1 INFO-VAX	Sat, 28 Jul 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 415       Contents:9 Re: (OT) TechTV:  Compaq to spotlight AOL on PC's, not IE 9 Re: (OT) TechTV:  Compaq to spotlight AOL on PC's, not IE 9 Re: (OT) TechTV:  Compaq to spotlight AOL on PC's, not IE  Re: 7.3 system disk corruption Re: 7.3 system disk corruption( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate( Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate' Re: Alpha: an invitation to communicate  benchmarking disk performance E Re: Compaq destroys Storageworks (was Re: 7.3 system disk corruption) E Re: Compaq destroys Storageworks (was Re: 7.3 system disk corruption) E Re: Compaq destroys Storageworks (was Re: 7.3 system disk corruption) & Re: Compaq FUD and lack of information& Re: Compaq FUD and lack of information Re: Compaq's Q2 financials Re: CSA [was LPs on the Web] FastCGI support in CSWS  Re: firmware for SCSI disks ?? Re: firmware for SCSI disks ?? hardware or software mirroring- Re: how to write sys$output without linefeed? : Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): RE: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS): Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)P Re: Ken Olsen (and DEC History), was: Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS MP Re: Ken Olsen (and DEC History), was: Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS MP Re: Ken Olsen (and DEC History), was: Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS MP Re: Ken Olsen (and DEC History), was: Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS MP Re: Ken Olsen (and DEC History), was: Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS M Re: LPs on the Web" Re: Min Mem on a  DEC 3300 for VMS" Re: Min Mem on a  DEC 3300 for VMS? Re: Now we're cooking with gas. (was:  Wailing and moaning....) ? Re: Now we're cooking with gas. (was:  Wailing and moaning....) * OPCOM messages sent outside the local node. Re: OPCOM messages sent outside the local node Oracle file size and VMS Re: Oracle file size and VMS Re: Oracle file size and VMS Problem with TZL10  Re: SAN-based Backup for OpenVMS  Re: SAN-based Backup for OpenVMS  Re: SAN-based Backup for OpenVMS$ Re: Selling VMS to another company ?$ Re: Selling VMS to another company ?$ Re: Selling VMS to another company ?( Re: Suggestion for IPF standalone backup" Re: Sun goes after Alpha user base3 Re: TCPIP v5.1 startup on dial-up service provider.  Re: The Inquirer on VMS port Re: The Inquirer on VMS port Re: The Inquirer on VMS port Re: The Inquirer on VMS port; Re: UCX v3.0, How to "SET CONFIG ENABLE SERVICE FILSRV200"? ; Re: UCX v3.0, How to "SET CONFIG ENABLE SERVICE FILSRV200"? $ Re: VAX Fortran and Visual Fortran ?, Re: VMS remains secure at DEFCON hacker fest1 When did F$GETSYI("DECNET_VERSION") first appear? 5 RE: When did F$GETSYI("DECNET_VERSION") first appear? 5 Re: When did F$GETSYI("DECNET_VERSION") first appear? 5 RE: When did F$GETSYI("DECNET_VERSION") first appear?  WHO ARE YOU forum? Re: WHO ARE YOU forum? Re: WHO ARE YOU forum?E [OT] Market corrections (was Re: Alpha: an invitation to communicate)   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:26:17 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> B Subject: Re: (OT) TechTV:  Compaq to spotlight AOL on PC's, not IE, Message-ID: <3B61C04E.E4807758@videotron.ca>   Alan Greig wrote: @ > Having already blown up the bridge it is no surprise if CompaqE > management now wish to burn their boats as well. As Bill Todd might > > say I'd really like to know what they are smoking right now.  L Perhaps Compaq realised that it had become too obvious that they were just aJ puppet of Microsoft/Intel, so this is a token move to show that Compaq can8 sometimes take some decisions that go against Microsoft.  L I suspect that the first thing folks do when they boot their wintel PC is to8 move to the trashcan all the advertising on the desktop.  N One reason why consumer PC sales have slumped is that the penetration rate hasJ probably reached some plateau (perhaps a temporary plateau, or a permanentF one, I don't know) and from now on, more and more sales will happen asN replacement of older computers. And with folks no longer interested in rushingJ to upgrade to even more bloated MS software, the need for faster PCs isn't really there anymore.   I So, what good is that $35 advertising by AOL on the desktop if the new PC K owner will zap the desktop with the contents of his older desktop, keep all 6 his settings from the older PC and keep the same ISP ?  L The one target where that $35 will work is selling a new PC to grand mothersT who just want to press the nearest button that looks like it will do what they want.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:55:48 -0400 2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)B Subject: Re: (OT) TechTV:  Compaq to spotlight AOL on PC's, not IEL Message-ID: <rdeininger-2707011555490001@user-2ivebrg.dialup.mindspring.com>  5 In article <3B61C04E.E4807758@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei % <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:     P > One reason why consumer PC sales have slumped is that the penetration rate hasL > probably reached some plateau (perhaps a temporary plateau, or a permanentH > one, I don't know) and from now on, more and more sales will happen asP > replacement of older computers. And with folks no longer interested in rushingL > to upgrade to even more bloated MS software, the need for faster PCs isn't > really there anymore.   F I think this will be a big effect in coming years.  People ran out andH bought their first computer because it was faddish, but knew very little about computers.  I Many bought a second computer a few years later, and chose more carefully H since they weren't completely clueless.  But in many cases, a lot of the, frustrations of computer ownership remained.  G If folks are getting a bit suspicious about all the computer hype, will G they keep buying computers every few years?  I suspect many people will # not, once the novelty has worn off.   I In the U.S., the pool of first- and second-time computer buyers is pretty E much used up.  Can the market continue to grow, based only on version / churning and software bloat?  I have my doubts.    --   Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 23:07:12 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> B Subject: Re: (OT) TechTV:  Compaq to spotlight AOL on PC's, not IE' Message-ID: <3B623A70.64884A4C@fsi.net>    Alan Greig wrote:  > D > On Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:30:50 -0000, wspencer@ap.nospam.org (Warren > Spencer) wrote:  > - > >I apologize if this is a little off topic:  > > J > >TechTV this morning reported that Compaq will exercise the new latitudeI > >Microsoft has "granted" to PC OEM's:  AOL's interface will be featured D > >prominently on new Compaq PC's, and Microsoft's IE/MSDN will not. > > K > >Interesting behavior from what till now has been a seemingly MS-friendly H > >company.  Is this a product of the reported expulsion in this n.g. of. > >"microsofties" from Compaq some months ago? > @ > Having already blown up the bridge it is no surprise if CompaqE > management now wish to burn their boats as well. As Bill Todd might > > say I'd really like to know what they are smoking right now.   ...and where we can get some!    --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   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.    ------------------------------    Date: 27 Jul 2001 11:00:40 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett) ' Subject: Re: 7.3 system disk corruption , Message-ID: <Oado4DCD77xq@malvm5.mala.bc.ca>  9 In article <4rv2mtg8nj68sjpk7oa6aroqps2pp72q7d@4ax.com>,  +     Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:   J >>It's not an upgrade, but a new cluster system we are building to replace >>an old VAXcluster. > F > You are building a new cluster with HSZ22 controllers? Oh dear. TimeG > to get on to your Compaq account manager fast. Building a new cluster D > with a controller  for which there already is a support retirement% > notice is not a terribly good idea.  > E    You'd have to be pretty stupid to assume you could build a cluster F just because you're using components Compaq is still selling ( or were a few months ago anyway ) :-)   ;    Mind you, this "you bought it last month, of course it's E obsolete now" attitude is common in the PeeCee world, so we shouldn't ; be surprised to see such an attitude from Compaq I suppose.   G    Seriously, if the RA3000/HSZ22 is no longer supported exactly *what* E is one supposed to use to build a "low end" cluster? Presumably those B of us who intend to cluster DS10s will find an HSG80 a bit pricey.  ?    So far my cluster is chugging along just fine on a couple of D RA310/HSZ20s - let's hope they keep working because it seems there's, nothing I could afford to replace them with.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:52:41 -0400   From: John Santos <JOHN@egh.com>' Subject: Re: 7.3 system disk corruption 6 Message-ID: <1010727154952.16443B-100000@Ives.egh.com>  ' On Fri, 27 Jul 2001, Tim Jackson wrote:   B > No, we aren't running a disk defragmenter (yet).  We plan to runB > PerfectDisk in the future.  Does anyone have any good or bad new$ > regarding PerfectDisk and VMS 7.3? >  > TIA   @ I'm running PerfectDisk (hobbyist licensed version) on my MV3600C under VMS 7.3 at home.  No problems with it.  This is a VAX though, A not an Alpha, and it's a standalone system, not a cluster.  (RA72  disks.)    --   John Santos    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:32:54 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> 1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate , Message-ID: <3B61C1DB.F0266A09@videotron.ca>   J Ahlstrom wrote: C > I am sure you are right.  I don't think a (for profit) company is < > required to generate profits.  But I believe it is open toC > shareholder suits if it cannot show that it is trying to generate 
 > profits.  N Shareholder might be perfectly happy without any dividends if the value of the& shares increases at a reasonable rate.  C I was under the impression that Microsoft didn't offer dividends to F shareholders. Is that correct ? If a company never offers dividends toD shareholders, is that tantamount to a company not being profitable ?   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 16:00:25 -0400 5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> 1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate 1 Message-ID: <oMj87.274$Yx2.3846@news.cpqcorp.net>   K The stock market is pure black magic, legalized gambling.  It may once have ; had some rational basis, but that has long since been lost.   J The board of directors of a corporation have a fiduciary responsibility toJ the shareholders of the company to work in their best interest (which theyJ have been elected to represent).  A company has no legal requirement to beG profitable, many startup companies expect to lose money for a number of I years - Yahoo for example has always been a loser.  Many companies return F some of the profits to the shareholders as dividends - but there is noI requirement to do so.  Most stocks (I dare say) have no dividend.  People H buy non-dividend stocks based on some mythical, personal, or mathmaticalI evaluation of how valuable the company is (or future expectations of it's J value - like all the dot coms), and then "bet" that other people will alsoJ wanyt to buy the stock, so the law of supply and demand of available stock( will cause it's price to rise (or fall).  I At some level, there is the inherent worth of the company - it's book (or J liquidation) value -- but it isn't uncommon to see companies trading belowH book in a down market.  A useful number is the price/earnings ratio - ofJ course, I've never figured out how you determine reasonable values - 10 is< better than 50, but how do you determine what is overvalued?    = JF Mezei wrote in message <3B61C1DB.F0266A09@videotron.ca>...  >J Ahlstrom wrote:D >> I am sure you are right.  I don't think a (for profit) company is= >> required to generate profits.  But I believe it is open to D >> shareholder suits if it cannot show that it is trying to generate >> profits.  > K >Shareholder might be perfectly happy without any dividends if the value of  the ' >shares increases at a reasonable rate.  > D >I was under the impression that Microsoft didn't offer dividends toG >shareholders. Is that correct ? If a company never offers dividends to E >shareholders, is that tantamount to a company not being profitable ?    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:13:22 -0700 0 From: "Brig Campbell" <brig.campbell@unisys.com>1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicate - Message-ID: <9jslh5$cq6$1@mail.pl.unisys.com>   @ "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message+ news:oMj87.274$Yx2.3846@news.cpqcorp.net... H > The stock market is pure black magic, legalized gambling.  It may once have= > had some rational basis, but that has long since been lost.   L It is not black magic, it's the foundation for capitalism.  It the mechinismI for which capital flows from old to new.  At times markets are irrational / but that never lasts, they are self correcting.    > L > The board of directors of a corporation have a fiduciary responsibility toL > the shareholders of the company to work in their best interest (which theyL > have been elected to represent).  A company has no legal requirement to beI > profitable, many startup companies expect to lose money for a number of 4 > years - Yahoo for example has always been a loser.  ) Not true for yahoo, see earnings history. $ http://biz.yahoo.com/z/a/y/yhoo.html   >Many companies returnH > some of the profits to the shareholders as dividends - but there is noK > requirement to do so.  Most stocks (I dare say) have no dividend.  People J > buy non-dividend stocks based on some mythical, personal, or mathmaticalK > evaluation of how valuable the company is (or future expectations of it's L > value - like all the dot coms), and then "bet" that other people will alsoL > wanyt to buy the stock, so the law of supply and demand of available stock* > will cause it's price to rise (or fall).  L The reason the many "new" companies don't provide dividends is that money isG reinvested in the business, it's used to fund growth.  Things like R&D, I expanding operations, etc.  If you're a utilitity, its a different story, J rather than pile up cash (except in California) you pay out the profits to the shareholders.    > K > At some level, there is the inherent worth of the company - it's book (or L > liquidation) value -- but it isn't uncommon to see companies trading belowJ > book in a down market.  A useful number is the price/earnings ratio - ofL > course, I've never figured out how you determine reasonable values - 10 is> > better than 50, but how do you determine what is overvalued? >  > ? > JF Mezei wrote in message <3B61C1DB.F0266A09@videotron.ca>...  > >J Ahlstrom wrote:F > >> I am sure you are right.  I don't think a (for profit) company is? > >> required to generate profits.  But I believe it is open to F > >> shareholder suits if it cannot show that it is trying to generate
 > >> profits.T > >:J > >Shareholder might be perfectly happy without any dividends if the value of > thet) > >shares increases at a reasonable rate.o > >cF > >I was under the impression that Microsoft didn't offer dividends toI > >shareholders. Is that correct ? If a company never offers dividends to:G > >shareholders, is that tantamount to a company not being profitable ?  >  >h   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:44:48 -0700q% From: J Ahlstrom <jahlstro@cisco.com>t1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicater) Message-ID: <3B61E0D0.2832D590@cisco.com>e   JF Mezei wrote:t   > J Ahlstrom wrote: E > > I am sure you are right.  I don't think a (for profit) company iso> > > required to generate profits.  But I believe it is open toE > > shareholder suits if it cannot show that it is trying to generateS > > profits. > P > Shareholder might be perfectly happy without any dividends if the value of the( > shares increases at a reasonable rate. >tE > I was under the impression that Microsoft didn't offer dividends to H > shareholders. Is that correct ? If a company never offers dividends toF > shareholders, is that tantamount to a company not being profitable ?  9 Profitability and dividends are only very loosely linked. 9 Some very profitable companies don't pay dividends.  Some 5 companies pay dividends during years or quarters whenM they have losses.   2 High Tech companies frequently pay no or very tiny3 dividends on the theory that they can use the money 1 better than the shareholder can and because moneyM7 that goes to dividends is taxed twice - once on companyn2 profit, once as shareholder income - whereas money3 kept to grow (hopefully) the business is taxed onlyc once.o   --5 The internet is "the largest legal creation of wealth  in the history of the planet."                     Noted VC 2000  . "I'm here today with something of an apology,"+ the Internet is "the largest legal creationl: (and evaporation) of wealth in the history of the planet."/ But, "I stand by my statement that the Internet  was -- and is -- under-hyped".                   Noted VC 2001C   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:07:20 GMT   From: jlsue <jlsuexxxz@home.com>1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicateb8 Message-ID: <t334mtsgl9vk167crbmsk9ikc8hafg9qcn@4ax.com>  3 On Thu, 26 Jul 2001 20:58:23 +0100, andrew harrisonW! <andrew.nospam@uk.sun.com> wrote:e  
 >jlsue wrote:g >> wI >> On Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:54:28 -0400, Bill Gunshannon <bill@cs.uofs.edu> 	 >> wrote:e >> s% >> >On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, jlsue wrote:l >> > >> >>SK >> >> Exactly what committments are you talking about?  Certainly you don'tLK >> >> mean the Alpha Roadmap?  Roadmaps certainly aren't to be construed asAL >> >> something to be  followed come-hell-or-highwater.  If business climateI >> >> changes enough, then the company must do something else in order toi >> >> survive. >> >>a
 >> ><snip> >> >>aJ >> >> But in no way did I ever see any committment to any long-term futureL >> >> for Alpha.  And, in the real world, I don't expect that you'd ever seeJ >> >> such a committment that you could really depend upon.  It just isn't0 >> >> possible in the business world to do that. >> >B >> >And yet, when people here apply the same logic to VMS they get) >> >accused of spreading FUD.  Go figure.  >>  F >> This is only true to a point.  Surely *all* vendors of all productsE >> can choose to cease making any products that aren't delivering theOG >> level of profit they need.  It's a Econ 101 idea:  Opportunity cost. D >> The cost of doing "X" includes the cost (loss?) of not doing "Y".. >> When you add it all up, is it all worth it? >>  @ >> The difference between this and FUD is that a competitor usesI >> under-handed methods to convince potential customers that this is whatFH >> their current vendor will do to them.  It assumes that the competitorF >> actually knows what the other vendor will decide to do.  Basically,G >> it's a lie because the competitor knows that it could be in the samenB >> boat in the unforeseeable future over the product that they are >> competing with. >>   >a< >Good joke in this case. How would you describe a vendor who> >has used underhand methods including being slightly cavalier = >with the truth to convince you to keep buying their product.e  F Er... nobody is cavalier with the truth here (except maybe you, andy).   >f9 >If FUD is telling the truth about the inadequacies of a t< >competitors product and in this case anti-FUD as practiced 9 >by various posters to this group is telling what turned  8 >out to be untruthes about capabilites and prospects of 9 >Compaqs products then call me a FUDSTER any day at least  >I will sleep at night.o  D If you had a product to sell that was worth a crap, then you'd spendC more time talking about the strenghts of said product and less timevF trying to denounce a product you don't understand very well ( which is< something you do qutie a lot - e.g., VMS, VMScluster, etc.).  B When you spend more time talking about the competition than you doE about your own products' strengths, then you don't have much to sell.k   >hD >> The funny thing is, when HP, IBM, etc. announced awhile back thatB >> they'd be switching to IA64 (this was before the long delays ofE >> delivering merced systems forced them to reevaluate), they weren't-G >> seen as breaking any committments.  But somehow Compaq is being held.G >> to a different standard by these competitors.  Yep, that's FUD in myL >> book. > G >Rubbish, IBM have made no such statement. IBM's Intel server division nD >(Sequent + Netinfinity) have said that they will be producing IA-64G >based boxes (its a logical followon from IA-32 based systems. None of sB >IBM's other product ranges have made any such statement. You are > >doing it again, being cavalier with the truth, as always you 8 >would be better off checking your facts before posting.  F At worst, I only mis-remembered.  Get a life buddy.  I certainly don'tF have all day to check news from 2 or 3 years ago, but I seem to recall@ that IBM was talking about migrating RS6000 stuff (AIX) to IA64.& Perhaps I must remembered incorrectly.   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Jul 2001 20:38:34 -0700/ From: Brannon_Batson@yahoo.com (Brannon Batson)u1 Subject: Re: Alpha:  an invitation to communicatem= Message-ID: <4495ef1f.0107271938.517d9c09@posting.google.com>   b andrew harrison <andrew.nospam@uk.sun.com> wrote in message news:<3B60765F.27393BB5@uk.sun.com>... > jlsue wrote: > > J > > On Mon, 23 Jul 2001 20:54:28 -0400, Bill Gunshannon <bill@cs.uofs.edu>
 > > wrote: > > & > > >On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, jlsue wrote: > > >t > > >>
 > > >> [snip]r > > >  > > > [snip] > = > Good joke in this case. How would you describe a vendor who ? > has used underhand methods including being slightly cavalier e> > with the truth to convince you to keep buying their product.  > How would you describe a vendor [SUN] that designed shoddy andD unreliable memory systems that failed frequently, and when customersC complained they then forced those customers into signing NDA's as agB condition of fixing the problem?[which was an obvious design flaw]  : > If FUD is telling the truth about the inadequacies of a = > competitors product and in this case anti-FUD as practiced f: > by various posters to this group is telling what turned 9 > out to be untruthes about capabilites and prospects of t: > Compaqs products then call me a FUDSTER any day at least > I will sleep at nightd  E Untruths of capabilities and prospects of products?  The UltraSparc 3iE systems are susceptible to a prefetcher bug, the only fix of which istA to disable the prefetcher via a firmware update.  This lowers theCF performance of the Blade systems by 5-15% depending on the benchmark. C So, has Sun pulled their benchmark numbers for the systems with thelB prefetcher enabled?  Of course not...they continue to sell systems> with benchmark numbers that customers cannot reproduce without; introducing a fatal bug into the reliability of the system.   A I don't like Compaq, but don't pretend that your company is abovew	 reproach./   >  > [snip] > 
 > Regards  > Andrew Harrisonp > Enterprise IT Architectt   Brannon Batson Alpha Development Groupe   not speaking for Compaqp   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Jul 2001 21:47:28 -0400* From: davidc@panix.com (David B. Chorlian)0 Subject: Re: Alpha: an invitation to communicate* Message-ID: <9jt5jg$i5$1@panix3.panix.com>  W In <9jslh5$cq6$1@mail.pl.unisys.com> "Brig Campbell" <brig.campbell@unisys.com> writes:d    A >"Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in messagep, >news:oMj87.274$Yx2.3846@news.cpqcorp.net...I >> The stock market is pure black magic, legalized gambling.  It may oncee >haven> >> had some rational basis, but that has long since been lost.  M >It is not black magic, it's the foundation for capitalism.  It the mechinismtJ >for which capital flows from old to new.  At times markets are irrational0 >but that never lasts, they are self correcting.  H Not so; the (U.S)  government (in one form or another) steps in when theA market cannot correct itself: The Fed's actions in October 1987,  J and later in bailing out a failing hedge firm; other governmental actions G with regard to foreign markets (bailout of Mexico) when this is thought > to be disruptive to the U.S. economy.  The last time the U.S. ? government let the market correct itself was 1929.  Capitalism e= requires support from non-capitalist institutions to survive.p   [remainder snipped]      --   David B. Chorlian  Neurodynamics Lab  SUNY/HSCB chorlian@spot.cns.hscbklyn.edu davidc@panix.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 11:46:39 +0800s" From: "Kenneth" <best@hotmail.com>& Subject: benchmarking disk performance0 Message-ID: <9jtci1$abo8@imsp212.netvigator.com>  F Is there any tools for benchmarking the disk performance in VMS 7.2-1?   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:09:55 -04007- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>7N Subject: Re: Compaq destroys Storageworks (was Re: 7.3 system disk corruption), Message-ID: <3B61BC7A.6E058476@videotron.ca>   Alan Greig wrote:eF > Software support ends on 30-JAN-2002 except for some limited configs; > of the RA3000 which will be supported until 31-July-2003.V  G read: a few key customers have some configs involving RA3000 so we will D continue to support those configs, and we don't care about the rest.  E > Compaq's suggested solution is to upgrade to an HSG80. So Compaq isrF > now decimating its highly profitable storage division and destroying; > customer confidence. Compaq's management are incompetent,eB > business-blind, moronic, creeps and I just wish VMS was owned by; > someone else so I never had to deal with them ever again.y  E Another indication to me that Compaq really intends to pamper the fewrM customers that they have identified as "must keep" and doesn't care about thehJ other customers. I see this as simply executing its long term strategy andN won't qualify Compaq as stupid or incompetent. I have to assume that they have! carefully tought out these moves.h  I Consider that Compaq is fully aware that under the failed Palmer attempt,lN Digital lost customers to other companies instead of moving customers to NT orK Unix from VMS.  With this in mind, one can only conclude that any move thatrI pushes some customers away has been calculated and Compaq is aware of theo impact it will have.  M Just because you do not agree with the move doesn't instantly make it stupid.   K Many would have liked to see Compaq push VMS into a succcesful product. ButoJ VMS is not Compaq's only way to make money and we have to resign ourselvesM that Compaq has chosen to gradually wein itself from VMS revenus and grow itsnN profit base from other products/operations. As a result of this, over the nextN few years, we can expect to see all sorts of decisions made which do not augur> well for VMS but are in line with Compaq's long term stragegy.  H Compaq did state that they were out to simplify/streamline their productN offerings. And killing off multiple variatiosn of storage products to focus onP a smaller number of newer products would be seen by Wall Street as a smart move.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:34:02 +0100i% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>nN Subject: Re: Compaq destroys Storageworks (was Re: 7.3 system disk corruption)* Message-ID: <3B61D03A.DEB6ECFC@virgin.net>   JF Mezei wrote:r   > Alan Greig wrote:mH > > Software support ends on 30-JAN-2002 except for some limited configs= > > of the RA3000 which will be supported until 31-July-2003.g >lI > read: a few key customers have some configs involving RA3000 so we willfF > continue to support those configs, and we don't care about the rest. >s  T Actually in this case I think support is extended to 2003 for all valid VMS configs.S It's mainly Unix configs and NT configs that go almost immedately. But you may wellrS be right about some of these being with key customers who now have two years rather  than 5 months to replace them.  S And still it's listed as the low cost entry RAID system on the Compaq web site. BuyeP the low cost system then immediately be forced to upgrade to the most expensive.  Some marketing plan Compaq have!   > G > > Compaq's suggested solution is to upgrade to an HSG80. So Compaq issH > > now decimating its highly profitable storage division and destroying= > > customer confidence. Compaq's management are incompetent,lD > > business-blind, moronic, creeps and I just wish VMS was owned by= > > someone else so I never had to deal with them ever again.u >cM > Many would have liked to see Compaq push VMS into a succcesful product. But.L > VMS is not Compaq's only way to make money and we have to resign ourselves >   T No they have  iPAQ as well. What makes you so sure that Compaq can ever make serious) money out of Windows based systems again?  --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 04:47:14 GMTh. From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>N Subject: Re: Compaq destroys Storageworks (was Re: 7.3 system disk corruption)D Message-ID: <mtr87.2501$0w3.353794@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  J "When you upgrade to Windows XP, you will be replacing your system anyway, so what's the big deal....  K "Oh, you have an Alpha and VMS and you've been using it for 5 years and seeaI no reason to replace it for another 5-10 years.  Right, now I understand.oK Oh, well, I can't do anything about it, I just got laid off.  Maybe you canoL explain it to the Compaq classic PC sales droid, but first you have to teach him to spell VMS."  H A friend was/is the sales support guy who worked the PSC deal for over 2J years and had to drag the Compaq classic sales guy in to talk to them - heL got religion when he did the quote and saw how many digits there were in the total dollars.  2 "Alan Greig" <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote in message2 news:k7p2mt8nvji1g5bi8ok9rnh60k6e3ojth9@4ax.com...3 > On Fri, 27 Jul 2001 13:28:25 +0100, "Tim Jackson"a  > <tim.jackson@amsjv.com> wrote: >u- > >Yes, we have been making backups as we go!e > > B > >As for the configuration, there are two points we are currently > >investigating: H > >               1.  HSZ22 controllers don't appear to be listed in the+ > >OpenVMS Cluster Configuration Guidelines G > >                    manual, although the HSZ22 manuals themselves do() > >talk about multi-host and VMSclusters.t >oG > You might be interested to know that the RA3000/HSZ22 is on a list ofoF > controllers now being retired even though it is A CURRENTLY SHIPPING > PRODUCT!!!!!!a? > http://www.compaq.com/products/storageworks/RA3000/index.htmlt >p  > Compaq have gone f**king nuts. >'G > I have just received a letter from Compaq which states "we have begunr@ > a retirement process for the distribution and services for the3 > software of the following storage hardware items:n >>G > HS1CP, HSD30, HSD50, HSJ30, HSJ40, HSJ50, HSZ40, HSZ50, HSZ70, RA410,a > RA450, RA3000 with HSZ22." >qF > Software support ends on 30-JAN-2002 except for some limited configs; > of the RA3000 which will be supported until 31-July-2003.> >oG > "As a result of this retirement, Compaq SOFTWARE Services (ie licensedB > subscription, software update distribution services and softwareG > telephone support) will no longer be available for the above items aseE > of 30th Jan 2002. Note hardware maintenance continues for the abovev# > items (but for how long - Alan)."t >aC > It then adds the suggested upgrade for RA3000 (as the poster I am-G > following up to has) "RA3000 with HSZ22 migrate to HSG80"  Yeh right!m >aF > So if you hit a data corruption type software bug you wall not get aF > fix although they will continue to maintain the hardware for a whileH > longer. Corporate policy would not permit me to continue to use any ofG > these controllers without full software support. Luckily our critical G > production cluster is dual HSZ80 based but we were actually quoted anSF > HSZ70 based system just two years ago. If we had taken that option IH > would today be forced to perform an unbudgeted upgrade to HSG80 by the > end of January.  >rE > Compaq's suggested solution is to upgrade to an HSG80. So Compaq isaF > now decimating its highly profitable storage division and destroying; > customer confidence. Compaq's management are incompetent,bB > business-blind, moronic, creeps and I just wish VMS was owned by; > someone else so I never had to deal with them ever again.i >dE > The letter is signed Trish Sandys (Compaq UK)  and provides a handynF > call number for customers to phone to upgrade to an HSG80. They'd be, > better off just giving Sun's phone number. >  > -- > Alan >M   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:42:41 -0400 5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>u/ Subject: Re: Compaq FUD and lack of informationh1 Message-ID: <Lvj87.272$Yx2.3835@news.cpqcorp.net>   I Come on.  I already said that if you, as a VMS customer, feel you need torL have specific questions answered, or that you have not been able to get whatF you need from your account rep - please drop any one of us a note (SueI Skonetski is probably the place I would send it) - and we will pass it to. the appropriate person.   E Nobody is trying to exclude you from anything, or only give "the good7K information" to big customers.  Some of the answers are "We don't know yet,nI can you wait a few weeks and we will have something more concrete to tell  you".u      = JF Mezei wrote in message <3B575AF0.DD185094@videotron.ca>.... >Hoff Hoffman wrote:I >>   (very reasonably) asking largely business-related questions.  I willl passF >>   your questions along to the folks here in OpenVMS that handle the businessL >>   issues related to OpenVMS and OpenVMS on IPF, as these questions shouldL >>   be answered -- various of the OpenVMS business folks have been visiting, >>   customers, and more visits are planned. >wI >You would do many a great favour if you ould ask these "business issues"s folksgI >why they only release the information during visits to the few customersn bigaK >enough to warrant a visit instead of making the information more public sonA >that the rest of us can better understand Compaq's true motives.h   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:56:58 +0200s& From: John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch>/ Subject: Re: Compaq FUD and lack of informatione* Message-ID: <3B61FFCA.56B6C96C@dplanet.ch>  G Christ Fred !   Why is Compaq incapable of making public comments about* this ?  # What is so difficult about it all ?e  E Why should *we* be begging the supplier for information ?  Any of the H competition would be bending over backwards to make public reassurances.  = Compaq are really showing their true colors in respect to thea Alpha-to-Intel transition.     John McLeane       Fred Kleinsorge wrote: > K > Come on.  I already said that if you, as a VMS customer, feel you need tohN > have specific questions answered, or that you have not been able to get whatH > you need from your account rep - please drop any one of us a note (SueK > Skonetski is probably the place I would send it) - and we will pass it tos > the appropriate person.s > G > Nobody is trying to exclude you from anything, or only give "the goodGM > information" to big customers.  Some of the answers are "We don't know yet, K > can you wait a few weeks and we will have something more concrete to tello > you".i > ? > JF Mezei wrote in message <3B575AF0.DD185094@videotron.ca>...x > >Hoff Hoffman wrote:K > >>   (very reasonably) asking largely business-related questions.  I wills > passH > >>   your questions along to the folks here in OpenVMS that handle the
 > businessN > >>   issues related to OpenVMS and OpenVMS on IPF, as these questions shouldN > >>   be answered -- various of the OpenVMS business folks have been visiting. > >>   customers, and more visits are planned. > > K > >You would do many a great favour if you ould ask these "business issues"e > folks K > >why they only release the information during visits to the few customersh > big M > >enough to warrant a visit instead of making the information more public soiC > >that the rest of us can better understand Compaq's true motives.t   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:28:41 GMT   From: jlsue <jlsuexxxz@home.com># Subject: Re: Compaq's Q2 financials48 Message-ID: <af44mtsbse489s26v2vhblbot5ua8fatjt@4ax.com>  E On Fri, 27 Jul 2001 00:10:06 -0400, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>n wrote:   >sI >> >For example, for the Enterprise Computing segment in Q1 it was statedo >thatrL >> >"Revenue benefited from strong growth in external storage and enterpriseJ >> >software sales resulting from continued customer acceptance of Storage >AreawL >> >Networks" - areas far more often associated with higher-end systems thanD >> >with 'industry-standard' servers - while "Such growth was offset
 >primarilyL >> >by lower revenue from industry standard servers as the economic slowdown >intH >> >the United States led to lower technology spending and a competitive >pricingF >> >environment".  And on the Enterprise Computing income front the Q1	 >document G >> >reported that "A favorable shift in mix to higher margin enterpriseA >storageJ >> >products was more than offset by an aggressive pricing environment for4 >> >industry standard servers in the United States". >>> >> Just FYI:  We do a *lot* of SAN implementations in strictlyC >> "industry-standard" server environments.  When folks have dozensoB >> (sometimes hundreds) of Windows servers, they like SANs to help >> consolidate the storage.@ >sD >If you're ready to provide comparative numbers, by all means do so.J >Meanwhile, Alan Greig's report of the Webcast appears to substantiate theF >inferences I drew previously (I'll try to find time to check that out	 >myself).o  B I'm not sure what kind of numbers you expect me to provide.  I canF only tell you that my group does consulting for everything west of theD East cost states, and we've done SAN implementations in Windows-only= environments.  I'm not saying that the business have no othery: computing platforms in all cases, but that we've done many Windows-only environments.  ? What this tells me is that you can't look at some number of SANiB implementations and say that it doesn't include the Windows serverE business.  Note, too, that to many folks the high-end Windows serversU  are considered enterprise class.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:25:04 -0400a  From: John Santos <JOHN@egh.com>% Subject: Re: CSA [was LPs on the Web] 6 Message-ID: <1010727150831.16443A-100000@Ives.egh.com>  2 On Fri, 27 Jul 2001 system@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:  ^ > In article <3B60A9A0.28541.10D0D76A@localhost>, "Stanley F. Quayle" <stan@stanq.com> writes:. > >On 26 Jul 2001, at 3:01, John Santos wrote:L > >> Hmmm.  If you are eligible and can join CSA (~$100-$150/year), then youJ > >> can get the VMS and/or Tru64 CD distributions (LP+DOCs 4 times a yearK > >> plus current O/S kit + any new O/S releases) for about $500/year.  Sayt1 > >> one VMS kit + 4 LP kits for about $100 each.  > >a> > >Actually, joining CSA is $600 per year.  Assuming that the I > >distribution subscriptions are $500 per year for CSA members, joining ] > >would make sense. > >HH > >Unfortunately, I've received no response to my email to Compaq about D > >the cost of the distribution subscriptions for CSA members, so I  > >don't know if I should join.0 > F > John may have been wrong about the yearly fee for CSA membership butC > the fee for the SDK is about $500/year ($495/year to be precise).<  C I probably was wrong about the annual fee.  The last time I saw thecD paper work about ASAP/CSA renewal was about 3 years ago, and someoneD mentioned it had gone up.  We renew again in about 2 months, so I'llB try to find out the current cost at that time, unless someone else posts the current figures now.  @ In either case, $150 or $600, I don't think that will affect our@ decision to renew.  We're not a big company (~25 employees), but? this is small change to us.  Maybe for a 1 or 2 person shop, itb# would be, but even then I doubt it.r   > --Q > VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMt
 >             L >   "And of course, I'm a genius, so people are naturally drawn to my fiery K >   intellect.  Their admiration overwhelms their envy!" -- Calvin & Hobbesa  D Where is Bill Watterson when we need him?  I blame Garry Trudeau forA starting this slippery slope that cartoonists are allowed to taket: extended vacations and then retire when they feel like it.   -- i John Santoso Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Jul 2001 13:11:30 -0700% From: stan@lsua.edu (Stanley Hippler)-  Subject: FastCGI support in CSWS= Message-ID: <782cd74d.0107271211.5be6816a@posting.google.com>u  C I want to use FastCGI with the latest release of CSWS.  Does anyonen> have this working and would be willing to share installion and configuration notes?  C It seems that having a downloadable version of CSWS + SSL + FastCGI F might be worthwhile in addition to the CSWS + SSL currently available.   Thanks in advance.   --stan   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:24:44 GMTc From: Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl>' Subject: Re: firmware for SCSI disks ??o' Message-ID: <3B61BFFC.4F7E927D@home.nl>h  K I got the version numbers wrong. They are DS-RZ1EF-VW on the container, andm? the actual disks show up as RZ1EF-CB and RZ2EA-AL on the HSZ70.    Dirk Munk wrote:  I > Can anyone give me a URL where to find firmware for Digital/Compaq SCSIS
 > disks ?. >iJ > I am building new raid sets etc. and would like to have all disks at the > same firmware level. >aI > I noticed that there are 2 versions of the DS-RZ1EA-VW 18.2 GB/7200 rpmuJ > drives. The HSZ raid controller tells me that one type is RZ1... and the< > other is a RZ2EL version. The RZ2 is much faster it seems. > 3 > Has anyone more information about both versions ?e >s
 > Regards, >d > Dirk   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:37:08 -0400t9 From: "D.B. Turner, islandco.com" <dbturner@islandco.com>t' Subject: Re: firmware for SCSI disks ??e/ Message-ID: <tm45cp4du855ea@news.supernews.com>o   These are NOT the same drivese  H The RZ1EF-CB is the DS-RZ1EF-VW - an IBM 1.6" Drive (IBM DGHS 18Y) Ultra Wide  H The RZ2EL-AL is a Low profile Fujitsu/Seagate disk and is Ultra2 (LVD) - obviously a much newer drive  H You cannot match the firmware - the best thing to do is find a VERY niceF Dealer (like ourselves) who might swap one type of drive for the otherG The DS-RZ1EA-VW are actually  a "tad"cheaper than the DS-RZ1EF-VW's FYIS  , So we may be interested in helping you out !   Davidy   -- David Turner   We sell Alpha's & Alpha Partsh http://www.islandco.comr sales@islandco.com Island Computers US Corp.t 2700 Gregory Streeto Savannah GA 31404t Tel: 912 447 6622f Fax: 912 201 0096t  K Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> wrote in message news:3B61BFFC.4F7E927D@home.nl...rI > I got the version numbers wrong. They are DS-RZ1EF-VW on the container,d andaA > the actual disks show up as RZ1EF-CB and RZ2EA-AL on the HSZ70.g >A > Dirk Munk wrote: > K > > Can anyone give me a URL where to find firmware for Digital/Compaq SCSIs > > disks ?. > >aL > > I am building new raid sets etc. and would like to have all disks at the > > same firmware level. > > K > > I noticed that there are 2 versions of the DS-RZ1EA-VW 18.2 GB/7200 rpmwL > > drives. The HSZ raid controller tells me that one type is RZ1... and the> > > other is a RZ2EL version. The RZ2 is much faster it seems. > >d5 > > Has anyone more information about both versions ?f > >R > > Regards, > >  > > Dirk >i   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 11:45:06 +0800n" From: "Kenneth" <best@hotmail.com>' Subject: hardware or software mirroringa0 Message-ID: <9jtci0$abo7@imsp212.netvigator.com>  L I am now using software mirroring and want to study the gain for changing to@ controller base mirroring. When I check the usage of the processJ SHADOW_SERVER, it only use very little CPU and IO, is there anything I can? check for the system overhead for using the software mirroring?s   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:32:53 GMTt2 From: "frank brown" <frank.brown@ci.seattle.wa.us>6 Subject: Re: how to write sys$output without linefeed?/ Message-ID: <96l87.4$CE4.867@news-west.eli.net>o  $ That is awesome JF Mezei, thank you! -Frank  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message% news:3B61A45F.7372930@videotron.ca...i >m( > Reverse line feed is your friend here. > % > $ENDLINE == ESC + "7" + ESC + "[1A"o > $STARTLINE == ESC + "8"o >a' > $WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "Hello how",ENDLINEd( > $WRITE SYS$OUTPUT STARTLINE," are you" >c >fK > Endline saves the cursor position (ESC 7) and then moves cursor up 1 line  (CSI > 1 A )sK > Startline restores the cursor position to where the cursor was when ESC 7e
 was received.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:34:44 -0400-- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>7C Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS):, Message-ID: <3B61B43C.69F050FF@videotron.ca>   Fred Kleinsorge wrote:M > Why does it have to know *anything* about NT.  FAT is simple-stupid, and inpB > itself is not OS specific.  Yes.  EFI knows the FAT file system.  N Does this mean that OSD will live as essentially a large container file inside of a FAT file system ?  @ If so, wouldn't there be some implications with regards to errorL reporting/handling by VMS (ana/error, show error for disk drives often givesF some warning of an impending disk failure), as well as software volume shadowing ?i   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:53:21 -0400C- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>pC Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)d, Message-ID: <3B61B899.148DF9D1@videotron.ca>   Fred Kleinsorge wrote:M > In this particilar case, the SYSLOA for the MV3100 tested for the existanceh! > of a KB, and made the decision.7  M But when I power up the machine and get to the >>> prompt, SYSLOA hasn't been  loaded yet, correct ?n  J So there would he hardware/firmware that checks the position of the littleM hidden switch to decide whether to read/write from a serial port, or to driveoG the video screen and accept input from a directly connected keyboard toeC operate the various commands available at the >>> prompt. Correct ?v  L As I recall, all of the >>> commands are available even if the disk drive is totally empty.  L I was under the impression that the console program was actually stored in aI ROM chip and that the CPU istself had only enough smarts to branch to thesL first instruction in that ROM chip during power-up. The ROM' chip would thenJ provide the smarts needed to display and act on the >>> prompt, and if the6 non-volatile values were so set, poerform an autoboot.  M As a result, it would seem to me that the actual boot logic would be executedSG by code stored in the console ROM and not part of the CPU architectrureiI itself. I.E. whether to fetch the first block of the boot disk, or send atM request over the ethernet etc would be executed by code in the ROM and not in ( the CPU.  Is that a correct assumption ?  L Or has Intel decided to embed the console ROM into the actual CPU chip ? (If+ so, what would be the advantage of this ?).o   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:00:03 -0400w- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>mC Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)a, Message-ID: <3B61BA2A.1D56B98F@videotron.ca>   Hoff Hoffman wrote:tF >   to offer commitments on.  USB is the defacto standard interconnectG >   on commodity systems, hence that may well be the default managementi3 >   interconnect on various new hardware platforms.o    J But "commodity systems" have not had to deal with disaster tolerant setupsN with machines in different buildings controlled from anywhere.  You can "move"G a serial port by plugging it into a terminal server and then access thesN console port from almost anywhere. So you can easily control the system in theO backup site from your primary site using the ethernet that links the two sites.e  A Can you do that with USB ? One would need to develop some sort ofi# terminal-server equivalent for USB.s  N Also bear in mind that USB has a big problem due to the master-slave setup. IfL a PC is a master, it won't esaily connect to a server that also has a master	 USB port.e  L (This has implications all the way down to PDAs which would need a slave USBM port to synchronize to a PC, but would need a master USB port to connect to ar" digital camera or other adult toy.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:09:51 GMT-2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)C Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)j1 Message-ID: <30j87.262$Yx2.3832@news.cpqcorp.net>g  \ In article <3B61B43C.69F050FF@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: :Fred Kleinsorge wrote:rN :> Why does it have to know *anything* about NT.  FAT is simple-stupid, and inC :> itself is not OS specific.  Yes.  EFI knows the FAT file system.e :kO :Does this mean that OSD will live as essentially a large container file insider :of a FAT file system ?y     No.g  A :If so, wouldn't there be some implications with regards to errortM :reporting/handling by VMS (ana/error, show error for disk drives often givesfG :some warning of an impending disk failure), as well as software volume  :shadowing ?     No.g   	--5  I   Since this concise an answer will undoubtedly annoy or puzzle someone, aJ   I'll elaborate: ODSx will not exist within FAT32.  In fact, the reverse G   will be true.  The boot block will look different (it'll look like aneF   MBR block), and pointers in the (MBR) boot block will reference someH   disk storage elsewhere on the system disk -- in fact, the system disk H   structure will externally look and work just like it does now.  There H   will probably be a new reserved file on the system disk (just like theG   existing APB.EXE is referenced by LBN from within the boot block; seegL   WRITEBOOT and the IDSM), but the referenced file will contain the "stuff" J   of interest to the console, and the internal format of the file will be I   known to the console.  In fact, the internal format will look just likeLK   FAT32.  Wow.  Cool design, eh?  :-)  (If we work it right, we might even eK   have a way to keep Windows from scribbling its "harmless" signatures ontoa   OpenVMS disks.)l  J   What I'd personally like to see in the more distant future: I'd like to J   see a set of pseudo-device that permits ODSx to exist within a partitionH   on a FAT32 disk.  Will that happen anytime soon?  No.  When that does G   happen, will it mean we have to address incidents of disk errors, of sH   physical disk BACKUPs, of an OpenVMS equivilent of the PC FDISK tool, J   and similar?  Yes.  But call us back later, well after when we have the ;   initial bootstrap of "FAT32 within OpenVMS ODSx" working.    	--      ODSx: ODS2 and ODS5.    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: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:12:59 -0400 5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>oC Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS) 1 Message-ID: <W3j87.263$Yx2.3828@news.cpqcorp.net>s  = JF Mezei wrote in message <3B61A5E1.7F278D44@videotron.ca>...a >Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:>F >> Yes, just as VMS's VMB/APB have (just) enough knowledge of ODS-2 to
 locate the >> secondary bootstrap - >OK >But VMB or APB.EXE are blocks that are read by the console. So the consolerI >doesn't necessarily need to know about a file structure, it just blindly  pickss. >up data from the disk at a specific location. >iC >What Fred seems to be saying is that the console on IA64 will havew
 sufficientL >knowledge of the NT file system to parse file system structures to find the >data it needs to read.a  H Oddly enough, although we don't use it - the SRM console does understand ODS2 as well as FAT.  G Booting VMS on an Alpha today involves the console reading in APB.  APB-G knows enough about ODS2/5 to read in SYSBOOT (the secondary bootstrap).0  L On IPF, APB would be replaced by OS_LOADER in the EFI partition, which wouldB know enough about ODS2/5 to load in SYSBOOT (or it's replacement).   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:17:45 -0400e5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>aC Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)s1 Message-ID: <p8j87.265$Yx2.3718@news.cpqcorp.net>u  = JF Mezei wrote in message <3B61A6FC.3E5DCF3F@videotron.ca>...y >Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:oG >> The per-cputype loadable code (SYSLOADxxx.EXE) contains the code ford consolee >> output, among others. >gF >But by the time SYSLOADxxx.EXE is loaded, the machine isalready a VMS machine,! >it is no longer in console mode.> >oJ >Isn't console mode all of the stuff that exists prior to you entering the BOOTH >command as well as the initial action as a result of the boot command ? >uJ >I realise that console mode probably provides VMS with some basic IO that4 >allows VMS to display the very early boot messages.  I I have no idea what SYSLOADxxx is.  Maybe you mean SYS$CPU_ROUTINES_xxxx.   K During booting, the system executes in the context of the console until theIG end of INIT_IO_DB (after all the execlets are loaded) at which time thew drivers are brought online.t  K It is a more "formal" handoff on IPF, the system calls an Exit Boot routine E to terminate bootstrap services, and formally pass control to the OS.   J Many people confuse the console user interface for being all there is to aI console, where the most important parts of the console are really all thepK things it does to initialize the environment, as well as the loading of the  OS.n   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:24:10 -0400w5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>cC Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)s1 Message-ID: <oej87.267$Yx2.3807@news.cpqcorp.net>o  = JF Mezei wrote in message <3B61B899.148DF9D1@videotron.ca>...d >Fred Kleinsorge wrote:-D >> In this particilar case, the SYSLOA for the MV3100 tested for the	 existanceS" >> of a KB, and made the decision. >[I >But when I power up the machine and get to the >>> prompt, SYSLOA hasn't> been >loaded yet, correct ? >nK >So there would he hardware/firmware that checks the position of the littleaH >hidden switch to decide whether to read/write from a serial port, or to drive H >the video screen and accept input from a directly connected keyboard toD >operate the various commands available at the >>> prompt. Correct ? >      Yes.  J >As I recall, all of the >>> commands are available even if the disk drive is >totally empty.+ >L     Yes.  K >I was under the impression that the console program was actually stored int a J >ROM chip and that the CPU istself had only enough smarts to branch to theH >first instruction in that ROM chip during power-up. The ROM' chip would thenK >provide the smarts needed to display and act on the >>> prompt, and if the 7 >non-volatile values were so set, poerform an autoboot.  >o    B Yes (Sort of.  On Alpha there is a serial ROM that has the code to# uncompress the ROM and jump to it).(  E >As a result, it would seem to me that the actual boot logic would be  executedH >by code stored in the console ROM and not part of the CPU architectrureJ >itself. I.E. whether to fetch the first block of the boot disk, or send aK >request over the ethernet etc would be executed by code in the ROM and nott in) >the CPU.  Is that a correct assumption ?1 >o    I Yes.  But that code doesn't have to do it that way.  And in the IPF case, J that code knows how to not only fetch the first block, but how to find and read a FAT partition structure.   I >Or has Intel decided to embed the console ROM into the actual CPU chip ?A (If1, >so, what would be the advantage of this ?).  
 No.  None.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:29:34 GMTe2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)C Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)e1 Message-ID: <yij87.268$Yx2.3772@news.cpqcorp.net>a  \ In article <3B61A5E1.7F278D44@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: :Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:nQ :> Yes, just as VMS's VMB/APB have (just) enough knowledge of ODS-2 to locate the  :> secondary bootstrap - :7K :But VMB or APB.EXE are blocks that are read by the console. So the console O :doesn't necessarily need to know about a file structure, it just blindly picksa. :up data from the disk at a specific location. :nN :What Fred seems to be saying is that the console on IA64 will have sufficientL :knowledge of the NT file system to parse file system structures to find the :data it needs to read.a  F   For a ROM-based VAX systems, for all Alpha systems, and for the IPF E   systems, the console reads at the boot block on the target device, 4I   uses the data contained within to find the loader, and then the loader s+   then starts to load the operating system.h   	--o  L   VAX: The console program loads and starts, finds and loads the bootblock, H   finds and loads VMB.EXE from data in the bootblock, and VMB.EXE loads    SYSBOOT.EXE, and off we go...L  N   Alpha: The console program loads and starts, finds and loads the bootblock, H   finds and loads APB.EXE from data in the bootblock, and APB.EXE loads    SYSBOOT.EXE, and off we go...e  L   IPF: The console program loads and starts, finds and loads the bootblock, H   finds and loads the supporting code and the bootstrap from data withinL   the bootblock, (possibly then looks for and loads an APB- or VMB-analog,) D   and the primary bootstrap then loads SYSBOOT.EXE, and off we go...  H   Are the bootblock formats the same?  No.  (VAX and Alpha systems shareI   the same bootblock format, IPF will have a different format.)  Are the ?I   contents of the primary bootstrap the same?  No.  (But then APB.EXE is aI   certainly not identical to VMB.EXE, and the IPF analog will definitely  J   differ.)  Are the boot sequence internals the same?  No.  (The existing C   VAX and Alpha boot sequence internals are dissimilar, of course.)e  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: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:35:48 -0400o- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>2C Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)e, Message-ID: <3B61C289.23260469@videotron.ca>   Tom Linden wrote:.N > Who cares, all you need is a small partition to accomplish the bootstrap and > onceJ > completed you don't see it any longer, so you lost a few sectors.  Its a > means, not an end.  N But doesn't that mean that VMS no longer has control over the whole disk driveN ? Would BACKUP/PHYSICAL work on the physical disk drive, or just the partition that VMS lives in ?t  I Would VMS retain full control over error discovery and recovery as it hasS traditionally prefered to do ?  K If you do software volume shadowing, software disk striping etc, would thatrH involved the whole disk drive or just that partition that VMS lives in ?   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:30:40 -0400 5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> C Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)-1 Message-ID: <ukj87.269$Yx2.3767@news.cpqcorp.net>w  F As an FYI.  This thread is useful as a way to let you know that we areK actually making progress in getting a basic understanding of IPF.  In fact,iK today I finally saw an IA64 system, and the EFI boot manager - so I can nowtF say that from what I saw for the menu options (it looks a lot like theJ original ARC console before AlphaBoot) - console IO can be assigned to the
 serial ports.l  E For those of you who are struggling with EFI and bootstrap concepts --  . http://www.pentium.de/technology/efi/index.htm    seems to be the source to go to.  = JF Mezei wrote in message <3B61BA2A.1D56B98F@videotron.ca>...    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:36:54 -0400e5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> C Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)d1 Message-ID: <kqj87.270$Yx2.3813@news.cpqcorp.net>   = JF Mezei wrote in message <3B61C289.23260469@videotron.ca>...  >Tom Linden wrote:K >> Who cares, all you need is a small partition to accomplish the bootstrap  ande >> onceeK >> completed you don't see it any longer, so you lost a few sectors.  Its a0 >> means, not an end.f >eI >But doesn't that mean that VMS no longer has control over the whole diskh driverE >? Would BACKUP/PHYSICAL work on the physical disk drive, or just theo	 partition  >that VMS lives in ? >wJ >Would VMS retain full control over error discovery and recovery as it has >traditionally prefered to do ?i >sL >If you do software volume shadowing, software disk striping etc, would thatI >involved the whole disk drive or just that partition that VMS lives in ?t  K Sigh.  The disk is still a PURE ODS2/5 volume to all VMS software.  VMS hasrK TOTAL control over the whole disk drive.  There will be a FILE on the disk, F that in reality will contain a FAT32 partition, for anything (like theL console) that wants to use the data in the file.  The bootblock, if anythingK OTHER than the console cares about it, will simply be a new format, and BTW ) that format turns out to be a MBR record.>   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 12:52:52 -0700V# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>aC Subject: RE: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)e9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIOEBPDBAA.tom@kednos.com>c  H I would invite you to read the documention on MILO which is used to boot Linux I on ARC-only alpha systems.  From the discussion I have seen from Fred andv HoffJ this appears to be precisely they way it is going to work.  So you have to flay" the feline in a different fashion.   > -----Original Message-----6 > From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca]& > Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 12:36 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com E > Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)s >  >  > Tom Linden wrote: B > > Who cares, all you need is a small partition to accomplish the > bootstrap andl > > onceL > > completed you don't see it any longer, so you lost a few sectors.  Its a > > means, not an end. >,? > But doesn't that mean that VMS no longer has control over theh > whole disk driveB > ? Would BACKUP/PHYSICAL work on the physical disk drive, or just > the partitionc > that VMS lives in ?e >rK > Would VMS retain full control over error discovery and recovery as it hasr  > traditionally prefered to do ? >tB > If you do software volume shadowing, software disk striping etc, > would thatJ > involved the whole disk drive or just that partition that VMS lives in ? >h   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 16:26:15 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>eC Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS):, Message-ID: <3B61CE59.882BF184@videotron.ca>   Fred Kleinsorge wrote:K > Yes.  But that code doesn't have to do it that way.  And in the IPF case,dL > that code knows how to not only fetch the first block, but how to find and! > read a FAT partition structure.a  M It is correct to state that the VMS group has decided to build VMS so that itwL can boot on an IA64 machine that has ROMs that were designed to boot WindowsJ and will have the same configuration "menu" with the same disk drive namesN that are used to configure how a machine will boot windows ? (press F10 or ESCK within a certain number of seconds from power up to bring the configurationh menu) ?t  L Is it correct to state that the BIOS is often under the control/selection ofN the computer maker instead of the chip maker ? If so, couldn't Compaq design aH BIOS that is more sophisticated and supports more functionality than the/ standard BIOS that is expected on wintel junk ?   N How are the Tandem and Tru64 groups handling the boot sequence ? Is there workJ that is common to the 3 groups or do they work independantly of each other. when it comes to interfacing to the hardware ?  N Would it be correct to state that NSK will want to have its own BIOS/CONSOLE ?   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 16:41:17 -0400o- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> C Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS)1, Message-ID: <3B61D1DD.B50BD076@videotron.ca>   Fred Kleinsorge wrote:M > Sigh.  The disk is still a PURE ODS2/5 volume to all VMS software.  VMS has.M > TOTAL control over the whole disk drive.  There will be a FILE on the disk,t1 > that in reality will contain a FAT32 partition,w  K Thanks. I had originally misunderstood that the disk drive would have a FATyI partition that contained an OSD disk drive. But what you're saying is ther	 reverse. r  H Since you'll be having a FAT container file on ODS, will you be re-usingL Pathworks code to let the boot loader find what it needs inside the FAT file :-) ;-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 05:58:40 GMT . From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>C Subject: Re: IPF Console Bootstrap (was: Re: No chance for OpenVMS) D Message-ID: <kws87.2443$bl1.381236@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  @ "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message+ news:eiW77.172$Yx2.3425@news.cpqcorp.net...uK > The same thought has crossed my mind.  But I have not yet seen the UI foroJ > the console, and don't know if there are ways to confine the devices theJ > console looks at for partitions.   Of course, just like the SRM, it will beG > looking to find all the devices anyway (regardless of doing a read of  blockc > 0 from them all).n  F Booting an Alpha from Fibre Channel doesn't size more than the devicesF needed to boot; those are configured using a utility and stored in theK console flash.  Probing 100s or 1000s of partitions would obviously be veryiL painful; just probing and brining on line a couple dozen FC adapters is veryJ painful because the init code does them one by one (doing them in parallelH and then having a hardware error occur would make diagnosing the failing hardware almost impossible).  L So, we have a cluster of Alpha and IA64 systems, and the SRM will be lookingG at block 0 and the EFI will be looking at block 0, so which will it be?      1) a Files-11 bootblock      2) a MBR  K It clear that the people working on this are PC centric and are thinking in"I terms of big systems being maybe 10 disks or something.  Hey, by the time K "big" systems are deployed, 10 disks will be 2 terabytes or more and no one- would need more than that.  L I remember when years ago we first had discussion of device naming for FibreI Channel disks.  The position taken was that everything would use WWID forfL device naming.  My response was, there is no reasonable way to make a 48 bitK WWID manageble, and the response was, oh, storage management software would K take care of it.  I responded, NFW - add a console or controller command toNJ write a device name into a code page.  No way, we'll hash the WWID to a 10H bit 4 digit number.   So, for years that was the discussion.  FC shippedL with the ability to set the unit number for VMS.  Tru64 configured and names6 the disks based on algorithms that are not documented.  J My point is that hardware engineers and many system architects hand wave aJ lot of issues with words like "management software will solve the problem"G without facing the fact that management software is hard to develop andsI therefore expensive to develop and because it sells in low volume ends upeJ being so expensive even for crappy management software, that only managersL who don't do any really hands on use of systems buy the crap.  Case in point is SWCC and the SAN applicance.A  L It is really necessary to face the fact that PC folk don't have a clue aboutK enterprise issues and someone has to tell them that they are f**king idiotsn& and make them understand the problems.  K Of course, there are so many areas where these guys are clueless.  Consider L the case of the 144 and 288 gig drives.  What are they good for.  For a highF performance server with 10 terabytes the requirements for I/O rate andC thruput probably dictates the need for 1000 drives across 10-100 FCVK adapters.  (100 adpaters is maybe 20 adapters on each of 5 cluster members)    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:24:18 GMT>4 From: LESLIE@209-16-45-102.insync.net (Jerry Leslie)Y Subject: Re: Ken Olsen (and DEC History), was: Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS Ms) Message-ID: <6_k87.5394$%L5.75914@insync>n  1 Frank da Cruz (fdc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu) wrote:n) : In article <9jpcjt$6h5$1@joe.rice.edu>,r, : Jerry Leslie <leslie@clio.rice.edu> wrote:5 : : Frank da Cruz (fdc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu) wrote:  : : :rE : : : ...I actually like the (real IBM) PC keyboard a lot better than G : : : the DEC ones, at least after I've swapped the Ctrl and Caps Lock aE : : : (and Esc and Grave) keys.  Unfortunately they don't make these i@ : : : keyboards any more, so if you've got 'em, hang on to them! : : I : : The Northgate keyboards are still available as Avant Prime keyboards, " : : from www.innovativeoffice.com. : :  : : Specs are available at:m : : I : :   http://www.northgate.com/products/keyboards_mouse/avant_stellar.htmc : : I : : These weigh 5 lbs, so will stay put, as well as larting (l)users  :-)lI : : who want elevated privileges but can't explain why.               :-)r : : G : Yes, I know, I have several of them.  They would be perfect (true IBMaC : look, feel, and weight PLUS programmable keyboard so you can swap J : Ctrl/Caps-Lock and anything else you want *in the keyboard*, independentL : of the OS) BUT...  they ruined it by messing by fattening the Return/EnterH : key, thus leaving not enough room for all ASCII characters on the mainG : keypad -- one of them is out beyond right shift.  Not great for touch L : typists.  Plus whenever you go to type backslash you find yourself hittingH : return, which is also pretty poor human engineeing -- if you're at theN : shell or command prompt, that makes something happen that you didn't intend. : J : Aside from this little flaw, which makes them useless for touch typists, : they are wonderful.r : G Ack !! I just compared the pictures to the the layout on the (original)tC Northgate Omni 102, which is still plugged into the AT&T 6300 here.m  4 The old Northgate is nothing like what you describe.  D The function keys are two columns on the left side of the main keys.  ( Another product "improved" too much. :-(   ------------------------------   Date: 27 Jul 2001 21:41:01 GMT0 From: fdc@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Frank da Cruz)Y Subject: Re: Ken Olsen (and DEC History), was: Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS Mr5 Message-ID: <9jsn5d$gl8$1@newsmaster.cc.columbia.edu>d  ) In article <6_k87.5394$%L5.75914@insync>,i5 Jerry Leslie <LESLIE@209-16-45-102.insync.net> wrote:u : : ... L : : Aside from this little flaw, which makes them useless for touch typists, : : they are wonderful.  : : I : Ack !! I just compared the pictures to the the layout on the (original) E : Northgate Omni 102, which is still plugged into the AT&T 6300 here.a : 6 : The old Northgate is nothing like what you describe. : F : The function keys are two columns on the left side of the main keys. : * : Another product "improved" too much. :-( :hJ Yes, I've been looking for the perfect keyboard ever since I can remember,G and thought I had finally found it.  But no, every keyboard has a fatal 0 flaw.  From history, the ones I liked best were:  B  . The Concept-100.  Every key in the right place, and if I recallF    correctly, pretty good feel too, but it's been a long time.  Anyway1    the flaw here is that they are loooooong gone.-  @  . The *original* NeXT keyboard also have every key in the right?    place.  But not much in the way of tactile feedback.  And of(@    course they quickly ruined the layout in exactly the way that?    Avanti did -- the politically correct fat Return key pushing,9    backslash off the main keypad.  On a UNIX workstation!r  H The IBM 101 is perfect in every way except the placement of the Ctrl andH Esc keys, plus maybe they could have fit the tilde/grave key on the mainG keypad if they had not made the Backspace key so wide (I suppose for VTaG emulation it could also use more F keys but that's not a personal issueaH for me).  Of course it can be remapped on a per-OS basis, but why botherG if you don't have to?  (I have a PC where I can boot about 30 OS's, andl@ figuring out to how to remap it in each is really not worth it.)  @ Some people like the "Happy Hacking" keyboard, but not me.  It'sE insubstantial, mushy, and they too put backslash (AND Delete!) in theh wrong place.   - Franks   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 23:46:18 +0100n1 From: Steve Reece <SYSTEM@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk> Y Subject: Re: Ken Olsen (and DEC History), was: Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS Md5 Message-ID: <3B61FD4A.A59479E@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk>   G Although I fundamentally agree with Frank, a few there are a few thingsdE that PC mail packages have managed to get right that VMS mail in bothm; its command line and DECW interfaces could be improved in :d@ - maintaining an address book rather than relying upon logicals,= distribution files, remembering addresses or doing REPLYs to;cC - being able to do a REPLY/ALL/EDIT/EXTRACT to reply to a number ofe- people at once without typing their names in.    Steve.     Frank da Cruz wrote:L > Some of us use our Windows PCs primarily as VT terminal emulators and readM > all our email on Unix or VMS.  If you restrict Windows to this kind of workfM > (and maybe running a cautiously configured Web browser, but never, *never*, J > NEVER even *think* about using PC-based e-mail), it actually has several& > advantages over actual VT terminals: > J >  . You can have lots of terminals at once, especially with a big screen. >  . Color.e >  . Copy & paste. >  . Configurable keys.- > L > etc etc, plus I actually like the (real IBM) PC keyboard a lot better thanK > the DEC ones, at least after I've swapped the Ctrl and Caps Lock (and Esc-K > and Grave) keys.  Unfortunately they don't make these keyboards any more,f( > so if you've got 'em, hang on to them! > 	 > - Franka   -- cG "A shadow fell over her face; clear, as if the composure were rent like E a veil.  And her lips parted, but only with a short intake of breath.FA Then she said, 'Well, then you are right.  Indeed, we are even.'"3% 		Louis, "Interview with the Vampire"i   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 04:04:12 GMTh- From: goathunter@goatley.com (Hunter Goatley)'Y Subject: Re: Ken Olsen (and DEC History), was: Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS M 1 Message-ID: <3b623966.200126907@news.process.com>h  O On Fri, 27 Jul 2001 23:46:18 +0100, Steve Reece <SYSTEM@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk>e wrote:  H >Although I fundamentally agree with Frank, a few there are a few thingsF >that PC mail packages have managed to get right that VMS mail in both< >its command line and DECW interfaces could be improved in :A >- maintaining an address book rather than relying upon logicals, > >distribution files, remembering addresses or doing REPLYs to;D >- being able to do a REPLY/ALL/EDIT/EXTRACT to reply to a number of. >people at once without typing their names in.  E PMDF MAIL is what VMS Mail should have evolved to.  These things, andoG full MIME support and lots more, are provided by PMDF MAIL on VMS.  Anda) it's completely compatible with VMS Mail.n  M Note: I work on PMDF now, so I suppose this post could be seen as biased. ;-)n   Hunter ------9 Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ 9 goathunter@goatley.com     http://www.goatley.com/hunter/r   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 05:19:07 GMTh. From: "mulp" <michaelpettengill@earthlink.net>Y Subject: Re: Ken Olsen (and DEC History), was: Re: Escape sequences not filtered in VMS MeD Message-ID: <fXr87.2377$bl1.368974@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  > "Steve Reece" <SYSTEM@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk> wrote in message/ news:3B61FD4A.A59479E@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk...oI > Although I fundamentally agree with Frank, a few there are a few thingsnG > that PC mail packages have managed to get right that VMS mail in bothF= > its command line and DECW interfaces could be improved in :TB > - maintaining an address book rather than relying upon logicals,? > distribution files, remembering addresses or doing REPLYs to;tE > - being able to do a REPLY/ALL/EDIT/EXTRACT to reply to a number ofn/ > people at once without typing their names in.n  3 Well, there is VMS mail and then there is VMS mail.B  K The VMS mail included with VMS was a simple program put together along with L PHONE and a simple version of NOTES to mimic what the author found useful onK th U of I system that worked on in school.  There were people who wanted tooH enhance it in all sorts of ways, but the issue was how to afford to do a reasonable job.u  H Especially given that there was a group developing mail products for VMSJ with gateways and so on for a real production mail system.  In the mind ofL VMS engineers, these mail products were equated with all-in-1 which providedH a tailored "gui" interface before the IBM PC existed.  Few people in VMSD understood what all-in-1 was, a framework for providing a customizedK environment for non-computer users in an office environment, and obviously,b  mail was a critical application.  ' There were the mail transport products.1  L Then there was the mail user agent and support infrastructure including file2 cabinets, corporate wide address books, and so on.  G Basically, if you look at M$ mail products, that's what DEC offered, in E competition with IBM, HP, and a number of others, when Bill Gates was ! working on his Basic interpreter.   H Including the MAIL program in VMS was, in hindsight, an error.  If thereI hadn't been anything supplied by VMS, either users would have developed a L standard package that was more general, or user pressure would have resultedG in enterprise mail striped down to an inexpensive light weight version..  J My recommendation to the UCX folk, (I was a founding member of the group),I was to not do any mail support.  Instead, go to the DEC mail folk and getiL them to bundle in a restricted version.  But no, a kludge was done that usedI VMS MAIL and so the long history of kludge upon kludge followed.  Later I,F learned of PMDF and I argued that for TCPIP, they should contract withK Innosoft for a PMDF Lite that could be easily upgraded to a full functional L enterprise version.  With PMDF would come integrated support for things likeE MIME.  Obviously that didn't happen.  (A standard contract would havefJ specified that if Innosoft was bought by a competitor, the source code andB rights would transfer to Compaq which would have allowed even more
 flexibility.)    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 22:53:48 -050001 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>@ Subject: Re: LPs on the WebI' Message-ID: <3B62374C.345D9C5A@fsi.net>f   Larry Kilgallen wrote: > ] > In article <3B60D49B.300085F7@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:o > > John Santos wrote: > L > >> Hmmm.  If you are eligible and can join CSA (~$100-$150/year), then youJ > >> can get the VMS and/or Tru64 CD distributions (LP+DOCs 4 times a yearF > >> plus current O/S kit + any new O/S releases) for about $500/year. > >nK > > Now, if there were a parallel to that for end-users - so the people whonH > > might buy any software CSAs develop can afford the platform that the > > software runs on...t > >oI > > Oops! Sorry - I keep forgetting that I'm only person in the world who  > > understands that...  > > ( > > ...other than Bill Gates, that is... > H > The Bill Gates I know is for Microsoft, and their package for non-ISVsJ > costs $2000 per year, whereas approved ISVs pay Microsoft $500 per year.  = Indeed - rather opposite to OpenVMS's end-user and ISV lands.x  B M$ rapes the (non-"approved") developers, OVMS rapes the end-user, "approved" or not.  D Current estimates are that there are 450,000 or so surviving OpenVMSG machines in the world (which count is now dropping at rates not seen inoG years). The M$-powered machine count is somewhere in the multiple 100'sE of millions.  F Given those figures and the compared wealth of the company principals,. I'd say the models work rather differently...   $ ...but as always, YMMV considerably.   -- f David J. Dachterag dba DJE Systems5 http://www.djesys.com/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/M  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.i   ------------------------------   Date: 27 JUL 2001 18:19:35 GMT+ From: Dave Greenwood <greenwoodde@ornl.gov> + Subject: Re: Min Mem on a  DEC 3300 for VMSe2 Message-ID: <27JUL01.18193590@feda01.fed.ornl.gov>  O In a previous article, "Dijk, Jeroen van" <Jeroen.vanDijk@Getronics.com> wrote:89 > What is the minimum memory for VMS at a DECserver 3300?u7 > I try it with 16 Mb, but that clearly was too little.O: > What OS can I run on DECserver 3300 with 16 Mb memory?   >  aB > Before I'm going to buy the expensive and rare 64 Mb memory sets4 > I want to know that the minimum Memory for VMS is. >   < > Please help me so I can boot my DEC server with a real OS.  5 Assuming that you really mean a DEC Alpha 3000-300...e  B I had 64MB on my 3400 and got tired of waiting for it to page whenE using Netscape.  I *think* VMS claims a minimum of 32Mb but of coursee you can try what you want.  C Kingston is advertising 64Mb for $171 on their web page.  Camintonn B also adverses 32Mb (although I don't know their price).  I presume; other vendors have new/used DEC/3rd-party memory available.    Dave --------------9 Dave Greenwood                Email: Greenwoodde@ORNL.GOV H Oak Ridge National Lab        %STD-W-DISCLAIMER, I only speak for myself   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:50:21 -0400h2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)+ Subject: Re: Min Mem on a  DEC 3300 for VMSoL Message-ID: <rdeininger-2707011550220001@user-2ivebrg.dialup.mindspring.com>  A In article <27JUL01.18193590@feda01.fed.ornl.gov>, Dave Greenwood  <greenwoodde@ornl.gov> wrote:   J > In a previous article, "Dijk, Jeroen van" <Jeroen.vanDijk@Getronics.com> wrote:; > > What is the minimum memory for VMS at a DECserver 3300?g9 > > I try it with 16 Mb, but that clearly was too little.w< > > What OS can I run on DECserver 3300 with 16 Mb memory?   > >   D > > Before I'm going to buy the expensive and rare 64 Mb memory sets6 > > I want to know that the minimum Memory for VMS is. > >  w> > > Please help me so I can boot my DEC server with a real OS. > 7 > Assuming that you really mean a DEC Alpha 3000-300...p > D > I had 64MB on my 3400 and got tired of waiting for it to page whenG > using Netscape.  I *think* VMS claims a minimum of 32Mb but of course  > you can try what you want. > E > Kingston is advertising 64Mb for $171 on their web page.  CamintonndD > also adverses 32Mb (although I don't know their price).  I presume= > other vendors have new/used DEC/3rd-party memory available.h    E For a 3000-300 (if that's what he really meant), we bought 64 MB fromeC clearpoint for around $80 several months ago.  Used, and presumablyo subject to availability.   -- i Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.come   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:54:08 -0400l- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>eH Subject: Re: Now we're cooking with gas. (was:  Wailing and moaning....), Message-ID: <3B61C6D4.A593328A@videotron.ca>   Fred Kleinsorge wrote:N > Some prime areas that we plan to keep working on are performance (especiallyJ > IO), UNIX compatabilty/standards, management tools, and the file system.  I At this point in time, i would rather see the VMS engineers port DCL as aeN shell for Linux or TRU64 as well as port the remainder of the clustering stuff	 to Tru64.   J Ideally, VMS should be merged with Tandem's NSK. It lacks good interactive shell which VMS could give it.  & And I'd love to have TPU run on a MAC.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:16:17 GMT   From: jlsue <jlsuexxxz@home.com>H Subject: Re: Now we're cooking with gas. (was:  Wailing and moaning....)8 Message-ID: <dq34mtg7itk7bflmfc6d81i4vhlp5plrci@4ax.com>  , On Fri, 27 Jul 2001 02:19:57 -0400, JF Mezei% <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:i  
 >jlsue wrote:-I >> This viewpoint assumes, of course, that Compaq is free to discuss this.H >> openly.  There are other parties involved in this deal besides CompaqD >> who may have reasons to keep some information closer to the vest. >dF >Had Compaq had its customers big and small as a priority, the deal itM >negotiated with Intel and others would have allowed Compaq to inform all itsdJ >customers. If third parties have forced Compaq to negotiate NDAs with theL >customers it wants to keep, it means that Compaq discussed this and thoughtI >that it is only necessary to NDA the largest customers and didn't bothers/ >negotiating for the rest of the customer base.    Time will tell, I suppose.   >  >tH >> Um... with the cost of Alpha systems, I kinda thought we were keeping/ >> the smaller customers out of the VMS market.a >a >nN >There are plenty of "legacy" customers on VMS. Plenty who still have some VAXM >or ALpha systems that are in maintenance mode with no new applications goingcM >to VMS and waiting for the right time to get the budgets to migrate to Unix.a > O >Given the right signals and public commitment by Compaq, those customers mighttM >re-activate their involvement in VMS and start to spend on their VMS systemstM >again. But the continued ignorance by Compaq of these customers only ensuresnL >that they do eventually go to a system that is actively pushed by a vendor.  @ And I certainly hope that lower-cost IA64 systems running VMS in! VMSclusters will help that along.n   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Jul 2001 11:34:54 -0700) From: linuxmtl@yahoo.com (Moi Je Le Sais) 3 Subject: OPCOM messages sent outside the local nodes= Message-ID: <80125384.0107271034.7b8e78c0@posting.google.com>    Hi,d  B I'am wondering if I can send all OPCOM messages be sent to another- node on the network via any tcp/ip services ;e  # Example: Can I use snmp to to this?   <          Is is possible to send the messages through e-mail?   Regards,   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:14:04 GMT-2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)7 Subject: Re: OPCOM messages sent outside the local nodec1 Message-ID: <04j87.264$Yx2.3626@news.cpqcorp.net>   i In article <80125384.0107271034.7b8e78c0@posting.google.com>, linuxmtl@yahoo.com (Moi Je Le Sais) writes:.  = : Is is possible to send the [opcom] messages through e-mail?n  ,   Yes, but you'll have some code to write.    @   You'll need to trap the terminal broadcasts, enable a terminalC   (often a pseudo terminal) as an operator, and then send the text lC   of the broadcasts along to the target email address via callable dA   MAIL.  This would involve some application coding, but nothing     particularly difficult.h  C   Given the potentially high frequency of messages sent via OPCOM,  C   it might be easier and safer to recreate the OPERATOR.LOG at somegB   specified interval (eg: daily) and then send the contents of theB   old OPERATOR.LOG to the target user.  (This would be trivial to 
   implement.)e    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: 27 Jul 2001 13:56:00 -0700& From: xteruel@nbhd.org (Xavier Teruel)! Subject: Oracle file size and VMSt= Message-ID: <c31be8b3.0107271256.7ade9b5b@posting.google.com>w  D I udnerstand that there is a limitation of a 4GB file size in OracleF DUE to a VMS limitation with some STAT() function. Does anyone know if9 this is being resolved? And in what version/patch of VMS?c  	 Thanks...    ------------------------------    Date: 27 Jul 2001 17:07:57 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)p% Subject: Re: Oracle file size and VMSf3 Message-ID: <6LA$Y$mFf2AB@eisner.encompasserve.org>o  f In article <c31be8b3.0107271256.7ade9b5b@posting.google.com>, xteruel@nbhd.org (Xavier Teruel) writes:F > I udnerstand that there is a limitation of a 4GB file size in OracleH > DUE to a VMS limitation with some STAT() function. Does anyone know if; > this is being resolved? And in what version/patch of VMS?6  B Since it contains no dollar sign, I think that STAT function would) be part of C or the CRTL, not VMS proper.:  F Of course if Oracle really wanted to, they could use the native calls.6 The description sounds like they are making an excuse.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:36:58 GMTn2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)% Subject: Re: Oracle file size and VMSr1 Message-ID: <_9l87.278$Yx2.3902@news.cpqcorp.net>a  f In article <c31be8b3.0107271256.7ade9b5b@posting.google.com>, xteruel@nbhd.org (Xavier Teruel) writes:E :I udnerstand that there is a limitation of a 4GB file size in OracletG :DUE to a VMS limitation with some STAT() function. Does anyone know ifo: :this is being resolved? And in what version/patch of VMS?  E   The OpenVMS version of the C stat() call presently uses a longword s   for off_t.    H   AFAIK, there is no general version of stat() presently available that    offers a quadword-size off_t.i  J   The C code to calculate a stat-like quadword-sized off_t stat using RMS F   calls is readily available.  The core of the C code looks like this:  
   FileSize =  K     (((unsigned __int64) xabfhc->xab$l_ebk - 1) * 512) + xabfhc->xab$w_ffb;   ,   I'll pass the request along to the C team.  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:19:13 +0200,, From: "Gnter Gratzer" <guenter.g@utanet.at> Subject: Problem with TZL10i0 Message-ID: <996260714.17182@hagakure.utanet.at>   Hi,eK I want to use Sony 125P DDS-3 Tapes on my TLZ10 drive. If I use a brand newy# tape and use the following commandsi! $ INIT/MEDIA=COMPACT MKA500: TESTo! $ MOUNT/FOR/media=compact mka500:3= $ backup/media=compact/ignor=label dka100:[000000...] mka500:4
 and look withv ABF008/81> show dev mka500/fulla  D Magtape ABF008$MKA500:, device type DEC TLZ10, is online, allocated,
 deallocateG     on dismount, mounted foreign, record-oriented device, file-oriented  device,sL     error logging is enabled, device is busy, controller supports compaction3     (compaction enabled), device supports fastskip.r  <     Error count                    0    Operations completed 4883477o1     Owner process          "_FTA30:"    Owner UICf [GUENTHEA,GUENTERG]h0     Owner process ID        204004BB    Dev Prot S:RWPL,O:RWPL,G:R,Wo;     Reference count                4    Default buffer size, 512p  ;     Volume label            "TEST  "    Relative volume no.w 0 9     Record size                    0    Transaction counto 1c3     Mount status             Process    Mount countr 1a$     ACP process name              "".     Density                     DDS2    Format	 Normal-11o     Volume status:  odd parity.-  : it shows Density DDS2! What must I do to use DDS3 density?  $ The following Patches are installed:G DEC AXPVMS ODL V2.1                 Platform    Install     10-JUL-2001t 15:16:13G DEC AXPVMS VMS721_ACRTL V3.0        Patch       Install     06-JUL-2001> 15:16:50G DEC AXPVMS VMS721_SYS V10.0         Patch       Install     03-JUL-20015 08:50:52G DEC AXPVMS VMS721_RMS V2.0          Patch       Install     03-JUL-2001w 08:49:24G DEC AXPVMS VMS721_LIBRTL V3.0       Patch       Install     03-JUL-2001S 08:47:50G DEC AXPVMS VMS721_UPDATE V3.0       Patch       Install     03-JUL-2001  08:45:34G DEC AXPVMS TCPIP_ECO V5.0-113       Patch       Install     02-JUL-2001s 20:38:43G DEC AXPVMS VMS721_ACRTL V2.0        Patch       Install     02-JUL-2001/ 20:36:13G DEC AXPVMS DCOM V1.1-B              Full LP     Install     02-JUL-2001  19:31:18G DEC AXPVMS ODL V2.1                 Platform    Install     11-APR-2001h 08:47:08G COMPAQ AXPVMS DENT V2.0             Full LP     Install     07-MAR-2001O 10:42:10G DEC AXPVMS VMS721_IPC V1.0          Patch       Install     15-JAN-2001h 17:36:26G DEC AXPVMS VMS721_DQCONFIG V2.0     Patch       Install     15-JAN-2001s 17:35:52G DEC AXPVMS VMS721_DRIVER V1.0       Patch       Install     15-JAN-2001  17:35:11G DEC AXPVMS VMS721_BACKUP V1.0       Patch       Install     15-JAN-2001o 17:21:22G DEC AXPVMS VMS721_MOUNT96 V2.0      Patch       Install     15-JAN-2001h 17:14:11G DEC AXPVMS VMS721_PCSI V1.0         Patch       Install     15-JAN-2001w 17:10:29G DEC AXPVMS ODL V2.1                 Platform    Install     20-NOV-2000d 19:09:07G DEC AXPVMS VMS721_UPDATE V1.0       Patch       Install     22-AUG-2000l 11:07:24G DEC AXPVMS DECNET_OSI V7.2-1        Full LP     Install     27-JUL-2000e 19:23:49G DEC AXPVMS DWMOTIF V1.2-5           Full LP     Install     27-JUL-2000p 19:23:49G DEC AXPVMS OPENVMS V7.2-1           Platform    Install     27-JUL-2000  19:23:49G DEC AXPVMS VMS V7.2-1               Oper System Install     27-JUL-2000n 19:23:49G DEC AXPVMS DECNET_OSI V7.1          Full LP     Remove      27-JUL-2000i 19:23:49G DEC AXPVMS DNVOSIECO02 V7.1         Patch       Remove      27-JUL-2000  19:23:49G DEC AXPVMS DWMOTIF V1.2-4           Full LP     Remove      27-JUL-2000e 19:23:49G DEC AXPVMS OPENVMS V7.1             Platform    Remove      27-JUL-2000i 19:23:49G DEC AXPVMS VMS V7.1                 Oper System Remove      27-JUL-2000  19:23:49G DEC AXPVMS TCPIP V5.0-11            Full LP     Install     04-JUL-2000n 16:04:15G DEC AXPVMS TCPIP V5.0-9             Full LP     Remove      04-JUL-2000d 16:04:15G DEC AXPVMS ODL V2.1                 Platform    Install     04-JUL-2000e 08:47:57G DEC AXPVMS ODL V2.1                 Platform    Install     20-JAN-2000D 17:42:29G DEC AXPVMS FORRTL V7.2-1            Full LP     Install     07-DEC-1999t 14:27:59G DEC AXPVMS FORTRAN V7.2-1           Full LP     Install     07-DEC-1999h 14:27:59G DEC AXPVMS DCE V1.5                 Full LP     Install     04-OCT-1999a 11:37:04G DEC AXPVMS ODL V2.1                 Platform    Install     07-MAY-1999a 08:11:13G DEC AXPVMS DCE V1.5                 Full LP     Install     19-APR-1999  16:40:27G DEC AXPVMS TCPIP V5.0-9             Full LP     Install     19-APR-1999c 16:18:21G DEC AXPVMS UCX V4.2-21              Full LP     Remove      19-APR-1999  16:15:08G DEC AXPVMS UCXECO_42_1 V1.0         Patch       Remove      19-APR-1999o 16:15:08G DEC AXPVMS BNU V2.1                 Full LP     Install     08-APR-1999  13:22:19G DEC AXPVMS ODL V2.1                 Platform    Install     08-APR-1999d 13:22:19G DEC AXPVMS BNU V1.9                 Full LP     Remove      08-APR-1999s 13:22:19G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.9                 Platform    Remove      08-APR-1999s 13:22:19G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.9                 Platform    Install     08-APR-1999a 13:12:38G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.9                 Platform    Install     08-APR-1999  13:05:41G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.9                 Platform    Install     08-APR-1999r 13:02:09G DEC AXPVMS BNU V1.9                 Full LP     Install     17-DEC-1998i 16:31:58G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.9                 Platform    Install     17-DEC-1998  16:31:58G DEC AXPVMS BNU V1.8                 Full LP     Remove      17-DEC-1998  16:31:58G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.8                 Platform    Remove      17-DEC-1998o 16:31:58G DEC AXPVMS DNVOSIECO02 V7.1         Patch       Install     24-SEP-1998s 06:56:13G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.8                 Platform    Install     07-SEP-1998w 13:07:47G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.8                 Platform    Install     14-AUG-1998  12:45:37G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.8                 Platform    Install     14-AUG-1998  11:13:04G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.8                 Platform    Install     14-AUG-1998c 11:11:51G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.8                 Platform    Install     14-AUG-1998o 11:10:39G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.8                 Platform    Install     14-AUG-1998S 11:09:31G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.8                 Platform    Install     14-AUG-1998  11:02:20G DEC AXPVMS BNU V1.8                 Full LP     Install     14-AUG-1998i 10:46:48G DEC AXPVMS HYPERHELP V5.1-2         Full LP     Install     14-AUG-1998- 10:46:48G DEC AXPVMS NS_NAV_EXPORT V3.0-3     Full LP     Install     14-AUG-1998o 10:46:48G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.8                 Platform    Install     14-AUG-19981 10:46:48G DEC AXPVMS BNU V1.0                 Full LP     Remove      14-AUG-1998a 10:46:48G DEC AXPVMS NS_NAV_EXPORT V2.0-21    Full LP     Remove      14-AUG-19983 10:46:48G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.0                 Platform    Remove      14-AUG-1998  10:46:48G DEC AXPVMS UCXECO_42_1 V1.0         Patch       Install     20-MAY-1998v 07:15:10G DEC AXPVMS UCX V4.2-21              Full LP     Install     20-MAY-1998  07:11:42G DEC AXPVMS UCX V4.1-12              Full LP     Remove      20-MAY-1998  07:11:42G DEC AXPVMS UCXECO_41_8 V8.0         Patch       Remove      20-MAY-1998w 07:11:42G DEC AXPVMS UCXECO_41_8 V8.0         Patch       Install     21-APR-1998  08:49:44G DEC AXPVMS BNU V1.0                 Full LP     Install     13-MAR-1998  08:19:33G DEC AXPVMS NS_NAV_EXPORT V2.0-21    Full LP     Install     13-MAR-1998c 08:19:33G DEC AXPVMS ODL V1.0                 Platform    Install     13-MAR-1998e 08:19:33G DEC AXPVMS DECNET_OSI V7.1          Full LP     Install     06-NOV-1997i 11:32:05G DEC AXPVMS DWMOTIF V1.2-4           Full LP     Install     06-NOV-1997- 11:32:05G DEC AXPVMS OPENVMS V7.1             Platform    Install     06-NOV-1997r 11:32:05G DEC AXPVMS UCX V4.1-12              Full LP     Install     06-NOV-1997D 11:32:05G DEC AXPVMS VMS V7.1                 Oper System Install     06-NOV-19977 11:32:05L ----------------------------------- ----------- ----------- ---------------- ----       Thanks   Gnter   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:00:30 -0400u. From: Chuck McCrobie <mccrobie@cablespeed.com>) Subject: Re: SAN-based Backup for OpenVMSi. Message-ID: <3B61D66E.C0E0279D@cablespeed.com>  ' I have not used their product, but try:m  # http://www.bridgeheadsoftware.co.uk     Supported platforms list OpenVMS   Rick Dyson wrote:y > I > Does anyone know if there are any solutions available for using some oflQ > the big, new SDLT tape library boxes in an EMA 12000 SAN with HSG80 controllersB= > and using Fiber Channel for interconnects to OpenVMS Alphasn > running v7.2-1?n > K > In particular, I am researching the possiblility of performing the backup Q > between the SAN-served disks and the SDLT drive *without* needing to move everyrO > byte to and from the OpenVMS server too.  That is, keep all the data movementw > within the fabric of the SAN.b > Q > I believe there are solutions like this available for WinXX and Unix boxes, butpN > I can't seem to locate anything that is available for OpenVMS that will makeN > OpenVMS readable tapes.  Something that could be used for disaster recovery, > etc. > 
 > Regards, > Rick > --J > Richard L. Dyson                                    rick-dyson@uiowa.eduJ >  _   _  _____                    http://www-pi.physics.uiowa.edu/~dyson/J > | | | ||_   _|  Senior Systems Analyst  --  INFORMM-Cerner Systems Group> > | | | |  | |    The University of Iowa Hospitals and ClinicsJ > | \_/ | _| |_   Information Systems BT1000 GH       Office: 319/384-7016J >  \___/ |_____|  Iowa City, IA 52242-1052               FAX: 319/384-7020   -- h --o   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:17:26 -0700T< From: "Kenneth H. Fairfield" <Kenneth.H.Fairfield@intel.com>) Subject: Re: SAN-based Backup for OpenVMSl) Message-ID: <3B61E876.E08C9F87@intel.com>o   Rick Dyson wrote:-  I > Does anyone know if there are any solutions available for using some ofsQ > the big, new SDLT tape library boxes in an EMA 12000 SAN with HSG80 controllersn= > and using Fiber Channel for interconnects to OpenVMS Alphas> > running v7.2-1?2 > K > In particular, I am researching the possiblility of performing the backupoQ > between the SAN-served disks and the SDLT drive *without* needing to move every>O > byte to and from the OpenVMS server too.  That is, keep all the data movementy > within the fabric of the SAN.a  O I was just last Friday at a StorageWorks presentation in Portland, OR.  While Ir don't know aboutO an EMA 12000, they were talking about the new ESL9198 tape library with SDLT's.c NearL as I can figure, it's basically a SCSI "device", but you put it on a special SCSI-to-FC adapter+ (my lame terminology) to put it on the SAN.t  S The interesting thing is that you _don't_ hang it off HSG's (I don't know why, theyi	 just saidrR that's not supported).  What happens instead is that it appears directly as a SCSI tapeP drive to the VMS host(s) on the SAN.  At least that's what I was told and that's what# happens for unix and WinXX hosts...t  Q This was a co-presentation with Veritas who don't support VMS.  I mean to talk tot theiO Legato people to see if they know how to deal with these SAN-hosted tapes.  TheiM point being the non-VMS StorageWorks people thought one needs some host-basedaR software to talk to the library and to limit/control the visibility of tape drives	 to hosts.nQ I was specifically interested in whether multiple VMS clusters on the same fabricaP could somehow use the single tape library, that is, different drives on the same libraryyR in parallel.  This should be possible in principle, but I don't know the practical limitations.  S As to having disks backed up to tape without (VMS) host intervention, how would you:  O do that?  That is more of a "NAS" concept, which just means there's yet anothero hostR on the SAN that owns the disks (and tapes) which it serves to (VMS) hosts.  As farO as I know, there is no autonomous (as in embedded controller) type disk to tapeoN backup yet available.  OTOH, FC is so fast, I don't think you need to worry as? much about moving all those bytes to and from the VMS host. :-)        -Ken --6 I don't speak for Intel, Intel doesn't speak for me...   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:45:04 -0400R( From: Hamlyn Mootoo <univms@bigfoot.com>) Subject: Re: SAN-based Backup for OpenVMSc+ Message-ID: <3B625160.EF913CEE@bigfoot.com>3  C Are you planning on doing block for block physical backups, disk tot: tape? What happens when you want to restore a single file?   HM   Rick Dyson wrote:u > I > Does anyone know if there are any solutions available for using some of,Q > the big, new SDLT tape library boxes in an EMA 12000 SAN with HSG80 controllerse= > and using Fiber Channel for interconnects to OpenVMS Alphas  > running v7.2-1?  > K > In particular, I am researching the possiblility of performing the backupuQ > between the SAN-served disks and the SDLT drive *without* needing to move everymO > byte to and from the OpenVMS server too.  That is, keep all the data movementv > within the fabric of the SAN.c > Q > I believe there are solutions like this available for WinXX and Unix boxes, butmN > I can't seem to locate anything that is available for OpenVMS that will makeN > OpenVMS readable tapes.  Something that could be used for disaster recovery, > etc. > 
 > Regards, > Rick > --J > Richard L. Dyson                                    rick-dyson@uiowa.eduJ >  _   _  _____                    http://www-pi.physics.uiowa.edu/~dyson/J > | | | ||_   _|  Senior Systems Analyst  --  INFORMM-Cerner Systems Group> > | | | |  | |    The University of Iowa Hospitals and ClinicsJ > | \_/ | _| |_   Information Systems BT1000 GH       Office: 319/384-7016J >  \___/ |_____|  Iowa City, IA 52242-1052               FAX: 319/384-7020   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:10:10 -0400n- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>-- Subject: Re: Selling VMS to another company ?0, Message-ID: <3B61AE7C.4E93373B@videotron.ca>   "D.Webb" wrote:KP > The only reason Intel would require Compaq to issue information under NDA's isQ > if the information affected Intel's plans eg the idea that Intel might actuallyo0 > be dropping IA64 and replacing it with alpha.   N Perhaps Compaq had already secretely given Intel all sorts of Alpha tricks andJ Intel had already begun to integrate them into the upcoming generations ofF IA64. So Compaq might require NDA to tell customers that Intel will beH producing very fast IA64 much sooner than the pubnlic really knows sinceN Compaq had been secretely giving Intel all sorts of Alpha goodies for the last couple of years.  M And by the time Intel does come out with the fast chips, Alpha will have long G been forgotten and nobody wilo suspect that Compaq had given away Alpha + secrets before the June 25 deal was signed.   M Hey, there are plenty of possibilities one can conjure up if you have a vivid8 enough imagination.b  M Personally though, I beleive that what Compaq told its valued customers undertI NDA has more to do with business practices than with technological stuff.iH IA64's underperformance can be compensated by adding a few more CPUs andN Compaq may have garanteed its customers that they won't have to spend any moreL money than they would have had under the EV7-EV8 roadmap because Compaq willK foot the bill for the extra CPUs needed to make IA64 perform as well as thei& Alpha roadmap Compaq had committed to.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:13:24 GMTe  From: jlsue <jlsuexxxz@home.com>- Subject: Re: Selling VMS to another company ?x8 Message-ID: <ne34mtopt3eou6frh2lhrcpv9m7j8ano05@4ax.com>  . On 27 Jul 2001 10:39:16 +0200, Jan Vorbrueggen8 <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:  # >jlsue <jlsuexxxz@home.com> writes:l >eI >> In Compaq's case, it covers a business decision that is - at this time-E >> anyway  - considered to be a corporate secret.  Nothing is broken.nI >> Customers aren't being extorted for  anything.  And it may be required-M >> by Intel to use NDAs to diseminate this information.  You just don't know.t >"F >I can either assume your insinuation is incorrect - in that case, theI >analsysis of there being a secret rationale to Compaq's decision stands. J >Or I can assume it is correct; in that case, the posting alone would haveJ >violated the NDA, because the conclusion must be that HP's designers haveJ >worked a miracle with McKinley's performance - a miracle meaning it is atK >least 5 times faster than reasonable estimates (e.g., those of Paul DeMoneEM >in his recent article). This also means that there are no problems with EV8,eN >as Compaq is claiming (part of the reason I set the "miracle factor" to 5 in  >the above). >tF >Now, shall I believe you or Compaq's "official" argumentation for theM >decision? No matter what I believe, the company's credibility is still shot.7 >   ? Who the heck knows?  Certainly not you or anyone else in here -ED including myself, which means that I couldn't possibly have violated any NDA.  : The point is that there are probably thousands of possibleD permutations of the facts - and there must be some permutations that' canmake this decision a reasonable one.   A But being the best isn't, unfortunately, a certain path to market B success.  I wish it were, but we've often lamented on that in this group (a la vhs vs beta).t  1 And being successful financially is what we need.s  D We'll all just have to wait and see if this is the path to financial success.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 01:14:24 GMT   From: jlsue <jlsuexxxz@home.com>- Subject: Re: Selling VMS to another company ? 8 Message-ID: <qn34mtgndi29g2dt564p5real37cr74tga@4ax.com>  B On Fri, 27 Jul 2001 11:11:36 +0000 (UTC), david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk (D.Webb) wrote:     O >The only reason Intel would require Compaq to issue information under NDA's isaP >if the information affected Intel's plans eg the idea that Intel might actuallyQ >be dropping IA64 and replacing it with alpha. Unfortunately as had already been  I >discussed that outcome is about as likely as the Sun not rising tomorrow0	 >morning.c  7 Now get off Andrew's case.  He's doing the best he can.    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 18:16:54 GMTX8 From: hammond@not@peek.ppb.cpqcorp.net (Charlie Hammond)1 Subject: Re: Suggestion for IPF standalone backup 1 Message-ID: <qei87.252$Yx2.3739@news.cpqcorp.net>   6 In article <vnd87.8732$ar1.29361@www.newsranger.com>, D Simon Clubley <simon_clubley@remove_me.excite.com-Earth.UFP> writes:  M >[BTW, just for future reference, is there some confusion here about the term I >standalone backup ? I have always used the term "standalone backup" as a L >generic term to boot to a self-contained environment for backup operations.I >On Vax, that's the traditional minimal environment. On Alpha, that's theC$ >less minimal CD-based environment.]  L "Standalone Backup" properly refers to the self-contained backup environemntJ which is used on OpenVMS VAX, and was used on OpenVMS Alpha V1.0 and V1.5.J (I think it was also used on early baselevels of what became OpenVMS ALpha V6.1, maybe even on FT1?)L  L Starting with OpenVMS Alpha V6.1, Standalone Backup was no longer maintainedJ or shipped.  This pleased OpenVMS Engineering because Standalon Backup wasI always somewhat of a bothersome kludge to maintain, and to keep "in sync"eJ with the OpenVMS Backup utility.  In its place, OpenVMS Alpha alows you toI boot full OpenVMS from the operating system CD-ROM (the "kit CD").  This  H is usually called the "standalone environment"; it is *MUCH* more useful8 for system maintenance functions that Standalone Backup.  K One assumes that Stanalone Backup will *never* be available on IPF systems, H but that [something similar to] the OpenVMS Alpha Standalone Environment will be.   -- 9K     Charlie Hammond -- Compaq Computer Corporation -- Pompano Beach  FL USA6H        (hammond@not@peek.ppb.cpqcorp.net -- remove "@not" when replying)J       All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:29:19 -0400n- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>R+ Subject: Re: Sun goes after Alpha user base , Message-ID: <3B61B2F8.5581C89A@videotron.ca>   Peter LANGSTOEGER wrote:N > And I cannot imagine why one VMS customer which is forced to migrate off VMSJ > by Q, will want to stay with COMPAQ at all, too. So, a lost VMS customer& > is a lost Q customer. What a DEJA VU   Who said "forced to migrate" ?  L If Compaq makes it very interesting for a customer to switch to NT, then the' customer is likely to stay with Compaq.R  N Compaq is very aware that forcing customers off of VMS means that it will loseI the majority of thsoe customers. So I strongly suspect that it has a more N profitable strategy of LURING customers to NT instead of forcing them off VMS.  K This is why Compaq is giving just enough to VMS to make customers confident F that compaq isn't out to kill VMS, all the while ensuring that the VMSL customer base doesn't grow and that VMS doesn't become too popular. The moreN time Compaq has, the more time there is to develop the serious applications onM NT that will give VMS customers a better solution with more features and more N importantly with features needed "today" , available on the NT version but not available on VMS.l    L Just because Palmer failed in his premature and too quickly executed attemptK at migrating customers away from VMS doesn't automatically mean that a well = thought out and patient longer term strategy would also fail.S   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 23:09:54 +0100E1 From: Steve Reece <SYSTEM@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk>e< Subject: Re: TCPIP v5.1 startup on dial-up service provider.6 Message-ID: <3B61F4C2.6089E723@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk>  F I've been doing a TCPIP SET ROUTE/GATEWAY=aa.bb.cc.dd/DEFAULT once theG ppp connection has been established.  You're right that the provider is1 Demon Simon.  B This morning when I was posting the message I deleted the ethernetC interface so that the IP stack is only using the ppp connection forlH TCP/IP and doing this has enabled TCP/IP to start without having the pppH connection up and without hanging just after the PWIP startup message isE displayed.  It means I've got to use DECnet between the Alpha and the H other systems sitting here, but this is only a minor hardship I suppose. Steve.   Simon Clubley wrote: > 0 > On Fri, 27 Jul 2001 07:44:51 +0100, in article@ > <3B611BF3.37F654C3@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk>, Steve Reece wrote: > >ED > >I'm now a subscriber to a dial-up ISP but there is (at least) one > >problem : > >VE > >As part of my configuration of TCPIP Services for OpenVMS v5.1 (on:C > >Alpha) I have smtp configured to use my ISP's smtp server as itsGJ > >alternate gateway.  When TCP/IP starts it expects to be able to see the: > >server (as it did with v4.2 as well) so I have to do anI > >@SYS$STARUTP:TCPIP$STARTUP, wait for it to pause and then do my dialup.+ > >in order for TCP/IP Services to startup.vK > >Any ideas what I might do to ease the situation and have TCP/IP ServicesY& > >start as part of my system startup? > > G > >Environment is a DEC 3000 model 600 workstation running OpenVMS v7.3_H > >with TCP/IP Services for OpenVMS Version 5.1.  Dialup connection usesB > >PPP and the number is stored in the configuration on the modem. > >4 > >Thanks in advance. 	 > >Steve.  > J > [Based on your address, I'm assuming that the ISP in question is Demon.] > P > My production machine is VMS Alpha 7.1, UCX 4.2, ECO 4. I used to use PPP/SLIPO > dialup, but now use a ISDN LAN based router. I also have my alternate gateway K > set to post.demon.co.uk, but I have never experienced the problem you are-1 > describing, either now or when I used SLIP/PPP.1 > L > I suspect that it is because I have a different routing setup. How are youI > defining your route to Demon ? Are you using a default gateway, or justVN > enabling specific routes ? Are your routes defined all the time or just when > you need to dialup ? > P > In my setup, routes are defined at the time of dialup and removed by the batchN > job that initiated the dialup when the job has finished collecting E-Mail orJ > FTPing files. I do not use a default gateway, but only define routing toN > the required subnets. If I want to web browse from this machine, I have LynxJ > setup to use Demon's proxy server, so I only need to set a subnet to the > proxy server.e > O > I think your problem may be that you have a route to Demon permanently setup,nJ > so startup hangs. If you can define the route only when you need to, the > problem may go away. >  > Simon. > J > PS: Be aware that the only time I have ever crashed a VMS box was when IJ > tried to get PPP working. I think that there are patches for the various > problems that I uncovered. >  > --= > Simon Clubley, simon_clubley@remove_me.excite.com-Earth.UFPrM > In the task of removing Microsoft from the marketplace, I have discovered anG > truly remarkable plan, but this signature is too small to contain it.    -- iG "A shadow fell over her face; clear, as if the composure were rent likehE a veil.  And her lips parted, but only with a short intake of breath.pA Then she said, 'Well, then you are right.  Indeed, we are even.'" % 		Louis, "Interview with the Vampire".   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:02:26 +0100_% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>y% Subject: Re: The Inquirer on VMS port|* Message-ID: <3B61ACB2.E59679DB@virgin.net>   JF Mezei wrote:   M > Since Oracle still has RDB as a product, it is quite likely that they stillo= > have enough engineers to recompile RDB on the new IA64 VMS.|  N I have an inquiry open with Oracle on future support for RDB on iVMS. OfficialN answer is "No decision yet". If Compaq are serious about a future for VMS theyL should lean on Oracle because the longer this port remains in doubt the moreJ customers will start looking elsewhere. When you consider that Oracle wereL on-board from day one supporting the Tru64 port you have to wonder if Oracle know something we don't.  J Did you know that the latest major release of RDB has been in Beta for two' years? Something is wrong there surely?e   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:16:41 -0400e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>d% Subject: Re: The Inquirer on VMS portn, Message-ID: <3B61B003.4FD726CA@videotron.ca>  * fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br wrote: > B > It is time for a "Interested Company" to take OpenVMS/Alpha from > Compaq/Intel.e  M No, it is time for customers to wake up and smell the coffee. It is pointlesskM to hope for a saviour for VMS or Alpha. Compaq isn't about to let go of those'N customers, and Compaq thinks it can make much more money selling the engineersM and patents for VMS to some outfit such as Microsoft than it could by selling U VMS as a whole to some company that intends to then compete against Compaq/Microsoft.   G As far as I am concerned, Compaq will continue to treat VMS as a maturetE product with no marketing, as it has done since it purchased Digital.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:12:05 -0300t) From: fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br % Subject: Re: The Inquirer on VMS port L Message-ID: <OF237F93C6.8AC7E864-ON03256A96.0063DE43@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>  H I was just wondering if Compaq and Oracle and CA and etc..... decided to sell all the VMS stuff to a Linux company :-))))   ! Like happened with SCO x Caldera.c     Regardsr     FC    S                                                                                    rS                     Alan Greig                                                     sS                     <a.greig@virg        Para:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com             sS                     in.net>              cc:                                       iS                                          Assunto:     Re: The Inquirer on VMS port aS                     27/07/2001                                                     eS                     15:02                                                          eS                     Responder a                                                    sS                     Alan Greig                                                     lS                                                                                    0S                                                                                    u             JF Mezei wrote:3  G > Since Oracle still has RDB as a product, it is quite likely that they  stilll= > have enough engineers to recompile RDB on the new IA64 VMS.   E I have an inquiry open with Oracle on future support for RDB on iVMS.r OfficialI answer is "No decision yet". If Compaq are serious about a future for VMSx theyG should lean on Oracle because the longer this port remains in doubt then moreJ customers will start looking elsewhere. When you consider that Oracle wereE on-board from day one supporting the Tru64 port you have to wonder ife Oracle know something we don't.  J Did you know that the latest major release of RDB has been in Beta for two' years? Something is wrong there surely?n   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 12:01:40 -0700n1 From: "Brian Catlin" <briancatlin@mindspring.com>n% Subject: Re: The Inquirer on VMS portl3 Message-ID: <9jsdqm$fbo$1@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>l  W "Alan Greig" <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote in message news:3B61ACB2.E59679DB@virgin.net...  >  >  > JF Mezei wrote:  > O > > Since Oracle still has RDB as a product, it is quite likely that they stillu? > > have enough engineers to recompile RDB on the new IA64 VMS.N >MP > I have an inquiry open with Oracle on future support for RDB on iVMS. OfficialP > answer is "No decision yet". If Compaq are serious about a future for VMS theyN > should lean on Oracle because the longer this port remains in doubt the moreL > customers will start looking elsewhere. When you consider that Oracle wereN > on-board from day one supporting the Tru64 port you have to wonder if Oracle > know something we don't.  1 Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while     -Brian    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 16:33:28 -0400f. From: Virginia Flores <virginiaflores@msn.com>D Subject: Re: UCX v3.0, How to "SET CONFIG ENABLE SERVICE FILSRV200"?5 Message-ID: <OE8GcmnFDHwu77cVid60000bf53@hotmail.com>a   Dale:o  E I agree with John Malmberg.  I used to work with UCXTCPSRV V1.5 and IcL created a STARTUCX.COM that was called from my SYS$MANAGER:SYSTARTUP_V5.COM.$ Worked perfectly after every reboot.   -Virginia Flores   ----- Original Message -----, From: Dale Frameli <dframeli@aus.telusa.com> To: <Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com>a$ Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 12:45 PM@ Subject: UCX v3.0, How to "SET CONFIG ENABLE SERVICE FILSRV200"?    G > I have a DEC3000-300X which runs OpenVMS 1.5 and utilizes UCX 3.0.  IrB > have created a "service" and have enabled it.  When I reboot theC > system, the service is still there, but it is disabled.  In latera6 > versions of UCX, you can type something similiar to: >d) > UCX>SET CONFIG ENABLE SERVICE FILSRV200t >oH > to save the service state, and thus have it enabled when the system isC > restarted.  In UCX v3.0, this command does not appear to exist :(h > F > How can I enable a service after restart if I'm using UCX v3.0?  DueE > to buget constrains, upgrading the operating system or UCX is not ao > possibility. >  > Thanks > Dale > dframeli@aus.telusa.coml >    ------------------------------    Date: 27 Jul 2001 13:50:05 -0700, From: dframeli@aus.telusa.com (Dale Frameli)D Subject: Re: UCX v3.0, How to "SET CONFIG ENABLE SERVICE FILSRV200"?< Message-ID: <de844d64.0107271250.c7b4d14@posting.google.com>   John,   9   Excellent idea!  Sure wish I had thought of that one :)h   Thanks,f Dale    n malmberg@encompasserve.org (John E. Malmberg) wrote in message news:<TKW8gwtXhDmo@eisner.encompasserve.org>...? > In article <de844d64.0107270845.4c53ec51@posting.google.com>, 4 > dframeli@aus.telusa.company (Dale Frameli) writes: > I > > I have a DEC3000-300X which runs OpenVMS 1.5 and utilizes UCX 3.0.  IeD > > have created a "service" and have enabled it.  When I reboot theE > > system, the service is still there, but it is disabled.  In latera8 > > versions of UCX, you can type something similiar to: > >t+ > > UCX>SET CONFIG ENABLE SERVICE FILSRV200a >  eJ > > to save the service state, and thus have it enabled when the system isE > > restarted.  In UCX v3.0, this command does not appear to exist :(r >   H > > How can I enable a service after restart if I'm using UCX v3.0?  DueG > > to buget constrains, upgrading the operating system or UCX is not as > > possibility. >  > Have you considered placing: > I > $UCX ENABLE SERVICE FILSRV200 ! in the SYSTARTUP_VMS command file after  > the UCX product is started?r >  > -Johnf > Personal Opinion Onlyt   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 14:51:05 -0400 , From: Steve Lionel <Steve.Lionel@compaq.com>- Subject: Re: VAX Fortran and Visual Fortran ?e8 Message-ID: <6ud3mt00q7s9q5psakds0lnl6j20bdeonf@4ax.com>  6 On Thu, 26 Jul 2001 23:05:45 +0200, Jan-Erik Sderholm <noone@home.com> wrote:o  A >Oh, this FTN prog produces code in an language called "ZPL" thatd9 >thermal transfer printers from ZEBRA understands. I's ano9 >label-description language that is just "printed" to thee9 >printer as ASCII. I'd suspect that I'll just connect theh@ >printer on COM1 and then OPEN the port and write to it directly >from the FTN prog.v  D You may find that doesn't work well, and many Windows printers don'tC support direct ASCII writes at all.  Writing the text as a file and A using our Fortran_WinPrint routine is probably the best approach.p    = Send Visual Fortran support requests to vf-support@compaq.com   - Steve Lionel (mailto:Steve.Lionel@compaq.com)@ Fortran EngineeringW* High-Performance Technical Computing Group& Compaq Computer Corporation, Nashua NH  6 Compaq Fortran web site: http://www.compaq.com/fortran2 Message Board: http://www.compaq.com/fortran/forum   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:18:05 -0500s2 From: Patrick Jankowiak <pjankowi@usa.alcatel.com>5 Subject: Re: VMS remains secure at DEFCON hacker festc/ Message-ID: <3B61E89D.16650056@usa.alcatel.com>-  , This is a multi-part message in MIME format.& --------------9DA74CDDC27EA3329DEDBBD0* Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bitu  A What? scortch-1? you dare to mock the holey VMSONE domain and our< scortched-earth policy? = (The great bloodshot eye rotates slowly, and focuses upon the. Dachtera...)C MOOOOOHAHAHAHahahahaaaa! No free VMS for you!!! And no vemisone for  dessert! Now, off with you!!  ) Oops, forgot, this isn't the CircleMUD.. n6 This place just has to get a little livelier at 5 pm..     "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:o > > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message# > news:3B60D243.226118AC@fsi.net...b > > eccm wrote:] > > >aH > > > 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/  > >u, > > Hhmmm... VMSone - is that like Scortch-1 > >a > M > I believe "Vemisone" is an ointment or foot cream or something like that... & --------------9DA74CDDC27EA3329DEDBBD0- Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;o  name="pjankowi.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit / Content-Description: Card for Patrick JankowiakS  Content-Disposition: attachment;  filename="pjankowi.vcf"   begin:vcard  n:Jankowiak;Patricks tel;cell:214-763-4764C tel;work:972-477-7631y x-mozilla-html:TRUEn url:http://www.alcatel.com1 org:Alcatel Microelectronics;South Central Region  version:2.1c0 email;internet:patrick.jankowiak@usa.alcatel.com  title:Field Application Engineerd adr;quoted-printable:;;M/S 3001-MICR=0D=0A1000 Coit Road=0D=0A=0D=0A;Richardson;Texas;75075-5802;USA fn:Patrick Jankowiak	 end:vcardr  ( --------------9DA74CDDC27EA3329DEDBBD0--   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 15:28:20 -0700 < From: "Kenneth H. Fairfield" <Kenneth.H.Fairfield@intel.com>: Subject: When did F$GETSYI("DECNET_VERSION") first appear?) Message-ID: <3B61EB04.E3330A04@intel.com>.  ' Sorry to ask a technical question.  :-}e  F I've written a command procedure which uses F$GETSYI("DECNET_VERSION")A to determine whether the current host is running DECnet IV versuseG DECnet-Plus/DECnet/OSI.  Of course I _stole_ the test from SYS$MANAGER:AG SYSTARTUP_VMS.TEMPLATE figuring if it's good enough for VMS EngineeringJ it's good enough for me. :-)  G Problem is that I've only been able to verify it back to VMS/Alpha 6.2. C I'd like to know _when_ the DECNET_VERSION item was first supportedeF for F$GETSYI in VMS.  I'd guess that VMS 6.0/6.1, VAX and Alpha, wouldK be safe, but what about VAX/VMS 5.5?  Was it present any earlier than that?t> Alternatively, was DECnet Phase V available on VAX as early asF VMS 5.5, and if so, what is the most reliable way to determine whether Phase IV or Phase V is running?'   Thanks, KenM   --6 I don't speak for Intel; Intel doesn't speak for me...   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:39:55 -0500e. From: "Wyer, Brett" <brett.wyer@telecheck.com>> Subject: RE: When did F$GETSYI("DECNET_VERSION") first appear?> Message-ID: <F3167739ACCD8E449B71E0CF0059263D12623644@tckmail>   Ken-  J I remember running DECnet Phase V on VAX/VMS 5.5.  Although at that time IF believe it was called DECnet/VAX Extensions.  Here's the output from a. DECnet Phase IV node running VAX/VMS v5.5-2H4:  ' BSCGWY_$ say f$getsyi("decnet_Version")o 00040200 BSCGWY_$ ncp sho exec char    8 Node Volatile Characteristics as of 27-JUL-2001 17:37:34   Executor node = 1.248 (BSCGWY)  ; Identification           = DECnet-VAX V5.5-2,  VMS V5.5-2H4 ! Management version       = V4.0.0g   Brett6     -----Original Message-----A From: Kenneth H. Fairfield [mailto:Kenneth.H.Fairfield@intel.com]A# Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 5:28 PM  To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comt: Subject: When did F$GETSYI("DECNET_VERSION") first appear?    ' Sorry to ask a technical question.  :-}   F I've written a command procedure which uses F$GETSYI("DECNET_VERSION")A to determine whether the current host is running DECnet IV versuspG DECnet-Plus/DECnet/OSI.  Of course I _stole_ the test from SYS$MANAGER:sG SYSTARTUP_VMS.TEMPLATE figuring if it's good enough for VMS Engineering  it's good enough for me. :-)  G Problem is that I've only been able to verify it back to VMS/Alpha 6.2. C I'd like to know _when_ the DECNET_VERSION item was first supported6F for F$GETSYI in VMS.  I'd guess that VMS 6.0/6.1, VAX and Alpha, wouldK be safe, but what about VAX/VMS 5.5?  Was it present any earlier than that?A> Alternatively, was DECnet Phase V available on VAX as early asF VMS 5.5, and if so, what is the most reliable way to determine whether Phase IV or Phase V is running?/   Thanks, Kenp   --6 I don't speak for Intel; Intel doesn't speak for me...   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 23:18:34 GMTa2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)> Subject: Re: When did F$GETSYI("DECNET_VERSION") first appear?1 Message-ID: <eFm87.280$Yx2.3657@news.cpqcorp.net>t  h In article <3B61EB04.E3330A04@intel.com>, "Kenneth H. Fairfield" <Kenneth.H.Fairfield@intel.com> writes:D :I'd like to know _when_ the DECNET_VERSION item was first supported :for F$GETSYI in VMS.  s     V5.4.e  H :what is the most reliable way to determine whether Phase IV or Phase V  :is running?      You found it.  DECNET_VERSION.   	--      The DECnet version longword:     31                      0C   +-----+-----+-----+-----+P   |     |     |     |     |    +-----+-----+-----+-----+s      |     |     |     |*      |     |     |     +--  Site ECO level      |     |     |%      |     |     +-- Compaq ECO leveln      |     |F      |     +-- Compaq DECnet Phase (4 for Phase IV, 5 for DECnet-Plus)      |       +-- Reserved for future use    (   Some general examples of the encoding:        %X0004nnnn : DECnet Phase IV&     %X000402nn : DECnet-VAX Extensions2     %X0005nnnn : DECnet-Plus (Phase V, DECnet/OSI)    N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Jul 2001 19:22:29 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)v> Subject: RE: When did F$GETSYI("DECNET_VERSION") first appear?3 Message-ID: <EuokhGXYZIEN@eisner.encompasserve.org>   o In article <F3167739ACCD8E449B71E0CF0059263D12623644@tckmail>, "Wyer, Brett" <brett.wyer@telecheck.com> writes:   L > I remember running DECnet Phase V on VAX/VMS 5.5.  Although at that time IH > believe it was called DECnet/VAX Extensions.  Here's the output from a0 > DECnet Phase IV node running VAX/VMS v5.5-2H4: > ) > BSCGWY_$ say f$getsyi("decnet_Version")e
 > 00040200   > -----Original Message-----C > From: Kenneth H. Fairfield [mailto:Kenneth.H.Fairfield@intel.com]   I > Problem is that I've only been able to verify it back to VMS/Alpha 6.2.dE > I'd like to know _when_ the DECNET_VERSION item was first supportedyH > for F$GETSYI in VMS.  I'd guess that VMS 6.0/6.1, VAX and Alpha, wouldM > be safe, but what about VAX/VMS 5.5?  Was it present any earlier than that?_  % On VMS V5.3-1, the output looks like:   - $ write sys$output f$getsyi("decnet_version")DA %DCL-W-IVKEYW, unrecognized keyword - check validity and spellingc  \DECNET_VERSION\  $    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 21:48:34 +0200m, From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch> Subject: WHO ARE YOU forum?u% Message-ID: <3B61C593.8762131@gmx.ch>n  H I'd love to see a WHO ARE YOU forum for VMS people, where we could share something else than technique.  H Where I could for example say that I'll be in Corsica for vacation untilJ the 5th without the risk to be flamed for a non-VMS related post, you see?   :-)e   D.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 16:03:38 -0400w  From: norm.raphael@jamesbury.com Subject: Re: WHO ARE YOU forum?r4 Message-ID: <C2256A96.006DF48D.00@jklh21.valmet.com>  ( DECUServe...er...Encompass has WHO_AM_I.  ) ..and very low flames (most of the time).z        / Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch on 07/27/2001 03:48:34 PMi  ' Please respond to Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch7   To:   Info-VAX@mvb.saic.comp cc:- Subject:  WHO ARE YOU forum?        H I'd love to see a WHO ARE YOU forum for VMS people, where we could share something else than technique.  H Where I could for example say that I'll be in Corsica for vacation untilJ the 5th without the risk to be flamed for a non-VMS related post, you see?   :-)h   D.   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Jul 2001 17:05:17 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)  Subject: Re: WHO ARE YOU forum?a3 Message-ID: <9O1iOsCVcxIn@eisner.encompasserve.org>   W In article <C2256A96.006DF48D.00@jklh21.valmet.com>, norm.raphael@jamesbury.com writes:   * > DECUServe...er...Encompass has WHO_AM_I.  @ Exactly.  A lot of us know who each other are quite well through7 DECUServe, even if the rest of you are not included :-)b   ------------------------------    Date: 27 Jul 2001 20:36:08 -07003 From: Eric Smith <eric-no-spam-for-me@brouhaha.com> N Subject: [OT] Market corrections (was Re: Alpha: an invitation to communicate)0 Message-ID: <qhpualg1xz.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com>  , davidc@panix.com (David B. Chorlian) writes:J > Not so; the (U.S)  government (in one form or another) steps in when the > market cannot correct itself:   E You mean that they step in when they don't WANT it to correct itself.   J > Capitalism requires support from non-capitalist institutions to survive.  D There is very little evidence to support this viewpoint.  In the US,H almost all government intervention in the market consists of attempts to= correct for the ill effects of prior government intervention.1   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.415 ************************