <Laishev@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU>C Subject: Re: Looking for .CLD files for some standard VMS  commandst/ Message-ID: <3C14A79B.FD7D29C@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU>    Have a look to sys$update: $dir sys$update:*.clds $ $dir sys$update:*.cldv   Directory SYS$COMMON:[SYSUPD]   J ACC.CLD;1           ANALYZE.CLD;1       BACKUP.CLD;1        CHECKSUM.CLD;1E CONVERT.CLD;1       COPY.CLD;1          CREATE.CLD;1        CTF.CLD;1 H DCLINT.CLD;1        DECW$FONTCOMPILER.CLD;1                 DELETE.CLD;1J DIAGNOSE_STUB.CLD;1 DIFF.CLD;1          DIRECTORY.CLD;1     DISMOUNT.CLD;1J DUMP.CLD;1          EDIT.CLD;1          ENABLE.CLD;1        EXCHANGE.CLD;1F GENCAT.CLD;1        HELP.CLD;1          ICONV.CLD;1         INIT.CLD;1F INSTALL.CLD;1       JAVA.CLD;1          LIBRARIAN.CLD;1     LINK.CLD;1I LMF.CLD;1           LOCALE.CLD;1        MACRO.CLD;1         MACRO64.CLD;1eG MAIL.CLD;1          MESSAGE.CLD;1       MONITOR.CLD;1       MOUNT.CLD;1iG NCS.CLD;1           OSAKTRACE.CLD;1     PCSI.CLD;1          PHONE.CLD;1uI PPPD.CLD;1          PWRK$COMMANDS.CLD;11                    RECOVER.CLD;1 H RENAME.CLD;1        REPLY.CLD;1         RUN.CLD;1           RUNOFF.CLD;1F SEARCH.CLD;1        SET.CLD;1           SHOW.CLD;1          SORT.CLD;1K SPAWN.CLD;1         START.CLD;1         SUBMIT.CLD;1        SWXCR$CLD.CLD;1oH SYNCH.CLD;1         THREADCP.CLD;1      TYPE.CLD;1          UNLOCK.CLD;1	 ZIC.CLD;1e   Total of 59 files.     Piet Timmers wrote:c > 	 > Hi all,l > M > I wonder if there is sombody outhere that can help me to the .CLD files foroF > the standard VMS commands DIRECTORY, PURGE, DELETE etc. Any would be > appreciated. > 	 > Regardso >  > Piet   -- a Cheers,aF +OpenVMS [Sys|Net] HardWorker .......................................+E  Russia,Delta Telecom Inc,                    Cel:  +7 (901) 971-3222 E  191119,St.Petersburg,Transportny per. 3                     116-3222tF +http://starlet.deltatel.ru ................. SysMan rides HailStorm +   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:29:25 +0100u2 From: martin@radiogaga.harz.de (Martin Vorlaender)- Subject: Re: manuals (was Linus' view on VMS) ; Message-ID: <3c14e2e5.524144494f47414741@radiogaga.harz.de>n  ) Paul Sture (paul.sture@bluewin.ch) wrote:r > Art Rice wrote:  > > Jan-Erik Sderholm wrote:h8 > > > Personaly I find the PDF versions better than both> > > > bookreader and HTML. Prints nice, and using an "industry > > > standard" reader.i > > M > > Except that Compaq is offering more and more as "Web Resource"  i.e. HTMLe >rL > Which doesn't offer the search facility of Bookreader. Hmm - time to look - > at Martin Vorlaender's port of ht://Dig :-)   ? Go for it! ;-) No - wait for the next release... real soon now.e  H I have knowledge of a Compaq Customer Services department that does thisD already. Nice test for ht://Dig: a slightly modified version took 16E minutes on a TurboLaser (with access to the docs via the filesystem).n   cu,    Martin -- eG                            | Martin Vorlaender  |  VMS & WNT programmer 4  UNIX is user friendly.    | work: mv@pdv-systeme.deG  It's just selective about |   http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/h;  who its friends are.      | home: martin@radiogaga.harz.det   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:04:48 +0100 ( From: Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.ch>- Subject: Re: manuals (was Linus' view on VMS)r- Message-ID: <VA.000004e3.e43ee268@bluewin.ch>.  N In article <3c14e2e5.524144494f47414741@radiogaga.harz.de>, Martin Vorlaender  wrote:+ > Paul Sture (paul.sture@bluewin.ch) wrote:R > > Art Rice wrote:n > > > Jan-Erik Sderholm wrote:s: > > > > Personaly I find the PDF versions better than both@ > > > > bookreader and HTML. Prints nice, and using an "industry > > > > standard" reader.l > > > O > > > Except that Compaq is offering more and more as "Web Resource"  i.e. HTMLs > >tN > > Which doesn't offer the search facility of Bookreader. Hmm - time to look / > > at Martin Vorlaender's port of ht://Dig :-)g > A > Go for it! ;-) No - wait for the next release... real soon now.h > M Do you anticipate problems with the current release? I could have used it on sO Friday when digging around the TCP/IP docs. I pointed Bookreader at some older o CDs only to see it ACCVIO :-(d  J > I have knowledge of a Compaq Customer Services department that does thisF > already. Nice test for ht://Dig: a slightly modified version took 16G > minutes on a TurboLaser (with access to the docs via the filesystem).t > L 16 minutes to do the indexing? It's probably worth mentioning at this point N that I've had the documentation placed on the filesystem, both at home and at A work, for quite a while now - it's sooo much faster than the CDs.o ___i
 Paul Sture Switzerlanda   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:49:19 +0000e4 From: John Laird <john@laird-towers.freeserve.co.uk>1 Subject: Re: manuals (was RE: Linus' view on VMS)v8 Message-ID: <44191ucp0pr2s3mbnofq7o5oo9itmbu866@4ax.com>  H On Sat, 08 Dec 2001 19:56:44 +0100, Jan-Erik Sderholm <noone@dummy.com> wrote:  C >Hm, If you check http://www.openvms.compaq.com:8000/, the big newsoC >in the 7.3 column, is that more or less every manual also now havetC >a PDF version. 7.1 and 7.2 commes only in HTML. This does not lookr= >like "more and more as ""Web Resource""  i.e. HTML" to me...o  C True.  The argument about there being no particularly decent viewerS+ available under OpenVMS still holds, sadly.r     	Johnr   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:26:48 -0000 8 From: John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk>1 Subject: RE: manuals (was RE: Linus' view on VMS) N Message-ID: <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BF14B@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>  H PDF is a much better format for providing documentation. HTML is limitedJ because people rarely provide a "print whole manual" option and it's oftenJ difficult to browse through. With PDF you can have an index, searching forJ keywords, print whole manual or selected parts and you have a high qualityH document. It's certainly a "Web resource" these days as much as HTML for documentation.  H I wouldn't get too upset about not having a PDF viewer on VMS. It's veryG likely that one would access the VMS system from a Windows PC (or LinuxoL perhaps) anyway and so the PDF docs are available on the same screen. It's aJ small detail that the viewing of the PDF doc isn't being driven by VMS but one day perhaps it may be ...t   John  B Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk= Post: Denys Wilkinson Building, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UKoA Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)b   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:01:36 GMTt3 From: "Tom Wade" <t.wade@vms.eurokom.ie.removespam>m1 Subject: Re: manuals (was RE: Linus' view on VMS)e- Message-ID: <4f3R7.2629$_3.10335@news.iol.ie>y  E "John Macallister" <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk> wrote in messageeH news:35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BF14B@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk...: > PDF is a much better format for providing documentation.  H I've got to disagree with you.  I *hate* PDF, and this has nothing to doL with its support of VMS, as I use a Microsoft desktop anyway.  What I detest aboutn PDF is:d  G 1.  Try to get a whole page on the screen, and the print is unreadable.-I 2.  Everything always comes with US Letter size rather than A4 (5% of thee9 world's population lives in countries that don't use A4).gK 3.  Try to scroll down a page using the wheelmouse, and instead of smoothlyJH scrolling between pages like most word processors do, it jumps suddenly,+ leaving you unsure of how much you skipped. K 4.  I find myself clicking on what looks like a link only to see the littled fist clench back at me. G 5.  If a large document is hosted as 'online documentation' at a remoteyG site, I have to download the entire thing even if I only want to browsec through a small portion of it.  J HTML is far better in my opinion.  The only thing that is easier in PDF isJ to print out the whole thing, and if people are using that option a lot itJ says a lot about the ease of use of PDF as an *online* medium (it would beH better to provide a postscript version for people who want to print it).  A Quite frankly I loathe PDF and will never produce anything in it.v  L ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --L Tom Wade    | EMail: T.Wade@vms.eurokom.ie.removespam  (all domain mailers).G EuroKom     | X400:  g=tom;s=wade;o=eurokom;p=eurokom;a=eirmail400;c=ie-& 30, Dale Rd | Tel:   +353 (1) 278-7878& Stillorgan  | Fax:   +353 (1) 278-78793 Co Dublin   | Disclaimer:  This is not a disclaimero@ Ireland     | Tip:         "Friends don't let friends do Unix !"    HTML is limitedL > because people rarely provide a "print whole manual" option and it's oftenL > difficult to browse through. With PDF you can have an index, searching forL > keywords, print whole manual or selected parts and you have a high qualityJ > document. It's certainly a "Web resource" these days as much as HTML for > documentation. >sJ > I wouldn't get too upset about not having a PDF viewer on VMS. It's veryI > likely that one would access the VMS system from a Windows PC (or Linux L > perhaps) anyway and so the PDF docs are available on the same screen. It's atL > small detail that the viewing of the PDF doc isn't being driven by VMS but > one day perhaps it may be ...n >  > John >eD > Name: John B. Macallister  E-mail: j.macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk? > Post: Denys Wilkinson Building, Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH,UK C > Phone: +44-1865-273388 (direct)  273333 (reception)  273418 (Fax)  >e >  >n   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 08:20:47 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 1 Subject: Re: manuals (was RE: Linus' view on VMS)s3 Message-ID: <sK6KaCGjqYS0@eisner.encompasserve.org>t  c In article <4f3R7.2629$_3.10335@news.iol.ie>, "Tom Wade" <t.wade@vms.eurokom.ie.removespam> writes:e  J > I've got to disagree with you.  I *hate* PDF, and this has nothing to doN > with its support of VMS, as I use a Microsoft desktop anyway.  What I detest > about 	 > PDF is:i > I > 1.  Try to get a whole page on the screen, and the print is unreadable.aK > 2.  Everything always comes with US Letter size rather than A4 (5% of thev; > world's population lives in countries that don't use A4).   ? That is a choice made by authors, not by the PDF format design..= I have the same problem with ISO documents in Postscript thate come in non-US page sizes.  M > 3.  Try to scroll down a page using the wheelmouse, and instead of smoothlyaJ > scrolling between pages like most word processors do, it jumps suddenly,- > leaving you unsure of how much you skipped. M > 4.  I find myself clicking on what looks like a link only to see the little  > fist clench back at me.e  ? Those seem to be related to a particular reader rather than the0 PDF format..   ------------------------------   Date: 10 Dec 2001 15:53:31 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) 1 Subject: RE: manuals (was RE: Linus' view on VMS)w+ Message-ID: <9v2lpr$fok$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>m  N In article <35666012DF4CD411BE940090279FA240010BF14B@ppnt41.physics.ox.ac.uk>,;  John Macallister <J.Macallister1@physics.ox.ac.uk> writes:h |>K |> I wouldn't get too upset about not having a PDF viewer on VMS. It's very A |> likely that one would access the VMS system from a Windows PC n   Heretic!!!!c  0 Oh yeah, before the flames start flying ---  :-)   bill   -- 0J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   e   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:08:16 +0100R= From: Jan-Erik =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F6derholm?= <noone@dummy.com> 1 Subject: Re: manuals (was RE: Linus' view on VMS),) Message-ID: <3C14EC00.152056B6@dummy.com>o   Hi.Z My comments below. Regardsc Jan-Erik Sderholm.L   Tom Wade wrote:a >  > I > 1.  Try to get a whole page on the screen, and the print is unreadable.<  ;   More or less depending on what screen you use, I suppose.4  K > 2.  Everything always comes with US Letter size rather than A4 (5% of theo; > world's population lives in countries that don't use A4).a  G   Can easily be overriden in the printer setup (timeout). And if we ask  politly,<   maybe Compaq could put both letter and A4 on the docs CDs.  M > 3.  Try to scroll down a page using the wheelmouse, and instead of smoothlyCJ > scrolling between pages like most word processors do, it jumps suddenly,- > leaving you unsure of how much you skipped.-  <   I'v no problem scrolling with the wheel *if* I select menu "View/Continuous".;   If using "View/"Single Page", it jumps at the page break.c  M > 4.  I find myself clicking on what looks like a link only to see the littlet > fist clench back at me.t  -   No matter what tool , you have to learn it.d  I > 5.  If a large document is hosted as 'online documentation' at a remote I > site, I have to download the entire thing even if I only want to browsef  > through a small portion of it.  H   I just copied the PDF files from the doc CD to my laptop. I always got%   them with me. No need to be online.-   > L > HTML is far better in my opinion.  The only thing that is easier in PDF isL > to print out the whole thing, and if people are using that option a lot itL > says a lot about the ease of use of PDF as an *online* medium (it would beJ > better to provide a postscript version for people who want to print it).  C   One thing that is much easier in PDF is to print out just *a few*>
 pages. I'vE   never managed to do that in HTML. What is a "page" in HTML anyway ?t   > C > Quite frankly I loathe PDF and will never produce anything in it.p  D   Fine with me, as long as Compaq keeps producing the VMS manuals in PDF.     >h   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:23:47 +0000 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>i> Subject: Merger still possible if Compaq disposes PC business?8 Message-ID: <28o91uoimut0m24t00rbs6kq11c10ugjhp@4ax.com>  1  http://money.cnn.com/2001/12/10/deals/hp_compaq/E   Compaq shares fall 11%  !  December 10, 2001: 11:01 a.m. ETr  F Packard Foundation rejection seen causing revision of HP buyout terms.  b            s2 HP shareholder nixes Compaq merger - Dec. 7, 2001 A Packard Foundation could vote on HP-Compaq merger - Dec. 7, 2001    n  hB NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Compaq Computer Corp. shares shed nearly 11C percent Monday Morning following a decision by a key shareholder to 4 vote against Hewlett-Packard's $24 billion takeover.  A The David and Lucille Packard Foundation, which owns more than 10d? percent of HP shares, surprised many when it made a preliminary.C decision Friday to vote its shares against the deal. Other heirs of-A the founding Hewlett and Packard families also are opposed to the"6 merger and control a combined 18 percent of HP shares.  D Analysts Monday rated chances of the HP takeover succeeding at about@ 20 to 30 percent, down from the 50 to 60 percent odds before the Packard Foundation's decision.  B "There is a low chance of this going through now," A.G. Edwards  &! Sons analyst Shelby Seyrafi said.   D While Compaq (CPQ: down $1.15 to $10.17, Research, Estimates) sharesD declined, HP (HWP: down $0.27 to $23.25, Research, Estimates) gained nearly 2 percent early Monday.  B Walter Hewlett, son of Hewlett-Packard co-founder William Hewlett,; also vowed Friday to block the deal if it were brought to a A shareholder vote. Hewlett claims the takeover would increase HP's # exposure to the waning PC business.u  @ HP and Compaq responded jointly Friday saying they will continueF communicating the merits of the merger to their broad shareowner base.  E "Our firm commitment to this merger stems from our conviction that itt< will deliver the industry leadership and earnings growth ourB shareowners expect and our employees deserve," the companies said.  F HP and Compaq have yet to set a date for the shareholder votes but the? chances of the deal making it before stockholders also is slim,0= especially if it becomes obvious the deal will be voted down,j1 influential Bear Stearns analyst Andy Neff  said.M  = But HP can't call off the deal on its own. The boards of both C companies could call off the transaction, a material adverse change:F must occur, or either set of shareholders must vote to end the merger.  6 HP and Compaq could not be reached for comment Monday.  C But some think the "preliminary" decision by the Packard FoundationDF could mean the companies could opt to restructure the merger to get it approved, analyst said.   C "This definitely increases the likelihood of a restructuring," A.G.1 Edwards' Seyrafi said.  E A revision of the merger could call for HP-Compaq to sell some assets C or minimize exposure to the PC business, Neff of Bear Stearns said..  E "We would assume any revising of the terms would involve the disposal @ of the PC business in some fashion - which could be construed as@ positive for Dell - although there could also be a change in theF pricing terms, although we don't think that the latter would solve the> objections of the family," Neff wrote in research note Monday.            ; The next step for the merger is a decision by InstitutionalE; Shareholder Service. ISS, the prestigious firm that advises E institutional investors in proxy contests, represents shareholders of. both Compaq and HP.P  ? ISS has yet to make a decision how it will vote, spokesman Richf Ferlauto said.  D "We are going to make independent judgment based on what is best forD shareholder value," he said. "We will look at this independently and; the families' position won't affect us one way or another."a  F ISS will look at all information available on the merger including theD negative report from Booz Allen that the Packard Foundation used, an industry source said.   C ISS will issue its report once the companies have filed their final % proxy on the merger, Ferlauto said.  r  .  t   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:56:20 -0500 & From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>B Subject: Re: Merger still possible if Compaq disposes PC business?/ Message-ID: <u19tqen0q0dke8@corp.supernews.com>e  2 "Alan Greig" <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote in message2 news:28o91uoimut0m24t00rbs6kq11c10ugjhp@4ax.com...E > But some think the "preliminary" decision by the Packard FoundationiH > could mean the companies could opt to restructure the merger to get it > approved, analyst said.  >dE > "This definitely increases the likelihood of a restructuring," A.G.s > Edwards' Seyrafi said. >cG > A revision of the merger could call for HP-Compaq to sell some assets E > or minimize exposure to the PC business, Neff of Bear Stearns said.t >rG > "We would assume any revising of the terms would involve the disposaloB > of the PC business in some fashion - which could be construed asB > positive for Dell - although there could also be a change in theH > pricing terms, although we don't think that the latter would solve the@ > objections of the family," Neff wrote in research note Monday.   ----- Original Message -----& From: "Jeff Killeen" <Jeff@IDM-IO.com>3 Newsgroups: comp.os.vms,comp.org.decus,comp.sys.deci( Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:56 PMB Subject: Re: Packard Foundation Tells Merger Urgers to "Paq it In"  G It is interesting speculation as to what could save the deal.  The most D obvious gambit would be to spin off the Consumer products into a newG Company.  It would solve in single action what the regulators seem mostgH interested in plus make the analysts happy while keeping the core of the deal intact...   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:04:23 +0100i1 From: John McLean <mcleanj@swissonline.delete.ch>e< Subject: Mistake alert (was Re: Compaq after merger-failure)5 Message-ID: <3C14EB17.F9F06D16@swissonline.delete.ch>f   About 2 day ago I wrote: > E > Up to the end of September Compaq was losing about $1 billion everyfJ > three weeks in the PC area.  Compaq could give the new PC group a fairlyI > generous $2 billion to get them started and then just walk away knowingwE > that what they have "donated" would be lost in just 6 weeks anyway.v  F Wrong.  Mea culpa.  This is not what Compaq would have lost in 6 weeksE on PCs, it's the Expenses on PCs.  Revenue - if they are lucky - is al, few dollars more than this over the 6 weeks.  A I must read my notes more carefully in future.  (Sounds like BartdH Simpson writing with chalk on the blackboard about 200 times "I must not waste chalk.")   cheers ... and sorry !     John Mcleanr   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:44:51 -0500c2 From: "Sue Skonetski" <susan.skonetski@compaq.com>Q Subject: Re: New York City meeting - Porting OpenVMS to Itanium - you are invitede1 Message-ID: <fS3R7.346$BK1.6990@news.cpqcorp.net>o  ; If you attended this meeting last week, what did you think?w  : /For those not in attendance there was standing room only.   SueS    = "Sue Skonetski" <susan.skonetski@compaq.com> wrote in messageS- news:zr9N7.2056$RL6.62787@news.cpqcorp.net...oL > Just so you know Gaitan is a technical director in the OpenVMS EngineeringH > group and a great person as well, Chris is my new manager and you will like > him as well. >F5 > If you can attend this I would highly recommend it.t >o > Warm Regards,n >o > Sue" >  >o >eH > ______________________________________________________________________ >aL > New York Metro Encompass Local Users Group (LUG) will meet on Dec. 6, 2001 >-K > featuring a presentation on "Porting OpenVMS to Itanium." This is part of  an >cL > series of forums focusing on AlphaServer and OpenVMS related topics hosted > by >n > Compaq and the LUG.6 >1B > Anyone interested in these Compaq technologies, including Compaq
 customers, >fH > resellers and employees may attend. See below for how to pre-register. >vL > The event will take place at the Compaq office in Manhattan, 2 Penn Plaza, > 8thD >oL > Floor, New York City, in the Pacific Conference room on Thursday, Dec 6th, >s > between 1-3PMi >q	 > Agenda:u >t5 > 1:00- 1:10 Welcome and Introductions - Lynne Hummel  >L) > 1:10- 1:30 Alpha Roadmap - Lynne Hummelu >t4 > 1:30- 1:40 LUG /Encompass Business - Gary McCready >t9 > 1:40- 2:40 Porting OpenVMS to Itanium - Gaitan D'Antonii >o, > 2:40- 2:50 Discussion topics - Chris Brown >lG > 2:50- 3:00 Local OpenVMS service and support - Compaq Global Servicesc >nJ > Lynne Hummel is the High Performance Sales Specialist and Alpha Business >nL > Manager for NYC Financial Accounts at Compaq. She will be reviewing recent >u& > announcements and the Alpha roadmap. >nD > Gaitan D'Antoni and Chris Brown are Technical Directors in OpenVMS >-K > Engineering. They join us from Nashua, NH and will be presenting Compaq'sd > planse >sG > for porting OpenVMS to Itanium. Gaitan will review schedules, layeredS	 > product- > / > software, tools and other topics of interest.l >eL > Gary McCready is an employee of Securities Industry Automation Corporation > and2 >AK > is planning to organize the NYC Metro LUG. He will be able to address thev >nL > benefits of membership, dues structure, and the plans for the location and >tG > content of future NYC Metro LUG meetings. Come prepared to share your  ideas  > with >u > Gary.s > J > Compaq has a comprehensive Global Services Group which delivers remedial andv >tI > consulting services for OpenVMS customers. We will provide a very briefo
 > overview >i> > of our capabilities to serve customers in the NY Metro area. >n4 > To reserve your place at this event, send email to >wF > Barbara.Hunt@compaq.com. You will be met by a Compaq employee at the >uH > security desk at the entrance to the building. Should you arrive late, > E > please call our reception desk at 212-856-2000 for an escort. Lightd >m > refreshments will be served. >i7 > Please forward this invitation to your colleagues whon >vF > may be interested in attending. For additional information about the > Encompass  >oI > NY Metrolocal user group, please send email go NYMLUG@McCready.com. Fori more >f( > information on Encompass, please visit >a- > http://www.decus.org/encompass/index.shtml.* >d >  >  >l >e   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 08:34:23 -0800+ From: pierre.bru@spotimage.fr (Bru, Pierre)e  Subject: NTP server with UCX 4.2= Message-ID: <1c0e37b1.0112100834.40771d7d@posting.google.com>-   hello,  ; if I setup an NTP client alone on my Alpha, all works well.lE if I setup an NTP server alone on the same Alpha, all works well too.o  D my need is to have the Alpha get its time from my other server (be aE client) and at the same time, act as a server of next stratum. as thedD clock of the Alpha is not good, I want it to be a client not a peer.  D when I start as a client alone, the LOG tells me that I'm running at
 stratum 4.  F . if I insert the line "master-clock 1" (or 2 or 3), the server startsE at stratum 1 (respectively 2 or 3) and of course, does not synchonizerE on my other server witch is at startum 3, thinking the other server'sr  time is worst or at best, equal.  D . if I insert the line "master-clock 4" (or above), the LOG says theF Alpha is a master-clock of the expected stratum, clients are no longer able to synchronize on it :(  B is it possible to be act as the client of a server and at the same8 time be a server of the next stratum. (and if so, how ?)   TIA, Pierre.i   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:47:06 GMT 2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)$ Subject: Re: NTP server with UCX 4.21 Message-ID: <uy6R7.367$BK1.7195@news.cpqcorp.net>1  k In article <1c0e37b1.0112100834.40771d7d@posting.google.com>, pierre.bru@spotimage.fr (Bru, Pierre) writes:0  E :my need is to have the Alpha get its time from my other server (be a F :client) and at the same time, act as a server of next stratum. as theE :clock of the Alpha is not good, I want it to be a client not a peer.s ..C :is it possible to be act as the client of a server and at the samee9 :time be a server of the next stratum. (and if so, how ?)i  F   When posting, please include the OpenVMS version, and (in this case)   the TCP/IP Services ECO.  G   We overhauled NTP in TCP/IP Services V5.0 and later.  Please upgrade.      If you don't already have:)        SYS$SPECIFIC:[UCX$NTP]UCX$NTP.CONF    then please copy.        SYS$SPECIFIC:[UCX$NTP]UCX$NTP.TEMPLATE    to)        SYS$SPECIFIC:[UCX$NTP]UCX$NTP.CONF   I   Since you probably don't want to define your host as local-master, NTP tK   will automatically set your local host's stratum to the server's stratum s   plus one.m  (      ;this effectively sets the stratum:        server w.x.y.z       peer w.x.y.a   >   where w.x.y.z and w.x.y.a are IP host addresses (not names).  ;   Start (or restart) NTP: @SYS$MANAGER:UCX$NTPD_STARTUP.COMo    N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:57:14 -08001' From: David Mathog <mathog@caltech.edu>lB Subject: Re: Packard Foundation Tells Merger Urgers to "Paq it In"+ Message-ID: <3C14E96A.ACDAC35D@caltech.edu>n   Bruce Lane wrote:l  K >         This is great news. I wondered if there was any common sense left B > at HP after their ridiculous spin-off of their test gear branch.  F The only thing ridiculous about the Agilent spinoff was that the wrong company.G got to keep the HP name.  HP originally moved into computers to provideo "smarts"H for their test gear. It grew into a big business, especially the printer part of-A it.  And it just didn't make sense after a while for this huge PCr company to also makeF test equipment.  Ok, if they were GE they might have been able to pull
 that off, butSE HP is not GE. Besides, from the test equipment side PCs are commodityo parts, like G screws or lightbulbs.  Since the split Agilent has presumably been freee to shiptC Dell PCs with their test equipment - just like the vast majority ofo
 other testD equipment suppliers.  If they've taken advantage of that opportunity they're likelyE now able to ship the same configuration for less than they would havee	 were they  still required to use HP PCs.p   Regards,   David Mathog mathog@caltech.edu   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 08:10:05 -08007 From: emery.univer.cours@videotron.ca (Sebastien Emery)t* Subject: Re: Point at the end of Logicals?< Message-ID: <3b178c9b.0112100810.7a23f7b@posting.google.com>   Good information, thanks.p  + Another question about the rooted logicals.e  6 Can we make a rooted logical based on another logical?   Example:/ define/trans=conceal ONE NODE$DISK:[SYS0.DIR1.]m  3 and after, use it to create another rooted logical?e  $ define/trans=conceal TWO ONE:[DIR2.]: Maybe I'm just wrong the way I'm doing the second logical.   Thanks.m Sebastien Emery'    
 If we have  Y briggs@encompasserve.org wrote in message news:<kV6Ax3Xca7MM@eisner.encompasserve.org>...fg > In article <9026b6ac.0111261120.4f36528c@posting.google.com>, rosj01@hotmail.com (James Ross) writes:s/ > > Some logicals have a point at the end like  0 > > "SYS$COMMON" = "NODE:DISK:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.]" > > C > > And when I try to change directory to this SYS$COMMON by typing  > > set def SYS$COMMON8 > > nothing hapen. The default dir is still the old one. > > # > > What the point at the end meen?v > I > There's a fair bit of history, backwards compatibility, cross-componenti@ > cooperation and just plain strangeness in this area.  (I don'tD > intend that pejoratively -- it's tough trying to please everyone). > B > The short answer is that logical names such as the one you point? > out is a "rooted logical name".  It is meant to be treated asaE > a virtual device name but operates by referencing a directory name.1 > 0 > So you ask for SYS$COMMON:[SYSEXE] and you get' > SYS$SYSDEVICE:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.SYSEXE]b >  > H > Now, under VMS the notion of "current working directory" is maintainedI > in two separate places.  One piece is set with the SYS$SETDDIR service.sB > That is the _directory_ that you default into.  Another piece isF > the SYS$DISK logical name.  That's the _disk_ that you default into. > H > When you do a $ SET DEFAULT [SYSEXE], what is affected is your defaultI > directory (SYS$SETDDIR).  When you do a $ SET DEFAULT SYS$COMMON:, what)C > is affected is your default disk (SYS$DISK logical name).  And ifg> > you do $ SET DEFAULT SYS$COMMON:[SYSEXE], both are affected. > & > 			default device		default directory >  > Initial			USER_DISK:		[USER1] + > $ SET DEF SYS$COMMON	SYS$COMMON:		[USER1]s* > $ SET DEF [SYSEXE]	SYS$COMMON:		[SYSEXE]) > $ SET DEF SYS$LOGIN	USER_DISK:		[USER1]t) > $ SET DEF [SYSEXE]	USER_DISK:		[SYSEXE]w > H > Once upon a time, life was simple.  Disks were disks, directories were1 > directories and this scheme worked pretty well.e > B > But then around the VMS 3.x timeframe (corrections welcome), VMSE > introduced the notion of rooted logical names.  Now you could have,o > for instance:  >  >   $ DEFINE APPS _DRA1:[APPS.]" >   $ SET DEFAULT APPS:[FOCUS] > J > It's been a long time, but if I recall correctly, the leading underscoreI > had significance.  One leading underscore was a "terminal" logical name G > and two were "concealed".  Or some such.  That capability persists toP > this day unless I'm mistaken., > J > And so now your directory information could come from two sources -- the? > default directory string.  And the default disk logical name.h > H > But then in VMS 4.x the entire logical name system was re-implemented.J > We got multiple translations for a single logical name.  And translationJ > attributes.  And name attributes.  And access modes.  Which was criticalJ > in order to allow for clusters with shared system disks.  And it cleaned( > up some long standing security issues. > G > Sometime in VMS 5.x or 6.x the syntax was loosened so that you didn'trK > have to couch a file spec such as SYS$SYSDEVICE:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.][SYSEXE]mK > in terms of a rooted logical.  You could use the whole file specificationaH > just that way.  (I suspect that RMS was basically told to root out the$ > ".][" string as a semantic no-op). >  >  > To conjure up a nasty case:  > A >   $ DEFINE DEFDISK DISK1:, DISK2:[ANDY], DISK3:[JANE.], [PEGGY]t> >   $ DEFINE THISDISK DISK4:, DISK5:[SUE], [LARRY], [], ROME::" >   $ SET DEFAULT DEFDISK:[FOOBAR] >   $ DIR THISDISK:c > D > And so the file system has to run through the permutations of yourG > search-list default disk, your search-list file spec and your defaulteI > directory to figure all the places where it should look for files.  AndiF > if it can't find a file, it has to figure out which error message to> > display.  No such device?  no such directory?  no such file? > Node unreachable?l > A > For fun, you can easily cobble up nested (or recursive!) searchPE > lists with hundreds or even thousands of translations.  Last time IDE > checked this, the search logic cut out with a loop detection cutoffoF > at a depth of 8 and a total of 256 translations (if I remember right > from long long ago). >  > A more classic syndrome is:h >  >   $ SET DEFAULT SYS$MANAGER: >   $ DIR MKA0:o > J > You get the tape directory listing twice with a rewind in between.  OnceI > for each translation of SYS$SYSROOT.  Because the choice of translation L > affects the selected directory name, even though the system manager didn't= > expect it to and even though the mag tape ACP doesn't care.o > K > Hey -- you didn't explicitly specify a directory.  So the file system hadt > to guess.a >  > the classic workaround is: >  >  $ DIR MKA0:[] > H > Thus explicitly specifying a null directory name (which gets filled inH > from the one stashed by SYS$SETDDIR and which then gets ignored by the > mag tape ACP). >  > 	John Briggs   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:42:05 -0000a3 From: "Malcolm" <malcolm@neverness.freeserve.co.uk>-* Subject: Re: Point at the end of Logicals?. Message-ID: <9v2vlm$99f$1@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>  D "Sebastien Emery" <emery.univer.cours@videotron.ca> wrote in message6 news:3b178c9b.0112100810.7a23f7b@posting.google.com... > Good information, thanks.  >t- > Another question about the rooted logicals.0 >h8 > Can we make a rooted logical based on another logical? >t
 > Example:1 > define/trans=conceal ONE NODE$DISK:[SYS0.DIR1.]  >t5 > and after, use it to create another rooted logical?  >d& > define/trans=conceal TWO ONE:[DIR2.]  G Try this. It works out whether or not the logical name is CONCEALED andnL adjusts accordingly. You may need to do a bit more work to get it to do what you want to do.bL If you want to pass multiple parameters in P3, you can enclose it in quotes, etc.H "/TRANSLATION_ATTRIBUTES=CONCEALED /TABLE=LNM$GROUP_002000 /EXEC" (or asL long as there are no spaces in it, you can just run the whole lot together -J but then it breaks if someone edits it and makes it "pretty" by putting in	 spaces ;)e  K I did something like this for a test system I set up, since it only had onegK disk, so I set up the other "disks" as concealed logicals. The advantage ofoI this method is, if you change the value of the concealed logical, it willML adjust itself accordingly. I did it in a similar way to below so that when I= eventually got more disks, a minimum of editing was required.s  I Note: doesn't handle search lists, and in present form picks up the firstp translation it finds...i   $ DEFINE_LOG: SUBROUTINE& $! P1 = logical name, P2 = equivalence( $! P3 (optional) = Parameters to DEFINE. $!! $! Get equivalence's directory...- $!$ $ src_log_name = f$element(0,":",p2) $! $! And the rest...$ $ src_dir_name = f$element(1,":",p2) $!D $! Change f$TRNLNM as necessary to select correct table, access mode4 $! etc. See HELP LEXI F$TRNLNM for more information.8 $ if f$trnlnm(src_log_name,,,,,"CONCEALED") .eqs. "TRUE" $ then= $   tmp_log_name = f$trnlnm(src_log_name) +src_dir_name -"]["a" $   define 'p3 'p1 'final_log_name $ else $   define 'p3 'p1 'p2 $ endift $ ENDSUBROUTINEh   You can then do:  : $ CALL DEFINE_LOG ONE NODE$DISK:[SYS0.DIR1.] "/TRANS=CONC"/ $ CALL DEFINE_LOG TWO ONE:[DIR2.] "/TRANS=CONC"o  K Because of the way concealed logical names work, you can't directly do whatv you want to do.e  F This does mean that TWO will become "NODE$DISK:[SYS0.DIR1.DIR2.]". But  that's as good as you can get ;(  < > Maybe I'm just wrong the way I'm doing the second logical.  K Yep. Can't be done. You have to find the value of the first logical and put F it in, because you can't base a concealed logical on another concealed	 logical..0  > I discovered this many years ago at uni, when I wanted to haveJ EES:[B2.MM.PROGRAMS] as PROGRAMS:[000000], so I could have PROGRAMS:[COM],C etc. Reason being that my account was re-created every year and the > directory spec changed... first EES:[B1.MM], then EES:[B2.MM],1 MCS:[CS1.MM],MCS:[CS2.MM], and finally I91:[MM])!   I I did get it to work eventually by trial and error sometime in the second7 year ;).  	 -Malcolm.q   >n	 > Thanks.u > Sebastien Emerya >s >t   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:14:57 +0100 (MET) 9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> ! Subject: Re: RECALL does not workd; Message-ID: <01KBPAULSPCY9138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>   G > Errrm. How many 100 MB files do you have which have a) less than 65K _7 > records and b) record length not exceeding 255 bytes?U  D Many, actually.  For example, huge PostScript files.  Sensible line G length, but lots of lines!  OK, 65K*255 is 16 MB or whatever, though I n$ HAVE edited larger PostScript files.  A Usually, the case was some fine-tuning by hand by inserting some eF /translate or /scale commands in the first few lines of the file, for = example when scaling something up to A0 and then printing it e: out---printer margins are usually not millimeter-accurate.  I I can do the edit then move on to other things while the file is saved.  CI The line-number limit doesn't bother here since they are not "processed"   within EDT.:   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:04:48 +0100p( From: Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.ch>! Subject: Re: RECALL does not workt- Message-ID: <VA.000004e2.e43ee254@bluewin.ch>t  K In article <01KBPAULSPCY9138XQ@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>, Phillip Helbig 0 wrote:I > > Errrm. How many 100 MB files do you have which have a) less than 65K  9 > > records and b) record length not exceeding 255 bytes?n > F > Many, actually.  For example, huge PostScript files.  Sensible line I > length, but lots of lines!  OK, 65K*255 is 16 MB or whatever, though I h& > HAVE edited larger PostScript files. > C > Usually, the case was some fine-tuning by hand by inserting some iH > /translate or /scale commands in the first few lines of the file, for ? > example when scaling something up to A0 and then printing it  < > out---printer margins are usually not millimeter-accurate. > K > I can do the edit then move on to other things while the file is saved.  nK > The line-number limit doesn't bother here since they are not "processed" b
 > within EDT.r >uH And I did a limited test with a small file > 255 characters per record. J Even though EDT claims to truncate these records, it appears that it only G does so for display purposes, writing the complete records on an EXIT. i ___n
 Paul Sture Switzerlandi   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:26:34 +0800 1 From: "news.q-net.net.au" <tdreher@econom.com.au>t6 Subject: recursive $SETIMR ; Alpha:works / Vax:crashes0 Message-ID: <3c1463ac@usenet.per.paradox.net.au>   Hi,t  7 I would like to set up a Timer Ast from a main process,t8 whose AST Routine does some work, and then calls itself.  K in DEC Basic, the call looks like this: (looks the same in main process andm ast routine.  & SYS_STATUS = SYS$SETIMR( 0% BY VALUE , &    !  [event flag]I                                                      WAIT_TIME_B BY REF ,t
 &    ! daytimsK                                                      LOC( TIMER_HANDLER) BY  VALUE,    &    ! [astadr]oA                                                     10% BY VALUE,i &    ! [reqidt] B                                                       0% BY VALUE)	 ! [flags]-    C WAIT_TIME_B is a Quadword containing the time when the timer fires.i  ' On AXP with VMS 7.2-1, it works, but on4  L On VAX VMS 6.2, the timer fires in the main process, starts the timer in the handler,: and when the second time when the timer fires, I get this:  ; %SYSTEM-F-ACCVIO, access violation, reason mask=00, virtuali+ address=00000003, PC=817859F0, PSL=03C00000n  2   Improperly handled condition, image exit forced.  4         Signal arguments              Stack contents  1         Number = 00000005                00000005e1         Name   = 0000000C                0000000A 1                  00000000                0000001031                  00000003                81742A30o1                  817859F0                7FFEDF8Ae1                  03C00000                03C00000s1                                          00000000I1                                          203C00A0O1                                          000006B0 1                                          7FEA395C            Register dumpe  B         R0 = FF800000  R1 = 00000003  R2 = 80004BB8  R3 = 0006680EB         R4 = 81A65480  R5 = 00000000  R6 = 7FEA38D0  R7 = 00000001B         R8 = 0000000A  R9 = 7FEA38D0  R10= 00000000  R11= 7FEA3899B         AP = 7FEA3854  FP = 7FEA3814  SP = 7FEA3890  PC = 817859F0         PSL= 03C00000s     Any Help is appreciated.   Regards, Thomas    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:59:23 GMTs- From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network>iF Subject: Troubleshooting the mailing list? - was: Re: Activity on list* Message-ID: <3C14A914.3040504@qsl.network>   Bruin, J.M. de wrote:o  F > I haven't been getting any mails from this for a couple of days now.R > I've taken a look at the comp.os.vms list on groups.google.com and there I see a > bunch of postings.C > It seems there has been a lack of mails to me since December 5th.n > % > Anyone suffering the same problems?     I Since I am using the news group, I do not know the current status of the   info-vax mailing list.  D If you look in the OpenVMS faq at http://www.openvms.compaq.com/ it G provides instructions on contacting the listserver to update or verify I your settings.  F Your subscription might have been dropped.  Or you might be in a mode I were it believes that you do not want to get messages for a while.  That vI can happen if you go on holiday, and your mailbox fills up, or you start  H sending everyone "I am out of the office" replies automatically, and it - gets the attention of the mailing list owner.   I If your subscription has been dropped, then you might want to check with -H your ISP.  A couple of the ISP's that I have had did not understand how F to replace or service their mail server, and put one on line that did & not have any user mail accounts on it.  I This causes bounce messages indicating that your address does not exist,  I and will never exist.  When a mailing list receives a message like this, ,  it will typically drop the user.  C Another possibility, that due to some of the SPAM that has made it eF through, some mail administrator more local to you has set the E-mail / Tfilters to reject all e-mail from this source.    -Johns   wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Onlyf   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:07:58 GMT 3 From: "Tom Wade" <t.wade@vms.eurokom.ie.removespam>a> Subject: Re: Tru64.org Flash Poll on Merger "Pearl Harbor Day"- Message-ID: <2l3R7.2630$_3.10402@news.iol.ie>   ? "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in messagei6 news:QgqQ7.7497$Sj1.3002542@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...G > Got an opinion about the December 7 Development in the HWP-CPQ Merger  story? > Why not pay a visit to5 > www.tru64.org and weigh in on the following survey:o >hK > In light of the announcement that the David and Lucile Packard Foundation  > will not support HP'shE > proposed acquisition of Compaq, do you believe the proposed merger:- >s > -  Is likely to succeedo >t > - May or may not succeed >  > - It's toast!a  G Given that the merger will mean the loss of Tru64, in favor of the HPUXfI solution, I would expect the folks at www.tru64.org to be biassed against H it.  Since I have no love for Tru64, this doesn't affect me.  In fact, IH regard the death of any Unix system to be highly welcome, particularly a Compaq one.n    L ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --L Tom Wade    | EMail: T.Wade@vms.eurokom.ie.removespam  (all domain mailers).G EuroKom     | X400:  g=tom;s=wade;o=eurokom;p=eurokom;a=eirmail400;c=iel& 30, Dale Rd | Tel:   +353 (1) 278-7878& Stillorgan  | Fax:   +353 (1) 278-78793 Co Dublin   | Disclaimer:  This is not a disclaimerd@ Ireland     | Tip:         "Friends don't let friends do Unix !"   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:54:40 GMT'& From: "Ken Farmer" <kfarmer@tru64.org>> Subject: Re: Tru64.org Flash Poll on Merger "Pearl Harbor Day"> Message-ID: <Q04R7.29828$MR2.5709576@typhoon.southeast.rr.com>  > "Tom Wade" <t.wade@vms.eurokom.ie.removespam> wrote in message' news:2l3R7.2630$_3.10402@news.iol.ie...S >MA > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in messageh8 > news:QgqQ7.7497$Sj1.3002542@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net... >>I > > Got an opinion about the December 7 Development in the HWP-CPQ Merger  >tI > Given that the merger will mean the loss of Tru64, in favor of the HPUXsK > solution, I would expect the folks at www.tru64.org to be biassed against J > it.  Since I have no love for Tru64, this doesn't affect me.  In fact, I   Tom,  : There are no "folks", I run the site solo on my free time.  J Biased?  I'm not necessarily for or against the merger, there are pros andK cons on both sides.  I am on the other hand honest.  In addition I would do 8 a little researched before I made such a bold statement.  J > regard the death of any Unix system to be highly welcome, particularly a
 > Compaq one.   7 You need to spend a few days with a good Unix SysAdmin.e  D > Tom Wade    | EMail: T.Wade@vms.eurokom.ie.removespam  (all domain	 mailers).tI > EuroKom     | X400:  g=tom;s=wade;o=eurokom;p=eurokom;a=eirmail400;c=ieh( > 30, Dale Rd | Tel:   +353 (1) 278-7878( > Stillorgan  | Fax:   +353 (1) 278-78795 > Co Dublin   | Disclaimer:  This is not a disclaimer   B > Ireland     | Tip:         "Friends don't let friends do Unix !"  L Who has the bias?  I wonder why you would make a statement like that?  Maybe' you can back it up with some reasoning.c     Kent   -- Ken Farmer, kfarmer@tru64.org: Tru64.org, http://www.tru64.orgN# OpenVMS.org, http://www.openvms.orgS        > "Tom Wade" <t.wade@vms.eurokom.ie.removespam> wrote in message' news:2l3R7.2630$_3.10402@news.iol.ie...E > A > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in messager8 > news:QgqQ7.7497$Sj1.3002542@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...I > > Got an opinion about the December 7 Development in the HWP-CPQ Merger  > story? > > Why not pay a visit to7 > > www.tru64.org and weigh in on the following survey:  > >EB > > In light of the announcement that the David and Lucile Packard
 Foundation > > will not support HP'seG > > proposed acquisition of Compaq, do you believe the proposed merger:  > >  > > -  Is likely to succeedn > >  > > - May or may not succeed > >h > > - It's toast!s >tI > Given that the merger will mean the loss of Tru64, in favor of the HPUXmK > solution, I would expect the folks at www.tru64.org to be biassed againsteJ > it.  Since I have no love for Tru64, this doesn't affect me.  In fact, IJ > regard the death of any Unix system to be highly welcome, particularly a
 > Compaq one.A >t >sL > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > --D > Tom Wade    | EMail: T.Wade@vms.eurokom.ie.removespam  (all domain	 mailers). I > EuroKom     | X400:  g=tom;s=wade;o=eurokom;p=eurokom;a=eirmail400;c=ie ( > 30, Dale Rd | Tel:   +353 (1) 278-7878( > Stillorgan  | Fax:   +353 (1) 278-78795 > Co Dublin   | Disclaimer:  This is not a disclaimercB > Ireland     | Tip:         "Friends don't let friends do Unix !" >s >e >t   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:24:11 -0500-- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> > Subject: Re: Tru64.org Flash Poll on Merger "Pearl Harbor Day", Message-ID: <3C14EFB9.3DF07C91@videotron.ca>   Tom Wade wrote:EJ > it.  Since I have no love for Tru64, this doesn't affect me.  In fact, IJ > regard the death of any Unix system to be highly welcome, particularly a
 > Compaq one.r  L While I understand your opinion, what worries me is the trend that Compaq isJ following. If you contine that trend, there will really be nothing left ofK "Digital" before long. And HP has given signs that it would gladly continueoN that trend by both stating that Wintel crap would be given a certain priority,# and its unwarranted killing of MPE.i   ------------------------------    Date: 10 Dec 2001 08:39:14 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)o( Subject: Re: Unix for HELP ... Examples?3 Message-ID: <KfYFNCPH+3vC@eisner.encompasserve.org>   R In article <3C1302AF.40230713@mail.com>, "C.W.Holeman II" <cwhii@mail.com> writes:( > What is Unix for Examples in VMS HELP?! > MAN seems to lack this feature.   4    The UNIX equivalent to examples is "hire a guru".   ------------------------------   Date: 10 Dec 2001 17:04:17 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)i( Subject: Re: Unix for HELP ... Examples?+ Message-ID: <9v2puh$hnu$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>d  3 In article <KfYFNCPH+3vC@eisner.encompasserve.org>,e0  koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:U |> In article <3C1302AF.40230713@mail.com>, "C.W.Holeman II" <cwhii@mail.com> writes:c+ |> > What is Unix for Examples in VMS HELP?Y$ |> > MAN seems to lack this feature. |> e7 |>    The UNIX equivalent to examples is "hire a guru".-  A Many of the man pages contain examples.  But you have to actuallyo
 read them.  ; What is the VMS equivalent of the apropos (man -k) command.L; Oh wait, we have already determined that there is no way toS9 do a context based search of HELP.  I guess the answer tom that is "hire a VMS guru".   bill   -- sJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:34:04 -0500l# From: Jim Agnew <agnew@hsc.vcu.edu>s( Subject: Re: Unix for HELP ... Examples?+ Message-ID: <3C14F20C.BC7FF24C@hsc.vcu.edu>e  4 there's the hints section, plus new users section...   Bill Gunshannon wrote: > 5 > In article <KfYFNCPH+3vC@eisner.encompasserve.org>, 2 >  koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:W > |> In article <3C1302AF.40230713@mail.com>, "C.W.Holeman II" <cwhii@mail.com> writes: - > |> > What is Unix for Examples in VMS HELP?d& > |> > MAN seems to lack this feature. > |>9 > |>    The UNIX equivalent to examples is "hire a guru".e > C > Many of the man pages contain examples.  But you have to actuallye > read them. > = > What is the VMS equivalent of the apropos (man -k) command.c= > Oh wait, we have already determined that there is no way to ; > do a context based search of HELP.  I guess the answer to  > that is "hire a VMS guru". >  > bill >  > --L > Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesF > bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. > University of Scranton   |@ > Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:40:16 -0500_* From: Bob Supnik <bsupnik@nauticusnet.com># Subject: VAX/VMS simulator progress 8 Message-ID: <aqh91ukl0e7fdgme7a3gnesl79va33aiv1@4ax.com>  E The VAX pre-release on http://simh.trailing-edge.com can now boot the A VAX hobbyist CD through the banner, the date/time dialog, and the[C 'Configuring devices...' message.  It then crashes with a BUGCHECK,2 exception above ASTDEL.N  @ The problem is that, following an RQDX3 interrupt, and the usualF cascade of interrupts (vector 3FC IPL 15 for the device, then software@ 8, then software 4, then software 3 for process scheduling), the0 process that is scheduled has a stack like this:   SP/	PC SP+4/	00C20000 SP+8/	another PC SP+C/	00400000  C To me, the top of the stack sure looks like an AST delivery (IPL ateE time of whatever caused the PC/PSL to be pushed = 2).  When that codehC is restarted, it does some random stuff and then exits with an RSB,o@ returning to the location at SP+8.  But that's clearly the wrongD place, the stack is 'off by 1', and eventually, the PSL at SP+C gets? interpreted as a PC, causes an ACV length error, and the systemh crashes.  D I need to instrument the simulator better to understand how/when theA AST got scheduled, whether that was the right context, and so on.l   /Bob Supnik    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:32:39 -050075 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> H Subject: Re: Writing a device driver: virtual/physical address questions1 Message-ID: <un6R7.366$BK1.6977@news.cpqcorp.net>H  K Generally speaking, devices deal in physical addresses.  If they understand I virtual addresses, it would be because the device itself has some type ofBE virtual address translation (some graphics devices, for example, haverJ capabilities similar to this) which may/may not have any bearing to system VAs.  L Also, in general, you can't assume that you can directly map the page - yourL code should use map registers to create what will look to your hardware likeK a physically contiguous set of physical addresses (see IOC$LOAD_MAP et al).d  K As to the control region you need, how big is it?  If it is very large, youoE may want to use "BAP" (Bus Addressable Pool".  You may want to use itmF anyway, since it will guarantee you that the memory is direct mappableK without mapping registers.  It's too new for the book, you'll probably neede the VMS release notes for BAP.  H The routine int exe_std$alophycntg(int npages, void **sva_p) says IPL ==0 SYNCH.  This routine will take out the MMG lock.      L Simon Clubley wrote in message <6TPQ7.55296$xS6.88962@www.newsranger.com>...F >This is on an Alpha, VMS V7.2. I am using C instead of MACRO-32, as I >know C better.r >HF >[Note: Although I am well experienced in other aspects of VMS, I haveE >recently resumed writing my first ever VMS device driver. This meansyE >that I may simply need pointing to a section in the manuals. It alsooD >means that I may not understand some VMS driver concepts as well as >I think I do. :-)]  >eB >I am working with a PCI device which uses DMA for reading/writingC >process/device driver buffers. This device does this by writing tohF >PCI memory space, which is of course mapped to Alpha physical memory. >tH >This bit I have no problem with; the problem is translating between VMSJ >virtual addresses and physical addresses as well as allocating physically >contiguous memory.  >s >Question 1: >iF >EXE$STD_READ loads IRP$L_SVAPTE with the address of the PTE that mapsG >to the first page of the buffer; I am assuming that this is the L3 PTEiH >of the locked down buffer. The problem is, assuming a buffer that spansH >several pages, how do you get, from this PTE, the physical addresses of) >the other pages assigned to the buffer ?- > H >The problem I am seeing is that you may have to return to the L1/L2 PTEH >tables in order to get this information as the L3 PTE may be located at >the end of the L3 page. >tE >The method I've come up with (untested as yet, I'm still writing the  driver!)F >is to get the original virtual address using the macros in VMS_MACROSL >and then use the other macros to get the PTE for each page. Is this correct ?tF >[Of course you need to do this while the driver has process context.] > + >I am wondering what I am missing here. :-)  >I >Question 2: >tD >The driver itself needs to allocate a chunk of physically (not just
 virtually)F >contiguous memory, which it will pass the physical base address of toH >the device's DMA controller. [The memory contains instructions, written using J >the device's own opcodes, for controlling the data transfer to the user's	 >buffer.]t >iJ >I couldn't find any reference to allocating physical memory, just virtualK >memory, within the driver manuals. I found a pointer (in the VAXBI sectionnE >of the VAX driver manuals!) which led me to the following prototype:i > 2 >int exe_std$alophycntg(int npages, void **sva_p); >iK >The problem is that I can't find any documentation for using this routine.cK >For example, does it have to be called at a minimum IPL ? At a maximum IPLo ?n > K >Assuming that it's the right one, where do you find it formally documented0 ?  >  >Question 3: > L >Just curious, but do DEC/CPQ devices generally require the driver writer toG >just load a PTE or system virtual address into the device, or does theDF >driver writer have to translate to physical addresses as I am doing ? > I >Finally, I would like to comment that the driver manual is well written;2F >the questions above are about material that I cannot find documented. >  >Thanks for any information, >5 >Simon.  >  >--tA >Simon Clubley, simon_clubley@remove_me.altavista.co.uk-Earth.UFP L >In the task of removing Microsoft from the marketplace, I have discovered aF >truly remarkable plan, but this signature is too small to contain it.   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.686 ************************