1 INFO-VAX	Fri, 16 Mar 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 150       Contents:' Re: - OpenVMS ever to be on Intel chip?  Re: 500au Video questions % Re: 9GB System Disk for an 8GB ES40 ? 2 Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference?6 Re: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference? Any information on FDVSHR.EXE ! Re: Any information on FDVSHR.EXE  Re: apache performance Brazilian TITANIC  Re: Brazilian TITANIC - Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut - Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut - Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut - Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut  Re: DCL minute of the day P Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS     Educational     PrP Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS     Educational     PrP Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS    EducationalProgram)P RE: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS    EducationalProgram)P Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS    EducationalProgram)P Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS    EducationalProgram)P Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS  Educational     Progr Errors on disk RE: Errors on disk Re: Errors on disk Re: fmsdef.h5 Good Netiquette (was Re: OpenVMS Educational Program) . Has SYS$SETEXV gone away in OpenVMS Alpha 7.2?% Re: How does one become a VMS guru ?? % Re: How does one become a VMS guru ?? % Re: How does one become a VMS guru ?? < RE: I seem to be in a different reality today, one where VMS< RE: I seem to be in a different reality today, one where VMS< Re: I seem to be in a different reality today, one where VMS< Re: I seem to be in a different reality today, one where VMS< Re: I seem to be in a different reality today, one where VMS Little Help, Please... Re: Little Help, Please... Re: Little Help, Please... RE: Little Help, Please... Re: Little Help, Please... Re: Little Help, Please...! Re: Obtaining 7.2-1 and TCPIP 5.1 ! Re: Obtaining 7.2-1 and TCPIP 5.1  Re: OpenVMS Educational Program  Re: OpenVMS Educational Program  Re: OpenVMS Educational Program  Re: OpenVMS Educational Program 1 Re: OpenVMS Educational Program = OpenVMS sadness ! Pathworks Client and Windows 2000  performance  Re: performance  Re: performance   Re: Possible security hole in...  Re: Possible security hole in...  Re: Possible security hole in...  Re: Possible security hole in...  Re: Possible security hole in...  Re: Possible security hole in...% Processes with PFW on an empty system 
 Samba and W2k  Splitting a Large File Support of old systems Re: Support of old systems- Re: Talk to Rich Marcello - Austin Texas area - Re: Talk to Rich Marcello - Austin Texas area - Re: Talk to Rich Marcello - Austin Texas area ' Re: TDF change problems with V7.3 EFT2? # Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II # Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II # Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II # Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II # Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II # RE: The Chris and Bill show. Act II # Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II . Re: Volume Shadowing merge rates on Big Disks?  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 19:05:37 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>0 Subject: Re: - OpenVMS ever to be on Intel chip?- Message-ID: <87vgpaj7ni.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   = Mark Garrett <Mark.Garrett@wedontwantyourspam.com.au> writes:   A > Great infiniband looks like some old concepts ;) Looks like and 2 > update of an RH20 channel for the new century ;)    True. Read Tony in RH20 land? :)   --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:13:59 GMT 5 From: Lyndon Bartels <lyndon.bartels@childrenshc.org> " Subject: Re: 500au Video questions/ Message-ID: <3AB1E763.4670A8FA@childrenshc.org>    Lyndon Bartels wrote:  > J > As you all probably know, I've bought for my personal pleasure, a 500au. >  > I also have a 500au at work. > C > Right now, they're sitting side-by-side under my desk. This makes  > comparisons very easy. > G It looks as though the video card that came with my 500au (SN-PBXGK-AB) < is not supported under VMS. So I'm looking at alternatives.   B I looked at the 1998 Systems and Options catalog. And it says thatB "Graphics options require 1 64-bit slot". That catalog lists three possible cards:    Powerstorm 3D30 (SN-PBXGB-AB)," Powerstorm 4D20 (SN-PBXGB-CA), and Powerstorm 4D51T (SN-PBXGI-AD)  : Of those cards, I see that I could purchase the first two.  E Adding into this, there is the ELSA Gloria (SN-PBXGK-BB). The catalog  doesn't list the ELSA.    D I have a two-part question. First, is the ELSA Gloria supported in aF 500au, and if so, must it be installed in one of the 64-bit PCI slots.    G I'm a little reluctant to purchase the ELSA Gloria. My work 500au has a F ELSA Gloria in it, and there's a window text over-run problem that theE graphics ECO was supposed to fix. But hasn't. Why buy a card that has  issues?      Thanks in advance,   Lyndon     --   Lyndon F. Bartels  VMS Systems Administrator  Childrens Hospitals and Clinics  lyndon.bartels#childrenshc.org 651-855-2504 (work)  651-855-2570 (fax)   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 19:36:15 +0100 = From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> . Subject: Re: 9GB System Disk for an 8GB ES40 ?) Message-ID: <3AB25D1F.A9CBE9D9@gtech.com>    Kark wrote: P > Does anyone think a 9GB StorageWorks disk would be too small to contain the OSO > and the paging file for an 8GB memory option?  I'm kind of stuck with the 9GB 5 > disk if I want to do RAID1 with a KZPAC controller.   E There are more than enough space for the OS. The question is how much 2 page-file do you need. That depends on your usage.   Arne  > PS: In general it is considered good for performance reason to3     put page-files on other disks than the OS disk.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:16:24 -0700   From: l_ricker@lto.locktrack.com; Subject: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference? . Message-ID: <01031610162483@lto.locktrack.com>  9 I'm a bit confused and need advice as I plan for some VMS 1 upgrade activities.  Planning to take an existing 9 AlphaServer 1200 to VMS V7.2-1 (from V7.1-1H2)... got the 7 CDROM box containing, in addition to the VMS disks, the  Firmware Update V5.8 CDROM.   6 My confusion is this:  If I check the system's PALcode4 version, with F$GETSYI("PALCODE_VERSION"), I get the4 following result string:  "1.19-14" (on the system I8 intend to upgrade).  Comparing this to a couple of other6 systems which *are already* at VMS V7.2-1, they report2 "1.21-1" and "1.61-49" on another 1200 and a DS20,
 respectively.   8 I don't see a corresponding F$GETSYI argument that would9 show me "FIRMWARE_VERSION"?... or am I missing something. > The fact that the PALcode shows version numbers like "1.xx-xx": which is so far from "Firmware V5.8" is what concerns me a bit.  4 Question is, how is "PALCODE_VERSION" related to the5 so-called "Firmware version", and what happens to the 7 PALcode when I upgrade the target system using the V5.8 6 CDROM?  Is PALcode updated by a firmware update, or is7 it just console and device firmware as the accompanying  booklet indicates?  ; If PALcode is *not* updated (or updatable), are there other  concerns in doing this upgrade?   > I probably "knew" something about all this, but have forgotten; whatever it was, and all these various version numbers have  got me spooked!    TIA,   Lorin    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 13:49:10 -0500 2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)? Subject: Re: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference? L Message-ID: <rdeininger-1603011349110001@user-2ive6mn.dialup.mindspring.com>  P In article <01031610162483@lto.locktrack.com>, l_ricker@lto.locktrack.com wrote:  ; > I'm a bit confused and need advice as I plan for some VMS 3 > upgrade activities.  Planning to take an existing ; > AlphaServer 1200 to VMS V7.2-1 (from V7.1-1H2)... got the 9 > CDROM box containing, in addition to the VMS disks, the  > Firmware Update V5.8 CDROM.  > 8 > My confusion is this:  If I check the system's PALcode6 > version, with F$GETSYI("PALCODE_VERSION"), I get the6 > following result string:  "1.19-14" (on the system I: > intend to upgrade).  Comparing this to a couple of other8 > systems which *are already* at VMS V7.2-1, they report4 > "1.21-1" and "1.61-49" on another 1200 and a DS20, > respectively.  > : > I don't see a corresponding F$GETSYI argument that would; > show me "FIRMWARE_VERSION"?... or am I missing something. @ > The fact that the PALcode shows version numbers like "1.xx-xx"< > which is so far from "Firmware V5.8" is what concerns me a > bit. > 6 > Question is, how is "PALCODE_VERSION" related to the7 > so-called "Firmware version", and what happens to the 9 > PALcode when I upgrade the target system using the V5.8 8 > CDROM?  Is PALcode updated by a firmware update, or is9 > it just console and device firmware as the accompanying  > booklet indicates?  J The V5.8 is the version number of the CD.  Each platform firmware gets itsC own version number.  Sometimes a particular platform doesn't change  versions for several CDs.   B The systems I've worked on have VMS PALcode, Unix PALcode, and theF console, which seem to all get upgraded in one operation.  If you haveJ upgradeable devices, that's a separate operation.  All of these components# can have different version numbers.   G Isn't there a little booklet with the CD that gives version numbers for  each platform?   --   Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.com    ------------------------------   Date: 16 Mar 2001 13:02:28 GMT# From: bedlam702@aol.com (Bedlam702) & Subject: Any information on FDVSHR.EXE: Message-ID: <20010316080228.13231.00001527@ng-fq1.aol.com>  O I am missing this file on my machine. Any help in getting it back or rebuilding  it?    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 14:49:30 +0100 > From: "Jean-Francois Marchal" <jean-francois.marchal@x9000.fr>* Subject: Re: Any information on FDVSHR.EXE. Message-ID: <98t5g9$qat$1@reader1.imaginet.fr>  / better is to re-install your version of fms ...   = "Bedlam702" <bedlam702@aol.com> a crit dans le message news: / 20010316080228.13231.00001527@ng-fq1.aol.com... F > I am missing this file on my machine. Any help in getting it back or
 rebuilding > it?    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 11:26:04 GMT + From: "Darren Peacock" <daz005@hotmail.com>  Subject: Re: apache performance = Message-ID: <gLms6.4452$992.26154@news-server.bigpond.net.au>    1)   Install the CGI'sB               This should make a significant performance increase.L Our site has about 1000 CGI and a massive load, without installing the CGI's* the fault rate went out to 33,000 a secondE pretty damn impressive , it kept going and going, absolutely i didn't  believe it could do it. ? ONce installed the fault rate sits at 300 on the busiest  days.   H That box will handle thousands of  hits a second with minimum memory. NO	 problemo.   K 2) If you have a bunch of Perl scripts stick some RMS Global buffers on the  files.   Cheers    8 "Jan Mnnich" <moennich@greenstream.de> wrote in message) news:98qeqp$r21$05$1@news.t-online.com...  > hi there,  > L > the apache server produces many page faults when executing any cgi-script.L > on our test-machine (alphaserver 1000) the performance is horrible! i haveK > to wait at least 3 seconds for each generated page! is there any solution  to > increase the performance?  > 	 > 1000thx 
 > jan mnnich  > moennich@greenstream.de  >  >  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:59:15 -0300 ) From: fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br  Subject: Brazilian TITANICL Message-ID: <OF6C6E159E.738B6C43-ON03256A11.004A739B@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>   Click at  : http://www2.correioweb.com.br/cw/2001-03-16/fotos/capa.pdf  ' You can see something interesting . . .    Regards    FC   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 13:27:27 -0500 % From: "Brian Tillman" <tillman_brian>  Subject: Re: Brazilian TITANIC$ Message-ID: <3ab25b49$1@news.si.com>  ( >You can see something interesting . . .  " Not without ActiveX enabled.  Bah! --  A Brian Tillman                   Internet: tillman_brian at si.com A Smiths Aerospace                          tillman at swdev.si.com = 3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS      Addresses modified to prevent < Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991     SPAM.  Replace "at" with "@"8        This opinion doesn't represent that of my company   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 07:44:17 -0500 % From: "Islandco" <sales@islandco.com> 6 Subject: Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut/ Message-ID: <tb42mqheqbh975@corp.supernews.com>   6 Compaq will be merging Commercial and Consumer groups.  E Oh God... It is difficult enough convincing Compaq employees at their H customer service number that their company sells Commercial systems with6 Alpha chips in them - not just PC's and Pro-whatevers.J I have been repeatedly told that "We don't have any products called Alpha"  0 The beginning of the end - I can feel it !!!!!!!   DT   -- Island Computers US Corporation  2700 Gregory Street 	 Suite 150  Savannah GA 31404  Tel: 912 447 6622  Fax: 912 201 0096  sales@islandco.com www.islandco.com  C This message and any files transmitted with it are confidential and J may be privileged and/or subject to the provisions of privacy legislation.H They are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whomE they are addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
 recipient,G please notify Island Computers US Corp immediately and then delete this  message.I You are notified that reliance on, disclosure of, distribution or copying  of this message is prohibited.    . <Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com> wrote in message> news:OF800C7CB8.2F722EAD-ON88256A11.00045E3E@foundation.com...' > A friend just pointed this out to me:  > C > http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20010315/tc/compaq_layoffs_1.html  > I >          HOUSTON (AP) - Compaq Computer Corp. is cutting 5,000 jobs and J >          warned Thursday that first-quarter earnings will fall far short of analysts' >          estimates.  > L > Hmmmm, PCs not doing so well, huh? What was that VMS revenue figure again?/ > Maybe this is where that VMS ad came from....  >  > Shane  >  >    ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 08:45:20 -0500- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) 6 Subject: Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut3 Message-ID: <zv2wzji4P73i@eisner.encompasserve.org>   W In article <tb42mqheqbh975@corp.supernews.com>, "Islandco" <sales@islandco.com> writes: 8 > Compaq will be merging Commercial and Consumer groups.  E I read that as Commercial and Consumer Wintel groups.  Reading todays G article in the Washington Post made it pretty clear that Wintel isn't a 6 good market to be in, Compaq should do something else.  B Gee, just what Compaq was saying way back when they bought Tandem.  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------? Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporation = NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil Group E                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replying    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 11:30:21 -0500 # From: SteveSov <st3v3sov@yahoo.com> 6 Subject: Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut) Message-ID: <3AB23F9D.2E6CFD98@yahoo.com>    Islandco wrote:  > 8 > Compaq will be merging Commercial and Consumer groups. > G > Oh God... It is difficult enough convincing Compaq employees at their J > customer service number that their company sells Commercial systems with8 > Alpha chips in them - not just PC's and Pro-whatevers.L > I have been repeatedly told that "We don't have any products called Alpha" > ... {snip}  ! Which 800 number are you calling?    Steve5   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:21:01 -0800e! From: Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.como6 Subject: Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cutD Message-ID: <OF7A4ECEE7.16F204A6-ON88256A11.0064861A@foundation.com>  I Not necessarily. If the commercial PC and consumer PC groups merge, whicheJ is how I read that, the figures for real computers will have to be trackedK separately. Now, given what we've been speculating about the VMS (oh, and I H suppose Those Other Two's)  revenues being used to subsidise the PC end,J how d'you think they plan to hide that when the figures are separated out?* How will they explain it to the investors?  > I see this as having the potential to be a good thing for VMS.   Shaned          7 Islandco <sales@islandco.com> on 03/16/2001 04:44:17 AM    To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com  cc:u  7 Subject:  Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cuta    6 Compaq will be merging Commercial and Consumer groups.  E Oh God... It is difficult enough convincing Compaq employees at theireH customer service number that their company sells Commercial systems with6 Alpha chips in them - not just PC's and Pro-whatevers.J I have been repeatedly told that "We don't have any products called Alpha"  0 The beginning of the end - I can feel it !!!!!!!   DT   -- Island Computers US Corporatione 2700 Gregory Street 	 Suite 150? Savannah GA 31404e Tel: 912 447 6622? Fax: 912 201 0096e sales@islandco.com www.islandco.com  C This message and any files transmitted with it are confidential andiJ may be privileged and/or subject to the provisions of privacy legislation.H They are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whomE they are addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intendedS
 recipient,G please notify Island Computers US Corp immediately and then delete this  message.I You are notified that reliance on, disclosure of, distribution or copyingb of this message is prohibited.    . <Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com> wrote in message> news:OF800C7CB8.2F722EAD-ON88256A11.00045E3E@foundation.com...' > A friend just pointed this out to me:a >rC > http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20010315/tc/compaq_layoffs_1.html  >eI >          HOUSTON (AP) - Compaq Computer Corp. is cutting 5,000 jobs and J >          warned Thursday that first-quarter earnings will fall far short of analysts' >          estimates.c >tE > Hmmmm, PCs not doing so well, huh? What was that VMS revenue figureo again?/ > Maybe this is where that VMS ad came from....n >2 > Shanet >  >a   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 07:22:38 GMT , From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch>" Subject: Re: DCL minute of the day& Message-ID: <3AB1BF21.A13A557E@gmx.ch>  P Someone told me that it could come from an antispam filter within this newsgroupP program which could block his posts because there is the word "spam" in his mail
 "address".   D.   Dave Weatherall wrote: > F > On Wed, 14 Mar 2001 07:51:42, Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch> > wrote: > ( > > Why is Brian's post not posted here? > >t > > D. > >k > > Peter Weaver wrote:- > > >-H > > > "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" <system@SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote in8 > > > message news:009F8F2C.E25962F4@SendSpamHere.ORG...
 > > .../.. > H > I never saw it either, It's not as if all Brian's stuff gets filtered.B > This is the second case that has been apparent in the last threeC > weeks. I wonder what else has gone missing. Where and Why too, of 	 > course.  >  > Cheers - Dave.   -- e6 MORANDI Consultants, Swiss Quality Computer Consulting6 avenue de Granges-Paccot 2, 1700 Fribourg  Switzerland1     Tel: +41.79.705.46.70 - Fax: +41.26.465.13.58l4  Visit our Web site at http://Didier.Morandi.Free.fr   ------------------------------   Date: 16 Mar 2001 15:26:34 GMT* From: bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler)Y Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS     Educational     Prj3 Message-ID: <98tbba$im9$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>.  , In article <3AB15726.32CD1225@infopuls.com>,, 	Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes: > Brian Wheeler wrote: >>  / >> In article <3AAFE6FC.D628A3DE@infopuls.com>, 6 >>         Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes: >> > Brian Wheeler wrote:  >> >>s2 >> >> In article <3AAE5EA9.311BD545@infopuls.com>,9 >> >>         Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:o >> >> > Brian Wheeler wrote: >> >> >>2 >> >> >> In article <3AAE30C5.20D69B88@bbc.co.uk>,@ >> >> >>         Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk> writes:
 >> >> >> >
 >> >> >> >! >> >> >> > Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:B
 >> >> >> >7 >> >> >> >> Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:) >> >> >> >>cQ >> >> >> >> > > BTW, in at least one case the use of Unixy C code has resulted inEZ >> >> >> >> > > relaxation of a not-so-useful restriction in a set of VMS system services.F >> >> >> >> > What was this relaxation? Didn't it break existing code? >> >> >> >>iT >> >> >> >> The output format of $ASCTIM for delta times is defined to be limited toV >> >> >> >> 10000 days minus a tick; the binary format itself, useful for calculationsS >> >> >> >> of all sorts, is of course not so restricted (the limit is around 32000sX >> >> >> >> years). However, all other time-related system services were also restrictedY >> >> >> >> to that 10000 day limit. This broke when the audit server used the delta time T >> >> >> >> format to compute a time_t - 10000 days after 1-JAN-1970. So this changeE >> >> >> >> actually made existing code work, instead of breaking it.m >> >> >> >>R >> >> >> >>         Jan 
 >> >> >> >7 >> >> >> > However, 1-JAN-19970 is a unix thing anyway. 
 >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> <sarcasm>M >> >> >>         Yeah, nobody but a unix loser would ever use 1-JAN-1970 as ar >> >> >> base for delta time!t >> >> >> </sarcasm>  >> >> >>< >> >> >> Isn't this whole topic getting a little bit stupid? >> >> >>U >> >> >> Its been a constant Unix vs VMS war which, as we all know, is pointless.  If.S >> >> >> Compaq decides to add more unix interfaces on top of VMS, what's the harm?aQ >> >> >> How does adding an interface dumb down the system, or lower its quality?e >> >> > 6 >> >> > This depends where it is implemented and what.m >> >> > If it's in the kernel then it makes things more complicated and will reduce quality in many respects.> >> >> > If the UNIX API requires functionality which is in contradiction to VMS system services the view of the system might be inconsistent.2 >> >>mS >> >> Granted, but since nobody knows how its going to be implemented, then there'smR >> >> no way one can argue that adding unix apis will bring the quality of the VMS >> >> kernel down. >> > >> > This was exactly my point: before the choir applauses it must be clear how it is accomplished. If it is done the wrong way the outcome will be a disadvantage.y >> VP >> So, you're saying that just the possibility of VMS engineering doing a shittyO >> job is enough to rag on the concept as a whole?  Your anti-unix prejudice isR >> clouding your reasoning.s > \ > The job isn't done shitty, the concept is shit (like UNIX). What can you make out of shit? >  >> >> >> If.S >> >> >> it is buggy, its not unix's fault...but the implementation on VMS.  AddingeP >> >> >> interfaces to an OS doesn't weaken it...it can only strengthen it.  DidP >> >> >> adding a C compiler to VMS lower the quality of the OS?  Did the TCP/IP4 >> >> >> libaries from Tru64 unix lower the quality? >> >> > k >> >> > Libraries and tools are not part of the kernel. I wonder what your experience in OS development is.u >> >> O >> >> Again, we don't know how the Unix API would be added to VMS, so it may beaM >> >> a tools/libraries issue and not touch the kernel at all.  Ok, that is ai- >> >> bit unlikely, but still, a possibility.r >> > >> > See above. And there is still the problem of offering the wrong way (the UNIX) to solve things which will complicate the day to day work of VMS admins, programmers and users.0 >> eO >> The VMS way isn't going away.  What makes you think that adding UNIX APIs is,O >> going to make life harder for anyone?  Sure, no choice is easier, but beforel9 >> long there won't be anyone around to not make choices.n >  > It makes things more complicated because there are more ways to do things and you have to think about how other people solved things if you have to work on what they created before they left or with it if you work together.e > Why would one chose VMSIX? In other words: this COE stuff wouldn't change anything because the miracle wouldn't happen. There is no advantage in running a UNIX like crap app on VMS.a > T >> >> I was arguing from the point that there seems to be an overriding feeling thatC >> >> anything related to unix is unclean and must not be near VMS.m >> > >> > Exactly. Dump UNIX which is pure crap (not only from the architecture point of view but also from point of implemetation quality, user interface aso; only the price might be okay if you get payed for using it).s >> iQ >> You are a troll, there's no other explanation.  You're using Netscape on LinuxtP >> to post this tripe, yet apparently unix is crap.  Sure, whatever.  Why aren't# >> you using Netscape on VMS, then?e >  > Sorry for pointing out again that you have a major lack of understanding and logic. Even if there were no app on VMS which is better or even equal to all UNIX apps this is no technical prove that UNIX were better. Of course it would be strange not to conclude that but first there should be an analysis. In our case this analysis reveales that a company whose name is not spelled out here did active damage to the app base, market reputation, business goals and future perspectives of VMS. This lead to the fac > that there isn't any decent browser around. The from UNIX ported Navigator is crap as far as I rate the frequent complains in this NG. From what I read only a masochist could try to use VMS as a browser platform. But anyway I didn't try it so far but soon I will because this beloved Navigator on Linux sucks severly too besides that Linux sucks by itself. So it's obvious that you didn't try to put in a resonable statement because you all knew that. It's obvious that you only tried to accuse me. My conclusii > is that you ran out of arguments (to be precise: if haven't read a technical argument from you so far).n  N Nor I from you.  You've been ragging on Unix for no reason other than the fact its different than VMS.m    : > I really don't understand what you are doing in this NG.  H Well, as I see it, I'm arguing with someone who believes if all you have+ is a hammer (VMS) then the world is a nail.t     > N >> I submit to you that the Unix architecture is actually superior to VMS's inN >> many ways.  The simplistic approach where everything is treated as a streamO >> of bytes is a powerful concept.  However, does this mean that Unix is better P >> than VMS as a whole?  Nope, as far as I'm concerned, its a matter of choosingP >> the right tool for the job.  Sometimes Unix is the right tool, sometimes VMS.M >> However, to keep this discussion on track, the number of jobs where VMS ise! >> suitable is rapidly shrinking.d > > Are USamerican. Sorry I'm not to insult the majority but it's too funny to have the European prejudice of the USamerican stereotype: simplicity is the solution LOL. Albert Einstein said (of course he said it in German and in fact the English version doesn't make much sense but it's too tempting to quote it here): Make it as simple as possible but not too simple. Why not assembly language? The simpler the tools are the better, eh? I don't believe that you really think what you're writing. a  O I'm not even going to respond to this...though I am tempted to invoke Godwin's s law...just to move on.    >I also don't understand why the UNIX bytestream advocates don't see that the work of structuring the date has to be done in the apps which is okay for the semantic part. But for several basic types of data organisation its ideal to have it already at hand in the filesystem.N > To say it bluntly: having only bytestreams as common denominator in the filesystem or for program data exchange with pipeing is the opposite of superiority. Again: if you really think what you're writing here why are you here?  I The problem with structuring files by the OS is that there are times whenTO different applications want to view the _SAME_ data using different structures.@M That is a flaw with structured storage.  With a stream of bytes, its possible ( to view data in any structure desired.     > S >> >> >> There are two major APIs out there:  Unix and Windows.  If compaq wants toiW >> >> >> expand VMS's marketshare, it is going to have to provide a good implementationrR >> >> >> of one of those two...and I don't see the Windows API being chosen.  OnceR >> >> >> developers see VMS as "just another target", they're more likely to startS >> >> >> writing pieces of code which take advantage of VMS...compared to now where - >> >> >> a port is nearly a complete rewrite.  >> >> >qM >> >> > Is it that difficult to understand that we don't need another UNIX???o >> >> K >> >> That's fine...except that unless VMS conforms to something other thanmP >> >> itself, vendors are not going to bother porting software to it because itsL >> >> not important (or: profitable) to justify a complete rewrite to make a >> >> VMS application. >> > >> > Why isn't that bad? Does any Micro$oft product conform to anything other than itself? To what does a UNIX version conform?  >>  N >> Microsoft can do its own thing because marketshare....marketshare which VMSQ >> does not have.  Unix conforms to POSIX which is open, and anyone can implemente >> it...witness Linux. >  > But no one did it so far. And POSIX is crap also which even most UNIX people concede. Ever read The Mythical Man Month? POSIX is the camel which should have been a horse designed by a committee.  M Oh, I agree, to some extent.  There are some parts of POSIX which are screwy,e  but for the most part, it works.   > 7 >> > Why would it be helpful to have UNIX apps on VMS??  >> iQ >> Gee, why would anyone want more apps for their OS?  VMS is fun to look at withOL >> nothing installed...why, I could just type "dir/full" all day!  There areN >> many applications for unix which are quite useful that could be compiled onP >> VMS if some basic infrastructure was added...which is what this is all about. > / > But why on VMS, why not running them on UNIX?u  6 But you say that Unix sucks, so I should do it on VMS.   > P >> > If you want to take advantage of VMS you have to write a real VMS app. What1 >> > is the point in having another UNIX version?o >>  Q >> The half-assed (but valiant) ports of unix software to VMS have one overriding:G >> problem:  they're always behind.  It takes so much effort to port anmP >> application to VMS that trying to keep it up to date is virtually impossible. >> o >> >\ >> >> > Think about Apple. Would Steve Jobs argue that Apple should drop their superior API,' >> > UI and so on for UNIX or Windoze??s >> >>oQ >> >> Have you seen Mac OS X?  It is _BSD_ with Apple specific APIs built on top.iM >> >> It is another unix.  You can run unix apps and mac apps...so if someoneeK >> >> want to run an open source database it doesn't take months to make iti( >> >> compile (let alone work correctly) >> > >> > We all know this. Do you know NeXTSTEP? Would any Mac user accept a UNIX app? I know of a long term Mac user who is afraid of MacOS X because he thinks that he might get in touch with the UNIX underneath.  >>  K >> It wouldn't have anything to do with you ragging on how bad Unix is, now-M >> would it?  "Mr. Mac user, if you use mac OS X and accidentally open up themA >> command line, your soul is as good as gone!"  Give me a break.- >  > ????/> Any arguments available? Should I have written that this very same Mac user is a genious in graphics design and that he specifically said that he doesn't want to cope around with the UNIX command line shell crap. Does this make you feel better? Surely he won't die but he would lose his valuable time.-  K If it is done correctly, the user will not use the unix command line unlesseK they want to.  Apple isn't stupid, and all the functionality will be there -J without going to the command line.  Your Mac user is afraid of the unknown> and that's fine...except that there's nothing to be afraid of.     >  >> > But anyway: MacOS X adds something on top, doesn't change the kernel. MacOS X adds functionality instead of dublicating it. Having UNIX API on VMS is redundant, superflous and completely unecessary.m >> sP >> IN YOUR OPINION.  This is what this boils down to.  I (and many others) wouldQ >> find this a very nice addition to VMS.  If its unnecessary for you, then don'ttL >> use it.  Its that simple.  Hell, don't even upgrade.  Stay at the currentL >> version because any new feature must be evil and degrade the quality VMS! > > Stupid and missing the point. Exactly the opposite is required. Keep the UNIX crap out of VMS that VMS can be developed in a clean and stable fashion with all power focused on the things that are necessary. And that all quality accustomed users can upgrade without risk. If UNIX crap creeps into the kernel than I can't avoid it if I upgrade. Your proposal is a reasonable as your UNIX defense. What are you doing here?l >  >> >> >Who would like to have another Windoze instead of a Mac? There are other much more efficient and technically much better solutions to the "VMS problem" (how some of this NG would phrase the lack of a few desktop and a few enterprise apps). >> >>?O >> >> What is that solution?  Compaq (and Digital's) Marketing always seemed to N >> >> be focused on preaching to the choir, but that doesn't help.  OutrageousL >> >> costs for OS licenses doesn't help.  No entry-level-priced machines to' >> >> seed the market isn't helping....u >> > >> > I published several techical solutions already and I'm getting tired now - some people will be happy to read that, I know ...< >> > You will find them by yourself they are not farfetched. >> .P >> I've not read them, and judging by your attitude, it'd be a waste of my time.J >> Quick, plow your head into the sand and maybe VMS will become dominant! > > Poor misunderstanding. As I stated several times: people a different. The vast majority of computer people is not VMS people and never will because it likes the challenge of unimportant things like mastering the UNIX command line shell quirks, keeping the irregular command names and options in mind and others. We simply don't need this (and you). We don't need UNIX on VMS. Why don't you get it??  * Ok, then I'd like to make an announcement:D 	VMS IS DEAD.  GRAFTING THE UNIX API ON IT WON'T HELP IT, AS LONG ASD 	CLOSE MINDED VMS USERS (OR VMS-USERS-TO-BE) REFUSE TO DEAL WITH THED 	REALITY THAT, MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, VMS ISN'T THE RIGHT TOOL FOR THE( 	JOB.  GOODBYE, VMS!  WE HARDLY KNEW YE!   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 11:31:53 -0500s2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)Y Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS     Educational     PraL Message-ID: <rdeininger-1603011131550001@user-2ive6ob.dialup.mindspring.com>  H In article <98tbba$im9$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>, bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler) wrote:    K > The problem with structuring files by the OS is that there are times wheneE > different applications want to view the _SAME_ data using different. structures. O > That is a flaw with structured storage.  With a stream of bytes, its possibleh* > to view data in any structure desired.    J Well, VMS lets you work with completely unstructured files.  It isn't evenA very hard.  But it is a rare need, so it isn't the default in anyl  programming situation I've used.  J I hope you will admit that in many situations, a "standard" view of a file is just what is needed..  , > Ok, then I'd like to make an announcement:M >         VMS IS DEAD.  GRAFTING THE UNIX API ON IT WON'T HELP IT, AS LONG AS4M >         CLOSE MINDED VMS USERS (OR VMS-USERS-TO-BE) REFUSE TO DEAL WITH THE M >         REALITY THAT, MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, VMS ISN'T THE RIGHT TOOL FOR THEb1 >         JOB.  GOODBYE, VMS!  WE HARDLY KNEW YE!A  J I'm getting really, really tired of this thread.  I think I'll abandon it,: in spite of the interesting bits that appear now and then.   -- p Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.comi   ------------------------------   Date: 16 Mar 2001 15:07:15 GMT* From: bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler)Y Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS    EducationalProgram)>3 Message-ID: <98ta73$ije$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>k  , In article <3AB16B4A.2B1C5602@infopuls.com>,, 	Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:   [snip]   >> > >> > Wrong. Having another UNIX is no advantage. Everybody who can afford VMS can afford another PC to run Linux, Solaris or whatever. No need for VMS to run UNIX crap SW.e >> dR >> Ok, so you're saying that people should buy solaris or linux machines when theyL >> need software not available for VMS.  Fair enough...BUT what happens whenJ >> all of the software functions that VMS is offering become available forN >> Unix at a lower cost?  Oooops!  No more reason to keep that costly VMS box.H >> Shut it down and sell it for scrap.  I like VMS, but the one functionP >> it has provided us for the last decade (database serving) has been passed offN >> to a much cheaper/faster unix box.  Its only still running until we get theN >> data migrated out and then its going to be decommissioned.  The unix box weQ >> put it on is a $1500 Dell PC running Linux & Sybase.  And before you go off on K >> "crap unix", etc, its been running non stop since October 1999.  LongishR5 >> uptimes are no longer the exclusive domain of VMS.v >> -R >> What function should we used the decommissioned VMS machine for?  Great, stableH >> OS...but without software, what's the point of keeping it plugged in? >  > Good point but not helpful because as you already pointed out: VMS is more expensive anyway and with steadily increasing power of once weak machines you don't need the more expensive machines now where they have been necessary before.  ; So where is VMS the right tool and unix not the right tool?m  v> UNIX is crap from its (missing) architecture a.s.o.. I don't repeat it. It will be crap even if it runs forever. If you only put a DB on it, if you don't have any administration to do on this host, if you don't need any VMSish features like clustering and it's unreavaled power to efficiently manage and provide resources to a lot of users there is really no need for VMS.  J So then, unix isn't crap if it does the job.  That's what its all about.    O Speaking of clusters, unix isn't as far behind as you'd like to believe.  ThereiM are free (though admittedly somewhat young) High Availabilty, Load Balancing,TJ and Single-Image clustering solutions for Linux today...not to mention the& ones that are from commercial vendors.    X> What most people posting to this topic don't understand is that competing with UNIX using quickshot ported UNIX apps is a deadend. Unwillingly you proved what I tried to explain because with that very same example the apps availability wasn't the reason. Instead it was basically what I said: having an app which makes no use of VMS features.  M VMS is a dead end no matter what, unless by some miracle it becomes the rightVN tool for more jobs.  Otherwise its a niche player, and like every niche playerK before it, the niche will disappear.  Then what?  Then your much hated UnixOJ is the only player left...serving the niche market which was once VMS's as! well as a bunch of other markets.      >  >> >> > - Writing SW for a niche is the stupidest thing you can do. SW should be sold to as many customers as possible because copying SW is almost free.m >> >> Q >> >> YEP, WRITING SOFTWARE FOR NICHE MARKETS IS STUPID, WHICH IS WHY VMS IS VERY>N >> >> NEARLY DEAD.  If the COE initiative allows 'commodity' unix source to beC >> >> compiled on VMS then VMS is that much less of a niche player.  >> > >> > Idiot. *IDIOT*. >> d* >> Is this because I don't agree with you? > > No, because you obviously don't think before you write down an argument. Besides that you don't take into account what is related with the COE stuff you exhange the roles of the Q and the SW shops. The COE stuff is the SW which the Q writes and which is aimed for a niche market. Read Fred Kleinsorges very much telling post about this subject. This initiative will help in putting VMS in even more a niche.e  J Ah, but the tools needed to make COE feasable to maintain (the unix apis) J benefit all SW vendors who want to port their software to VMS.  Its not so1 much about COE as it is about the infrastructure.a     > ^ >> > VMS is not dead. VMS is artificially made to a niche OS by several other idiots like you. >> lQ >> Like ME?  I think not.  VMS has been artificially made into a niche OS because>O >> many proponents (such as yourself) believe with all your heart that anythingtM >> not VMS is evil and that it must be crap.  VMS is niche because it doesn't ' >> implement common standards.  Period.f > $> You are a good example of denying history. Firstly: there other ideas/OSs worth to look at - surely *not* UNIX; that's what I stated. Secondly: the standards argument is stupid because there are several examples in history that having your own solution is not a problem. Ever heard Windoze?  E Yeah, and apparently unlike you, I'm not ignorant on how it became a nK standard.  It was forcefully bundled with mass market OEM machines.  MS wascM weilding monopoly power in the DOS market to force windows onto users whetherlL they wanted it or not.  When enough installs were out there, *ONLY THEN* wasM it a successful platform to write to.  VMS is very different in this respect:lD realistically one vendor for hardware, very small market share, etc.     > < >> >Study history! Stay away from VMS, you don't deserve it! >> aI >> Why don't I deserve it?  Is it because I see the value in other tools?cQ >> I have studied history.  I've been using VMS for years...longer than I've beenbQ >> using unix...however I use unix for nearly all of my tasks now.  Why?  Becausea  >> that's where the software is. > 1 > Point well taken. But not VMS' technical fault.e   Very true.  We agree on this.  o   >  >> > Use UNIX! Use UNIX SW.e >> M >> I do, and so do you.  >  > Unfortunately I have to. >  >> aN >> [[off topic:  please wrap your lines at 75 chars, these long lines are very$ >>   annoying, not to mention rude]] > > [[off topic also: you are the fourth person complaining about my long lines. I decided not to put in artifical line breaks because this should be the task of the rendering engine (like with HTML). Robert Deininger used to post these long lines also and then I thought through and came to the conclusion that I would adjust my news reader to put in these line breakes. Would you like to adjust your reader the same way?]]    N If more than one person is complaining, then maybe its not everyone else.  Not+ everyone uses Netscape to view their news. g   >  >> >> > - Offering bad ways like UNIX shells to accomplish tasks is a safe method to kill the productivity of VMS. Today we know how things are solved properly. Tomorrow we will never know.d >> >> P >> >> Get off it.  UNIX != "bad ways", no matter how many times you keep tellingR >> >> yourself that.  Its different.  That's all.  VMS has one bad side to it:  noR >> >> matter how well designed it is, it is PROPRIETARY.  Unix, as a whole is not,S >> >> which gives it a huge advantage in my book over VMS.  With unix I can move to 9 >> >> another vendor if there are quality or cost issues.  >> >O >> > You don't understand a clue. This proprietary argument has long disproved.  >> nO >> Disproved?  How?  VMS is proprietary.  This is a fact.  When you have sourcewK >> code on VMS is cannot be compiled anywhere else without massive changes.eK >> Properly written unix apps (and there are quite a few) can be recompilednK >> with little or no change from one unix to another.  This is also a fact.s& >> How can this possibly be disproved? > > This can't. Proprietary is a word to denote undocumented (API wise) or niche products. This isn't a technical argument. And as another poster pointed out VMS was one of the first OSs beeing certified by the Open Group (or something similar). There are several standards even open standards that are severely broken. Your proprietary argument isn't worth anything. Do you understand this? Do we agree?  H We agree, but only to an extent.  VMS is proprietary in that there is noI independant (i.e. not controlled by compaq) which says "this is VMS".  It>G is available from only one vendor, and is not compatible with any otherw< system at the source level (except for very trivial things).    Y > BTW I don't buy your recompilation argument because there are too many counterexamples.s  K Show me some, then.  I put the clause "well written" in there on purpose.   K Anyone can write a program which will only compile on a certain platform.  nI There are several methods of writing programs which will run on more thanrI one unix without the need to rework it substantially.  Autoconf is one oft these methods.     >  >> > UNIX and Windoze are another form of beeing proprietary with UNIX having the disadvantage of never beeing the same if you change the vendor.e >> tJ >> Are they as great as when you move from VMS to anything else?  Not evenM >> close.  The difference between unixes is trivial at best for the end user, 5 >> and only require a bit of effort for the sysadmin.? >  > Yes - the differences between the UNIXes are much smaller than between VMS and UNIX. What a surprise! VMS isn't UNIX? Why isn't UNIX implementing the Windoze API. There is the vast majority of apps!  K The WINE project is implementing the windows api on unix. Corel has used itlL to port several applications to linux via a recompile.  Also, products such ' as WindU has been doing this for years.o    ,> The differences for using the UNIX commands are painful (for the end user - what is an end user of an OS anyway?) - especially for two widely used commands: "find" and "ps". Compare the option on Linux and Solaris. Are these the same commands? One might find it doubtful if you look at the options.  J Ok, lets look at ps first.  Common usage is either 'ps' or 'ps -ef'.  Lets# compare the output of 'ps' first...t   SOLARIS:    PID TTY      TIME CMD  17092 pts/1    0:01 bashu  17100 pts/1    2:08 emacs-20    Linux:   PID TTY          TIME CMDS  6369 pts/0    00:00:00 bash  6382 pts/0    00:00:00 ps  M I don't see any real difference (except the commands being run are different)    ok, "ps -ef" SOLARIS:2      UID   PID  PPID  C    STIME TTY      TIME CMD4     root     0     0  0   Jan 24 ?        0:24 sched:     root     1     0  0   Jan 24 ?        0:04 /etc/init -6     root     2     0  0   Jan 24 ?        0:21 pageout7     root     3     0  0   Jan 24 ?       132:15 fsflushoF     root   261     1  0   Jan 24 ?        0:00 /usr/lib/saf/sac -t 300=     root   199     1  0   Jan 24 ?        0:00 /usr/lib/utmpd, [you get the idea]     Linux:3 UID        PID  PPID  C STIME TTY          TIME CMD 8 root         1     0  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:06 init [5]9 root         2     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:10 [kflushd]i9 root         3     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:01:11 [kupdate]e7 root         4     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:00 [kpiod]r8 root         5     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:12 [kswapd]= root         6     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:00 [mdrecoveryd]e7 bin        337     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:00 portmapa7 root       352     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:00 [lockd]  [etc]o  K Ok, there are some differences:  time is listed differently, and linux usesiJ '[]' to denote a swapped out process.  These are not critical differences.  H Sure, they have different 'exotic' features, but lets face it, the basic functionality is the same.  F For find, there are more differences, but the basic usage is the same 6 regardless of platform:  find <dir> -name "<filename>"  J This works the same on all unixes I've dealt with.  Again, its an issue ofI 'exotic' features...sort of like when you use VMS 5.5 and bitch about not  having 'PIPE'.     > N >> > If 60% of market were owned by VMS nobody would talk about proprietarity. >> dN >> Ah, but it is not at 60%.  I doubt even 10%.  It is proprietary, regardless >> of market size. >  > You again missed the point. Windoze is also proprietary as is UNIX. What makes you claim that UNIX isn't proprietary? What makes you think that this is an advantage?d    H If I had the itch, I could implement a unix of my own.  It is very near K impossible to make a windows clone.  It is only slightly less impossible towJ make a VMS clone.  Unix is a class of operating systems, not a single one.   > > >> > Read the UNIX-Haters Handbook! Leave VMS alone! Use UNIX! >>  P >> Ah, the source of your misguidance.  Maybe this quote from the "Anti-Forward"& >> will shed some light on this issue:M >>         Dennis Ritchie writes "You claim to seek progress, but you succeede >>         mainly in whining."N >> I have read it.  Its crap.  It bitches and moans about everything, yet manyL >> of its complaints are "fixed" in most unixes.  In addition, if one wantedI >> to, it would be easy to write a "VMS-Hater's Handbook".  But its not avM >> matter of hating anything:  its about choosing the right tool for the job.r> >> VMS is rapidly becoming less and less often the right tool. > Beause you made it so? >  > If you really have read it (not only the Anti-Forward) then you would know that it's not about hating for the sake of hating.   N Indeed, its about complaining.  "Waaa!  It doesn't do what I thought it shouldN so its broken!" (or:  "Waa!  There's another way to do this, so its broken!") = Don't get me wrong, there are some valid criticisms, but manyoO of them are toolset issues.  Want a standard user experience across all unixes?tM Install the GNU tools everywhere...magically most of the complaints addressed  are solved.'    > It clearly shows what sucks and why. And I read it only last year after my painful experiences with UNIX and I found it very true (nothing about the fixes you mentioned generaly). Would you like to go through the book together with me and check what has been fixed? Has the shell command interpretation concept been fixed? No! Have the command and parameter irregularities been fixed?S > No! Has the 'every file is an unstructured stream of bytes' model been fixed? No!o  G Please explain to me why a file as stream of bytes is broken.  It was ap: design (yes DESIGN) decision, and not subject to "fixing".  C > Please name the three most important things that have been fixed.   N Its been years since I read it.  Why don't you point out the three biggest andN I'll discuss them.  Mostly its about the userspace tools.  GNU tools fix most ) of the issues (where there are issues).        > ~ >> >> > I'm too tired to continue this list. Every educated engineer will understand that this is a major attempt to kill VMS. >> >>-S >> >> If by "educated" you mean "anything but pure VMS is evil and we don't need toeM >> >> be interoperable with anyone but ourselves", then I guess you're right.  >> > >> > Silly.a >> sK >> Yes, your attitude is silly.  You have yet to show that adding unix apisnL >> kills VMS.  If they started removing VMS apis, then yes, I could see yourF >> point.  But as it stands, they're adding to, and not removing from. > ' > Do you know Occam's Razor? See below!c  M Yes, I do.  In this case, the "simpler" solution is to add a new API and not l" remove valid APIs from the kernel.     >  >> >> > My hope and wish: the good VMS engineers stay with the normal version. The COE version will be so crappy and full of bugs that it will never be usable.  >> >> T >> >> This is an interesting statement.  So, anything Unixy is so inheritly unstableN >> >> that just by implementing it brings the whole OS down?  You're on crack.R >> >> If they do a shit-awful job of bringing unix services to vms, then its their  >> >> own damned fault.  Period. >> >>> > Stupid. As explained several times: introducing unecessary complexity, superflous or redundant functions and ways to accomplish tasks which are in contradiction to the desing principles of VMS is a safe way to ruin it all. This has nothing to do with implementation quality.. > ( >> I'll thank you not to call me stupid. > ) > Please take your time before you write.p  M Believe it or not, I do think quite a bit about what you write...though often J its so full of insults (to me, unix users, world in general) that its hard to see past them.i   > 0 >> It has everything to do with implementation! A > I wrote "implementation quality" not implementation in general.u > O >>                                              If the UNIX api is added to VMSoP >> via a set of libraries, then it is no more redundant or more complex than any >> other RTL!  f > z > I wrote this before. But we don't know yet. So it's far too early to applause and we should know how it is accomplished.  + EXACTLY.  Its also far to early to condemn.a   > O >>             If something in the kernel has to change, then it is an issue ofnO >> the kernel not being flexible enough to accomplish the task at hand.  If therP >> task at hand was for anything non-unix-api related, you'd probably be all for >> a change in the kernel. > > The problem with the implementaion in the kernel is that I expect a few UNIX calls to interfere with VMS calls. If you want to access the same resource with the UNIX API from within one program and with the VMS API from within another program. I expect problems that the semantics of these accesses are different and exclude each other. Which results in a severe implementation design problem.   I Do you know this for a fact?  We don't know what they're going to do, andeI assuming they're competent (which I do), they'll make the right choices. s   >  >> m >> >P >> >> Attitudes like this is why VMS is dead.  Its a wonder that TCP/IP was everL >> >> added to VMS with attitudes like this....DECNet is the pure networking6 >> >> protocol!  LAT is the way to true enlightenment! >> >>> > Do you like democracy?? You know, the kind of organising a state in which the people who have money buy the people who simulate decision processes (politicians) or a dumb majority can decide if one plus one is three or four? Is TCP/IP better because the majority is using it? >>  G >> Is VMS better because nobody is using it?   Quality is not inversely  >> proportional to usage.d >  > Argh - yes, but no point!! Did I say or imply this? Did you say that DECnet should have to be replaced by TCP/IP because this is the (majority) standard?   G You implied that things chosen by the majority are corrupt and or lowerb quality.   > O >> >> WAIT A MINUTE!  If VMS is so great, and unix so bad, why is it that I spyr  >> >> this line in your headers: >> >>h= >> >> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.0.36 i586)u >> >>oN >> >> Huh.  Looks like you're just a troll...or a hypocrite.  Not only are you< >> >> using a unix to do your mail, you're doing it on a PC. >> >>p
 >> >> Ugh. >> >> Brianc >> > >> > As I stated several months ago: I'm in a process to moving back to VMS because I'm tired of the wrong promises of UNIX land. UNIX is crap. Believe me! I have 7 years first hand experience mostly with Solaris and Linux, but some others also.M >> aM >> Which promises are those?  Why did you switch from VMS in the first place?r >  > Because I changed my working place. I first used CDC and DEC. Then Apple, then PC, then Mac, then PC, then Solaris, Linux, Solaris. My private SW is running on Linux and/or VMS.h > P >> In the 7 years did you attempt to learn why Unix does things the way it does,Q >> or did you just sit and complain about how "its no VMS"?  I'm serious, I would J >> like to know.  I (and many others) made a transition from VMS or PCs orI >> whatever to Unix without the obvious hatred you seem to be displaying.  > "> I'm an intested type of person. I learned UNIX with great enthusiams. The promises were it is elegant, simple and reliable. When using the PC I constantly thought about VMS. With UNIX it was different. Only after the mentioned 7 years and reading the mentioned book I became a UNIX hater.  C That's odd, because I find unix far simpler to understand than VMS.e     > ` >> > I also publicly offered to put money into a fund to get a full VMS Opera port. No response. >> >V >> > Do you know on what platform Navigator has been developed? Could it be UNIX crap? >> > Navigator is crap. I use it to avoid Micro$oft although some people say the IE is the better browser. If there is a decent VMS browser available I'll switch to that. >> WL >> So, we come back to the core of the problem:  lack of available software.N >> Whether something was built on unix doesn't make it crap, anymore than unix6 >> as a whole is crap.  Why don't you write a browser? > H > Good question. Because I have *other* things to do. Do you understand?  J Of course I do.  However, others have other things to do, and supporting a% small-user-base OS isn't one of them.a     >  >> >7 >> > Do you think that your contribution has any value?t >> oM >> Yes, in fact I do.   You know, at first I thought you were just a mindlessyH >> anti-unix troll.  But then I came to a startling realization:  you'reL >> just close minded.  Computers are just tools.  You pick the one that doesM >> the job the best *FOR YOU*.  If VMS does the job for you (which apparently I >> it doesn't, as you're using a unix browser) then that's great.  VMS isaI >> lacking in several areas for me (and others), which is why I think the P >> COE initiative is a good thing.  I think VMS is a great operating system, andN >> I'd hate to see it go away.  But, that doesn't mean that I think everythingL >> else sucks.  There is room in computing for more than one OS...right toolR >> for the job.  VMS is no longer the right tool for many applications, and adding> >> unix APIs would be a step towards making it the right tool. > > Think about the business case. I'm sure it isn't there. The initiative will bring some UNIX apps but they will run unsatisfying and have a lot of bugs which will show up only on VMS. In the mid-term there will no more usable SW on VMS than without this COE initiative, maybe even fewer because the genuine VMS apps might have been changed to the more portable API and will then mainly be supported on UNIXes. Did you ever consider this effect?n  H Yes, I did.  But I don't think it changes anything.  Answer this: is no H software better than (possibly) buggy software?  VMS isn't going to haveJ any new VMS-only software regardless of the COE initiative.  At least withI it, there's the possibility that more people would be exposed to VMS and bM possibly incorporate some of VMS's strong points into their software.  Hidingo6 VMS in the corner isn't going to bring new developers.   > h > UNIX isn't the right tool even if it is sometimes the only tool because it lets too much to wish left.  D I disagree.  Any tool is the right tool, compared to no tool at all.   > O >> I suppose we should just agree to disagree:  I think adding Unix APIs to VMS O >> would be a good thing, and you think it'd be a bad thing.  I suppose there'smH >> no further need for discussing this, since neither of us are going to >> convince the other. >> e >> Brian > > Probably. But I don't see why you think VMS is great and shouldn't vanish if you even like the few most ugly thinks of UNIX like the shell and the API and the simplistic approach (e.g. files as structureless streams of byte).  Why are you here in this NG?>  K Its not impossible to see the beauty in two different methods.  Its easy to I see advantages to both methods, and disadvantages.  But it all boils downu* to the right tool (as I've said before).     Briana   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:50:55 -0600 + From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com>SY Subject: RE: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS    EducationalProgram)pL Message-ID: <3B55D7F383B0D31197D9009027541CBF0BDD5481@cmiexch1.cmi.itds.com>   > -----Original Message-----: > From: bdwheele@indiana.edu [mailto:bdwheele@indiana.edu]  . > In article <3AB16B4A.2B1C5602@infopuls.com>,. > 	Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:  ; > > UNIX is crap from its (missing) architecture a.s.o.. I  ? > don't repeat it. It will be crap even if it runs forever. If o@ > you only put a DB on it, if you don't have any administration < > to do on this host, if you don't need any VMSish features ; > like clustering and it's unreavaled power to efficiently  : > manage and provide resources to a lot of users there is  > really no need for VMS.o  @ > So then, unix isn't crap if it does the job.  That's what its  > all about.    K Well -- actually, it could do the job, and still be doing it the wrong way,rJ and it would still be crap.  That's really not what the argument should be about here though. :)y  > > VMS is a dead end no matter what, unless by some miracle it  > becomes the rightp> > tool for more jobs.  Otherwise its a niche player, and like  > every niche player> > before it, the niche will disappear.  Then what?  Then your  > much hated Unix ? > is the only player left...serving the niche market which was e > once VMS's asd# > well as a bunch of other markets.    Ahh -- now that's the point.    @ > If I had the itch, I could implement a unix of my own.  It is  > very near @ > impossible to make a windows clone.  It is only slightly less  > impossible tov? > make a VMS clone.  Unix is a class of operating systems, not o > a single one.     < That's not exactly true -- see the below windows clone in c:  B void main(void); /* Remember, _ALWAYS_ use function prototypes! */   void main(void) {p 	while (1);' }N  5 I'll bet this will even compile on VMS _and_ unix. :)   K I would give a Pascal example, too, but I haven't done any Pascal recently.o  @ > Please explain to me why a file as stream of bytes is broken.  >  It was a.< > design (yes DESIGN) decision, and not subject to "fixing".  L Actually, if I understand correctly, RMS is only stacked on top of Files-11,G anyway.  It could be "fixed" in a sense the same way that Files-11 was,s+ although "extended" would be a better word.i  @ > > Argh - yes, but no point!! Did I say or imply this? Did you ? > say that DECnet should have to be replaced by TCP/IP because i" > this is the (majority) standard?  = > You implied that things chosen by the majority are corrupt : > and or lower
 > quality.  F On this I have to agree -- things chosen by the majority, for whateverJ reason (co-incidence, or is the majority just that stupid?), seem to be ofK low quality.  Broadcast TV, radio, Microshaft products, VHS video tapes (asdK opposed to laserdisc, or at least beta), cd audio (as opposed to DAT), most H laws in the US (not that you could really argue that those are chosen byH majority these days... feel free to throw that one out), McDonalds...  IK have a long list.  I'm afraid, though, that this has no bearing on the real2 topic at hand. :)o  E > That's odd, because I find unix far simpler to understand than VMS.t  J I think the argument is that it's too simple -- which it is sometimes, for some things.   Regards,   ChrisT  ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developer  Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");t '    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 11:10:56 -0500 2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)Y Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS    EducationalProgram)rL Message-ID: <rdeininger-1603011110590001@user-2ive6ob.dialup.mindspring.com>  H In article <98ta73$ije$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>, bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler) wrote:  . > In article <3AB16B4A.2B1C5602@infopuls.com>,5 >         Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:r >    I > > [[off topic also: you are the fourth person complaining about my long H lines. I decided not to put in artifical line breaks because this shouldF be the task of the rendering engine (like with HTML). Robert DeiningerI used to post these long lines also and then I thought through and came tosF the conclusion that I would adjust my news reader to put in these line= breakes. Would you like to adjust your reader the same way?]]     J It was an accident.  News program got configured wrong somehow.  The postsI did NOT come back to me with long lines, so I did not know I was broken. tJ I wish someone had complained sooner.  My news program is supposed to chopJ up my lines when it posts.  If it doesn't, I can't tell -- it fixes up the article when it downloads it.   J There are news readers that CAN'T reformat messages.  Folks shouldn't postG long lines, html, MIME, base64, or quoted-printable in this newsgroup. wJ Nor Backup save-sets, compressed text libraries, TPU section files, or any other VMS-specific file format.   F And Word attachments are Right Out.  But that's so obvious I shouldn't mention it.b   -- q Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.comm   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 11:24:15 -0500 2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)Y Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS    EducationalProgram)oL Message-ID: <rdeininger-1603011124170001@user-2ive6ob.dialup.mindspring.com>  H In article <98ta73$ije$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>, bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler) wrote:     > ok, "ps -ef"
 > SOLARIS:4 >      UID   PID  PPID  C    STIME TTY      TIME CMD6 >     root     0     0  0   Jan 24 ?        0:24 sched< >     root     1     0  0   Jan 24 ?        0:04 /etc/init -8 >     root     2     0  0   Jan 24 ?        0:21 pageout9 >     root     3     0  0   Jan 24 ?       132:15 fsflushdH >     root   261     1  0   Jan 24 ?        0:00 /usr/lib/saf/sac -t 300? >     root   199     1  0   Jan 24 ?        0:00 /usr/lib/utmpdr > [you get the idea] >  >  > Linux:5 > UID        PID  PPID  C STIME TTY          TIME CMDi: > root         1     0  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:06 init [5]; > root         2     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:10 [kflushd] ; > root         3     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:01:11 [kupdate]a9 > root         4     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:00 [kpiod]i: > root         5     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:12 [kswapd]? > root         6     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:00 [mdrecoveryd]k9 > bin        337     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:00 portmapc9 > root       352     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:00 [lockd]u > [etc]b > M > Ok, there are some differences:  time is listed differently, and linux usesnL > '[]' to denote a swapped out process.  These are not critical differences.    I Well, I'll point out a potential problem that could result.  I don't knowaF if this is a real problem in unix, since I don't do stuff like this...  H If someone writes code that parses the output of these commands for someF reason, the program is not going to be portable between platforms.  ItJ might not be portable between versions of the same platform, if the outputH format is changed. Such a program has tighter requirements than a person reading a few lines of text.  G Of course, a program parsing the equivalent VMS output would be just aslI unportable.  We often see inexperienced VMS folks do this.  In VMS, theretH is usually a documented, stable-over-time API to retrieve such info, andG everyone is encouraged to use it.  When no API is available, we have toIJ resort to parsing output.  (I posted such a hack myself just yesterday.)  J We also complain, and over time VMS has gotten much more complete in these info look-up areas.l  I In the present example (ps on unix, show system on VMS) I know there is aaI good API in VMS.  I'm ignorant about unix.  If there is is NOT a standardiJ (across many unixes) API to retrieve detailed process information, then itG is a technical deficiency of unix compared to VMS, for the reasons I've>	 outlined.   I I suspect this might be an example of the sort of thing Christos has been E complaining about.  But he's gotten so excited in this thread, I have.7 trouble understanding what his specific complaints are.i   -- v Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.comP   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 15:52:36 -0000r- From: wspencer@ap.nospam.org (Warren Spencer) Y Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS  Educational     Progra/ Message-ID: <tb4dm4hta9r024@news.supernews.com>w  - bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler) wrote ino) <98lgmd$p4j$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>:    * >In article <3AAE30C5.20D69B88@bbc.co.uk>,5 >     Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk> writes:g >> e >> t >> Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:, >>  / >>> Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:s >>>mI >>> > > BTW, in at least one case the use of Unixy C code has resulted ine  
 -- snip --  H >There are two major APIs out there:  Unix and Windows.  If compaq wantsC >to expand VMS's marketshare, it is going to have to provide a goodrE >implementation of one of those two...and I don't see the Windows APIL >being chosen.    L IIRC, I believe that the Win32 api was ported to OpenVMS as part of COM for  OpenVMS, in version 7.2.  ; > Once developers see VMS as "just another target", they're D >more likely to start writing pieces of code which take advantage ofA >VMS...compared to now where a port is nearly a complete rewrite.h >a >Brian Wheeler >bdwheele@indiana.edua   ws   -- g1 << Marriage is Grand.  Divorce is Fifty Grand. >>>   Warren Spencer Senior Software Engineer The Associated Press  ? ** My employer does not necessarily agree with my statements **V   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 11:03:32 +0100t7 From: Alain Chappuis <Alain.Chappuis@medecine.unige.ch>p Subject: Errors on disk 1 Message-ID: <3AB1F303.2AC36B20@medecine.unige.ch>a   Hello,  ) I have somes errors under one disk: 1025 e  (DKA100:, device type DEC RZ26N)  . I would like to see the type of error, I take:    ANALYZE/ERROR_LOG/INCLUDE=DKA100  % and the analyse program return to me:   1 Error Log Report Generator           Version V7.2i@ %ERF-F-CEHFND, New header format found. Install DECevent and run conversion utility  ; I have to forget something in the installation of OVms 7.2?r   What do I have to install?  ! Thank you in advance for help me.i   Ps: OpenVMS V7.2-1   Alain. --D +----------------------+-------------------------------------------+D | Alain Chappuis       | Responsable du systeme cmu.unige.ch       |D | Analyste programmeur | Responsable des serveurs WEB medecine, JID|D | Universite de Geneve | E-mail : Alain.Chappuis@medecine.unige.ch |D | Centre Medical Univ. | Phone  : +41 (22) [70]25.073              |D | 1, Rue Michel-Servet | FAX    : +41 (22) 347.33.34 / 702.58.58   | | CH-1211 Geneve 4     | WWW   C+ :http://cmub.unige.ch/si/alain.html|        D +----------------------+-------------------------------------------+   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:25:22 +0000s5 From: "Steeples, Oliver" <Oliver.Steeples@COMPAQ.com>e Subject: RE: Errors on diskrN Message-ID: <F498D199EDB12D468CD2C66680D308018B12EE@reoexc04.emea.cpqcorp.net>  	 DEDevent:a  : http://www.support.compaq.com/svctools/decevent/index.html   	Oliver      -----Original Message-----> From: Alain Chappuis [mailto:Alain.Chappuis@medecine.unige.ch]% Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 10:04 AM  To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Come Subject: Errors on diskf     Hello,  ) I have somes errors under one disk: 1025 t  (DKA100:, device type DEC RZ26N)  . I would like to see the type of error, I take:    ANALYZE/ERROR_LOG/INCLUDE=DKA100  % and the analyse program return to me:   1 Error Log Report Generator           Version V7.2C@ %ERF-F-CEHFND, New header format found. Install DECevent and run conversion utility  ; I have to forget something in the installation of OVms 7.2?    What do I have to install?  ! Thank you in advance for help me.o   Ps: OpenVMS V7.2-1   Alain. --D +----------------------+-------------------------------------------+D | Alain Chappuis       | Responsable du systeme cmu.unige.ch       |D | Analyste programmeur | Responsable des serveurs WEB medecine, JID|D | Universite de Geneve | E-mail : Alain.Chappuis@medecine.unige.ch |D | Centre Medical Univ. | Phone  : +41 (22) [70]25.073              |D | 1, Rue Michel-Servet | FAX    : +41 (22) 347.33.34 / 702.58.58   | | CH-1211 Geneve 4     | WWW   m+ :http://cmub.unige.ch/si/alain.html|       sD +----------------------+-------------------------------------------+   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 15:32:05 GMT 2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) Subject: Re: Errors on diske0 Message-ID: <Vlqs6.65$eE2.2095@news.cpqcorp.net>  k In article <3AB1F303.2AC36B20@medecine.unige.ch>, Alain Chappuis <Alain.Chappuis@medecine.unige.ch> writes:c :Hello,r :e* :I have somes errors under one disk: 1025 ! :(DKA100:, device type DEC RZ26N)p  H   If an immediate BACKUP/IMAGE followed by a BACKUP restoration does notE   resolve the errors (the restoration will cause any bad blocks to beoG   revectored), it is likely time to replace the disk.  Which means you nG   will need a BACKUP of the disk, which (if you perform the recommendede8   restoration process) you will already have the BACKUP.  A :%ERF-F-CEHFND, New header format found. Install DECevent and runn :conversion utilityo  H   The particular Alpha platform running would be of interest, as some ofI   the Alpha platforms specifically require Compaq Analyze (in place of or'   in addition to DECevent).m  J :I have to forget something in the installation of OVms 7.2? [V7.2-1 -srh]  C   DECevent and Compaq Analyze -- there are cases where you need one    or the other or both.e   :What do I have to install?   F   Install DECevent and/or Compaq Analyze.  Please see the OpenVMS FAQ.  D   My preference here would be to install DECevent only after I have F   performed a BACKUP/IMAGE[/VERIFY] of the disk that is reporting the 	   errors.r  G   This might be a transient error, or it might be an impending failure.i  E   I would personally assume the latter, and would tend to assume thatcH   the disk archiving practices might, um, leave something to be desired,F   or that an image backup might not be performed as frequently as the    data on the disk is changed.  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, 16 Mar 2001 15:21:47 GMT 2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) Subject: Re: fmsdef.hg0 Message-ID: <fcqs6.64$eE2.2095@news.cpqcorp.net>  o In article <98rghr$eed$1@reader1.imaginet.fr>, "Jean-Francois Marchal" <jean-francois.marchal@x9000.fr> writes:bC :May we get a future fms version ? FMS has a null price for licencen :maintenance  I   I do not know the answer to that, nor do I particularly know the status ;   of FMS at present (nor have I looked to find the status).n  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 13:40:34 -0000@ From: lcs Mixmaster Remailer <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]>> Subject: Good Netiquette (was Re: OpenVMS Educational Program)5 Message-ID: <20010316134034.5714.qmail@nym.alias.net>s  ? On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> wrote:e   <snip>  
 Christoff,  K Please refer to RFC1855 (http://www.faqs.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt). Many readers I receive the content of this group via a mailing list. I'm sure they would C appreciate if messages were appropriately edited to save bandwidth.-   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 11:46:36 -0500e" From: Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org>7 Subject: Has SYS$SETEXV gone away in OpenVMS Alpha 7.2?V: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010316112439.02209cc0@24.8.96.48>  I I've been trying to track down some odd problems with C++ exceptions and  < some third-party code, and as part of that I've been trying H (unsuccessfully) to fiddle with sys$setexv. Unfortunately calls to this / return a status of 372, invalid system service.   I There's a prototype for it in the starlet libraries, and the compile and fG link go OK, so I'm sort of at a loss as to what's going on. (It's even a documented in the web docs)i   Anyone got any ideas?    					Dan  I --------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------a2 Dan Sugalski                          even samurai? dan@sidhe.org                         have teddy bears and evend;                                       teddy bears get drunku   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 14:23:43 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>. Subject: Re: How does one become a VMS guru ??- Message-ID: <87n1amkz9s.fsf@prep.synonet.com>b  + Peter Sutter <sutterp@sopac.com.au> writes:l  " ( Non WA readers, hit 'n' now... )	 Hi Peter!d  J > > Ring Decus, join. find out when the next LUG meeting is and get along.  D > You seem to know much more than I do. When is the next LUG meetingD > over here in Perth WA? I know Decus Australia got revived recently1 > but nobody knows anything about a LUG in Perth.   C I've been looking for a suitable time/place to have an initial meety= and get an interim commitee going to organise the first 'realtC meeting'. Now that the Xmas hol season is gone, people are back andp$ life has restarted, it should be OK.   Glad to have you aboard :)   -- e< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:06:49 -0800a! From: Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com . Subject: Re: How does one become a VMS guru ??D Message-ID: <OF234D7306.A44A8212-ON88256A11.00637351@foundation.com>  = Microsoft's the Borg. I see Andrew more as a Klingon..... ;-)e   Shanee          4 steven.reece@quintiles.com on 03/15/2001 12:01:45 PM   To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com- cc:   / Subject:  Re: How does one become a VMS guru ??       I Andrew probably wants to punch anyone that's not indoctrinated to the Sunj Borg, I mean Sun God.o :-)l   Larry Kilgallen wrote/quoted :I >>>>      I guess being a hotshot is okay... sounds like someone wants to- punch % >    you though , so I'm not so sure.e    A           Well, Andrew wants to punch you.  Does that count ? :-)f <<<    ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 13:16:06 -0500+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)c. Subject: Re: How does one become a VMS guru ??3 Message-ID: <vJPbDuG7WQyN@eisner.encompasserve.org>o  h In article <OF234D7306.A44A8212-ON88256A11.00637351@foundation.com>, Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com writes: > ? > Microsoft's the Borg. I see Andrew more as a Klingon..... ;-)o >   9 	But he sails the skies on the Starship Enterprise 10000.h   ---t   	"We need more power Scotty!"i  % 	"I'm given 'er all she's got Capen'"f 	 4 	"Capen!  We've just lost a fewmer energy modules!      	"Can we get them back, Scotty?"  G 	"I don't know capen!  I can't be sure if it was stray alpha particles k% 	that took 'em out or zinc whiskers!"-   				Rob-   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:45:04 -0600.* From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>E Subject: RE: I seem to be in a different reality today, one where VMS - Message-ID: <0033000018874713000002L032*@MHS>i  6 =0AIs OpenVMS in a type size greater than eight point?   About damn time.   WWWebb   > -----Original Message-----1 > From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETs' > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 12:57 PMn8 > To: Webb, William W; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETH > Subject: RE: I seem to be in a different reality today, one where VMS=   >a >f > AAAAAAHWWWWOOOOOOOOO!!!!!  >u > It's about Freaking time!!!! >g >  > YEEEAAAAHHH! >o > "David J. Dachtera" wrote: >e > > LJEB wrote:a > > > : > > > Just opened the new ComputerWeekly (15th March), and > found an advert foro? > > > Alpha & OpenVMS, not only that it is a WHOLE PAGE advert!  > > >e= > > > Description: Simple red background, a small image, withw > the following text:s > > >O? > > > HOW DO YOU FIND OUT WHICH ALPHASERVER OPERATING SYSTEM IS. > THE MOST RELIABLE? > > > ASK A SERACH ENGINE. > > >mF > > > More specifically, ask America's number one rated search engine. > > >- > > > Ask nothernlight.com.n > > >n) > > > They'll give you an instant answer:A > > >o; > > > Compaq's OpenVMS, the operating system which had made  > their search engineaH > > > home the largest text retrieval database ever created. Of course,=  > > > > nothernlight.com is just one of hundreds of thousands of > businesses world: > > > wide now profiting from their investment in OpenVMS. > > >-! > > > Ask them the same question.n' > > > They'll give you the same answer.- > > >  > > > COMPAQ > > > Inspiration Technology > >i: > > THIS IS THE BIG ONE, ELIZABETH! I'M COMIN' TO JOIN YA! > >w > > -- > > David J. DachteraR > > dba DJE Systemso > > http://www.djesys.com/ > >n> > > Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board:# > > http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/i > >d> > > This *IS* an OpenVMS-related newsgroup. So, a certain bias
 > in postings: > > is to be expected. > > D > > Feel free to exercise your rights of free speech and expression. > >s= > > However, attacks against individual posters, or groups oft > posters, are > > strongly discouraged.  >=   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 15:31:38 GMT = From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-)aE Subject: RE: I seem to be in a different reality today, one where VMSp0 Message-ID: <009F918C.BF2687CD@SendSpamHere.ORG>  Z In article <0033000018874713000002L032*@MHS>, WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov> writes:7 >=0AIs OpenVMS in a type size greater than eight point?0 >0 >About damn time.o >  >WWWebb   ( Where does one get this Computer weekly?   --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMa            0O city, n., 1. a place where trees are cut down and streets are named after them.k   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:16:24 -00003' From: "LJEB" <LJEB@somewhere.out.there>dE Subject: Re: I seem to be in a different reality today, one where VMSf) Message-ID: <98te89$jll$1@soap.pipex.net>a  J "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" <system@SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote in message* news:009F918C.BF2687CD@SendSpamHere.ORG...< > In article <0033000018874713000002L032*@MHS>, WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov> writes:s9 > >=0AIs OpenVMS in a type size greater than eight point?  > >o  H Only guessing but the point size is about 14. the text I entered was theC entire advert (minus the bottom line small print of about 6 point).u     > >About damn time.S > > 	 > >WWWebb  >h* > Where does one get this Computer weekly? >i  J In the UK ComputerWeekly is one of 2 main IT Press publications, the otherJ being Computing. Both are broad-sheet format (B3? approx. 15.5" by 11.5" ) news papers.  I They are available for purchase at most news agents, or delivered free tooK just about anyone in the business. I would be surprised to find any company K in the UK that use computers, and does not have at least one copy deliveredp to the office every week.   J Although its use for news is becoming less important with web publicationsH getting there quicker, it is still one of the best places to look for IT2 jobs and agency/contract advertisements in the UK.   > --4 > VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001 VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM >cK > city, n., 1. a place where trees are cut down and streets are named after  them.p   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:48:14 -0000a' From: "LJEB" <LJEB@somewhere.out.there>iE Subject: Re: I seem to be in a different reality today, one where VMSn) Message-ID: <98tg3u$kfd$1@soap.pipex.net>g  2 "LJEB" <LJEB@somewhere.out.there> wrote in message# news:98te89$jll$1@soap.pipex.net...0 > D > "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" <system@SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote in messagei, > news:009F918C.BF2687CD@SendSpamHere.ORG...> > > In article <0033000018874713000002L032*@MHS>, WILLIAM WEBB! > <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov> writes:e; > > >=0AIs OpenVMS in a type size greater than eight point?I > > >l >3J > Only guessing but the point size is about 14. the text I entered was theE > entire advert (minus the bottom line small print of about 6 point).a >< >s > > >About damn time.s > > >  > > >WWWebbi > >l, > > Where does one get this Computer weekly? > >i > F > In the UK ComputerWeekly is one of 2 main IT Press publications, the otherpD > being Computing. Both are broad-sheet format (B3? approx. 15.5" by 11.5" ) H                             ^^^^^^^^^^^-- oops, tabloid newspaper format > news papers. >IK > They are available for purchase at most news agents, or delivered free topE > just about anyone in the business. I would be surprised to find anyr companyyC > in the UK that use computers, and does not have at least one copyg	 delivered. > to the office every week.  >n? > Although its use for news is becoming less important with web. publicationsJ > getting there quicker, it is still one of the best places to look for IT4 > jobs and agency/contract advertisements in the UK. >m > > --6 > > VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001 > VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM > >eG > > city, n., 1. a place where trees are cut down and streets are namedm after. > them.p >u >c >E >r   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 13:05:32 -0500 ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>eE Subject: Re: I seem to be in a different reality today, one where VMSr( Message-ID: <98tk9a$37e$1@pyrite.mv.net>  0 LJEB <LJEB@somewhere.out.there> wrote in message# news:98te89$jll$1@soap.pipex.net...V >iL > "Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-" <system@SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote in message, > news:009F918C.BF2687CD@SendSpamHere.ORG...> > > In article <0033000018874713000002L032*@MHS>, WILLIAM WEBB! > <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov> writes:e; > > >=0AIs OpenVMS in a type size greater than eight point?- > > >- >-J > Only guessing but the point size is about 14. the text I entered was theE > entire advert (minus the bottom line small print of about 6 point).s >e >  > > >About damn time.n > > >e > > >WWWebbE > > , > > Where does one get this Computer weekly? > >c >UL > In the UK ComputerWeekly is one of 2 main IT Press publications, the otherL > being Computing. Both are broad-sheet format (B3? approx. 15.5" by 11.5" ) > news papers. >cK > They are available for purchase at most news agents, or delivered free to-E > just about anyone in the business. I would be surprised to find any  company5C > in the UK that use computers, and does not have at least one copyu	 deliveredE > to the office every week.F >DL > Although its use for news is becoming less important with web publicationsJ > getting there quicker, it is still one of the best places to look for IT4 > jobs and agency/contract advertisements in the UK.  H Oh, dear:  I hope this isn't the same publication that was running NT on; Alpha ads for a month or more after the product was axed...e   - bill   >s > > --6 > > VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001 > VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM > >yG > > city, n., 1. a place where trees are cut down and streets are nameds aftera > them.t >e >  >r >    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:19:35 -0500m' From: Jack Bogart <jbogart@vangard.com>r Subject: Little Help, Please...s6 Message-ID: <000401c0ae2c$82febae0$37010c0a@akron.com>  E What commands do I need to use to determine space used/available on a2 physical drive in OpenVMS?  " Your help is appreciated.  Thanks.  < ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Jack L. Bogart Sr. Systems EngineerJ StorNet, Inc.          175 Montrose West Avenue; Suite 280          Akron, Ohio   44321D Office (330) 666-5190     Fax (330) 666-0830     Cell (330) 284-7471H Centralized Storage Management --- High Availability --- Data ProtectionE Outsourced Storage Operations --- Consulting --- Support --- TraininghJ "I feel that there is a world market for as many as five computers" Thomas Watson, IBM corp. - 1943< ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:44:12 -0500   From: jamese@beast.dtsw.army.mil# Subject: Re: Little Help, Please...r0 Message-ID: <01031610441272@beast.dtsw.army.mil>   Jack,   M Jack Bogart <jbogart@vangard.com> wrote on Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:19:35 -0500 in + <000401c0ae2c$82febae0$37010c0a@akron.com>:,  G > What commands do I need to use to determine space used/available on aC > physical drive in OpenVMS?   Get "FREE" by Hunter Goatley. 2 Here's one site:   ftp://ftp.wku.edu/vms/fileserv/  : Ed James                           ed.james@telecomsys.com5 TeleCommunications Systems, Inc.   voice 410-295-1919e; 2024 West Street, Suite 300              800-810-0827 x1919B5 Annapolis, MD 21401-3556           fax   410-280-1094a   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:53:43 +0100r7 From: Martin Zinser <zinser@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>l# Subject: Re: Little Help, Please...n2 Message-ID: <3AB23707.D0B1184F@sysdev.exchange.de>   Hi,h   Jack Bogart wrote: > G > What commands do I need to use to determine space used/available on al > physical drive in OpenVMS? >     $ show device/full <device name>   For a general overview   $show device/full de   might be useful.  $ > Your help is appreciated.  Thanks.  %                     Greetings, MartinC   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:47:10 -0600h* From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov># Subject: RE: Little Help, Please...t- Message-ID: <0033000018884516000002L062*@MHS>l  @ =0AYou did't specify whether you wanted it from the command line or via lexical functions:    $ SHOW DEV/FULL device-name   6 $ f$getdvi("device-name","FREEBLOCKS") for free blocks7 $ f$getdvi("device-name","MAXBLOCK")   for total blocks-  6 To delineate something as a physical device when using+ f$getdvi, you prefix it with an underscore.t  8 For more information, see HELP LEXICALS f$getdvi or TFM.  + You have to do math to get the blocks used.-   HTH.   WWWebb     > -----Original Message-----1 > From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET-' > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 10:26 AM 8 > To: Webb, William W; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET! > Subject: Little Help, Please...e >g >eH > What commands do I need to use to determine space used/available on a=   > physical drive in OpenVMS? >i$ > Your help is appreciated.  Thanks. >r> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Jack L. Bogart > Sr. Systems Engineer< > StorNet, Inc.          175 Montrose West Avenue; Suite 280 >       Akron, > Ohio   44321F > Office (330) 666-5190     Fax (330) 666-0830     Cell (330) 284-7471? > Centralized Storage Management --- High Availability --- Datal > ProtectionH > Outsourced Storage Operations --- Consulting --- Support --- Training=  : > "I feel that there is a world market for as many as five > computers" Thomasn > Watson, IBM corp. - 1943> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >=   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 11:26:52 -0500@2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)# Subject: Re: Little Help, Please...0L Message-ID: <rdeininger-1603011126540001@user-2ive6ob.dialup.mindspring.com>  B In article <000401c0ae2c$82febae0$37010c0a@akron.com>, Jack Bogart <jbogart@vangard.com> wrote:  G > What commands do I need to use to determine space used/available on aa > physical drive in OpenVMS? > $ > Your help is appreciated.  Thanks. >   F In DCL, look at the item codes for the f$getdvi lexical function.  ForF compiled code, look the the $getdvi system service.  You will probably find what you want.e   -- n Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.com2   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 19:42:05 +0100d= From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>d# Subject: Re: Little Help, Please...u) Message-ID: <3AB25E7C.ED64FC9C@gtech.com>n   Jack Bogart wrote:G > What commands do I need to use to determine space used/available on at > physical drive in OpenVMS?   $ SHOW DEV/FULL device   for interactive usage.  * For a DCL script use the lexical F$GETDVI.   Arne   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 15:58:17 GMT-- From: goathunter@goatley.com (Hunter Goatley)"* Subject: Re: Obtaining 7.2-1 and TCPIP 5.10 Message-ID: <3ab23783.70922771@swen.process.com>  J On 15 Mar 2001 15:10:59 -0700, nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett) wrote:  2 >In article <3ab1031c.70439716@swen.process.com>, 4 >    goathunter@goatley.com (Hunter Goatley) writes: >iO >>>Well, there is also the fact they've finally added XDMCP to TCPIP.  Actually-M >>>I was looking at MX last night, and it looks like it would cost $500.  I'drK >>>be better off putting that $500 towards the full Condist and OS set.  ItoL >>>would be kind of nice if MX or PMDF was available with a Hobbyist license >>>:^) >>>aM >> Unfortunately, our contract with Sun didn't take the Hobbyist program intotN >> account, and we'd have to pay them royalties for every copy distributed via >> the Hobbyist program. >t4 >    You have to pay Sun royalties for copies of MX? >r >c >;-) >oE Ah, yes, I guess I should have been a bit more explicit. 8-)  For then% record, I was referring only to PMDF.s   Hunter ------9 Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/c9 goathunter@goatley.com     http://www.goatley.com/hunter/)   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 19:29:25 +0100* From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER)* Subject: Re: Obtaining 7.2-1 and TCPIP 5.1* Message-ID: <3ab25b85$1@news.kapsch.co.at>  L In article <3AB13F4F.5478B776@clark.net>, Ben Sego <bsego@clark.net> writes:P >Gosh, Hunter, I guess you guys never really got the new dot com fever, then didS >you?  'Cause, paying to give things away is exactly what lots of those fine failed. >(non)businesses did.   7 Thats was the M$ way for a looong period and it worked. 8 So why do you blame the dot com starters for their try ?G Blame M$ for their chuzpe to now wanting so much money for their publicn? beta tests (or what else do you call their software) instead...-   -- a< Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER           Tel.    +43 1 81111-2651; Network and OpenVMS system manager  Fax.    +43 1 81111-888t< <<< KAPSCH AG  Wagenseilgasse 1     E-mail  eplan@kapsch.netH A-1121 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist"   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 12:10:36 +0000R0 From: andrew harrison <andrew.nospam@uk.sun.com>( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program* Message-ID: <3AB202BC.D82E2174@uk.sun.com>   Christof Brass wrote:6 > D > It has been written that these COE amendments would for a certain K > period (I assume at least 5 to 10 years) not be available to the public. hJ > So your argument wouldn't fit. But my fear also wouldn't be appropriate.I > But my point is that technically this is something very risky and done tK > the wrong way will kill VMS technically. Why would one use VMS with UNIX oI > apps instead of using UNIX? And putting engineering effort in that COE oG > niche market project will reduce the engineering power spent for the - > public version.  > Insane, isn't it?0 > P > I'm sure that even the COE UNIX API would already be there this wouldn't help L > VMS. Instead it might well kill VMS also from the marketing point of view L > because the real VMS apps will vanish and there will no apps remain using M > the real power of VMS. And there will be a lot of apps spoiling VMS by not .+ > using its features like structured files.0  ? Ahh so you are afraid that change will kill OpenVMS. Do nothingN? and it will survive change it to make it compete with UNIX and   it will die.  > The underlying feeling I get when I read you posts is despite 8 all the architectural posturing that you are afraid that; OpenVMS skinned to look like UNIX would not be competitive e9 with UNIX itself. I get the impression that you think it  : should remain safely hidden in its slowly declining niche.  ? But lets just address the software issue, the OpenVMS software g8 catalogue is declining, every week people post articles ? complaining that such and such a vendor has decided to do theirA9 next release of SW on NT or UNIX rather than OpenVMS. Thei; fact is that commercial apps that use RMS are declining and  have been for some time. n  = How long do you want to wait and how few apps that really use 8 RMS do you need to get to before you reluctantly concede8 defeat and clutch at a UNIX or Win32 set of API's to get more SW onto OpenVMS.e  6 Your posts also seem to contain an enormous degree of ; pessimism about the ability of Compaqs OpenVMS engineering o6 group to do a reliable implimentation of the COE API's on OpenVMS.s  > I would not rely on them to post accurate security advisories < about OpenVMS but I have no reason to suspect their ability ; when it comes to writing code. They also have access to the = Tru64 code base which no doubt they will plunder judiciously e# to help them in the implimentation.a  6 So far in this discussion all you have done is posted 6 negative responses with very hand wavey suggestions as6 to how OpenVMS is going to boost its software support.  7 Perhaps instead of attacking other peoples constructiveg< suggestions you could make some alternative but constructive9 suggestions yourself instead of indulging in a boring and  tendacious architectural rant.   Regards- Andrew Harrison- Enterprise IT Architect0   ------------------------------   Date: 16 Mar 2001 15:29:55 GMT* From: bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler)( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program3 Message-ID: <98tbhj$im9$2@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>n  N I concur!  I *KNEW* there was a reason why I didn't put you in my killfile! :)   Brian=      * In article <3AB202BC.D82E2174@uk.sun.com>,3 	andrew harrison <andrew.nospam@uk.sun.com> writes:o > Christof Brass wrote:w >> ?E >> It has been written that these COE amendments would for a certain tL >> period (I assume at least 5 to 10 years) not be available to the public. K >> So your argument wouldn't fit. But my fear also wouldn't be appropriate. J >> But my point is that technically this is something very risky and done L >> the wrong way will kill VMS technically. Why would one use VMS with UNIX J >> apps instead of using UNIX? And putting engineering effort in that COE H >> niche market project will reduce the engineering power spent for the  >> public version. >> Insane, isn't it? >> 0Q >> I'm sure that even the COE UNIX API would already be there this wouldn't help eM >> VMS. Instead it might well kill VMS also from the marketing point of view bM >> because the real VMS apps will vanish and there will no apps remain using pN >> the real power of VMS. And there will be a lot of apps spoiling VMS by not , >> using its features like structured files. > A > Ahh so you are afraid that change will kill OpenVMS. Do nothingrA > and it will survive change it to make it compete with UNIX and y > it will die. > @ > The underlying feeling I get when I read you posts is despite : > all the architectural posturing that you are afraid that= > OpenVMS skinned to look like UNIX would not be competitive  ; > with UNIX itself. I get the impression that you think it  < > should remain safely hidden in its slowly declining niche. > A > But lets just address the software issue, the OpenVMS software  : > catalogue is declining, every week people post articles A > complaining that such and such a vendor has decided to do their ; > next release of SW on NT or UNIX rather than OpenVMS. The.= > fact is that commercial apps that use RMS are declining and  > have been for some time. - > ? > How long do you want to wait and how few apps that really useJ: > RMS do you need to get to before you reluctantly concede: > defeat and clutch at a UNIX or Win32 set of API's to get > more SW onto OpenVMS.L > 8 > Your posts also seem to contain an enormous degree of = > pessimism about the ability of Compaqs OpenVMS engineering  8 > group to do a reliable implimentation of the COE API's
 > on OpenVMS.n > @ > I would not rely on them to post accurate security advisories > > about OpenVMS but I have no reason to suspect their ability = > when it comes to writing code. They also have access to they? > Tru64 code base which no doubt they will plunder judiciously t% > to help them in the implimentation.i > 8 > So far in this discussion all you have done is posted 8 > negative responses with very hand wavey suggestions as8 > to how OpenVMS is going to boost its software support. > 9 > Perhaps instead of attacking other peoples constructiveo> > suggestions you could make some alternative but constructive; > suggestions yourself instead of indulging in a boring and   > tendacious architectural rant. > 	 > Regardsa > Andrew Harrisons > Enterprise IT Architecte   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:28:12 GMTe" From: Rob Komar <rkomar@telus.net>( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program, Message-ID: <b5ps89.5j1.ln@robpc1.telus.net>  3 David Mathog <mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu> wrote:n   [snip]  ! > There's also a problem in LinuxtJ > (and WNT) that devices are named sequentially as they are found at boot C > time instead of by fixed location.  If you lose disk 2 out 5 thennM > /dev/sdc->/dev/sdb, /dev/sdd->/dev/sdc, and /dev/sde->/dev/sdd.  There will L > be no /dev/sde.  Apparently Linux kernel 2.4 has some sort of fixed deviceM > name mechanism but the current kernels don't.  As things are now it can get M > very ugly in this situation when you loose a disk, much worse than on VMS. :K > I lost one totally during a reboot to run badblocks, and ended up running9F > it on the wrong disk before I realized that the iffy device had just > disappeared.  K This has been fixed for a while now (for ext2 filesystems).  You can assignmJ each file system a volume label, and then use that label in the fstab file@ when specifying the device.  See the fstab man page for details.  * [now for something more on-topic for COV:]  H Companies like IBM and SGI support Linux because it offers them a way ofE battling MicroSoft.  They recognize that small companies that upgradevG when they grow prefer to stay with systems that they are familiar with.AC Linux and the free BSD unices are popular among the small companiestI because they are cheap and because there are many young (and, thus, cheap I to employ) people who are familiar enough with them.  When the time comesoC for a larger and more mature system, many of them choose one of theaI proprietary Unix systems.  Sun even offers support for running Linux appstG under Solaris to make migration easier.  So, where Linux was originallynE perceived as a threat against the proprietary Unices, it has now beeneF recognized to be an important driving force behind the rejuvenation of the entire Unix server market.  C I hope that those dead set against porting VMS to PC hardware or toeB porting whiz-bang Windows/Unix software to VMS reconsider in lightB of the above (or have a completely different plan for rejuvenating VMS market share).   Cheers,t	 Rob Komarf   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 17:33:08 GMT 4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program= Message-ID: <o7ss6.11380$mH4.2983128@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>t  7 "Brian Wheeler" <bdwheele@indiana.edu> wrote in message - news:98tbhj$im9$2@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu...gC > I concur!  I *KNEW* there was a reason why I didn't put you in my- killfile! :) >$ > Brian3 >0  B Correct. Andrew is anything but a cheerleader for OpenVMS, but hisJ observations on COE and VMS apps availability are spot-on. Plus they are aJ refreshing change from some of the bloviation that makes its way into this hallowed forum.    >m, > In article <3AB202BC.D82E2174@uk.sun.com>,C > andrew harrison <andrew.nospam@uk.sun.com> wrote what he wrote...6   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:45:54 -0300 ) From: fabio_compaq@ep-bc.petrobras.com.brr: Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program = OpenVMS sadnessL Message-ID: <OF012CCC03.03DFACF3-ON03256A11.0045C4FC@ep-bc.petrobras.com.br>  E It is what I am feeling for this Operating System . . .incredible how~ people can have~% feelings to hardware and software :-)-  G Of course If i feel it will not continue to be marketed, I will jump to. Solaris or HP-UX ....L  H I still having hope but I will not forgive Compaq  as a customer if this company decidesg> to abandon OpenVMS ... I believe the feelings are mutual ! ! !  ; No Tru64 under Alpha and no NT under Compaq proliants ! ! !c   RegardsI   FC        A andrew harrison <andrew.nospam@uk.sun.com> em 16/03/2001 09:10:36?             Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com       ( Assunto: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program     Christof Brass wrote:  > C > It has been written that these COE amendments would for a certainvJ > period (I assume at least 5 to 10 years) not be available to the public.J > So your argument wouldn't fit. But my fear also wouldn't be appropriate.H > But my point is that technically this is something very risky and doneJ > the wrong way will kill VMS technically. Why would one use VMS with UNIXH > apps instead of using UNIX? And putting engineering effort in that COEF > niche market project will reduce the engineering power spent for the > public version.l > Insane, isn't it?  >nJ > I'm sure that even the COE UNIX API would already be there this wouldn't helpK > VMS. Instead it might well kill VMS also from the marketing point of view K > because the real VMS apps will vanish and there will no apps remain usingeH > the real power of VMS. And there will be a lot of apps spoiling VMS by not + > using its features like structured files.-  ? Ahh so you are afraid that change will kill OpenVMS. Do nothingh> and it will survive change it to make it compete with UNIX and it will die.  = The underlying feeling I get when I read you posts is despiter8 all the architectural posturing that you are afraid that: OpenVMS skinned to look like UNIX would not be competitive8 with UNIX itself. I get the impression that you think it: should remain safely hidden in its slowly declining niche.  > But lets just address the software issue, the OpenVMS software7 catalogue is declining, every week people post articlest? complaining that such and such a vendor has decided to do theirA9 next release of SW on NT or UNIX rather than OpenVMS. TheT; fact is that commercial apps that use RMS are declining and  have been for some time.  = How long do you want to wait and how few apps that really usei8 RMS do you need to get to before you reluctantly concede8 defeat and clutch at a UNIX or Win32 set of API's to get more SW onto OpenVMS.   5 Your posts also seem to contain an enormous degree ofu: pessimism about the ability of Compaqs OpenVMS engineering6 group to do a reliable implimentation of the COE API's on OpenVMS.e  = I would not rely on them to post accurate security advisoriesn; about OpenVMS but I have no reason to suspect their ability-; when it comes to writing code. They also have access to the < Tru64 code base which no doubt they will plunder judiciously# to help them in the implimentation.~  5 So far in this discussion all you have done is posted-6 negative responses with very hand wavey suggestions as6 to how OpenVMS is going to boost its software support.  7 Perhaps instead of attacking other peoples constructive1< suggestions you could make some alternative but constructive9 suggestions yourself instead of indulging in a boring anda tendacious architectural rant.   Regardso Andrew Harrison  Enterprise IT Architectl   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 13:50:24 -0500T6 From: "Dominic Olivastro" <DOlivastro@ChiResearch.com>* Subject: Pathworks Client and Windows 2000& Message-ID: <g9ts6.104$xh6.483@client>  H We just purchased some PC's running Win 2000.  The PW Client software weH have is Version 7.1A.  This won't install on the Win 2000 machines.  The- installation says it can not find NetCFG.dll.a  E Do I need to move up to a newer version on PW Client?  Is Compaq even 3 supporting Win 2000?  What has everybody else done?g   TIAt DOM      -- Dominic Olivastrou CHI Research, Incc 10 White Horse Piket Haddon Heights, NJ 08035   Phone:  1-856-546-0600 Fax:       1-856-546-9633g% mailto:    DOlivastro@ChiResearch.comF   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:02:30 -05001) From: Bob Ricci <maxx0623@concentric.net>m Subject: performance3 Message-ID: <012301c0ae2a$1f4c08b0$585b5cc0@Subway>   L I have disk drives atached on a SAN through fiber with 512 mb cache on HSg80' dual controllers, dual compaq switches.:J The argument which compaq has not answered yet is where is the performanceE better, on locally attached drives to the NT nodes and Alpha nodes orhJ through the SAN. Remembering the SAN has read-ahead caching and write-back caching.J The alphas run 7.2-1 and the Nt boxes run NT 4.0..all disks are comparable 36GB 10rpm scsi....d Has anybody ran any tests? Robert V. Riccie Systems Managers Drs. Associates (SUBWAY) 325 Bic Dr.: Milford, Ct 06460u  tel  203 877 4281 ext 1144  fax to pc 203 783 7144  fax 203 876 6682a email ricci_r@subway.com  or     maxx0623@concentric.netd http://www.subway.comH   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:15:20 GMT?2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) Subject: Re: performance0 Message-ID: <s_qs6.71$eE2.2330@news.cpqcorp.net>  _ In article <012301c0ae2a$1f4c08b0$585b5cc0@Subway>, Bob Ricci <maxx0623@concentric.net> writes:y  K :The argument which compaq has not answered yet is where is the performanceaF :better, on locally attached drives to the NT nodes and Alpha nodes orK :through the SAN. Remembering the SAN has read-ahead caching and write-backk	 :caching.>  H   Probably because there are a sufficient number of variables here that L   there can be no particularly correct answer that is not also particularly K   generic.  For an example of what I mean by "generic answer", read on. :-)h  L   I would initially tend to assume that locally connected current-generationJ   storage would be faster than current-generation remote storage, but the K   SAN storage model blurs served vs local and dedicated (storage-specific)  L   vs generic (remote network) access.  (I also have not sought nor seen the <   performance numbers for these storage areas in some time.)  K :The alphas run 7.2-1 and the Nt boxes run NT 4.0..all disks are comparablee :36GB 10rpm scsi....  G   OpenVMS Alpha vs Microsoft Windows NT and local (unspecified storage  K   controller) storage vs remote Fibre Channel SAN storage.  That the disks :G   are apparently the same only simplifies this question slightly -- andRJ   I've seen individual 36 GB 10Krpm disks with very different performance G   levels, due to internal differences across subtle variants of drives.e   :Has anybody ran any tests?i  I   There are tests that can certainly be run on the local system, but the yG   best tests involve a review of your applications and of your specificuG   performance constraints.  I've seen intractable problems surface, and G   I've seen cases were a trivial system or application change grants a oB   huge performance windfall.  I've seen cases where benchmarks areF   impressive and -- because the application is performing a completelyH   different set of operations -- application performance stinks.  I haveG   also seen the reverse case, where application performance far exceedsIF   what would have been expected based solely on the benchmark results.  K   If you are having performance problems or require additional performance,hE   I would encourage a systematic evaluation of the storage componentstI   and the storage access requirements.  (I would also point out that mosthI   application database packages are now typically processor-limited when mK   correctly configured and tuned, and are no longer typically I/O limited.)wG   You need to look carefully at the environment and local requirements.u  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: 16 Mar 2001 11:28:34 -0500+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)n Subject: Re: performance3 Message-ID: <S$V4AXBspk0K@eisner.encompasserve.org>a  _ In article <012301c0ae2a$1f4c08b0$585b5cc0@Subway>, Bob Ricci <maxx0623@concentric.net> writes:yN > I have disk drives atached on a SAN through fiber with 512 mb cache on HSg80) > dual controllers, dual compaq switches.eL > The argument which compaq has not answered yet is where is the performanceG > better, on locally attached drives to the NT nodes and Alpha nodes oriL > through the SAN. Remembering the SAN has read-ahead caching and write-back
 > caching.L > The alphas run 7.2-1 and the Nt boxes run NT 4.0..all disks are comparable > 36GB 10rpm scsi....w > Has anybody ran any tests?    = 	It depends.  Tell us more about your locally attached disks.c? 	What type controller?  How much cache and what RAID levels ford- 	that locally attached (internal) controller?e   				Robw   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 15:30:30 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>) Subject: Re: Possible security hole in...i- Message-ID: <87ae6mkw6h.fsf@prep.synonet.com>c  # "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org> writes:n  = >     All of the 'VMS hacking texts' I've ever seen have beendE >     outdated, inaccurate and for the most part useless.  Not one of-E >     them has ever contained what I would call a real exploit.  That(D >     doesn't mean they don't exist.  VMS needs a decent code audit.  0 NSA C2 and B! are, I think, a pretty good audit.  D >      Quite apart from that, once they have a shell they can likelyD >      launch attacks upon other machines, possibly other companies'D >      machines, or possibly other of your machines on networks thatA >      might not have been accessible to them in the first place,cD >      taking advantage of any trust relationships that might exist.  B But most of you network process DON'T have a CLI. Exiting from the? image drops you into the last chance exception handeler and thesF process is deleted. Near all the others run from a login.com that logs out as soon as the image exits.h  B Even if you DO get into the account, The account has no privs, the image did, but that's gone...r   -- i< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.h@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 13:09:29 GMTe From: LBohan@dbc.spam_less..com>) Subject: Re: Possible security hole in... 8 Message-ID: <c914btkmvtf89fo7qubf99jql2uv9ep0lh@4ax.com>  F On Thu, 15 Mar 2001 15:20:09 -0000, "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org> wrote:  A >"John E. Malmberg" <malmberg@encompasserve.org> wrote in messagee. >news:g8mgftFpT$NB@eisner.encompasserve.org...C >> In article <Vz1s6.216759$Dd3.3011639@monolith.news.easynet.net>,h& >> "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org> writes: >> >I >> >     Not true.  I have succeeded in exploiting buffer overflows under ' >> >     VMS to execute arbitrary code.n >>F >>    Actually I have done that a few times myself, and have sure thatC >>    others have too.  I did find my bugs though and stopped that.a >>G >>    When you corrupt the stack like that, it can be difficult to findc >>    the bad code.a >>F >>    However I was not able to execute any code that way that I couldF >>    not have executed by deliberately writing my own program, either/ >>    with Macro-32 or a higher level language.  >>D >>    You only have access to the user mode stack, nothing that will >>    elevate your privileges. >eK >    Not so.  If you are executing code from remote, you gain local access.OI >    If you are exploiting an image that is installed with privileges youe- >    don't already have, you gain privileges.g >eI >>    A link to a hackers/crackers guide to OpenVMS appeared a while backVB >>    in this newgroup.  A read of it revealed errors, out of dateC >>    information, but basically not much more than what was in the B >>    currently shipping documentation or already pubically known. >>- >>    IIRC The URL is now in the OpenVMS FAQ.d >oF >    All of the 'VMS hacking texts' I've ever seen have been outdated,H >    inaccurate and for the most part useless.  Not one of them has everH >    contained what I would call a real exploit.  That doesn't mean they1 >    don't exist.  VMS needs a decent code audit.l  ; I've seen recipes for NT 4.x (Wintel x86) overlow exploits, ! often 6 - 10 pages in length, ie:r3 http://www.nmap.org/sploits/ms.ie.mk.url.htmloften o+ coded against specific DLL && exe versions.r  = It'd  be interesting to see/hear how difficult it would be,  -9 and  what level of skill,  is required to come up with a  = clever and original buffer overflow exploit for Alpha VMS ...r   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 14:37:01 -0000q! From: "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org>i) Subject: Re: Possible security hole in... @ Message-ID: <EIps6.217136$Dd3.3155461@monolith.news.easynet.net>  , <LBohan@dbc.spam_less..com> wrote in message2 news:c914btkmvtf89fo7qubf99jql2uv9ep0lh@4ax.com...H > On Thu, 15 Mar 2001 15:20:09 -0000, "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org> wrote: >AC > >"John E. Malmberg" <malmberg@encompasserve.org> wrote in messagea0 > >news:g8mgftFpT$NB@eisner.encompasserve.org...E > >> In article <Vz1s6.216759$Dd3.3011639@monolith.news.easynet.net>,m( > >> "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org> writes: > >> >K > >> >     Not true.  I have succeeded in exploiting buffer overflows underb) > >> >     VMS to execute arbitrary code.u > >>H > >>    Actually I have done that a few times myself, and have sure thatE > >>    others have too.  I did find my bugs though and stopped that.l > >>I > >>    When you corrupt the stack like that, it can be difficult to finde > >>    the bad code.t > >>H > >>    However I was not able to execute any code that way that I couldH > >>    not have executed by deliberately writing my own program, either1 > >>    with Macro-32 or a higher level language.a > >>F > >>    You only have access to the user mode stack, nothing that will  > >>    elevate your privileges. > >eE > >    Not so.  If you are executing code from remote, you gain local  access.oK > >    If you are exploiting an image that is installed with privileges youg/ > >    don't already have, you gain privileges.e > >hK > >>    A link to a hackers/crackers guide to OpenVMS appeared a while backtD > >>    in this newgroup.  A read of it revealed errors, out of dateE > >>    information, but basically not much more than what was in thebD > >>    currently shipping documentation or already pubically known. > >>/ > >>    IIRC The URL is now in the OpenVMS FAQ.h > >eH > >    All of the 'VMS hacking texts' I've ever seen have been outdated,J > >    inaccurate and for the most part useless.  Not one of them has everJ > >    contained what I would call a real exploit.  That doesn't mean they3 > >    don't exist.  VMS needs a decent code audit.  > = > I've seen recipes for NT 4.x (Wintel x86) overlow exploits,a# > often 6 - 10 pages in length, ie:i4 > http://www.nmap.org/sploits/ms.ie.mk.url.htmloften- > coded against specific DLL && exe versions.e >@= > It'd  be interesting to see/hear how difficult it would be,i: > and  what level of skill,  is required to come up with a? > clever and original buffer overflow exploit for Alpha VMS ...c >A >e  L     Unfortunately, the security disclosure policy stated in the FAQ for this groupa     precludes that..   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 14:51:09 -0000s! From: "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org> ) Subject: Re: Possible security hole in...s@ Message-ID: <%Vps6.217139$Dd3.3156631@monolith.news.easynet.net>  9 "Paul Repacholi" <prep@prep.synonet.com> wrote in message1' news:87ae6mkw6h.fsf@prep.synonet.com...o% > "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org> writes:R >O? > >     All of the 'VMS hacking texts' I've ever seen have beenCG > >     outdated, inaccurate and for the most part useless.  Not one ofaG > >     them has ever contained what I would call a real exploit.  That~F > >     doesn't mean they don't exist.  VMS needs a decent code audit. > 2 > NSA C2 and B! are, I think, a pretty good audit.  E     C2 doesn't involve a code audit, it's largely about audit trails.uD     Testing involves ensuring the security mechanisms work, and that8     there are no obvious ways for people to bypass them.  #     B1 includes a full code audit :a  A     "A team of individuals who thoroughly understand the specific0E     implementation of the TCB shall subject its design documentation,:C     source code, and object code to thorough analysis and testing."s  :     Quite how this team of individuals managed to miss the>     sprintf's into fixed length buffers and format string bugs6     I've found I have no idea, but miss them they did.   >    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 15:11:51 -0000i! From: "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org> ) Subject: Re: Possible security hole in...e@ Message-ID: <Kgqs6.217157$Dd3.3158379@monolith.news.easynet.net>  @ "John E. Malmberg" <malmberg@encompasserve.org> wrote in message- news:3PIYBPuXNk2F@eisner.encompasserve.org...nB > In article <4e5s6.216852$Dd3.3036385@monolith.news.easynet.net>,% > "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org> writes:e > E > > "John E. Malmberg" <malmberg@encompasserve.organization> wrote inv messagee1 > > news:g8mgftFpT$NB@eisner.encompasserve.org...n > >>F > >>    You only have access to the user mode stack, nothing that will  > >>    elevate your privileges. > >tF > >     Not so.  If you are executing code from remote, you gain local access.ML > >     If you are exploiting an image that is installed with privileges you0 > >     don't already have, you gain privileges. > I >       Technically possible, however you must realize that in most casesrI >       the privileges available from such an exploit are not really thatU= >       useful to do much more than create a minor annoyance.i >aK >       More ancient versions of VMS did have more vulnerability there, buta >       that was long ago. > J >       So I agree that it can be done, assuming that there is an actuallyG >       some code that is able to write past an allocated buffer in theoG >       shipping product.  There are many reasons that is not likely toM >       occur.  L         Small likelihood or otherwise, I assure you it has occurred.  I knowL         that might sound a little weak, but I can't elaborate any further atL         this point in time without disclosing specific holes, which I'm sureF         you wouldn't want me to do since it would expose many people's systems.  J         Also, there are plenty more holes that don't involve this class of         attack.n   >V > >>/ > >>    IIRC The URL is now in the OpenVMS FAQ.i > >vI > >     All of the 'VMS hacking texts' I've ever seen have been outdated,nK > >     inaccurate and for the most part useless.  Not one of them has everc3 > >     contained what I would call a real exploit.m > H >       That is exactly what the person who posted the last one said andE >       he claimed to have updated it.  It did not seem to help much.e >S  G         That's because he took an outdated list of 'default' passwords,hG         a mishmash of help pages on how to create accounts and what the I         privileges mean, and added very little to it.  I think that real,eI         verifiable remote and local holes are a little different to that.r  K > >     That doesn't mean they don't exist.  VMS needs a decent code audit.0 >TG >       You are presuming that OpenVMS Engineering does not do a decentr: >       code audit?  What information do you have on this? >n  @         The fact that parts of their code break in strcpy() upon unexpectedlyI         long input.  The fact that parts of their code break on %s%s typetK         input (format string bugs).  Not being able to spot a strcpy into a L         fixed-length buffer with user supplied data during a 'code audit' isK         IMHO pretty poor.  I'm sure I'd spot it, and I'm not claiming to be          any kind of expert.H  J         Don't get me wrong, I like VMS.  I'd just like to see it made moreL         secure in this respect - the tcp stack just doesn't stand up against"         modern attack methodology.    9 > >> >     On top of that, for local holes, the procedureeF > >> >     is actually considerably simpler than under unix, thanks toJ > >> >     the lib$spawn() call and the fact that it requires no argumentsF > >> >     (unlike execl("/bin/sh", "sh", 0) the standard unix method.J > >> >     Under VMS, all you need is a jump to lib$spawn - no 'shellcode' > >> >     required. > >>G > >>    An interesting idea.  Missing a few concepts though.  There are  > >>    much more easier ways. > >eH > >     I'm always interested in easier ways to do that sort of thing :) >b >       That would be telling.  @         Well, my way works so I'm not that bothered.  I was justI         interested :)  As for 'missing a few concepts' they can't be very2J         important ones since my method (used locally) accomplishes what it         sets out to do.-   > >-H > >>    And you still will not end up with any more privileges or rights! > >>    than you started up with.a > >uI > >      Once again, not so.  Your basic misconception is that people are E > >      somehow attempting to manipulate the operating system itself@A > >      into giving them more privileges (a bit like the old VMSeH > >      store-the-privilege-mask-in-address-space-the-user-can-write-toI > >      cock-up :) ).  The point is, use an overflow to hijack processesa1 > >      that are running at evelated privileges.  >r1 >       I assure you that I had no misconception.i >eI >       I was assuming that access to a shell prompt or other control wasoG >       sucessful.  Almost all of the network services run with out anywH >       privileges that would allow an intruder to cover their tracks or  >       to alter sensitive data.  I         Is that not the same as 'some of the network services do run withrH         privileges that would allow an intruder to cover their tracks orK         alter sensitive data' ?  An attacker only has to win once.  Is thatf'         sort of hole not worth fixing ?n   > H >       In many cases though your initial assumption of what to do wouldD >       not work.  For one reason or another OpenVMS knows that manyD >       network processes are not allowed access to a command shell.G >       As for the other reasons the overrun methods would probably notm$ >       work: That would be telling.    )        That's a well reasoned argument :)   J         I'm going to guess you think my 'initial assumption of what to do'I         would be to try and run LOGINOUT.EXE, which would indeed fail forrB         the reasons you outline.  There are, however, more ways toI         skin a cat.  I fear we've had a misunderstanding here - the jump- H         to-lib$spawn() idea I outlined previously was for use in *local*L         exploits - remote exploits are harder, but certainly not impossible.   >r > <snip> >fH > >      Personally, I think that's quite serious, but if you don't mindI > >      everyone and his donkey running round your machine, that's up toa
 > >      you.o >nD >        I assure you that everyone and their donkey are not able to< >        run arround any OpenVMS machine that I have set up.B >        That is also probably the case with most OpenVMS systems,H >        unless someone has tampered with the default security settings. >cH >        Security on a computer system is best used to prevent accidentsE >        by authorized users.  Except for the few systems with directeG >        non-firewall access to the public internet or a school campus,tC >        the likely hood of a deliberate attack is extremely small.c >f  .          So lets not bother fixing the holes ?  I >        The probability of an internal accident or a hardware failure is-F >        very much larger, and that is where the most effort should be >        done. >-@ >        If that is done properly it is not likely that the rare3 >        deliberate attack will be able to do much.  >oI >        <The obvious consequences of getting unauthorized acces snipped>2 >   ?          Snip all you want, the argument still carries weight..c  H >        Basically at this point your discussion seems to be starting toJ >        consist of repeating the same points over and over, which require0 >        all the stars to be correctly alligned.    J          No, they don't.  The attacks I am talking about require a default&          install of VMS, nothing more.   >aE >        Yes, if all those conditions did exist, any operating systemtH >        would be vulnerable.  I never contested the point.  No one can. >iJ >        That does not mean that they have to exist or that they do exist,% >        or even are likely to exist.l    <          They do exist, and are exploitable; I can prove it.   >eF >        In the case of OpenVMS, the window for such a bug to occur is >        very very small.o >uF >        And you have not presented anything to convince me otherwise.    F          The stated security disclosure policy in this newsgroup's FAQ preventsJ          me from presenting anything to convince you otherwise.  If I have timeH          I might knock up some proof-of-concept code.  Otherwise, you'll have tosJ          wait until compaq have had a look and the bugtraq posts come out.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:26:46 -0800e! From: Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com ) Subject: Re: Possible security hole in... D Message-ID: <OF6F1BB171.68B12409-ON88256A11.006521E9@foundation.com>  C Then post one that doesn't work anymore. I have noticed a couple offJ loopholes in your posts that suggest you may not have the capabilities youI keep hinting at. I'd like to see one of your "exploits" run past the realh gurus on this list.n   Shane           3 ph0bos <ph0bos@shady.org> on 03/16/2001 06:37:01 AMt   To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comg cc:a  * Subject:  Re: Possible security hole in...      , <LBohan@dbc.spam_less..com> wrote in message2 news:c914btkmvtf89fo7qubf99jql2uv9ep0lh@4ax.com...H > On Thu, 15 Mar 2001 15:20:09 -0000, "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org> wrote: >aC > >"John E. Malmberg" <malmberg@encompasserve.org> wrote in message 0 > >news:g8mgftFpT$NB@eisner.encompasserve.org...E > >> In article <Vz1s6.216759$Dd3.3011639@monolith.news.easynet.net>, ( > >> "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org> writes: > >> >K > >> >     Not true.  I have succeeded in exploiting buffer overflows under ) > >> >     VMS to execute arbitrary code.  > >>H > >>    Actually I have done that a few times myself, and have sure thatE > >>    others have too.  I did find my bugs though and stopped that.: > >>I > >>    When you corrupt the stack like that, it can be difficult to findl > >>    the bad code.5 > >>H > >>    However I was not able to execute any code that way that I couldH > >>    not have executed by deliberately writing my own program, either1 > >>    with Macro-32 or a higher level language.5 > >>F > >>    You only have access to the user mode stack, nothing that will  > >>    elevate your privileges. > >sE > >    Not so.  If you are executing code from remote, you gain local  access. K > >    If you are exploiting an image that is installed with privileges you / > >    don't already have, you gain privileges.t > > K > >>    A link to a hackers/crackers guide to OpenVMS appeared a while back D > >>    in this newgroup.  A read of it revealed errors, out of dateE > >>    information, but basically not much more than what was in the D > >>    currently shipping documentation or already pubically known. > >>/ > >>    IIRC The URL is now in the OpenVMS FAQ.e > > H > >    All of the 'VMS hacking texts' I've ever seen have been outdated,J > >    inaccurate and for the most part useless.  Not one of them has everJ > >    contained what I would call a real exploit.  That doesn't mean they3 > >    don't exist.  VMS needs a decent code audit.e >>= > I've seen recipes for NT 4.x (Wintel x86) overlow exploits,i# > often 6 - 10 pages in length, ie:r4 > http://www.nmap.org/sploits/ms.ie.mk.url.htmloften- > coded against specific DLL && exe versions.i >h= > It'd  be interesting to see/hear how difficult it would be, : > and  what level of skill,  is required to come up with a? > clever and original buffer overflow exploit for Alpha VMS ...o >a >,  G     Unfortunately, the security disclosure policy stated in the FAQ for  this groupd     precludes that..   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 17:25:50 +0100 2 From: "Dr. Otto Titze" <titze@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de>. Subject: Processes with PFW on an empty system3 Message-ID: <3AB23E8E.417018E8@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de>l   Hi,t  = in a 6.2 VMS cluster (VAXes, Alphas) I included an Alpha 2100tC and a Vax 4090 with VMS 4200. While I have no problems with the VAXf9 the Alpha after some hours hangs. The system (1G Memory, a= 5.5GB free on Disk, 2.1 GB page file) is totally empty. Just -G booted, with TCP/IP services, LAT, Data provider(AMDS) but nothing else<G running. If I some time after the boot try to login from a simple Vt400D the process hangs with PFW.o   Any hint where I may look into?@   Regradss Otto -- t,  -------------------------------------------, | Dr. Otto Titze, Kernphysik TUD           |, | Schlossgartenstr. 9, D-64289 Darmstadt   |, | titze@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de                |, | Tel: +49(6151)16-2916,FAX:16-4321        |,  -------------------------------------------   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:41:49 +0100p2 From: "Dr. Otto Titze" <titze@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de> Subject: Samba and W2k3 Message-ID: <3AB2343C.43A4FF45@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de>    Hi,   9 has anyone out there already used successfully Samba-VMS e7 from a W2000 Client? It works for us with W95, W98, WNTo but not from W2k.u   Regardsn Otto   ,  -------------------------------------------, | Dr. Otto Titze, Kernphysik TUD           |, | Schlossgartenstr. 9, D-64289 Darmstadt   |, | titze@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de                |, | Tel: +49(6151)16-2916,FAX:16-4321        |,  -------------------------------------------   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 11:16:24 +0100e$ From: Michael Unger <unger@decus.de> Subject: Splitting a Large Filei* Message-ID: <009F9192.FFFAE6A0.1@decus.de>  $ A small piece of DCL can do this ...  E (I had the need for that some time ago - split very large files [morepB than 1.000.000 records] into pieces small enough to fit into TPU's; working space [small VAX system with small page file too].)e   Michaele    & $! file identifier  .......  SPLIT.COM* $! author  ................  Michael Unger( $! creation  ..............  03-Aug-2000( $! last modification  .....  03-Aug-2000E $! purpose  ...............  split sequential files into smaller onesU $! $  file_name    = p1 $  record_limit = p2 $!" $  IF file_name .EQS. "" THEN EXIT6 $  IF record_limit .EQS. "" THEN record_limit = "1000", $  IF F$SEARCH(file_name) .EQS. "" THEN EXIT: $  IF F$FILE_ATTRIBUTES(file_name, "EOF") .EQ. 0 THEN EXIT? $  IF F$FILE_ATTRIBUTES(file_name, "ORG") .NES. "SEQ" THEN EXIT  $!0 $  name_only    = F$PARSE(file_name, , , "NAME")) $  record_limit = F$INTEGER(record_limit)g $  loop_count   = 0w $  record_count = 0i $  pending_flag = "FALSE"  $! $  WRITE SYS$OUTPUT - "       "splitting file ", file_name $  WRITE SYS$OUTPUT -iD       " into pieces of ", F$FAO("!UL", record_limit), " records ..." $! $  OPEN /READ input 'file_name'r $! $file_loop:  $!  $  loop_count   = loop_count + 1: $  output_file  = F$FAO("!AS.!6ZL", name_only, loop_count) $! $  WRITE SYS$OUTPUT -u*       "current output file: ", output_file $!# $  OPEN /WRITE output 'output_file's $! $  IF pending_flag .EQS. "TRUE"  $  THENR! $     WRITE /SYMBOL output recorde $     pending_flag = "FALSE" $     record_count = 1 $  ELSE  $     record_count = 0 $  ENDIF $!
 $record_loop:e $! $  READ /END=end input recordn $!$ $  IF record_count .GE. record_limit $  THENR $     pending_flag = "TRUE"  $     CLOSE output $     GOTO file_loop $  ELSEu! $     WRITE /SYMBOL output record % $     record_count = record_count + 1m $     GOTO record_loop $  ENDIF $! $end:e $! $  CLOSE input $  CLOSE outputt $! $  EXITs   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 14:36:28 +0100t2 From: "Dr. Otto Titze" <titze@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de> Subject: Support of old systemss3 Message-ID: <3AB216DC.904E4354@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de>i  = Great VMS: I am running a mixed 6.2 and 7.2 cluster and stilly1 	have old systems supported which I bought in the 
 	lat 80-ties.f< But TRU64 Unix: I intended tu upgrade to TRU64 V5.1. Then I . 	had to recognize that most of my older Alphas0 	(3000/400, 200 4/233...) are no more supported.  A Is'n that nice? Both operating systems are from Compaq. Obviouslyv- I was too long a VMS user to understand this.f   Regards  Otto  ,  -------------------------------------------, | Dr. Otto Titze, Kernphysik TUD           |, | Schlossgartenstr. 9, D-64289 Darmstadt   |, | titze@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de                |, | Tel: +49(6151)16-2916,FAX:16-4321        |,  -------------------------------------------   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:02:24 GMTr2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)# Subject: Re: Support of old systemse0 Message-ID: <kOqs6.67$eE2.2330@news.cpqcorp.net>  h In article <3AB216DC.904E4354@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de>, "Dr. Otto Titze" <titze@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de> writes:> :Great VMS: I am running a mixed 6.2 and 7.2 cluster and still2 :	have old systems supported which I bought in the :	lat 80-ties.  C   Decade-old computers are very slow and very constrained, and are o   more expensive to support.  = :But TRU64 Unix: I intended tu upgrade to TRU64 V5.1. Then I n/ :	had to recognize that most of my older Alphas 1 :	(3000/400, 200 4/233...) are no more supported.  ..B :Is'n that nice? Both operating systems are from Compaq. Obviously. :I was too long a VMS user to understand this.  F   Support of older systems (Alpha and VAX) and older peripherals is a F   large effort for OpenVMS Engineering.  Like Tru64 UNIX engineering, C   OpenVMS engineering also regularly review our costs vs continued  H   support of older systems, and whether the basic requirements of newer +   releases can be met on the older systems.   H   Tru64 UNIX specifically decided to discontinue support of TURBOchannelI   systems, and to focus engineering and qualification efforts on PCI and wK   new widget and new feature support.   Were OpenVMS Engineering to follow  H   that lead, we could then decide to devote more time to newer features ;   and to newer systems, and to add staff to newer projects.o  H   The current EV67 and EV68 microprocessors are far faster than the EV4 A   microprocessors found in the DEC 2000, DEC 3000, DEC 4000, and fF   AlphaStation 200 series, far more than a MHz-based comparison alone    might indicate.   J   Further, some application vendors and some customers are considering an F   EV56 minimum support level, in order to use tje byte-word and other H   instruction set extensions not available in hardware in earlier Alpha D   microprocessors.  OpenVMS Engineering cannot use as many of these G   instructions in the OpenVMS executive as we would like to at present  D   (though the compiler teams have found some rather elegant ways to H   incorporate these instructions into the newer executable code), which H   means that there is a performance trade-off across the generations of    Alpha systems.  7   TANSTAAFL: There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.   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: 16 Mar 2001 15:23:02 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>6 Subject: Re: Talk to Rich Marcello - Austin Texas area- Message-ID: <87elvykwix.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   # Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com writes:,  F > If somebody in this meeting would be prepared to kidnap him, arrangeE > for some compromising pictures to be taken with him and a couple of - > sheep, then help us blackmail him...... ;-)s  0 Where are you going to get that sort of sheep...   --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.i@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 11:41:02 +0100o5 From: Oswald Knoppers <Oswald.Knoppers@whitehouse.nl> 6 Subject: Re: Talk to Rich Marcello - Austin Texas area- Message-ID: <3AB1EDBE.21036A12@whitehouse.nl>u   Paul Repacholi wrote:e > % > Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com writes:a > H > > If somebody in this meeting would be prepared to kidnap him, arrangeG > > for some compromising pictures to be taken with him and a couple oft/ > > sheep, then help us blackmail him...... ;-)  > 2 > Where are you going to get that sort of sheep...   http://www.muttonbone.com/   Oswald   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:13:52 -0800 ! From: Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.comy6 Subject: Re: Talk to Rich Marcello - Austin Texas areaD Message-ID: <OF2874392B.4A9CEB6F-ON88256A11.00640A05@foundation.com>  H I'm in a suburb of Los Angeles, right next to Hollywood. Our local sheepI will do anything to get in front of a camera, and if you don't believe me-H go see a movie called "Blow Dry", with Alan Rickman. It's showing now...   Shanen          E Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>@k9.healthnet.com on 03/15/2001  11:23:02 PM    Sent by:  prep@k9.healthnet.comp     To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comg cc:   7 Subject:  Re: Talk to Rich Marcello - Austin Texas areae    # Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com writes:s  F > If somebody in this meeting would be prepared to kidnap him, arrangeE > for some compromising pictures to be taken with him and a couple of - > sheep, then help us blackmail him...... ;-)o  0 Where are you going to get that sort of sheep...   --< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.o@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:02:39 GMTe8 From: hammond@not@peek.ppb.cpqcorp.net (Charlie Hammond)0 Subject: Re: TDF change problems with V7.3 EFT2?0 Message-ID: <zOqs6.68$eE2.2310@news.cpqcorp.net>  I I have verified that the situation desribed below still exists in recent,oL internal baelevels of OpenVMS version 7.3, and I have reported this problem.I I cannot make any promise or prediction about getting this fixed for the s
 V7.3 release..    Y In article <98ra14$4v4$1@news1.xs4all.nl>, "Bart Zorn" <B.Zorn@TrueBit.nospam.nl> writes:r >Hello all!  > # >The TDF change is due soon, again.p >iL >I am running OpenVMS G7.3 (EFT2) on my home Alpha, and to my dismay I foundC >out that the rule for the TDF changes in Europe are wrong (again)., >[it should be]: ..1 >1 3600 MET 0 MET-1MET DST-2,M3.5.0/02,M10.5.0/03n ..5 >HOWEVER, the new time changing code gives us, again:  > 1 >1 3600 MET 0 MET-1MET DST-2,M3.4.0/02,M10.4.0/03  ..   -- yK     Charlie Hammond -- Compaq Computer Corporation -- Pompano Beach  FL USA.H        (hammond@not@peek.ppb.cpqcorp.net -- remove "@not" when replying)J       All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's.   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 07:14:06 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) , Subject: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II3 Message-ID: <8e562ipPe$AF@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  \ In article <871yrzy6po.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes:  ; > The down side, is that the POSIX standard has fundamentale@ > incompatabilities with VMS. File Protection/Permissions is oneF > example. This *could* impact back into VMS. And a pile of others I'm > sure.p  A Although you may not favor Microsoft's products, look at what VMSlC did with Microsoft concepts in 7.2-1, and consider what the _could_t do with Unix concepts.  D VMS 7.2-1 (Alpha-only) allows authentication for DCOM processes thatF intertwines VMS and NT "credentials".  Just as each process has a UIC,D privileges, and identifiers we all know and love from VMS, each DCOMD _also_ has the corresponding NT baggage.  SIDs, keys and hash tokens7 may be some of the names involved - I am not an expert.o  I If your DCOM process on VMS wants to read something from the VMS RegistryYH (I guess you can't understand why unless you are a DCOM person), controlK over whether you can read it (or write it) is governed by _Microsoft_style_a' ACLs on object inside the VMS Registry.r  E So here we have one VMS machine implementing two different protection K models, with different rules for ACL parsing, different Rights credentials,a etc.  G There is no technical reason they could not extend that to three models G (or perhaps 255, or 32767, or wherever the documentation folks tell the.F programmers to stop :-).  Now DEQ has not promised this sort of thing,D but if you corner somebody like Andy Goldstein at a DECUS conferenceE he will certainly indicate such a thing is possible, and it is highlycC unlikely he will say "What a unique idea, nobody in VMS Developmentv& had ever considered that possibility".   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 08:47:28 -0500- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) , Subject: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II3 Message-ID: <yXKO3Enirp0c@eisner.encompasserve.org>u  \ In article <871yrzy6po.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes: > ; > The down side, is that the POSIX standard has fundamental @ > incompatabilities with VMS. File Protection/Permissions is oneF > example. This *could* impact back into VMS. And a pile of others I'm > sure.0  B I'm hoping COE will force VMS to add real stream file support (notJ delimited by CR, LF, or CRLF, and not filled to complete 512 byte blocks).  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------? Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporation = NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil Group E                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replyingi   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 09:12:20 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett)N, Subject: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II, Message-ID: <H03R3I1gjm8X@malvm1.mala.bc.ca>  . In article <871yrzy6po.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, 1    Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes:> > G > I can see a BIG plus from COE: It will be a solid "We are not dying!">F > peg to stomp on the fudsters with. 20 year is a BIG lump in any part+ > of the computer world except IBM and VMS.  >   E     I'll probably be accused of being a fudster for asking this, but:e  >     I thought this was true initially, but then I saw postings< suggesting COE is not something that is included in the base@ O/S, but is an "add-on" product. I'm not quite sure I understood@ this or what it means, but I wonder if the 20 year commitment is$ meaningful to the general community.  ;    Does this "20 year commitment" really mean that VMS must ; be available commercially for the next 20 years, or does itv8 only mean that any defense establishment that buys a COE6 system must be guaranteed that specific system will be< supported for 20 years. Will anybody be able to buy a system; and get this 20 year commitment or will it be restricted to 9 the defense establishment. 20 years of support is not the 8 same as 20 years of active development - I'm sure people> still have PDP-11s from 20 years ago that are still supported,< but you don't see a lot of RSTS or RSX based solutions being< proposed in the general marketplace anymore. I have no doubt; that if Compaq killed VMS tomorrow somebody would still be tC using it 20 years from now, but it would still be dead nonetheless.   @  If nobody actually buys a system with the COE "layered product"7 is Compaq free to withdraw this commitment at any time?o   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 09:17:50 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett) , Subject: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II, Message-ID: <hzxlPTWMQckh@malvm1.mala.bc.ca>  4 In article <8e562ipPe$AF@eisner.encompasserve.org>, >    Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) writes:  ^ > In article <871yrzy6po.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes: > < >> The down side, is that the POSIX standard has fundamentalA >> incompatabilities with VMS. File Protection/Permissions is one.G >> example. This *could* impact back into VMS. And a pile of others I'mp >> sure. > K > If your DCOM process on VMS wants to read something from the VMS Registry J > (I guess you can't understand why unless you are a DCOM person), controlM > over whether you can read it (or write it) is governed by _Microsoft_style_e) > ACLs on object inside the VMS Registry.g > G > So here we have one VMS machine implementing two different protection0M > models, with different rules for ACL parsing, different Rights credentials,s > etc. > I     Doesn't Advanced Server ( nee Pathworks ) do something similar, usingkH specially formatted ACEs to impose the Windows security model onto filesH that it serves up? Surely POSIX could do the same thing ( files accessedG through the POSIX layer would be subject to the restrictions imposed by- special POSIX ACEs )   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:50:29 -0800s! From: Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.come, Subject: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act IID Message-ID: <OF66702BA3.CB3AD1F9-ON88256A11.0061E061@foundation.com>  I The way I heard it, it'll start out in a special version of VMS, but in aWJ future release it will be folded back into the base OS. Can anyone confirmD or deny the detail here? Will it be separately licenced, or bundled?   Shanes          E nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett) on 03/16/2001 08:12:20 AMA   To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com- cc:-  - Subject:  Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II-    - In article <871yrzy6po.fsf@prep.synonet.com>,e1    Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes:l >iG > I can see a BIG plus from COE: It will be a solid "We are not dying!"iF > peg to stomp on the fudsters with. 20 year is a BIG lump in any part+ > of the computer world except IBM and VMS.r >r  E     I'll probably be accused of being a fudster for asking this, but:s  >     I thought this was true initially, but then I saw postings< suggesting COE is not something that is included in the base@ O/S, but is an "add-on" product. I'm not quite sure I understood@ this or what it means, but I wonder if the 20 year commitment is$ meaningful to the general community.  ;    Does this "20 year commitment" really mean that VMS mustE; be available commercially for the next 20 years, or does iti8 only mean that any defense establishment that buys a COE6 system must be guaranteed that specific system will be< supported for 20 years. Will anybody be able to buy a system; and get this 20 year commitment or will it be restricted to 9 the defense establishment. 20 years of support is not the 8 same as 20 years of active development - I'm sure people> still have PDP-11s from 20 years ago that are still supported,< but you don't see a lot of RSTS or RSX based solutions being< proposed in the general marketplace anymore. I have no doubt: that if Compaq killed VMS tomorrow somebody would still beC using it 20 years from now, but it would still be dead nonetheless.W  @  If nobody actually buys a system with the COE "layered product"7 is Compaq free to withdraw this commitment at any time?l   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 13:01:08 -0600n* From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>, Subject: RE: The Chris and Bill show. Act II- Message-ID: <0033000018899292000002L022*@MHS>r  0 =0AI don't know about COE in general, but as far3 as the implementation of the POSIX interfaces goes,   0 I was told by an authoritative source that the Q! was going to do it in two stages:=  6 the first being to resurrect and improve the old POSIX layered product kit; and  9 the second being full integration of the POSIX interfaces-
 into OpenVMS.r   WWWebb   > -----Original Message-----1 > From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETS' > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 12:51 PM18 > To: Webb, William W; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET. > Subject: RE: The Chris and Bill show. Act II >l >y= > The way I heard it, it'll start out in a special version of6 > VMS, but in ad= > future release it will be folded back into the base OS. Can  > anyone confirmF > or deny the detail here? Will it be separately licenced, or bundled? >o > Shanes >e >a >f >  >pH > nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett) on 03/16/2001 08:12:20 AM=   >o > To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com- > cc:- >-/ > Subject:  Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II| >  >l/ > In article <871yrzy6po.fsf@prep.synonet.com>,k3 >    Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes:6 > >,= > > I can see a BIG plus from COE: It will be a solid "We are-
 > not dying!"-H > > peg to stomp on the fudsters with. 20 year is a BIG lump in any par= td- > > of the computer world except IBM and VMS.: > >o >oH >     I'll probably be accused of being a fudster for asking this, but:=   ><@ >     I thought this was true initially, but then I saw postings> > suggesting COE is not something that is included in the baseB > O/S, but is an "add-on" product. I'm not quite sure I understoodB > this or what it means, but I wonder if the 20 year commitment is& > meaningful to the general community. >n= >    Does this "20 year commitment" really mean that VMS mustR= > be available commercially for the next 20 years, or does itp: > only mean that any defense establishment that buys a COE8 > system must be guaranteed that specific system will be> > supported for 20 years. Will anybody be able to buy a system= > and get this 20 year commitment or will it be restricted toi; > the defense establishment. 20 years of support is not theX: > same as 20 years of active development - I'm sure people@ > still have PDP-11s from 20 years ago that are still supported,> > but you don't see a lot of RSTS or RSX based solutions being> > proposed in the general marketplace anymore. I have no doubt< > that if Compaq killed VMS tomorrow somebody would still beE > using it 20 years from now, but it would still be dead nonetheless.s >oB >  If nobody actually buys a system with the COE "layered product"9 > is Compaq free to withdraw this commitment at any time?n >=   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 13:39:30 -05006  From: jamese@beast.dtsw.army.mil, Subject: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II0 Message-ID: <01031613393070@beast.dtsw.army.mil>  G Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com wrote on Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:50:29 -0800 in 9 <OF66702BA3.CB3AD1F9-ON88256A11.0061E061@foundation.com>:a  K > The way I heard it, it'll start out in a special version of VMS, but in a L > future release it will be folded back into the base OS. Can anyone confirmF > or deny the detail here? Will it be separately licenced, or bundled?  L From http://www.openvms.compaq.com/solutions/government/coe/dii_COE_Faq.html  K Q: Will these capabilities be incorporated into the operating system and ber    available in V7.3?   J A: The industry standard API's that are being added to OpenVMS for the DIIB    COE environment are not available in OpenVMS V7.3. We expect toM    incorporate these API's into the general operating system in a new featurei    release in CY2002.   : Ed James                           ed.james@telecomsys.com5 TeleCommunications Systems, Inc.   voice 410-295-1919-; 2024 West Street, Suite 300              800-810-0827 x1919-5 Annapolis, MD 21401-3556           fax   410-280-1094o   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 18:14:37 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>7 Subject: Re: Volume Shadowing merge rates on Big Disks?l- Message-ID: <874rwukoky.fsf@prep.synonet.com>.  , John Jansen <jjansen@tilgroup.co.nz> writes:  A > Currently we use a Alpha 4100/300 with 4 gig and 9 gig disks ink8 > shadow sets.  A shadow merge can take over a full day.  F I have a screeming 3000/600 with a pair of $GB Seagate 'cudas shadowedE as the system disk. At 17:47, I blew my 4200 away, and the shadow setlH is merging now. Set up as one on each fast narrow bus. DKA200, and DKB0.  A I was gonig to followup with the completion time, but after about  15 min, it is at 78%, so   ...0  D Completed 18:10. That's 23 min. SHOWOW_MAX_COPY was set to 64 on theB 600, and zeroed on the other nodes. No, I don't want to do it overC 10base2!! Not a lot had been written to the set from the vaxes, but D I did ensure a write from the node I crashed just before killing it.   --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.a@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.150 ************************