1 INFO-VAX	Sat, 17 Mar 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 151       Contents:P Re: 3Dlabs OXYGEN VX1 PCI Graphics (was: Re: the Northeast Digital Systems Ebay P Re: 3Dlabs OXYGEN VX1 PCI Graphics (was: Re: the Northeast Digital Systems Ebay  Re: 500au Video questions . Re: A Compaq Qwestion a VMSer Would Never Ask.. Re: A Compaq Qwestion a VMSer Would Never Ask.2 Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference?6 Re: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference?6 Re: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference?2 Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference?6 Re: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference?6 Re: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference?6 Re: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference? Re: Alpha on ABC Evening news ! Re: Any information on FDVSHR.EXE > Re: Booting stand-alone with VMS 7.2-1 and fibre channel disks- Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut - Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut ? DFWDAYS Event April 17th-20th Dallas Texas Hosted by the DFWCUG C Re: DFWDAYS Event April 17th-20th Dallas Texas Hosted by the DFWCUG C Re: DFWDAYS Event April 17th-20th Dallas Texas Hosted by the DFWCUG C Re: DFWDAYS Event April 17th-20th Dallas Texas Hosted by the DFWCUG 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 Educational    ProgramP Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducational     ProgramP Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducational     ProgramP Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducational     ProgramP Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducational     ProgramP Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducationalProgram) ProP Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducationalProgram) ProP Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducationalProgram) ProP Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducationalProgram) ProP Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducationalProgram) Pro9 Re: Good Netiquette (was Re: OpenVMS Educational Program) 2 Re: Has SYS$SETEXV gone away in OpenVMS Alpha 7.2?2 Re: Has SYS$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 ?? + LDAP Client - Anyone Ported to OpenVMS Yet?  Re: Merging multiple disks' Moving shadow-copying from VAX to Alpha + Re: Moving shadow-copying from VAX to Alpha ! 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  Re: OpenVMS Educational Program  Re: OpenVMS Educational Program  Re: OpenVMS Educational Program  Re: OpenVMS Educational Program  RE: OpenVMS Educational Program  RE: OpenVMS Educational Program  Re: OpenVMS Educational Program  Re: OpenVMS Educational Program  Re: OpenVMS Educational Program  Re: OpenVMS Educational Program B Re: OpenVMS Educational Program: Looking a Gift Horse in the Mouth> OpenVMS Educational Program: Looking a Gift Horse in the MouthB Re: OpenVMS Educational Program: Looking a Gift Horse in the MouthB Re: OpenVMS Educational Program: Looking a Gift Horse in the MouthB Re: OpenVMS Educational Program: Looking a Gift Horse in the MouthB Re: OpenVMS Educational Program: Looking a Gift Horse in the Mouth% Re: Pathworks Client and Windows 2000 M Re: POSIX Streams, File Permissions (was: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II M Re: POSIX Streams, File Permissions (was: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II M Re: POSIX Streams, File Permissions (was: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II M Re: POSIX Streams, File Permissions (was: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II   Re: Possible security hole in...  Re: Possible security hole in...  Re: Possible security hole in...) Re: Processes with PFW on an empty system  Re: Samba and W2k  Re: Support of old systems- 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: TDF change problems with V7.3 EFT2? ' 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 Northeast Digital Systems Ebay Follies. Re: the Northeast Digital Systems Ebay Follies. Re: the Northeast Digital Systems Ebay Follies TURBOchannel graphics  Re: TURBOchannel graphics  Re: TURBOchannel graphics . Re: Volume Shadowing merge rates on Big Disks? VPM$SERVER ERROR MESSAGE Re: VPM$SERVER ERROR MESSAGE Re: VPM$SERVER ERROR MESSAGE Re: VPM$SERVER ERROR MESSAGE! Re: [Q] skip [vms$common] parsing   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 00:48:41 GMT 2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)Y Subject: Re: 3Dlabs OXYGEN VX1 PCI Graphics (was: Re: the Northeast Digital Systems Ebay  0 Message-ID: <Jvys6.96$eE2.2550@news.cpqcorp.net>  n In article <A+vf2LICQB+i@tachxxsoftxxconsult>, wayne@tachysoft.xxx.412538.killspam.015a (Wayne Sewell) writes:   :...D :However, this time I am looking to replace the display machine, so " :I do care about the video card...  G   Device drivers for the 3Dlabs OXYGEN VX1 PCI Graphics Controller are  F   now available for OpenVMS Alpha at the ECO website.  (ECO name: VX1)  G   Other common OpenVMS-supported graphics controllers include the ELSA  A   GLoria Synergy, and the PowerStorm 300/PowerStorm 350 series...   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: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 03:13:10 GMT  From: dittman@dittman.net Y Subject: Re: 3Dlabs OXYGEN VX1 PCI Graphics (was: Re: the Northeast Digital Systems Ebay  B Message-ID: <aDAs6.225484$sD.12075503@e420r-sjo2.usenetserver.com>  3 Hoff Hoffman <hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam> wrote: p : In article <A+vf2LICQB+i@tachxxsoftxxconsult>, wayne@tachysoft.xxx.412538.killspam.015a (Wayne Sewell) writes:   : :...F : :However, this time I am looking to replace the display machine, so $ : :I do care about the video card...  I :   Device drivers for the 3Dlabs OXYGEN VX1 PCI Graphics Controller are  H :   now available for OpenVMS Alpha at the ECO website.  (ECO name: VX1)  F Be aware that the VX1 does not work correctly on 21164A systems.  I'veG tried on both a PC164LX and when that didn't work a 433au (assuming the G problem to be due to something related to the unsupported status of the = PC164LX).  I've send logs to Fred, but he's gone on vacation.  --   Eric Dittman dittman@dittman.net    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 00:15:20 +0100 + From: Arne Bergseth <Arne.Bergseth@dnv.com> " Subject: Re: 500au Video questions' Message-ID: <3AB29E87.BA32A437@dnv.com>   ; PWS 500au with Elsa Gloria Synergy video card works for me.   E Last year I have bought a Digital PWS 500au for use at home with VMS, A from a dealer in Savannah, Georgia and it works perfectly for me.   C Do not read the 1998 systems and options catalog about this matter, I the support for the Elsa Gloria video card came in a VMS patch later than  that. J In the documentation with the patch, there is also specifications for what0 resolutions and refresh frequencies may be used., The video card in my machine is SN-PBXGK-BB.< It is running with VMS 7.2-1 and most relevant patches, see:_ http://ftp1.support.compaq.com/public/vms/axp/v7.2-1/dec-axpvms-vms721_graphics-v0400--4.README   3 See also the description for 4D10T with VMS 7.2 in: \ http://ftp1.support.compaq.com/public/vms/axp/v7.2/dec-axpvms-vms72_graphics-v0100--4.README  N If there is distubances in the picture, it may be possible to try reducing the   picture frequency. Some place, I have seen:F  SN-PBXGK-AA mentioned as Compaq PowerStorm 4D10T,  Comet 4MB Graphics
 controllerF  SN-PBXGK-AB mentioned as Compaq PowerStorm 4D10T,  Comet 8MB Graphics
 controllerK  SN-PBXGK-BB mentioned as Elsa Gloria Synergy,                  Synergy 8MB  video controller  F As for Monitor, I think almost any current multisync monitor should be possible= to use,  I did buy a Philips 19 inch monitor in a local shop.    Regards,        Arne Bergseth   Lyndon Bartels wrote:    > Lyndon Bartels wrote:  > > L > > As you all probably know, I've bought for my personal pleasure, a 500au. > >   > > I also have a 500au at work. > > E > > Right now, they're sitting side-by-side under my desk. This makes  > > comparisons very easy. > > I > 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.  > D > I looked at the 1998 Systems and Options catalog. And it says thatD > "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. > G > Adding into this, there is the ELSA Gloria (SN-PBXGK-BB). The catalog  > doesn't list the ELSA. > F > I have a two-part question. First, is the ELSA Gloria supported in aH > 500au, and if so, must it be installed in one of the 64-bit PCI slots. > I > I'm a little reluctant to purchase the ELSA Gloria. My work 500au has a H > ELSA Gloria in it, and there's a window text over-run problem that theG > 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 14:52:16 -0500 ! From: Reg <RegBurgess@Lucent.com> 7 Subject: Re: A Compaq Qwestion a VMSer Would Never Ask. * Message-ID: <3AB26EEF.1C741187@Lucent.com>  = I have been seeing road signs to "ONLY" for many years now. B There seem to be left and right turns to it in almost every town I visit,H but I never seem to get there. Is there such a village, city or town ?   \R" I assume it is pronounced "On_li"   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:   9 > http://web14.compaq.com/falco/detail.asp?FAQnum=FAQ2859  >  > -- > Terry C. Shannon > Consultant and Publisher > Shannon Knows Compaq" > email: terryshannon@mediaone.net& > Web (info on SKC): www.acersoft.com   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 04:17:40 GMT 3 From: Carl Nelson <carl.nelson@mcmail.maricopa.edu> 7 Subject: Re: A Compaq Qwestion a VMSer Would Never Ask. 3 Message-ID: <3AB2E565.A5072307@mcmail.maricopa.edu>   C How about the most anthologized song in the universe. Its on almost / EVERY collection cd advertised on teeeeveeee...    "And many more"   D Has anyone EVER heard this song? Is it a secret mind control project designed to drive us mad?   E -- Carl. (Who has gone to a Star Trek convention, wearing a T-shirt I 4 had made that says "Who the HELL is Captain Slog?".)   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 10:49:35 -0700   From: l_ricker@lto.locktrack.com; Subject: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference? . Message-ID: <01031611493504@lto.locktrack.com>  5 > Isn't there a little booklet with the CD that gives $ > version numbers for each platform?  = Yes, but that's what's confusing.  The little booklet doesn't > mention PALcode, nor does it have any version #'s in the range
 "1.xx-xx".  ; After talking with my colleagues about this over lunch, I'm 	 figuring:   ? a) Do the firmware upgrade to V5.8, since the booklet says that @ it's required for VMS V7.2-1.  If this upgrades the PALcode too,@ then fine.  However, I'm upgrading firmware "in the dark", sinceA (on this remote system) I don't know what firmware it's currently @ running, just that it's "old" (whatever was there at sys-install time in about 1996).  = b) Since I've never done anything explicit to upgrade PALcode * before, I'm not going to sweat it.  But...  ? c) I remain curious about where updated PALcode comes from, and @ yes, Rob, your and my colleagues comments remind me that PALcode> is specific to a particular operating system, e.g., VMS.  As I= understand it, PALcode implements the basic hardware "virtual ; machine" that the operating system relies upon, and thus is # different (tuned) for various OS's.   A So, and again just for curiosity, is PALcode(s) upgraded with the ; firmware, or does it come in some obscure file(s) in the OS  upgrade itself?  Or what?   B And, again, is there an F$GETSYI argument that returns the version@ of the system's firmware (similar to "PALCODE_VERSION"), or mustA one drop the system to dead-sargeant-prompt >>> to find that out? ? Clearly, seeing the "PALCODE_VERSION" is only confusing me when < the upgrade's determining factor is really firmware version.  % IMWTK (inquiring minds want to know)!    Lorin    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 20:58:45 GMT 2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)? Subject: Re: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference? 0 Message-ID: <98vs6.84$eE2.2583@news.cpqcorp.net>  Q In article <01031611493504@lto.locktrack.com>, l_ricker@lto.locktrack.com writes:    B :So, and again just for curiosity, is PALcode(s) upgraded with the< :firmware, or does it come in some obscure file(s) in the OS :upgrade itself?  Or what?  I   The terms PALcode and firmware are effectively interchangeable for most K   purposes, and there are a number of different version numbers and version E   numbering schemes around.  Just use the current firmware (from the  D   firmware V5.8 or V5.9 CD-ROM distributions or downloaded from the %   firmware website) onto your system.   E   The firmware distribution has a nice version number, and contains a E   wide variety of PALcode (firmware) and console updates for various  I   systems.  Any particular Alpha system may or may not see a new PALcode  H   (firmware) version released on any particular firmware distribution.  H   The firmware distribution also contains the console, and that too has    a version number.   =   Read the "readme" files at the firmware website as a start.   G   PALcode is the Privileged Architecture Library code, and provides the H   hardware "flavoring" prefered by the particular operating system.  TheG   operating system can call into the PALcode for certain functions, and I   the PALcode knows how to perform the particular required activities on  6   each particular Alpha microprocessor implementation.  I   AlphaServer 1200 OpenVMS PALcode 1.19-14 looks to be from the firmware  F   V5.1 kit, and was provided with SRM V5.1-3.  Firmware V5.9 provides J   OpenVMS PALcode 1.21-2, and SRM V5.9-5.  While the OpenVMS PALcode from K   included with Firmware V5.5 through V5.9 is the same (1.21-2), there are  E   newer versions of the SRM console for most of (all of?) these kits.   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 21:11:36 GMT 1 From: "Mark D. Jilson" <jilly@clarityconnect.com> ? Subject: Re: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference? 2 Message-ID: <3AB28201.FA794DF3@clarityconnect.com>  D The PALCODE will be on the firmware update CD and will get installedH along with the SRM firmware.  Post just the cpu section of the following  	 $ ANA/SYSe CLUE CONFIG     This should have what is needed.  ! l_ricker@lto.locktrack.com wrote:a > 7 > > Isn't there a little booklet with the CD that gives & > > version numbers for each platform? > ? > Yes, but that's what's confusing.  The little booklet doesn'te@ > mention PALcode, nor does it have any version #'s in the range > "1.xx-xx". > = > After talking with my colleagues about this over lunch, I'm  > figuring:f > A > a) Do the firmware upgrade to V5.8, since the booklet says thatlB > it's required for VMS V7.2-1.  If this upgrades the PALcode too,B > then fine.  However, I'm upgrading firmware "in the dark", sinceC > (on this remote system) I don't know what firmware it's currentlySB > running, just that it's "old" (whatever was there at sys-install > time in about 1996). > ? > b) Since I've never done anything explicit to upgrade PALcodel, > before, I'm not going to sweat it.  But... > A > c) I remain curious about where updated PALcode comes from, andnB > yes, Rob, your and my colleagues comments remind me that PALcode@ > is specific to a particular operating system, e.g., VMS.  As I? > understand it, PALcode implements the basic hardware "virtual = > machine" that the operating system relies upon, and thus is % > different (tuned) for various OS's.n > C > So, and again just for curiosity, is PALcode(s) upgraded with theb= > firmware, or does it come in some obscure file(s) in the OSl > upgrade itself?  Or what?S > D > And, again, is there an F$GETSYI argument that returns the versionB > of the system's firmware (similar to "PALCODE_VERSION"), or mustC > one drop the system to dead-sargeant-prompt >>> to find that out?lA > Clearly, seeing the "PALCODE_VERSION" is only confusing me whenn> > the upgrade's determining factor is really firmware version. > ' > IMWTK (inquiring minds want to know)! 	 >   Lorin    -- SD Jilly	- Working from Home in the Chemung River Valley - Lockwood, NY0 	- jilly@clarityconnect.com			- Brett Bodine fan. 	- Mark.Jilson@Compaq.com			- since 1975 or so, 	- http://www.jilly.baka.com               -   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 12:47:16 -0700i  From: l_ricker@lto.locktrack.com; Subject: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference?P. Message-ID: <01031613471641@lto.locktrack.com>   Mark wrote:u  , > Post just the cpu section of the following   > $ ANA/SYSa
 > CLUE CONFIG   * ...which yields (on a development system):   SDA> clue config      [ ... snip ... ]n  # Per-CPU Slot Processor Information: K CPU ID         00                        CPU State    rc,pa,pp,cv,pv,pmv,plmJ CPU Type       EV56  Pass 2 (21164A)     Halt Request "Default, No Action"G PAL Code       1.21-1                    Halt PC      00000000.20000000oG CPU Revision   ....                      Halt PS      00000000.00001F00nN Serial Number  ..........                Halt Code    "Bootstrap or Powerfail" Console Vers   V5.4-2M  K CPU ID         01                        CPU State    rc,pa,pp,cv,pv,pmv,pla        [ ... snip ... ]d  @ "Aha!  I see!" says the blind man.  PAL Code and Console Vers...> I've got it!  Thanks, Mark, Rob and Steve... I'll proceed with reckless abandon again.e   Lorin    ------------------------------    Date: 17 Mar 2001 06:03:53 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>? Subject: Re: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference?g- Message-ID: <87k85p9xrq.fsf@prep.synonet.com>n  " l_ricker@lto.locktrack.com writes:  D > And, again, is there an F$GETSYI argument that returns the versionB > of the system's firmware (similar to "PALCODE_VERSION"), or mustC > one drop the system to dead-sargeant-prompt >>> to find that out?sA > Clearly, seeing the "PALCODE_VERSION" is only confusing me whent> > the upgrade's determining factor is really firmware version.  E A SHOW CONF or what ever, to the recumbent marine should give you the. numbers I think.  H The way I prefer to do FW updates is to drop the file on another machine# and net boot it in. Quick and easy.    --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 01:38:49 GMTT6 From: "Andy Bustamante" <A_C_Bustamante@earthlink.net>? Subject: Re: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference?iD Message-ID: <Jezs6.2513$Im6.346277@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>  J If you go into the associated readme's there are some platforms which needD to be at 5.3 or better before you jump to 5.8.  One of those "Compaq recommends" disclaimers.   -- Andy Bustamantea Remove the ASCII 95s to reply - <l_ricker@lto.locktrack.com> wrote in message ( news:01031610162483@lto.locktrack.com...  ; > I'm a bit confused and need advice as I plan for some VMSn3 > upgrade activities.  Planning to take an existing ; > AlphaServer 1200 to VMS V7.2-1 (from V7.1-1H2)... got theE9 > CDROM box containing, in addition to the VMS disks, theE > Firmware Update V5.8 CDROM.s > 8 > My confusion is this:  If I check the system's PALcode6 > version, with F$GETSYI("PALCODE_VERSION"), I get the6 > following result string:  "1.19-14" (on the system I: > intend to upgrade).  Comparing this to a couple of other8 > systems which *are already* at VMS V7.2-1, they report4 > "1.21-1" and "1.61-49" on another 1200 and a DS20, > respectively.w >e: > I don't see a corresponding F$GETSYI argument that would; > show me "FIRMWARE_VERSION"?... or am I missing something.a@ > 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. >a6 > Question is, how is "PALCODE_VERSION" related to the7 > so-called "Firmware version", and what happens to ther9 > PALcode when I upgrade the target system using the V5.838 > CDROM?  Is PALcode updated by a firmware update, or is9 > it just console and device firmware as the accompanying  > booklet indicates? >e= > 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!1 >a > TIA,	 >   Lorin    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 00:18:23 -0500w2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)? Subject: Re: Alpha firmware vs. PALcode: what's the difference?oL Message-ID: <rdeininger-1703010018230001@user-2ivec0m.dialup.mindspring.com>  P In article <01031611493504@lto.locktrack.com>, l_ricker@lto.locktrack.com wrote:    A > c) I remain curious about where updated PALcode comes from, and B > yes, Rob, your and my colleagues comments remind me that PALcode@ > is specific to a particular operating system, e.g., VMS.  As I? > understand it, PALcode implements the basic hardware "virtualX= > machine" that the operating system relies upon, and thus isy% > different (tuned) for various OS's.n > C > So, and again just for curiosity, is PALcode(s) upgraded with thet= > firmware, or does it come in some obscure file(s) in the OS  > upgrade itself?  Or what?o  E PALcode is upgraded at the same time as the "firmware".  I think it's-4 almost correct to say firmware is PALcode + console.  D > And, again, is there an F$GETSYI argument that returns the versionB > of the system's firmware (similar to "PALCODE_VERSION"), or mustC > one drop the system to dead-sargeant-prompt >>> to find that out? A > Clearly, seeing the "PALCODE_VERSION" is only confusing me whend> > the upgrade's determining factor is really firmware version.   $ mcr sysman set env/nod=alpha_nodestG do write sys$output "Console version: ", f$getsyi("console_version"), -                      "    ", -tD                     "PALcode version: ", f$getsyi("palcode_version") exit   Our "old" firmware was...r  : %SYSMAN-I-OUTPUT, command execution on node (DEC 3000-300): Console version: V6.9                PALcode version: 5.56  E %SYSMAN-I-OUTPUT, command execution on node (AlphaStation 600A 5/500)-< Console version: V4.9-169            PALcode version: 1.19-4  7 %SYSMAN-I-OUTPUT, command execution on node (DPW 600au)p: Console version: V6.9-7              PALcode version: 1.20  : %SYSMAN-I-OUTPUT, command execution on node (DEC 3000-400): Console version: V7.0                PALcode version: 5.56    E After upgrading using firmware CD V5.6 (which came with our VMS 7.1-2p) kit), the systems reported the following:   : %SYSMAN-I-OUTPUT, command execution on node (DEC 3000-300): Console version: V7.0                PALcode version: 5.56E %SYSMAN-I-OUTPUT, command execution on node (AlphaStation 600A 5/500)r< Console version: V5.6-114            PALcode version: 1.21-47 %SYSMAN-I-OUTPUT, command execution on node (DPW 600au) : Console version: V7.2-1              PALcode version: 1.20: %SYSMAN-I-OUTPUT, command execution on node (DEC 3000-400): Console version: V7.0                PALcode version: 5.56    C In this case, the Console version changed on all 4 systems, but thee" PALcode only changed on 1 of them.     Hope the example helps.o   -- h Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.comS   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 03:10:10 +0100 + From: Arne Bergseth <Arne.Bergseth@dnv.com>o& Subject: Re: Alpha on ABC Evening news' Message-ID: <3AB2C782.A3FD717A@dnv.com>t   Martin Zinser wrote:   >cF > On a really related topic (triggered by PHA0:) - Anybody got further1 > VAXtrek episodes, beyonde the ones available on  >t5 >  http://www.decus.de:8080/www/vms/fun/vaxtrek.htmlx  >   < I just looked at the VAXtrek site, and unfortunately noticed% that  The Picture could not be found. 3 Also the pages for VAXtrek 1-3 seems to be missing.i  
 Arne Bergseth    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 19:13:17 -0000 , From: "Richard Maher" <Tier3@btinternet.com>* Subject: Re: Any information on FDVSHR.EXE2 Message-ID: <98tojn$dr$1@plutonium.btinternet.com>   Hi,e  K It's the form driver shareable for FMS. You should be abled to down load itsF from the VMSINSTALL kit without a license just like the language RTLs.   Regards Richard Maher.  F FMS the best *character cell* forms product ever! Maybe one of the VMSD engineers can give you an up to date break down of revenue and total= licenses for DECforms, FMS and TDMS. (Please include relativem( cost/expenditure over the last 10 years)  K BUt then these are the people who gave you RTR while killing off ACMS. TalkLH about oxymorons! "VMS TP Strategy" you gotta be havin' a laugh ain't ya?    . Bedlam702 <bedlam702@aol.com> wrote in message4 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: 17 Mar 2001 03:46:27 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>G Subject: Re: Booting stand-alone with VMS 7.2-1 and fibre channel disksn- Message-ID: <87g0gdbip8.fsf@prep.synonet.com>r  7 "Steeples, Oliver" <Oliver.Steeples@compaq.com> writes:   E > >Q1.  I swear that when I booted my 4100 (KGPSAs were installed anduE > >cabled, HSGs were configged) from the 7.2-1 CD, I couldn't see anyDD > >of the DGA devices from "standalone environment".  Is that right?A > >Is the 7.2-1 CD incapable of seeing fc disks when you boot thed > >standalone environment?  B > Yes, 7.2-1 does'n load any fibre drivers from the CD so no fibre> > disks can be seen.  Either the 7.2-1h1 CD can be used or the, > following for a stabackit type enviroment:  F > Patch vms 7.2-1 with fibre_scsi_v0400 (or at least 300 as this fixesB > loads'a'stuff) run alpha stabackit (can never remember what it'sF > called) to small spare local scsi disk.  boot this disk from >>> andC > all fibre disks will be seen, basically you are loading the fibreo" > drivers into the stacbackit kit.  E Can one put the drivers etc needed on a floppy and boot DVA0:,DKA500:t3 SO the system can load the drivers from the Floppy?   C Seem to remember Hoff or some one using something like this to boot-	 a multia.e   -- n< 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.   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Mar 2001 04:40:11 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>6 Subject: Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut- Message-ID: <87y9u5a1n8.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   # Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com writes:'  E > Not necessarily. If the commercial PC and consumer PC groups merge,eD > which is how I read that, the figures for real computers will haveB > to be tracked separately. Now, given what we've been speculatingD > about the VMS (oh, and I suppose Those Other Two's) revenues beingF > used to subsidise the PC end, how d'you think they plan to hide thatF > when the figures are separated out?  How will they explain it to the > investors?  E Well, if you look over at the Reg, you will see the ( blush, ah hum )sC Sun has got to be #1 server vendor in the US, pipping IBM. From all$B the numbers, you can cut a rough guess at the VMS (non) share. The/ margin figures make interesting reading though.t  @ > I see this as having the potential to be a good thing for VMS.  D One of the Veeps is leaving and not being replaced. Perhaps we could2 draw up a list :) A good de-thorning for starters.   -- i< 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 21:09:18 -0000l- From: wspencer@ap.nospam.org (Warren Spencer)r6 Subject: Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut/ Message-ID: <tb507u5p9n57b5@news.supernews.com>e  $ Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com wrote in: <OF800C7CB8.2F722EAD-ON88256A11.00045E3E@foundation.com>:   & >A friend just pointed this out to me: >uB >http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20010315/tc/compaq_layoffs_1.html > H >         HOUSTON (AP) - Compaq Computer Corp. is cutting 5,000 jobs andI >         warned Thursday that first-quarter earnings will fall far shortm! >         of analysts' estimates.  >hD >Hmmmm, PCs not doing so well, huh? What was that VMS revenue figure5 >again? Maybe this is where that VMS ad came from....f >v >Shane    & Here's the part that I think is funky:  K "The layoffs will come mostly from supply chain and marketing organization a changes..."s  H I hope they don't lay off the lonely VMS marketing guy that finally got 2 that one OpenVMS/Alpha advertisement out the door!   ws     -- e1 << Marriage is Grand.  Divorce is Fifty Grand. >>P   Warren Spencer Senior Software Engineer The Associated Press  ? ** My employer does not necessarily agree with my statements **p   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 14:26:46 -0500 - From: John Wisniewski <wisniewski@vmsone.com>uH Subject: DFWDAYS Event April 17th-20th Dallas Texas Hosted by the DFWCUG* Message-ID: <3AB268F6.74EF4081@vmsone.com>   From: Wisniewski, John% Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 2:37 PMd To: 'Terry C. Shannon'- Subject: DFWDAYS Event      An Open Letter...n http://www.dfwcug.org/         Mr. Shannon,  G Categorically and for the record the Dallas Ft Worth Compaq Users Groupe steadfastly denies that ourR( LUG has Nuclear First Strike Capability.  H The DFWCUG is shocked to find that a journalist, and Encompass Leader of' your stature might feel the stockpilinge? of nuclear fuel is automatically an offensive act, when done by-+ legitimately franchised Local User Group of- The Encompass US Chapter.e   For the Record:n  G The DFWCUG is exploring the peaceful uses of various energy sources for-* it's many datacenters, high current-demandD projects, and three phase power requirements for our VAX 11/780s and other Older VAXen.  E These sources include Solar, Wind, Hydro, Bio-mass, and yes, Nuclear.., With the rising costs of electricity we mustF consider our options carefully if we are to guide our members into the- future of technological expansion, electrical H power must continue to remain at a reasonable cost, and remain plentiful* for our experimental projects to remain on	 schedule.   F To insinuate that the DFWCUG is amassing nuclear fuel for first strike$ capability is ludicrous, inaccurate,B and violates the 1st, 3rd and 14th paragraphs of the New Encompass( treaty (eh by-laws), legally joined intoF by the Encompass US Chapter and all LUGs of the Former US DECUS empire in back in the year 2000.a  D Our exploration into nuclear capability is well within our technical# charter from our National Encompass E Chapter and is only designed for peaceful, defensive, energy researcho	 purposes.t  H With the proliferation of terrorist LUGs and their use of charged energy) weapons, Pickles of Mass Destruction, andlG Bio-digestive hastening technologies, the DFWCUG does reserve the rightt( to use its resources to defend ourselvesC against aggressor user groups, by responding to their technologicale0 aggression with our own technologies in kind and severity if the need arises.  E We have demonstrated our defensive capabilities at our Yearly DFWDAYs.' event and this next event will continuet) our show of goodwill and peaceful intent.t  F The DFWCUG will host a technological display for the peaceful uses for Compaq technologies during= April 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th of this year in Dallas Texas.   D We hope Encompass members throughout the United States and our DECUS+ friends across the Seas will take advantageeE of the DFWCUG's peaceful intent in holding this conferance and attendm- the DFWDAYS 2001 event to learn technological . co-operation and the latest Compaq Techniques.     Agenda:o  F Tue 17th -- A "Free" day long "Attunity" software seminar on strategic( information on turning your systems intoH                   business to business tools and how to use your systems for E-business.l  B Wen 18th --A Day long Galaxy Training Class with using a GS series$ Alpha, Plus keynotes from the FBI onG                   Computer Crime, Compaq OpenVMS, Compaq Tru64 Unix andl2 other Enterprise technology sessions all day long.  H Thu 19th --Another Day Long Galaxy Training Class (in case the first one is filled), Plus keynotes fromD                  Rich Marcello (Compaq VP of OpenVMS) and a complete- Diamond Forum, with Technology topics, Oracle %                  and Compaq Services.   E Fri 20th --Half day of Seminars, Windows 2000, Storage, Linux, Compaq $ Services, Digital India, and DigitalB            Networks Product Groups sporting their famous "digital" block  logos...C  H (note:See the webpages for the latest schedules and speaker information)      G And for our friends in fthe Quartermasters Corp, eh, Procurment, Peoplel8 who buy stuff,  we will have a Vendor's Round House withE Compaq Alliance Vendors for you to talk with about their softwares to @ help your peaceful needs.   Wens the 18th and Thursday the 19th.  H And if you are man enough to defend yourself in a public forum, you too, Mr. Shannon will be a speakeriG at this event.  While at the DFWDAYS event you will be asked about your.  crimes against humanity and yourE insight laden opinions on Compaq, Technology, and the peaceful use of ! nuclear weapons in your own past.a  C And Of course the DFWCUG will have an impressive display of our own.+ technological "Arsenal of Peace" on display:H and perhaps a "Special" display on Thursday Evening before your talk Mr. Shannon!   OFF THE RECORD:w  D The DFWCUG is a peace-loving organization by charter but we will not% hesitate to defend our technology andiD our very way of life if provoked or set upon by the luddite minions," jealous of our Historical Computer, collection and unrivaled collection of MP3s.  > Y'all (Texas-English translation: all of you; Texas-East Coast) translation: youse guys; Texas-West CoastvE translation:You dudes) are invited to DFWDAYS to witness the DFWCUG'sh$ peaceful intent twords all the otherF LUGs, and Usergroups using the superior technology that only available from Compaq.      
 Sincerely,  ? The DFWCUG Committee for Strategic Defense and Power Conversion   A For more Information  or to Register Online for The DFWDays Peace  Conference visit:0   http://www.dfwcug.org/   ands  ! The Shannon Knows Compaq Archives-   http://www.acersoft.com/   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 16:57:31 -0500- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)cL Subject: Re: DFWDAYS Event April 17th-20th Dallas Texas Hosted by the DFWCUG3 Message-ID: <wwNO+lTBm9f+@eisner.encompasserve.org>   Z In article <3AB268F6.74EF4081@vmsone.com>, John Wisniewski <wisniewski@vmsone.com> writes:  @ > Y'all (Texas-English translation: all of you; Texas-East Coast+ > translation: youse guys; Texas-West Coast@ > translation:You dudes)    , Southern Pennsilvanian translation: you-uns.  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------? Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporation0= NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GroupiE                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replying    ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 17:44:57 -05009 From: kaplow_r@eisner.encompasserve.org.mars (Bob Kaplow) L Subject: Re: DFWDAYS Event April 17th-20th Dallas Texas Hosted by the DFWCUG3 Message-ID: <qtU6gf96VDQ5@eisner.encompasserve.org>y  Z In article <3AB268F6.74EF4081@vmsone.com>, John Wisniewski <wisniewski@vmsone.com> writes:I > Categorically and for the record the Dallas Ft Worth Compaq Users Grouph > steadfastly denies that our * > LUG has Nuclear First Strike Capability.  H You know I've sent you some stuff for your collection in the past. In myE spare time, I *AM* a Rocket Scientist. if you decide you need help inLH delivering any "device" via "special delivery", feel free to contact me.  A Until than, I'm back to my project of placing a cat in GEO orbit..   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 22:51:14 GMTo4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>L Subject: Re: DFWDAYS Event April 17th-20th Dallas Texas Hosted by the DFWCUG= Message-ID: <CNws6.12763$mH4.3094452@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>w  : "John Wisniewski" <wisniewski@vmsone.com> wrote in message$ news:3AB268F6.74EF4081@vmsone.com... > From: Wisniewski, John' > Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 2:37 PM- > To: 'Terry C. Shannon'/ > Subject: DFWDAYS Event      An Open Letter...i > http://www.dfwcug.org/ >e >n >) >u > Mr. Shannon, >rI > Categorically and for the record the Dallas Ft Worth Compaq Users Group0 > steadfastly denies that ourn* > LUG has Nuclear First Strike Capability. >l  ( <much intriguing sabre-rattling deleted>   > J > And if you are man enough to defend yourself in a public forum, you too, > Mr. Shannon will be a speakermI > at this event.  While at the DFWDAYS event you will be asked about yourm" > crimes against humanity and yourG > insight laden opinions on Compaq, Technology, and the peaceful use ofr# > nuclear weapons in your own past.y  I Let it be known that I never had the privilege to use nuclear weapons foriI peaceful purposes, or even as a Protective Reaction(tm) measure during mybE tenure in the Southeast Asian War Games. Alas, the hundreds of tacairgC strikes I called in, and the numerous ARCLIGHT visits I provided toeL enlighten Hanoi Jane Fonda and her godless heathen veecee fellow-travellers,2 were limited to mass quantities of dumb iron bomb,  G With that little matter cleared up once and for all, be it known that IoK accept your challenge and will.appear before the DFWCUG Court of Inquiry asVL directed. I will be armed with 1GHz Alpha chips and Marvelous tales from theA Unannounced Product File, not to mention all the lurid details ofw% Ultra(enterprise) Blunder Down Under.g     cheers,e   Terry C. ShannonL SGT 98C20/6B20 USASA 509th RRG (ret), Nha Trang, Bon Song, Pleiku, Laos, and Places Like That   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Mar 2001 03:36:09 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>Y Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS     Educational     PrA- Message-ID: <87k85pbj6e.fsf@prep.synonet.com>-  , bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler) writes:  F > The problem with structuring files by the OS is that there are times@ > when different applications want to view the _SAME_ data usingF > different structures.  That is a flaw with structured storage.  With? > a stream of bytes, its possible to view data in any structure(
 > desired.  ; It is pretty straight forward to do this. Use $READ or, use 8 the hack that was posted to fudge the file attrs to RMS.  F The OS does not structure the file, you do. The only thing the OS doesF is give RMS address space, and provide space for it to store metadata.   -- V< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.V@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 16:33:39 -0500- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)hY Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS     Educational     Prg3 Message-ID: <1fR58xDhv+$f@eisner.encompasserve.org>-  -  bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler) writes:0   F > The problem with structuring files by the OS is that there are times@ > when different applications want to view the _SAME_ data usingF > different structures.  That is a flaw with structured storage.  With? > a stream of bytes, its possible to view data in any structuree
 > desired.  J Which is the right tool, sometimes, and can be done on UNIX, VMS, Windows, ...X  F But is not the right tool other times and then UNIX, Windows, and such can't help you, but VMS can.  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------? Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporationh= NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GroupSE                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replyingt   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 16:31:43 -0500- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Y Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS    EducationalProgram)m3 Message-ID: <yToIUgU+Ow5O@eisner.encompasserve.org>i   In article <rdeininger-1603011124170001@user-2ive6ob.dialup.mindspring.com>, rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) writes:e  K > In the present example (ps on unix, show system on VMS) I know there is aeK > good API in VMS.  I'm ignorant about unix.  If there is is NOT a standardiL > (across many unixes) API to retrieve detailed process information, then itI > is a technical deficiency of unix compared to VMS, for the reasons I'veo > outlined.   = There is no such standard API.  Maybe with COE we'll get one.-  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------? Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporation = NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil Group@E                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replyingr   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 16:29:43 -0500- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)mY Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS    EducationalProgram)s3 Message-ID: <z2$hE31DMRiN@eisner.encompasserve.org>f    writing my own or buying someone` In article <98ta73$ije$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>, bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler) writes:  = > So where is VMS the right tool and unix not the right tool?n  & 1) high interrupt real time processing: 2) never saw any UNIX vendor offer the equivalent to SEVMS  M > Ok, there are some differences:  time is listed differently, and linux useslL > '[]' to denote a swapped out process.  These are not critical differences.  F It is if your code depends on them.  Try ps -aux on a few UNIX and seeF what real differences are, especially if one's a BSD and the other's a SVID.V  I > 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".  F Because I have to write record access routines or spend big bucks on aF DBMS just to be able to update records or find records in an otherwizeG simple file.  Both lead to cost.  With VMS I get a choice, stream filesrD or sequential record files, or keyed indexed files, in other words IG choose the right tool to do the job instead of being forced to use just.
 the one tool.R  P > Its been years since I read it.  Why don't you point out the three biggest andP > I'll discuss them.  Mostly its about the userspace tools.  GNU tools fix most + > of the issues (where there are issues).  h  F Exactly.  Remember GNU = gnu's not UNIX.   The problem isn't GNU, it's? UNIX.  If UNIX wasn't the problem, GNU wouldn't have to fix it.u  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------? Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporationh= NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GrouptE                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replying    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 16:07:17 -0600B+ From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com>hY Subject: RE: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS    EducationalProgram) L Message-ID: <3B55D7F383B0D31197D9009027541CBF0BDD5484@cmiexch1.cmi.itds.com>   > -----Original Message-----D > From: rdeininger@mindspring.com [mailto:rdeininger@mindspring.com]  ? > Well, I'll point out a potential problem that could result.  n > I don't knowH > if this is a real problem in unix, since I don't do stuff like this...  H I have, and it is.  I assume that if you wanted to take into account theF differences between unix systems in your program, it would run on many4 different systems, but it would kind of be a hassle. RE:c9 > If someone writes code that parses the output of these t > commands for some5H > reason, the program is not going to be portable between platforms.  It    < > In the present example (ps on unix, show system on VMS) I  > know there is a : > good API in VMS.  I'm ignorant about unix.  If there is  > NOT a standard8 > (across many unixes) API to retrieve detailed process  > information, then it= > is a technical deficiency of unix compared to VMS, for the l > reasons I've > outlined.a  H Certainly a good and valid point -- that I'm aware of there's not reallyJ much of a standard across platforms for this.  At least it differs betweenD the platforms that have a "proc" or "debug" type filesystem, and theG platforms that don't.  It differs some as well between the more similar.J systems, for instance, one platform with a "debug" fs may not be quite the same as the next...A   Regards,   Christ  ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developerg Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");* '   l   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 01:20:50 +0000-) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>6Y Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS Educational    Programt+ Message-ID: <3AB2BBF2.64397CE@infopuls.com>s   Christopher Smith wrote: >  > > -----Original Message-----4 > > From: Christof Brass [mailto:brass@infopuls.com] > ? > > The job isn't done shitty, the concept is shit (like UNIX).w" > > What can you make out of shit? > N > Fertilizer -- and some aboriginal peoples make entire villages from it... :) > 
 > Regards, >  > Chris  > # > Christopher Smith, Perl DeveloperF > Amdocs - Champaign, IL >  > /usr/bin/perl -e 'A > print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");r > '   4 Thanks - I knew it, UNIX must be good for something.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:06:19 +0000h) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>eY Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducational     Programj, Message-ID: <3AB29C6B.40DD69A6@infopuls.com>   Brian Wheeler wrote: > . > In article <3AB15726.32CD1225@infopuls.com>,5 >         Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:o > > Brian Wheeler wrote: > >>1 > >> In article <3AAFE6FC.D628A3DE@infopuls.com>,e8 > >>         Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes: > >> > Brian Wheeler wrote:r > >> >>a4 > >> >> In article <3AAE5EA9.311BD545@infopuls.com>,; > >> >>         Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:  > >> >> > Brian Wheeler wrote:
 > >> >> >>4 > >> >> >> In article <3AAE30C5.20D69B88@bbc.co.uk>,B > >> >> >>         Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk> writes: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> ># > >> >> >> > Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:n > >> >> >> >9 > >> >> >> >> Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:u
 > >> >> >> >>nS > >> >> >> >> > > BTW, in at least one case the use of Unixy C code has resulted ins\ > >> >> >> >> > > relaxation of a not-so-useful restriction in a set of VMS system services.H > >> >> >> >> > What was this relaxation? Didn't it break existing code?
 > >> >> >> >> V > >> >> >> >> The output format of $ASCTIM for delta times is defined to be limited toX > >> >> >> >> 10000 days minus a tick; the binary format itself, useful for calculationsU > >> >> >> >> of all sorts, is of course not so restricted (the limit is around 32000iZ > >> >> >> >> years). However, all other time-related system services were also restricted[ > >> >> >> >> to that 10000 day limit. This broke when the audit server used the delta time V > >> >> >> >> format to compute a time_t - 10000 days after 1-JAN-1970. So this changeG > >> >> >> >> actually made existing code work, instead of breaking it. 
 > >> >> >> >>o > >> >> >> >>         Jane > >> >> >> >9 > >> >> >> > However, 1-JAN-19970 is a unix thing anyway.e > >> >> >> >
 > >> >> >> > >> >> >> <sarcasm>O > >> >> >>         Yeah, nobody but a unix loser would ever use 1-JAN-1970 as aa > >> >> >> base for delta time!q > >> >> >> </sarcasm>u
 > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> Isn't this whole topic getting a little bit stupid?
 > >> >> >>W > >> >> >> Its been a constant Unix vs VMS war which, as we all know, is pointless.  IfsU > >> >> >> Compaq decides to add more unix interfaces on top of VMS, what's the harm? S > >> >> >> How does adding an interface dumb down the system, or lower its quality?q	 > >> >> >o8 > >> >> > This depends where it is implemented and what.o > >> >> > If it's in the kernel then it makes things more complicated and will reduce quality in many respects.o > >> >> > If the UNIX API requires functionality which is in contradiction to VMS system services the view of the system might be inconsistent.a > >> >> U > >> >> Granted, but since nobody knows how its going to be implemented, then there'seT > >> >> 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.u > >>R > >> So, you're saying that just the possibility of VMS engineering doing a shittyQ > >> job is enough to rag on the concept as a whole?  Your anti-unix prejudice isr > >> clouding your reasoning.e > >e^ > > The job isn't done shitty, the concept is shit (like UNIX). What can you make out of shit? > > 
 > >> >> >> IfWU > >> >> >> it is buggy, its not unix's fault...but the implementation on VMS.  AddingeR > >> >> >> interfaces to an OS doesn't weaken it...it can only strengthen it.  DidR > >> >> >> adding a C compiler to VMS lower the quality of the OS?  Did the TCP/IP6 > >> >> >> libaries from Tru64 unix lower the quality?	 > >> >> >lm > >> >> > Libraries and tools are not part of the kernel. I wonder what your experience in OS development is.g > >> >>tQ > >> >> Again, we don't know how the Unix API would be added to VMS, so it may beyO > >> >> a tools/libraries issue and not touch the kernel at all.  Ok, that is aa/ > >> >> bit unlikely, but still, a possibility.f > >> > > >> > 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.e > >>Q > >> The VMS way isn't going away.  What makes you think that adding UNIX APIs isaQ > >> going to make life harder for anyone?  Sure, no choice is easier, but beforeg; > >> long there won't be anyone around to not make choices.t > >i > > 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.m > > 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.e > >2V > >> >> I was arguing from the point that there seems to be an overriding feeling thatE > >> >> anything related to unix is unclean and must not be near VMS.y > >> > > >> > 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).n > >>S > >> You are a troll, there's no other explanation.  You're using Netscape on Linux R > >> to post this tripe, yet apparently unix is crap.  Sure, whatever.  Why aren't% > >> you using Netscape on VMS, then?7 > >0 > > 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 f > > 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 concluk > > is that you ran out of arguments (to be precise: if haven't read a technical argument from you so far).u > P > Nor I from you.  You've been ragging on Unix for no reason other than the fact > its different than VMS.p  e Re-read. BTW I told you exactly where your problem of logic is (see above). You didn't reply/correct.W  < > > I really don't understand what you are doing in this NG. > J > 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.n  :Very simple. Very telling (this analogy): it shows that you don't know VMS. Most OSs are too versatile to be compared with a dedicated tool like a hammer. And technically it doesn't make much sense as both VMS and UNIX can be used to almost everything what can be done with an OS. The quality makes the difference.  P > >> I submit to you that the Unix architecture is actually superior to VMS's inP > >> many ways.  The simplistic approach where everything is treated as a streamQ > >> of bytes is a powerful concept.  However, does this mean that Unix is betterGR > >> than VMS as a whole?  Nope, as far as I'm concerned, its a matter of choosingR > >> the right tool for the job.  Sometimes Unix is the right tool, sometimes VMS.O > >> However, to keep this discussion on track, the number of jobs where VMS ise# > >> suitable is rapidly shrinking.  > > > > 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. > P > I'm not even going to respond to this...though I am tempted to invoke Godwin's > law...just to move on.   You better do.  > >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.r > > 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? > K > The problem with structuring files by the OS is that there are times when Q > 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 possiblea( > to view data in any structure desired.   So what? If this is the case (or can be expected): use bytestream files. There is nothing in VMS which prevents you from that. But in most cases the apps could take advantage in using structured storage and by that outsourcing parts of the storage routines. To have a cleanly declared structured file is a mean of documentation and allows the system manager to perform standard analysis and maintenance on that - without needing a tool from the app vendor. I encountered this situation already and know of others@with the same experience. I propose a simple calculation: if the use of the structured view outweighs the use of the unstructured view use a structured storage. I wondering how many apps you have designed an implemented. I don't see a problem to put another view on top of a certain structured view. What is the problem?  U > >> >> >> There are two major APIs out there:  Unix and Windows.  If compaq wants topY > >> >> >> expand VMS's marketshare, it is going to have to provide a good implementation T > >> >> >> of one of those two...and I don't see the Windows API being chosen.  OnceT > >> >> >> developers see VMS as "just another target", they're more likely to startU > >> >> >> writing pieces of code which take advantage of VMS...compared to now wherem/ > >> >> >> a port is nearly a complete rewrite.e	 > >> >> >nO > >> >> > Is it that difficult to understand that we don't need another UNIX???n > >> >>pM > >> >> That's fine...except that unless VMS conforms to something other thanhR > >> >> itself, vendors are not going to bother porting software to it because itsN > >> >> 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?C > >>P > >> Microsoft can do its own thing because marketshare....marketshare which VMSS > >> does not have.  Unix conforms to POSIX which is open, and anyone can implementg > >> it...witness Linux. > >t > > 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. > O > Oh, I agree, to some extent.  There are some parts of POSIX which are screwy,o" > but for the most part, it works.   One moment, please! I was never talking of "working". Even the so-called-OSs from Micro$oft sometimes work. I was talking about quality wrt design, concepts and implementation. That's what I see jeopardised with the superfluous COE UNIX crap.  9 > >> > Why would it be helpful to have UNIX apps on VMS??r > >>S > >> Gee, why would anyone want more apps for their OS?  VMS is fun to look at withaN > >> nothing installed...why, I could just type "dir/full" all day!  There areP > >> many applications for unix which are quite useful that could be compiled onR > >> VMS if some basic infrastructure was added...which is what this is all about. > > 1 > > But why on VMS, why not running them on UNIX?i > 8 > But you say that Unix sucks, so I should do it on VMS.  ^Sorry I feel tempted to insult you. As I explained several times: a quickshot ported UNIX app on VMS will very probable be less stable than within its habitat. It seems that you don't want to clearly and logically argue. Instead it seems that you are repeating the same old arguments which have long disproved although it's long enough time to argue.4 VMS with UNIX apps sucks. Did you want to read that?  R > >> > If you want to take advantage of VMS you have to write a real VMS app. What3 > >> > is the point in having another UNIX version?G > >>S > >> The half-assed (but valiant) ports of unix software to VMS have one overriding=I > >> problem:  they're always behind.  It takes so much effort to port anrR > >> application to VMS that trying to keep it up to date is virtually impossible. > >> > >> >^ > >> >> > Think about Apple. Would Steve Jobs argue that Apple should drop their superior API,) > >> > UI and so on for UNIX or Windoze??u > >> >> S > >> >> Have you seen Mac OS X?  It is _BSD_ with Apple specific APIs built on top.-O > >> >> It is another unix.  You can run unix apps and mac apps...so if someonecM > >> >> want to run an open source database it doesn't take months to make itO* > >> >> 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.l > >>M > >> It wouldn't have anything to do with you ragging on how bad Unix is, nowtO > >> would it?  "Mr. Mac user, if you use mac OS X and accidentally open up theaC > >> command line, your soul is as good as gone!"  Give me a break.d > >o > > ????1> > 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.A > M > If it is done correctly, the user will not use the unix command line unlessyL > they want to.  Apple isn't stupid, and all the functionality will be thereL > 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.  $Besides losing your productivity. Even the UNIX shell weren't crap the need to additionally learn this (which is really not meant for normal computer users) would be a waste of time. It seems that your UNIX addiction let you forget even the basics: not every computer user is a UNIX sysadmin.   > >> > 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.  > >>R > >> IN YOUR OPINION.  This is what this boils down to.  I (and many others) wouldS > >> find this a very nice addition to VMS.  If its unnecessary for you, then don'tsN > >> use it.  Its that simple.  Hell, don't even upgrade.  Stay at the currentN > >> version because any new feature must be evil and degrade the quality VMS! > >h> > 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 as reasonable as your UNIX defense. What are you doing here? > >  > >> >> >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). > >> >>gQ > >> >> What is that solution?  Compaq (and Digital's) Marketing always seemed tonP > >> >> be focused on preaching to the choir, but that doesn't help.  OutrageousN > >> >> costs for OS licenses doesn't help.  No entry-level-priced machines to) > >> >> seed the market isn't helping....  > >> > > >> > 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. > >>R > >> I've not read them, and judging by your attitude, it'd be a waste of my time.L > >> Quick, plow your head into the sand and maybe VMS will become dominant! > > > > Poor misunderstanding. As I stated several times: people are 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:M >         VMS IS DEAD.  GRAFTING THE UNIX API ON IT WON'T HELP IT, AS LONG ASbM >         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 THEe1 >         JOB.  GOODBYE, VMS!  WE HARDLY KNEW YE!s   Amen!t  Although I actually don't understand the "we hardly knew ye" which in my interpretation is "we hardly knew you" which in turn may have the meaning that you didn't know VMS very well which seems a contradiction to what you wrote about having your VMS experience first.>  ZTo conclude this: you may go back and pick the few proposals I made to do a test with people from outside this NG to verify what you or I were claiming. If you agree on one of these I'm in to put money in this. If you don't feel that your position will allow this risk I suggest you stay out of this discussion (which will probably the end then).   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:10:32 +0000w) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>sY Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducational     Program + Message-ID: <3AB29D68.F49D3B3@infopuls.com>w   Paul Repacholi wrote:s > . > bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler) writes: > H > > The problem with structuring files by the OS is that there are timesB > > when different applications want to view the _SAME_ data usingH > > different structures.  That is a flaw with structured storage.  WithA > > a stream of bytes, its possible to view data in any structurea > > desired. > = > It is pretty straight forward to do this. Use $READ or, usee: > the hack that was posted to fudge the file attrs to RMS. > H > The OS does not structure the file, you do. The only thing the OS doesH > is give RMS address space, and provide space for it to store metadata. >  > --> > Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,9 > +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.pB >                                              West Australia 60760 > Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.  < I would nevertheless count RMS as part of the OS. I'm wrong?   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:09:48 +0000s) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>sY Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducational     Programe, Message-ID: <3AB29D3C.3EBF59FB@infopuls.com>   Robert Deininger wrote:> > J > In article <98tbba$im9$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>, bdwheele@indiana.edu > (Brian Wheeler) wrote: > M > > The problem with structuring files by the OS is that there are times whenhG > > different applications want to view the _SAME_ data using different 
 > structures.wQ > > That is a flaw with structured storage.  With a stream of bytes, its possible/* > > to view data in any structure desired. > L > Well, VMS lets you work with completely unstructured files.  It isn't evenC > very hard.  But it is a rare need, so it isn't the default in anyw" > programming situation I've used. > L > I hope you will admit that in many situations, a "standard" view of a file > is just what is needed.g > . > > Ok, then I'd like to make an announcement:O > >         VMS IS DEAD.  GRAFTING THE UNIX API ON IT WON'T HELP IT, AS LONG ASfO > >         CLOSE MINDED VMS USERS (OR VMS-USERS-TO-BE) REFUSE TO DEAL WITH THEmO > >         REALITY THAT, MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, VMS ISN'T THE RIGHT TOOL FOR THEe3 > >         JOB.  GOODBYE, VMS!  WE HARDLY KNEW YE!  > L > I'm getting really, really tired of this thread.  I think I'll abandon it,< > in spite of the interesting bits that appear now and then. >  > -- > Robert Deininger > rdeininger@mindspring.coma   Yup. Sad enough. Is there a board of UNIX and VMS independent engineers to present the case? The UNIX-Haters Handbook is something like "The Case Against C". It's sad that nobody from the UNIX advocates here takes the chance to disprove the book.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:12:16 +0000t) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>oY Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducational     Programn, Message-ID: <3AB29DD0.AF303455@infopuls.com>   Warren Spencer wrote:n > / > bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler) wrote inp* > <98lgmd$p4j$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>: > , > >In article <3AAE30C5.20D69B88@bbc.co.uk>,7 > >     Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@bbc.co.uk> writes:r > >> > >> > >> Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:  > >>1 > >>> Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:  > >>>XK > >>> > > BTW, in at least one case the use of Unixy C code has resulted in  >  > -- snip -- > J > >There are two major APIs out there:  Unix and Windows.  If compaq wantsE > >to expand VMS's marketshare, it is going to have to provide a goodeG > >implementation of one of those two...and I don't see the Windows APIe > >being chosen. > M > IIRC, I believe that the Win32 api was ported to OpenVMS as part of COM forv > OpenVMS, in version 7.2. > = > > Once developers see VMS as "just another target", they'recF > >more likely to start writing pieces of code which take advantage ofC > >VMS...compared to now where a port is nearly a complete rewrite.c > >v > >Brian Wheeler > >bdwheele@indiana.edu. >  > ws >  > --3 > << Marriage is Grand.  Divorce is Fifty Grand. >>u >  > Warren Spencer > Senior Software Engineer > The Associated Press > A > ** My employer does not necessarily agree with my statements **e  e Something like that happened. And there was even an ix86 emulator for executing Windoze and Win apps.s   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 00:51:39 +0000o) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>eY Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducationalProgram) Pro , Message-ID: <3AB2B51B.DFBACEBB@infopuls.com>   Brian Wheeler wrote: > . > In article <3AB16B4A.2B1C5602@infopuls.com>,5 >         Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:g >  > [snip] > [snip]T > >> What function should we used the decommissioned VMS machine for?  Great, stableJ > >> OS...but without software, what's the point of keeping it plugged in? > >d > > 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?s  Q Where you want to a stable and easy to administer environment with good VMS apps.   x> > 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.  = I don't think so. I'm also interested what is under the hood.o  Q > Speaking of clusters, unix isn't as far behind as you'd like to believe.  TheretO > are free (though admittedly somewhat young) High Availabilty, Load Balancing,tL > and Single-Image clustering solutions for Linux today...not to mention the( > ones that are from commercial vendors.  I The architecture is still the same and the other "features" I criticised.d  Z> > 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. > O > VMS is a dead end no matter what, unless by some miracle it becomes the right P > tool for more jobs.  Otherwise its a niche player, and like every niche playerM > before it, the niche will disappear.  Then what?  Then your much hated Unix L > is the only player left...serving the niche market which was once VMS's as# > well as a bunch of other markets.y   Sad enough, but not a technical point. If the world doesn't want one of the best OSs and the by far better OS than UNIX the world doesn't deserve it. It's that simple. Every community has the leaders it deserves.   > >> >> > - 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.o > >> >>tS > >> >> YEP, WRITING SOFTWARE FOR NICHE MARKETS IS STUPID, WHICH IS WHY VMS IS VERYhP > >> >> NEARLY DEAD.  If the COE initiative allows 'commodity' unix source to beE > >> >> compiled on VMS then VMS is that much less of a niche player.l > >> > > >> > Idiot. *IDIOT*. > >>, > >> Is this because I don't agree with you? > >e> > 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 > K > Ah, but the tools needed to make COE feasable to maintain (the unix apis)hL > benefit all SW vendors who want to port their software to VMS.  Its not so3 > much about COE as it is about the infrastructure.    Let's see when and if it's available to the SW vendors. I'm not sure if I understood Fred Kleinsorge correctly. It seems that for some time the UNIX API won't in the core VMS.t  ` > >> > VMS is not dead. VMS is artificially made to a niche OS by several other idiots like you. > >>S > >> Like ME?  I think not.  VMS has been artificially made into a niche OS becausepQ > >> many proponents (such as yourself) believe with all your heart that anything?O > >> not VMS is evil and that it must be crap.  VMS is niche because it doesn't ) > >> implement common standards.  Period.t > >d*> > You are a good example of denying history. Firstly: there are 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? > F > Yeah, and apparently unlike you, I'm not ignorant on how it became aM > standard.  It was forcefully bundled with mass market OEM machines.  MS was O > weilding monopoly power in the DOS market to force windows onto users whetheraN > they wanted it or not.  When enough installs were out there, *ONLY THEN* wasO > it a successful platform to write to.  VMS is very different in this respect:jF > realistically one vendor for hardware, very small market share, etc.   While this paragraph is also what I think is the truth it sadly enough isn't related to my argument and doesn't help you in defending your position. Rember - we were talking about the word "proprietary".e  > > >> >Study history! Stay away from VMS, you don't deserve it! > >>K > >> Why don't I deserve it?  Is it because I see the value in other tools?hS > >> I have studied history.  I've been using VMS for years...longer than I've been S > >> using unix...however I use unix for nearly all of my tasks now.  Why?  Becausey" > >> that's where the software is. > >s3 > > Point well taken. But not VMS' technical fault.  >  > Very true.  We agree on this.e >  > >o > >> > Use UNIX! Use UNIX SW.i > >> > >> I do, and so do you.t > >a > > Unfortunately I have to. > >  > >>P > >> [[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?]] > P > If more than one person is complaining, then maybe its not everyone else.  Not, > everyone uses Netscape to view their news.  v Okay. But what is the best configuration to avoid artificial line breaks leaving sometimes only a few words on a line?   > >> >> > - 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.  > >> >>SR > >> >> Get off it.  UNIX != "bad ways", no matter how many times you keep tellingT > >> >> yourself that.  Its different.  That's all.  VMS has one bad side to it:  noT > >> >> matter how well designed it is, it is PROPRIETARY.  Unix, as a whole is not,U > >> >> which gives it a huge advantage in my book over VMS.  With unix I can move to>; > >> >> another vendor if there are quality or cost issues.k > >> >Q > >> > You don't understand a clue. This proprietary argument has long disproved.M > >>Q > >> Disproved?  How?  VMS is proprietary.  This is a fact.  When you have sourcetM > >> code on VMS is cannot be compiled anywhere else without massive changes.bM > >> Properly written unix apps (and there are quite a few) can be recompiledsM > >> with little or no change from one unix to another.  This is also a fact.n( > >> How can this possibly be disproved? > >a> > 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? > J > We agree, but only to an extent.  VMS is proprietary in that there is noK > independant (i.e. not controlled by compaq) which says "this is VMS".  IttI > is available from only one vendor, and is not compatible with any others> > system at the source level (except for very trivial things).  Agreed. But I stay to what I wrote: this isn't a technical argument. And it's per se not even an economical argument as we can see with Micro$oft and to some extend with Apple which uses its beeing different (read proprietary) to certain degree as marketing.  [ > > BTW I don't buy your recompilation argument because there are too many counterexamples.o > K > Show me some, then.  I put the clause "well written" in there on purpose.eK > Anyone can write a program which will only compile on a certain platform..K > There are several methods of writing programs which will run on more than K > one unix without the need to rework it substantially.  Autoconf is one ofs > these methods.  This is true but there are many quirks necessary to have a large app compile on different UNIX flavours. Even well designed and well implemented C apps (oxymoron, I know) need substantial maintenance to be portable in that sense. Have you ever read these C header files with these endless #ifdefs and #defines coping with the small but tedious (and from my point of view unecessary) differences? I can only say: ugly!n   > >> > UNIX and Windoze are another form of beeing proprietary with UNIX having the disadvantage of never beeing the same if you change the vendor.r > >>L > >> Are they as great as when you move from VMS to anything else?  Not evenO > >> close.  The difference between unixes is trivial at best for the end user, 7 > >> and only require a bit of effort for the sysadmin.c > >  > > 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! > M > The WINE project is implementing the windows api on unix. Corel has used itiM > to port several applications to linux via a recompile.  Also, products suchh) > as WindU has been doing this for years.h  I know WINE and WABI - good approaches but there is something wrong. Both never took off. It's similar to the FX32! although the FX32! was even much better. It seems to me very interesting that the emulation approach isn't very popular at the moment. Instead the trend is towards using universal library APIs like Qt and providing apps on all major platforms (no, not including VMS). ) Have you good experiences with WINE apps?T  .> > 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. > L > Ok, lets look at ps first.  Common usage is either 'ps' or 'ps -ef'.  Lets% > compare the output of 'ps' first...d > 
 > SOLARIS: >    PID TTY      TIME CMD >  17092 pts/1    0:01 bashe >  17100 pts/1    2:08 emacs-20o >  > Linux: >   PID TTY          TIME CMDo >  6369 pts/0    00:00:00 bash >  6382 pts/0    00:00:00 ps > O > I don't see any real difference (except the commands being run are different)- >  > 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 fsflush H >     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:5 > UID        PID  PPID  C STIME TTY          TIME CMDy: > 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]t9 > root         4     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:00 [kpiod]h: > root         5     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:12 [kswapd]? > root         6     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:00 [mdrecoveryd]i9 > bin        337     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:00 portmap99 > root       352     1  0 Mar01 ?        00:00:00 [lockd]  > [etc]  > M > Ok, there are some differences:  time is listed differently, and linux useshL > '[]' to denote a swapped out process.  These are not critical differences.  C I don't fight for these small differences. This example is for you.s But I'm not sure if your statistics is correct. I use ps -aux on Linux which doesn't work on the Solaris version I'm using (2.6). I studied the man page for ps on Solaris and found that the option set is *very* different from the Linux one.  J > Sure, they have different 'exotic' features, but lets face it, the basic > functionality is the same.  _ This is true. But I think this isn't very helpful as most people need additional functionality.M  G > For find, there are more differences, but the basic usage is the samed8 > regardless of platform:  find <dir> -name "<filename>"   Honestly the basic functionality isn't very helpful. Especially the combination with grep is often needed. How can you case insensitively search on Solaris? Linux: find <dir> -iname '<filename>'. What about the time window -mmin <time1> -mmax <time2>? How is this accomplished on Solaris?C Honestly the quotation needed to make find work with grep is silly.o~ And why do I have to use this -exec option at all. Why can't I use pipeing the list of file names found by "find" into grep???  L > This works the same on all unixes I've dealt with.  Again, its an issue ofK > 'exotic' features...sort of like when you use VMS 5.5 and bitch about not. > having 'PIPE'.   Sorry? Do you really mean that?n  P > >> > If 60% of market were owned by VMS nobody would talk about proprietarity. > >>P > >> Ah, but it is not at 60%.  I doubt even 10%.  It is proprietary, regardless > >> of market size. > >e > > 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?o > I > If I had the itch, I could implement a unix of my own.  It is very near-M > impossible to make a windows clone.  It is only slightly less impossible toaL > make a VMS clone.  Unix is a class of operating systems, not a single one.  z I don't agree besides the last statement which is awfully true and reveals at the same time the whole UNIX business pitty. What makes you think that it's anything harder to make Windoze clone than a UNIX clone? And isn't VMS certified as "open"? What does this mean? Doesn't it mean that the interfaces are well documented, stable and published?  @ > >> > Read the UNIX-Haters Handbook! Leave VMS alone! Use UNIX! > >>R > >> Ah, the source of your misguidance.  Maybe this quote from the "Anti-Forward"( > >> will shed some light on this issue:O > >>         Dennis Ritchie writes "You claim to seek progress, but you succeede  > >>         mainly in whining."P > >> I have read it.  Its crap.  It bitches and moans about everything, yet manyN > >> of its complaints are "fixed" in most unixes.  In addition, if one wantedK > >> to, it would be easy to write a "VMS-Hater's Handbook".  But its not a O > >> matter of hating anything:  its about choosing the right tool for the job. @ > >> 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.a > P > Indeed, its about complaining.  "Waaa!  It doesn't do what I thought it shouldO > so its broken!" (or:  "Waa!  There's another way to do this, so its broken!")d? > Don't get me wrong, there are some valid criticisms, but manyiQ > of them are toolset issues.  Want a standard user experience across all unixes?oO > Install the GNU tools everywhere...magically most of the complaints addressedU
 > are solved.w > > > 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?U > > No! Has the 'every file is an unstructured stream of bytes' model been fixed? No!i > I > Please explain to me why a file as stream of bytes is broken.  It was as< > design (yes DESIGN) decision, and not subject to "fixing".   We went throught that already. BTW design as no-design is simply to genious. What is design if you don't do anything? Okay if this was intentionally it could be called design. But from history you would know: it simply wasn't. Nothing with UNIX was design.   > E > > Please name the three most important things that have been fixed.' > P > Its been years since I read it.  Why don't you point out the three biggest andO > I'll discuss them.  Mostly its about the userspace tools.  GNU tools fix moste) > of the issues (where there are issues).   4 I mentioned several in the post you are replying to.   > >> >> > I'm too tired to continue this list. Every educated engineer will understand that this is a major attempt to kill VMS. > >> >>aU > >> >> If by "educated" you mean "anything but pure VMS is evil and we don't need togO > >> >> be interoperable with anyone but ourselves", then I guess you're right.  > >> >
 > >> > Silly.n > >>M > >> Yes, your attitude is silly.  You have yet to show that adding unix apisaN > >> kills VMS.  If they started removing VMS apis, then yes, I could see yourH > >> point.  But as it stands, they're adding to, and not removing from. > >I) > > Do you know Occam's Razor? See below!  > N > Yes, I do.  In this case, the "simpler" solution is to add a new API and not$ > remove valid APIs from the kernel.  S But it is even simpler and better (as I pointed out several times) not to add them.    > >> >> > 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.n > >> >> V > >> >> This is an interesting statement.  So, anything Unixy is so inheritly unstableP > >> >> that just by implementing it brings the whole OS down?  You're on crack.T > >> >> 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* > >> I'll thank you not to call me stupid. > > + > > Please take your time before you write.l > O > Believe it or not, I do think quite a bit about what you write...though oftensL > its so full of insults (to me, unix users, world in general) that its hard > to see past them.   Don't take it personal. You aren't UNIX. If I criticise UNIX it's because it sucks and I've lost too much time in believing its simplistic anti-philosophy. If I insult you than because you do so to me in constantly avoiding arguing to the point. I offered to agree on practical testing - no reaction. Do you know any board of engineers, independant from UNIX and VMS, to which we could presented our arguments?  1 > >> It has everything to do with implementation!EC > > I wrote "implementation quality" not implementation in general.w > >oQ > >>                                              If the UNIX api is added to VMSsR > >> via a set of libraries, then it is no more redundant or more complex than any > >> other RTL!e > >i| > > 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.    Not sure. If time and effort is spent on this the wrong way its now time to point to this risk. And I reacted on the applauses. If nobody would have said an enthusiastic word about this I may have stayed quietly.  Q > >>             If something in the kernel has to change, then it is an issue ofiQ > >> the kernel not being flexible enough to accomplish the task at hand.  If the R > >> task at hand was for anything non-unix-api related, you'd probably be all for > >> a change in the kernel. > >e> > The problem with the implementation 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. > K > Do you know this for a fact?  We don't know what they're going to do, andfJ > assuming they're competent (which I do), they'll make the right choices.   Agreed, if there is a way out. Sometimes you end up in unsolvable problems. This is more likely if the concepts you try to mix are more or less against each other.t  R > >> >> Attitudes like this is why VMS is dead.  Its a wonder that TCP/IP was everN > >> >> added to VMS with attitudes like this....DECNet is the pure networking8 > >> >> 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? > >>I > >> Is VMS better because nobody is using it?   Quality is not inverselya > >> proportional to usage.. > >  > > 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?o > I > You implied that things chosen by the majority are corrupt and or lowern
 > quality.   No - instead I implied that majority decisions don't warrant quality. And I admit I normally expect that the majority is wrong (Hollywood movies, Windoze, Macdonalds, cars). But basically I prefer analysis - not marketing arguments.  Q > >> >> WAIT A MINUTE!  If VMS is so great, and unix so bad, why is it that I spyr" > >> >> this line in your headers: > >> >>i? > >> >> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.0.36 i586)r > >> >> P > >> >> 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. > >> >>e > >> >> Ugh.
 > >> >> Brians > >> > > >> > As I stated several months ago: I'm in a process of 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.r > >>O > >> Which promises are those?  Why did you switch from VMS in the first place?  > >t > > 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.  > >sR > >> In the 7 years did you attempt to learn why Unix does things the way it does,S > >> or did you just sit and complain about how "its no VMS"?  I'm serious, I wouldoL > >> like to know.  I (and many others) made a transition from VMS or PCs orK > >> whatever to Unix without the obvious hatred you seem to be displaying.  > >e$> > I'm an intested type of person. I learned UNIX with great enthusiasm. 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. > E > That's odd, because I find unix far simpler to understand than VMS.o  ,As I pointed out: people are different. But besides that the design criticism is beyound liking or disliking. In fact this is an explanation why UNIX sucks so much. What is difficult with VMS to understand? What about the CLI? Do you like shells better than DCL? Do you think man is better than HELP?  b > >> > I also publicly offered to put money into a fund to get a full VMS Opera port. No response. > >> >X > >> > 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. > >>N > >> So, we come back to the core of the problem:  lack of available software.P > >> Whether something was built on unix doesn't make it crap, anymore than unix8 > >> as a whole is crap.  Why don't you write a browser? > >oJ > > Good question. Because I have *other* things to do. Do you understand? > L > Of course I do.  However, others have other things to do, and supporting a' > small-user-base OS isn't one of them.    Not a technical point.  9 > >> > Do you think that your contribution has any value?m > >>O > >> Yes, in fact I do.   You know, at first I thought you were just a mindlessdJ > >> anti-unix troll.  But then I came to a startling realization:  you'reN > >> just close minded.  Computers are just tools.  You pick the one that doesO > >> the job the best *FOR YOU*.  If VMS does the job for you (which apparently K > >> it doesn't, as you're using a unix browser) then that's great.  VMS isIK > >> lacking in several areas for me (and others), which is why I think theaR > >> COE initiative is a good thing.  I think VMS is a great operating system, andP > >> I'd hate to see it go away.  But, that doesn't mean that I think everythingN > >> else sucks.  There is room in computing for more than one OS...right toolT > >> 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. > >s> > 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?h > I > Yes, I did.  But I don't think it changes anything.  Answer this: is no J > software better than (possibly) buggy software?  VMS isn't going to haveL > any new VMS-only software regardless of the COE initiative.  At least withJ > it, there's the possibility that more people would be exposed to VMS andO > possibly incorporate some of VMS's strong points into their software.  HidingS8 > VMS in the corner isn't going to bring new developers.  If the COE initiative were the only way to get more VMS apps then VMS is doomed. I doubt that. I expect a few companies developing "best on VMS" software (slogan: yes, it runs on UNIX but better on VMS) and I expect new VMS customers. But I'm not sure. Compaq can kill all.   j > > UNIX isn't the right tool even if it is sometimes the only tool because it lets too much to wish left. > F > I disagree.  Any tool is the right tool, compared to no tool at all.   Maybe you are right. But having buggy UNIX crap apps on VMS only looks like having tools. And these buggy apps can even destroy VMS reputation (no, not the reputation of not having any apps around).  Q > >> I suppose we should just agree to disagree:  I think adding Unix APIs to VMS4Q > >> would be a good thing, and you think it'd be a bad thing.  I suppose there's J > >> no further need for discussing this, since neither of us are going to > >> convince the other. > >>
 > >> 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?1 > M > Its not impossible to see the beauty in two different methods.  Its easy to K > see advantages to both methods, and disadvantages.  But it all boils down * > to the right tool (as I've said before). >  > Brian    These general statements don't tell me much. What are the points which attract you to VMS after you mostly switched to UNIX and wrt the fact that your experience is that VMS is harder to understand than UNIX?   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 00:55:25 +0000p) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>.Y Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducationalProgram) Proi, Message-ID: <3AB2B5FD.925D73DB@infopuls.com>   Robert Deininger wrote:n > J > In article <98ta73$ije$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>, bdwheele@indiana.edu > (Brian Wheeler) wrote: > 0 > > In article <3AB16B4A.2B1C5602@infopuls.com>,7 > >         Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:t > >s > K > > > [[off topic also: you are the fourth person complaining about my longpJ > lines. I decided not to put in artifical line breaks because this shouldH > be the task of the rendering engine (like with HTML). Robert DeiningerK > used to post these long lines also and then I thought through and came tovH > the conclusion that I would adjust my news reader to put in these line? > breakes. Would you like to adjust your reader the same way?]]m > L > It was an accident.  News program got configured wrong somehow.  The postsJ > did NOT come back to me with long lines, so I did not know I was broken.L > I wish someone had complained sooner.  My news program is supposed to chopL > up my lines when it posts.  If it doesn't, I can't tell -- it fixes up the > article when it downloads it.' > L > There are news readers that CAN'T reformat messages.  Folks shouldn't postH > long lines, html, MIME, base64, or quoted-printable in this newsgroup.L > Nor Backup save-sets, compressed text libraries, TPU section files, or any! > other VMS-specific file format., > H > And Word attachments are Right Out.  But that's so obvious I shouldn't
 > mention it.. >  > -- > Robert Deininger > rdeininger@mindspring.comp  @ Sorry! I learned from you because I thought it through. Honestly@ I think it would be better not to put in artificial line breaks.> But I already changed my configuration to break my lines after 64 characters.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 00:58:55 +0000V) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>tY Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducationalProgram) Prod, Message-ID: <3AB2B6CF.2C4D1C62@infopuls.com>   Bob Koehler wrote: > " > writing my own or buying someoneb > In article <98ta73$ije$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>, bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler) writes: > ? > > So where is VMS the right tool and unix not the right tool?e > ( > 1) high interrupt real time processing< > 2) never saw any UNIX vendor offer the equivalent to SEVMS > O > > Ok, there are some differences:  time is listed differently, and linux usesiN > > '[]' to denote a swapped out process.  These are not critical differences. > H > It is if your code depends on them.  Try ps -aux on a few UNIX and seeH > what real differences are, especially if one's a BSD and the other's a > SVID." > K > > Please explain to me why a file as stream of bytes is broken.  It was aa> > > design (yes DESIGN) decision, and not subject to "fixing". > H > Because I have to write record access routines or spend big bucks on aH > DBMS just to be able to update records or find records in an otherwizeI > simple file.  Both lead to cost.  With VMS I get a choice, stream files F > or sequential record files, or keyed indexed files, in other words II > choose the right tool to do the job instead of being forced to use justd > the one tool.! > R > > Its been years since I read it.  Why don't you point out the three biggest andQ > > I'll discuss them.  Mostly its about the userspace tools.  GNU tools fix mostt+ > > of the issues (where there are issues).  > H > Exactly.  Remember GNU = gnu's not UNIX.   The problem isn't GNU, it'sA > UNIX.  If UNIX wasn't the problem, GNU wouldn't have to fix it.I > H > ----------------------------------------------------------------------A > Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporationo? > NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil Group G >                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replyingH   Funny - this GNU logic :-)   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 01:03:16 +0000s) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> Y Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducationalProgram) ProE, Message-ID: <3AB2B7D4.D6992915@infopuls.com>   Christopher Smith wrote: >  > > -----Original Message-----< > > From: bdwheele@indiana.edu [mailto:bdwheele@indiana.edu] > 0 > > In article <3AB16B4A.2B1C5602@infopuls.com>,5 > >       Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:g > < > > > UNIX is crap from its (missing) architecture a.s.o.. I@ > > don't repeat it. It will be crap even if it runs forever. IfA > > you only put a DB on it, if you don't have any administrationu= > > to do on this host, if you don't need any VMSish featuresm< > > like clustering and it's unreavaled power to efficiently; > > manage and provide resources to a lot of users there iso > > really no need for VMS.. > A > > So then, unix isn't crap if it does the job.  That's what itso > > all about. > M > Well -- actually, it could do the job, and still be doing it the wrong way, L > and it would still be crap.  That's really not what the argument should be > about here though. :)> > ? > > VMS is a dead end no matter what, unless by some miracle its > > becomes the righti? > > 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 Unixo@ > > is the only player left...serving the niche market which was > > once VMS's asi% > > well as a bunch of other markets.l >  > Ahh -- now that's the point. > A > > If I had the itch, I could implement a unix of my own.  It ish
 > > very near A > > impossible to make a windows clone.  It is only slightly lesss > > impossible ton@ > > make a VMS clone.  Unix is a class of operating systems, not > > a single one.  > > > That's not exactly true -- see the below windows clone in c: > D > void main(void); /* Remember, _ALWAYS_ use function prototypes! */ >  > void main(void) {> >         while (1); > }o > 7 > I'll bet this will even compile on VMS _and_ unix. :)w > M > I would give a Pascal example, too, but I haven't done any Pascal recently.u > A > > Please explain to me why a file as stream of bytes is broken.t
 > >  It was as> > > design (yes DESIGN) decision, and not subject to "fixing". > N > Actually, if I understand correctly, RMS is only stacked on top of Files-11,I > anyway.  It could be "fixed" in a sense the same way that Files-11 was,t- > although "extended" would be a better word., > A > > > Argh - yes, but no point!! Did I say or imply this? Did youf@ > > say that DECnet should have to be replaced by TCP/IP because$ > > this is the (majority) standard? > > > > You implied that things chosen by the majority are corrupt > > and or lower > > quality. > H > On this I have to agree -- things chosen by the majority, for whateverL > reason (co-incidence, or is the majority just that stupid?), seem to be ofM > low quality.  Broadcast TV, radio, Microshaft products, VHS video tapes (astM > opposed to laserdisc, or at least beta), cd audio (as opposed to DAT), mostvJ > laws in the US (not that you could really argue that those are chosen byJ > majority these days... feel free to throw that one out), McDonalds...  IM > have a long list.  I'm afraid, though, that this has no bearing on the real  > topic at hand. :)n > G > > That's odd, because I find unix far simpler to understand than VMS.B > L > I think the argument is that it's too simple -- which it is sometimes, for > some things. > 
 > Regards, >  > Chrisr > # > Christopher Smith, Perl Developerm > Amdocs - Champaign, IL >  > /usr/bin/perl -e 'A > print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");d > 'l  < Sorry for only have to agree. You in fact did already what I@ tried to do later in one of my recent posts to this message, but3 you did it shorter which *is* an advantage. Thanks.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 01:30:17 +0000 ) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>dY Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducationalProgram) Prot, Message-ID: <3AB2BE29.7F6D8A67@infopuls.com>   Christopher Smith wrote: >  > > -----Original Message-----4 > > From: Christof Brass [mailto:brass@infopuls.com] > = > > Yes - the differences between the UNIXes are much smallers? > > than between VMS and UNIX. What a surprise! VMS isn't UNIX?a= > > Why isn't UNIX implementing the Windoze API. There is thee > > vast majority of apps! > D > Softwindows, WABI, Wine, BOCHS, .... you tell me -- why isn't Unix > implementing the windows API?l >  > Seems to me that it is.e > 
 > Regards, >  > Chrism > # > Christopher Smith, Perl Developer  > Amdocs - Champaign, IL >  > /usr/bin/perl -e 'A > print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");  > 'y >   5 Yup, it is, someway. Could you tell me what BOCHS is?e, I repeat here what I posted already - sorry:= I know WINE and WABI - good approaches but there is something > wrong. Both never took off. It's similar to the FX32! although? the FX32! was even much better. It seems to me very interestingy= that the emulation approach isn't very popular at the moment.r> Instead the trend is towards using universal library APIs like? Qt and providing apps on all major platforms (no, not includingM VMS).r- Have you had good experiences with WINE apps?n   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:43:50 +0000!) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>DB Subject: Re: Good Netiquette (was Re: OpenVMS Educational Program), Message-ID: <3AB2A536.BD960B13@infopuls.com>   lcs Mixmaster Remailer wrote:u > A > On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> wrote:c >  > <snip> >  > Christoff, > M > Please refer to RFC1855 (http://www.faqs.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt). Many readersMK > receive the content of this group via a mailing list. I'm sure they would E > appreciate if messages were appropriately edited to save bandwidth.t  
 Bandwidth?   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 20:17:08 +01003. From: "Jesper Naur" <jesper.naur@post.tele.dk>; Subject: Re: Has SYS$SETEXV gone away in OpenVMS Alpha 7.2? , Message-ID: <98tok9$328$1@news.inet.tele.dk>  - Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org> wrote in message>4 news:5.0.2.1.0.20010316112439.02209cc0@24.8.96.48...& > and as part of that I've been tryingI > (unsuccessfully) to fiddle with sys$setexv. Unfortunately calls to thisX1 > return a status of 372, invalid system service.e .. > Anyone got any ideas?d  
 Hello Dan.   I use:   $ cc/version+ Compaq C V6.2-008 on OpenVMS Alpha V7.1-1H2t  5 I have no problems with the following little program:n     #include <stdio.h>   #include <ssdef.h> #include <starlet.h>     int exc_routine( void )r { "    printf("exc_routine called\n");    return 1; }/   void main( void )I {h    long status;     long * dummyptr;U      status = 1;    printf("start\n"); D    status = sys$setexv( 0, exc_routine, 3, 0 ); /* PSL$C_USER = 3 */,    printf("setexv status = %08X\n", status);        /* force an exception */C     dummyptr = (long *) 0X100000;    status = *dummyptr;#    printf("status = %d\n", status);' }n   Best regards Jesper Naure   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 14:30:07 -0500n" From: Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org>; Subject: Re: Has SYS$SETEXV gone away in OpenVMS Alpha 7.2?t: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010316142908.0222e008@24.8.96.48>  / At 08:17 PM 3/16/2001 +0100, Jesper Naur wrote:d  . >Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org> wrote in message5 >news:5.0.2.1.0.20010316112439.02209cc0@24.8.96.48...e( > > and as part of that I've been tryingK > > (unsuccessfully) to fiddle with sys$setexv. Unfortunately calls to thisu3 > > return a status of 372, invalid system service.  >..s > > Anyone got any ideas?o >h >Hello Dan.t >  >I use:? > 
 >$ cc/versionu, >Compaq C V6.2-008 on OpenVMS Alpha V7.1-1H2 >f6 >I have no problems with the following little program:F >    status = sys$setexv( 0, exc_routine, 3, 0 ); /* PSL$C_USER = 3 */  G D'oh! I was running a little test and passed in the address of a local pI variable just to have something to pass in. Apparently setexv checks the aO permission on the pages or something--passing in a real function pointer works.    Thanks, Jesper.s   					Dan  I --------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------x2 Dan Sugalski                          even samurai? dan@sidhe.org                         have teddy bears and even ;                                       teddy bears get drunks   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 14:02:20 -0500o# From: Jim Agnew <agnew@hsc.vcu.edu> . Subject: Re: How does one become a VMS guru ??+ Message-ID: <3AB2633C.14E64700@hsc.vcu.edu>o  2 THEM'S KILLING WORDS.. THAT'S AN INSULT!!!!!!  ;-)   Q'aPla!!  " Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com wrote: > ? > Microsoft's the Borg. I see Andrew more as a Klingon..... ;-)  >  > Shanei > 6 > steven.reece@quintiles.com on 03/15/2001 12:01:45 PM >  > To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comr > cc:  > 1 > Subject:  Re: How does one become a VMS guru ??h > K > Andrew probably wants to punch anyone that's not indoctrinated to the Sun  > Borg, I mean Sun God.E > :-)t >   > Larry Kilgallen wrote/quoted :K > >>>>      I guess being a hotshot is okay... sounds like someone wants tos > puncht' > >    you though , so I'm not so sure.  > C >           Well, Andrew wants to punch you.  Does that count ? :-)e > <<<V   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 14:20:31 -0600 * From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>. Subject: RE: How does one become a VMS guru ??- Message-ID: <0033000018907063000002L032*@MHS>l  1 =0AFunny, 'twas Tribbles wot came to my mind. ;^)    WWWebb   > -----Original Message-----1 > From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETb& > Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 2:16 PM8 > To: Webb, William W; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET0 > Subject: RE: How does one become a VMS guru ?? >t > 4 > THEM'S KILLING WORDS.. THAT'S AN INSULT!!!!!!  ;-) > 
 > Q'aPla!! > $ > Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com wrote: > >nA > > Microsoft's the Borg. I see Andrew more as a Klingon..... ;-)g > >t	 > > Shanei > >g8 > > steven.reece@quintiles.com on 03/15/2001 12:01:45 PM > >  > > To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com  > > cc:h > >s3 > > Subject:  Re: How does one become a VMS guru ??  > >s4 > > Andrew probably wants to punch anyone that's not > indoctrinated to the Sun > > Borg, I mean Sun God.o > > :-)w > >l" > > Larry Kilgallen wrote/quoted :< > > >>>>      I guess being a hotshot is okay... sounds like > someone wants to	 > > punch ) > > >    you though , so I'm not so sure.y > >tE > >           Well, Andrew wants to punch you.  Does that count ? :-)m > > <<<. >=   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 11:52:52 -0800 ! From: Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.comu. Subject: Re: How does one become a VMS guru ??D Message-ID: <OFF46CE05B.11F0C8F1-ON88256A11.006D2A1C@foundation.com>  K You are being overly wordy. When you wish to fight a K'Zin, just scream andu leap.s   Shane           7 Jim Agnew <agnew@hsc.vcu.edu> on 03/16/2001 11:02:20 AMp   To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com  cc:d  / Subject:  Re: How does one become a VMS guru ??t    2 THEM'S KILLING WORDS.. THAT'S AN INSULT!!!!!!  ;-)   Q'aPla!!  " Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com wrote: >e? > Microsoft's the Borg. I see Andrew more as a Klingon..... ;-)n >c > Shanee > 6 > steven.reece@quintiles.com on 03/15/2001 12:01:45 PM >o > To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comn > cc:s >f1 > Subject:  Re: How does one become a VMS guru ??e >eK > Andrew probably wants to punch anyone that's not indoctrinated to the Sunt > Borg, I mean Sun God.y > :-)  >t  > Larry Kilgallen wrote/quoted :K > >>>>      I guess being a hotshot is okay... sounds like someone wants tot > puncht' > >    you though , so I'm not so sure.s >wC >           Well, Andrew wants to punch you.  Does that count ? :-)  > <<<    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 20:44:04 -0000 - From: wspencer@ap.nospam.org (Warren Spencer)a4 Subject: LDAP Client - Anyone Ported to OpenVMS Yet?/ Message-ID: <tb4uokng7h4e23@news.supernews.com>-  
 Hello All,  I It looks like we can't wait for OpenVMS 7.3 to get an LDAP client.  Have j@ any of you ported a current *or* older version of it to OpenVMS?   ws   -- m1 << Marriage is Grand.  Divorce is Fifty Grand. >>>   Warren Spencer Senior Software Engineer The Associated Press  ? ** My employer does not necessarily agree with my statements **:   ------------------------------   Date: 16 Mar 2001 06:25:25 CDT= From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.412538.killspam.015a (Wayne Sewell)[# Subject: Re: Merging multiple disksr. Message-ID: <4ymej$SJ0XxS@tachxxsoftxxconsult>  g In article <3AB160A6.29CC3BDE@earthlink.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@earthlink.net> writes:h > Wayne Sewell wrote:r	 >> [snip] N >> However, I found that it is rather easy to get around this problem with the  >> no_conceal option of f$parse.	 >> [snip]t > G > In our case, that was the problem - F$PARSE( ..., "NO_CONCEAL" ), but]F > the surrounding code mishandled the resulting strings. The resulting > filespecs were malformed.b >   N Yes, that's true.  You do have to be aware that you may get weird file stringsO with no_conceal.  You basically have to strip them out after the parse to get a 0 directory that you can use for much of anything.  6 $ directory = directory - "][" - ".000000" - "000000."     -- AO ===============================================================================rM Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxxi: http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-)IO ===============================================================================.O Dean Wormer to Flounder: "Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 15:43:26 -0500n  From: norm.raphael@jamesbury.com0 Subject: Moving shadow-copying from VAX to Alpha4 Message-ID: <C2256A11.00727E77.00@jklh21.valmet.com>  @ Okay, I've got 7 shadowsets that were mounted from an Alpha withG copy in a cluster with 2 VAX and 2 Alpha that all had the DSA's mountedg* as single-volume shadow sets to start out.  D Now 4 of them are being copied by one of the VAXes and the the otherJ three are being mounted by the other Alpha.  This is not optimal.  I would$ prefer the Alphas to split the load.  = 1.  Short of changing the sysgen Parameter SHADOW_MAX_COPY to F zero on the VAXes before the mount, is there any way to optimize this?  K 2.  What steps could I take now in the middle of the copy to safely migrate,O the work from the VAX to the Alpha (without starting the copy over, of course)?a   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:22:06 GMT 2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)4 Subject: Re: Moving shadow-copying from VAX to Alpha0 Message-ID: <yexs6.95$eE2.2703@news.cpqcorp.net>  W In article <C2256A11.00727E77.00@jklh21.valmet.com>, norm.raphael@jamesbury.com writes:.  > :1.  Short of changing the sysgen Parameter SHADOW_MAX_COPY toG :zero on the VAXes before the mount, is there any way to optimize this?   B   The current shadowing ECO kits have new capabilities that may beA   of interest -- check the ECO kit for details.  (The new driversf.   won't help you without a reboot, of course.)  E :2.  What steps could I take now in the middle of the copy to safely  G :migrate the work from the VAX to the Alpha (without starting the copy g :over, of course)?  D   Donno if that can/will happen short of dismounting from the VAX...  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: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 02:29:32 +0100i+ From: Arne Bergseth <Arne.Bergseth@dnv.com> * Subject: Re: Obtaining 7.2-1 and TCPIP 5.1' Message-ID: <3AB2BDFC.31E962B7@dnv.com>-   John Santos wrote:  E > Out of curiousity, does anyone know how many hobbyist licenses havec > been issued? >D  C When renewing some of my licences a few days ago, it seems that the " license numbers has increased from' -102130   by end of march last year  to:$ -195038   in mid of march this year,1   this will make about 100000 licenses in a year.iC   Since there is about 100 licences in the layered products package 8   this seems to indicate about 1000 sites, of which some:   may have licences for a cluster with  more than one CPU.E A question now is wether the numbering is sequential for all licenses J issued by DECUS, or if there is separate numbering for different chapters.  
 Arne Bergsethn   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 18:58:48 +0000 0 From: andrew harrison <andrew.nospam@uk.sun.com>( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program* Message-ID: <3AB26268.AAB270FD@uk.sun.com>  " Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com wrote: > A > My God, Andrew just supported my position on something! Now I'ms > worried....... :-/ >   - Don't be worried, your position is basically l+ common sense and I speak as someone who hase+ no interest in OpenVMS surviving except to m maintain OS diversity.  & Ironically for all the help (not) that. Christof is giving OpenVMS he could be working& for Sun. Now there is a thought :):):)     Regards, Andrew Harrisoni Enterprise IT Architectn   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Mar 2001 02:10:01 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program- Message-ID: <87snkdbn5y.fsf@prep.synonet.com>h  + Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:.  $ > Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com wrote: > > N > > Turn it around, Christof. Why don't people use VMS, if Unix sucks so much? >   > <HUGE pile of Mozilla/Linux crap formated pseudo post deleted>  B Christof, you are your own worst enemy. And your posts are a prime- example of what you have been going on about.u   -- t< 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 23:18:35 +0000 ) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>j( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program, Message-ID: <3AB29F4B.A6EF3087@infopuls.com>   Rob Komar wrote: > 5 > David Mathog <mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu> wrote:- >  > [snip] > # > > There's also a problem in Linux,K > > (and WNT) that devices are named sequentially as they are found at boot E > > time instead of by fixed location.  If you lose disk 2 out 5 theniO > > /dev/sdc->/dev/sdb, /dev/sdd->/dev/sdc, and /dev/sde->/dev/sdd.  There willyN > > be no /dev/sde.  Apparently Linux kernel 2.4 has some sort of fixed deviceO > > name mechanism but the current kernels don't.  As things are now it can getoN > > very ugly in this situation when you loose a disk, much worse than on VMS.M > > I lost one totally during a reboot to run badblocks, and ended up runningaH > > it on the wrong disk before I realized that the iffy device had just > > disappeared. > M > This has been fixed for a while now (for ext2 filesystems).  You can assignML > each file system a volume label, and then use that label in the fstab fileB > when specifying the device.  See the fstab man page for details. > , > [now for something more on-topic for COV:] > J > Companies like IBM and SGI support Linux because it offers them a way ofG > battling MicroSoft.  They recognize that small companies that upgradePI > when they grow prefer to stay with systems that they are familiar with.(E > Linux and the free BSD unices are popular among the small companiesrK > because they are cheap and because there are many young (and, thus, cheapnK > to employ) people who are familiar enough with them.  When the time comesnE > for a larger and more mature system, many of them choose one of the K > proprietary Unix systems.  Sun even offers support for running Linux apps:I > under Solaris to make migration easier.  So, where Linux was originallymG > perceived as a threat against the proprietary Unices, it has now been H > recognized to be an important driving force behind the rejuvenation of  > the entire Unix server market. > E > I hope that those dead set against porting VMS to PC hardware or toVD > porting whiz-bang Windows/Unix software to VMS reconsider in lightD > of the above (or have a completely different plan for rejuvenating > VMS market share). > 	 > Cheers,  > Rob Komar    Great analysis! But I still don't see the business case as long as VMS and Alpha is that much expansive compared to the pure UNIX solution. VMS will not be the entry level as you pointed out indirectly. So when will VMS come in? I doubt there will be a moment during a company's growing where VMS with UNIX apps (note: quickshot ported and thus less stable than on its original habitat) will have a chance to come in. Do you see clearly the necessity of such a company to choose VMS at any time of their lifetime for running UNIX apps?   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:35:56 +0000 ) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> ( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program+ Message-ID: <3AB2A35C.8759F5B@infopuls.com>j  U Great! I'm on the right way. Having Andrew as opponent is as safe as sleeping in bed.    Brian Wheeler wrote: > P > I concur!  I *KNEW* there was a reason why I didn't put you in my killfile! :) >  > Brianj > , > In article <3AB202BC.D82E2174@uk.sun.com>,< >         andrew harrison <andrew.nospam@uk.sun.com> writes: > > Christof Brass wrote:e > >>F > >> It has been written that these COE amendments would for a certainM > >> period (I assume at least 5 to 10 years) not be available to the public.gM > >> So your argument wouldn't fit. But my fear also wouldn't be appropriate.lK > >> But my point is that technically this is something very risky and donedM > >> the wrong way will kill VMS technically. Why would one use VMS with UNIXeK > >> apps instead of using UNIX? And putting engineering effort in that COEeI > >> niche market project will reduce the engineering power spent for the- > >> public version. > >> Insane, isn't it? > >>R > >> I'm sure that even the COE UNIX API would already be there this wouldn't helpN > >> VMS. Instead it might well kill VMS also from the marketing point of viewN > >> because the real VMS apps will vanish and there will no apps remain usingO > >> the real power of VMS. And there will be a lot of apps spoiling VMS by notn. > >> using its features like structured files. > >aC > > Ahh so you are afraid that change will kill OpenVMS. Do nothingiB > > and it will survive change it to make it compete with UNIX and > > it will die. > >tA > > 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. > >)B > > But lets just address the software issue, the OpenVMS software; > > catalogue is declining, every week people post articles-C > > complaining that such and such a vendor has decided to do theirs= > > next release of SW on NT or UNIX rather than OpenVMS. Thee? > > fact is that commercial apps that use RMS are declining and2 > > have been for some time. > > A > > How long do you want to wait and how few apps that really usen< > > 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.e > >n9 > > Your posts also seem to contain an enormous degree ofa> > > pessimism about the ability of Compaqs OpenVMS engineering: > > group to do a reliable implimentation of the COE API's > > on OpenVMS.h > >1A > > 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' > > to help them in the implimentation.  > > 9 > > So far in this discussion all you have done is posted : > > negative responses with very hand wavey suggestions as: > > to how OpenVMS is going to boost its software support. > > ; > > Perhaps instead of attacking other peoples constructive @ > > suggestions you could make some alternative but constructive= > > suggestions yourself instead of indulging in a boring and-" > > tendacious architectural rant. > >0 > > Regards  > > Andrew Harrisone > > Enterprise IT Architectn   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:38:22 +0000M) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>;( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program+ Message-ID: <3AB2A3EE.2F10AA8@infopuls.com>    andrew harrison wrote: > $ > Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com wrote: > >tC > > My God, Andrew just supported my position on something! Now I'mr > > worried....... :-/ > >  > . > Don't be worried, your position is basically- > common sense and I speak as someone who hasn, > no interest in OpenVMS surviving except to > maintain OS diversity. > ( > Ironically for all the help (not) that0 > Christof is giving OpenVMS he could be working( > for Sun. Now there is a thought :):):) > 	 > Regards  > Andrew Harrisonr > Enterprise IT Architects   HELP!n   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:34:54 +00001) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>1( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program, Message-ID: <3AB2A31E.CCFC3FC8@infopuls.com>   andrew harrison wrote: >  > Christof Brass wrote:t > > E > > It has been written that these COE amendments would for a certainoL > > period (I assume at least 5 to 10 years) not be available to the public.L > > 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 doneL > > the wrong way will kill VMS technically. Why would one use VMS with UNIXJ > > apps instead of using UNIX? And putting engineering effort in that COEH > > niche market project will reduce the engineering power spent for the > > public version.n > > Insane, isn't it?  > >hQ > > I'm sure that even the COE UNIX API would already be there this wouldn't helpaM > > VMS. Instead it might well kill VMS also from the marketing point of vieweM > > because the real VMS apps will vanish and there will no apps remain using N > > the real power of VMS. And there will be a lot of apps spoiling VMS by not- > > using its features like structured files.t > A > Ahh so you are afraid that change will kill OpenVMS. Do nothingm@ > and it will survive change it to make it compete with UNIX and > it will die.  W I really can't believe it! Nobody in this group wrote that nothing has to be changed!!!?X I really don't get it. What is the meaning of this stupid overture??? Are you braindead?  @ > The underlying feeling I get when I read your 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.  Obviously you didn't read my posts or you didn't understand it. Numerous times I stated that niche is the worst thing you can aim for SW! Your post clearly shows that you should look around if there is something like brain available for you instead of using your "underlying feeling".  @ > But lets just address the software issue, the OpenVMS software9 > catalogue is declining, every week people post articlesrA > complaining that such and such a vendor has decided to do their ; > next release of SW on NT or UNIX rather than OpenVMS. Then= > fact is that commercial apps that use RMS are declining and  > have been for some time.  L I never said the evolution of mankind is an advance in understanding/reason.  ? > How long do you want to wait and how few apps that really uset: > 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.o   You obviously didn't read/understand my posts. Having UNIX on VMS isn't a solution. If you are that cute show the business case in which this would make sense!   7 > Your posts also seem to contain an enormous degree ofe< > pessimism about the ability of Compaqs OpenVMS engineering8 > group to do a reliable implimentation of the COE API's
 > on OpenVMS.C  `Unfortunately not. I even think they might be the only group in OS development who could accomplish the impossible: to implement the broken UNIX crap API *together* with the VMS API that the outcome is still reliable (as opposed to UNIX). This would be the first reliable UNIX implementation. Alas this won't help because the UNIX apps are crap anyway.JThe worst thing about these brilliant people in the VMS group is that they probably will succeed and we have the shitty UNIX in VMS whithout chance to escape from it. Will I use Windoze than to avoid UNIX shit? Will I have to write my own OS? I really don't know. If I expect VMS engineering to fail I wouldn't have said anything.  ? > I would not rely on them to post accurate security advisoriesp= > 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.a   Obviously the VMS engineering group (as mentioned before wrt graphics drivers) will have to re-write the code and chances are that Tru64 will get the corrected source back. This will then the second reliable UNIX implementation.  7 > So far in this discussion all you have done is postedr8 > negative responses with very hand waved suggestions as8 > to how OpenVMS is going to boost its software support.  ' Sorry? Please be more specific on that.m  9 > Perhaps instead of attacking other peoples constructiveA> > suggestions you could make some alternative but constructive; > suggestions yourself instead of indulging in a boring andh  > tendacious architectural rant.  It's always the same with the UNIX advocates: they don't have any substantial argument to defend the crap they adore. BTW you are exactly the right person to ask for constructive suggestions. Why do *you* think that VMS is superior to UNIX? What is the main problem of UNIX?  	 > Regardsf > Andrew Harrisonn > Enterprise IT Architectt   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:39:22 +0000 ) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>d( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program, Message-ID: <3AB2A42A.140F6575@infopuls.com>   Paul Repacholi wrote:) > - > Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> writes:1 > & > > Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com wrote: > > >dP > > > Turn it around, Christof. Why don't people use VMS, if Unix sucks so much? > >- > @ > <HUGE pile of Mozilla/Linux crap formated pseudo post deleted> > D > Christof, you are your own worst enemy. And your posts are a prime/ > example of what you have been going on about.P >  > --> > Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,9 > +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.iB >                                              West Australia 60760 > Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.  / More explanation of the second sentence please.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:53:46 +0000l) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> ( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program, Message-ID: <3AB2A78A.D0907362@infopuls.com>   Christopher Smith wrote: >  > > -----Original Message-----4 > > From: Christof Brass [mailto:brass@infopuls.com] > ? > > > Because that's where the apps run. If you make those samer > > apps available on-A > > > VMS then VMS becomes a viable option in many areas where itr > > is currently= > > > not viable now. You try selling a manager VMS for a web1 > > server that serves( > > > out Real Networks streaming media: > > > A > > > Manager: I want to provide streaming Real Networks media to1 > > our customers.1 > > > Techie: Can I interest you in a VMS system?o3 > > > Manager: Does Real Networks server run on it?e1 > > > Techie: Well, no, but it's really robust...aA > > > Manager looks at Techie as if he's grown a second head, and2 > > makes a mental8 > > > note to surf Dice.com looking for a new techie.... > A > > Here we are: the business case - I waited ages for someone tot? > > present one as to justify this COE stuff besides DoD. But In< > > don't buy it. Why using VMS for an app running alreay on< > > UNIX? A UNIX like app also. A UNIX quality app also. Why< > > bother buying a VMS box? Does really anyone believe that> > > within the next five or ten years there will be in any way> > > close as much apps be around on VMS as on UNIX? As for theA > > business case: the manager selects a UNIX box for sure if sHe.) > > is thinking about app availability inP? > > any respect. Even if the currently needed apps are there. It: > > personally doubt that a UNIX app will run flawless andA > > efficient on VMS. Can we expect that these quickshot ports of'H > > UNIX apps will run in a cluster? Will they use RMS structered files?= > > Again back to the business case: What is the advantage ina; > > buying a VMS box? I doubt that there is any if you plant= > > running UNIX apps. Will the quality of the system (OS andt: > > app) be really better than on the original platform. I@ > > seriously doubt that. Given the low quality of the UNIX apps; > > will the hidden bugs not pop up all around? Will that ay@ > > combination, VMS with a quickshot UNIX app on top, really beF > > more stable than on the original platform? I seriously doubt that.< > > A shop that could afford VMS could afford top liga IntelF > > compatible crap with Linux or Solaris. Where is the business case? > 9 > Let me offer support for the business case in this way:  > H > Let's assume that all of this COE is implemented without affecting the? > quality of VMS in a negative way (that's another argument...)p  4 One major point of my concern. I don't believe that.   > Now our situation is this: > N > Given the option of two high-end configurations (one Unix, and an equivalent
 > VMS setup),e >  > Unix will run Unix apps. >  > VMS will run Unix apps.- > H > VMS will _also_ run VMS apps, which may not alone justify buying a VMSK > machine, but might be very strong as an "added bonus" to what you can get4L > with the Unix setup.  You may be surprised to know that there are a lot ofN > features in VMS that even the most hard-core Unix people would love to have.I > A lot of the time, the excuse to go with Unix instead is compatibility.b  Good point but I don't think it suffices. Having different OSs in one company is not a problem nowadays. If VMS is needed because there is one killer app on VMS then VMS will be used anyway. If additional UNIX apps are necessary they will in most cases better run on UNIX boxes. There might be a few situations where the VMS only case is the best but I doubt it as long as there aren't many true VMS apps around. I expect instead a soft migration of the VMS SW vendors to the VMS/UNIX API and then to UNIXf' completely. Let's see what will happen.u  M > I know that during my experience with Unix, I would have certainly liked itt5 > to provide things like RMS, decent error reporting,eN > _ACCESS_CONTROL_LISTS_!!!, _ABILITY_TO_DROP_OR_ASSUME_PRIVS_INDIVIDUALLY!!!,K > etc, etc.  Do you have any idea how many people are paying for add-ons toCM > Unix to provide any number of these things that are designed into VMS?  VMSaM > would give all of this from a single vendor -- there would be no excuse not  > to use it. > C > Now at this point, it may sound like I want VMS to be just a Unix & > replacement -- but think about this: > G > Once VMS has a foothold in these markets, people will start giving it A > software support again. What do they have to lose?  It would behL > "compatible," but with more extra features than you could count, and whileN > application reliability may be questionable in Unix apps, system reliabilityK > need not suffer.  If Compaq handles this right, VMS could possibly _be_ anK > Unix replacement, but in the migrational sense. People who don't have thetL > budget to do all of their software development in house might actually end0 > up using it again.  That can't be bad, can it?  C Depends on what kind of people are attracted to go this way if any.   N > I really do believe that software availability is a big part of the problem.   I too.  L > The excuse used to be that it was "proprietary," but we both know that's aC > load of crap, since all of Microshaft's products (which have moree= > marketshare than the 0% they deserve) are also proprietary.d  6 I completely agree. "Propretary" should never be used.  A > As Andrew Harrison said, it's no magic bullet, but it may help.e > 
 > Regards, >  > Chrisc > # > Christopher Smith, Perl Developer  > Amdocs - Champaign, IL >  > /usr/bin/perl -e 'A > print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");e > 't >n   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 18:21:59 -0600 + From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com>-( Subject: RE: OpenVMS Educational ProgramL Message-ID: <3B55D7F383B0D31197D9009027541CBF0BDD5489@cmiexch1.cmi.itds.com>   > -----Original Message-----2 > From: Christof Brass [mailto:brass@infopuls.com]  @ > The worst thing about these brilliant people in the VMS group < > is that they probably will succeed and we have the shitty < > UNIX in VMS whithout chance to escape from it. Will I use ? > Windoze than to avoid UNIX shit? Will I have to write my own w? > OS? I really don't know. If I expect VMS engineering to fail w  > I wouldn't have said anything.  K Oh, man -- this part really struck me.  Would you really rather use windowsaL than unix? :)  In my experience, windows is several times less reliable thanI unix, and as far as the design aspect you're so fond of, I can assure youtL there's none of that in windows. (Well, maybe very little in windows nt, butI no more than unix has) I can only conclude that you must be on crack from  this paragraph. (No offense...)e   Regards,   ChrisO  ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developerd Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");t 'e   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 18:43:41 -0600t+ From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com>e( Subject: RE: OpenVMS Educational ProgramL Message-ID: <3B55D7F383B0D31197D9009027541CBF0BDD548A@cmiexch1.cmi.itds.com>   > -----Original Message-----2 > From: Christof Brass [mailto:brass@infopuls.com]   > Christopher Smith wrote:  ; > > Let me offer support for the business case in this way:o > > = > > Let's assume that all of this COE is implemented without X > affecting the A > > quality of VMS in a negative way (that's another argument...)i  6 > One major point of my concern. I don't believe that.  H I think that is your biggest argument with several people on this group,G actually.  I do, however, have quite a bit of faith in VMS engineering.u    = > > A lot of the time, the excuse to go with Unix instead is u > compatibility.  = > Good point but I don't think it suffices. Having different i: > OSs in one company is not a problem nowadays. If VMS is > > needed because there is one killer app on VMS then VMS will = > be used anyway. If additional UNIX apps are necessary they h@ > will in most cases better run on UNIX boxes. There might be a ; > few situations where the VMS only case is the best but I w@ > doubt it as long as there aren't many true VMS apps around. I ? > expect instead a soft migration of the VMS SW vendors to the s > VMS/UNIX API and then to UNIXn) > completely. Let's see what will happen.m  J You make a very good point about the "killer app."  The real question thenJ becomes, where is this "killer app?"  What was it that made VMS so popularJ for such a long time?  Because it could really use some of that right now.  H I might -- if I were in the mood to argue -- argue that VMS _is_ its ownI "killer app" in the sense that it has so many capabilities out of the box F that really are quite impressive.  The problem is that you need eitherH third-party products or expertise that are getting very rare in order toL take advantage of the system to its fullest.  That's why compaq needs to getK people to put their development time -- one way or the other -- behind VMS, J and that's also why compaq needs to straighten out its reputation with the schools.  L It's the first aspect -- getting people to develop software that will run onI VMS -- that I'm concerned with in this argument.  If you know of a betteraH way to do that, then I, and I'm sure lots of other people, would be very interested to hear it.  ? > > Unix replacement, but in the migrational sense. People who o > don't have the< > > budget to do all of their software development in house  > might actually end2 > > up using it again.  That can't be bad, can it?  E > Depends on what kind of people are attracted to go this way if any.t  K That's an interesting point, and I see why you're worried about the type oftI users it will attract -- after all, there's a slim chance that if they'rerK all unix people, compaq would be tempted to make VMS itself more unix-like.y( (Correct me if this isn't the problem)    J On the other hand, it's my belief that most people who use computers don'tI care what software they're running.  They care that they can use it to do K XYZ, and the really stupid ones care that it looks exactly the same down torI the pixel as the last computer they used so that they don't get lost, butPG they won't care if it's VMS underneath.  So I really don't think of ther above as a danger at all.w  < > > I really do believe that software availability is a big  > part of the problem.   > I too.  I Then there's no fundamental argument here, really -- the only question isr this:w  % How can VMS expand its software base?      Regards,   Chrisy    ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developert Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");s 's   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 02:06:56 +0000a) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>w( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program, Message-ID: <3AB2C6C0.AD1827C6@infopuls.com>   Christopher Smith wrote: >  > > -----Original Message-----4 > > From: Christof Brass [mailto:brass@infopuls.com] > A > > The worst thing about these brilliant people in the VMS groupn= > > is that they probably will succeed and we have the shittyA= > > UNIX in VMS whithout chance to escape from it. Will I uset@ > > Windoze than to avoid UNIX shit? Will I have to write my own@ > > OS? I really don't know. If I expect VMS engineering to fail" > > I wouldn't have said anything. > M > Oh, man -- this part really struck me.  Would you really rather use windowsnN > than unix? :)  In my experience, windows is several times less reliable thanK > unix, and as far as the design aspect you're so fond of, I can assure you N > there's none of that in windows. (Well, maybe very little in windows nt, butK > no more than unix has) I can only conclude that you must be on crack fromh! > this paragraph. (No offense...)t > 
 > Regards, >  > Chrism > # > Christopher Smith, Perl Developer  > Amdocs - Champaign, IL >  > /usr/bin/perl -e 'A > print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");s > 'n  @ This was a rhethorical question. I don't know Windoze yet. Maybe> I'm disappointed after using it 7 years like I'm after 7 years of UNIX.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 02:20:50 +0000h) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>g( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program, Message-ID: <3AB2CA02.F5586E5E@infopuls.com>   Christopher Smith wrote: >  > > -----Original Message-----4 > > From: Christof Brass [mailto:brass@infopuls.com] >  > > Christopher Smith wrote: > = > > > Let me offer support for the business case in this way:a > > >u> > > > Let's assume that all of this COE is implemented without > > affecting the C > > > quality of VMS in a negative way (that's another argument...)e > 8 > > One major point of my concern. I don't believe that. > J > I think that is your biggest argument with several people on this group,I > actually.  I do, however, have quite a bit of faith in VMS engineering.i  ? The problems stays (as I pointed out already) even this task ise done perfectly.e  > > > > A lot of the time, the excuse to go with Unix instead is > > compatibility. > > > > Good point but I don't think it suffices. Having different; > > OSs in one company is not a problem nowadays. If VMS ise? > > needed because there is one killer app on VMS then VMS willN> > > be used anyway. If additional UNIX apps are necessary theyA > > will in most cases better run on UNIX boxes. There might be aN< > > few situations where the VMS only case is the best but IA > > doubt it as long as there aren't many true VMS apps around. Ih@ > > expect instead a soft migration of the VMS SW vendors to the! > > VMS/UNIX API and then to UNIXe+ > > completely. Let's see what will happen.i > L > You make a very good point about the "killer app."  The real question thenL > becomes, where is this "killer app?"  What was it that made VMS so popularL > for such a long time?  Because it could really use some of that right now.  < Unrivaled real time capabilities with good price/performance: ratio. And a lot of engineers who estimated this clean OS.  J > I might -- if I were in the mood to argue -- argue that VMS _is_ its ownK > "killer app" in the sense that it has so many capabilities out of the boxlH > that really are quite impressive.  The problem is that you need eitherJ > third-party products or expertise that are getting very rare in order toN > take advantage of the system to its fullest.  That's why compaq needs to getM > people to put their development time -- one way or the other -- behind VMS,wL > and that's also why compaq needs to straighten out its reputation with the
 > schools.  7 Definitely. UNIX should only be used in education as ans? counterexample - to teach how software engineering should nevero be done.  N > It's the first aspect -- getting people to develop software that will run onK > VMS -- that I'm concerned with in this argument.  If you know of a betteraJ > way to do that, then I, and I'm sure lots of other people, would be very > interested to hear it. > @ > > > Unix replacement, but in the migrational sense. People who > > don't have the= > > > budget to do all of their software development in house- > > might actually end4 > > > up using it again.  That can't be bad, can it? > G > > Depends on what kind of people are attracted to go this way if any.B > M > That's an interesting point, and I see why you're worried about the type of@K > users it will attract -- after all, there's a slim chance that if they're M > all unix people, compaq would be tempted to make VMS itself more unix-like. ( > (Correct me if this isn't the problem)  7 We don't need the masses to destroy the quality of VMS.o  L > On the other hand, it's my belief that most people who use computers don'tK > care what software they're running.  They care that they can use it to doCM > XYZ, and the really stupid ones care that it looks exactly the same down to K > the pixel as the last computer they used so that they don't get lost, butrI > they won't care if it's VMS underneath.  So I really don't think of the  > above as a danger at all.-  = I'm not only talking about the users; it's the developers whoi ensure app quality.o  = > > > I really do believe that software availability is a big  > > part of the problem. > 
 > > I too. > K > Then there's no fundamental argument here, really -- the only question is[ > this:a > ' > How can VMS expand its software base?e  & VMS can't, software developers can :-)  
 > Regards, >  > Chris  > # > Christopher Smith, Perl Developer  > Amdocs - Champaign, IL >  > /usr/bin/perl -e 'A > print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");  > 's   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:47:56 -0500o  From: Ben Sego <bsego@clark.net>( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program) Message-ID: <3AB2EC7C.D0060C13@clark.net>    Christof Brass wrote:o <snip>  L > > I might -- if I were in the mood to argue -- argue that VMS _is_ its ownM > > "killer app" in the sense that it has so many capabilities out of the box J > > that really are quite impressive.  The problem is that you need eitherL > > third-party products or expertise that are getting very rare in order toP > > take advantage of the system to its fullest.  That's why compaq needs to getO > > people to put their development time -- one way or the other -- behind VMS, N > > and that's also why compaq needs to straighten out its reputation with the > > schools. > 9 > Definitely. UNIX should only be used in education as anoA > counterexample - to teach how software engineering should nevers
 > be done.  R Unix is a good system, and has some excellent and elegant features.  Blind bigotryP won't help your cause, and hating Unix won't make it go away.  But a lack of newN applications will make VMS go away.  Currently, when a company has to choose aN target environment for their new software, VMS isn't very high up on the list.Q This is a business reality, and all the praise in the world for the purity of VMSbQ won't change it.  Making it cheaper and easier to get applications onto VMS might P change it.  Compaq's expanded license scheme will help; so would COE compliance.K COE won't kill VMS, but a lack of new applications might well do the trick.t <snip>  O > > That's an interesting point, and I see why you're worried about the type ofNM > > users it will attract -- after all, there's a slim chance that if they'reoO > > all unix people, compaq would be tempted to make VMS itself more unix-like. * > > (Correct me if this isn't the problem) >i9 > We don't need the masses to destroy the quality of VMS.s  P Cool.  If everyone holds onto that attitude, then you'll get to enjoy the purityO of VMS all alone.  While I understand that holds appeal, it doesn't do much for.H the corporate types who decide where to spend their development dollars.  N > > On the other hand, it's my belief that most people who use computers don'tM > > care what software they're running.  They care that they can use it to doi > > XYZ,   <snip>N The users might not care, but the people who control the budget do.  Right nowL internal IT shops at nearly all companies have to pay for support of WindowsM machines; some companies buy support for Unix (or Linux); fewer still buy IBMeO mainframe support.  Clearly, some pay for VMS support.  (When I say "pay for" IoR mean they employ people to administer the systems.)  Any time they can cut out oneO of the architectures, their infrastructure support costs go down.  Right now itmQ seems it's the VMS boxes that are being kicked to the curb.  That's a tough trend N to turn around, but it will likely have to start with people getting more (andQ more modern) software to run on VMS.  Anything that furthers that goal would seem % to be desirable to the VMS community.e   Ben Sego   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 05:30:26 GMTs4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program= Message-ID: <SDCs6.14764$mH4.3371096@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>i  - "Ben Sego" <bsego@clark.net> wrote in messagep# news:3AB2EC7C.D0060C13@clark.net..., > Christof Brass wrote:M > <snip> >IJ > > > I might -- if I were in the mood to argue -- argue that VMS _is_ its ownoK > > > "killer app" in the sense that it has so many capabilities out of theM boxML > > > that really are quite impressive.  The problem is that you need eitherK > > > third-party products or expertise that are getting very rare in orderb toK > > > take advantage of the system to its fullest.  That's why compaq needsh to getL > > > people to put their development time -- one way or the other -- behind VMS,L > > > and that's also why compaq needs to straighten out its reputation with theo > > > schools. > > ; > > Definitely. UNIX should only be used in education as anyC > > counterexample - to teach how software engineering should neverM > > be done. >_L > Unix is a good system, and has some excellent and elegant features.  Blind bigotry K > won't help your cause, and hating Unix won't make it go away.  But a lack  of newG > applications will make VMS go away.  Currently, when a company has toa choose aJ > target environment for their new software, VMS isn't very high up on the list. L > This is a business reality, and all the praise in the world for the purity of VMSI > won't change it.  Making it cheaper and easier to get applications ontod	 VMS might F > change it.  Compaq's expanded license scheme will help; so would COE compliance.eF > COE won't kill VMS, but a lack of new applications might well do the trick. > <snip>  J Yup. That's the VMS Achille's Heel, and it's a well-known fact in ZKO3 and
 elsewhere.   >eI > > > That's an interesting point, and I see why you're worried about the\ type oftG > > > users it will attract -- after all, there's a slim chance that if- they're F > > > all unix people, compaq would be tempted to make VMS itself more
 unix-like., > > > (Correct me if this isn't the problem) > >-; > > We don't need the masses to destroy the quality of VMS.d >oK > Cool.  If everyone holds onto that attitude, then you'll get to enjoy thep purityH > of VMS all alone.  While I understand that holds appeal, it doesn't do much forJ > the corporate types who decide where to spend their development dollars. >o  K Well stated. "Purity" and proliferation (or even survival) are incompatible H goals. If one has a problem with "the masses" "destroying the quality ofI VMS," how does one expect to attract new users, ISVs, et al? One doesn't,uH assuming one is rational. If nobody but a small--and shrinking--cadre ofJ "elitists" are the only people using the OS, both the cadre and the OS are doomed to irrelevance.   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 16:47:56 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett) K Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program: Looking a Gift Horse in the Mouth , Message-ID: <rBGKAWbE06O$@malvm1.mala.bc.ca>  > In article <Mkys6.13506$mH4.3165922@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>, 9    "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes:.  H > I fail to understand all the complaining about the OpenVMS EducationalE > Program. If I understand the Program correctly, it works like this:: > L > 1) Educational Institution goes to Web site and signs up to participate in > the Program. > L > 2) Compaq provides the Educational Institution with a Registration Number. > N > 3) Educational Institution makes Registration Number available to interested > students.  > K > 4) Students go to Web site, provide the Institution-specific Registration  > Number, and ask for PAKs.  > J > 5) Compaq emails the PAKs (in a DCL file) to Students, Students load theK > PAKs on their systems, and gain access to VMS base license and a bunch ofh > layered products.i > 2 > 6) Students have to renew the PAKs every August. > " > So what seems to be the problem? > K     If you assume these students have their own Alphas at home and want to dH use VMS on them then nothing - it works just as you've described. But ifL you assume that then what's the point of this program - the hobbyist program- already gave everyone the ability to do that.   H     The problem is that if the institution owns some Alphas and wants toF install VMS on them for student and/or staff use the situation is muchH cloudier. I think if you look back at earlier postings that David, I and@ others have made the reason we think this is so should be clear.  H     If you really want to find out more about this maybe you can contactH me offline - I won't bother the group with re-iterations of my rantings.  M =============================================================================dM Malcolm Dunnett      Malaspina University-College   Email: dunnett@mala.bc.caaH Information Systems  Nanaimo, B.C. CANADA V9R 5S5     Tel: (250)755-8738   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 00:37:00 GMTs4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>G Subject: OpenVMS Educational Program: Looking a Gift Horse in the Moutht= Message-ID: <Mkys6.13506$mH4.3165922@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>m  F I fail to understand all the complaining about the OpenVMS EducationalC Program. If I understand the Program correctly, it works like this:   J 1) Educational Institution goes to Web site and signs up to participate in the Program.  J 2) Compaq provides the Educational Institution with a Registration Number.  L 3) Educational Institution makes Registration Number available to interested	 students.e  I 4) Students go to Web site, provide the Institution-specific Registrationa Number, and ask for PAKs.n  H 5) Compaq emails the PAKs (in a DCL file) to Students, Students load theI PAKs on their systems, and gain access to VMS base license and a bunch ofh layered products.n  0 6) Students have to renew the PAKs every August.    So what seems to be the problem?   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 02:07:40 +0000r) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>lK Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program: Looking a Gift Horse in the MouthV, Message-ID: <3AB2C6EC.D08C076A@infopuls.com>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:t > H > I fail to understand all the complaining about the OpenVMS EducationalE > Program. If I understand the Program correctly, it works like this:Y > L > 1) Educational Institution goes to Web site and signs up to participate in > the Program. > L > 2) Compaq provides the Educational Institution with a Registration Number. > N > 3) Educational Institution makes Registration Number available to interested > students.v > K > 4) Students go to Web site, provide the Institution-specific Registrationn > Number, and ask for PAKs.e > J > 5) Compaq emails the PAKs (in a DCL file) to Students, Students load theK > PAKs on their systems, and gain access to VMS base license and a bunch ofm > layered products.  > 2 > 6) Students have to renew the PAKs every August. > " > So what seems to be the problem?   The problem is that UNIX sucks.e# Terry, you seem to be off topic ;-)r   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Mar 2001 11:02:37 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>K Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program: Looking a Gift Horse in the Mouth - Message-ID: <87snkd85de.fsf@prep.synonet.com>.  6 "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes:  < > I fail to understand all the complaining about the OpenVMSF > Educational Program. If I understand the Program correctly, it works > like this:  = > 1) Educational Institution goes to Web site and signs up to  > participate in the Program.   D > 2) Compaq provides the Educational Institution with a Registration	 > Number.-  
 OK so far.  N > 3) Educational Institution makes Registration Number available to interested > students.s  D They have to remember a URL. They have to DO it... Now, if you thinkE this is a joke, then all I can say is to consider 3rd years, who haveiF done a full semester of Unix System Programming, and can use Vi! I kid you not.  > > 4) Students go to Web site, provide the Institution-specific( > Registration Number, and ask for PAKs.  F > 5) Compaq emails the PAKs (in a DCL file) to Students, Students loadF > the PAKs on their systems, and gain access to VMS base license and a > bunch of layered products.  ? Bet some of them delete the mail, have not got it in the lab...'  2 > 6) Students have to renew the PAKs every August.  E Well, for here, it is a few weeks into second semester, go to step 4,02 and install new wall due to frequent head crashes.  " > So what seems to be the problem?  F So, I have several 6xxx Vaxes, and an old 8400 or two, and half a roomE of fruit. I am going to use *single user licences* on the suckers? ItBG is also lacking a Data base or three. Be nice if Oricle jumped in here.   > We are NOT teaching billyfuckware, or Linux. Multi user, multi) function is the whole point of doing VMS.   A All of this assumes you can just handwave away minor details like F machines, storage, controllers, SW kits, space... Oh and manuals.  DECD used to allow edus to print and sell at cost manual for course work.A Studying from the screen just does not work, in my experience. ItvE certainly does not for me, and I have yet to find any one who I coulds say it does work for.a  D If you drop a CSLG set on top, it becomes usefull, but the cost goes through the roof.U  ? Compaq needs to put serious ( tax deductable ) money into this.t   --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.n@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 20:44:28 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett)oK Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program: Looking a Gift Horse in the Mouthe, Message-ID: <KDSicBTGhiYU@malvm1.mala.bc.ca>  . In article <87snkd85de.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, 2     Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes: > H > So, I have several 6xxx Vaxes, and an old 8400 or two, and half a roomG > of fruit. I am going to use *single user licences* on the suckers? ItuI > is also lacking a Data base or three. Be nice if Oricle jumped in here.i >   D     Oracle has an educational licensing program that, while not freeK is fairly cheap. I don't have the number in front of me, but I think it wasd> under $1000/year for unlimited use of the database and relatedB products ( developer, designer, sql*plus, etc ). No administrative? processing is allowed under this license though, only teaching.h  @     Or you can always get an obsolete version of Rdb through the	 the CSLG.a  A   (come to think of it, I don't believe Oracle includes Rdb undert= their educational licensing program mentioned above, hmm... )r   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 04:31:20 GMTs4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>K Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program: Looking a Gift Horse in the Mouthe= Message-ID: <sMBs6.14754$mH4.3335342@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>   9 "Paul Repacholi" <prep@prep.synonet.com> wrote in message ' news:87snkd85de.fsf@prep.synonet.com...n8 > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes: >'> > > I fail to understand all the complaining about the OpenVMSH > > Educational Program. If I understand the Program correctly, it works > > like this: >e? > > 1) Educational Institution goes to Web site and signs up to  > > participate in the Program.u >gF > > 2) Compaq provides the Educational Institution with a Registration > > Number.t >t > OK so far. > E > > 3) Educational Institution makes Registration Number available toe
 interested
 > > students.r >tF > They have to remember a URL. They have to DO it... Now, if you thinkG > this is a joke, then all I can say is to consider 3rd years, who have H > done a full semester of Unix System Programming, and can use Vi! I kid
 > you not. >l@ > > 4) Students go to Web site, provide the Institution-specific* > > Registration Number, and ask for PAKs. >eH > > 5) Compaq emails the PAKs (in a DCL file) to Students, Students loadH > > the PAKs on their systems, and gain access to VMS base license and a > > bunch of layered products. > A > Bet some of them delete the mail, have not got it in the lab...n >h4 > > 6) Students have to renew the PAKs every August. >tG > Well, for here, it is a few weeks into second semester, go to step 4, 4 > and install new wall due to frequent head crashes. >f$ > > So what seems to be the problem? > H > So, I have several 6xxx Vaxes, and an old 8400 or two, and half a roomG > of fruit. I am going to use *single user licences* on the suckers? ItiI > is also lacking a Data base or three. Be nice if Oricle jumped in here.   L Well, with all his billions, perhaps Larry Ellison will help in this regard.! But don't hold your breath, mate!(  L At least not for Oracle. Oracle Rdb is another story, an Oracle Rdb HobbyistJ license is in the works. I have no idea how Oracle will handle edus, tho'.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 20:53:46 +01003, From: "Bart Zorn" <B.Zorn@TrueBit.nospam.nl>. Subject: Re: Pathworks Client and Windows 2000* Message-ID: <98tr1j$oue$1@news1.xs4all.nl>   Yes, you need V7.2!i   Regards,  	 Bart Zorno  A "Dominic Olivastro" <DOlivastro@ChiResearch.com> wrote in messagei  news:g9ts6.104$xh6.483@client...J > We just purchased some PC's running Win 2000.  The PW Client software weJ > have is Version 7.1A.  This won't install on the Win 2000 machines.  The/ > installation says it can not find NetCFG.dll.n >iG > Do I need to move up to a newer version on PW Client?  Is Compaq evenq5 > supporting Win 2000?  What has everybody else done?c >l > TIA  > DOMi >y >N > -- > Dominic Olivastrod > CHI Research, Incn > 10 White Horse Pikeo > Haddon Heights, NJ 08035 >e > Phone:  1-856-546-0600 > Fax:       1-856-546-9633 ' > mailto:    DOlivastro@ChiResearch.comg >y >o   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 21:02:23 GMTf2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)V Subject: Re: POSIX Streams, File Permissions (was: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II0 Message-ID: <zbvs6.86$eE2.2583@news.cpqcorp.net>  \ In article <87wv9pboct.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes:0 :koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: :e? :> In article <871yrzy6po.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholim" :> <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes: :k> :> > The down side, is that the POSIX standard has fundamentalC :> > incompatabilities with VMS. File Protection/Permissions is onee
 :> > example.   G   This has been dealt with already: write access implies delete in COE.l  6   The requirements for the UID/GID stuff was fun, too.  < :> > This *could* impact back into VMS. And a pile of others :> > I'm sure.     Ayup, way more...   E :> I'm hoping COE will force VMS to add real stream file support (not D :> delimited by CR, LF, or CRLF, and not filled to complete 512 byte :> blocks).p :,( :File type UNDEFINED? Just like unix? :)  F   The COE C RTL will have this support.  AFAIK, the underlying device E   driver and the related supporting code are all operating correctly.a  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 16:59:17 -0500- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) V Subject: Re: POSIX Streams, File Permissions (was: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II3 Message-ID: <yg4IU4aENIhL@eisner.encompasserve.org>   e In article <zbvs6.86$eE2.2583@news.cpqcorp.net>, hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) writes:t > H >   The COE C RTL will have this support.  AFAIK, the underlying device G >   driver and the related supporting code are all operating correctly.i >   D Cool.  But only the C RTL?  I can't access it via RMS?  I might just' someday want to get at it from Fortran.r  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------? Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporationn= NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GroupgE                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replyings   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:18:47 GMTM2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)V Subject: Re: POSIX Streams, File Permissions (was: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II0 Message-ID: <rbxs6.94$eE2.2703@news.cpqcorp.net>  c In article <yg4IU4aENIhL@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:tf :In article <zbvs6.86$eE2.2583@news.cpqcorp.net>, hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) writes: :> rI :>   The COE C RTL will have this support.  AFAIK, the underlying device gH :>   driver and the related supporting code are all operating correctly. :> s :lE :Cool.  But only the C RTL?  I can't access it via RMS?  I might justo( :someday want to get at it from Fortran.  H   (Pardon my cringe.)  I have no doubt access to the device driver will F   be available, I just don't know if it will be officially documented.  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: 17 Mar 2001 10:11:04 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>V Subject: Re: POSIX Streams, File Permissions (was: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II- Message-ID: <87bsr19mbr.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   4 hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) writes:  ^ > In article <87wv9pboct.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes:2 > :koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: > :'A > :> In article <871yrzy6po.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholio$ > :> <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes: > :x@ > :> > The down side, is that the POSIX standard has fundamentalE > :> > incompatabilities with VMS. File Protection/Permissions is one  > :> > example.t > I >   This has been dealt with already: write access implies delete in COE.i > 8 >   The requirements for the UID/GID stuff was fun, too.  B What about things like removing the group access of a file you ownC remove your access, according to POSUX? It is this sort of semantica& clash that I see being the real worry.  D Oh well, if it screws over SEVMS really well, they might think about' changing it! Rather you than me Hoff...O   -- n< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.e@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Mar 2001 04:09:10 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>) Subject: Re: Possible security hole in...r- Message-ID: <877l1pbhnd.fsf@prep.synonet.com>k  # "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org> writes:n  : > The fact that parts of their code break in strcpy() uponF > unexpectedly long input.  The fact that parts of their code break onA > %s%s type input (format string bugs).  Not being able to spot arD > strcpy into a fixed-length buffer with user supplied data during aF > 'code audit' is IMHO pretty poor.  I'm sure I'd spot it, and I'm not$ > claiming to be any kind of expert.  D > Don't get me wrong, I like VMS.  I'd just like to see it made moreF > secure in this respect - the tcp stack just doesn't stand up against > modern attack methodology.  C Sheesh, this could cover a SHIT load of code... CRTL natch, TNT andiD the COM stuff ( idf you haven't deleeted TNT, you deserve it ), but,C COBRTL, PASRTL, the portalble math library, Galaxy stuff, debugger, D edit/fdl ( ?? wasn't that pascal? ). Oh and C++ and Java. And the IP stack.  E If this is correct, then VMS engineering should put a total black bans
 on C code.  8 Finding refs to the CRTL from other RTLs was not nice...   --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.l@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 17:07:32 -05003 From: malmberg@encompasserve.org (John E. Malmberg)e) Subject: Re: Possible security hole in...a3 Message-ID: <fW0TC5LF$p6Z@eisner.encompasserve.org>   d In article <Kgqs6.217157$Dd3.3158379@monolith.news.easynet.net>, "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org> writes: >rC >     The stated security disclosure policy in this newsgroup's FAQ=E >     prevents me from presenting anything to convince you otherwise.   E   The policy that you are mentioning also politely requests that suchy,   security holes be sent directly to Compaq.  8   It is not clear from your posts if you have done that.  A >     If I have time I might knock up some proof-of-concept code.dA >     Otherwise, you'll have to wait until compaq have had a lookr% >     and the bugtraq posts come out.5  F   If you do not presently have the code, then how can you be confident+   that you have actually found such a hole?g  %   Please submit your proof to Compaq.y   -Johns Personal Opinion Only.   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:17:22 GMTr2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)) Subject: Re: Possible security hole in...a0 Message-ID: <6axs6.93$eE2.2703@news.cpqcorp.net>  d In article <Kgqs6.217157$Dd3.3158379@monolith.news.easynet.net>, "ph0bos" <ph0bos@shady.org> writes:' :  ...I'd just like to see it made moremG :  secure in this respect - the tcp stack just doesn't stand up againsto :  modern attack methodology...t  ?   Please contact the Compaq Customer Support Center or a Compaqt   representative directly.  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 20:15:32 GMTi2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)2 Subject: Re: Processes with PFW on an empty system0 Message-ID: <Evus6.81$eE2.2279@news.cpqcorp.net>  h In article <3AB23E8E.417018E8@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de>, "Dr. Otto Titze" <titze@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de> writes:  > :in a 6.2 VMS cluster (VAXes, Alphas) I included an Alpha 2100C :and a Vax 4090 with VMS 4200...  ...If I some time after the boot  = :try to login from a simple Vt400 the process hangs with PFW.A :e  :Any hint where I may look into?  O   http://www.openvms.compaq.com/doc/72final/6491/6491pro_006.html#page_faultingc  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 16:54:59 -05003 From: malmberg@encompasserve.org (John E. Malmberg)s Subject: Re: Samba and W2k3 Message-ID: <$c$l6sASlvwf@eisner.encompasserve.org>w  3 In article <3AB2343C.43A4FF45@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de>,o4 "Dr. Otto Titze" <titze#ikp.tu-darmstadt.de> writes: > Hi,o >m: > has anyone out there already used successfully Samba-VMS9 > from a W2000 Client? It works for us with W95, W98, WNTt > but not from W2k.C  N There are reports on the SAMBA-VMS mailing lists of the 2.0.3 version working.  I It was discovered with SAMBA UNIX 2.0.6 that W2K and Samba were sometimes G incompatable.  The fixes are in SAMBA 2.0.7, and no one has admitted oniK either comp.os.vms or the SAMBA-VMS mailing list to have built SAMBA 2.0.7.   L From what I have read of the reports, sometimes W2K and SAMBA prior to 2.0.7# work ok, and sometimes they do not.o  H One of the symptoms mentioned was slow response with a lot of additional" packets showing up on the network.   -Johni wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only.   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Mar 2001 04:00:51 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com># Subject: Re: Support of old systemsn- Message-ID: <87bsr1bi18.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   4 hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) writes:  F > In article <3AB216DC.904E4354@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de>, "Dr. Otto Titze"% > <titze@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de> writes:   E >> Great VMS: I am running a mixed 6.2 and 7.2 cluster and still haved; >> old systems supported which I bought in the lat 80-ties.e  D >   Decade-old computers are very slow and very constrained, and are >   more expensive to support.  E >> But TRU64 Unix: I intended tu upgrade to TRU64 V5.1. Then I had tohF >> recognize that most of my older Alphas (3000/400, 200 4/233...) are >> no more supported.k  F >> Is'n that nice? Both operating systems are from Compaq. Obviously I. >> was too long a VMS user to understand this.  E >   Support of older systems (Alpha and VAX) and older peripherals isy< >   a large effort for OpenVMS Engineering.  Like Tru64 UNIXD >   engineering, OpenVMS engineering also regularly review our costs@ >   vs continued support of older systems, and whether the basicC >   requirements of newer releases can be met on the older systems.h  E I hope you keep one fully supported 780 for a while Hoff ( or go find,2 one if need be ). It would make such a nice add :)  , 25 years of support, and still going strong!   -- s< 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 15:21:21 -0600>1 From: "Dave Gudewicz" <david.gudewicz@abbott.com> 6 Subject: Re: Talk to Rich Marcello - Austin Texas area8 Message-ID: <98u051$eia$1@fizban.fizban.pprd.abbott.com>  G Alan Rickman of "are we there yet" Galaxy Quest fame?  I thought he was  great in this movie.   Dave...   . <Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com> wrote in message> news:OF2874392B.4A9CEB6F-ON88256A11.00640A05@foundation.com... >hJ > I'm in a suburb of Los Angeles, right next to Hollywood. Our local sheepK > will do anything to get in front of a camera, and if you don't believe medJ > go see a movie called "Blow Dry", with Alan Rickman. It's showing now... >g > Shanee >n >  >s >c >eG > Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>@k9.healthnet.com on 03/15/2001 
 > 11:23:02 PMt > ! > Sent by:  prep@k9.healthnet.comt >  >' > To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comn > cc:h > 9 > Subject:  Re: Talk to Rich Marcello - Austin Texas area  >- >-% > Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com writes:  > H > > If somebody in this meeting would be prepared to kidnap him, arrangeG > > for some compromising pictures to be taken with him and a couple oft/ > > sheep, then help us blackmail him...... ;-)n >e2 > Where are you going to get that sort of sheep... >> > --> > Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,9 > +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. B >                                              West Australia 60760 > Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked. >  >w >s   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 01:19:13 +0000i) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>u6 Subject: Re: Talk to Rich Marcello - Austin Texas area, Message-ID: <3AB2BB91.6826AD1C@infopuls.com>  " Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com wrote: > J > If somebody in this meeting would be prepared to kidnap him, arrange forM > some compromising pictures to be taken with him and a couple of sheep, then ! > help us blackmail him...... ;-)n >  > Shaner  > I'm in - I offer US$ 10'000.- for this: we can let him do what we want. :-)   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 20:08:01 +0100* From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER)0 Subject: Re: TDF change problems with V7.3 EFT2?* Message-ID: <3ab26491$1@news.kapsch.co.at>  Y In article <98ra14$4v4$1@news1.xs4all.nl>, "Bart Zorn" <B.Zorn@TrueBit.nospam.nl> writes:y# >The TDF change is due soon, again.m  ' Yup. One more night at the computer ;-)b  L >I am running OpenVMS G7.3 (EFT2) on my home Alpha, and to my dismay I foundC >out that the rule for the TDF changes in Europe are wrong (again).n >lJ >I don't recall which ECO it was, but finally we got it right in DTSS. TheL >rule for western Europe (+0100 standard, +0200 day light saving) should be:  I Why do they call it 'Western Europe' when in fact it is 'Middle Europe' ?IG Western Europe (like UK and Portugal) do have Western Europe Time whicheJ is the same as the GMT/UTC (The same bug is in M$ slackware). And the restH of western and middle europe do have 'Middle Europe' or 'Central Europe'E and I don't know why there are two names for the same timezone. Maybeo@ only to name different DST rules ? Would be silly, wouldn't it ?  1 >1 3600 MET 0 MET-1MET DST-2,M3.5.0/02,M10.5.0/033 > G >Essential is, that we  change the time on the last sunday of march andr7 >october. I thought that is the case is the US as well.s >s5 >HOWEVER, the new time changing code gives us, again:r > 1 >1 3600 MET 0 MET-1MET DST-2,M3.4.0/02,M10.4.0/03w >e3 >just like we had in the early days of DECnet-plus.j  : I don't remember that I ever saw such a rule. I always had  ! 	MET-1MET_DST-2,M3.5.0/2,M9.5.0/2    and later (IIRC after 1995)a  " 	MET-1MET_DST-2,M3.5.0/2,M10.5.0/2  : that means wrong time (not day) and MET_DST (not MET DST).  K I don't know how often I did fix it (in SYS$UPDATE:DTSS$TIMEZONE_RULES.DAT)yI but I do remember seeing the same bug with the wrong fall DST change time M in a CABLETRON SmartSwitchRouter (now called an ENTERASYS Expedit or similar)h  % Are you sure with your observations ?5   --  < Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER           Tel.    +43 1 81111-2651; Network and OpenVMS system manager  Fax.    +43 1 81111-888f< <<< 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 20:49:43 +0100p, From: "Bart Zorn" <B.Zorn@TrueBit.nospam.nl>0 Subject: Re: TDF change problems with V7.3 EFT2?* Message-ID: <98tqq3$o9m$1@news1.xs4all.nl>  7 Well, I am not someone who will easily say "I am sure"!<  F However, there is no reason to expect that you will have to be at yourK console next weekend, because the 4th sunday of this month is also the lastr one!  L My complaint did not regard the naming scheme. I stopped worrying abou that.I Most systems that I managed also ran PMDF, which allows you to use a more , sensible naming scheme, like +0100 or +0200.  J Like Charlie Hammond respondedn earlier in this group, OpenVMS engineering. has it somewhere on a list as a known problem.   Regards,  	 Bart Zornb  7 "Peter LANGSTOEGER" <eplan@kapsch.net> wrote in messageb$ news:3ab26491$1@news.kapsch.co.at...8 > In article <98ra14$4v4$1@news1.xs4all.nl>, "Bart Zorn"" <B.Zorn@TrueBit.nospam.nl> writes:% > >The TDF change is due soon, again.a >a) > Yup. One more night at the computer ;-)- >-H > >I am running OpenVMS G7.3 (EFT2) on my home Alpha, and to my dismay I found E > >out that the rule for the TDF changes in Europe are wrong (again).- > >-L > >I don't recall which ECO it was, but finally we got it right in DTSS. TheJ > >rule for western Europe (+0100 standard, +0200 day light saving) should be:- >-K > Why do they call it 'Western Europe' when in fact it is 'Middle Europe' ?BI > Western Europe (like UK and Portugal) do have Western Europe Time whichrL > is the same as the GMT/UTC (The same bug is in M$ slackware). And the restJ > of western and middle europe do have 'Middle Europe' or 'Central Europe'G > and I don't know why there are two names for the same timezone. MaybeoB > only to name different DST rules ? Would be silly, wouldn't it ? >n3 > >1 3600 MET 0 MET-1MET DST-2,M3.5.0/02,M10.5.0/03t > > I > >Essential is, that we  change the time on the last sunday of march andt9 > >october. I thought that is the case is the US as well.- > >-7 > >HOWEVER, the new time changing code gives us, again:  > >o3 > >1 3600 MET 0 MET-1MET DST-2,M3.4.0/02,M10.4.0/03r > > 5 > >just like we had in the early days of DECnet-plus.  > < > I don't remember that I ever saw such a rule. I always had >-" > MET-1MET_DST-2,M3.5.0/2,M9.5.0/2 >2 > and later (IIRC after 1995)l >z# > MET-1MET_DST-2,M3.5.0/2,M10.5.0/2: >:< > that means wrong time (not day) and MET_DST (not MET DST). >w) > I don't know how often I did fix it (inw# SYS$UPDATE:DTSS$TIMEZONE_RULES.DAT)EK > but I do remember seeing the same bug with the wrong fall DST change timesF > in a CABLETRON SmartSwitchRouter (now called an ENTERASYS Expedit or similar) >H' > Are you sure with your observations ?C >L > --> > Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER           Tel.    +43 1 81111-2651= > Network and OpenVMS system manager  Fax.    +43 1 81111-888>> > <<< KAPSCH AG  Wagenseilgasse 1     E-mail  eplan@kapsch.netJ > A-1121 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist"   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 20:52:31 +0100 , From: "Bart Zorn" <B.Zorn@TrueBit.nospam.nl>0 Subject: Re: TDF change problems with V7.3 EFT2?* Message-ID: <98tqv8$olo$1@news1.xs4all.nl>  K OK, thanks. Fortunately it makes no difference this year. The first time it-! will be a problem is spring 2002.n   Regards,  	 Bart Zorn-  E "Charlie Hammond" <hammond@not@peek.ppb.cpqcorp.net> wrote in messaged* news:zOqs6.68$eE2.2310@news.cpqcorp.net...K > I have verified that the situation desribed below still exists in recent,yE > internal baelevels of OpenVMS version 7.3, and I have reported thisC problem.J > I cannot make any promise or prediction about getting this fixed for the > V7.3 release.s >  >f8 > In article <98ra14$4v4$1@news1.xs4all.nl>, "Bart Zorn"" <B.Zorn@TrueBit.nospam.nl> writes:
 > >Hello all!w > >:% > >The TDF change is due soon, again.h > >wH > >I am running OpenVMS G7.3 (EFT2) on my home Alpha, and to my dismay I found E > >out that the rule for the TDF changes in Europe are wrong (again).a > >[it should be]: > ..3 > >1 3600 MET 0 MET-1MET DST-2,M3.5.0/02,M10.5.0/03r > ..7 > >HOWEVER, the new time changing code gives us, again:s > > 3 > >1 3600 MET 0 MET-1MET DST-2,M3.4.0/02,M10.4.0/03E > .. >  > --I >     Charlie Hammond -- Compaq Computer Corporation -- Pompano Beach  FLr USAnJ >        (hammond@not@peek.ppb.cpqcorp.net -- remove "@not" when replying)L >       All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's. >,   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 19:19:08 -0000R, From: "Richard Maher" <Tier3@btinternet.com>, Subject: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II3 Message-ID: <98tov2$c2c$1@neptunium.btinternet.com>l  	 Hi Larry,   ( Is sys$acme *ever* going to be released?   Regards Richard Mahero  D Larry Kilgallen <Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam> wrote in message- news:8e562ipPe$AF@eisner.encompasserve.org...l> > In article <871yrzy6po.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes:1 >n= > > The down side, is that the POSIX standard has fundamentalnB > > incompatabilities with VMS. File Protection/Permissions is oneH > > example. This *could* impact back into VMS. And a pile of others I'm	 > > sure.  >rC > Although you may not favor Microsoft's products, look at what VMSeE > did with Microsoft concepts in 7.2-1, and consider what the _could_e > do with Unix concepts. >iF > VMS 7.2-1 (Alpha-only) allows authentication for DCOM processes thatH > intertwines VMS and NT "credentials".  Just as each process has a UIC,F > privileges, and identifiers we all know and love from VMS, each DCOMF > _also_ has the corresponding NT baggage.  SIDs, keys and hash tokens9 > may be some of the names involved - I am not an expert.  >eK > If your DCOM process on VMS wants to read something from the VMS RegistryuJ > (I guess you can't understand why unless you are a DCOM person), control; > over whether you can read it (or write it) is governed byu _Microsoft_style_s) > ACLs on object inside the VMS Registry.o >tG > So here we have one VMS machine implementing two different protection @ > models, with different rules for ACL parsing, different Rights credentials, > etc. > I > There is no technical reason they could not extend that to three modelsoI > (or perhaps 255, or 32767, or wherever the documentation folks tell the2H > programmers to stop :-).  Now DEQ has not promised this sort of thing,F > but if you corner somebody like Andy Goldstein at a DECUS conferenceG > he will certainly indicate such a thing is possible, and it is highly.E > unlikely he will say "What a unique idea, nobody in VMS Developmentt( > had ever considered that possibility".   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Mar 2001 01:44:18 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>, Subject: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II- Message-ID: <87wv9pboct.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   / koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:t  > > In article <871yrzy6po.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholi! > <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes:a  = > > The down side, is that the POSIX standard has fundamentaloB > > incompatabilities with VMS. File Protection/Permissions is oneD > > example. This *could* impact back into VMS. And a pile of others
 > > I'm sure.   D > I'm hoping COE will force VMS to add real stream file support (notC > delimited by CR, LF, or CRLF, and not filled to complete 512 bytef
 > blocks).  ' File type UNDEFINED? Just like unix? :)P  % Be fun sorting it in the RTL. ( not )   6 Perhaps you could expand on what exactly you mean Bob.   -- D< 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: 16 Mar 2001 16:50:17 -0500- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)-, Subject: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II3 Message-ID: <19qv6kiPVFqV@eisner.encompasserve.org>Q  \ In article <87wv9pboct.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes: > E >> I'm hoping COE will force VMS to add real stream file support (notdD >> delimited by CR, LF, or CRLF, and not filled to complete 512 byte >> blocks).3 > ) > File type UNDEFINED? Just like unix? :)f > ' > Be fun sorting it in the RTL. ( not )n > 8 > Perhaps you could expand on what exactly you mean Bob.  C Yep, just a UNIX-like collection of bytes, no record definition, noi1 embedded delimiters.  Actually usefull sometimes..   Case in point:  F All the FTP clients and servers I've used store ASCII text in variableG length records, binary data as bytes in 512 byte blocks (UCX, Multinet,rC Wollongong).  Getting binary data from UNIX we had a requirement topH verify the checksum and length of a file (in bytes).  We couldn't verifyJ the length of the file, we could only verify that the length was right to G the next 512 bytes and that everything after the expected length was 0.o  G Our customer was happy with this, but why not provide a file form which-B could properly handle FTP binary transfer and track the last byte?  D There's also the occaisional need to write data as one structure andG read it as another.  On those rare occaisions byte streams are usefull.e  F IMHO their are a couple problems with putting in RMS support for this.G To the observer RMS seems to have an inbread need to somehow treat all .C files as record oriented, I don't knowif there is technical realitynF behind this observation.  The other problem is that "stream" now meansB CRLF delimitted records, it should have been stream-crlf.  I guess2 "undefined" will do, but that won't be as obvious.  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------? Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences Corporation = NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GroupAE                                 | please remove ".aspm" when replyinga   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 21:24:40 -05009 From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen)a, Subject: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II3 Message-ID: <0zjyVkdY5GY6@eisner.encompasserve.org>n  ` In article <H03R3I1gjm8X@malvm1.mala.bc.ca>, nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett) writes:0 > In article <871yrzy6po.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, 3 >    Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes:r >> .H >> I can see a BIG plus from COE: It will be a solid "We are not dying!"G >> peg to stomp on the fudsters with. 20 year is a BIG lump in any parti, >> of the computer world except IBM and VMS. >> G > G >     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 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.  ' Compaq does not have the rights to COE.p$ Sun does not have the rights to COE.= COE is an application environment owned by the US government.u; You will never get COE (except those of you in government).i  < The operating system issue is to provide an operating system< upon which COE can run, and that requires support for Posix,9 CDE and a bunch of other stuff from the Unix world.  Whate: Compaq has said they will do to VMS is make it possible to> run COE on VMS, and that requires they add a lot of Unix-style support.  9 The idea is that the Unix-style support will be useful toh< others, not that anyone besides the US government would ever want COE itself.   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 19:00:40 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett) , Subject: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II, Message-ID: <u87vZ$gfkk1C@malvm1.mala.bc.ca>  4 In article <0zjyVkdY5GY6@eisner.encompasserve.org>, >    Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) writes: >> @H >>     I'll probably be accused of being a fudster for asking this, but: >> DA >>     I thought this was true initially, but then I saw postingsa? >> suggesting COE is not something that is included in the basetC >> O/S, but is an "add-on" product. I'm not quite sure I understoodaC >> this or what it means, but I wonder if the 20 year commitment ish' >> meaningful to the general community.  > ) > Compaq does not have the rights to COE.n& > Sun does not have the rights to COE.? > COE is an application environment owned by the US government.h= > You will never get COE (except those of you in government).c > > > The operating system issue is to provide an operating system> > upon which COE can run, and that requires support for Posix,7 > CDE and a bunch of other stuff from the Unix world.     ;     Yes, that's what I meant - sorry it wasn't clearer. The-: question was whether the OS enhancements would be included; in the base OS or be a layered product ( like the old Posix : stuff ). It appears the answer is they'll make it into the; base O/S - though initially it will require a special-order : version of VMS which won't be distributed with the regular updates.  9    That still leaves the question of whether the "20 year 8 commitment" really means anything. Doesn't it ultimately5 just mean that if someone in the govenment buys a VMSt8 COE system Compaq must support it for 20 years - even if5 they were to stop making VMS available to the generale4 public in 5 years ( no, I'm not suggesting they have9 any intention of dropping VMS in 5 years, just suggestingo6 the COE commitment probably doesn't prevent them from  doing so ).   ; > The idea is that the Unix-style support will be useful toe> > others, not that anyone besides the US government would ever > want COE itself.  (   I understand that part and applaud it.   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Mar 2001 10:31:31 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>, Subject: Re: The Chris and Bill show. Act II- Message-ID: <873dcd9ldo.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   / koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:T  E > Yep, just a UNIX-like collection of bytes, no record definition, noo3 > embedded delimiters.  Actually usefull sometimes.a   > Case in point:  ? > All the FTP clients and servers I've used store ASCII text inuB > variable length records, binary data as bytes in 512 byte blocksF > (UCX, Multinet, Wollongong).  Getting binary data from UNIX we had aE > requirement to verify the checksum and length of a file (in bytes).hF > We couldn't verify the length of the file, we could only verify thatF > the length was right to the next 512 bytes and that everything after > the expected length was 0.  I > Our customer was happy with this, but why not provide a file form which D > could properly handle FTP binary transfer and track the last byte?  J Ah, yes. The 'undefined is too ugly, we will fuck with your mind and claimE it is 512 byte "records" '... I gave up bitching about this stupidityo
 years ago!  F On that score, I agree 100% with you. It is anti-functional, and plainF broken. UDF will allow you to set the EOF where ever it really is. 512; byte records, by definition *must* be modulo 512 byte long.y  F > There's also the occaisional need to write data as one structure andI > read it as another.  On those rare occaisions byte streams are usefull.   H > IMHO their are a couple problems with putting in RMS support for this.I > To the observer RMS seems to have an inbread need to somehow treat all aE > files as record oriented, I don't knowif there is technical reality9H > behind this observation.  The other problem is that "stream" now meansD > CRLF delimitted records, it should have been stream-crlf.  I guess4 > "undefined" will do, but that won't be as obvious.  G That is for the good reason that all except for UDF *are* records! DontRJ forget that the LF, or CR, or CRLF, or count prefix are record delimiters.K If you read in a file with stmlf attribs, and no cariage control you should H never see a LF in you input. Alas, if your data has O12 in it, that will be eaten as well.A  F One of the things RSX did right, and VMS broke. Like sequence numbers, any one remember them?   -- s< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.B@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.   ------------------------------   Date: 16 Mar 2001 06:15:30 CDT= From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.412538.killspam.015a (Wayne Sewell)a7 Subject: Re: the Northeast Digital Systems Ebay Folliesh. Message-ID: <A+vf2LICQB+i@tachxxsoftxxconsult>  k In article <hMbs6.11690$a3.26482@typhoon.aracnet.com>, "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@shell1.aracnet.com> writes:i: > Bradford J. Hamilton <hamilton@encompasserve.org> wrote:J >> Your suspicions are correct - they are selling for a very high reserve. >  >> If you go to their website: > 2 >> http://www.northeastdigital.com/Alphacenter.htm > : > Ouch.  You're better off buying from Island Computers!    L No way in hell.  I wouldn't buy from Island if they were selling 50 wildfire systems for a dollar.e   >What gets me about M > the systems Northeast is selling is that they're really nice sounding boxese > with horrible video cards!  L Well, that normally wouldn't be a factor, since I have only one machine thatN requires video, all others putting their windows on that one screen.  However,M this time I am looking to replace the display machine, so I do care about the  video card.        -- 0O ===============================================================================eM Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxxh: http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-)oO ===============================================================================tO Dean Wormer to Flounder: "Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."d   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 20:35:35 -05005- From: "Island Computers" <sales@islandco.com>t7 Subject: Re: the Northeast Digital Systems Ebay Folliesh/ Message-ID: <tb5fn748sdf290@corp.supernews.com>   
 Really ???  J I don't understand the hostility but as someone said in a small restaurant? in a little village slightly north of Paris "Chacun a son gout"d   DT   -- sales@islandco.comJ "Wayne Sewell" <wayne@tachysoft.xxx.412538.killspam.015a> wrote in message( news:A+vf2LICQB+i@tachxxsoftxxconsult...H | In article <hMbs6.11690$a3.26482@typhoon.aracnet.com>, "Zane H. Healy"$ <healyzh@shell1.aracnet.com> writes:< | > Bradford J. Hamilton <hamilton@encompasserve.org> wrote:L | >> Your suspicions are correct - they are selling for a very high reserve. | >w  | >> If you go to their website: | >E4 | >> http://www.northeastdigital.com/Alphacenter.htm | > : | > Ouch.  You're better off buying from Island Computers! |-E | No way in hell.  I wouldn't buy from Island if they were selling 50w wildfire | systems for a dollar.. |  | >What gets me about I | > the systems Northeast is selling is that they're really nice soundingA boxes  | > with horrible video cards! |'I | Well, that normally wouldn't be a factor, since I have only one machine: thatF | requires video, all others putting their windows on that one screen. However,K | this time I am looking to replace the display machine, so I do care abouts thet
 | video card.s |  |f |n | -- |eL ============================================================================ ===-: | Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738 wayne@tachysoft.xxxz: | http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.htmlH | change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot :-)  |nL ============================================================================ ===rJ | Dean Wormer to Flounder: "Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life."   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Mar 2001 18:52:39 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett) 7 Subject: Re: the Northeast Digital Systems Ebay Follies(, Message-ID: <RS$e2KxXyjd0@malvm1.mala.bc.ca>  0 In article <tb5fn748sdf290@corp.supernews.com>, / "Island Computers" <sales@islandco.com> writes:.   > Really ??? > L > I don't understand the hostility but as someone said in a small restaurantA > in a little village slightly north of Paris "Chacun a son gout"2 >   <    Well when you get those 50/$1 Wildfire systems be sure to give me a call :-)  B    If Wayne doesn't want to buy from you that's more available for the rest of us.n   > DT >  > -- > sales@islandco.comL > "Wayne Sewell" <wayne@tachysoft.xxx.412538.killspam.015a> wrote in message* > news:A+vf2LICQB+i@tachxxsoftxxconsult...J > | In article <hMbs6.11690$a3.26482@typhoon.aracnet.com>, "Zane H. Healy"& > <healyzh@shell1.aracnet.com> writes:> > | > Bradford J. Hamilton <hamilton@encompasserve.org> wrote:N > | >> Your suspicions are correct - they are selling for a very high reserve. > | >e" > | >> If you go to their website: > | >e6 > | >> http://www.northeastdigital.com/Alphacenter.htm > | >y< > | > Ouch.  You're better off buying from Island Computers! > |mG > | No way in hell.  I wouldn't buy from Island if they were selling 50n
 > wildfire > | systems for a dollar.i > |o > | >What gets me abouteK > | > the systems Northeast is selling is that they're really nice sounding  > boxes   > | > with horrible video cards! > |oK > | Well, that normally wouldn't be a factor, since I have only one machine  > thatH > | requires video, all others putting their windows on that one screen.
 > However,M > | this time I am looking to replace the display machine, so I do care abouts > thec > | video card.I > |  > |l > |  > | -- > |rN > ============================================================================ > === < > | Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738 > wayne@tachysoft.xxx < > | http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.htmlJ > | change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot > :-)s > |cN > ============================================================================ > ===sL > | Dean Wormer to Flounder: "Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through > life." >  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 14:25:30 -0500 , From: Howard S Shubs <hshubs@mindspring.com> Subject: TURBOchannel graphics> Message-ID: <hshubs-BF9142.14252816032001@news.mindspring.com>  A Does anyone know where I can find driver-level information about o TURBOchannel video cards?    -- dG "...run in circles, scream and shout!"    I hope you have good backups.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 01:13:55 +0100a+ From: Arne Bergseth <Arne.Bergseth@dnv.com>t" Subject: Re: TURBOchannel graphics' Message-ID: <3AB2AC42.E4C98A34@dnv.com>i  < The NetBSD people has picked up some specifications for some& TURBOchannel devices and collected in:D ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/misc/dec-docs/index.html#EK-369AA-OD  % There is a book published by Digital: &   Writing OpenVMS device drivers in C,. but it does not contain details about devices.  
 Arne Bergsetha     Howard S Shubs wrote:s  B > Does anyone know where I can find driver-level information about > TURBOchannel video cards?t >l >e   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 19:58:40 -0500m, From: Howard S Shubs <hshubs@mindspring.com>" Subject: Re: TURBOchannel graphics> Message-ID: <hshubs-B43662.19584016032001@news.mindspring.com>  ' In article <3AB2AC42.E4C98A34@dnv.com>,5-  Arne Bergseth <Arne.Bergseth@dnv.com> wrote:s  = >The NetBSD people has picked up some specifications for someh' >TURBOchannel devices and collected in:mE >ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/misc/dec-docs/index.html#EK-369AA-ODn  I Pardon, but is that a HTTP reference or an FTP reference?  It's confused   as written.    --  G "...run in circles, scream and shout!"    I hope you have good backups.a   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Mar 2001 02:47:10 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>7 Subject: Re: Volume Shadowing merge rates on Big Disks?s- Message-ID: <87ofv1blg1.fsf@prep.synonet.com>Q  I Well, in the way of Murphy, Netscape and a doubledealloc bug check, I goty a repeat of the test :(>  = The alpha dived, and the merge completed with 35 min uptime. o   -- d< 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 18:51:36 -0600m/ From: Gloria Griffith <qusgagh@am1.ericsson.se> ! Subject: VPM$SERVER ERROR MESSAGEe/ Message-ID: <3AB2B517.E13BB805@am1.ericsson.se>i  & --------------CB6AC3A0F8F8185507893E8F* Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bitU   I need the advice of a "VMS"H guru/expert/wizard/technican/RPVA/vizer/specialist/dinasour OR  whatever@ you prefer to be called. (yes I read all of the postings to thisH newsgroup.....I pick up a lot of good information and sometimes you guysD are very  entertaining.......of course I enjoy reading log files too ;-}   D Now  to business, I have cut and pasted a message I am getting on myE Alpha OVMS 7.1-2 system.  I have tried  many things to fix this and IaB have applied the patches that were on the compaq ftp site but thisG blasted message keeps popping up. I bet my bunions that one of you guysfE knows how to fix this.....now if you will just share that informationt6 with a novice it will be a glorious ST Paddy's indeed!  8 %%%%%%%%%%%  OPCOM  16-MAR-2001 18:17:55.71  %%%%%%%%%%%( Message from user AUDIT$SERVER on GC01BMB Security alarm (SECURITY) and security audit (SECURITY) on GC01BM,
 system id: 10, 25+ Auditable event:          Privilege failure-G Event information:        SETPRV not used to enable permanent privilege  not auth2 orized to process (SET PROCESS/PRIVILEGE, $SETPRV)1 Event time:               16-MAR-2001 18:17:55.71 " PID:                      21A5031C( Process name:             MONITOR_SERVER$ Username:                 VPM$SERVER& Process owner:            [VPM$SERVER] New privileges:n1 CMKRNL,CMEXEC,SYSNAM,GRPNAM,ALLSPOOL,IMPERSONATE,d  6 DIAGNOSE,LOG_IO,GROUP,ACNT,PRMCEB,PRMMBX,PSWAPM,ALTPRI ,s  5 SETPRV,TMPMBX,WORLD,MOUNT,OPER,EXQUOTA,NETMBX,VOLPRO,,  6 PHY_IO,BUGCHK,PRMGBL,SYSGBL,PFNMAP,SHMEM,SYSPRV,BYPASS ,t  5 SYSLCK,SHARE,UPGRADE,DOWNGRADE,GRPPRV,READALL,IMPORT,h(                           AUDIT,SECURITY' Old privileges:           TMPMBX,NETMBXl  Privileges missing:       SETPRV                                  & --------------CB6AC3A0F8F8185507893E8F) Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bite  > <!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en"> <html>f I need the advice of a "VMS" guru<font face="">/expert/wizard/technican/RPVA/vizer/specialist/dinasourH </font>OR&nbsp; whatever you prefer to be called. (yes I read all of theF postings to this newsgroup.....I pick up a lot of good information andF sometimes you guys are very&nbsp; entertaining.......of course I enjoy reading log files too ;-}&nbsp;iF <p>Now&nbsp; to business, I have cut and pasted a message I am gettingF on my Alpha OVMS 7.1-2 system.&nbsp; I have tried&nbsp; many things toH fix this and I have applied the patches that were on the compaq ftp siteG but this blasted message keeps popping up. I bet my bunions that one ofsN you guys knows how to fix this.....now if you will just share that information< with a novice it will be a glorious ST Paddy's indeed!&nbsp;J <p>%%%%%%%%%%%&nbsp; OPCOM&nbsp; 16-MAR-2001 18:17:55.71&nbsp; %%%%%%%%%%%, <br>Message from user AUDIT$SERVER on GC01BMF <br>Security alarm (SECURITY) and security audit (SECURITY) on GC01BM,
 system id: 10  <br>25J <br>Auditable event:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Privilege failureaG <br>Event information:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; SETPRVa/ not used to enable permanent privilege not auth 6 <br>orized to process (SET PROCESS/PRIVILEGE, $SETPRV)c <br>Event time:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;I 16-MAR-2001 18:17:55.71i <br>PID:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 21A5031CY <br>Process name:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;h MONITOR_SERVERm <br>Username:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;O
 VPM$SERVERT <br>Process owner:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [VPM$SERVER]O <br>New privileges:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 1 CMKRNL,CMEXEC,SYSNAM,GRPNAM,ALLSPOOL,IMPERSONATE,  <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6 DIAGNOSE,LOG_IO,GROUP,ACNT,PRMCEB,PRMMBX,PSWAPM,ALTPRI <br>,  <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5 SETPRV,TMPMBX,WORLD,MOUNT,OPER,EXQUOTA,NETMBX,VOLPRO,h <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;6 PHY_IO,BUGCHK,PRMGBL,SYSGBL,PFNMAP,SHMEM,SYSPRV,BYPASS <br>,u <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;5 SYSLCK,SHARE,UPGRADE,DOWNGRADE,GRPPRV,READALL,IMPORT,  <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; AUDIT,SECURITYO <br>Old privileges:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;i
 TMPMBX,NETMBX-B <br>Privileges missing:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; SETPRV
 <br>&nbsp;
 <br>&nbsp;
 <br>&nbsp;
 <br>&nbsp;
 <br>&nbsp;
 <br>&nbsp;
 <br>&nbsp;
 <br>&nbsp;	 <p>&nbsp;s
 <br>&nbsp;
 <br>&nbsp;
 <br>&nbsp;
 <br>&nbsp;
 <br>&nbsp;<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</html>w  ( --------------CB6AC3A0F8F8185507893E8F--   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Mar 2001 10:40:59 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>% Subject: Re: VPM$SERVER ERROR MESSAGEh- Message-ID: <87wv9p86dg.fsf@prep.synonet.com>e  1 Gloria Griffith <qusgagh@am1.ericsson.se> writes:   ) > Old privileges:           TMPMBX,NETMBXc" > Privileges missing:       SETPRV  3 Is VPM installed with the correct privs? Or at all?    --  < 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: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 00:15:26 -0600o/ From: Gloria Griffith <qusgagh@am1.ericsson.se>e% Subject: Re: VPM$SERVER ERROR MESSAGEn/ Message-ID: <3AB300FE.36FD401E@am1.ericsson.se>m   Yes, and it looks like this:   $ install list vpm/fulls  ) DISK$ALPHASYS:<SYS0.SYSCOMMON.SYSEXE>.EXEh)    VPM;1            Open Hdr          Prv &         Entry access count         = 0*         Current / Maximum shared   = 1 / 0>         Privileges = SYSNAM PSWAPM ALTPRI TMPMBX NETMBX SYSPRV>         Authorized = SYSNAM PSWAPM ALTPRI TMPMBX NETMBX SYSPRV  A So do I just need to add SETPRV to the privileges?  Can I do that F without a whole new install command?  Would you please send me how you+ think it should be installed? (the command)   C Thanks for your response....I am here because one of my sites had alF power loss and I had to check out my systems.  What is your excuse for working so late? Love your job?e     Paul Repacholi wrote:R  3 > Gloria Griffith <qusgagh@am1.ericsson.se> writes:  > + > > Old privileges:           TMPMBX,NETMBXm$ > > Privileges missing:       SETPRV > 5 > Is VPM installed with the correct privs? Or at all?e >t > --> > Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,9 > +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda..B >                                              West Australia 60760 > Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 00:16:22 -0600 / From: Gloria Griffith <qusgagh@am1.ericsson.se>r% Subject: Re: VPM$SERVER ERROR MESSAGEr/ Message-ID: <3AB30136.4C0A4A60@am1.ericsson.se>t   Yes, and it looks like this:   $ install list vpm/fullt  ) DISK$ALPHASYS:<SYS0.SYSCOMMON.SYSEXE>.EXEd)    VPM;1            Open Hdr          Prvu&         Entry access count         = 0*         Current / Maximum shared   = 1 / 0>         Privileges = SYSNAM PSWAPM ALTPRI TMPMBX NETMBX SYSPRV>         Authorized = SYSNAM PSWAPM ALTPRI TMPMBX NETMBX SYSPRV  A So do I just need to add SETPRV to the privileges?  Can I do thatdF without a whole new install command?  Would you please send me how you+ think it should be installed? (the command)g  C Thanks for your response....I am here because one of my sites had a F power loss and I had to check out my systems.  What is your excuse for working so late? Love your job?=     Paul Repacholi wrote:=  3 > Gloria Griffith <qusgagh@am1.ericsson.se> writes:a >C+ > > Old privileges:           TMPMBX,NETMBXh$ > > Privileges missing:       SETPRV >m5 > Is VPM installed with the correct privs? Or at all?o >  > --> > Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,9 > +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.eB >                                              West Australia 60760 > Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 04:13:59 +0100t2 From: martin@radiogaga.harz.de (Martin Vorlaender)* Subject: Re: [Q] skip [vms$common] parsing; Message-ID: <3ab2d677.524144494f47414741@radiogaga.harz.de>y  6 David J. Dachtera (djesys.nospam@earthlink.net) wrote:F > there is currently no easy way to find all the aliases for any file.   $ DEFINE DFU$NOSMG 1	 $ MCR DFUa DFU> dir/alias sys$sysdevice:aI %DFU-I-INDSCAN, Making directory table for SYS$SYSDEVICE: (VAXMV$DKA300:)<, %DFU-I-DIRSCAN, Scanning 1189 directories...0 VAXMV$DKA300:[000000]SYSMAINT.DIR;1 is alias for(  VAXMV$DKA300:[VMS$COMMON]SYSMAINT.DIR;1/ VAXMV$DKA300:[SYSE]SYSCOMMON.DIR;1 is alias forr&  VAXMV$DKA300:[000000]VMS$COMMON.DIR;1/ VAXMV$DKA300:[SYS0]SYSCOMMON.DIR;1 is alias for &  VAXMV$DKA300:[000000]VMS$COMMON.DIR;1I VAXMV$DKA300:[USER.MV.PROJEKTE.LIB.FREETYPE-1_3.LIB]FILE.C;1 is alias foro?  VAXMV$DKA300:[USER.MV.PROJEKTE.LIB.FREETYPE-1_3.LIB]TTFILE.C;1eL VAXMV$DKA300:[USER.MV.PROJEKTE.LIB.FREETYPE-1_3.LIB]FT_CONF.H;1 is alias forI  VAXMV$DKA300:[USER.MV.PROJEKTE.LIB.FREETYPE-1_3.LIB.ARCH.VMS]FT_CONF.H;1dK VAXMV$DKA300:[USER.MV.PROJEKTE.LIB.FREETYPE-1_3.LIB]MEMORY.C;1 is alias fornA  VAXMV$DKA300:[USER.MV.PROJEKTE.LIB.FREETYPE-1_3.LIB]TTMEMORY.C;1dJ VAXMV$DKA300:[USER.MV.PROJEKTE.LIB.FREETYPE-1_3.LIB]MUTEX.C;1 is alias for@  VAXMV$DKA300:[USER.MV.PROJEKTE.LIB.FREETYPE-1_3.LIB]TTMUTEX.C;1  ' %DFU-S-DONE, Directories scanned : 1189    cu,=   Martin -- =J One OS to rule them all       | Martin Vorlaender  |  VMS & WNT programmer7 One OS to find them           | work: mv@pdv-systeme.dehJ One OS to bring them all      |   http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/> And in the Darkness bind them.| home: martin@radiogaga.harz.de   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.151 ************************