1 INFO-VAX	Thu, 26 Jul 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 411       Contents:! Re: 64 systems don't NEED windows  Re: 7.3 system disk corruption RE: 7.3 system disk corruption Re: 7.3 system disk corruption* Re: Best file spec for incremental backup?+ Re: Check out the Wall Street Journal today  Re: checksum Re: checksum Compaq's Q2 financials Re: Compaq's Q2 financials Re: Compaq's Q2 financials Re: Compaq's Q2 financials Re: Compaq's Q2 financials Re: Compaq's Q2 financials* Re: DFWCUG Announcement regarding DEFCON 9* Re: DFWCUG Announcement regarding DEFCON 9* Re: DFWCUG Announcement regarding DEFCON 9* Re: DFWCUG Announcement regarding DEFCON 9* Re: DFWCUG Announcement regarding DEFCON 9* Re: DFWCUG Announcement regarding DEFCON 9* Re: DFWCUG Announcement regarding DEFCON 9= Escape sequences not filtered in VMS Mail (VMS Mail V7.3 ECO) A Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS Mail (VMS Mail V7.3 ECO) A Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS Mail (VMS Mail V7.3 ECO) A Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS Mail (VMS Mail V7.3 ECO) A Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS Mail (VMS Mail V7.3 ECO) ) Re: IPF already needs a face-lift for VMS : Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)* Re: KZPCA SCSI adapter board for Alpha/VMS* Re: KZPCA SCSI adapter board for Alpha/VMS Re: LPs on the Web Re: LPs on the Web Re: LPs on the Web Re: LPs on the Web Re: LPs on the Web Re: LPs on the Web Re: LPs on the Web Re: Migration from VMS Re: Migration from VMS Re: Migration from VMS
 Re: Minimerge % Re: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 % RE: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 % Re: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 % RE: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 % RE: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 % Re: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 % RE: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 % RE: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 % RE: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 ? Re: Now we're cooking with gas. (was:  Wailing and moaning....) ? Re: Now we're cooking with gas. (was:  Wailing and moaning....) ? Re: Now we're cooking with gas. (was:  Wailing and moaning....) ? Re: Now we're cooking with gas. (was:  Wailing and moaning....)  Re: Porting quandry  Re: Porting quandry 0 Re: Problem w/protected subsystems & lib$spawn()$ Re: Selling VMS to another company ?$ Re: Selling VMS to another company ? Re: simple COPY question Re: SMTP and distribution lists B Re: Triggering tasks from network file arrival - Was Re: Basic VMS* VAX/VMS Hobby PAK license question/problem. Re: VAX/VMS Hobby PAK license question/problem. Re: VAX/VMS Hobby PAK license question/problem. RE: VAX/VMS Hobby PAK license question/problem Re: VM: checking some myths. Re: VM: checking some myths. Re: VM: checking some myths. Re: VM: checking some myths. Re: VM: checking some myths., Re: VMS remains secure at DEFCON hacker fest Re: Zero Quadword Time Poll  Re: Zero Quadword Time Poll   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 23:48:55 +0200 ) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> * Subject: Re: 64 systems don't NEED windows, Message-ID: <3B5F3EC7.D47AF70E@infopuls.com>   "Steven P. Underwood" wrote:M > >************************************************************************** M > >*                       RIP VMS & ALPHA                                  * M > >************************************************************************** C > That's it.  Compaq's next announcement will be the sale of VMS to H > Microsoft, so they can concentrate on their "core" business of selling > boxes ;-)  >  > Steve  > Steven P. Underwood,DNRC > Whitinsville,MA  > StevenU@POBoxes.com    Compaq's core business: > 1.sell precious assets for little money to the wrong companies3 2.buy precious assets for huge money and destroy it    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:02:52 -0400 2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)' Subject: Re: 7.3 system disk corruption L Message-ID: <rdeininger-2507011602530001@user-2ive7gm.dialup.mindspring.com>  4 In article <3b5ef7f5$1@pull.gecm.com>, "Tim Jackson" <tim.jackson@amsjv.com> wrote:  G > Configuration:   DS10 and DS20E, shared SCSI, RAIDarray 3000, OpenVMS E > 7.3 plus latest patches, DECnet-Plus, TCP/IP Services 5.1, Advanced G > Server 7.3 (as BDC), DECwindows Motif 1.2-6, FORTRAN, Pascal, C, C++,  > GKS, DCPS-(Open and Plus). > I > Has anyone experienced corruption of their OpenVMS 7.3 system disk?  We H > have successfully configured our system, but twice now I have left theG > system running overnight only to come in the next morning to find the B > system disk corrupted.  Many symptoms reported from ANALYZE/DISKH > including multiply allocated blocks, blocks marked free when used, andE > many others I can't remember and which ANALYZE/DISK/REPAIR cleared.   F The only time I've had serious disk corruptions like this was when theG disk was failing.  Lots of hardware errors were showing up in the error  logs.   F Multiply allocated blocks are a ticking time bomb.  There is a seriousG problem here.  Make SURE you have good backups; you'll likely need them H soon.  If you don't have them, back up what you have now, before it gets worse.  6 The next time you do an ANALYZE/DISK, keep the output.  I Shared SCSI likely adds lots of extra opportunities for disk corruption.  A Are you certain your hardware configuration is supported?  Unlike G single-host SCSI, where many unsupported configurations work just fine, = with multi-host SCSI you need to stick very close to official  configurations.    --   Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:48:48 -0400 + From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@compaq.com> ' Subject: RE: 7.3 system disk corruption R Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4D4951F@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   Tim,  D As Robert just pointed out - are there any HW errors reported in the
 errorlog ?  K Reason for asking is that I have a few internal VMS V7.3 lab servers that I K have installed with no issues like this. I just ran $ana/disk/repair on one 2 that has been up for approx 3 weeks and it ran ok.  L Also, these folks have been running OpenVMS V7.3 in production for some timeI (albeit in a different HW config) and, to the best of my knowledge, never  had the issues you mentioned -= http://www.openvms.compaq.com/openvms/brochures/Bank-Austria/    Regards,  
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  Compaq Canada Inc. Professional Services  Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax  :  819-772-7036 Email: Kerry.Main@Compaq.com     -----Original Message-----0 From: Tim Jackson [mailto:tim.jackson@amsjv.com] Sent: July 25, 2001 12:56 PM To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com # Subject: 7.3 system disk corruption     E Configuration:   DS10 and DS20E, shared SCSI, RAIDarray 3000, OpenVMS C 7.3 plus latest patches, DECnet-Plus, TCP/IP Services 5.1, Advanced E Server 7.3 (as BDC), DECwindows Motif 1.2-6, FORTRAN, Pascal, C, C++,  GKS, DCPS-(Open and Plus).  G Has anyone experienced corruption of their OpenVMS 7.3 system disk?  We F have successfully configured our system, but twice now I have left theE system running overnight only to come in the next morning to find the @ system disk corrupted.  Many symptoms reported from ANALYZE/DISKF including multiply allocated blocks, blocks marked free when used, andC many others I can't remember and which ANALYZE/DISK/REPAIR cleared.    TIA D ------------------ Purely Personal Opinion -------------------------D Tim Jackson                                    tim.jackson@amsjv.com Air Systems Group  Alenia Marconi Systems Ltd.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 08:23:08 +0300 % From: Gabriel Sterk <gabi@aipm.co.il> ' Subject: Re: 7.3 system disk corruption 2 Message-ID: <000701c11593$0eed67e0$2c46bf10@manai>  ; Besides looking for hardware errors, as others pointed out, 4 do you have any disk defragmenter running at night??   Regards,
 Gabriel Sterk      > -----Original Message-----2 > From: Main, Kerry [mailto:Kerry.Main@compaq.com]) > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 10:49 PM  > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com ) > Subject: RE: 7.3 system disk corruption  >  >  > Tim, > F > As Robert just pointed out - are there any HW errors reported in the > errorlog ? > ? > Reason for asking is that I have a few internal VMS V7.3 lab   > servers that I6 > have installed with no issues like this. I just ran  > $ana/disk/repair on one 4 > that has been up for approx 3 weeks and it ran ok. > 6 > Also, these folks have been running OpenVMS V7.3 in  > production for some time; > (albeit in a different HW config) and, to the best of my   > knowledge, never  > had the issues you mentioned -? > http://www.openvms.compaq.com/openvms/brochures/Bank-Austria/  > 
 > Regards, >  > Kerry Main > Senior Consultant  > Compaq Canada Inc. > Professional Services  > Voice: 613-592-4660  > Fax  :  819-772-7036 > Email: Kerry.Main@Compaq.com >  >  > -----Original Message-----2 > From: Tim Jackson [mailto:tim.jackson@amsjv.com] > Sent: July 25, 2001 12:56 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com % > Subject: 7.3 system disk corruption  >  > G > Configuration:   DS10 and DS20E, shared SCSI, RAIDarray 3000, OpenVMS E > 7.3 plus latest patches, DECnet-Plus, TCP/IP Services 5.1, Advanced G > Server 7.3 (as BDC), DECwindows Motif 1.2-6, FORTRAN, Pascal, C, C++,  > GKS, DCPS-(Open and Plus). > @ > Has anyone experienced corruption of their OpenVMS 7.3 system  > disk?  We H > have successfully configured our system, but twice now I have left theG > system running overnight only to come in the next morning to find the B > system disk corrupted.  Many symptoms reported from ANALYZE/DISKH > including multiply allocated blocks, blocks marked free when used, andE > many others I can't remember and which ANALYZE/DISK/REPAIR cleared.  >  > TIA F > ------------------ Purely Personal Opinion -------------------------F > Tim Jackson                                    tim.jackson@amsjv.com > Air Systems Group  > Alenia Marconi Systems Ltd.  >    ------------------------------   Date: 24 Jul 2001 21:10:09 CDT= From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.320117.killspam.015d (Wayne Sewell) 3 Subject: Re: Best file spec for incremental backup? . Message-ID: <EgBzLUx2gmhI@tachxxsoftxxconsult>  c In article <793af3df.0107200921.72861d7f@posting.google.com>, tadamsmar@aol.com (Tom Adams) writes: ; > We had been using [*...] as the file spec for incremental / > backups that might be used to recover a disk.  > & > Is [000000...] a better choice? Why?    L [000000...] would include the contents of the 000000 directory itself in the backup.   O Of course, if you want to cover everything you can always specify just the disk  name.  That's what I do.   --  O =============================================================================== M Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxx : http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-) O =============================================================================== H Randolph Duke (in Trading Places): "Mother always said you were greedy.". Mortimer Duke: "She meant it as a compliment!"   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:04:35 -0400 ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> 4 Subject: Re: Check out the Wall Street Journal today( Message-ID: <9jn4vg$rgq$1@pyrite.mv.net>  L "Jan Vorbrueggen" <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote inJ message news:y4hew1icra.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de...+ > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes:  > K > > I mean that VMS in no enjoys the perception of 'standardness' that Unix D > > variants and Windows do.  The only entry in the list that VMS is remotelyH > > like in such respects (which I believe are the respects that largely defineJ > > 'proprietary' in many minds) is MacOS.  Hence the phrase 'just like' - i.e., C > > *identically to* that entire list - seems wildly inappropriate.  > I > Oh, it wasn't clear that you were talking perception instead of reality K > (whatever that is). With this in mind, I quite agree with you. OTOH, such G > perception has not stopped IBM to successfully market MVS, VM, AS/400  systems.  J I wouldn't have spent significant amounts of time a year ago trying to getH Compaq to leverage (rather than neglect) its prime differentiators - VMSH first among them - if I didn't think that VMS *could* be successful *if* Compaq marketed it.   F That, however, has never occurred.  So not only is VMS not 'just like'H systems perceived as 'industry-standard' and/or 'open' (VMS doesn't evenD have the POSIX fig-leaf any more), it's also not 'just like' systems; perceived as 'proprietary' but sufficiently successful (and 1 vendor-supported) to be safe to commit to anyway.    - bill   >  > Jan    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 20:14:07 +0200 , From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch> Subject: Re: checksum & Message-ID: <3B5F0C70.5CD56F4D@gmx.ch>   Mark Daniel wrote: > * > $ MD5digest == "$dir:[dev]MD5DIGEST.EXE"+ > $ call MD5dir /OUT=dev:[dir]MD5DIGEST.LIS  > $ exit > $ MD5dir: subroutine
 > $ show time 	 > $ loop: / > $    FileName = f$search("dev:[dir...]*.*;0") - > $    if FileName .eqs. "" then goto endLoop  > $    MD5digest 'FileName'  > $    goto loop > $ endLoop: > $ endsubroutine  > $ exit  @ If you don't mind, Mark, with all the respect that I owe you ;)  I would rather code it that way:  	 $ENDLOOP:  $ exit $ endsubroutine   G I know there are some undocumented features, like the IF which does not > change the $status value (...), that may be used, but I prefer@ standards. STANDARDS! It makes maintenance by others easier, no?   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 07:52:44 +0930 / From: Mark Daniel <Mark.Daniel@wasd.vsm.com.au>  Subject: Re: checksum / Message-ID: <3B5F46B4.23F3B584@wasd.vsm.com.au>   8 Of course, a coding error (not my first, not my last ;^)   Didier Morandi wrote:  >  > Mark Daniel wrote: > > , > > $ MD5digest == "$dir:[dev]MD5DIGEST.EXE"- > > $ call MD5dir /OUT=dev:[dir]MD5DIGEST.LIS 
 > > $ exit > > $ MD5dir: subroutine > > $ show time  > > $ loop: 1 > > $    FileName = f$search("dev:[dir...]*.*;0") / > > $    if FileName .eqs. "" then goto endLoop  > > $    MD5digest 'FileName'  > > $    goto loop > > $ endLoop: > > $ endsubroutine 
 > > $ exit > B > If you don't mind, Mark, with all the respect that I owe you ;)" > I would rather code it that way: >  > $ENDLOOP:  > $ exit > $ endsubroutine  > I > I know there are some undocumented features, like the IF which does not @ > change the $status value (...), that may be used, but I preferB > standards. STANDARDS! It makes maintenance by others easier, no?   --   Illegitimis nil carborundum.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 23:35:19 +0200 & From: John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> Subject: Compaq's Q2 financials * Message-ID: <3B5F3B97.2D8B7574@dplanet.ch>  F Well, Compaq took a pasting in Q2, losing $398 million before tax, butE that includes a hit for $493 million of restructuring charges, making * the normal total a profit of $167 million.  D PC's of various types were again the losers, this time $155 million,@ bringing to $237 million the amount they have lost for the year.  H Enterprise Computing was way down from last year - at $74 million incomeD compared to $383 million - and for the 6 months it has returned $206B million compared to $645 million last year.  (Most of the drop wasD blamed on poor USA sales but Compaq see Europe starting to catch the same disease.)  D Compared to last quarter, EC revenue is down about 10% but income isG down about 40%.  PC revenue is down about 8% but income is down but the % losses from PC's have almost doubled.     	 Comments: F 1. No mention of the Alpha sale anywhere that I could see, so maybe itF is included in these figures or maybe not.  Did people start moving toH Intel in June - in which case one would expect it in the financials - or did they move from July 1st ?   D 2.  It would be very interesting to see the breakdown for EnterpriseD Computing.  How are sales of Alpha-based platforms holding ?  Is theF reduced income from Linux hardware starting to bite, especially in theB Tru64 area ?  Are the ProLiants servers - now classified as EC - a handicap to the sector ?  E 3.  In the reallocation of segments back in April, the restatement ofoE Year 2000 figures showed EC revenue unchanged but income mysteriouslycD dropped and reallocated (in part) to PC's.  Has this been done again> here and should EC income be higher and PC income even lower ?  A 4.  Not very inspiring figures overall and clearly they had to doeG something.  The question remains, did they throw away the part with theA= best potential for profits if only they knew how to sell it ?n     John McLeanF   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:12:08 -0400M' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>e# Subject: Re: Compaq's Q2 financialsi( Message-ID: <9jnjfm$dr8$1@pyrite.mv.net>  3 "John McLean" <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> wrote in messagee$ news:3B5F3B97.2D8B7574@dplanet.ch...   ...E  	 Comments:aH > 1. No mention of the Alpha sale anywhere that I could see, so maybe itH > is included in these figures or maybe not.  Did people start moving toJ > Intel in June - in which case one would expect it in the financials - or > did they move from July 1st ?A  L If you're referring to the supposed bundle of cash Intel was willing to ponyK up, I seriously doubt that it's reflected in the Q2 numbers (since it would J have made a major impact).  And of course given that the announcement cameL less than a week before the close of the quarter, the impact of any customerL reaction is presumably also absent.  But IIRC it was said here that the $493J million restructuring charge did include some of the employees affected by the Alpha cancellation.n   >SF > 2.  It would be very interesting to see the breakdown for EnterpriseF > Computing.  How are sales of Alpha-based platforms holding ?  Is theH > reduced income from Linux hardware starting to bite, especially in theD > Tru64 area ?  Are the ProLiants servers - now classified as EC - a > handicap to the sector ?  A Indeed it would.  And it's also interesting to note that even theiJ finer-granularity hints in the 'Revenue' and 'Operating Income' paragraphsK that were given in the Q1 'Financial Discussion' document are absent in the  corresponding Q2 document.  J For example, for the Enterprise Computing segment in Q1 it was stated thatH "Revenue benefited from strong growth in external storage and enterpriseK software sales resulting from continued customer acceptance of Storage Area H Networks" - areas far more often associated with higher-end systems thanJ with 'industry-standard' servers - while "Such growth was offset primarilyK by lower revenue from industry standard servers as the economic slowdown incL the United States led to lower technology spending and a competitive pricingK environment".  And on the Enterprise Computing income front the Q1 document-K reported that "A favorable shift in mix to higher margin enterprise storage0F products was more than offset by an aggressive pricing environment for0 industry standard servers in the United States".  F In other words, in Q1 industry standard servers were dragging down theJ profitability of the Enterprise Computing division in much the same mannerL that the PC business has been dragging down Compaq as a whole.  Since the Q2K document cites much the same market conditions as the reasons for continuedoC problems, it would not seem unreasonable to infer that the relative I contributions of the separate divisions within Enterprise Computing might I well have been similar to those in Q1 - and if so, it's hardly surprising.I that Compaq is a bit more shy about advertising that fact (since it wouldo/ seem to foreshadow outright catastrophe in Q3).u   >nG > 3.  In the reallocation of segments back in April, the restatement of G > Year 2000 figures showed EC revenue unchanged but income mysteriously F > dropped and reallocated (in part) to PC's.  Has this been done again@ > here and should EC income be higher and PC income even lower ? >5C > 4.  Not very inspiring figures overall and clearly they had to do I > something.  The question remains, did they throw away the part with the.? > best potential for profits if only they knew how to sell it ?    Is that really in any doubt?   - bill   >, >R
 > John McLean,   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 23:51:16 -0400o- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>e# Subject: Re: Compaq's Q2 financialsb+ Message-ID: <3B5F93AF.A48D30F@videotron.ca>g   John McLean wrote:F > PC's of various types were again the losers, this time $155 million,B > bringing to $237 million the amount they have lost for the year.  J On CNN Moneyline, Lou Dobs stated that if Compaq said that its consumer PCI wasn't doing well, it was very bad news because it was Compaq's bread andpM butter (or something to that order). Compaq has its PR job well defined sincehF it still appears as a "PC maker" and not an enterprise computer maker.  N Also, during that segment, it was mentioned that Dell was the biggest computerL maker, ahead of Compaq. Shouldn't that rank go to IBM ? So it seems that theM press still see "computer maker" as "wintel" and measures in market share ando! units of wintel machines shipped.o    J > Enterprise Computing was way down from last year - at $74 million incomeF > compared to $383 million - and for the 6 months it has returned $206- > million compared to $645 million last year.l  L Yep, that was a big drop in enterprise computing. But no information on whatI portion of enterprise computing is down. There was a tidbit about storage-I doing well and Compaq having eben named by Gartner Dataquest the first inM enterprise storage solutions.7  H > 1. No mention of the Alpha sale anywhere that I could see, so maybe it- > is included in these figures or maybe not. s  N Compaq's streamlining of solutions, including the deal with Intel is mentioned1 in the discussion paper, but no figures provided.     F > 2.  It would be very interesting to see the breakdown for Enterprise? > Computing.  How are sales of Alpha-based platforms holding ? n  H The fact that they don't want to breakdown the enterprise division is anK indication that they want to retain the freedom to make strategic decisionso? which may not appear to be economically good in the short term.s  D > Tru64 area ?  Are the ProLiants servers - now classified as EC - a > handicap to the sector ?  L I suspect that Proliant servers represent the largest chunk of units shippedK and revenu for enterprise. They may have poor margins, but if they make 10%oQ profit and sell 100 times more than alphas, they may still generate more profits.i    I > something.  The question remains, did they throw away the part with the0? > best potential for profits if only they knew how to sell it ?,  P Compaq exists to serve Microsoft and Intel. Other systems are tolerated for now.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 00:06:19 -0400e' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>3# Subject: Re: Compaq's Q2 financials ( Message-ID: <9jo4n6$qau$1@pyrite.mv.net>  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message% news:3B5F93AF.A48D30F@videotron.ca...p > John McLean wrote:   ...f  F > > Tru64 area ?  Are the ProLiants servers - now classified as EC - a > > handicap to the sector ? >'F > I suspect that Proliant servers represent the largest chunk of units shippedrI > and revenu for enterprise. They may have poor margins, but if they make  10% J > profit and sell 100 times more than alphas, they may still generate more profits.  L That's not the impression one gets from the Q1 (1Q01FinancialDiscussion.pdf)< discussion, which said revenues were down due to fall-off inH industry-standard server volume and profits were down due to fall-off inI industry-standard server margins (in an 'aggressive pricing environment',iG which as I've mentioned before seems to be Compaq-ese for selling below-- actual cost to try to preserve market share).i  J If the same (and worse) was the case in Q2, it's no wonder they don't want to talk about the details.   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 04:21:02 GMTd From: "Bill" <billmuy@home.com>p# Subject: Re: Compaq's Q2 financialss? Message-ID: <OUM77.408058$p33.8329060@news1.sttls1.wa.home.com>v  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message% news:3B5F93AF.A48D30F@videotron.ca...t > John McLean wrote: > G > Also, during that segment, it was mentioned that Dell was the biggest7 computerJ > maker, ahead of Compaq. Shouldn't that rank go to IBM ? So it seems that the K > press still see "computer maker" as "wintel" and measures in market sharev andm# > units of wintel machines shipped.a >   L The statement may be a little closer to the truth than it first appears.  IfH you read "computer maker" literally -- i.e. make tangible hardware, thenI Dell is about the same size as IBM now, and will probably overtake IBM as D the biggest computer h/w maker in a quarter or two.  If you considerL "services",   "software", and "financing"  part of being a "computer maker",I then IBM is of course much bigger.  But even that could change in the notMH too distant future since Mr Dell's goal is to grow his little company to, $100Bn annual revenues and 40% market share.   >RJ > The fact that they don't want to breakdown the enterprise division is anC > indication that they want to retain the freedom to make strategics	 decisions A > which may not appear to be economically good in the short term.i >o  G Or perhaps they don't want their competition to know too much about thepK business models and cost structures.   All companies try to aggregate theirdK "reportable segments" as much as possible to protect the individual productd0 line profitability from prying competitive eyes.   Bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 01:51:04 -0400o- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>n# Subject: Re: Compaq's Q2 financialsl, Message-ID: <3B5FAFBA.7FA50E6C@videotron.ca>   Bill wrote:-I > Or perhaps they don't want their competition to know too much about thesM > business models and cost structures.   All companies try to aggregate their M > "reportable segments" as much as possible to protect the individual product22 > line profitability from prying competitive eyes.  J But isn't it to Compaq's advantage to brag about how it has/had non-wintelM enterprise systems that generated much cash ? Wall Street would then see thattI Compaq is much more than a wintel box maker and would more likely compared Compaq to IBM than to Dell.p  J By lumping the try enterprise systems with the wintel servers, and talkingN only about the winter server in that segment, Compaq uses the profits from theE "real" enterprise stuff to make their wintel server line look better.t  L So, if Compaq's goal is to grow its wintel server business, it would explainI why Compaq would want to lump in the profitable enterprise stuff with thesK wintel server to make the wintel server look more profitable than it really=I is. Also, by not reporting VMS separately, assuming it is currently quite"E profitable, when VMS profits go down nobody will notice. So if Compaq ? mismanages VMS and lets its profits dry up, nobody will notice.u  E Once VMS starts to loose money and Compaq decides to widthdraw active:J support/development of VMS, it will be a bit like Alpha: Compaq will claimL that it costs too much money and kills it, but you can't really veryfy if it makes or looses money.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 18:27:35 GMT 4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>3 Subject: Re: DFWCUG Announcement regarding DEFCON 9 ; Message-ID: <rcE77.2362$eH.1394950@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>h  : "John Wisniewski" <wisniewski@vmsone.com> wrote in message$ news:3B5E84DE.501BCA43@vmsone.com... >  >i >  > J > > The Dallas Ft Worth Compaq User Group (The DFWCUG) has an announcement > > regarding they > > recent DEFCON 9 Convention:d > >aE > > July 12-14th  2001, a team of DFWCUG members took an Alphastationn > > running OpenVMS C > > 7.2-1h1 with a standard installation and OpenVMS Hobbyist PAKs,, > > Apache, and TCP/IPG > > services for OpenVMS 5.0a to the DEFCON 9 Hackers Convention in Laso
 > > Vegas NV.n >i > This was  posted Monday... >a > No snide comments... > 
 > No Jabs....r >a > No cries for free VMS... >aE > No complaints about OpenVMS being the reason your site is moving toc > SUN... >  > No moans about marketing...o >e3 > No one telling me that it's already in the FAQ...l >'@ > Either comp.os.vms is slipping or you folks really are getting2 > apathetic... Or maybe it's just July doldrums...5 > Or maybe you're busy porting VMS apps to Itanium;-)b >sG > This was a good thing.. Just taking a VMS box to DEFCON and Survivingn! > would have been a good thing...-) > The DFWCUG did much better then that...2 >u  J Any OS that can survive repeated intrusive attempts from Notorious Belgian$ Hacker Cedric Zool is OK in my book!  E Umm, did you see Zool in Lost Wages? Rumour has it he was among thoseD
 present...   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 20:18:58 +0200u2 From: martin@radiogaga.harz.de (Martin Vorlaender)3 Subject: Re: DFWCUG Announcement regarding DEFCON 9q; Message-ID: <3b5f0d92.524144494f47414741@radiogaga.harz.de>   . John Wisniewski (wisniewski@vmsone.com) wrote:J > > The Dallas Ft Worth Compaq User Group (The DFWCUG) has an announcement- > > regarding the recent DEFCON 9 Convention:  ...  > This was  posted Monday... > No snide comments...
 > No Jabs....  > No cries for free VMS...L > No complaints about OpenVMS being the reason your site is moving to SUN... > No moans about marketing...e3 > No one telling me that it's already in the FAQ...a > @ > Either comp.os.vms is slipping or you folks really are getting2 > apathetic... Or maybe it's just July doldrums...5 > Or maybe you're busy porting VMS apps to Itanium;-)c >nG > This was a good thing.. Just taking a VMS box to DEFCON and Survivinga! > would have been a good thing...g) > The DFWCUG did much better then that...l   It sure sounded like fun :-)  E I followed all of your posts, read the DFWCUG newsletter article, and E forwarded it to local contacts (within PDV and Compaq). What more wasaI I to do? I mean, other than being deeply impressed. Oh, I forgot (sorry):t  . Congratulations to everyone in the Green team!   You made VMS shine. Thank you.   cu,t   Martin -- cG So long, and thanks        | Martin Vorlaender  |  VMS & WNT programmer 4 for all the books...       | work: mv@pdv-systeme.deK In Memoriam Douglas Adams  |       http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/s;             1952-2001      | home: martin@radiogaga.harz.deA   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:52:23 -0400 2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)3 Subject: Re: DFWCUG Announcement regarding DEFCON 9aL Message-ID: <rdeininger-2507011552240001@user-2ive7gm.dialup.mindspring.com>  : In article <3B5E84DE.501BCA43@vmsone.com>, John Wisniewski <wisniewski@vmsone.com> wrote:  J > > The Dallas Ft Worth Compaq User Group (The DFWCUG) has an announcement > > regarding theo > > recent DEFCON 9 Convention:a > > E > > July 12-14th  2001, a team of DFWCUG members took an Alphastationm > > running OpenVMSyC > > 7.2-1h1 with a standard installation and OpenVMS Hobbyist PAKs,s > > Apache, and TCP/IPG > > services for OpenVMS 5.0a to the DEFCON 9 Hackers Convention in Las2
 > > Vegas NV.p >  > This was  posted Monday...  D Have you e-mailed Sue Skonetski ( Susan.Skonetski@compaq.com ) aboutG this?  She's the person in Compaq most likely to get some milage out ofeF this story. But it didn't seem like my place to relay 3rd- or 4th-hand news.b  F She might have seen your post, but most folks have better things to do> than read everything here, so she could easily have missed it.  J I enjoyed the narrative when it was posted, but didn't feel I had anything to add except "told you so".   -- c Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.comr   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 00:19:55 GMTe' From: bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net>.3 Subject: Re: DFWCUG Announcement regarding DEFCON 9s0 Message-ID: <3B5F65A5.D2317721@bellatlantic.net>   John Wisniewski wrote: > J > > The Dallas Ft Worth Compaq User Group (The DFWCUG) has an announcement > > regarding the. > > recent DEFCON 9 Convention:  > >iE > > July 12-14th  2001, a team of DFWCUG members took an Alphastationn > > running OpenVMSiC > > 7.2-1h1 with a standard installation and OpenVMS Hobbyist PAKs,e > > Apache, and TCP/IPG > > services for OpenVMS 5.0a to the DEFCON 9 Hackers Convention in Lasf
 > > Vegas NV.a >  > This was  posted Monday... >  > No snide comments... > 
 > No Jabs....  >  > No cries for free VMS... > E > No complaints about OpenVMS being the reason your site is moving to- > SUN... >  > No moans about marketing...u > 3 > No one telling me that it's already in the FAQ...v > @ > Either comp.os.vms is slipping or you folks really are getting2 > apathetic... Or maybe it's just July doldrums...5 > Or maybe you're busy porting VMS apps to Itanium;-). > G > This was a good thing.. Just taking a VMS box to DEFCON and Survivingo! > would have been a good thing... ) > The DFWCUG did much better then that...s > ! > See you at CETS in September...i >  > John Wisniewskit > wisniewski@vmsone.comr > @ > PS:  Please tell me if I missed any of the reoccuring posts;-)@ No comments about Palmer?  Hmmm. WE are slipping.  Where is Carl Lydick when we need him!   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:44:08 -0500i1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>f3 Subject: Re: DFWCUG Announcement regarding DEFCON 9m' Message-ID: <3B5F67D8.666A17B5@fsi.net>B   John Wisniewski wrote: > J > > The Dallas Ft Worth Compaq User Group (The DFWCUG) has an announcement > > regarding the  > > recent DEFCON 9 Convention:u > > E > > July 12-14th  2001, a team of DFWCUG members took an Alphastation  > > running OpenVMSsC > > 7.2-1h1 with a standard installation and OpenVMS Hobbyist PAKs,s > > Apache, and TCP/IPG > > services for OpenVMS 5.0a to the DEFCON 9 Hackers Convention in Las 
 > > Vegas NV.c >  > This was  posted Monday... >  > No snide comments... > 
 > No Jabs....e >  > No cries for free VMS... > E > No complaints about OpenVMS being the reason your site is moving toQ > SUN... >  > No moans about marketing...i > 3 > No one telling me that it's already in the FAQ...e > @ > Either comp.os.vms is slipping or you folks really are getting2 > apathetic... Or maybe it's just July doldrums...5 > Or maybe you're busy porting VMS apps to Itanium;-)r > G > This was a good thing.. Just taking a VMS box to DEFCON and Survivingh! > would have been a good thing...u) > The DFWCUG did much better then that...  > ! > See you at CETS in September...f >  > John Wisniewskie > wisniewski@vmsone.comw > @ > PS:  Please tell me if I missed any of the reoccuring posts;-)  H We all know and love VMS - we would have expected nothing less than what was found to be true.o  E "Free" VMS? We'll settle for affordable Alphas, affordable commercial @ VMS licenses, affordable commercial layered product licenses andE affordable software library distributions (for end-users, not CSAs ors  ISVs - they're already covered).  F Now that the dot-com world has gone bust, small business is left aloneE to survive where the giants succumbed. To bad we *STILL* can't affordoF our beloved platform of choice, and instead must run inferior hardware: and operating software, layered products and applications.  F More money that goes to the G-man, or others, instead of to the "Q"...   -- i David J. Dachterar dba DJE Systemsh http://www.djesys.com/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/e  F This *IS* an OpenVMS-related newsgroup. So, a certain bias in postings is to be expected.  @ Feel free to exercise your rights of free speech and expression.  F However, attacks against individual posters, or groups of posters, are strongly discouraged.o   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 00:55:30 GMTi' From: bad bob <sfmc68@bellatlantic.net>?3 Subject: Re: DFWCUG Announcement regarding DEFCON 9e0 Message-ID: <3B5F6DFD.C8AE315B@bellatlantic.net>   "David J. Dachtera" wrote: >  > John Wisniewski wrote: > >fL > > > The Dallas Ft Worth Compaq User Group (The DFWCUG) has an announcement > > > regarding the ! > > > recent DEFCON 9 Convention:- > > >-G > > > July 12-14th  2001, a team of DFWCUG members took an Alphastationp > > > running OpenVMSuE > > > 7.2-1h1 with a standard installation and OpenVMS Hobbyist PAKs,t > > > Apache, and TCP/IPI > > > services for OpenVMS 5.0a to the DEFCON 9 Hackers Convention in Las, > > > Vegas NV.2 > >l > > This was  posted Monday... > >e > > No snide comments... > >  > > No Jabs....i > >p > > No cries for free VMS... > >tG > > No complaints about OpenVMS being the reason your site is moving tot
 > > SUN... > >t > > No moans about marketing...j > >l5 > > No one telling me that it's already in the FAQ...n > > B > > Either comp.os.vms is slipping or you folks really are getting4 > > apathetic... Or maybe it's just July doldrums...7 > > Or maybe you're busy porting VMS apps to Itanium;-)h > >eI > > This was a good thing.. Just taking a VMS box to DEFCON and Surviving # > > would have been a good thing...d+ > > The DFWCUG did much better then that...r > >s# > > See you at CETS in September...p > >t > > John Wisniewskif > > wisniewski@vmsone.comr > >2B > > PS:  Please tell me if I missed any of the reoccuring posts;-) > J > We all know and love VMS - we would have expected nothing less than what > was found to be true.T > G > "Free" VMS? We'll settle for affordable Alphas, affordable commercialGB > VMS licenses, affordable commercial layered product licenses andG > affordable software library distributions (for end-users, not CSAs or " > ISVs - they're already covered).< I read that different, I kept reading it as "FREE" VMS, not @ "Free VMS" - sorta like free the hostages, let the product sell,? let the product be advertised, let the world know about VMS.... + oh well, just twisted on this end I guess..r bad bobf   > H > Now that the dot-com world has gone bust, small business is left aloneG > to survive where the giants succumbed. To bad we *STILL* can't affordrH > our beloved platform of choice, and instead must run inferior hardware< > and operating software, layered products and applications. > H > More money that goes to the G-man, or others, instead of to the "Q"... >  > -- > David J. Dachtera  > dba DJE Systemsf > http://www.djesys.com/ > < > Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board:! > http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/a > H > This *IS* an OpenVMS-related newsgroup. So, a certain bias in postings > is to be expected. > B > Feel free to exercise your rights of free speech and expression. > H > However, attacks against individual posters, or groups of posters, are > strongly discouraged.o   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 03:56:27 GMT0. From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>3 Subject: Re: DFWCUG Announcement regarding DEFCON 9oD Message-ID: <LxM77.1232$nS1.142645@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  K Is it any wonder that VMS is fading in the market place.  At about the same I time as this was happening, Windows was in the news everywhere, includingCL reports about the White House web site.  Everyone knows that Windows is usedJ everywhere because its reported constantly.  Did anyone mention VMS in theH White House?  Only a small number of DEC people knew that VMS was there, and, gack!, it was         all-in-1 of all things.  F When VMS was being hacked 18-20 years ago, virtually no one knew about computer networks.  F The obvious solution is to build in security holes into VMS and TandemE software so that hackers will illegally transfer trillions of dollarsrJ around.  Then, and only then, will these neglected systems get the respect that they deserve.  : "John Wisniewski" <wisniewski@vmsone.com> wrote in message$ news:3B5C979D.B35F6A42@vmsone.com...F The Dallas Ft Worth Compaq User Group (The DFWCUG) has an announcement
 regarding thel recent DEFCON 9 Convention:-I July 12-14th  2001, a team of DFWCUG members took an Alphastation runningl OpenVMScK 7.2-1h1 with a standard installation and OpenVMS Hobbyist PAKs, Apache, and9 TCP/IPI services for OpenVMS 5.0a to the DEFCON 9 Hackers Convention in Las Vegasn NV.aF The Alphastation was placed in competition during the Capture the Flag Hacking Game that wasnI held on the floor of  DEFCON 9during the convention as a member server of  the GREEN team. L The Alphaserver provided WEBservices and inbound telnet.   The Community was invited to telnetmF to a public account that automatically created non-prived accounts and webservice for any of thelI Hackers on the floor.  An additional public account hosted terminal basedk games such as VAXtrek,L Moria 4.81, Hack, Rogue, Battlestar, ZK and Doomsday 2000 (for those who got bored just tryingM to hack;-).gF The Green Team took 3rd place in the competition for Capture the Flag." After three long days on the floorI of Defcon 9 the Alphatation was deemed virtually unhackable by the Defconn judges.  During the AwardsI on Sunday July 14th the winning Team acknowledge the prowess of the greeno# team's servers and systems managerseC and the CTF Judge declared the "VAX" Cool for it's content and it'sr- continuous service during the worst that 4300n5 hackers could throw at it over the three day contest. F Congratulations and a sincere "Thank You" to the DFWCUG team for their& success and  reminding all of us  justF how secure and functional OpenVMS really is, even in the most security" hostile environment on the planet.& The DFWCUG Steering Committee  7/23/01     --K The DFWCUG is proud of member's accomplishments in the face of such Hackinge adversity and look forwardK to the security white paper that will be presented at CETS2001 in Septemberi# once all the logs and data recordedjB by the Alphastation during the various attacks have been analyzed.I In the meantime we invite you to read more about our Member's activity att DEFCON 9K in our current QUADWORDS newsletter available in PDF format on our WEBpage.t DFWCUG HOMEPAGE  http://www.dfwcug.org/$ DFWCUG QUADWORDS NEWSLETTER FOR JULY< http://www.montagar.com/dfwcug/DFWCUG_newsletters/200107.pdf DEFCON HOMEPAGEs http://www.defcon.org/! CETS 2001 CONVENTION IN Septembero http://www.cets2001.come DECUS/Encompass WEBpages http://www.decus.org/h   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:57:58 GMTlB From: Simon Clubley <simon_clubley@remove_me.excite.com-Earth.UFP>F Subject: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS Mail (VMS Mail V7.3 ECO)5 Message-ID: <GMD77.6658$ar1.21491@www.newsranger.com>r  F A MAIL ECO has just been released for V7.3. Part of the notice is this little gem:f  D #  o  VMS  Mail  does  not  filter  out  the  <ESC>  character  whenD #     displaying  certain  types  of information.  A user could sendD #     any type of VT Escape Sequences to another user's terminal and/ #     change the receiving terminal's behavior.r  K This is the kind of thing that I would have expected to see (and did see asbA a student) 15 years ago. I am concerned to see it in VMS in 2001.   I I would like to politely ask how did this ever get out of VMS Engineeringi in the first place ?  K Sadly, it does leave the impression that newcomers (I am assuming that this H is the work of a newcomer) to VMS Engineering are only been taught _how_# things work in VMS and not _why_...-   Simon.   -- -; Simon Clubley, simon_clubley@remove_me.excite.com-Earth.UFP K 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.t   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:06:20 -04008# From: Jim Agnew <Agnew@hsc.vcu.edu> J Subject: Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS Mail (VMS Mail V7.3 ECO)+ Message-ID: <3B5F18AC.9D7933D1@hsc.vcu.edu>   G actually, i think it got put back... it's not there in 5.5-2, (i think)n   j.  I I used to bug my boss by emailing him exe files...  talk about a terminalO beeping....s   Simon Clubley wrote:  H > A MAIL ECO has just been released for V7.3. Part of the notice is this
 > little gem:a >VF > #  o  VMS  Mail  does  not  filter  out  the  <ESC>  character  whenF > #     displaying  certain  types  of information.  A user could sendF > #     any type of VT Escape Sequences to another user's terminal and1 > #     change the receiving terminal's behavior.t >'M > This is the kind of thing that I would have expected to see (and did see aslC > a student) 15 years ago. I am concerned to see it in VMS in 2001.  >mK > I would like to politely ask how did this ever get out of VMS Engineering. > in the first place ? >DM > Sadly, it does leave the impression that newcomers (I am assuming that this J > is the work of a newcomer) to VMS Engineering are only been taught _how_% > things work in VMS and not _why_...i >o > Simon. >y > --= > Simon Clubley, simon_clubley@remove_me.excite.com-Earth.UFPmM > In the task of removing Microsoft from the marketplace, I have discovered a0G > truly remarkable plan, but this signature is too small to contain it.u   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:40:46 GMT.- From: goathunter@goatley.com (Hunter Goatley)WJ Subject: Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS Mail (VMS Mail V7.3 ECO)1 Message-ID: <3b5f208f.338460870@news.process.com>d  H On Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:06:20 -0400, Jim Agnew <Agnew@hsc.vcu.edu> wrote:  H >actually, i think it got put back... it's not there in 5.5-2, (i think) >tN >> This is the kind of thing that I would have expected to see (and did see asD >> a student) 15 years ago. I am concerned to see it in VMS in 2001.  F I think this, too, can be laid at the feet of the people who did the CE rewrite of VMS Mail, as this was something they corrected back when Ip" was a student (around 1985 or so).   Hunter ------9 Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/o9 goathunter@goatley.com     http://www.goatley.com/hunter/r   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:20:34 -0400s# From: Jim Agnew <Agnew@hsc.vcu.edu>eJ Subject: Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS Mail (VMS Mail V7.3 ECO)+ Message-ID: <3B5F2A11.5707F4C0@hsc.vcu.edu>i   mm.. HI Hunter!!!!!(  Q you're right...  i remember that flap over that bug back then...  'course you cann see my grey beard.... ;-)-   jiml   Hunter Goatley wrote:M  J > On Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:06:20 -0400, Jim Agnew <Agnew@hsc.vcu.edu> wrote: >@J > >actually, i think it got put back... it's not there in 5.5-2, (i think) > >sP > >> This is the kind of thing that I would have expected to see (and did see asF > >> a student) 15 years ago. I am concerned to see it in VMS in 2001. >dH > I think this, too, can be laid at the feet of the people who did the CG > rewrite of VMS Mail, as this was something they corrected back when Ie$ > was a student (around 1985 or so). >< > Hunter > ------; > Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ ; > goathunter@goatley.com     http://www.goatley.com/hunter/    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:55:44 +0200 , From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch>J Subject: Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS Mail (VMS Mail V7.3 ECO)& Message-ID: <3B5F3250.EAF3B9D1@gmx.ch>   Simon Clubley wrote: > H > A MAIL ECO has just been released for V7.3. Part of the notice is this
 > little gem:  > F > #  o  VMS  Mail  does  not  filter  out  the  <ESC>  character  whenF > #     displaying  certain  types  of information.  A user could sendF > #     any type of VT Escape Sequences to another user's terminal and1 > #     change the receiving terminal's behavior.e  H It was nice. I remember my first Christmas at DEC in 1983. We VMS peopleB received two VMS mail containing one a xmas tree with its blinkingG candles, and another one with a train choo-choo-ing in circle. All thislA was displayed following the "instructions": type ext/noheader TT:   1 We had VT100s at that time, and no virus risks...0  " Ahhh the good time. Gone for ever?  	 Probably.c   How is Ken Olsen going?    D.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 04:28:28 GMTe. From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>2 Subject: Re: IPF already needs a face-lift for VMSD Message-ID: <M%M77.1290$nS1.152383@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  L "Jan Vorbrueggen" <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote inJ message news:y4u202qydt.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de...A > system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-) writes:e  : > > Or, double map the pages.  One mapping UR, another KW? >w. > Quite acceptable. Page table space is cheap.  A Is this allowed by the architecture?  And with what restrictions?i  J Also, this makes for some interesting programming challenges.  I have codeI that reads some performance counters that are UR with an option to "zero"eG them by doing a change mode kernel.  For the cell $FOO, what address ist% bound to the symbol table entry $FOO?    Can I write code that like%     save_counters(){saved_foo=$FOO;};-       zero_counters(){     save_counters();     $FOO_writeable=0;      };L If the compiler inlines the save_counters and then reschedules the code, how weird does this get?  H Since the page protection can be changed on the fly, this means that theF mapping needs to be different for all kernel mode pages not matter the protection, doesn't it.m  + Looks like that approach is an ugly kludge.    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 05:15:25 GMT1. From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>C Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS) C Message-ID: <NHN77.958$SU4.201690@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>:  @ "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message) news:x2i77.25$Yx2.499@news.cpqcorp.net...tJ > The EFI console would then find the MBR, and be able to locate the FAT32I > firmware partition needed to boot VMS.  While on the VMS side, the disk 2 > would look just like any normal VMS system disk.  2 Are you thinking that the only boot device is C: ?  K Or are you allowing for the possibility of booting from $1$DGA473: which is.L located in a SAN with a half dozen Alpha VMS systems mounting it?  When will= Alpha VMS be updated to wrap ODS2/5 inside a FAT32 partition.i  K Or is the Fiber Channel Array Controller going to present a FAT32 volume tolI the Itanium node and the inner ODS2/5 container to the rest of the world?i  F It seems to me that if the boot disk has to have the appearance to theH console of FAT32, then all VMS flavors need to understand FAT32 volumes,I even if the only support is to have single file which contains the ODS2/5  file structure.   H And there is a lot of software that knows about Files-11 Home Blocks andL ODS2 file structure at some level: shadowing, backup, software raid, and who) knows what else developed outside of DEC.e  K Of course, one solution would be to have a small disk that is FAT32 that isn; used to boot a small "IPB" which then does the right thing.   L If this "disk" were dedicated to booting just the IPB, then it wouldn't needG to be very large.  It could even be a 16-32 meg flash card, say CompactiJ Flash, SmartMedia, Memory Stick....  Upgrading the console could be easy -: just swap the card or mount it and do an image dump to it.  L Is there any other disk format standard other than the DEC home block formatH standard that works across multiple architectures and operating systems?  I Btw, why does Intel, whatever, define the boot partition to be FAT32?  An K "industry standard PC" console aka bios can boot from a partition no mattertK what format it is, based on information in the partition table???  Where isMK that format defined?  Or is that just some M$ ad hoc kludge that M$ doesn't , document so that it can lockout competitors?   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 02:02:48 -0400f- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>aC Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)r, Message-ID: <3B5FB27A.D3A0DBD6@videotron.ca>   mulp wrote: 4 > Are you thinking that the only boot device is C: ? > M > Or are you allowing for the possibility of booting from $1$DGA473: which is.N > located in a SAN with a half dozen Alpha VMS systems mounting it?  When will? > Alpha VMS be updated to wrap ODS2/5 inside a FAT32 partition.W  L I don't actually understand why/how the boot console of a machine would need* to understand a particular disk structure.  K Is it correct to state that when the console powers up, it scans the bus to H get a list of disk devices (and at which point, the SAN controller would* report it has , say, 5 drives available) ?  L And from that point on, the when the console is asked to boot from a device,F it requests a specify physical block from that device which is totallt* transparent to the disk structure itself ?  N Once it has gotten the boot block, that block would contain code that can loadM more stuff from the disk, at which point the computer would gain knowledge on'L how to access "files" on the disk drive based on the expected file structure
 for that IS ?t    M As such, is it correct to state that the console need not understand the filey structure of disk drives ?    	 QUESTION:   L Will IPF only report device names such as A: B: C: D: E: etc ? Or will it beN capable of using more intelligent device names that might include a controller name as well as disk name ?e         > M > Or is the Fiber Channel Array Controller going to present a FAT32 volume tolK > the Itanium node and the inner ODS2/5 container to the rest of the world?S > H > It seems to me that if the boot disk has to have the appearance to theJ > console of FAT32, then all VMS flavors need to understand FAT32 volumes,K > even if the only support is to have single file which contains the ODS2/5b > file structure.  > J > And there is a lot of software that knows about Files-11 Home Blocks andN > ODS2 file structure at some level: shadowing, backup, software raid, and who+ > knows what else developed outside of DEC., > M > Of course, one solution would be to have a small disk that is FAT32 that isw= > used to boot a small "IPB" which then does the right thing.t > N > If this "disk" were dedicated to booting just the IPB, then it wouldn't needI > to be very large.  It could even be a 16-32 meg flash card, say CompactiL > Flash, SmartMedia, Memory Stick....  Upgrading the console could be easy -< > just swap the card or mount it and do an image dump to it. > N > Is there any other disk format standard other than the DEC home block formatJ > standard that works across multiple architectures and operating systems? > K > Btw, why does Intel, whatever, define the boot partition to be FAT32?  AnnM > "industry standard PC" console aka bios can boot from a partition no matter.M > what format it is, based on information in the partition table???  Where is M > that format defined?  Or is that just some M$ ad hoc kludge that M$ doesn'tg. > document so that it can lockout competitors?   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:14:31 -0400@9 From: "D.B. Turner, islandco.com" <dbturner@islandco.com>D3 Subject: Re: KZPCA SCSI adapter board for Alpha/VMS1/ Message-ID: <tluraeofqfb1fe@news.supernews.com>    Rich  H Well yes - it would work - but then you're going to be running your FAST< Hard disk drives (if any scsi drives) at 8 bit narrow speeds  C Remember the issues with SCSI - the slowest drive sets the standarde  F And yes - there is no SCSI 50  pin header - just a little Female 68 to Female 50 converter cable.  I What we do is use a NCR53c810 SCSI-2 card for CD's and tapes and then use 9 the Ultra-2 cards for Disks (and the new LVD tape drives),   keeps it nice and clean !!!o  I As for IDE drives - I am surprised your customers will even accept them !ML SCSI is currently the ONLY way to go - and as for Ultra2 compared with UltraK 160 - in perfect lab conditions, with perfect cabling, in a VERY controlledsH environment, you;ll see the difference on an oscillascope (that spellingJ doesn't look right) but in reality - maybe a few milliseconds difference -. as these ratings are only BURST ratings anyhow  < Going to drink a REBEL beer from Pilzen Czechoslovakia now -   Cheers All!C   Davids   -- David Turner   We sell Alpha's & Alpha Partsh http://www.islandco.coma sales@islandco.com Island Computers US Corp.  2700 Gregory Street5 Savannah GA 31404  Tel: 912 447 6622i Fax: 912 201 0096   1 Rich Jordan <jordan@ccs4vms.com> wrote in message 7 news:cc5619f2.0107250635.6046bd90@posting.google.com...oD > Thanks to David for the technical info, and to all for responding.G > FYI I did happen to get the compaq 'survey' pop-up while on my searchmF > for info; they got a rather scathing bit of feedback.  I will likelyA > call them when I have time to languish on hold for a while (not 	 > today).r >AD > So it appears that we can now get Ultra-2 SCSI throughput on a VMSF > system, but only to individual disks.  At least that might be of use@ > on my home system, assuming a KZPCA will work in a PWS600au... > C > : On Tue, 24 Jul 2001 20:44:10 -0400, "D.B. Turner, islandco.com"   > <dbturner@islandco.com> wrote: >tE > >As for the KZPCA - it's a cheap controller that deters people from  > usingn > >SCSI narrow devices.n > >e >aG > David, the configurator is showing the KZPCA working with narrow tapeeG > drives using a specific (passive) wide to narrow adapter cable at theoE > tape drive (looks like a little stub cable).  Unfortunately all the H > DS10s we put out recently came with preconfigured crappy IDE drives; IH > imagine a SCSI CD would get the same treatment, and would work on thisE > controller also.  Is there a documented limitation concerning otherlC > narrow devices, or is it just the lack of a 50-pin header you are  > refering to above? >u
 > Rich Jordanc   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:57:58 -0500t% From: "Rich Jordan" <rjordan@mcs.net>e3 Subject: Re: KZPCA SCSI adapter board for Alpha/VMSn5 Message-ID: <ZuM77.18106$j02.265578@news.goodnet.com>s  . D.B. Turner, islandco.com wrote in message ... >Richo >oI >Well yes - it would work - but then you're going to be running your FASTR= >Hard disk drives (if any scsi drives) at 8 bit narrow speedsH    K So this is not a controller capable of running each drive on its bus at thewJ drive's rated speed?  A lot of peecee-type controllers claim that ability.K That would totally explain an earlier question I had about the configuratoreE demanding a second KZPCA for an internal tape drive even when one was-, already configured for the internal disk(s).   >lD >Remember the issues with SCSI - the slowest drive sets the standard >j    C Again, I thought this had changed with more recent LVD controllers.g? Obviously still lacking all the details on this beastie though.s   > J >As for IDE drives - I am surprised your customers will even accept them !    E ONLY the CD-ROM is IDE, and in our applications, is only used for VMSiF upgrades and rare emergencies to boot the standalone environment.  TheG disks/tapes etc are always SCSI.  I had that fight out with the bosses.c  ? Thanks again for responding.  BTW, my PWS600au has the embeddeduI controller, currently running three internal Ultra-wide drives.  I have ac KZPAAoA running a DAT drive, and the CDROM is another IDE beast, for now.iD A KZPCA, if it is compatible with this system, would allow me to addJ external ultra-2s, so we're looking at a (potential) 40 to 80MB/s upgrade," not 80 - 160 that you referred to.  L THink one of these will work in an Alphastation 200?  Think its worth it? :)   Rich Jordanb   ------------------------------  , Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:50:36 +0200 (CEST)- From: Freddy Meerwaldt <frederik@freddym.org>  Subject: Re: LPs on the WebiK Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0107251949330.23935-100000@firewall.freddym.org>    Hi!e  D > You are correct that skipping all quality control would save work,/ > but that is not what draws some of us to VMS.a  9 Why should that be a "skipping of all quality control"???uJ The software is developed and as soon as it's ready, it'll get on the CD -5 which kind of quality control do you want to do here?x   Greetings - Freddy -- rN Geek Code 3.1: GCS s+: a--- C+++ UBOU+++ P-- E--- W++ N w--- V++ PGP- t? 5? tv  J ==========================================================================>  Frederik Meerwaldt           Homepage: http://www.freddym.orgC  Bavaria/Germany              OpenVMS and Unix Howtos and much more I  Solaris, HP/UX, AIX, NetBSD, OpenBSD, IRIX, Tru64, OpenVMS, Ultrix, BeOSh   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:22:59 GMT 2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) Subject: Re: LPs on the Weba1 Message-ID: <n0F77.106$Yx2.2940@news.cpqcorp.net>l  { In article <Pine.LNX.4.21.0107251949330.23935-100000@firewall.freddym.org>, Freddy Meerwaldt <frederik@freddym.org> writes:p  E :> You are correct that skipping all quality control would save work,o0 :> but that is not what draws some of us to VMS. : : :Why should that be a "skipping of all quality control"???K :The software is developed and as soon as it's ready, it'll get on the CD -s6 :which kind of quality control do you want to do here?  D   Some is simple stuff, some is more involved.  I would want to knowC   that the kit unpacks.  That the kit installs.  That the kit's own0C   installation verification procedure (IVP) (still) works.  That a jD   kit that was not revised for a new operating system release still C   installs.  That the general operating system and platform-relatedlE   documentation associated with the kit is still current.  That there,A   is not a new kit or a necessary ECO kit.  Verification that the C   resulting CD-R media actually does read correctly in a reasonablei:   variety of CD-R drives.  Probably some other items, too.  ,   None of this is rocket science, of course.  D   I've personally made enough of these boo-boos with various of the B   Freeware kits over the years to have some appreciation for what    could be involved.  A   And obviously some customers may or may not be interested in or 0   may or may not value any verification process.  F   With some hardware devices of recent, verification of correct deviceE   operation will cost more than the profits expected from the sale ofeF   the device -- use of statistical verification is the only way to go    for these widgets...  :   nb: I do NOT know specifics of the verification process.  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: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:37:05 -0400c2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) Subject: Re: LPs on the WebeL Message-ID: <rdeininger-2507011537060001@user-2ive7gm.dialup.mindspring.com>  
 In articleG <Pine.LNX.4.21.0107251729310.23683-100000@firewall.freddym.org>, Freddy-' Meerwaldt <frederik@freddym.org> wrote:p   > Hi!o > O > > > They should be delivering at least ten thousand of these CDs, right? Even-P > > > $10 per CD will buy you half a man year to do the checking which should be3 > > > highly automated in any case. I don't buy it.n > > L > > It takes different people skilled in various languages and applications,/ > > spread over many groups within the company.s > > K > > How do you "automate" checking the differences between V2.6 and V2.7 ofo
 > > kits ? > F > Maybe they shouldn't automate it, but what about the following idea:J > Just make an internal location for all the layered Products, and as soonK > as a layered product is updated to a new version, the new version will berJ > copied to this internal source, and CDs will be burned according to this	 > source.   4 I expect they have something like that in place now.  H > So there's almost no need for manpower (OK, just a bit for copying the# > ready product to the location...)w  G Someone has to find all the important differences between versions, ande+ turn that list into readable release notes.e  G Someone has to check dependencies on other products, OS versions, ECOs,-! and important 3rd-party products.,  F Someone has to package the product into a PCSI (or VMSINSTAL) kit, andH then do test installs on various platforms, and then verify the results,E hopefully file by file.  This is complex, and requires quite a lot ofjG skill.  There have been several recent problems here that I've seen, sou2 any additional cuts in manpower would be very bad.  C All the relevant documents have to be produced in several differentsG formats.  This should be trivial, but it clearly isn't since there haveu" been recent problems here as well.  F After all the product kits are ready, someone has to fit them onto theE CDs.  There are certain "traditional" expectations of how the layeredhG products are arranged, which seems to reduce the amount of CD-shuffling @ required for "typical" system managers.  I expect everyone hatesJ _something_ about this arrangement, but it could be much worse.  Even thisI simple task can't be handed to some random mouse-clicker off the street. { More skilled labor to pay for.  H After all the CDs are built in image form, someone should probably check. them again by doing some actual installations.  I After all that (and probably several things I didn't think of) you have aaJ set of CD masters that can be duplicated and mailed out.  This part shouldJ be really trivial, but maybe I only think so because I don't know anything	 about it.-  J Some of the above items might be classed as "product development" and someI as "product delivery".  I don't know where the line should be drawn.  ButnH the cost of the CDs likely has to pay for at least some of these things.  J Still, VMS CD kits haven't really gotten any cheaper since CD first becameH widespread.  It's annoying, when we know that CDs were expensive to make back then, and trivial now.t  E Some of these activities are not needed for platforms like Weendoze. eD Those customers are trained to download the latest faddish dreck andJ install it without a second thought.  Typical VMS sites wouldn't do that. I We want tested, packaged kits, with the supporting documentation.  And weSE are much less tolerant of "little" problems than the Weendoze sheepleMJ are.  We want quality, and we pay for it.  Like everyone, we'd like to pay& less, so we complain about the prices.   --   Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.comS   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:32:08 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>F Subject: Re: LPs on the Webe' Message-ID: <3B5F6508.3E3E39C9@fsi.net>h   Larry Kilgallen wrote: >  > In article <y4vgkhm800.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>, Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:? > > Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) writes:h > >sK > >> I think you underestimate the cost of producing and checking all thoseaJ > >> products before they go onto the master discs.  Is there really a newH > >> version of the French variant of DECwindows ?  Did they provide theH > >> documentation update required by internal procedures.  ConceptuallyJ > >> this is straightforward, but it takes a lot of people, including time> > >> of the individual development teams when products change. > >>D > >> I am not saying the cost is $1000, but it is certainly not $30. > >hM > > They should be delivering at least ten thousand of these CDs, right? EvennN > > $10 per CD will buy you half a man year to do the checking which should be1 > > highly automated in any case. I don't buy it.a > J > It takes different people skilled in various languages and applications,- > spread over many groups within the company.e > I > How do you "automate" checking the differences between V2.6 and V2.7 oft > kits ?   $ DIFF fs1 fs2		! ?-  G Seriously - this is quality control that needs to be done regardless ofmE the distro medium - TK, CD, 9-track, web, ...  Including that cost inoC the cost of mass-producing media seems a bit skewed. The kits *ARE*BH overpriced, and this is easily proved. I can put you in touch with localC firms as well as those of national repute who will back me up 100%.g  F Even a full CD-R costs me $1 or less per disc and .28 hours of my timeB at $30 or so dollars per hour (a rough estimation of a respectableH salary for an OpenVMS SysAdmin worth his salt). I make that as $10.25 orF so per disc to produce. Mark that up 100% and multiply by the 15 or soF discs in the set plus packaging and that still comes to less than $325C US for the kit. Naturally, mass press runs of CDs are significantly  cheaper than that.  5 Don't kid yourself - they're making out like BANDITS!t   -- n David J. Dachterac dba DJE Systemso http://www.djesys.com/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/t  F This *IS* an OpenVMS-related newsgroup. So, a certain bias in postings is to be expected.  @ Feel free to exercise your rights of free speech and expression.  F However, attacks against individual posters, or groups of posters, are strongly discouraged.o   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 20:41:19 -0500 (CDT)s From: sms@antinode.org Subject: Re: LPs on the WebI) Message-ID: <01072520411987@antinode.org>u  >    I'm just a bargain-seeking hobbyist, and I'd like to see anE affordable CD-ROM kit or network access to VMS software.  In the mean ! time, I grasp at charity or Ebay.h  E    Irregardful, some folks here seem to be confused between the costshH associated with preparing to release the kit for a new product (or a new@ version of an old product), and the cost of duplicating a set of( CD-ROM's (or maintaining an FTP server).  F    There is certainly some cost involved in arranging the product kitsE on the CD-ROM's, printing the contents listings, and so on, but let's D not try to drag in all the costs of product development and customerF service, which costs should be covered by the license fees and support
 contracts.  G    As I'm currently battling an apparent bug in their C compiler (whichtH seems to have gotten worse instead of better with Forte 6 update 2), I'mF reluctant to use Sun as an example (again), but a whole Solaris kit isG only $75, and, if you have bandwidth to squander, they let you suck thelB whole thing down over the net.  They also let you get the latest C2 compiler kit (for all that's worth) over the net. . "http://www.sun.com/forte/cplusplus/buy.html":  F       If you previously purchased a Forte Developer 6 product, you canD       upgrade at no charge to the update 2 version of the same ForteF       Developer 6 product for which you are currently licensed. SimplyC       download the "Try & Buy" software. Rather than using the demorF       license that comes with the Try & Buy software, however, you mayG       continue using your existing license key from release 6 to enablei1       the update 2 software once it is installed.   F (Just stay away from "-xO3" if you like getting the same answers every time you run a program.)  @    What would the benefits be to Compaq of reducing the price toH end-users of their software kits?  Lower or higher income?  More or less@ satisfied customers?  More or less widespread use of VMS and its associated products?  D    These prices have been a source of complaint since about the timeD that DEC started distributing software on CD-ROM, even back in thoseD bygone days when my employer still used and sold applications on VMSE (and we thought that an RRD42 was fast).  I assume that the sales andeG marketing wizards at Compaq have analyzed the situation and consciously * decided to do things the way they do them.  G    There's not much reason for them to sell anything to _me_ at a loss,oG as I'm not likely to be a significant source of income to them (in thiseH lifetime, anyway).  (And as a parasite, I try not to waste too much timeH telling my host how to manage its affairs.)  With the abandonment of theA Alpha, it's less obvious than ever to me that VMS has a long-termcC future.  If it dies (or just fades away) any time soon, I'll be sadmG about it, but my ability to influence its fate is approximately nil.  I G figure that Compaq will eventually get about what it deserves, althoughAE we VMS users may not.  As my hardware tends to be at least five yearstH behind the state of the art, I should be set for a while.  Somebody wake7 me when the $500 DS20E systems start appearing on Ebay.i  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  C    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-9818  (voice, home)aC    382 South Warwick Street        (+1) 763-781-0308  (voice, work)aG    Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547      (+1) 763-781-0309  (facsimile, work)h9    sms@antinode.org                sms@provis.com  (work)    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 03:01:12 GMT)0 From: John Santos <john.santos@post.harvard.edu> Subject: Re: LPs on the Web = Message-ID: <MPG.15c951f3234e9cb98968d@news.bellatlantic.net>f  E In article <3B5F6508.3E3E39C9@fsi.net>, djesys.nospam@fsi.net says...  > Larry Kilgallen wrote: > >  > > In article <y4vgkhm800.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>, Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> writes:A > > > Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) writes:o > > >oM > > >> I think you underestimate the cost of producing and checking all thoseiL > > >> products before they go onto the master discs.  Is there really a newJ > > >> version of the French variant of DECwindows ?  Did they provide theJ > > >> documentation update required by internal procedures.  ConceptuallyL > > >> this is straightforward, but it takes a lot of people, including time@ > > >> of the individual development teams when products change. > > >>F > > >> I am not saying the cost is $1000, but it is certainly not $30. > > >-O > > > They should be delivering at least ten thousand of these CDs, right? EvennP > > > $10 per CD will buy you half a man year to do the checking which should be3 > > > highly automated in any case. I don't buy it., > > L > > It takes different people skilled in various languages and applications,/ > > spread over many groups within the company.k > > K > > How do you "automate" checking the differences between V2.6 and V2.7 ofe
 > > kits ? >  > $ DIFF fs1 fs2		! ?b > I > Seriously - this is quality control that needs to be done regardless ofbG > the distro medium - TK, CD, 9-track, web, ...  Including that cost innE > the cost of mass-producing media seems a bit skewed. The kits *ARE*eJ > overpriced, and this is easily proved. I can put you in touch with localE > firms as well as those of national repute who will back me up 100%., > H > Even a full CD-R costs me $1 or less per disc and .28 hours of my timeD > at $30 or so dollars per hour (a rough estimation of a respectableJ > salary for an OpenVMS SysAdmin worth his salt). I make that as $10.25 orH > so per disc to produce. Mark that up 100% and multiply by the 15 or soH > discs in the set plus packaging and that still comes to less than $325E > US for the kit. Naturally, mass press runs of CDs are significantlya > cheaper than that. > 7 > Don't kid yourself - they're making out like BANDITS!n  G Hmmm.  If you are eligible and can join CSA (~$100-$150/year), then youvE can get the VMS and/or Tru64 CD distributions (LP+DOCs 4 times a yearpF plus current O/S kit + any new O/S releases) for about $500/year.  SayF one VMS kit + 4 LP kits for about $100 each.  Is it $1000 for a kit orG $1000 for a one-year subscription to the kits?  Either way, my guess ishG that they intended to make their money on the support contracts and the E kits would be distributed at cost, but no one has revisited the pricerF structure since the CD kits were originally introduced, about 10 yearsD ago, and the costs of reproducing the kits has declined a lot since F then.  When the ASAP program started, maybe the reproduction costs had declined to about $500.s  F Maybe a corollary to the old rule about never attribute to malice thatC which can be caused by stupidity is to never attribute to stupidityt% that which can be caused by laziness.t   -- y John   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 21:53:02 -0700+1 From: Vance Haemmerle <vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>= Subject: Re: LPs on the Web=3 Message-ID: <3B5F3FBE.223BE0F6@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US>    Larry Kilgallen wrote: > H > I think you underestimate the cost of producing and checking all thoseG > products before they go onto the master discs.  Is there really a newpE > version of the French variant of DECwindows ?  Did they provide the E > documentation update required by internal procedures.  ConceptuallyaG > this is straightforward, but it takes a lot of people, including timeq; > of the individual development teams when products change.0  0   Checking?  Like checking to make sure the file; [CDROM]CD_CONTENTS.DAT was world readable on the March '01 a Alpha Software Library CD?  
  (It wasn't).t   --B Vance Haemmerle               Internet   vance@toyvax.Tucson.AZ.USK Tucson, AZ                    Web        http://toyvax.Tucson.AZ.US/~vance/s   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 14:43:27 -0400t2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) Subject: Re: Migration from VMS L Message-ID: <rdeininger-2507011443280001@user-2ive7gm.dialup.mindspring.com>  C In article <b45tltcjucfed1nlbfcb8vicbg9akgad9o@4ax.com>, Alan Greigw <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote:a  % > On Tue, 24 Jul 2001 14:47:42 -0300,T, > fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br wrote: > < > >I  read that  ABB is not planning to use Alphas anymore !9 > >Is it true abroad ? Was a news from ABB Brazil........  > B > ABB just announced 12000 job cuts yesterday... I used to do someH > consultancy work for an ABB location. They still had a VAX 6000 seriesC > cluster at that point. Don't know if they moved to Alphas or whato > their futures intentions are.o     Who/what is ABB?   -- e Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.coma   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:47:18 -0300o) From: fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.bry Subject: Re: Migration from VMSsL Message-ID: <OF313396BE.DBC3BE81-ON03256A94.00670E72@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>  A ABB... Asea Brown-Bovery ..... an European Industrial  Giant frome Switzerland-Sweden.    www.abb.comv   Regt   FC        C rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) em 25/07/2001 15:43:27   > Favor responder a rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)             Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com-       Assunto: Re: Migration from VMSs    C In article <b45tltcjucfed1nlbfcb8vicbg9akgad9o@4ax.com>, Alan Greig- <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote:-  % > On Tue, 24 Jul 2001 14:47:42 -0300,n, > fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br wrote: >z< > >I  read that  ABB is not planning to use Alphas anymore !9 > >Is it true abroad ? Was a news from ABB Brazil........R >rB > ABB just announced 12000 job cuts yesterday... I used to do someH > consultancy work for an ABB location. They still had a VAX 6000 seriesC > cluster at that point. Don't know if they moved to Alphas or whate > their futures intentions are.o     Who/what is ABB?   -- Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.com    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 05:25:04 GMT . From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: Migration from VMSuD Message-ID: <QQN77.1378$nS1.168657@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  ? "Robert Deininger" <rdeininger@mindspring.com> wrote in messageyF news:rdeininger-2407011936350001@user-2ivecho.dialup.mindspring.com...? > In article <88599d89.0107240937.4d08b858@posting.google.com>,t# > alanb@cloud9.net (Alan B.) wrote:  >uI > > Just for giggles, check the job postings using the VMS keyword on anysG > > of the common job search sites. There seems to always be at least a I > > few containing the "VMS" string, where they are migrating FROM VMS to  > > either NT and/or Unix. >eH > Yes, there are some migrations.  Most appear to be non-migratory jobs.  K But the few that are even mildly interesting/challenging are in places thatoI someone living in New Hampshire would consider a significant step down inn
 desirability.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:14:21 -0400u2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) Subject: Re: MinimergeL Message-ID: <rdeininger-2507011614220001@user-2ive7gm.dialup.mindspring.com>  H In article <y4puapidm1.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>,H Jan Vorbrueggen <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:  6 > rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) writes: > N > > > What is the rationale for going through these shenanigans (as you later M > > > call them) for a full copy (and not for a mini-copy)? Why not just copyr) > > > the source to the target in one go?bF > > Perhaps it is done without write-locking that section of the disk. > H > That is the explanation Glenn gave in an e-mail to me. It seems a veryK > wasteful way of solving the problem though - at a minimum, you're reading-K > the source disk twice instead of once, and have to keep an additional set D > of buffers around to do the comparison (which trashes cache in theN > process). As all writes must also go to the source member, the driver shouldP > be able to do a local check (at the host of the source member) for conflictingN > writes (a simple fence variable would be sufficient if the copy were done in! > LBN order) and act accordingly.t  G Well, I can imagine a pretty simple alogorithm using the current methodtI that will always give the right result, and will rarely (details ommittedhH :-) have to loop more than once in typical (details omitted) conditions.  H Your "simple" fence variable method might have ugly details, consideringF multiple concurrent readers and writers, on multiple nodes, with nodesH entering and leaving the cluster, etc.  The per-block overhead needed toH do it safely in all cases might make this slower than the simple method,< if the simple method rarely has to repeat a section of disk.  H Does the "simple" method really read the disk twice?  Or does the secondH read come out of a cache somewhere most of the time?  127 blocks is lessF than 65k.  What disk can't cache that much data, even under a moderate load?o  I In any case, with minicopy in V7.3, the performance of full copies shoulda be of less interest.   --   Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.comz   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 07:58:38 +0930l/ From: Mark Daniel <Mark.Daniel@wasd.vsm.com.au>.. Subject: Re: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3. Message-ID: <3B5F4816.86D20F7@wasd.vsm.com.au>  $ We have been caught by this one too.  D Any ideas?  Any solutions from Q?  A couple of our researchers still$ have large documents in this format.   TIA.  " smithp01@mcrc16.med.nyu.edu wrote: > N > Don't ask why, but I still like to use DECWRITE to edit old documents on the, > workstation rather than MS Word on my Mac. > O > However, after upgrading to 7.3 DECWRITE won't open any more due to a missing 	 > file...k > O > -CLI-E-IMAGEFNF, image file not found MCRC16$DKA100:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.][SYSLIB]e > XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE > L > During the upgrade from 7.2-1 the installation script skipped installing 4L > files that had to be grabbed off the CD to make VMS work at all (got a bitN > paniced over that, btw, apparently there was a note on more recent copies of( > the Release notes, but not all, sadly) > O > Anyway, XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE isn't on the 7.3 CD and isn't part of the DECWRITE Q > installation.  I imagine I can go get it from a 7.2 backup tape, but I'd rathersJ > find out what happened in case there is more to do than replace just one > missing file.g > --N > +------------ 8F EF 51 4E 4F 23 22 AF  6A 41 D6 C0 AE 31 B1 82 ------------+N > |Ross Smith, Academic Computing (RCR), NYU-SoM, 550 First Ave, NY, NY 10016|N > |E-Mail:  SMITHP01@MED.NYU.EDU   Phone:  (212)263-5356:  FAX: (212)263-8139|N > +-------------- <http://www.med.nyu.edu/people/P.Smith.html> --------------+   --   Illegitimis nil carborundum.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:36:34 -0700u! From: Tom Linden <tom@kednos.com>s. Subject: RE: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.39 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJICENNDAAA.tom@kednos.com>i  I Maybe this is naive, but what would happen if you just copied the librarye from say a 7.1 system?     > -----Original Message-----8 > From: Mark Daniel [mailto:Mark.Daniel@wasd.vsm.com.au]( > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 3:29 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comr0 > Subject: Re: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 >o >o& > We have been caught by this one too. > F > Any ideas?  Any solutions from Q?  A couple of our researchers still& > have large documents in this format. >r > TIA. > $ > smithp01@mcrc16.med.nyu.edu wrote: > > ? > > Don't ask why, but I still like to use DECWRITE to edit old  > documents on the. > > workstation rather than MS Word on my Mac. > >l@ > > However, after upgrading to 7.3 DECWRITE won't open any more > due to a missing > > file...O > >S) > > -CLI-E-IMAGEFNF, image file not foundo) > MCRC16$DKA100:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.][SYSLIB]e > > XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE > >pA > > During the upgrade from 7.2-1 the installation script skipped, > installing 4C > > files that had to be grabbed off the CD to make VMS work at all  > (got a bit? > > paniced over that, btw, apparently there was a note on more: > recent copies of* > > the Release notes, but not all, sadly) > > A > > Anyway, XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE isn't on the 7.3 CD and isn't partd > of the DECWRITEn> > > installation.  I imagine I can go get it from a 7.2 backup > tape, but I'd ratherL > > find out what happened in case there is more to do than replace just one > > missing file.r > > --B > > +------------ 8F EF 51 4E 4F 23 22 AF  6A 41 D6 C0 AE 31 B1 82 > ------------+cB > > |Ross Smith, Academic Computing (RCR), NYU-SoM, 550 First Ave, > NY, NY 10016|eA > > |E-Mail:  SMITHP01@MED.NYU.EDU   Phone:  (212)263-5356:  FAX:t > (212)263-8139|@ > > +-------------- <http://www.med.nyu.edu/people/P.Smith.html> > --------------+n >n > -- > Illegitimis nil carborundum. >e   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 08:31:09 +0930 / From: Mark Daniel <Mark.Daniel@wasd.vsm.com.au>c. Subject: Re: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3/ Message-ID: <3B5F4FB5.D45DCBBB@wasd.vsm.com.au>n  4 The CD is my hand :^) as I type this (one handed ;^)   Tom Linden wrote:e > K > Maybe this is naive, but what would happen if you just copied the libraryh > from say a 7.1 system? >  > > -----Original Message-----: > > From: Mark Daniel [mailto:Mark.Daniel@wasd.vsm.com.au]* > > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 3:29 PM > > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com,2 > > Subject: Re: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 > >i > > ( > > We have been caught by this one too. > >hH > > Any ideas?  Any solutions from Q?  A couple of our researchers still( > > have large documents in this format. > >s > > TIA. > >t& > > smithp01@mcrc16.med.nyu.edu wrote: > > > A > > > Don't ask why, but I still like to use DECWRITE to edit oldi > > documents on the0 > > > workstation rather than MS Word on my Mac. > > >xB > > > However, after upgrading to 7.3 DECWRITE won't open any more > > due to a missing
 > > > file...  > > >a+ > > > -CLI-E-IMAGEFNF, image file not foundr+ > > MCRC16$DKA100:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.][SYSLIB]e > > > XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE > > >oC > > > During the upgrade from 7.2-1 the installation script skippedT > > installing 4E > > > files that had to be grabbed off the CD to make VMS work at allb > > (got a bitA > > > paniced over that, btw, apparently there was a note on moree > > recent copies of, > > > the Release notes, but not all, sadly) > > > C > > > Anyway, XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE isn't on the 7.3 CD and isn't part  > > of the DECWRITEs@ > > > installation.  I imagine I can go get it from a 7.2 backup > > tape, but I'd ratherN > > > find out what happened in case there is more to do than replace just one > > > missing file.( > > > --D > > > +------------ 8F EF 51 4E 4F 23 22 AF  6A 41 D6 C0 AE 31 B1 82 > > ------------+ D > > > |Ross Smith, Academic Computing (RCR), NYU-SoM, 550 First Ave, > > NY, NY 10016|vC > > > |E-Mail:  SMITHP01@MED.NYU.EDU   Phone:  (212)263-5356:  FAX:s > > (212)263-8139|B > > > +-------------- <http://www.med.nyu.edu/people/P.Smith.html> > > --------------+  > >e > > --  > > Illegitimis nil carborundum. > >d   -- , Illegitimis nil carborundum.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 23:19:41 GMT = From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-)h. Subject: RE: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.30 Message-ID: <009FF8C7.38040442@SendSpamHere.ORG>  ] In article <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJICENNDAAA.tom@kednos.com>, Tom Linden <tom@kednos.com> writes: J >Maybe this is naive, but what would happen if you just copied the library >from say a 7.1 system?   L Been there and done that.  Short of the blocks it consumes on the disk it isL copied to, it has no impact.  :(   The DECWindows server is lacking the sup-M port needed too do/support Display PostScript.  They did everything possible :L to suck up to Adobe and remove display postscript and screw VMS customers in# the same profuse inhaling function.s   --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM<            fJ   "And of course, I'm a genius, so people are naturally drawn to my fiery I   intellect.  Their admiration overwhelms their envy!" -- Calvin & Hobbeso   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:24:45 -0700a! From: Tom Linden <tom@kednos.com>n. Subject: RE: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.39 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIIENODAAA.tom@kednos.com>o  K Well, as others have commented, you can use ghostview, ghostscript.  I usedn it for years on a variety of unices..   > -----Original Message-----F > From: Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- [mailto:system@SendSpamHere.ORG]( > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 4:20 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComI0 > Subject: RE: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 >  > ? > In article <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJICENNDAAA.tom@kednos.com>, Tomn! > Linden <tom@kednos.com> writes: L > >Maybe this is naive, but what would happen if you just copied the library > >from say a 7.1 system?  >eC > Been there and done that.  Short of the blocks it consumes on ther > disk it is= > copied to, it has no impact.  :(   The DECWindows server isa > lacking the sup-: > port needed too do/support Display PostScript.  They did > everything possible A > to suck up to Adobe and remove display postscript and screw VMS  > customers in% > the same profuse inhaling function.u >  > --4 > VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001 > VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM >sK >   "And of course, I'm a genius, so people are naturally drawn to my fierynK >   intellect.  Their admiration overwhelms their envy!" -- Calvin & Hobbes  >l   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 09:41:37 +0930 / From: Mark Daniel <Mark.Daniel@wasd.vsm.com.au>h. Subject: Re: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3/ Message-ID: <3B5F6039.F81FC15F@wasd.vsm.com.au>e   Partial success.  C Background ... asome years ago we moved to X Terminals without XDPSoD licenses, hence displaying PostScript when using DECwrite was not an@ issue (Ghostview/Script has been used for yonks for viewing suchH documents), DDIF images were used with .DOCs if required.  Our issue wasH ACTIVATING DECwrite after the 1.2-6 update, it was complaing it couldn't( activate the XDPS sharable library(ies).  C This is apparently solved (but still early days) for us, we can nowk# activate DECwrite.  What we did ...$  F Grabbed an earlier set of VMS binaries, mine just happened to be 7.1-2) with Motif 1.2-4 (in the drawer closest).t   $ CREATE /DIR KITS:[XDPS]  $ SET DEF KITS:[XDPS] 8 $ PRODUCT EXTRACT FILE DWMOTIF /SELECT=XDPS$* /SOURCE=cd:   polycenter extracted some 15 files, 7 of which were .exe  9 I then activated DECwrite, it complained it couldn't find      XDPS$DPSLIBSHR  8 $ COPY XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE SYS$COMMON:[SYSLIB] /PROT=W:RE  4 Again activated DECwrite, this time it couldn't find     XDPS$DPSCLIENTSHRc  ; $ COPY XDPS$DPSCLIENTSHR.EXE SYS$COMMON:[SYSLIB] /PROT=W:REo  = This time DECwrite came up and apparently is behaving itself.   D I know this is not a solution for any display PostScript embedded inF such documents (they will probably just appear unresolved or broken, ID cannot check at the moment) but at least our guys can now once again (apparently) use their editor.  G Brian Schenkenberger reports elsewhere in this thread that pursuing ther0 full display PostScript regression is pointless.  " smithp01@mcrc16.med.nyu.edu wrote: > N > Don't ask why, but I still like to use DECWRITE to edit old documents on the, > workstation rather than MS Word on my Mac. > O > However, after upgrading to 7.3 DECWRITE won't open any more due to a missingn	 > file...  > O > -CLI-E-IMAGEFNF, image file not found MCRC16$DKA100:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.][SYSLIB]d > XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE > L > During the upgrade from 7.2-1 the installation script skipped installing 4L > files that had to be grabbed off the CD to make VMS work at all (got a bitN > paniced over that, btw, apparently there was a note on more recent copies of( > the Release notes, but not all, sadly) > O > Anyway, XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE isn't on the 7.3 CD and isn't part of the DECWRITE-Q > installation.  I imagine I can go get it from a 7.2 backup tape, but I'd ratherbJ > find out what happened in case there is more to do than replace just one > missing file.e > --N > +------------ 8F EF 51 4E 4F 23 22 AF  6A 41 D6 C0 AE 31 B1 82 ------------+N > |Ross Smith, Academic Computing (RCR), NYU-SoM, 550 First Ave, NY, NY 10016|N > |E-Mail:  SMITHP01@MED.NYU.EDU   Phone:  (212)263-5356:  FAX: (212)263-8139|N > +-------------- <http://www.med.nyu.edu/people/P.Smith.html> --------------+   -- B Illegitimis nil carborundum.   ------------------------------    Date: 25 Jul 2001 20:49:47 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)s. Subject: RE: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.33 Message-ID: <R6QymPfmvm9e@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  p In article <009FF8C7.38040442@SendSpamHere.ORG>, system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-) writes:_ > In article <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJICENNDAAA.tom@kednos.com>, Tom Linden <tom@kednos.com> writes:MK >>Maybe this is naive, but what would happen if you just copied the libraryc >>from say a 7.1 system? > N > Been there and done that.  Short of the blocks it consumes on the disk it isN > copied to, it has no impact.  :(   The DECWindows server is lacking the sup-O > port needed too do/support Display PostScript.  They did everything possible r3 > to suck up to Adobe and remove display postscript   M I gather you are suggesting they should ignore their contractual obligations.g   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 18:07:13 -0700l! From: Tom Linden <tom@kednos.com>p. Subject: RE: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.39 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIIEOBDAAA.tom@kednos.com>t  H A bit too terse for me, Larry.  They being Compaq? obligations to Adobe?K If so, not sure how this effects the original poser.  My curiosity was more I related to the portability of the libs in VMS, something fairly common ink thef Unix world.o   > -----Original Message-----B > From: Larry Kilgallen [mailto:Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam]( > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 6:50 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com,0 > Subject: RE: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.3 >e >l2 > In article <009FF8C7.38040442@SendSpamHere.ORG>,A > system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-) writes:>A > > In article <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJICENNDAAA.tom@kednos.com>, Tomy! > Linden <tom@kednos.com> writes:uA > >>Maybe this is naive, but what would happen if you just copied0
 > the librarys > >>from say a 7.1 system? > >9A > > Been there and done that.  Short of the blocks it consumes ont > the disk it is? > > copied to, it has no impact.  :(   The DECWindows server is  > lacking the sup-< > > port needed too do/support Display PostScript.  They did > everything possible 5 > > to suck up to Adobe and remove display postscriptt >sB > I gather you are suggesting they should ignore their contractual > obligations. >g   ------------------------------    Date: 25 Jul 2001 22:19:05 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)-. Subject: RE: Missing XDPS$DPSLIBSHR.EXE on 7.33 Message-ID: <N6rQR2eAaizv@eisner.encompasserve.org>o  ] In article <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIIEOBDAAA.tom@kednos.com>, Tom Linden <tom@kednos.com> writes:gJ > A bit too terse for me, Larry.  They being Compaq? obligations to Adobe?  @ Under the terms of their contract, Adobe required Compaq to stop@ distributing Display Postscript.  They are phasing it out.  NEXT< used Display Postscript, but MacOS X uses (if anything) PDF.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:09:23 -0400o2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)H Subject: Re: Now we're cooking with gas. (was:  Wailing and moaning....)L Message-ID: <rdeininger-2507011509240001@user-2ive7gm.dialup.mindspring.com>  J In article <9jlnr8$i19$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote:    L > I thought I detected a faint whiff of inconsistency here, but it took me a > while to pin it down.  > L > Above, and in your previous post in this sub-thread, you state that you'veM > believed all along that the difficulties Compaq alluded to in keeping Alpha E > competitive were fiscal rather than 'anything technical' in nature.  > K > Whereas two days ago, in another thread (Selling VMS to another company), M > you were quite ready to suggest that unforeseen technical difficulties (andtN > the unexpectedly higher cost of overcoming them) might be at the root of the > cancellation decision.  I Aren't development costs and technical difficulties two sides of the sameoJ coin?  Most techinical problems can be solved if you throw enough money atF them.  If new obstacles emerged, and new money wasn't forthcoming, theJ project would suffer.  Should be classify this as a technical problem?  OrE a funding/management problem?  I bet it depends on whether you ask ant engineer or  a bean-counter.    aM > On the basis of the information available, that message still appears to ber > a triple lie:  ...cF > 3.  The long-planned funding levels were clearly sustainable even atJ > existing Alpha sales levels, let alone with the increased sales that any9 > reasonable Alpha marketing effort should have produced.l  J Compaq has fallen on hard times financially, as has most of the industry. E Perhaps funding plans developed over the past few years are no longer0D "clearly sustainable".  Various pressues might have forced the alphaG develpment funds to be stretched out for an extra year or two, delaying2 release.  Another speculation.  B You clearly have access to inside information that I don't so it's" pointless to respond to that part.   > ... plus the totalL > disregard for the firm commitments to Alpha's future Compaq had made right& > up until the June 25th announcement,  I You are one of the folks who keeps talking about "firm commitments".  CaneJ you name them, specifically?  I never saw them, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.  E Roadmaps and powerpoint slides aren't commitments.  I've seen those a[H number of times, and talk about products to be released in the future isD speculation, not commitment.  Were there real commitments to deliverJ EV8-based alpha systems, for example?  Who were some of the customers?  InG the absence of written contracts, I have trouble believing any sensiblebJ person would have built detailed plans based on the future availability ofJ EV8, EV9, or EV10.  Yes, I expect folks had vague plans like this:  "We'llI buy some EV7 alphaservers, and then when we need to upgrade we'll buy EV8eG servers, and then EV9."  If EV7 and the systems built with EV7 had been-J cancelled, I would be VERY sympathetic to your complaint.  But that didn't happen.a  iB Contracts with customers are commitments.  Things like DII-COE areF commitments. Even advance product specs might be a form of commitment.  " Had Compaq published any of these:  H Detailed specs (like a reference manual) for an EV8 processor?  (I don'tB mean ...vague ... SMT ... mumble ... glossy brochure ... wunnerfulH wunnerful ... mumble ... EV12 ... 25-year lifespan ... type of marketing fluff.)X  7 Detailed specs and capabilities of an EV8-based system?n  ( Promised ship dates for either of these?   Prices for either of these?h   -- r Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.coma   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:24:03 -0400 ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> H Subject: Re: Now we're cooking with gas. (was:  Wailing and moaning....)( Message-ID: <9jn641$sep$1@pyrite.mv.net>  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3B5EDDC4.2FB7BEB1@videotron.ca... > Bill Todd wrote:   ...   6 > > If there *is* some justification for the June 25thG > > move (and while I can't think of one that doesn't mean one couldn'tt exist), L > > it's long past time to make it clear - before people become unwilling to# > > believe *anything* Compaq says.o > J > The justification is quite clear. Compaq just doesn't want to be in thatJ > business. Compaq is a box maker, not a chip designer. Its strategy is to build H > software solutions and services businesses instead if designing chips. ThisC > was made quite clear on the 25th. What more do you need to know ?   I Since I've been publicly suggesting exactly that for more than two years,rL it's hardly something I'll disagree with now.  It also has very little to doF with the issue I've been talking about, which is vendor integrity, notK vendor strategy (though that apparent strategy provides plenty of reason to 5 call into question the vendor's business competence).e   ...i  L > The problem has not much to do with the death of Alpha but rather with theK > continued absence of VMS as part of Compaq's core products and marketing,s  E Perhaps in your mind.  To my mind, they are two very largely separate6 issues.E  C The Alphacide was handled in a manner that makes Compaq's integrity3J questionable at best.  As for VMS, it's just business as usual (though nowL further impacted by the customer reactions that the Alphacide and its manner of execution creates).   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 16:53:45 -0400c' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> H Subject: Re: Now we're cooking with gas. (was:  Wailing and moaning....)( Message-ID: <9jnbca$3sp$1@pyrite.mv.net>  ? "Robert Deininger" <rdeininger@mindspring.com> wrote in messagenF news:rdeininger-2507011509240001@user-2ive7gm.dialup.mindspring.com...L > In article <9jlnr8$i19$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> > wrote: >t >eL > > I thought I detected a faint whiff of inconsistency here, but it took me aM > > while to pin it down.n > > G > > Above, and in your previous post in this sub-thread, you state that? you'veI > > believed all along that the difficulties Compaq alluded to in keepings AlphasG > > competitive were fiscal rather than 'anything technical' in nature.  > > C > > Whereas two days ago, in another thread (Selling VMS to another 	 company), J > > you were quite ready to suggest that unforeseen technical difficulties (andL > > the unexpectedly higher cost of overcoming them) might be at the root of thee > > cancellation decision. >EK > Aren't development costs and technical difficulties two sides of the same  > coin?S  I Not when they're presented as two *separate* reasons, as Compaq has done.pH And, of course, the available evidence suggests that *neither* was true.  D And not in the context of your statement that you didn't believe the> cancellation was due to 'anything technical', for that matter.   ...   H > > 3.  The long-planned funding levels were clearly sustainable even atL > > existing Alpha sales levels, let alone with the increased sales that any; > > reasonable Alpha marketing effort should have produced.  > K > Compaq has fallen on hard times financially, as has most of the industry. G > Perhaps funding plans developed over the past few years are no longer F > "clearly sustainable".  Various pressues might have forced the alphaI > develpment funds to be stretched out for an extra year or two, delaying   > release.  Another speculation.  J Exactly.  When you've got something in the way of substance to offer, I'll happily discuss it.d  F Meanwhile, the most recent information I've found (the 2001Q1 summary)I indicates that most of the weight of these 'hard times' has fallen on the-J industry-standard portion of Compaq's product line, while profitability ofI its more 'proprietary' offerings is still decent.  While you're acquiring$F the kind of data that you seem to believe may exist, please include anK explanation of why it makes more sense to pursue the areas that aren't (andeJ for the past several years haven't been) very profitable at the expense ofF areas with more resilience in such hard times and likely better profit7 potential (than commodity products) even in good times.i   ...i   > > ... plus the totalH > > disregard for the firm commitments to Alpha's future Compaq had made rightr( > > up until the June 25th announcement, > K > You are one of the folks who keeps talking about "firm commitments".  CaneL > you name them, specifically?  I never saw them, but that doesn't mean they > don't exist.  J Then I guess you haven't looked very carefully at Alpha's Web site - ever.C I took the precaution a week ago of copying the "Compaq_com - AlphaeJ systems - Compaq's commitment to Alpha.htm" Web page just in case it mightK disappear:  it's a letter from Bill Heil and Jesse Lipcon, and while it was K written quite a while ago Compaq has kept it displayed as an indication of,G% well, "Compaq's commitment to Alpha".s  < Just checked - it's still there, so you can read it yourself  9 http://www.compaq.com/alphaserver/news/commit_letter.htmla  B but in case you're having access problems, here are a few nuggets:  ? "Compaq is unequivocally committed to Alpha for the long term."n  : and, in the context of the 'specifics' of the 'commitment'  K "we have an exciting Alpha roadmap ahead of us, including EV7, EV8, EV9 ando@ EV10, with a plan to offer a full line of systems based on theseJ generations. In EV8, we will implement a new CPU methodology, Simultaneous Multi-Threading"  K followed immediately by (in case you were inclined to quibble about whetheriH all these statements were really meant to fall under the umbrella of the
 'commitment')e   "With these commitments..."r   > G > Roadmaps and powerpoint slides aren't commitments.  I've seen those ayJ > number of times, and talk about products to be released in the future is > speculation, not commitment.  E I guess you'll have to take that up with Compaq:  their letter states 
 otherwise.  (   Were there real commitments to deliverH > EV8-based alpha systems, for example?  Who were some of the customers?  L I've certainly seen posts from people (Alan Grieg comes immediately to mind)H who feel that Compaq made individual commitments to them, as well as theH blanket commitment cited above.  Perhaps they'll be willing to reiterate: these comments so you won't have to go searching for them.     InI > the absence of written contracts, I have trouble believing any sensiblePL > person would have built detailed plans based on the future availability ofL > EV8, EV9, or EV10.  Yes, I expect folks had vague plans like this:  "We'llK > buy some EV7 alphaservers, and then when we need to upgrade we'll buy EV8cI > servers, and then EV9."  If EV7 and the systems built with EV7 had beenpL > cancelled, I would be VERY sympathetic to your complaint.  But that didn't	 > happen.i >.D > Contracts with customers are commitments.  Things like DII-COE areH > commitments. Even advance product specs might be a form of commitment.  G Remind me never to do business with you on a handshake.  Even the legal$J system recognizes verbal commitments as binding - they're just much harder	 to prove.v   >D$ > Had Compaq published any of these: > J > Detailed specs (like a reference manual) for an EV8 processor?  (I don'tD > mean ...vague ... SMT ... mumble ... glossy brochure ... wunnerfulJ > wunnerful ... mumble ... EV12 ... 25-year lifespan ... type of marketing	 > fluff.)m >E9 > Detailed specs and capabilities of an EV8-based system?w >i* > Promised ship dates for either of these? >e > Prices for either of these?y  D But in the end, what you and I think doesn't matter too much.  ThoseH customers who think that Compaq's actions are entirely honorable in thisK matter will respond accordingly.  And those customers who think that Compaq E has lied aggressively and persistently to them (as well as broken its1- 'commitments') will also respond accordingly.I   - bill   >u > -- > Robert Deininger > rdeininger@mindspring.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 23:26:59 -0400I- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>eH Subject: Re: Now we're cooking with gas. (was:  Wailing and moaning....), Message-ID: <3B5F8DFF.2D41E619@videotron.ca>   Bill Todd wrote:E > The Alphacide was handled in a manner that makes Compaq's integritydL > questionable at best.  As for VMS, it's just business as usual (though nowN > further impacted by the customer reactions that the Alphacide and its manner > of execution creates).  N Has it occured to you that this may have been done on purpose ? Compaq doesn'tN want to kill VMS. But by choosing the way it announces things, it can start to* steer customers to other Compaq platforms.  L While you and I see Compaq has having lost its integrity by breaking all itsE commitments for Alpha, we don't really know what Compaq said to those K customers that count, and perhaps those customers (the ones Compaq wants toMG retain) were given whatever it took to have them continue trust Compaq.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 23:58:10 +0200-) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>  Subject: Re: Porting quandry, Message-ID: <3B5F40F2.D0A9B879@infopuls.com>   Tom Linden wrote:o > I > It is true, but what they didn't say was that they couldn't sustain theeJ > ongoing develpoment required to keep alpha competitive, and owing to its	 > design,dF > it probably could never have been competitive with PPC, for example. >  > > -----Original Message-----6 > > From: Marty Kuhrt [mailto:kuhrt@encompasserve.org]( > > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 11:19 AM > > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comp > > Subject: Porting quandry > >s > >?A > > Perhaps someone can shed some light on this question, becauseoC > > I can't quite wrap my melon around this one.  CPQ sez that they A > > want to port everything to the same 64 bit chip, so that theysD > > only have one hardware platform to support.  OK, that makes someE > > sense.  It's the porting to IA64 that doesn't seem to make sense.o > >eA > > Didn't they already have all the OSs they use on Alpha, or ata! > > least close?  Let us recap...l > >mE > > NT    - had it, but dropped it.  If rumor is true, Alpha is still B > >         the development platform of choice for the MicroSerfs.E > >         I place the blame on this faux-pas squarely on the pointybE > >         head of the infant terrible, cry-baby billionaire, Gates,w) > >         or his winged monkey minions.  > > VMS   - long since done  > > Tru64 - ditton) > > NSK   - waiting for the lockstep chip D > > Linux - I have Redhat on a DS10, who knows about the other *nixs > > 3 > > So now they want to embark on the port to IA64.S > >o; > > NT    - don't know if it's ready yet.  See rumor above.  > > VMS   - 18 months39 > > Tru64 - Started to.  Stopped.  Restarting.  One year?n2 > > NSK   - waiting for lockstep IA64?  2003-2005?' > > Linux - I don't know anything here.o > >oB > > So it seems to me that they pretty much _had_ all the OSs theyD > > want to sell on a 64 bit "standard" platform.  Not only that butC > > the Alpha has been in production for almost 10 years.  Can IA64s( > > be considered production ready, yet? > >t  = But they couldn't get rid of their Wintel systems. This meansh? they had to support Alpha *and* the others. Even with Windows/*d? and NSK on Alpha they would have to continue to build, sell ands support Wintel.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:27:49 -0400b' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>- Subject: Re: Porting quandry( Message-ID: <9jnkd5$ech$1@pyrite.mv.net>  6 "Christof Brass" <brass@infopuls.com> wrote in message& news:3B5F40F2.D0A9B879@infopuls.com... > Tom Linden wrote:a > >eK > > It is true, but what they didn't say was that they couldn't sustain thenL > > ongoing develpoment required to keep alpha competitive, and owing to its > > design,sH > > it probably could never have been competitive with PPC, for example.  H My news server apparently no longer holds the original of this quote, soF without knowing its context I'll simply observe that 'they' are likely; didn't say something like that because it is utter hogwash.    > >d  > > > -----Original Message-----8 > > > From: Marty Kuhrt [mailto:kuhrt@encompasserve.org]* > > > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 11:19 AM > > > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comg > > > Subject: Porting quandry  C <lots of reasonable points snipped to cut to the equally-reasonable  conclusion:>  D > > > So it seems to me that they pretty much _had_ all the OSs theyF > > > want to sell on a 64 bit "standard" platform.  Not only that butE > > > the Alpha has been in production for almost 10 years.  Can IA64i* > > > be considered production ready, yet? > > >o >t? > But they couldn't get rid of their Wintel systems. This means A > they had to support Alpha *and* the others. Even with Windows/* A > and NSK on Alpha they would have to continue to build, sell andi > support Wintel.n  J So what?  There's good reason to have done so, just as there's good reasonG to support more than one OS on Alpha (or any platform):  customer needsdJ vary, and variety (if executed competently) helps satisfy a larger market.  G IBM found a good way to approach the same problem:  keep selling WintelwL boxes (so that it could still offer one-stop shopping) without attempting toL be the market leader in that area.  So since it's perfectly happy to supportE market leader Dell's (or anyone else's) products, it gets the best ofsG everything:  Wintel margins that support its Wintel efforts, a completer> product spectrum, and the ability to concentrate on the uniqueI differentiators that make IBM unparalleled in the industry (though Compaq J could have offered some real across-the-board competition had it chosen to try).l   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:44:38 GMTh+ From: Ryan Moore <rmoore@rmoore.dyndns.org> 9 Subject: Re: Problem w/protected subsystems & lib$spawn()u< Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.31.0107251235570.3202-100000@jaipur>  ( On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Hoff Hoffman wrote:l > In article <Pine.LNX.4.31.0107242149070.2559-100000@jaipur>, Ryan Moore <rmoore@rmoore.dyndns.org> writes:M > :I'm having problems getting a protected subsystem identifier to get passedmI > :to a subprocess when using lib$spawn() within a program.  Basically, IaI > :want a set of users to have read access to a directory, but have writeiJ > :access when they use a certain image.  That's what protected subsystems > :are designed to do. >.I >   Yep, and they're also designed to remove the enhanced access when the  >   image runs down. > K >   In this case, the image that first runs down is LOGINOUT, since you are L >   running DCL.  This, of course, scorches off any sign of the identifiers. >oI >   In other words, subsystem identifiers are presently incompatible witht< >   lib$spawn or lib$creprc invocations of DCL subprocesses.  G OK, reading the description in lib$spawn() for the "SUBSYSTEM" flags, IpG guess I see now what it's saying.  I guess I don't see the point of theaE subsystem flag since it seems to not be very useful (at least to me).   I > :However, within the image with the protected subsystem identifier, I'msJ > :calling lib$spawn() a couple times to perform some tasks (a couple COPY > :and PURGE commands).s >TI >   Use the callable convert API for the COPY, and use the LIB$FIND_FILE,fI >   LIB$FIND_FILE_END and LIB$DELETE_FILE calls for the PURGE.  This will(K >   allow you to avoid the SPAWN.  (Or -- if you have control over the fileMI >   creation -- consider options such as the delete-on-close or similar.)1H >   Or use task-to-task or a central (privileged) server that the clientD >   application calls when it needs to use these operations -- these8 >   servers can be application images or DCL procedures.  H That's certainly one option.  To make the minimum changes to the tool in= question, I think we're going to take the approach of callingbG sys$grantid() to add the identifier in question, do the work we need tol: do, then call sys$revokeid.  A manual version of subsystem? identifiers, I guess.  It's less secure, but in the environment I we're using the tool, security isn't the biggest factor.  We're using thefG identifiers to help prevent us from making stupid mistakes.  The peoplea' using the tool will have SETPRV anyway.u  J Thanks for clarifying what the lib$spawn() documentation is trying to say.F I don't think the description of the SUBSYSTEM flag is very clear... I' guess that's the real problem here.  :)'   -Ryan    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 18:25:19 GMTt4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>- Subject: Re: Selling VMS to another company ? ; Message-ID: <jaE77.2361$eH.1394212@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>k  L "Jan Vorbrueggen" <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote inJ message news:y4y9pdm83t.fsf@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de...8 > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes: >o= > > With EV8 the problem was cost and time to implementation.y >oJ > Such things don't suddenly drop from heaven into one's unsuspecting lap. SoI > all proclamations by Compaq in recent months that EV8 was on track mustr haveJ > been lies. Furthermore, it means that the group doing the work seriouslyJ > screwed up - why then should Intel have any interest in buying them? AndJ > what else is new in that ambitious chip projects are late - would an EV8 thatJ > was a year or even two late to market have to fear the then-current IA64H > implementation? With all the systems-integration features it has aboveI > anything Intel has on its roadmap? It seems quite hard to imagine that.- >-E > Finally, why not say "we looked at the EV8 project, and realized it@ wouldn'tJ > be able to deliver a workable product in such a time frame to be able toL > compete with future IA64 processors". But that is not what has been and is
 > being said.w >e > Jans  K How right you are. Perhaps someone at Compaq can provide the Better Answers 	 you seek.<   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:08:52 -0400t' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>i- Subject: Re: Selling VMS to another company ? ( Message-ID: <9jn57i$rhk$1@pyrite.mv.net>  ? "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> wrote in message'5 news:SDw77.1729$eH.1239581@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...    ...   H > With EV8 the problem was cost and time to implementation. Further info > available under NDA.  H Hmmm.  NDA because of the sensitive nature ot information cited as beingB sufficient to trash a highly-profitable product line.  Can you say 'cachegate'?   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 20:31:54 +0200f, From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch>! Subject: Re: simple COPY questiond& Message-ID: <3B5F109A.835C7C67@gmx.ch>   William King wrote:e >  > Looking for a little help... > L > It has been a long time since I used VMS full time and I'm having a bit ofI > difficulty moving data around between disks. What I'm trying to do is abL > image disk copy from a file onto a RL02 disk. The file was created on RT11H > and contains an image of a XXDP diagnostic disk (copy/device/file dl0: > xxdp.dsk)x  D RT11? This brings me back to the end of 1976, when I left the FrenchB Army, 8e Signal Corps. I went to a small consultants company doingF RT11/TSX development in DIBOL (TSX was a multi-users OS running on topH of RT11). And we were using Plessey Peripheral Systems as DEC compatibleG systems. I remember the name of my first PPS machine: Micro-II 13VF. InaE fact, the very first piece of genuine DEC stuff that I saw in my lifeyH was the RT11 v3 documentation set :-) All books were out of their cello,D except the system management or "internals" one (do not remember theH name). Discovering this untouched book talking MACRO 16, among all theseC people doing accounting programming in DIBOL definitely awakened my- vocation...   E I do remember very well the XXDP system disks (and the tape patches).'H The most famous one was ZRPDBA. Remember ZRPDBA? I do not, but I used itF sometimes just to know how it works, like my second son (5) who breaksH his toys "to see what is inside" :-) All these system programs were used> as hardware diagnostic or patches for DECsystems running RT11.  F I do not see why you are interested to get a copy for VMS, but that is another story.  @ I don't know why I tell you that, but I feel blues this evening.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:57:38 GMTm- From: goathunter@goatley.com (Hunter Goatley)h( Subject: Re: SMTP and distribution lists1 Message-ID: <3b5f069e.331820442@news.process.com>a  P On Wed, 25 Jul 2001 14:52:43 GMT, Jonathan Boswell <jsb@ost.cdrh.fda.gov> wrote:  O >Unfortunately, when MAIL was rewritten in C, some hack rearranged the order of-0 >processing and didn't quite get it quite right.  : There are several other things they didn't get right, too.  L I used to run lists that had a Reply-To: with multiple addresses.  PerfectlyE valid via RFCs, and perfectly accepted by VMS Mail until the rewrite.q Addresses would look like:  )    From:  MX%"user@node",MX%"user2@node2"t   On VMS V5.4:  
 MAIL> repl? To:     MX%"goathunter@goatley.com",MX%"goathunter@process.com".?   MX rewrote goathunter@goatley.com as <goathunter@goatley.com>v?   MX rewrote goathunter@process.com as <goathunter@process.com>v+ Subj:   RE: test of multiple from addressesn   On VMS V7.2:  
 MAIL> replA To:     MX%"goathunter@goatley.com"",MX%""goathunter@process.com"mP   MX rewrote goathunter@goatley.com"",MX%""goathunter@process.com as goathunter@ goatley.com + Subj:   RE: test of multiple from addressesi  G When I pointed this out to them, they claimed that it wasn't a VMS MailiJ problem, even when I pointed out to them that the "To:", which is suppliedF by MAIL in a REPLY, has an improper number of quotes, which causes theH problems.  They refused to admit that a) this was different behavior and< b) that it was wrong.  And the call was rejected and closed.     Hunter ------9 Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/t9 goathunter@goatley.com     http://www.goatley.com/hunter/m   ------------------------------    Date: 25 Jul 2001 16:58:31 -05003 From: malmberg@encompasserve.org (John E. Malmberg) K Subject: Re: Triggering tasks from network file arrival - Was Re: Basic VMSa3 Message-ID: <g18a1gVGBsNH@eisner.encompasserve.org>p  ( In article <3B5F0130.7779EF63@home.com>,B Jan-Erik =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F6derholm?= <noone@home.company> writes:> > Well, I'm sure they already have the file format sorted out,% > they are FTP'ing files today, not ?w  < They may be.  If the person that set it up for them is still; around then it could help to get them involved.  That is ifb8 it was the person who really did it, and not the guy who just took the credit for it.  ? > And it a peace-of-cake to check the "other" sides TCP/IP docs ' > to look up the REXEC or RSH syntax...V  = You are assuming that the documentation exists somewhere thatb? the other person has access to, and that they understand how toi read it.  ? Some people have a big problem with the concept that two single ; quotes and one double quote are not interchangable, or thatm: the apostophe and grave characters are likewise different.    @ You are also assuming that the side initiating the transfer even" has the ability to issue commands.  @ Many sites involved in these type of tranfers will not allow anyA thing that looks capable of issuing or receiving a remote commande on their system.  9 [And IMHO: for those type of systems, that is a very good.
  practice]    > And all of their programming will be likely done by a visiting> contracter that they always use, and he does not know anything? about UNIX or OpenVMS.  He is only available on a specific day, ? and if it does not work, it may take a week until he can figure ; out what the error message meant, and how to get around it.r  < And for some reason he can not or will not look at the other& FTP transfers to see what is going on.  : > And if the other side changes plattform, you don't startB > from scratch, do you ? (regarding this issue at least). You move- > what you already have to the new plattform.r  < FTP is a simple concept to most of us, and is popular enough= that eventually they can find someone that knows it for theiri: platform, and translate your simple instructions properly.  = To many others in the COMPUTER field FTP is still an advancedr= and complex thing that because it involves a network requiresn9 one or more specialists to get right.  And they know that = because the consultant that they paid a lot of money for told 
 them that.  > Local command execution is a foreign concept for many of these< people.  Remote command execution?  They will need the exactA syntax dictated to them.  And since they can not tell you exactlys? what their computer is running, there is no way that you can do : that.  You may be likely to find out what general line the? computer is, but more information is just as likely to be wrongl as it is to be right.o  5 > After all, we are just speaking about a single-linee > command, in most cases...e  9 You also have to realize that the person on the other endv8 is not running OpenVMS, and is likely not to have a good; understanding of any computer science, inspite of their jobt assignment.s  ? If they really did understand how their computer systems workedF= they could probably build a business case for converting theme all to OpenVMS and save money.   -Johnc wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only    ------------------------------    Date: 25 Jul 2001 21:25:36 -04005 From: pechter@i4got.pechter.dyndns.org (Bill Pechter)o3 Subject: VAX/VMS Hobby PAK license question/problemr3 Message-ID: <9jnrig$npo$1@i4got.pechter.dyndns.org>   E I've been trying for two hours to get the VAX/VMS paks to work on the  Vaxstation 3100 M38 here...s   F Am I missing the obvious... The serial number I used is on the back ofE the machine -- or is there a different hardware id I need to get like  on the sun's hostid?    oA At least the 11/780 could show the serial number on the backplanea from the console.O 	t> I did a quick anal /error and came up with the SID of 0A000006' is this what they need for the license?t  > The back of the machine shows Model: WS42-BF. SN: AB01000U3E.   0 The last time I installed VAX/VMS it was 3.6 8-)  " (Yeah I know it's OPEN/VMS now...)   Bill l bpechter@monmouth.come 	  	  l 	  Bill  -- e ---t>   Bill Gates is a Persian cat and a monocle away from being a >   villain in a James Bond movie              -- Dennis Miller 8   bpechter@shell.monmouth.com|pechter@pechter.dyndns.org   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 02:58:33 GMTS2 From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@shell1.aracnet.com>7 Subject: Re: VAX/VMS Hobby PAK license question/problem @ Message-ID: <tHL77.7695$zN6.5137346@e3500-chi1.usenetserver.com>  F In comp.sys.dec Bill Pechter <pechter@i4got.pechter.dyndns.org> wrote:  G > I've been trying for two hours to get the VAX/VMS paks to work on theS > Vaxstation 3100 M38 here...? >   H > Am I missing the obvious... The serial number I used is on the back ofG > the machine -- or is there a different hardware id I need to get like4 > on the sun's hostid?  J Since when do the Hobbyist PAKs even care what number you feed them?  I'veH pulled numbers out of the air for a couple of my systems.  Did something change?e  $ > (Yeah I know it's OPEN/VMS now...)   No, it's OpenVMS.r   			Zaned   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 03:26:07 GMTo0 From: John Santos <john.santos@post.harvard.edu>7 Subject: Re: VAX/VMS Hobby PAK license question/problem:> Message-ID: <MPG.15c957d8eb38b33898968e@news.bellatlantic.net>  4 In article <9jnrig$npo$1@i4got.pechter.dyndns.org>, ( pechter@i4got.pechter.dyndns.org says... > G > I've been trying for two hours to get the VAX/VMS paks to work on thew > Vaxstation 3100 M38 here...u >   H > Am I missing the obvious... The serial number I used is on the back ofG > the machine -- or is there a different hardware id I need to get like  > on the sun's hostid? >    bC > At least the 11/780 could show the serial number on the backplaneo > from the console.g > 	o@ > I did a quick anal /error and came up with the SID of 0A000006) > is this what they need for the license?g > @ > The back of the machine shows Model: WS42-BF. SN: AB01000U3E.  > 2 > The last time I installed VAX/VMS it was 3.6 8-) > $ > (Yeah I know it's OPEN/VMS now...)  @ OpenVMS (no slash, mixed case, and the "Open" part is silent ;-)  A ... You're trying too hard!  I think it wants the SN: (AB01000U3EuC above), but it doesn't really care.  The license code doesn't checkr3 the SN or the SID.  This is just for the paperwork.o  > The important thing to remember is to also acquire the layered> product PAK's.  You'll almost certainly need some of them (UCX= for TCP/IP, DVNETEND and/or DVNETRTG for DECNET, DW-MOTIF foru0 DECWindows, and a variety of compiler licenses.)  @ Lots of people forget this part and then when they boot up their2 shiny new VMS system, can't get it to do anything.   HTHs   -- i John   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 23:15:39 -0500e* From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>7 Subject: RE: VAX/VMS Hobby PAK license question/problem - Message-ID: <0033000030382008000002L082*@MHS>   7 =0AShould be that XXNNNNNNNN serial number on the back.m  ) Tell us exactly what you did to load 'em.h  7 or, if you want email me privately with license detailsn and I'll help you out.   WWWebb > -----Original Message-----1 > From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET ( > Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 9:33 PMF > To: Webb, William W - Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET5 > Subject: VAX/VMS Hobby PAK license question/problem  >q > H > I've been trying for two hours to get the VAX/VMS paks to work on the=   > Vaxstation 3100 M38 here...r >-H > Am I missing the obvious... The serial number I used is on the back o= f-H > the machine -- or is there a different hardware id I need to get like=   > on the sun's hostid? >jC > At least the 11/780 could show the serial number on the backplaneP > from the console.3 >0@ > I did a quick anal /error and came up with the SID of 0A000006) > is this what they need for the license?5 >1? > The back of the machine shows Model: WS42-BF. SN: AB01000U3E.I >h2 > The last time I installed VAX/VMS it was 3.6 8-) > $ > (Yeah I know it's OPEN/VMS now...) >s > Bill > bpechter@monmouth.com  >s >l
 >        Bill  > -- > ---s? >   Bill Gates is a Persian cat and a monocle away from being ah? >   villain in a James Bond movie              -- Dennis Miller : >   bpechter@shell.monmouth.com|pechter@pechter.dyndns.org >=   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:57:19 -0400 % From: Aaron Sawyer <asawyer@iris.com> % Subject: Re: VM: checking some myths.C( Message-ID: <3B5F40BF.3FADF4C2@iris.com>   JF Mezei wrote:. >  > Peter Hancock wrote:A > > 1. Nobody asked for VM. It was some kind of moonlight project . > >    by a scientific computing group at IBM. > L > I had heard it had been developped by some university or other educational0 > organisation and then adopted big time by IBM.  L Sounds like Cambridge University's CP/CMS (Control Program/Cambridge MonitorJ System) on the S360/67 (65 with DAT box, IIRC).  Certainly had the Virtual  Machine implemented.  Very nice.  # [remainder snipped; nothing to add]a   ------------------------------   Date: 25 Jul 2001 21:32:05 GMT  From: hack@watson.ibm.com (hack)% Subject: Re: VM: checking some myths. + Message-ID: <9jndsl$ir2$1@news.btv.ibm.com>s  3 In article <oqae1uycow.fsf_-_@premise.demon.co.uk>,u( Peter Hancock  <pgh@dcs.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > @ >Is it possible to say in a sentence or two, or point to a shortE >high-level description of what kind of communication interface there F >is/was between the virtual machines?  How do they look to each other?  H There are several available mechanisms, in two classes.  In either case,I two virtual machines look to each other like separate real machines, with 7 various communication channels of varying capabilities.a  B Class 1:  Virtualised real I/O interfaces.  These are available toC           any operating system -- the OS need not even know that itI*           is running in a virtual machine.  J    Coupling-Facility channels:  very high performance, but I think this is6                                 a restricted interface  K    Channel-to-Channel adapter:  uses channel programs to read-write blocks; L                                 high throughput for large-enough block sizes  N    Shared disk:  if hypervisor implements minidisk caching, performance should>                  approach that of CTCA; otherwise disk limited  ?    Card reader/punch:  simple CCW interface but low performancem  F Class 2:  hypervisor-defined interfaces.  These are still machine-likeG           in the way they are used (via privileged machine instructionsnG           and interrupt reflection, or direct storage access), but theypG           go beyond what is available in a real machine.  The operatingnG           system has to be aware of the VM hypervisor (CP, the "Controls           Program").  L    Shared "real" memory.  By mutual agreement two (or more) virtual machinesK    can have a region of their real address space shared.  (The mapping that I    is performed by the hypervisor underneath is invisible.)  There is (ornI    used to be) a mini-OS called GCS that exploits this.  There is even antI    architectural mode called XC (no real-machine equivalent) that extendseF    S/390 Access Register mode to DAT-off operating systems like CMS toJ    address multiple "real" address spaces, so one virtual machine's entireK    primary address space can (by mutual agreement, via hypervisor services)uE    by accessible as another virtual machine's AR-selected data space.e  F    VMCF - Virtual Machine Communication Facility:  provides a DMA-likeD    interface for sending and receiving packets.  Used for example to8    communicate with the VM-TCPIP server virtual machine.  G    IUCV - Inter-User-Communication-Vehicle:  a more elaborate messagingoH    facility with multiple channels, revocation mechanisms, etc.  Used byC    the CMS Shared Filesystem to communicate with the SFS server VM.o  F    LDF - Logical Device Facility:  allows one VM to act like a displayG    control unit for another's virtual 3270 console.  Used by PVM -- thee$    cross-network VM logon mechanism.  K    High-performace access to the virtual card reader (the primary "network"sF    interface between virtual machines, where one VM's Punch feeds intoJ    another VM's Reader), allowing 4K blocks of virtual cards to be read in    one gulp.  K Historically, the coupling between virtual card punches and readers (across-F the RSCS company-wide network, aka VNET) was the primary communicationK interface (nearly 30 years old).  It may sound quaint, but it's really justdM a data pipe (with 80-byte blocks) with tagged ends to perform the connection, I and it has a really simple interface (no connection protocols etc. -- theiL network is store-and-forward, so it's literally like mailing postcards whereK bunches (individual "spool files") are guaranteed to arrive in order (there B is no virtual equivalent to a deck of cards spilled on the floor).   Michel   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:16:45 GMTd+ From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>g% Subject: Re: VM: checking some myths.s) Message-ID: <uhew0pssw.fsf@earthlink.net>O  " hack@watson.ibm.com (hack) writes:  M > Historically, the coupling between virtual card punches and readers (acrossyH > the RSCS company-wide network, aka VNET) was the primary communicationM > interface (nearly 30 years old).  It may sound quaint, but it's really justTO > a data pipe (with 80-byte blocks) with tagged ends to perform the connection, K > and it has a really simple interface (no connection protocols etc. -- thenN > network is store-and-forward, so it's literally like mailing postcards whereM > bunches (individual "spool files") are guaranteed to arrive in order (therehD > is no virtual equivalent to a deck of cards spilled on the floor).  . VNET also supports "SMSG" & instant messaging.  D There was a standard instant message between the terminals belonging# to two different virtual machines.qA  B On the same machine, the straight forward messages allowed instant6 person-to-person communication/message. SMSG supportedA programmatically interception of instant messages allowed various E automated infrastructure, automated operator, tape mounting services,- etc.  A The support by VNET of SMSG allowed the "instant messaging" to bet? expanded to the network environment (i.e. VNET had an immediateiA message communication, separate from normal file & data ... which E would support this extending instant messaging to a multiple machine,v network environment).e  A instant messaging between two real people in two virtual machines O instant messaging between one real person and a program in two virtual machiness> instant messaging between two programs in two virtual machines  J instant messaging between one real person and VNET in two virtual machinesB        ... with VNET acting as transport to different real machine5        ... where it is a real person at the other endV  J instant messaging between one real person and VNET in two virtual machinesB        ... with VNET acting as transport to different real machine1        ... where it is a program at the other endu  F instant messaging between one program and VNET in two virtual machinesB        ... with VNET acting as transport to different real machine2        ... where it is a program  at the other end  A and of course, VNET could be used between two parties on the samej machine.  F The summer of 1980, the author of REXX did a multi-palyer, distributedF spacewar implementation using the SMSG mechanism; on the same machine,F spacewar distributed messages directly ... and this could operate in a@ multi (real) machine environment using VNET's support of instant
 messaging.  F Now the case was the spacewar game running in one virtual machine, wasB it actually interacting with a real person ... or was it a program simulating a real person.c   random refs:) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#10t) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#12a) http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#14e   -- mH Anne & Lynn Wheeler   | lynn@garlic.com -  http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 23:45:48 GMTc+ From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>E% Subject: Re: VM: checking some myths.?) Message-ID: <u8zhcprxo.fsf@earthlink.net>   ' Aaron Sawyer <asawyer@iris.com> writes:    > N > Sounds like Cambridge University's CP/CMS (Control Program/Cambridge MonitorL > System) on the S360/67 (65 with DAT box, IIRC).  Certainly had the Virtual" > Machine implemented.  Very nice. > % > [remainder snipped; nothing to add]   D It was the IBM Cambridge Scientific Center located at 545 Tech. Sq.,D Cambridge Mass (same bldg. as Multics) and had some number of peopleE that worked on CTSS. Started with CP & CMS on 360/m40 that had customeB modified hardware to support virtual memory in '65/'66 era ... and4 then was ported to 360/m67 when it became available.  ( misc. online history from Melinda Varian" http://pucc.princeton.edu/~melinda  D CSC had 30 or so people. It originated CP/40, CP/67, CMS, VNET, GML,C Compare & Swap, various performance tuning, early capacity planning F and misc. other things. Compare & Swap turns out to be the initials ofC the primary person at CSC responsible. GML (which spawned the wholemE genre of markup languages, SGML, HTML, XML, etc) is the letter of the D lastnames of three people involved (i.e. generalized markup language$ was chosen to match their initials).  < The internal "VNET" network was consistently larger than theB arpa/internet until about 1985. I claim one of the reasons is that< VNET essentially contained a "gateway" function allowing theE interconnection of networks ... the "internet" didn't really get thate- capability until Jan. 1st, 1983. random refs:r  ( http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm  D I was at a university on the west coast and some people came out andF installed CP/67 in January of 1968 (third CP/67 installation after CSC and Lincoln Labs).   misc. following have some refs:p0 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#360pcm3 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#fairshare 1 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#wsclocko2 http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#360mcode- http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#smpc   --  H Anne & Lynn Wheeler   | lynn@garlic.com -  http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 05:15:33 GMTt. From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>% Subject: Re: VM: checking some myths.pC Message-ID: <VHN77.959$SU4.201690@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>a  8 "Anne & Lynn Wheeler" <lynn@garlic.com> wrote in message# news:u8zhcprxo.fsf@earthlink.net...n  F > It was the IBM Cambridge Scientific Center located at 545 Tech. Sq.,F > Cambridge Mass (same bldg. as Multics) and had some number of peopleG > that worked on CTSS. Started with CP & CMS on 360/m40 that had customiD > modified hardware to support virtual memory in '65/'66 era ... and6 > then was ported to 360/m67 when it became available.  J IBM implemented virtula machines (VM's) before the above was implemented -F the upgrade strategy that IBM used to move customers to the 360 was toG provide VM's for each of the machines that IBM wanted to replace - eg.,oH those 1401 somethings or another.  And there were probably other VM's as/ well before the 360 from IBM and other vendors.-  J The confusion is probably related to the different objectives of the earlyJ implementors, (eg., running legacy code vs. providing the illusion of yourL own private machine for debug), and the fact that Virtual Machine was a term= coined after there had been a number of such implementations.a   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 21:17:25 -0500  From: eccm <eccm@swbell.net>5 Subject: Re: VMS remains secure at DEFCON hacker festg* Message-ID: <3B60CF35.ECC909BD@swbell.net>  B Here are you to be finding a link to my "DEFCON9 report of sorts",& It's my story and I'm sticking to it..   http://www.vmsone.com/~opcom/0  & "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" wrote: > f > In article <3B585A62.A772C066@usa.alcatel.com>, Patrick Jankowiak <pjankowi@usa.alcatel.com> writes:/ > >This is a multi-part message in MIME format..) > >--------------AE3B1D4DC4D9D81E4F862899 - > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-asciis" > >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >  > >Hi. > >aK > >A couple friends and I, on our own and for the drunken fun of it, took aoI > >VMS box configured with apache webserver and telnet and ftp and set up,K > >to automagically generate user accounts and default web pages for anyone>G > >who telnetted and answered the questionnaire, to defcon9, the yearlyt$ > >hackers' convention in las vegas. > >eJ > >It was subjected for 3 days to the attendees, over 5000 hackers. PeopleJ > >you should be afraid of. It stayed on the intranetwork with the hackersD > >for the whole time and was not hacked, and it was not for lack ofK > >attempts by some very expert and accomplished people, although one LuseraF > >did manage to (ahem) accidentally trip over the power cord. details	 > >later.  > >o& > >#3||0!, is VMS Marketing listening? > L > No.  They use PeeCees running Weendoze between BSoDs and script kiddie DoSK > attacks.  With this much too do, their processors can be perusing usenet.r >  > --Q > VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM  > K >   "And of course, I'm a genius, so people are naturally drawn to my fieryeK >   intellect.  Their admiration overwhelms their envy!" -- Calvin & Hobbes.   ------------------------------   Date: 24 Jul 2001 20:37:50 CDT= From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.320117.killspam.015d (Wayne Sewell)t$ Subject: Re: Zero Quadword Time Poll. Message-ID: <EBaYmCOBClik@tachxxsoftxxconsult>  N In article <VA.00000401.1ae2974e@sture.ch>, Paul Sture <paul@sture.ch> writes:L > In article <zoP1Gb+Wy3qL@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Larry Kilgallen wrote:k >> In article <0sJ57.1022$rc5.70029@news.cpqcorp.net>, hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) writes:e >> > oG >> >   The following is a trial balloon, and NOT something that we havet! >> >   immediate plans to change.g >> >  L >> >   One of the local engineers has suggested changing the interpretation J >> >   of a OpenVMS quadword time containing a zero from its existing to aJ >> >   new interpretation; from an absolute time (17-Nov-1858) to a delta  >> >   time ("now", basically).t >> i= >> That might break programs that depend on a zero time fielde; >> to mean that "this record has not been initialized yet",i< >> possibly doing a character substitution for "17-NOV-1858"4 >> after conversion.  That is ugly, but not illegal. >>> > FWIW I've seen order processing systems which used zero date= > fields to mean "Not done yet" - e.g. Despatch date, Invoice > > date, with reporting and programs actively using or ignoring > those zero values.    K Tapesys does this.  There are several time fields in the master reel record K (initialization date, scratch date, allocation date, last access, date lastmM freed, etc.).  In all of these cases, a zero date means "not yet specified". qN For instance, this is a new reel and has never been allocated, initialized, or
 scratched.   -- rO ===============================================================================yM Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxxe: http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-)bO ===============================================================================HH Randolph Duke (in Trading Places): "Mother always said you were greedy.". Mortimer Duke: "She meant it as a compliment!"   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 05:54:59 GMTl. From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>$ Subject: Re: Zero Quadword Time PollD Message-ID: <TgO77.1424$nS1.176490@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  @ "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message) news:Bdh77.21$Yx2.477@news.cpqcorp.net...nK > The stated reason is to reduce special case logic needed when subtracting5+ > two absolute times that result in a zero.W  K Yeh, but you have to special case the result when you subtract two absolute)D times that don't result in zero as well, if the result in the format# required by the VMS timer services.   L If this is related to the LIB$_ADD/SUB_TIMES, then those were implemented toJ support a limited set of uses; a more general implementation wouldn't have the problem.   Consider the cases ofd     1-jan-2001 - 2-jan-2001- vs     2-jan-2001 - 1-jan-2001u  J It seems to me that I should be able to take two events and find the deltaH time between them, or alternatively take a point in time and compute the/ time that is either x units before or after it.N  K A clean solution for LIB$xxx_TIMES is to add a 4th argument which is a maskfG indicating which of the two arguments are absolute and which are delta.o  G That the timer routines overload the time quadword so that you can passeL either a delta or absolute time with a single quadword argument doesn't mean3 that all timestamps are necessarily in that format.I  I (Oh, I did look up the routines, and I know that the status varies for mydG example, but I'm not sure how?  Is the status "negative time" or "wrong5 order" for one of the above?)a   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.411 ************************