1 INFO-VAX	Tue, 20 Mar 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 157       Contents:' Re: - OpenVMS ever to be on Intel chip? . Re: Building a VAX 3100 from the ground up 8-(- Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut - Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut  Re: CSWS and log filter  Datatrieve - DTR Re: Datatrieve - DTR@ DEC C v6.2-008, OpenVMS v7.2-1H1:  <string.h> definition problemD Re: DEC C v6.2-008, OpenVMS v7.2-1H1:  <string.h> definition problemD Re: DEC C v6.2-008, OpenVMS v7.2-1H1:  <string.h> definition problemD Re: DEC C v6.2-008, OpenVMS v7.2-1H1:  <string.h> definition problemD Re: DEC C v6.2-008, OpenVMS v7.2-1H1:  <string.h> definition problem@ Re: DECnet V on a hobbyist system vs replacing it with DECnet IVP Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS     EducationalProgramN Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS Educati onalProgram)M RE: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS EducationalProgram) P Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducationalProgram) ProP Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducationalProgram) Pro Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!  Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!  Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!  Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!  Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!  Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!  Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!  Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!  Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven! ! FTP Performance: UCX vs. Multinet % Re: FTP Performance: UCX vs. Multinet  Joke/ Re: LDAP Client - Anyone Ported to OpenVMS Yet? ! Re: Migrating from vms 6.2 to 7.2 " Re: One For the CI Cluster Experts" Re: One For the CI Cluster Experts 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: oracle question 0 Perceptics LaserStar12 3.3 distro tape (tk50)...4 Re: Perceptics LaserStar12 3.3 distro tape (tk50)...4 Re: Perceptics LaserStar12 3.3 distro tape (tk50)...# Re: POSIX Streams, File Permissions  RMS Alpha COBOL and RMS-STS  Re: RMS Alpha COBOL and RMS-STS  RE: RMS Alpha COBOL and RMS-STS  Re: Support of old systems Support of old systems- Re: Talk to Rich Marcello - Austin Texas area  TCPIP V5.1 vs TCPIP V5.0A ECO 2 # Re: TCPIP V5.1 vs TCPIP V5.0A ECO 2 $ The Truth about Free Pager Offers... Re: TURBOchannel graphics  Re: TURBOchannel graphics > Re: VMS-based webservers (was Re: OpenVMS Educational Program)> Re: VMS-based webservers (was Re: OpenVMS Educational Program)! Re: [Q] skip [vms$common] parsing ! Re: [Q] skip [vms$common] parsing ! Re: [Q] skip [vms$common] parsing   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 19 Mar 2001 14:59:04 -0500) From: Roland Roberts <roland@rlenter.com> 0 Subject: Re: - OpenVMS ever to be on Intel chip?- Message-ID: <m2zoehpm2f.fsf@tycho.rlent.pnet>   D >>>>> "Terry" == Terry C Shannon <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes:  F     Terry> Separately, there was a midnight project to port VMS to theF     Terry> Mach kernel. The project was done (half-baked, actually) atC     Terry> Carnegie Mellon University IIRC.  Some of the incomplete E     Terry> code--which may well have a few facets of Emerald embedded :     Terry> in it--is said to be floating around somewhere.  D Once upon a time, there were some papers on the web on this project.< Richard Levitte used to have copies or links on his web siteD (http://www.lp.se/), but I can't find them there anymore.  They wereC discussed as part of a "FreeVMS" project that died out when DEC and 3 then Compaq decide to open up the hobbyist program.   E I think I have hardcopies at home; if anyone is interested, I can try < to post a reference.  The project ran VMS services on a MachF microkernel which was running BSD as the primary OS.  The hardware wasE still a VAX as the authors wanted to be able to avoid having to write D everything from scratch: using VAX hardware meant VMS binaries could
 be run....   roland --    		       PGP Key ID: 66 BC 3B CDA Roland B. Roberts, PhD                             RL Enterprises A roland@rlenter.com                     76-15 113th Street, Apt 3B A rbroberts@acm.org                          Forest Hills, NY 11375    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 21:58:56 +0000 + From: "antonio.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org> 7 Subject: Re: Building a VAX 3100 from the ground up 8-( ' Message-ID: <3AB68120.AAB21CA5@iee.org>    "Cannell, David M." wrote: > L > Looks like we lost a 3100's system disk last night.  It also looks like it6 > had been improperly backed up and is not restorable.  	 Big Oops.   K > Apparently on site are the original systems tapes but no documentation of G > course.  Some hints would be welcome for starting the rebuild of this J > system.  Do we have to boot SDA from the tape first or should one of the5 > tapes boot directly into the system load procedure?    Start here:   :   http://www.openvms.compaq.com:8000/index.html#ovmsdocset  > In particulare, this manual is the Installation guide for VAX:  >   http://www.openvms.compaq.com:8000/72final/6521/6521pro.html  4 Basically you boot SAB (standalone backup) from tape6 (I forget whether that's a separate tape of the A tape4 or the B tape ... I switched to CD soo long ago...).  4 Assuming your tape drive is MKA400: then from memory you need something like:   	>>> B MKA400:   Antonio      --     --------------- - Antonio Carlini             arcarlini@iee.org    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 11:09:39 -0800 ! From: Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com 6 Subject: Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cutD Message-ID: <OF1DCFE092.D0C62173-ON88256A14.00691DC2@foundation.com>  H Demand to speak to a supervisor, and ask them why their staff don't knowI about Alphas. If you get the same response (ie What's Alpha?), repeat the K process until you reach someone who knows, and beat them verbally about the 2 head until they promise to get some training done.   Shane           7 SteveSov <st3v3sov@yahoo.com> on 03/16/2001 08:30:21 AM   / Please respond to Use.e.for.three@healthnet.com    To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com  cc:   7 Subject:  Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut          Islandco wrote:  > 8 > Compaq will be merging Commercial and Consumer groups. > G > Oh God... It is difficult enough convincing Compaq employees at their J > customer service number that their company sells Commercial systems with8 > Alpha chips in them - not just PC's and Pro-whatevers.E > I have been repeatedly told that "We don't have any products called  Alpha" > ... {snip}  ! Which 800 number are you calling?    Steve    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 20:01:50 GMT 4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>6 Subject: Re: Compaq earnings low, 5,000 jobs to be cut7 Message-ID: <OAtt6.41$Wz.14939@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net>   . <Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com> wrote in message> news:OF1DCFE092.D0C62173-ON88256A14.00691DC2@foundation.com... > J > Demand to speak to a supervisor, and ask them why their staff don't knowK > about Alphas. If you get the same response (ie What's Alpha?), repeat the I > process until you reach someone who knows, and beat them verbally about  the 4 > head until they promise to get some training done. >  > Shane  >   J Good luck. During a recent foray to the Western Provinces, I collected theL names of three clueless Compaq salesdroids who chant in unison "Alpha is for( Himalaya, Intel is for Everything Else."  ; Perhaps the headcount reduction should be amended to 5,003.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 16:10:12 -0500 3 From: "Gaitan D'Antoni" <gaitan.dantoni@compaq.com>   Subject: Re: CSWS and log filter1 Message-ID: <7But6.145$eE2.8450@news.cpqcorp.net>   ) Have you checked the log filesfor errors? 4 APACHE$ROOT:[LOGS]*.* and APACHE$ROOT:[000000]*.LOG.  H The CSWS processes run in the context of the APACHE$WWW account which isL non-privileged. Make sure the file protection on your .EXE file is such that APACHE$WWW has RE access.    -- Gaitan D'Antoni . Apache Web Server for OpenVMS Technical LeaderC http://www.openvms.compaq.com/openvms/products/ips/apache/csws.html  Compaq Computer Corporation   G "Martin Vorlaender" <martin.vorlaender@pdv-systeme.de> wrote in message . news:98q45u$358gs$1@ID-56200.news.dfncis.de... > Hi everyone, > I > after getting CSWS to work with TCPware I'm hitting the next roadblock:  > I > It seems that log filters (like cronolog [1], recommended in the Apache 5 > FAQ [2]) don't work. Here's what I tried to set up:  > $ > - Compile & link cronolog sources,2 >   copy image to APACHE$ROOT:[000000]CRONOLOG.EXE > @ > - Insert a call to APACHE$ROOT:[000000]DEFINE_CRONLOG.COM intoH >   APACHE$SERVER.COM (after MOD_JSERV start, just before server start), >   which reads  > 4 > $! Define CRONOLOG as an automatic foreign command > $ . > $ ! Prepend APACHE$ROOT:[000000] to DCL$PATH4 > $ max_index = F$TRNLNM("DCL$PATH",,,,,"MAX_INDEX")	 > $ i = 0   > $ eqv = "APACHE$ROOT:[000000]"+ > $ IF max_index .EQS. "" THEN GOTO eqvdone  > $ eqvloop:/ > $   eqv = eqv + "," + F$TRNLNM("DCL$PATH",,i)  > $   i = i + 1 + > $   IF i .LE. max_index THEN GOTO eqvloop  > $ eqvdone: > $ DEFINE/JOB DCL$PATH 'eqv'  > $ - > $ ! Remove process level definition, if any ? > $ IF F$TRNLNM("DCL$PATH","LNM$PROCESS_TABLE") .NES. "" THEN -   >      DEASSIGN/PROCESS DCL$PATH > $  > $ EXIT > 2 > - modify APACHE$ROOT:[CONF]HTTPD.CONF to include > E >   CustomLog "|cronolog /apache$specific/logs/AP%y%m%d.log" combined  >  >   I also tried > 0 >   CustomLog "|MCR apache$root:[000000]cronolog. > /apache$specific/logs/AP%y%m%d.log" combined >  > - start CSWS > > > - find that no log files (besides JServ logs) get created... > , > Does anyone have an idea what to try next? >  > cu, 
 >   Martin > 5 > [1] http://www.ford-mason.co.uk/resources/cronolog/ 7 > [2] http://httpd.apache.org/docs/misc/FAQ.html#rotate  >  > --L > One OS to rule them all       | Martin Vorlaender  |  VMS & WNT programmer9 > One OS to find them           | work: mv@pdv-systeme.de ! > One OS to bring them all      | * > http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/@ > And in the Darkness bind them.| home: martin@radiogaga.harz.de >  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 21:36:23 -0800 ( From: "calchas" <calchas982@yahoo.co.uk> Subject: Datatrieve - DTR 0 Message-ID: <BZut6.1518$_W2.2160@news.indigo.ie>  B Does anyone know of a book (still in print) or an online source of! information regarding DataTrieve.    Thanks in advance  Calchas    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 22:23:16 GMT 2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) Subject: Re: Datatrieve - DTR 1 Message-ID: <oFvt6.150$eE2.8499@news.cpqcorp.net>   [ In article <BZut6.1518$_W2.2160@news.indigo.ie>, "calchas" <calchas982@yahoo.co.uk> writes: C :Does anyone know of a book (still in print) or an online source of " :information regarding DataTrieve.  K   The Datatrieve documentation is (AFAIK) available in hardcopy and CD-ROM. J   If you want free Datatrieve documentation, no, I don't know of a source.  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: 19 Mar 2001 20:27:23 GMT= From: jlw@psulias.psu.edu (j.lance wilkinson, (814) 865-1818) I Subject: DEC C v6.2-008, OpenVMS v7.2-1H1:  <string.h> definition problem , Message-ID: <995q3b$18hi@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>  E I've got a chunk of code that for some time had no trouble compiling:    	#include <string.h> 	#ifndef strncasecmp8 	  int strncasecmp(char *string1, char *string2, int n); 	#endif   M The code was written on the assumption that the strncasecmp() function wasn't M implemented yet for DEC C, but eventually would be.  This was supposed to get L me around the situation in the future when it was implemented an appeared inH <string.h> -- eliminating changes to the code while also eliminating the! profile when it became redundant.   F After moving to this version of the DEC C compiler, RTS and libraries,: however, it seems that my anticipated handling was flawed:L +------------------------------- cut here ---------------------------------+B Source Listing     19-MAR-2001 14:57:30  Compaq C V6.2-008  Page 1O                    19-MAR-2001 14:57:25  PMDF_ROOT:[WWW.LIAS.SRC]TESTSTRING.C;6      1 #include <string.h>  564  	    565 #ifndef strncasecmp@ 	    566   int strncasecmp(char *string1, char *string2, int n);: 		......1                                                 M %CC-W-MISMATPARAM, (1) In this declaration, parameter 1 has a different type  : than specified in an earlier declaration of this function.  K %CC-E-NOTCOMPAT, (1) In this declaration, the type of "strncasecmp" is not  L compatible with the type of a previous declaration of "strncasecmp" at line 8 number 226 in file SYS$COMMON:[SYSLIB]DECC$RTLDEF.TLB;5.L +------------------------------- cut here ---------------------------------+  L To my eye, this looks like the compiler can't make up its mind if the symbolH (strncasecmp) is defined (#ifndef takes the true path, so it must NOT beE defined) or if it isn't (prototype declaration seems to trip over the L definition that obviously exists inside STRING.H, which I've printed off and indeed it appears in there).  I What gives, besides the fact I was too clever for my own good apparently?   M +-"Never Underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of mag tapes"--+ N | J.Lance Wilkinson ("Lance")            InterNet:  Lance.Wilkinson@psu.edu | M | Systems Design Specialist - Lead       AT&T:      (814) 865-1818          | M | Library Computing Services             FAX:       (814) 863-3560          | M | E3 Paterno Library                     "I'd rather be dancing..."         | M | Penn State University         A host is a host from coast to coast,       | M | University Park, PA 16802     And no one will talk to a host that's close | M | <postmaster@psulias.psu.edu>  Unless the host that isn't close            | M | VMS GopherMeister             Is busy, hung or dead.                      | M +------"He's dead, Jim. I'll get his tricorder. You take his wallet."-------+ 9                 [apologies to DeForest Kelley, 1920-1999] 3 <A Href="http://perdita.lcs.psu.edu">home page</a>  J <a Href="http://perdita.lcs.psu.edu/junkdec.htm">junk mail declaration</a>   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 16:02:37 -0500 " From: Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org>M Subject: Re: DEC C v6.2-008, OpenVMS v7.2-1H1:  <string.h> definition problem : Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.0.20010319160038.02319d20@24.8.96.48>  E At 08:27 PM 3/19/2001 +0000, j.lance wilkinson, (814) 865-1818 wrote: F >I've got a chunk of code that for some time had no trouble compiling: >  >         #include <string.h>  >         #ifndef strncasecmp A >           int strncasecmp(char *string1, char *string2, int n);  >         #endif  H This will only work if strncasecmp is defined via #define. If there's a I real function of this name it won't work. (Or, rather, the #ifndef won't  2 see it as defined, since you never #defined it...)  C There's no good way to check and see if a function exists with C's  K preprocessor. You need to have some sort of config file for that (with the  3 values set via a bunch of probe programs, probably)    					Dan  I --------------------------------------"it's like this"------------------- 2 Dan Sugalski                          even samurai? dan@sidhe.org                         have teddy bears and even ;                                       teddy bears get drunk    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Mar 2001 16:09:48 -05003 From: malmberg@encompasserve.org (John E. Malmberg) M Subject: Re: DEC C v6.2-008, OpenVMS v7.2-1H1:  <string.h> definition problem 3 Message-ID: <R2YsJWG07it5@eisner.encompasserve.org>   , In article <995q3b$18hi@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>,E jlw@psulias.psu.education (j.lance wilkinson, (814) 865-1818) writes:nG > I've got a chunk of code that for some time had no trouble compiling:p >( > 	#include <string.h> > 	#ifndef strncasecmp: > 	  int strncasecmp(char *string1, char *string2, int n);	 > 	#endife > H > The code was written on the assumption that the strncasecmp() functionF > wasn't implemented yet for DEC C, but eventually would be.  This wasC > supposed to get me around the situation in the future when it was<J > implemented an appeared in <string.h> -- eliminating changes to the code> > while also eliminating the profile when it became redundant. >iH > After moving to this version of the DEC C compiler, RTS and libraries,< > however, it seems that my anticipated handling was flawed:   <snip> > G > To my eye, this looks like the compiler can't make up its mind if the E > symbol (strncasecmp) is defined (#ifndef takes the true path, so it(E > must NOT be defined) or if it isn't (prototype declaration seems toeG > trip over the definition that obviously exists inside STRING.H, which 3 > I've printed off and indeed it appears in there).o  K > What gives, besides the fact I was too clever for my own good apparently?V  A You have confused the definition of a symbol or macro with in the ? preprocessor with the declaration or prototyping of a function.   D If Compaq C had implemented strncasecmp() as a macro for some reasonJ your cleverness would have worked for the compile, but may fail at another point.   -Johnr wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Onlys   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 21:21:53 GMTt2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)M Subject: Re: DEC C v6.2-008, OpenVMS v7.2-1H1:  <string.h> definition problemt1 Message-ID: <RLut6.146$eE2.8527@news.cpqcorp.net>e  l In article <995q3b$18hi@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>, jlw@psulias.psu.edu (j.lance wilkinson, (814) 865-1818) writes:F :I've got a chunk of code that for some time had no trouble compiling:  >   For some time on OpenVMS versions prior to V7.0, apparently.   :	#include <string.h>. :	#ifndef strncasecmpF9 :	  int strncasecmp(char *string1, char *string2, int n);h :	#endif :MN :The code was written on the assumption that the strncasecmp() function wasn'tN :implemented yet for DEC C, but eventually would be.  This was supposed to getM :me around the situation in the future when it was implemented an appeared inrI :<string.h> -- eliminating changes to the code while also eliminating the-" :profile when it became redundant.  I   If you "squat" on a reserved C name with your own declaration (and thisgH   is a practice I cannot recommend), you can see various weird and some    not-so-weird problems. n  F   Older Compaq C compilers encountered some serious "fun" at run-time J   (and programmers collected some cooresponding puzzlement) when the code K   included an external declarations of a variable named "stat" -- attempts  K   to write to the stat variable would stackdump with an access violation.  sI   Details of this particular conflict -- and what was being "squatted" on 9   and why it caused the ACCVIO -- are left to the reader.j  I   The best approach -- though I hesitate to refer to it as the "correct"  D   approach -- would have been to use your own function name for the F   function.  This is not as clean as code that self-migrates, but moreI   than a few products use this techqique -- many with conditionalizations F   around the code and associated #ifdef structure, and often tied intoE   an application-specific #include and/or compiler /DEFINE selection.   H   Also, "#ifndef strncasecmp" is a risky implementation approach, as it G   assumes that the function declaration will be defined by the headers rG   via a preprocessor #define -- and that's simply not the way that the .J   Compaq C compiler and the C RTL interoperate.  (Hence your #ifdef takes F   the correct and expected path, though not the path that you wanted.)  H   The strncasecmp() call was first introduced in the C RTL incorporated D   into OpenVMS V7.0, and the call is also available in the Compaq C G   backport library.  If you are not familiar with the backport library, F   please see the OpenVMS FAQ and particularly please see the Compaq C I   V5.6 (or later) documentation.  The Compaq C documentation is available1C   on the OpenVMS website, please see the OpenVMS FAQ for pointers.)8  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 15:31:55 -0600uC From: "Craig A. Berry" <craig.berry@nospam.SignalTreeSolutions.com>aM Subject: Re: DEC C v6.2-008, OpenVMS v7.2-1H1:  <string.h> definition problemsI Message-ID: <craig.berry-0DC98F.15315519032001@newsrump.sjc.telocity.net>e  , In article <995q3b$18hi@r02n01.cac.psu.edu>,?  jlw@psulias.psu.edu (j.lance wilkinson, (814) 865-1818) wrote:s  G > I've got a chunk of code that for some time had no trouble compiling:f >  > 	#include <string.h> > 	#ifndef strncasecmp: > 	  int strncasecmp(char *string1, char *string2, int n);	 > 	#endif    <snip>N > To my eye, this looks like the compiler can't make up its mind if the symbolJ > (strncasecmp) is defined (#ifndef takes the true path, so it must NOT beG > defined) or if it isn't (prototype declaration seems to trip over theaN > definition that obviously exists inside STRING.H, which I've printed off and > indeed it appears in there). > K > What gives, besides the fact I was too clever for my own good apparently?D  ? ifndef doesn't check for symbols, it checks for macros.  Since dH strncasecmp is apparently never defined as a macro, your prototype will 9 show up and collide with the vendor-provided one.  While pG functions are sometimes implemented as macros for performance reasons, l9 you can't count on that.  What you want is something liked   #if __CRTL_VER < 70000000v  v( /* put your home-grown prototype here */   #endif   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 03:08:02 +0000.) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> I Subject: Re: DECnet V on a hobbyist system vs replacing it with DECnet IVm, Message-ID: <3AB6C992.FE2D4A41@infopuls.com>  ! steven.reece@quintiles.com wrote:i > I > I think Robert made all the same comments that I would.  Maybe it's nots3 > just me that likes DECnet-Plus after all?!!!! :-) K > The only item that may be important for Christof is that DECNETT_REGISTERtK > will only go into the menu-driven interface if it knows what the terminalcM > type is.  If you just get a prompt from DECNET_REGISTER then you need to do2G > a set terminal/inquire or explicitly set up the device type yourself.c >  > Steve. > ; > Robert Deininger (rdeninger at mindspring dot com) wrote:9 > >>>$ MCR DECNET_REGISTERE > This is the way to add node/address information.  It's an SMG-style1% > menu-driven application by default.. > <trim> > <<<   < Thanks, it did recognise. But unfortunately both boxes still don't talk to each other.t   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Mar 2001 19:03:54 GMT* From: bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler)Y Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS     EducationalProgram 3 Message-ID: <995l6q$e20$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>v  3 In article <R+Zt7DPvAkxI@eisner.encompasserve.org>,s0 	koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:b > In article <99549t$c43$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>, bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler) writes: >> -P >> Unix is as easy to administer.  You have not shown any cases where it is not. >> What VMS apps?a > I > Ever try to find out what printer a queue on HP-UX is driving when it's5 > not working? >   G I try not to think about HP-UX :)  Point taken, but that's not really a.& Unix issue, as much as an HP-UX issue.   Briane  H > ----------------------------------------------------------------------A > Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences CorporationE? > NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GroupoF >                                | please remove ".aspm" when replying   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 23:51:52 +0100r) From: Brass Christof <brass@infopuls.com>iW Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS Educati onalProgram)e6 Message-ID: <20010319235152.C2459@mozart.infopuls.com>  B On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 09:27:59AM -0600, Christopher Smith wrote: > > -----Original Message-----4 > > From: Christof Brass [mailto:brass@infopuls.com] >  > > Christopher Smith wrote: > H > > > Softwindows, WABI, Wine, BOCHS, .... you tell me -- why isn't Unix# > > > implementing the windows API?n >  > > > Seems to me that it is.D > 9 > > Yup, it is, someway. Could you tell me what BOCHS is?  > M > BOCHS is kind of a different approach -- it's a "DOS emulator" ... actuallyOL > more of a "wintel" emulator.  I've heard tales of it booting OS/2, windowsL > 95, and linux, and actually running to an extent, though I'm not sure what	 > extent.    Then it's similar to VMware.  0 > > I repeat here what I posted already - sorry:A > > I know WINE and WABI - good approaches but there is somethingIB > > wrong. Both never took off. It's similar to the FX32! althoughC > > the FX32! was even much better. It seems to me very interestingEA > > that the emulation approach isn't very popular at the moment.iB > > Instead the trend is towards using universal library APIs likeC > > Qt and providing apps on all major platforms (no, not includingi	 > > VMS).  > N > Well, it's not necessarily a bad approach to provide standard interfaces.  IK > think that a mixture of the two would be even better.  On the other hand,oB > that's what Java is all about in a way, and it's way too slow :)  F I may agree or may not. What interests me is an analysis why WINE and G WABI have failed so obviously although I think from the perspective of  F engineering and resource economy it would make perfect sense to do it . that way instead of emulating a whole machine.  A Anyway whouldn't be VMware for Alpha the lang awaited killer app?wB Two flavours came in mind: one to provide separate Alphas, one to A provide also Intels. The Intel emulation has already be written. - Why is Compaq hesitating??  1 > > Have you had good experiences with WINE apps?. > K > Well, in a way -- I've gotten several apps to run under wine as stably asiJ > they run under windows. :)  There's a lot missing in wine at this point,  > though, for windows 95 and up.  - Can I conlude that it's less than satisfying?-  M > The problem really is that I don't care to emulate an "office productivity"dK > type app.  So the word processing packages, and everything else that most13 > people want wine to work with are useless for me.5  ( So to me - I use my own office software.  I > What I'd really like wine to do is drive hardware like digital cameras, F > parallel port scanners, etc, that I won't touch right now because it > requires the use of windows.  E WINE requires some sort of Windows also. AFAIK from a sound PR event tG organised by SUN to promote Solaris/386 you even have to buy a Windows uE licence - though I'm not sure about this because this was about 1990 eF or even earlier. One of the best technical PR events I ever met. Only I a few SUN people but highly qualified, sound answers, very good concepts.n Alas UNIX crap ...  N > My most recent try with wine was a complete failure, actually.  I was tryingJ > to get wine to run apple's "newton backup utility" for windows so that I0 > could back my newton up -- didn't work at all.  F AFAIK there are native Linux apps for that. I have an Newton also (in C fact the third box because the first two died the hardware death - oF fortunately within the warranty period). Since the left third box has E obviously a problem with the battery I have to keep it always at the wD charging station - a not very practical place for an agenda which I  should carry with me all time.A I don't the graffity requiring replacements and I don't like the tD keyboard type organisers. I still didn't find a replacement for the A Newton. Do you have any idea why it's claiming low battery a few lC minutes after separating it from the charging station? [Sorry very EC off topic! To continue this: I plan to buy one of these cool Apple eA Titan Powerbooks if there is MacOS X on. Maybe I will carry this -< with me along instead of the Newton or any other organiser.]  F > On the other hand, I've (just to prove it can be done) run programs D > like corel draw, which are very serious applications in their own  > right, and work just fine. > J > Bringing the topic back around -- a VMS equivalent would be interesting. > 
 > Regards, >  > Chris  > # > Christopher Smith, Perl DeveloperA > Amdocs - Champaign, IL >  > /usr/bin/perl -e 'A > print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");t > '    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:10:26 -0600t+ From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com>cV Subject: RE: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMS EducationalProgram)L Message-ID: <3B55D7F383B0D31197D9009027541CBF0BDD549A@cmiexch1.cmi.itds.com>   > -----Original Message-----2 > From: Brass Christof [mailto:brass@infopuls.com]    9 > > BOCHS is kind of a different approach -- it's a "DOS m > emulator" ... actually9 > > more of a "wintel" emulator.  I've heard tales of it e > booting OS/2, windowsx= > > 95, and linux, and actually running to an extent, though e > I'm not sure whatt > > extent.e   > Then it's similar to VMware.  L Except that it's actually more portable, I believe.  I've heard that it willK build/run, and emulate a wintel machine (to whatever extent it works...) on  MIPS/Irix, for instance.  H > I may agree or may not. What interests me is an analysis why WINE and : > WABI have failed so obviously although I think from the  > perspective of  H > engineering and resource economy it would make perfect sense to do it 0 > that way instead of emulating a whole machine.  H My analysis of why wine failed is easy -- it's not finished. :)  Wine isJ still alpha software, and with the limited number of people working on it,0 it will take quite a while for them to catch up.  K WABI on the other hand is more difficult.  I think most of the problem with I WABI (these days) is that it only runs windows 3.1 apps.  (where's Andrew-G when you need him? :)  One could wonder why they haven't tried to offerh+ something similar for windows 95(nt?) apps.a  C > Anyway whouldn't be VMware for Alpha the lang awaited killer app?>D > Two flavours came in mind: one to provide separate Alphas, one to C > provide also Intels. The Intel emulation has already be written. 0 > Why is Compaq hesitating??  I Well, there is Galaxy. ;)   No, it's not VMWare, but AFAIK, it will split6J one cpu into multiple instances (or did I misunderstand that part?  at anyH rate, one could assume the code that's there, and hardware support wouldI make a good base for it.).  The rest would be relatively easy if you were K only concerned with getting several "virtual alphas."  Wintel emulation, off" course, would be a separate layer.  3 > > > Have you had good experiences with WINE apps?   < > > Well, in a way -- I've gotten several apps to run under  > wine as stably ase> > > they run under windows. :)  There's a lot missing in wine  > at this point," > > though, for windows 95 and up.  / > Can I conlude that it's less than satisfying?h  K For what I'd like to do with it, yes.  Again, I blame that on the fact that-K it's not fully implemented.  On the other hand, for joe blockhead who wantsu9 to run microshaft word -- it would more than do, I think.   ; > > What I'd really like wine to do is drive hardware like   > digital cameras,H > > parallel port scanners, etc, that I won't touch right now because it  > > requires the use of windows.  G > WINE requires some sort of Windows also. AFAIK from a sound PR event O? > organised by SUN to promote Solaris/386 you even have to buy Y > a Windows G > licence - though I'm not sure about this because this was about 1990 lH > or even earlier. One of the best technical PR events I ever met. Only = > a few SUN people but highly qualified, sound answers, very i > good concepts. > Alas UNIX crap ...  J Well, I don't know about WABI, but wine doesn't need (will use if you haveL them...) windows dlls to function.  Nor does it need executables or anythingE else from the windows distribution. (again, it will offer to use them.H instead of the built-in stuff [which might actually even fix some of theK problems I had with it, since the windows libraries are as complete as they / get -- I don't have a windows license, though])t  H > AFAIK there are native Linux apps for that. I have an Newton also (in E > fact the third box because the first two died the hardware death - wH > fortunately within the warranty period). Since the left third box has G > obviously a problem with the battery I have to keep it always at the sF > charging station - a not very practical place for an agenda which I   > should carry with me all time.  J I have an original MP-1000, and find that rechargeable NiMH batteries last) me over a week for normal use -- not bad.   C > I don't the graffity requiring replacements and I don't like the yF > keyboard type organisers. I still didn't find a replacement for the C > Newton. Do you have any idea why it's claiming low battery a few  E > minutes after separating it from the charging station? [Sorry very o  J Sounds like your battery may be wearing out.  You could get it replaced orG rebuilt?  You could also try the brute-force charge/drain, charge/drain-H method... but if your battery isn't holding power after a long period of/ regular use, that's probably not going to help.D  E > off topic! To continue this: I plan to buy one of these cool Apple -C > Titan Powerbooks if there is MacOS X on. Maybe I will carry this @> > with me along instead of the Newton or any other organiser.]  I Good luck finding something else -- I got the thing way after end-of-lifeuI because none of the other organizers impressed me as much.  I still can'tnI find anything nearly as good. (handspring is nice as far as hardware, but( graffiti is just terrible)  I [By the way -- just to keep things on topic, I suggest private replies tor anything regarding apples. :)]   Regards,   ChrisC  ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developers Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");e 'i   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 02:55:12 +0000c) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>eY Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducationalProgram) Proc, Message-ID: <3AB6C690.3F276C3B@infopuls.com>   Brian Wheeler wrote: > 5 > In article <R+Zt7DPvAkxI@eisner.encompasserve.org>,m9 >         koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:ed > > In article <99549t$c43$1@flotsam.uits.indiana.edu>, bdwheele@indiana.edu (Brian Wheeler) writes: > >>R > >> Unix is as easy to administer.  You have not shown any cases where it is not. > >> What VMS apps?  > >dK > > Ever try to find out what printer a queue on HP-UX is driving when it's  > > not working? > >e > I > I try not to think about HP-UX :)  Point taken, but that's not really a-( > Unix issue, as much as an HP-UX issue.  ? This *is* a UNIX issue exactly because you could even give such-3 an answer. You should had never thought about that!c >  > Briany > J > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------C > > Bob Koehler                     | Computer Sciences CorporationrA > > NASA GSFC Flight Software       | Federal Sector, Civil GrouppH > >                                | please remove ".aspm" when replying   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 02:53:04 +0000m) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>iY Subject: Re: Dumbing Down VMS with UNIX Elements? (was Re: OpenVMSEducationalProgram) Pro,, Message-ID: <3AB6C610.E03722F7@infopuls.com>   Brian Wheeler wrote: [SNIP]@ > >> So where is VMS the right tool and unix not the right tool? > > U > > Where you want to a stable and easy to administer environment with good VMS apps.h > O > Unix is as easy to administer.  You have not shown any cases where it is not.m  ; Statistics, independent analysis and experience showed thata< equally good people are about twice as efficient with VMS as
 with UNIX.   > What VMS apps?  = Most prominent examples are Database centered apps, real-time-@ production and management apps (BWM, Bayer, BASF, power stations> all around the world) and financial transactional systems like? SWX Swiss Exchange, DBAG Frankfurt, Eurex, CBOT. Any questions?a  M > >> So then, unix isn't crap if it does the job.  That's what its all about.- > > A > > I don't think so. I'm also interested what is under the hood.r >  > Fair enough.  > BTW this open the hood attitude is a recent outcome of the bad@ experiences companies made with poorly crafted but running apps.@ If your programs don't have structure and don't obey good design: rules the maintenance and the future development will be a
 nightmare.   [SNIP]   > >o > > 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.g > > > Agreed.  Then we can argue about if its a good or bad thing.  = Unfortunately if it turns out to be a major step in the wrongd> direction the money has already been spent. That's why I write against it now.    [SNIP]  I > >> Yeah, and apparently unlike you, I'm not ignorant on how it became adP > >> standard.  It was forcefully bundled with mass market OEM machines.  MS wasR > >> weilding monopoly power in the DOS market to force windows onto users whetherQ > >> they wanted it or not.  When enough installs were out there, *ONLY THEN* waseR > >> it a successful platform to write to.  VMS is very different in this respect:I > >> realistically one vendor for hardware, very small market share, etc.f > >c > > 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. Remember - we were talking about the word "proprietary".a > M > Yes.  You were arguing that proprietary doesn't matter if you've got marketC( > share.  VMS doesn't have market share.  9 You are missing the point. No OS had the monopol from the>@ beginning besides M$DOS. There isn't any law that getting market share is forbidden.    [SNIP]    > Beats me, I use emacs.  > Haven't tried that on email although I know you can all within; emacs and I have even emacs on VMS. You can even browse Webi; pages within emacs. Is this true? And if, how does it work?e   [SNIP]  M > >> We agree, but only to an extent.  VMS is proprietary in that there is no N > >> independant (i.e. not controlled by compaq) which says "this is VMS".  ItL > >> is available from only one vendor, and is not compatible with any otherA > >> system at the source level (except for very trivial things).m > >.> > 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 a certain degree as marketing. > L > MS forced marketshare to create a de-facto standard.  VMS doesn't have theM > marketshare to do this.  Apple had obvious benefits over DOS, which negatedvO > its proprietary disadvantage.  VMS may have advantages over Unix, but they'reo= > not "obvious", so its proprietary nature is a disadvantage.t  8 Too simple, I don't buy it. This is rather a question of? perception, marketing and management culture (which isn't there 4 anymore unfortunately). To me and every educated and= knowledgable engineer who studied both systems the advantagesi8 are more obvious than the advantages of MacOS < 10 above Windoze.  > > 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!2 > 9 > Ugly, perhaps.  But C isn't the only language for apps.j  ? If you had read some recent posts of mine you would know that Ia@ try to convince the programmers to avoid C because it's the same8 crap as UNIX - both are married. The UNIX and C attitude@ complement each other in one of the fruitfulst ways resulting in6 very unreliable UNIX variants and apps on top of them.  < C is used too often. UNIX is mainly implemented in C. Do you. need any other reasons to stay away from UNIX?   > >> >> > UNIX and Windoze are another form of beeing proprietary with UNIX having the disadvantage of never beeing the same if you change the vendor. > >> >>cO > >> >> Are they as great as when you move from VMS to anything else?  Not evenaR > >> >> close.  The difference between unixes is trivial at best for the end user,: > >> >> and only require a bit of effort for the sysadmin. > >> > > >> > Yes - the differences between the UNIXes are much smaller than between VMS and UNIX. What a surprise! VMS isn't UNIX? Why isn't UNIX implementing the Windoze API. There is the vast majority of apps!2 > >>P > >> The WINE project is implementing the windows api on unix. Corel has used itP > >> to port several applications to linux via a recompile.  Also, products such, > >> as WindU has been doing this for years.  8 Corel messed several things up. Do they still exist? ;-); I think Corel isn't a good example of putting things right.a  > > 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).t- > > Have you good experiences with WINE apps?n > O > Yes.  They're not perfect, but they're not awful, either.  WINE also compilesnO > to native libraries, so when you write a win api app, you can recompile it onuG > any platform that WINE supports...so its not just an emulation issue.y  < All project *I* know about of using WINE didn't go well. Any counterexamples around?s   [SNIP]  G > > I don't fight for these small differences. This example is for you.  > > 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. > G > Its a BSD vs SYSV issue.  Linux allows either set of options, but the P > 'default' solaris one allows only one set.  If you put /usr/ucb (The BSD styleF > utils) in the head of your path, ps -aux works just fine on solaris.  @ Thanks, I'll try that. But honestly this isn't a point in favour
 of UNIX crap.e  M > >> Sure, they have different 'exotic' features, but lets face it, the basicr > >> functionality is the same.o > >ac > > This is true. But I think this isn't very helpful as most people need additional functionality.O > > J > >> For find, there are more differences, but the basic usage is the same; > >> regardless of platform:  find <dir> -name "<filename>"p > > $> > 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?G > > Honestly the quotation needed to make find work with grep is silly.h > > 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??? > 
 > You can:# >         find / | grep -i filenamed > should work just fine.  ? I don't get it. What does "filename" denote? If you had written 7 <filename> this would have made sense from the point oft> presenting the command but not from its usage because the list> filenames should be provided by find. Anyway this doesn't work: and you should have known this because there is simple but+ stupid reason because this won't work ever.e; The solution to this problem is left as an exercise for ther reader.    > > O > >> This works the same on all unixes I've dealt with.  Again, its an issue of N > >> 'exotic' features...sort of like when you use VMS 5.5 and bitch about not > >> having 'PIPE'.i > >i# > > Sorry? Do you really mean that?  >  > :)  Sort of.   [SNIP]  ~ > > 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?  P > Take a quick peek at the wine archives and see how often the documentation forN > windows is wrong, incomplete, or misleading.  Windows defines itself as Open3 > as well...these days 'open' doesn't mean a thing.   ? Stop that. I read that VMS has been certified by an independentf@ organisation. And you probably know that the incongruence of the? Windoze documentation and implementation is a quality assurancet@ problem with $$$ (should denote M$). Do you remember the russian> DOS clone? Better, faster, more stable. Implemented whithout a? bit of official documentation others than the readily available, one.   [SNIP]  > > 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? > P > Ok, fair enough.  I've been abusive, and I'll stop it.  It seemed the only way0 > to reply to your opinions of anything non-VMS.  = I'm against UNIX and C/C++ because I know it too well and I'mh/ sure the evolution is far beyound these archaict< systems/languages. I'm not against BeOS (I don't know it too? well and I don't like that they used C++ for implementation butw? they offer some very good ideas), not against MacOS from the UId@ point of view; even NeXTSTEP/MacOS X although based on mach/UNIX< are to certain degree okay. But I won't accept non-technical arguments for technical ones.   O > Ok, fair enough, but its far too easy for those applauses to turn into thrownm  > fruit if they do a shitty job.  > Not sure I understood you correctly. I didn't see a lot people@ thinking about the risks. I seems that most people here have the= attitude that VMS is at risk and any measure could help it. Ie: simply share their opinion. Instead I think this is a very< dangerous attitude as in case of danger outmost care must be> taken to make the right decisions because it could be the last ones.r  N > No arguments there.  If they compromise, I suspect they'll compromise on the > side of VMS.   :-(e  L > >> You implied that things chosen by the majority are corrupt and or lower
 > >> quality.i > >  > > 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. > >  > L > Same here...just because the overall trend does tend to show that the more? > quantity is the lower quality, there's no direct correlation.i  ; Statistically there *is* correlation. But correlation is no ? proof technically spoken. But you are missing my point that youw< dont' argue logically. I only claimed that the million flies> argument isnt' worth anything. The majority could be right but in most cases it is wrong.7 Remember, you started this quality vs quantity thought.t   [SNIP]  H > >> That's odd, because I find unix far simpler to understand than VMS. > >l0> > 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? > Q > No, Help is truly wonderful, but it doesn't allow me to search it for keywords,fO > but man does.  There are pros and cons to each (though, universally, GNU infot	 > sucks).   < The search is very simplistic and not very helpful althoug I@ admit without search is would even more a pain in the arse. OTOH= with VMS HELP there is rarely a need to search for a keyword.-> And the quality of HELP (not only its structured presentation)? is much better than most man pages. Think only about the numbere of examples.  G > The kernel structure of Unix is easier to understand, at least on the  > conceptual level.t  @ This could well be true because there is hardly any concept (not only my opinion).   e > >> >> > I also publicly offered to put money into a fund to get a full VMS Opera port. No response.o	 > >> >> >e[ > >> >> > Do you know on what platform Navigator has been developed? Could it be UNIX crap?h > >> >> > 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.o > >> >>tQ > >> >> So, we come back to the core of the problem:  lack of available software.iS > >> >> Whether something was built on unix doesn't make it crap, anymore than unix ; > >> >> as a whole is crap.  Why don't you write a browser?o > >> >M > >> > Good question. Because I have *other* things to do. Do you understand?c > >>O > >> Of course I do.  However, others have other things to do, and supporting ao* > >> small-user-base OS isn't one of them. > >  > > Not a technical point. > Q > True, its not.  But it is a valid point:  people aren't going to write software M > for a platform (regardless of its quality) if there aren't very many peoplef > there to use it.  % Definitely wrong - think about Linux.o  > >> > 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? > >>L > >> Yes, I did.  But I don't think it changes anything.  Answer this: is noM > >> software better than (possibly) buggy software?  VMS isn't going to haveeO > >> any new VMS-only software regardless of the COE initiative.  At least with.M > >> it, there's the possibility that more people would be exposed to VMS andtR > >> possibly incorporate some of VMS's strong points into their software.  Hiding; > >> VMS in the corner isn't going to bring new developers.i > >v> > 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.t > P > I'm not seeing it, which is why I feel that COE may be the only way for VMS to > get new users. >  > > m > >> > UNIX isn't the right tool even if it is sometimes the only tool because it lets too much to wish left.i > >>I > >> I disagree.  Any tool is the right tool, compared to no tool at all.g > >- > > 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). > >e > G > No arguments there.  But since they're optional, and the user will be P > installing them, its their call.  But, you're right, it leads to the "anythingQ > via telnet sucks"-syndrome that windows users have because they've got a shittyn > default telnet client.  ? Good point and well in line of my fears. Burn a manager and youn+ probably won't sell him/her anything later.a  T > >> >> I suppose we should just agree to disagree:  I think adding Unix APIs to VMST > >> >> would be a good thing, and you think it'd be a bad thing.  I suppose there'sM > >> >> no further need for discussing this, since neither of us are going to  > >> >> convince the other.m > >> >>W
 > >> >> Briane > >> >> >> > 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? > >>P > >> Its not impossible to see the beauty in two different methods.  Its easy toN > >> see advantages to both methods, and disadvantages.  But it all boils down- > >> to the right tool (as I've said before).m > >>
 > >> 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? > Q > I like the VMS command line, though its probably because of nostalgia.  I wroteiL > quite a bit of DCL.  Its a quality OS, that in itself makes it attractive.  > Quality is a black box. Sad that this really interesting point> which will very much appropriate to cov didn't fit into your's! news readers (read "emacs") page.O >  > Brian    ------------------------------   Date: 19 Mar 2001 19:41:44 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) $ Subject: Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!+ Message-ID: <995ndo$g6b$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>r  , In article <995el7$ehg@gap.cco.caltech.edu>,5  mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu (David Mathog) writes:ye |> In article <FreeThe.OpenVMS_7@nowhere.nil>, Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:n |> >(b) Business Ready.a |> >9 |> >* Cost around 2^11 USD (**INCLUDING** User Licenses).  |>                ^^^^   |> dG |> I sure hope that would include user licenses - that's 200 Billion USa |> dollars.   3 Ummmm.  Dave.  2^11 = 2048.                     :-)   7 Even the Unix Desk Calculator (dc) could work that out.>   bill     -- eJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   a   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Mar 2001 19:47:11 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)r$ Subject: Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!+ Message-ID: <995nnv$g6b$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>i  : In article <5.0.2.1.0.20010319122529.01977da0@24.8.96.48>,%  Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org> writes:h3 |> At 05:12 PM 3/19/2001 +0000, David Mathog wrote:t; |> >In article <FreeThe.OpenVMS_7@nowhere.nil>, Doc.Cypher e/ |> ><Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:e |> > >(b) Business Ready.u |> > >; |> > >* Cost around 2^11 USD (**INCLUDING** User Licenses).  |> >                ^^^^ |> >H |> >I sure hope that would include user licenses - that's 200 Billion US |> >dollars. |> c; |> That looks like 2^11, not 2*10^11. 2^11 is only $1024...  |> e  A What are people using to compute this??  DECW$CALC?           :-)a   bill   -- mJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------   Date: 19 Mar 2001 20:26:23 GMT2 From: mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu (David Mathog)$ Subject: Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!, Message-ID: <995q1f$m45@gap.cco.caltech.edu>  _ In article <5.0.2.1.0.20010319122529.01977da0@24.8.96.48>, Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org> writes:g1 >At 05:12 PM 3/19/2001 +0000, David Mathog wrote:n9 >>In article <FreeThe.OpenVMS_7@nowhere.nil>, Doc.Cypher a- >><Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:e >> >(b) Business Ready.i >> >9 >> >* Cost around 2^11 USD (**INCLUDING** User Licenses).u >>                ^^^^ >>F >>I sure hope that would include user licenses - that's 200 Billion US
 >>dollars. >f9 >That looks like 2^11, not 2*10^11. 2^11 is only $1024...   B Oops, right.  But then, how often do you see prices for a computer posted in powers of two?   David Mathog mathog@seqaxp.bio.caltech.edu ? Manager, sequence analysis facility, biology division, Caltech     ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 20:27:12 GMTi= From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-)a$ Subject: Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!0 Message-ID: <009F9411.88AD0BA1@SendSpamHere.ORG>  _ In article <995nnv$g6b$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:r; >In article <5.0.2.1.0.20010319122529.01977da0@24.8.96.48>,N& > Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org> writes:4 >|> At 05:12 PM 3/19/2001 +0000, David Mathog wrote:< >|> >In article <FreeThe.OpenVMS_7@nowhere.nil>, Doc.Cypher 0 >|> ><Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes: >|> > >(b) Business Ready. >|> > > < >|> > >* Cost around 2^11 USD (**INCLUDING** User Licenses). >|> >                ^^^^h >|> >tI >|> >I sure hope that would include user licenses - that's 200 Billion US 
 >|> >dollars.u >|> < >|> That looks like 2^11, not 2*10^11. 2^11 is only $1024... >|>  >mB >What are people using to compute this??  DECW$CALC?           :-)  ? Real programmers don't need a calculator to do powers of 2!  ;)   C For example 2^13 is the current Alpha page size in bytes: 8192(10).wD Half of that, 2^12, is 4096(10) and half of that, 2^11, is 2048(10).  B Note, I also specify the base as real programmers do their math in hex.  :) --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMe            eO city, n., 1. a place where trees are cut down and streets are named after them.n   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 14:34:44 -0600e, From: "Tony Scandora" <scandora@cmt.anl.gov>$ Subject: Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!+ Message-ID: <995qed$gst$1@milo.mcs.anl.gov>s   ...y > |>= > |> That looks like 2^11, not 2*10^11. 2^11 is only $1024...  > |> >o5 > What are people using to compute this??  DECW$CALC?c   Intel Pentium.  1 Tony Scandora, Argonne National Lab, 630-252-7541u scandora@cmt.anl.gov   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 13:03:12 -0800u! From: Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.coms$ Subject: Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!D Message-ID: <OF805CA0F7.86D7990F-ON88256A14.007391A1@foundation.com>  J My math sucks badly, but I could do that one in my head by counting powers of two.u   Shane           E bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) on 03/19/2001 11:47:11 AMf  & Please respond to bill@cs.scranton.edu   To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Come cc:t  % Subject:  Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!r    : In article <5.0.2.1.0.20010319122529.01977da0@24.8.96.48>,%  Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org> writes:r3 |> At 05:12 PM 3/19/2001 +0000, David Mathog wrote:r: |> >In article <FreeThe.OpenVMS_7@nowhere.nil>, Doc.Cypher/ |> ><Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:i |> > >(b) Business Ready.e |> > >; |> > >* Cost around 2^11 USD (**INCLUDING** User Licenses).m |> >                ^^^^ |> >H |> >I sure hope that would include user licenses - that's 200 Billion US |> >dollars. |>; |> That looks like 2^11, not 2*10^11. 2^11 is only $1024...  |>  A What are people using to compute this??  DECW$CALC?           :-)    bill   --J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |> Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Mar 2001 20:51:18 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon):$ Subject: Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!+ Message-ID: <995rg6$ija$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>   0 In article <009F9411.88AD0BA1@SendSpamHere.ORG>,@  system@SendSpamHere.ORG (Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman-) writes:b |> In article <995nnv$g6b$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:> |> >In article <5.0.2.1.0.20010319122529.01977da0@24.8.96.48>,) |> > Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org> writes:n7 |> >|> At 05:12 PM 3/19/2001 +0000, David Mathog wrote:n? |> >|> >In article <FreeThe.OpenVMS_7@nowhere.nil>, Doc.Cypher  3 |> >|> ><Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:  |> >|> > >(b) Business Ready.f
 |> >|> > >? |> >|> > >* Cost around 2^11 USD (**INCLUDING** User Licenses).  |> >|> >                ^^^^ |> >|> >L |> >|> >I sure hope that would include user licenses - that's 200 Billion US |> >|> >dollars. |> >|> s? |> >|> That looks like 2^11, not 2*10^11. 2^11 is only $1024...y |> >|> t |> >E |> >What are people using to compute this??  DECW$CALC?           :-)M |> tB |> Real programmers don't need a calculator to do powers of 2!  ;)  A Based on this thread, that statement is somewhat dubious.     :-)e   bill   -- rJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   e   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Mar 2001 20:51:55 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) $ Subject: Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!+ Message-ID: <995rhb$ija$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>n  + In article <995qed$gst$1@milo.mcs.anl.gov>,m/  "Tony Scandora" <scandora@cmt.anl.gov> writes:t |> t |> ... |> > |>v@ |> > |> That looks like 2^11, not 2*10^11. 2^11 is only $1024... |> > |>  |> >8 |> > What are people using to compute this??  DECW$CALC? |>   |> Intel Pentium.i   And that explains everything!!!o   bill   -- yJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   e   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 19:01:09 -0600r From: keith <kbrown@isd.net>$ Subject: Re: Free The OpenVMS Seven!' Message-ID: <3AB6ABD5.D1D6DD16@isd.net>    "Doc.Cypher" wrote:a > $ > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > . >                          Free The OpenVMS 7!/ >                         =====================t > C >     [Or at least reduce the cost from the current King's Ransom.]d > K > As COV members have been pointing out since the beginning of time (if notnJ > for longer), the bottom rungs on the VMS systems ladder are missing. YouL > don't need to be a rocket scientist to notice that no startup business canK > get an affordable VMS system. If they could, they would be struggling  tocM > find entry-level staff (i.e. recent graduates) to administer the system forp > them.a > K > I nominate the following strategic targets for an entry level VMS system:a >  > (a) Web Ready. > D > * Capable of running a small general-purpose website for the small6 >   business with a Cable or xDSL Internet connection.C > * Ready to handle staff and business email (say, not more than 15r >   accounts).F > * Acting as a small web-proxy and configurable filter to ensure best! >   use of limited net bandwidth.r >  > (b) Business Ready.> > 7 > * Cost around 2^11 USD (**INCLUDING** User Licenses).c7 > * Built-in patch retrieval and installation software.c9 > * Simple (e.g. Pathworks v5) file serving capabilities.c' > * Automated backup software included.a; > * Low-cost basic training in simple administrative tasks.t >  > (c) Developer Ready. >  > * Give away (gasp!) DECC. > > * Perl and other web-friendly tools bundled with the system.D > * Simple ring-bound manual(s) covering care, maintenance, and good4 >   security policies (Just like the good old days). > J > Given the above system, I think any aspiring e-businessman would jump atD > the chance to run the same OS as his favourite Wall Street Casino. > K > Now, once you've built this lovely imaginary system, give the first 1,000 F > away to major edjuyacashunal e-stablishments. (Don't forget the fullM > licenses *and* software kits this time!) That should help to get the peoplerJ > who're going to run these systems trained. Plus it will aid in getting a/ > whole new batch of affordable apps developed.u > 4 > And if these newly developed apps are a bit rough? > I > Fine! It'll keep Hoff and the rest of us busy topping up the retirementu > funds. >  > Any other suggestions? >  > Doc. >  > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----n > Version: 2.6.2 > B > iQEVAwUBOrU98sriC3SGiziTAQEE7Af/Ss7vUingmcNaJqUGhdRZS6Fv+ZIG0VnIB > hMz3HKhXEto/0QZCVknzXy02D+amMj9glH26Hylo76Gn439LSSFSRWkKNcl8t8paB > kCvcm0iW6lJzRuV3sy991zXYUemLvWhqxaheew9qjHSQ44aUJYeBS93Z26gXZzCiB > 2j0a5yc16G7L4BJlrjZUXpqwyPXuo8eYH/p8v8x8NjhX8WkcS3UBJcFBcRZLF+E3B > 6/r4dWKwrEDh5d7VSx3PTuFTYAi6zxL21pk1Io0U/CTHZ/sVIfmjmYH1L4b83wuE: > WAmR31UuHnJhOOJgxIkiJVNzgNMv35VjDr+PAJkGYF3bsXhjMcJI9A== > =axj4i > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----t  + Sounds good tome,  Where do I sign up?  ;-)l   Keith Browns kbrown780@isd.netn   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 14:57:02 -0500p2 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" <DRAGON@compuserve.com>* Subject: FTP Performance: UCX vs. Multinet6 Message-ID: <200103191457_MC2-C952-D26@compuserve.com>  H         You have a lot of variables that you haven't specified.  What isJ the load on the old and new VAXen?  What kind of disk does each have?  Ho= wSJ fragmented are the files that you are using for testing on each disk?  Wh= atJ model VAXstation 3100s are involved?  There are models 30/40 what use the=  B same processor in different boxes, models 38/48 which use a fasterD processor in different boxes, and the model 76 which has the fastest processor of all.e  J         I suspect that the difference is UCX vs. Multinet but you'll neve= r.J prove it with the evidence you've posted so far!  Also, since you are usi= ng6 MGFTP it may not be fair to blame UCX for the problem!  * Message text written by "Richard L. Dyson"C >I have found a disturbing difference in FTP transfer rates betweend asF pair of nodes I manage in Japan back to our local site here in the US.E Both VAXen in Japan are VAXStation 3100/GPX boxes sitting on the samen LANa< in the same room.  The end node in the US is my AlphaServer.  H     The problem is that the old VAX moves files back to the US more thanF 3 times faster than the new VAX (sent to allow us to eventually retire3 the old VAX)!  That is:  17,755 B/s vs. 75,702 B/s!u  *     Here are the two VAX nodes summarized:  '         Old                         Newi3     -------------------         -------------------s3     VAXStation 3100/GPX         VAXStation 3100/GPXt)     20 MB RAM                   32 MB RAM>,     VMS v5.3                    OpenVMS v6.2.     Multinet v3.0 rev A         UCX v4.2 ECO 4,                                 MGFTP v2.6-2  H     Both nodes are doing FTP transfers of the same two ZIP files back to the same VMS server in Iowa:           Iowa Nodee     ---------------------o     AlphaSever 2100 4/266      1 GB RAM     OpenVMS v6.2     UCX v4.1 ECO 10e     MGFTP v2.6-5  D     Is this just the performance difference between Multinet and UCXE (even though Multinet is very old and UCX other very new!)?  Is theresE some tuning I could do to the UCX system to help things?  If so, whateC kind of UCX or SYSGEN parameters would you recommend investigating?o  ?     Here are the data from some transfer tests I made recently:M  3   FTP Transfer rates from Japan VAXen to Iowa Alpha   6 Node  Day of  Time of     Size    Transfer Time   Rate8        Week   Day[CST]   [Bytes]    [min:sec]    [B/sec]8 ----  ------  --------   -------  -------------  -------7 OLD     M     10:48am    1807815    00:23.83      75863p7 OLD     M     10:50am    2237815    00:29.44      76013p7 OLD     M     10:51am    1807815    00:24.13      74920n7 OLD     M     10:52am    2237815    00:29.54      75755s7 OLD     M     11:15am    1807815    00:23.80      75959   7 NEW     M     10:30am    1807883    01:44.78      17254 7 NEW     M     10:32am    2237883    02:04.31      18002 7 NEW     M     10:40am    1807883    01:42.43      17649l7 NEW     M     10:40am    2237883    02:06.28      17721r7 NEW     M     11:27am    1807883    01:39.36      18195n7 NEW     M     11:29am    2237883    02:06.38      17707t   <a   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 20:39:19 GMTd- From: goathunter@goatley.com (Hunter Goatley)e. Subject: Re: FTP Performance: UCX vs. Multinet/ Message-ID: <3ab66e09.4506229@swen.process.com>n  P On Mon, 19 Mar 2001 14:57:02 -0500, "Richard B. Gilbert" <DRAGON@compuserve.com> wrote:  K >        I suspect that the difference is UCX vs. Multinet but you'll neve=s >rK >prove it with the evidence you've posted so far!  Also, since you are usi=r >nge7 >MGFTP it may not be fair to blame UCX for the problem!> > A And you should also install MGFTP V2.6-5, the current release, asI@ V2.6-3 increased the default window size, making MGFTP transfers# several times faster in most cases.    Hunter ------9 Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ 9 goathunter@goatley.com     http://www.goatley.com/hunter/t   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 19:16:16 -0700r% From: Dean Woodward <deanw@rdrop.com>d
 Subject: JokeI) Message-ID: <3AB6BD70.4A52F028@rdrop.com>g  3 OK, this isn't VMS-ish at all, but I just saw it...   @ Q:  How many IBM cpu's does it take to do a logical right shift?8 A:  33.  1 to hold the bits and 32 to push the register.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 19:10:33 -0000e- From: wspencer@ap.nospam.org (Warren Spencer) 8 Subject: Re: LDAP Client - Anyone Ported to OpenVMS Yet?/ Message-ID: <tbcmd9psbetpcc@news.supernews.com>u  @ wspencer@ap.nospam.org (Warren Spencer) wrote in <tb4uokng7h4e23 @news.supernews.com>:u   >Hello All,e >9J >It looks like we can't wait for OpenVMS 7.3 to get an LDAP client.  Have A >any of you ported a current *or* older version of it to OpenVMS?e >U >wst >-   Thanks to those who responded!  L More specifically, I'm looking for an LDAP api on OpenVMS.  I need to write H some application code, and use the ldap api to retrieve values from our J corporate directory.  Commerical or freeware or open source would be fine.  H OpenLDAP.org has ports for numerous platforms, but OpenVMS isn't amoung  them.r   Any suggestions?   tia,   ws   -- h1 << Marriage is Grand.  Divorce is Fifty Grand. >>    Warren Spencer Senior Software Engineer The Associated Press  ? ** My employer does not necessarily agree with my statements **a   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 11:13:59 -0800-! From: Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.comT* Subject: Re: Migrating from vms 6.2 to 7.2D Message-ID: <OF76C82AAE.0EEBEE73-ON88256A14.00698DE2@foundation.com>  & --Boundary_(ID_XJ++fKAGiCqoqlgHM3NYJw)* Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BITt    H As long as you're not using any undocumented interfaces, or really funkyE coding, it should just work. No port required. Worst case should be ad
 recompile.   Shane           F Abhijit Kulkarni <Abhijit_Kulkarni@infy.com> on 03/17/2001 03:57:31 AM   To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com  cc:^  ' Subject:  Migrating from vms 6.2 to 7.2e     Hi,eE      We want to migrate our application (the code is in dec-c,sql and1B pro-c) from vax/vms 6.2 to 7.2. I want to know are theer any tools	 availableeD for this? Also what are the problems which we face while porting the application to the new system?- Any pointers to the problem are most welcome.  Thanks and regards,i Abhijitt   (See attached file: C.DTF)      & --Boundary_(ID_XJ++fKAGiCqoqlgHM3NYJw)2 Content-type: application/octet-stream; name=C.DTF/ Content-disposition: attachment; filename=C.DTFT! Content-transfer-encoding: base64d  L eJ8+IiELAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNyL b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQWAAwAOAAAA0QcDABEAEQAbAB8ABgA9AQEggAMADgAAANEHAwARL ABEAGwAgAAYAPgEBCYABACEAAABCMUQyNDYyMjk1OEZERTRCQTE5QkVFNjE3RkY5MTdBOABdBwEEL gAEAHgAAAE1pZ3JhdGluZyBmcm9tIHZtcyA2LjIgdG8gNy4yAFwJAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEDkAYAL dAcAADEAAAADAAWACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAABShQAA8BMAAB4AXoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAL AABGAAAAAFSFAAABAAAABAAAADguNQALAKKACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAGhQAAAAAAAAMAL FIAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAAGFAAAAAAAACwAWgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAA4UAL AAAAAAALABeACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAOhQAAAAAAAAMAAoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGL AAAAABCFAAAAAAAAAwA9gAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAEYUAAAAAAAADAEKACCAGAAAAAADAL AAAAAAAARgAAAAAYhQAAAAAAAB4AToAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAADaFAAABAAAAAQAAAAAAL AAAeAE+ACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAA3hQAAAQAAAAEAAAAAAAAAHgBQgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAL AAAAAEYAAAAAOIUAAAEAAAABAAAAAAAAAAsAgYALIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAACIAAAAAAAAL CwCDgAsgBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAABYgAAAAAAAACAQkQAQAAAHkBAAB1AQAA0AEAAExaRnWFL TS7RAwAKAHJjcGcxMjUWMgD4C2BuDhAwMzNPAfcCpAPjAgBjaArAc7BldDAgBxMCgH0KgZJ2CJB3L awuAZDQMYA5jAFALAwu1IEhpLAcKogqBAZEgV2Ugd4MAcAVAdG8gbWkJwIxhdBTACGEgYXALUAsNL 4BWgaQIgICh0aPcUwAWgAQAgBAAXcAOgBYFgLWMsc3EDIABwZEwgcANgGBApIANSIEB2YXgvdm0EL IDYULjIVIjcaEC4gSfEU12tubwfgCsAUwBbxuwSQGHF5FSEG8AQgYRmA+wMQAaBsFMACEAXAFvAEL AO4/EWAcwBVAdxDwBUAbtd8Ysh1RGdEegA3gaBTQHXFvANAUwR3gHWFwCRELgGcvHwMWKhUxFvJuL B9FzedJzFbBtPxQEQRxhISD/C4AVsBEQIpYfVRujBGAjcK0gMWwFoAeALhQEVBDwXG5rHNEYkQlwL ZwsRc4kT9UFiHeBqaXQUBAUR4QAp8AAAAB4AcAABAAAAHgAAAE1pZ3JhdGluZyBmcm9tIHZtcyA2L LjIgdG8gNy4yAAAAAgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAcCu2XIzM5k0saTDSgGQ6ce+4wj0kAAACwACAAEAAAADL AN4/r28AAEAAOQCAo0Jy2a7AAQMA8T8JBAAAHgAxQAEAAAARAAAAQUJISUpJVF9LVUxLQVJOSQAAL AAADABpAAAAAAB4AMEABAAAAEQAAAEFCSElKSVRfS1VMS0FSTkkAAAAAAwAZQAAAAAADAP0/5AQAL AAMAJgAAAAAAAwA2AAAAAAADAIAQ/////wIBRwABAAAANgAAAGM9VVM7YT0gO3A9SVRMSU5GT1NZL UztsPVBVTk1TRzAzLTAxMDMxNzExNTczMVotMzAyOTE1AAAAAgH5PwEAAABWAAAAAAAAANynQMjAL QhAatLkIACsv4YIBAAAAAAAAAC9PPUlUTElORk9TWVMvT1U9SVRMSEpXL0NOPVJFQ0lQSUVOVFMvL Q049QUJISUpJVF9LVUxLQVJOSQAAAB4A+D8BAAAAEQAAAEFiaGlqaXQgS3Vsa2FybmkAAAAAHgA4L QAEAAAARAAAAQUJISUpJVF9LVUxLQVJOSQAAAAACAfs/AQAAAFYAAAAAAAAA3KdAyMBCEBq0uQgAL Ky/hggEAAAAAAAAAL089SVRMSU5GT1NZUy9PVT1JVExISlcvQ049UkVDSVBJRU5UUy9DTj1BQkhJL SklUX0tVTEtBUk5JAAAAHgD6PwEAAAARAAAAQWJoaWppdCBLdWxrYXJuaQAAAAAeADlAAQAAABEAL AABBQkhJSklUX0tVTEtBUk5JAAAAAEAABzCmy6P32K7AAUAACDDV86Fy2a7AAR4APQABAAAAAQAAL AAAAAAAeAB0OAQAAAB4AAABNaWdyYXRpbmcgZnJvbSB2bXMgNi4yIHRvIDcuMgAAAB4ANRABAAAAL QwAAADxDN0YyRDc0NDlDMjZENDExQTRCNjAwOTAyNzk4OUFDMDAyRkVGQjlEQHB1bm1zZzAzLmFkL LmluZm9zeXMuY29tPgAACwApAAAAAAALACMAAAAAAAMABhCZmAUmAwAHEAIBAAADABAQAAAAAAMAL ERAAAAAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAASEksV0VXQU5UVE9NSUdSQVRFT1VSQVBQTElDQVRJT04oVEhFQ09EL RUlTSU5ERUMtQyxTUUxBTkRQUk8tQylGUk9NVkFYL1ZNUzYyVE83MklXQU5UVE9LTk9XQVJFVEhFL RVJBTgAAAAACAX8AAQAAAEMAAAA8QzdGMkQ3NDQ5QzI2RDQxMUE0QjYwMDkwMjc5ODlBQzAwMkZF, RkI5REBwdW5tc2cwMy5hZC5pbmZvc3lzLmNvbT4AAEd/  ( --Boundary_(ID_XJ++fKAGiCqoqlgHM3NYJw)--   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Mar 2001 21:13:23 GMT! From: briannfo@aol.com (BrianNFO)l+ Subject: Re: One For the CI Cluster Expertsl: Message-ID: <20010319161323.24295.00002773@ng-fc1.aol.com>  0 >Have you installed the VAXDRIV03_062 patch kit?H >Are there any errors on the network card in this system?  I'd wager theH >network  will be the source of the problem.  $ ANA/SYS - SHOW LAN/COUNT >and look for errors.aG >The CI does not appear to play any role in this since PEA0 is the LAVCs# >driver for the network interfaces.  >i  M Indeed this is correct.  The PEDRIVER I see is used for cluster communicationmO over the LAN.  (I should've realized this.)  So, now I'm wondering if I have mysL cluster mis-configured.  I have a mixed-interconnect cluster with one singleL satellite system, yet the NISCS_LOAD_PEA0 param is set to 1 on each system. M I'm trying to determine that just by loading this driver, the system will use(N this for scs as opposed to he CI?  Is there any way to control this bahavior? M I noticed that cluster_config placed an "interconnect" entry in modparams and J all of my CI nodes say INTERCONNECT="NICI" so my assumption is this is the control.  6 Clearly it's using the CI for the traffic to my HSJ's.   Brian:   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Mar 2001 22:09:51 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>+ Subject: Re: One For the CI Cluster ExpertsG- Message-ID: <87vgp5q28g.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   # briannfo@aol.com (BrianNFO) writes:,  D > I had a problem with something tonight and I can't figure this oneE > out.  I am replacing a 6320 with a 6620.  The 6320 has a CIBCA, andd > the 6620 has a CIXCD.A  F > When I booted the 6620 off the 6320's system disk, my plan was to doC > licenses, system params, etc.  Shortly after the system joins the-C > cluster, I start getting "port has closed virtual circuit" to the A > other nodes.  Up and down...every few minutes.  When the system>9 > finally came up, it was logging PEA0 errors constantly.h  & PEA0: is the NI driver, not the CIXCD.    F > I pulled a CIXCD out of another good system, thinking I might have aD > bad board or a rev level issue, but the problem remained.  SomeoneE > at Compaq said "reboot your cluster."  I sceptically did, and stillmA > the same problem.  So for now, I'm back on the old system.  Any D > thoughts??  Oh, and if I'm missing something blatently obvious, be > gentle.  Thanks much.|  C Other thought, is are the other controllers running 4K packets, and + can the CIXCD? What are the other CI nodes?.   -- r< 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: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 11:26:09 -08009! From: Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.como( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational ProgramD Message-ID: <OF0D0D8957.8F51FE8D-ON88256A14.006A5BA5@foundation.com>  C That's a reasonable idea, but it does destroy the Alpha performanceoJ advantage to a large degree. If you stack up a Java program on VMS againstE a natively compiled program of similar quality on another platform ofiI similar computing power, the Java program will lose. Porting the nativelyi* compiled program will give better results.   Shane           = Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> on 03/17/2001 03:48:04 PM-   To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Coma cc:o  ) Subject:  Re: OpenVMS Educational Programk     "Doc.Cypher" wrote:R >F$ > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >A: > On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Rob Komar <rkomar@telus.net> wrote: >N > <snip> >EK > >Companies like IBM and SGI support Linux because it offers them a way of H > >battling MicroSoft.  They recognize that small companies that upgradeJ > >when they grow prefer to stay with systems that they are familiar with.F > >Linux and the free BSD unices are popular among the small companiesF > >because they are cheap and because there are many young (and, thus, cheaptF > >to employ) people who are familiar enough with them.  When the time comestF > >for a larger and more mature system, many of them choose one of theG > >proprietary Unix systems.  Sun even offers support for running Linuxa appsJ > >under Solaris to make migration easier.  So, where Linux was originallyH > >perceived as a threat against the proprietary Unices, it has now beenI > >recognized to be an important driving force behind the rejuvenation ofo! > >the entire Unix server market.a > >tF > >I hope that those dead set against porting VMS to PC hardware or toE > >porting whiz-bang Windows/Unix software to VMS reconsider in light E > >of the above (or have a completely different plan for rejuvenatingr > >VMS market share).- >p > Very well put Rob. >l > If I can summarise...p >(G > The Q need to produce a VMS system that can act as a small e-businessw; > server and costs not much more than the UN*X counterpart.t  ; Fully agreed. If Java is used as platform there should be ag= chance to offer this without having to port UNIX apps becauseh@ Java is inherent portable. With this combination there is even a@ chance to put VMS' strengths in front and to offer something the< UNIXes might not be able to offer: a very stable environment< (easy to maintain and all the other VMS advantages) combined? with a very fast and stable JVM. The outstanding implementation < of the JVM would be the most important and probably the only thing Compaq has to contribute.   I > For example, a small box to run a webserver, mail server, and carry outdE > simple business management tasks. All for not much more than $2000.P > I > Then the ambitious e-businessman can start with the same OS as the Wall  > Street Casinos.n >yK > Of course, you'd need to give them away to edjuyacashunal e-stablishments G > to make sure there was a base of VMS hackers to run these boxes. That? would D > also ensure that there was a broader base of free software for the > platform.i  @ I completely agree. There is simple calculation: the more people< are able to use VMS entry level systems the more people will@ actually do it even if the percentage is 0.0001. At universities@ the students are open minded, interested in new/alternative ways; and not completely accustomed to one solution. Therefore to 9 offer these systems especially to students and new, small  companies makes most sense.U   > Doc. >o > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----u > Version: N/A >rB > iQEVAwUBOrKa8sriC3SGiziTAQGW+gf8CgA8E6ZEULc2oSQyeOZOPwwLOKwnSfxzB > J5NAWYDvZdq0RlnVSFKXxAwy5xByoDphqMKHidBngGnOc2X/VRKJN4Zz+WCYYxjEB > tJv3kWNFJ4M/ZwAdkA5fvp/ad4Z9QGRSFdGEiC6tnpi5/l34u261BMgvyuTlOtEVB > uYN/yv7vZsi/N3eXJ1W2H+DCuMF6ttNGDhbpOhA0syXWAj3bn95emrpXQx1RDL/jB > EJ325ryEpHoOAkQJcCHK907LilBv4lL3gwoJMpRiZdmPvhy/6qY4uDS/XvfxpYXU: > t2Pc9DtFu6FBnWM24fiptRXsdIf7K2kzmHYwTroUeLgmYyiZvd90Og== > =BJmV  > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----o   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 11:37:29 -0800i! From: Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.coma( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational ProgramD Message-ID: <OF6113A395.6426AF1C-ON88256A14.006BC19D@foundation.com>  ( Damn, but I hate it when Andrew's right!   Shanea          D andrew harrison <andrew.nospam@uk.sun.com> on 03/19/2001 06:08:07 AM   To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comn cc:u  ) Subject:  Re: OpenVMS Educational Program      Christof Brass wrote:r > F > Great! I'm on the right way. Having Andrew as opponent is as safe as sleeping in bed. >t  3 Your bed must be a very very scary place. And don'ta2 get out in the dark the monster inder the bed will get you.  8 Strangely you are only on the right track if your secret$ agenda is the extinction of OpenVMS.  5 Even stranger I disagree with you, not because I careh1 about the survival of OpenVMS but because you areh wrong.  7 You have been quite happy to trash COE without offeringo3 any suggestions as to how you would get major ISV's/6 to support OpenVMS. Its terribly negative and probably5 rather dispiriting to people like Fred who appears to ! be involved with the COE process.-  7 So how would you get major ISV's to support OpenVMS ???3  7 And don't say OpenVMS is great and UNIX is crap becasueM: even if it was true it isn't going to get ISV's to support OpenVMS.   > Brian Wheeler wrote: > > E > > I concur!  I *KNEW* there was a reason why I didn't put you in mys killfile! :) > >P	 > > Brian  > >h. > > In article <3AB202BC.D82E2174@uk.sun.com>,> > >         andrew harrison <andrew.nospam@uk.sun.com> writes: > > > Christof Brass wrote:  > > >>H > > >> It has been written that these COE amendments would for a certainG > > >> period (I assume at least 5 to 10 years) not be available to the  public.)B > > >> So your argument wouldn't fit. But my fear also wouldn't be appropriate.H > > >> But my point is that technically this is something very risky and doneJ > > >> the wrong way will kill VMS technically. Why would one use VMS with UNIXI > > >> apps instead of using UNIX? And putting engineering effort in thatn COETK > > >> niche market project will reduce the engineering power spent for the- > > >> public version. > > >> Insane, isn't it? > > >>F > > >> I'm sure that even the COE UNIX API would already be there this
 wouldn't help0K > > >> VMS. Instead it might well kill VMS also from the marketing point of  viewJ > > >> because the real VMS apps will vanish and there will no apps remain using5J > > >> the real power of VMS. And there will be a lot of apps spoiling VMS by not0 > > >> using its features like structured files. > > > E > > > Ahh so you are afraid that change will kill OpenVMS. Do nothing D > > > and it will survive change it to make it compete with UNIX and > > > it will die. > > >8C > > > 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. > > >BD > > > But lets just address the software issue, the OpenVMS software= > > > catalogue is declining, every week people post articleseE > > > complaining that such and such a vendor has decided to do their ? > > > next release of SW on NT or UNIX rather than OpenVMS. The A > > > fact is that commercial apps that use RMS are declining andI > > > have been for some time. > > >iC > > > How long do you want to wait and how few apps that really useu> > > > 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.- > > >-; > > > Your posts also seem to contain an enormous degree ofr@ > > > pessimism about the ability of Compaqs OpenVMS engineering< > > > group to do a reliable implimentation of the COE API's > > > on OpenVMS.  > > >MC > > > I would not rely on them to post accurate security advisoriestA > > > about OpenVMS but I have no reason to suspect their ability-A > > > when it comes to writing code. They also have access to thepB > > > Tru64 code base which no doubt they will plunder judiciously) > > > to help them in the implimentation.@ > > >p; > > > 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 constructiveoB > > > suggestions you could make some alternative but constructive? > > > suggestions yourself instead of indulging in a boring andr$ > > > tendacious architectural rant. > > > 
 > > > Regards  > > > Andrew Harrisonr > > > Enterprise IT Architectr   -- Andrew Harrisono Enterprise IT Architecto   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 00:05:29 +0100n) From: Brass Christof <brass@infopuls.com>r( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program6 Message-ID: <20010320000529.D2459@mozart.infopuls.com>  B On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 09:47:44AM -0600, Christopher Smith wrote: > > -----Original Message-----4 > > From: Christof Brass [mailto:brass@infopuls.com] >  > @ > > Unrivaled real time capabilities with good price/performance> > > ratio. And a lot of engineers who estimated this clean OS. > H > It seems that Compaq need to look into that price/performance ratio :)8 > That's the only thing that I believe has changed much.  @ As an hobbyist I don't see this except for the HW side. You may A be right but this isn't a technical issue and can't be solved by h' technical initiatives like UNIX on VMS.   @ > > > That's an interesting point, and I see why you're worried  > > about the type ofM@ > > > users it will attract -- after all, there's a slim chance  > > that if they'retB > > > 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.g > D > But we need them to acknowledge the quality of VMS. :) (see below) > A > > > they won't care if it's VMS underneath.  So I really don't ) > > think of the > > > above as a danger at all.t > A > > I'm not only talking about the users; it's the developers whot > > ensure app quality.  > J > Well, actually, it's the developers who _should_ ensure app quality, butM > generally don't these days.  The ones who don't ensure the quality of theirAK > apps, of course, are the same ones (an overwhelming majority) who proudlyEJ > display acronyms like MCSE (an abbreviation for "I paid bill to get evenH > more wrong information") on their resume -- who use tools that are theL > equivalent of a wood-chipper without enough oil to build applications thatI > _should be_ the equivalent of a tree.  The quality of software directlyAG > reflects the quality of the brainwashed masses who believe that usingAF > "visual basic" makes you a programmer.  And what can we do about it?  G Congratulations! I fully agree and have had contact to people behaving AF like complete morons while bragging with their Micro$oft certificates B and unable to install a simple LAN with a Cisco router having two G different types of WAN connections (one leased line, one dial up line).DG VB isn't that bad - the problem is that the GUI builder tools only let  F you do one area of the jobs properly (the GUI part). If more logic is  needed you are on your own.p  J > Yes, if VMS adopts standards closer to the mass, some idiots, goofballs,M > etc, will bleed in and start writing trash that happens to run on VMS.  ThewH > other side of the coin, though, is that it will give the odd (1 in howN > many?) good programmer the ability to make sure that their software will runM > on VMS, which they can't justify at this point because it's a niche system,QL > and not profitable. :/  Do you really believe that most people running VMSD > would run bad software on it?  You'd just have to be more careful.  D Agreed. But it seems that your own analysis to which I fully agreed C leads to the consequences that I mentioned. Given the low ratio of AD good SW and the problems of writing VMS/UNIX SW which will be still B there the business image of VMS will change and it will lose very F soon its image of beeing bulletproof - though the qsUcas are at fault.@ I don't continue, but again, honestly, I think we can derive my D conclusions from your analysis. The only difference might be in the H probability: you see a very small chance to gain something good I don't. > ? > > > Then there's no fundamental argument here, really -- the w > > only question is > > > this:A > > > + > > > How can VMS expand its software base?6 > * > > VMS can't, software developers can :-) > J > Exactly my point. :)  What do you think though -- it's not as if you canN > make VMS more accessible to software developers who know what they're doing,) > and not to the idiots who don't, is it?H  D If I understand your last sentence correctly then you are saying we E can't make VMS easier accessible and by the same time select between NH the good and bad programmers. If you meant this I would it put a little F bit more againt the UNIX on VMS initiative: this way it's very likely I that the careless UNIX crap app programmers will jump on the bandwaggon. -H If Compaq had chosen one of the few very different approaches that I've I already proposed several times the likelihood to attract these UNIX crap 1& hackers would have been close to zero.  
 > Regards, >  > ChrisA > # > Christopher Smith, Perl Developerr > Amdocs - Champaign, IL >  > /usr/bin/perl -e 'A > print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");L > 'U   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:26:16 -0600s+ From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com>w( Subject: RE: OpenVMS Educational ProgramL Message-ID: <3B55D7F383B0D31197D9009027541CBF0BDD549B@cmiexch1.cmi.itds.com>   > -----Original Message-----2 > From: Brass Christof [mailto:brass@infopuls.com]  0 > > It seems that Compaq need to look into that  > price/performance ratio :): > > That's the only thing that I believe has changed much.  B > As an hobbyist I don't see this except for the HW side. You may C > be right but this isn't a technical issue and can't be solved by t) > technical initiatives like UNIX on VMS.i  L It's simply one more "piece of the puzzle," so to speak.  I would argue that< this perhaps even the most important thing for compaq to do.  ? > > reflects the quality of the brainwashed masses who believe - > that usingH > > "visual basic" makes you a programmer.  And what can we do about it? > @ > Congratulations! I fully agree and have had contact to people  > behaving 8H > like complete morons while bragging with their Micro$oft certificates D > and unable to install a simple LAN with a Cisco router having two @ > different types of WAN connections (one leased line, one dial  > up line). @ > VB isn't that bad - the problem is that the GUI builder tools  > only let lH > you do one area of the jobs properly (the GUI part). If more logic is  > needed you are on your own.t  L Well, visual basic is bad for a few reasons.  First off, it's limiting whereK it shouldn't be in boxing you into a gui designer, which, while ok for somerL things, doesn't have the flexibility that may be needed.  Next it allows youJ to be liberal where it shouldn't, in syntax. :)  ... and finally, the onlyI target it will build for is windows, which is its worst quality.  This istK ignoring the fact that it's owned by microsoft who might get bored of it atoK any time and change or pull the plug on it completely. (I'm not saying thism1 will happen, but I like "standardized" languages)h  < > > and not profitable. :/  Do you really believe that most  > people running VMSF > > would run bad software on it?  You'd just have to be more careful.  F > Agreed. But it seems that your own analysis to which I fully agreed E > leads to the consequences that I mentioned. Given the low ratio of tF > good SW and the problems of writing VMS/UNIX SW which will be still D > there the business image of VMS will change and it will lose very H > soon its image of beeing bulletproof - though the qsUcas are at fault.B > I don't continue, but again, honestly, I think we can derive my F > conclusions from your analysis. The only difference might be in the = > probability: you see a very small chance to gain something V > good I don't.i  J Well, as I said we really don't have a fundamental argument. :)  It's justK the way you put it -- the analysis is the same, but the probability of eachr outcome is different.u  ? > > Exactly my point. :)  What do you think though -- it's not / > as if you canP= > > make VMS more accessible to software developers who know M > what they're doing, + > > and not to the idiots who don't, is it?P  F > If I understand your last sentence correctly then you are saying we G > can't make VMS easier accessible and by the same time select between  = > the good and bad programmers. If you meant this I would it r > put a little lH > bit more againt the UNIX on VMS initiative: this way it's very likely ? > that the careless UNIX crap app programmers will jump on the p > bandwaggon.   I That's exactly what I meant.  As the saying goes, when you make something() that any idiot can use, every idiot will.o  L How would you go about making it easy for good programmers to get their workK targeted to VMS, then, including that it must cost next to no time for them K to start out? (that's an unfair requirement, but It's there because I don'tgJ believe that companies will want their people to port to VMS -- it will beH up to individuals to take it up as a personal project in the beginning.)  K I really am curious about how this could be accomplished, since I can thinktK of ways to attract "programmers," but no way to attract only certain types.   J I suppose you could always implement Macintosh compatibility libraries for
 DEC Pascal ;)o   Regards,   Chrisi    ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developerm Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");m 'a   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 01:07:39 +0000 ) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> ( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program, Message-ID: <3AB6AD5B.3C667100@infopuls.com>   andrew harrison wrote: >  > Christof Brass wrote:m > >iY > > Great! I'm on the right way. Having Andrew as opponent is as safe as sleeping in bed.s > >t > 5 > Your bed must be a very very scary place. And don'tm4 > get out in the dark the monster inder the bed will
 > get you. > : > Strangely you are only on the right track if your secret& > agenda is the extinction of OpenVMS.  = The opposite is the case and maybe you know it. It is like ina@ some stories where the bad people behave as if they want to help but instead the do the worst.o  7 > Even stranger I disagree with you, not because I cares3 > about the survival of OpenVMS but because you aret > wrong.   Fits in the picture.  9 > You have been quite happy to trash COE without offering 5 > any suggestions as to how you would get major ISV's 8 > to support OpenVMS. Its terribly negative and probably7 > rather dispiriting to people like Fred who appears to # > be involved with the COE process.c  ; Boring. I and others suggested several viable solutions notm: having the mentioned and analysed risks. Unfortunately you@ didn't get them or you didn't understand them. Bad luck for you.= Don't use other people for supporting your Anti-VMS attitude.o@ And another point: you didn't put in any valuable argument. Your post is an empty suit.  9 > So how would you get major ISV's to support OpenVMS ???G  
 See above!  9 > And don't say OpenVMS is great and UNIX is crap becasueE< > even if it was true it isn't going to get ISV's to support
 > OpenVMS.  = VMS is really great and UNIX is almost as crappy as Windoze -5; unfortunately in several respects its much more crappy thanh@ Windoze (I'm sorry to state this) - the most important advantage; is that because its simplicity you can survive whereas with2 Windoze you sometimes can't.  = You obviously didn't get is: COE and UNIX on VMS won't do the- trick!   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 01:47:55 +0000a) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> ( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program, Message-ID: <3AB6B6CB.6F6C06A7@infopuls.com>  " Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com wrote: > E > That's a reasonable idea, but it does destroy the Alpha performanceML > advantage to a large degree. If you stack up a Java program on VMS againstG > a natively compiled program of similar quality on another platform ofvK > similar computing power, the Java program will lose. Porting the nativelye, > compiled program will give better results.  ; The trick is to use native Java. There is a simple but veryl@ efficient way to do that without breaking the rules of SUNs Java@ game. This will offer the by far fastest Java implementation and4 bundled with the power of Alpha drive the other Java implementations to death.a  ! Isn't that a real killer app? :-)o   > Shaneo > ? > Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> on 03/17/2001 03:48:04 PMe >  > To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comb > cc:a > + > Subject:  Re: OpenVMS Educational Programt >  > "Doc.Cypher" wrote:E > >e& > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >u< > > On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Rob Komar <rkomar@telus.net> wrote: > >a
 > > <snip> > >iM > > >Companies like IBM and SGI support Linux because it offers them a way ofeJ > > >battling MicroSoft.  They recognize that small companies that upgradeL > > >when they grow prefer to stay with systems that they are familiar with.H > > >Linux and the free BSD unices are popular among the small companiesH > > >because they are cheap and because there are many young (and, thus, > cheapsH > > >to employ) people who are familiar enough with them.  When the time > comessH > > >for a larger and more mature system, many of them choose one of theI > > >proprietary Unix systems.  Sun even offers support for running Linuxe > appsL > > >under Solaris to make migration easier.  So, where Linux was originallyJ > > >perceived as a threat against the proprietary Unices, it has now beenK > > >recognized to be an important driving force behind the rejuvenation ofc# > > >the entire Unix server market.p > > > H > > >I hope that those dead set against porting VMS to PC hardware or toG > > >porting whiz-bang Windows/Unix software to VMS reconsider in lightlG > > >of the above (or have a completely different plan for rejuvenatingi > > >VMS market share).u > >e > > Very well put Rob. > >d > > If I can summarise...  > >5I > > The Q need to produce a VMS system that can act as a small e-businessS= > > server and costs not much more than the UN*X counterpart.  > = > Fully agreed. If Java is used as platform there should be ao? > chance to offer this without having to port UNIX apps becausetB > Java is inherent portable. With this combination there is even aB > chance to put VMS' strengths in front and to offer something the> > UNIXes might not be able to offer: a very stable environment> > (easy to maintain and all the other VMS advantages) combinedA > with a very fast and stable JVM. The outstanding implementationh> > of the JVM would be the most important and probably the only! > thing Compaq has to contribute.p > K > > For example, a small box to run a webserver, mail server, and carry out G > > simple business management tasks. All for not much more than $2000.  > >tK > > Then the ambitious e-businessman can start with the same OS as the Wallm > > Street Casinos.  > >rM > > Of course, you'd need to give them away to edjuyacashunal e-stablishments I > > to make sure there was a base of VMS hackers to run these boxes. Thatt > wouldeF > > also ensure that there was a broader base of free software for the
 > > platform.t > B > I completely agree. There is simple calculation: the more people> > are able to use VMS entry level systems the more people willB > actually do it even if the percentage is 0.0001. At universitiesB > the students are open minded, interested in new/alternative ways= > and not completely accustomed to one solution. Therefore tob; > offer these systems especially to students and new, small  > companies makes most sense.d >  > > Doc. > >c! > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----  > > Version: N/A > >lD > > iQEVAwUBOrKa8sriC3SGiziTAQGW+gf8CgA8E6ZEULc2oSQyeOZOPwwLOKwnSfxzD > > J5NAWYDvZdq0RlnVSFKXxAwy5xByoDphqMKHidBngGnOc2X/VRKJN4Zz+WCYYxjED > > tJv3kWNFJ4M/ZwAdkA5fvp/ad4Z9QGRSFdGEiC6tnpi5/l34u261BMgvyuTlOtEVD > > uYN/yv7vZsi/N3eXJ1W2H+DCuMF6ttNGDhbpOhA0syXWAj3bn95emrpXQx1RDL/jD > > EJ325ryEpHoOAkQJcCHK907LilBv4lL3gwoJMpRiZdmPvhy/6qY4uDS/XvfxpYXU< > > t2Pc9DtFu6FBnWM24fiptRXsdIf7K2kzmHYwTroUeLgmYyiZvd90Og==	 > > =BJmVe > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----n   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 01:33:58 +0000 ) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>t( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program, Message-ID: <3AB6B386.679D5C88@infopuls.com>   andrew harrison wrote: >  > Christof Brass wrote:  > >t > > andrew harrison wrote: > > >R > > > Christof Brass wrote:m > > > >-I > > > > It has been written that these COE amendments would for a certain9P > > > > period (I assume at least 5 to 10 years) not be available to the public.P > > > > So your argument wouldn't fit. But my fear also wouldn't be appropriate.N > > > > But my point is that technically this is something very risky and doneP > > > > the wrong way will kill VMS technically. Why would one use VMS with UNIXN > > > > apps instead of using UNIX? And putting engineering effort in that COEL > > > > niche market project will reduce the engineering power spent for the > > > > public version.u > > > > Insane, isn't it?  > > > > U > > > > I'm sure that even the COE UNIX API would already be there this wouldn't helprQ > > > > VMS. Instead it might well kill VMS also from the marketing point of view'Q > > > > because the real VMS apps will vanish and there will no apps remain usingtR > > > > the real power of VMS. And there will be a lot of apps spoiling VMS by not1 > > > > using its features like structured files.  > > >lE > > > Ahh so you are afraid that change will kill OpenVMS. Do nothing D > > > and it will survive change it to make it compete with UNIX and > > > it will die. > >n[ > > I really can't believe it! Nobody in this group wrote that nothing has to be changed!!!s\ > > I really don't get it. What is the meaning of this stupid overture??? Are you braindead? > >l > 5 > Well you have, you are in effect advocating that noT9 > major changes are made to OpenVMS, you also havn't madec8 > any other suggestions other than vague handwavey stuff8 > like lower cost machines and Java support all of which* > you could have got from one of MY posts.  $ Study my posts and change your mind!  D > > > 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. > >fC > > Obviously you didn't read my posts or you didn't understand it.oA > > Numerous times I stated that niche is the worst thing you cantC > > aim for SW! Your post clearly shows that you should look aroundeA > > if there is something like brain available for you instead oft$ > > using your "underlying feeling". > 8 > Sadly I have read your posts and despite the very long > lines I did understand them.  @ Congratulations! I knew you would be able to solve at least that sort of problem ;-)s  > > The problem is that the course you are advocating guarantees< > that OpenVMS will remain a niche OS. You claim not to want6 > OpenVMS to be a niche OS but on the other hand argue: > vehemently a course of action which will guarantee this.  @ Unfortunately I was to early with my congratulation - you didn't understand a clue :-(Q@ There are five simple but highly efficient actions/plans/ways to@ bring VMS on top. I mentioned them publicly. I won't repeat them> here. But worst: the COE stuff will drive VMS into a niche and? will most probably reduce its value and genuine market share asn< any sound analysis revealed so far. That's why you obviously$ support this UNIX crap on VMS stuff.  @ Look Andrew: I'm sure we have almost nothing in common. I try to8 help my customers, you do cheat/fraud them (sorry, wrong= English!). I regard VMS as the best multi-purpose mature high 4 end OS with least TCO, clean design and high quality? implementation. I know that UNIX is crap (in fact it is a piece > of shit). I won't repeat the reasons. Every good engineer will> have the same understanding. Why arguing? I don't see a common< ground. As long as these differences aren't sorted out there? will not be any understanding let alone agreement. And even ourx languages are different.  ' > That is why I say underlying feeling.n  ? I still don't understand what feeling has to do with this case.h# We need analysis and a smart brain.   D > > > But lets just address the software issue, the OpenVMS software= > > > catalogue is declining, every week people post articles E > > > complaining that such and such a vendor has decided to do theirt? > > > next release of SW on NT or UNIX rather than OpenVMS. ThetA > > > fact is that commercial apps that use RMS are declining and  > > > have been for some time. > >oP > > I never said the evolution of mankind is an advance in understanding/reason. > > C > > > How long do you want to wait and how few apps that really usea> > > > 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.' > >r > > 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!m  : > Actually I can give you one really good example of where; > not having the POSIX API's (if you like COE 0.8) has lostm, > Compaq revenue and that example is Oracle. > = > Oracle 8i was very very late on OpenVMS causing a number oft; > OpenVMS/Oracle projects to switch to UNIX/Oracle (in somec; > cases I know of Solaris/Oracle). One reason why it was sog9 > late was because Compaq dropped POSIX support making ite< > harder for Oracle to port 8i from Solaris (its development > platform) to OpenVMS.t  = Porting something OS independent (in case of features) and ato@ the same time marriaged with the OS like a database to VMS using? POSIX is brain dead. I don't believe that the Oracle people arel that stupid.  ? OTOH I regard your example as completely rubish. First of all Ia< don't believe it. Secondly it is wrong in itself because VMS@ Oracle customers would have switched to Tru64 instead of Solaris> crap. Third it is basically wrongly constructed because having7 Oracle on VMS instead of Tru64 is according to the mosti; knowledged posters the wrong way of using Oracle on Alphas.f  7 > This is only one example all be it a very significant 
 > example. > >a > ; > > > Your posts also seem to contain an enormous degree ofo@ > > > pessimism about the ability of Compaqs OpenVMS engineering< > > > group to do a reliable implimentation of the COE API's > > > on OpenVMS.. > >s@ > > Unfortunately not. I even think they might be the only groupG > > in OS development who could accomplish the impossible: to implementiA > > the broken UNIX crap API *together* with the VMS API that thesA > > outcome is still reliable (as opposed to UNIX). This would beb@ > > the first reliable UNIX implementation. Alas this won't help* > > because the UNIX apps are crap anyway. > ? > I am intrigued, what in your opinion is broken about the UNIXt: > API's. Are they all crap, be specific ???? Some examples/ > perhaps would be good rather than general BS.b  < We have been through that in full length within the last few? weeks. So I'm unfortunately forced to refer you to these posts.e= If you read them you will understand that you are posting BS.I7 Did you read and understand "The UNIX-Haters Handbook"?n  = > Are all UNIX apps crap ? I am sure all those UNIX ISV's outn= > there that Compaq are trying to get to port to OpenVMS willo0 > be happy to know that their products are crap.  @ I'm not Compaq. Would you mind refraining from the million flies> brain dead argument. I wonder whether you learn something from; this NG wrt argumentative logic. It would be very disirable  though.   A > > The worst thing about these brilliant people in the VMS groupoB > > is that they probably will succeed and we have the shitty UNIX@ > > in VMS whithout chance to escape from it. Will I use WindozeE > > than to avoid UNIX shit? Will I have to write my own OS? I reallylC > > don't know. If I expect VMS engineering to fail I wouldn't havea > > said anything. > D > Firstly why would OpenVMS engineering implimenting a bunch of UNIXE > API's stop you from using OpenVMS API's and OpenVMS utilities. ThissD > won't happen, you will get UNIX API and utilities co-existing with@ > OpenVMS API's and utilities, if you don't want to use the UNIX> > interface you won't have to anymore than you have to use CDE > instead of a CLI now.N  ? You're not up to date (to say the least). The UNIX crap will bes: implemented in the kernel and we have already talked about= negative consequences to VMS' behaviour which can be observedu now.  C > > > I would not rely on them to post accurate security advisories A > > > about OpenVMS but I have no reason to suspect their abilitygA > > > when it comes to writing code. They also have access to thetB > > > Tru64 code base which no doubt they will plunder judiciously) > > > to help them in the implimentation.  > >tI > > Obviously the VMS engineering group (as mentioned before wrt graphicssF > > drivers) will have to re-write the code and chances are that Tru64J > > will get the corrected source back. This will then the second reliable > > UNIX implementation. > @ > Unlikely, COE on OpenVMS will be a bunch of API's and utilites? > layered on top of the OpenVMS kernel. I doubt that there willi> > be much OpenVMS->Tru64 and Tru64->OpenVMS interchange at the= > kernel level. Libs, utilities etc yes. This also measn thatP< > implimenting COE on OpenVMS is unlikely to have any impact > on OpenVMS itself.  ? Unfortunately you aren't up to date wrt several impacts. Please  read the posts (RTFPs).a  ; > > > So far in this discussion all you have done is posted < > > > negative responses with very hand waved suggestions as< > > > to how OpenVMS is going to boost its software support. > > + > > Sorry? Please be more specific on that.s > >a > < > Tell us how you will ensure that the decline in the number9 > of apps in the OpenVMS SW porfolio is reversed ? I have 9 > read remarkably little in your postings to suggest thati6 > you have given it any serious thought, what you have: > suggested could have been borrowed from one of my posts.  = Unfortunately you didn't read them as I didn't read yours. Soo> there wasn't any chance for my to steal any thoughts from your> posts (I didn't knew that there were thoughts in your posts at= all otherwise I have read them of course, surprise, surprise;E= damned I missed the only post of yours with a thought in it).a  	 > Regards  > Andrew Harrison  > Enterprise IT Architectr   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 01:49:47 +0000l) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com> ( Subject: Re: OpenVMS Educational Program, Message-ID: <3AB6B73B.CDDE2991@infopuls.com>  " Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com wrote: > * > Damn, but I hate it when Andrew's right!  " No reason to worry - he isn't! ;-)   > ShaneM > F > andrew harrison <andrew.nospam@uk.sun.com> on 03/19/2001 06:08:07 AM >  > To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comh > cc:d > + > Subject:  Re: OpenVMS Educational Programe >  > Christof Brass wrote:p > > H > > Great! I'm on the right way. Having Andrew as opponent is as safe as > sleeping in bed. > >  > 5 > Your bed must be a very very scary place. And don'ty4 > get out in the dark the monster inder the bed will
 > get you. > : > Strangely you are only on the right track if your secret& > agenda is the extinction of OpenVMS. > 7 > Even stranger I disagree with you, not because I care'3 > about the survival of OpenVMS but because you areS > wrong. > 9 > You have been quite happy to trash COE without offering 5 > any suggestions as to how you would get major ISV'sn8 > to support OpenVMS. Its terribly negative and probably7 > rather dispiriting to people like Fred who appears tot# > be involved with the COE process.a > 9 > So how would you get major ISV's to support OpenVMS ???  > 9 > And don't say OpenVMS is great and UNIX is crap becasueV< > even if it was true it isn't going to get ISV's to support
 > OpenVMS. >  [SNIP]   > -- > Andrew Harrisont > Enterprise IT ArchitectP   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 13:00:56 -0600 (CST)s From: rmegee@tqtx.come Subject: Re: oracle question2 Message-ID: <200103191900.NAA27012@exwin.tqtx.com>  5 > At 12:21 PM 3/19/2001 -0600, rmegee@tqtx.com wrote:m9 > > > At 11:02 AM 3/19/2001 -0600, rmegee@tqtx.com wrote: 8 > > > >Neither of these forms work in a pl/sql statement$ > > > >from the sqlplus command line > > > >     declare@ > > > >     begin/ > > > >       command  > > > >     end; > > >iO > > > PL/SQL's generally executed on the server, not the client. (Well, some ofeO > > > it at least) That means you generally can't do host commands in triggers.rG > > > Instead you're better off having a server program hanging around C > > waiting onM > > > messages from an Oracle pipe, and have the trigger spit a message into f > > that( > > > pipe when it needs something done. > > >wP > > > Besides, even if you could do host commands from triggers, do you *really*L > > > want everything running with the privs attached to the Oracle account? > > > I > >That's kinda what I've concluded.  I'll have to watch for an output inyA > >and table populated by the trigger.   Thanks for the response.s > L > You don't need to go polling any table. Wasteful. Instead, take a look at N > the docs for the pipe package (dbms.pipe IIRC, which I might not--it's been L > a while). It provides a reasonably nice, blocking communications channel. N > Your server process can just do a loop reading from the pipe. When the pipe : > is empty, the read will block and take up no CPU cycles. > I Great! I found the oracle technet information on the use of dbms pipes.  eA          http://technet.oracle.com/support/bboard/content/662.htmi0 That sounds like just what I need.  Many thanks!   Robert --  P ================================================================================1                                 -----------------f1                                 |  elf Destruct |c1                                 ----------------- K    Never thinking that part of the button's label might have been worn off,gJ    he thought that getting rid of those pesky elves would be a good thing.%    Moments later the ship exploded...sP ================================================================================   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:10:53 -0500t  From: Ben Sego <bsego@clark.net>9 Subject: Perceptics LaserStar12 3.3 distro tape (tk50)...t) Message-ID: <3AB683ED.3EED602D@clark.net>l  G ...does anyone out there have this?  Before you ask the obvious, let mer go through some of the answers.n  C LaserStar and LaserWare are software packages which implement ODS-2 A filesystems on optical media for jukeboxes and standalone drives,e
 respectively.o  D We've been asked to support an abandoned (and seemingly unloved) VAXG 3100 system.  That's the good news.  (Yes, that's as good as it gets in ? this story.)  The system hasn't had decent management in years,iC apparently.  The system has developed problems, due to the neglect.sC We're currently assessing the state of backups, and of the originalsC software distributions.  In order to move the data off some 12 inch E platters in an expedient fashion, we may need to rebuild and reload ar@ pristine software set onto a "new" VAX.  I've called the vendor,E Perceptics, and they're out of the VMS business.  I explained that we E might need to reinstall the software on a different CPU and disk set,oE and the fine folks there pointed out that the license our (and their)sE customer purchased allowed for such an eventuality.  "Great," I said, G "we can be legal.  Now where do we get a replacement distrubution tape,aG 'cause the customer misplaced theirs?"  "Can't help you," they replied,VG "unless you want to buy a license to run under Unix."  I explained thatfF we just wanted to get things working again under VMS.  Perceptics saidG they could offer some help, but that they couldn't cut new media, sincelC "our VAX is probably in the same shape as your customer's machine."I  E So, that's our dilema.  Currently, we're assessing the situation, and-> looking at our options.  Our customer owns a valid license ForE Perceptics software, but they've "misplaced" the tk50 which contained:H LaserStar12, version 3.3.  Perceptics can't supply the media.  They haveH offered to sell us a version which runs under Unix.  We'll probably takeA them up on that, but it would still be nice to get the VAX system G humming properly again, even if it's only for the time it takes to move E the data off the system.  We might be able to recover everything fromeF backups, but the tapes we've tried so far have all had serious errors.E So, we may be down to asking for software distro copies.  Does anyonem out there have a copy of this?   Thanks,n   Ben Sego   ------------------------------   Date: 19 MAR 2001 23:16:49 GMT+ From: Dave Greenwood <greenwoodde@ornl.gov> = Subject: Re: Perceptics LaserStar12 3.3 distro tape (tk50)...e2 Message-ID: <19MAR01.23164966@feda01.fed.ornl.gov>  ! Ben Sego <bsego@clark.net> wrote:    [snip]G > So, that's our dilema.  Currently, we're assessing the situation, andl@ > looking at our options.  Our customer owns a valid license ForG > Perceptics software, but they've "misplaced" the tk50 which containedsJ > LaserStar12, version 3.3.  Perceptics can't supply the media.  They haveJ > offered to sell us a version which runs under Unix.  We'll probably takeC > them up on that, but it would still be nice to get the VAX systemgI > humming properly again, even if it's only for the time it takes to movekG > the data off the system.  We might be able to recover everything frombH > backups, but the tapes we've tried so far have all had serious errors.G > So, we may be down to asking for software distro copies.  Does anyone   > out there have a copy of this?  D I recently shut down a VAX which used Perceptics' software.  Can youC read a 9-track tape?  I have a v3.3 distribution on 9-track.  There ? may be a company around that could read the tape for you if youu can't.  E Er - you state "LaserStar12".  My 9-track tapes just say "LaserStar".a% I don't know if there's a difference.l  F Of possibly more immediate help, I have a LSTARV033.A file on a backupF tape which I *may* be able to read.  I'm guessing that's the LaserStarC v3.3 saveset.  If I can read it and you have network access to yourhD VAX I could get it to you via ftp.  That's only part of the solution$ if you need the LaserWare part also.  B One other possibility.  I *thought* Perceptics sold the VMS rightsD to that software to DEC which then sold it under another name (which8 I've now forgotten).  You might pursue that possibility.   Dave --------------9 Dave Greenwood                Email: Greenwoodde@ORNL.GOV H Oak Ridge National Lab        %STD-W-DISCLAIMER, I only speak for myself   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 21:39:42 -0500o  From: Ben Sego <bsego@clark.net>= Subject: Re: Perceptics LaserStar12 3.3 distro tape (tk50)...y) Message-ID: <3AB6C2EE.37BFE70D@clark.net>S   Dave Greenwood wrote:Y  F > I recently shut down a VAX which used Perceptics' software.  Can youE > read a 9-track tape?  I have a v3.3 distribution on 9-track.  TheretA > may be a company around that could read the tape for you if youa > can't.  K I don't currently have a 9-track drive, but there's a couple of local mediaM* conversion shops nearby that we work with.  G > Er - you state "LaserStar12".  My 9-track tapes just say "LaserStar".d' > I don't know if there's a difference.   K The 12 was supposed to indicated it controlled a 12 inch drive (or jukebox)vH instead of  5 1/4 inch hardware.  It's not clear that there's actually aH difference in the software; there may only have been a difference in the license.  H > Of possibly more immediate help, I have a LSTARV033.A file on a backupH > tape which I *may* be able to read.  I'm guessing that's the LaserStarE > v3.3 saveset.  If I can read it and you have network access to yourtF > VAX I could get it to you via ftp.  That's only part of the solution& > if you need the LaserWare part also.  K That would be very helpful.  I can get it onto the VAX a number of ways, sod having the file would be great.   D > One other possibility.  I *thought* Perceptics sold the VMS rightsF > to that software to DEC which then sold it under another name (which: > I've now forgotten).  You might pursue that possibility.   >s > Dave > --------------; > Dave Greenwood                Email: Greenwoodde@ORNL.GOVoJ > Oak Ridge National Lab        %STD-W-DISCLAIMER, I only speak for myself  L I didn't realize that Perceptics had transferred the rights, and they didn'tJ mention it when I called, but it makes sense. I'll look into that.  In theH mean time, if I could arrange to get your saveset and/or 9trk tape, I'llC probably be a few steps closer.  The only problem left might be theaL "LaserWare" part of the equation, if it turns out that that part of softwareD was on a separate tape.  Maybe somebody else will come up with that?     Ben Sego   bsego@methodin.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 03:03:13 +0000.) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>u, Subject: Re: POSIX Streams, File Permissions, Message-ID: <3AB6C871.D9DEDB24@infopuls.com>   Hoff Hoffman wrote:  > ^ > In article <87bsr19mbr.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes:7 > :hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) writes:a > :>L > :>   This has been dealt with already: write access implies delete in COE. > :>; > :>   The requirements for the UID/GID stuff was fun, too.w > :gE > :What about things like removing the group access of a file you ownfF > :remove your access, according to POSUX? It is this sort of semantic) > :clash that I see being the real worry.n > F >   These mappings are what makes porting code around and particularlyE >   makes implementing standards compliance such "fun".  But you knewp >   that...h > F >   The POSIX security rules are implemented in the OpenVMS kernel forD >   V7.2-6C1.  Yes, these rules are slightly different from those ofG >   native OpenVMS environments, and this is something that we are well G >   aware of for the documentation and particularly for the discussions - >   of object access and privilege "leakage".p > H >   This and related issues of application compatibility -- the securityH >   rules are just one part of application compatibility -- are the coreI >   reasons why the integration of the DII COE work in V7.2-6C1 back into I >   the OpenVMS mainline releases will be a non-trivial project, and will I >   not occur for at least several releases.  (AFAIK, this re-integrationhI >   work is currently planned, and currently planned for release sometimeh" >   (well?) after OpenVMS V7.3-1.) >  [SNIP]  P >  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------L >       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.comP >  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------N >    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com  6 Why can't we have a pure VMS version and UNIX-version?   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 19:20:46 -0000i, From: "Richard Maher" <Tier3@btinternet.com>$ Subject: RMS Alpha COBOL and RMS-STS3 Message-ID: <995m5t$ahk$1@neptunium.btinternet.com>n   Hi,   L I understand that the address of the rms-sts fields can no longer be used to access rabs/fabs in DEC COBOL K (eg: 01  fred pointer value reference rms-sts of myfile. won't even compile K and "set fred to . . ." results in an address that isn't in a fab/rab (I'veiB tried both)) but is there an alternate way of doing this on Alpha?  K Also, am I wrong in thinking the rms-sts, stv fields *aren't* being updatedvC for every error? (IE: I'm in my "declaratives" yet the rms-sts says   rms$_normal) Can anyone explain?   Regards Richard Maherc   ------------------------------   Date: 20 Mar 2001 00:58 -0400a From: hein@eps.zko.dec.c*m( Subject: Re: RMS Alpha COBOL and RMS-STS& Message-ID: <20MAR200100583936@miasys>  d In article <995m5t$ahk$1@neptunium.btinternet.com>, "Richard Maher" <Tier3@btinternet.com> writes... >Hi, > M >I understand that the address of the rms-sts fields can no longer be used to  >access rabs/fabs in DEC COBOL    I     The RABs/FABs are part of the .OBJ on VAX.  On Alpha, the RTL createsnK     RABs/FABs as needed.  This is why the DCOB$ routine calls are needed onoB     Alpha to return the address information known only to the RTL.  F     The user should heed Appendix E of the DEC COBOL Reference Manual.B     This Appendix describes two functions DCOB$RMS_CURRENT_FAB andC     DCOB$RMS_CURRENT_RAB which return the addresses of the RMS FAB       and RAB for a file.   L >Also, am I wrong in thinking the rms-sts, stv fields *aren't* being updatedD >for every error? (IE: I'm in my "declaratives" yet the rms-sts says! >rms$_normal) Can anyone explain?o    D     RMS special registers are specific to DEC COBOL and VAX COBOL onJ     OpenVMS.  In addition, there are differences in the implementations ofH     RMS special registers between the 2 architectures as detailed in the1     DEC COBOL User Manual Compatibility Appendix.t  @     There have been some rtl updates to handle RMS-STS problems.3     Please check your cobol and cobol rtl versions.n  A     DEC COBOL will sometimes emulate RMS record IO (SYS$GET) withoC     block IO (SYS$READ) for performance reasons. Perhaps STS is note     handled exactly the same.      hth, 	Hein.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 14:27:47 +0800h' From: Tim Sneddon <tsneddon@olc.com.au>n( Subject: RE: RMS Alpha COBOL and RMS-STS< Message-ID: <2FCE1FC4E068D411877B00D0B7477F4D0E19E9@onlpc26>  1 Does anyone have the jumper settings for a RZ23L?    Tim.  D --------------------------------------------------------------------C "You can download an atmosphere and dial up a groove, but there's arC certain magic when three musicians and a dyslexic get together and e play in a room."
    -- BonoD --------------------------------------------------------------------   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 00:09:20 +0100 = From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>o# Subject: Re: Support of old systemso) Message-ID: <3AB6919F.77296647@gtech.com>S   "Dr. Otto Titze" wrote: ? > Great VMS: I am running a mixed 6.2 and 7.2 cluster and still : >         have old systems supported which I bought in the >         lat 80-ties.= > But TRU64 Unix: I intended tu upgrade to TRU64 V5.1. Then I 7 >         had to recognize that most of my older Alphase9 >         (3000/400, 200 4/233...) are no more supported.a > C > Is'n that nice? Both operating systems are from Compaq. Obviouslys/ > I was too long a VMS user to understand this.   B Supporting old hardware and software is a "legacy policy" employed by IBM and Digital.a  9 In the new modern open world everything is supposed to be-) trashed after a maximum of 3 years usage.r  	 :-) / :-(.   Arne   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:29:46 -0600 (CST)  From: sms@antinode.org Subject: Support of old systemsh) Message-ID: <01031917294594@antinode.org>o  2 From: "Dr. Otto Titze" <titze@ikp.tu-darmstadt.de>  ? > Great VMS: I am running a mixed 6.2 and 7.2 cluster and stilla3 > 	have old systems supported which I bought in thee > 	lat 80-ties.i> > But TRU64 Unix: I intended tu upgrade to TRU64 V5.1. Then I 0 > 	had to recognize that most of my older Alphas2 > 	(3000/400, 200 4/233...) are no more supported.  G    He had me worried, as I had just invested my $39 in a non-commercialnG Tru64 V5.1 kit for my (other) AlphaStation 200 4/233.  Apparently, it's 2 some AlphaOther-thing 200 4/233 which was dropped.  D    In any case, from my limited experience, VMS is far more tolerantH that Tru64 in the choice of upgrade paths.  I was at V5.0, not V5.0A, so8 I had to re-install to go to V5.1.  That was a surprise.  E    As a non-commercial (and cheapskate) user, I'd like to continue toVF use my obsolete (cheap) hardware for as long as practical (or a littleD longer), so I'm grateful for the effort spent on old-junk support in VMS.  D    I don't know about the rest of the folks out there, but I'm aboutF ready for another batch of bargain AlphaStations, like the 200 4/233'sD at Onsale two or three years ago.  New-in-box, obsolete, and cheap. ! Does it get any better than that?t  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  C    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-9818  (voice, home) C    382 South Warwick Street        (+1) 763-781-0308  (voice, work) G    Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547      (+1) 763-781-0309  (facsimile, work)t9    sms@antinode.org                sms@provis.com  (work)    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 11:12:10 -0800t! From: Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.comg6 Subject: Re: Talk to Rich Marcello - Austin Texas areaD Message-ID: <OF8BCD5A79.B6BFFC2C-ON88256A14.00696D04@foundation.com>  E Even with the mask, he still wouldn't be able to pass as a sheep.....u   Shanet          J "Doc.Cypher" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> on 03/17/2001 03:40:51 AM   To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com? cc:   7 Subject:  Re: Talk to Rich Marcello - Austin Texas areah    " -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----  K On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Oswald Knoppers <Oswald.Knoppers@whitehouse.nl> wrote:i >Paul Repacholi wrote: >>& >> Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com writes: >>I >> > If somebody in this meeting would be prepared to kidnap him, arrangeoH >> > for some compromising pictures to be taken with him and a couple of0 >> > sheep, then help us blackmail him...... ;-) >>3 >> Where are you going to get that sort of sheep...u >o >http://www.muttonbone.com/u >t >Oswald   & I can lend you a nice ski mask Oswald.   -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----r Version: N/A  @ iQEVAwUBOrKa8sriC3SGiziTAQEYhQf/fI2E7QRcI1zQNeTfC9tqmr4qItfb8qbS@ qx1QVFJLmlJGJL8SxOcjddYBNCq0keUnoI/RQYlFDObvQnd2UFEir0LNwJGUbrW+@ PBj9gSlV3UqRL5iS4BL1LXa7fIhqy1T88TSEOiUOHRFazfjHXDTvpa9PFEIOtzE2@ ntbdyHGAapbkoHnM8Ow+SkB5aHraXaOEipEqXQHbBBFixUl6PeYodJ5wZDb0GAek@ zgcDJiI6B2LUKkUSLMDdpnjeVrr8igu6Ht1uV22GwbeE/DuvPM4CtiknkPIQebe78 YkVgmuHWWXmI3GwKvs7QiQQk7V29rwopGi6kejFvuf9TQSPA/VqZrw== =jOG9  -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----t   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 03:06:30 GMTr) From: rob.buxton@wcc.govt.nz (Rob Buxton)=( Subject: TCPIP V5.1 vs TCPIP V5.0A ECO 20 Message-ID: <3ab6c848.25304385@news.wcc.govt.nz>   Chaps,  C I've got a weekend booked to apply some Patches. Both VAX and Alphau& running VMS 7.2 (VAX) & 7.2-1 (Alpha).% So I thought I'd also upgrade TCP/IP..  B I've got TCPIP V5.1 on the March Distribution but I've also pulled down ECO 2 for 5.0A.  @ Anyone any bad experiences of either that would suggest caution?   TIAa   Rob.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 22:14:26 -0600s+ From: Shael Richmond <ksrich@bellsouth.net>e, Subject: Re: TCPIP V5.1 vs TCPIP V5.0A ECO 2- Message-ID: <3AB6D922.8AF44F73@bellsouth.net>e   Rob Buxton wrote:g >  > Chaps, > E > I've got a weekend booked to apply some Patches. Both VAX and Alphaa( > running VMS 7.2 (VAX) & 7.2-1 (Alpha).' > So I thought I'd also upgrade TCP/IP.s > D > I've got TCPIP V5.1 on the March Distribution but I've also pulled > down ECO 2 for 5.0A. > B > Anyone any bad experiences of either that would suggest caution? >   F I recently upgraded to UCX 5.1 on both VAX and Alpha with no problems.@ 5.1 has several new features although I'm not using any of them.C The new location field with telnet is very nice.  No headaches like  the upgrade from 4.2 to 5.0.   Shaelt   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 00:10:46 -0800w From: pageus@myrealbox.com- Subject: The Truth about Free Pager Offers...e$ Message-ID: <330536762@MVB.SAIC.COM>   The Truth About FREE Pagers...   By now you have seen countless emails for getting a FREE PAGER by calling a toll-free number... so what is the TRUTH about this offer?    First off, you might be wondering "How can a company give away FREE PAGERS?" and still make money? Companies like Motorola sell many different styles of pagers and in most cases, when a new style of pager is released, the older pagers lose appeal to the general audience. Lets take the example of the email which says "FREE PAGER, in your choice of color: Blue, Teal or Black, Call 877-699-7401" In that case the pager is a Motorola T-10 Pager and this pager no longer sells as good as some of their other pagi Here is what happens:'  You call the number and tell them that you want a free blue pager. They explain to you that the cost of the monthly service is $9.75 and they ask you to pay 3 months up front, but this amount is fully refundable if you don't like the pagers. The pagers are not used or refurbished so you don't have to worry about getting a second hand pager. The only thing they ask is that you use them for the paging service and this is where they make their money back. In some cases the pager is worth hundreds of dollarseA So, Why so many emails? Why so many different Toll-Free Numbers?:   Yes, you can get many emails on the same subject: "FREE PAGER" and usually at the bottom of the email you can email to remove yourself. But when you remove yourself, you still get emails... If you notice, some of the emails may have the same exact ad but with different phone numbers. This is because the company has many resellers, all assigned a different number and they use this number in their emails, flyers and business cards. If you reply to someone to remove you, there can be many other people with b* Do these opportunities REALLY make money?:  gYes! Electronics and services are things that everyone is looking for these days. Not only do these people sell pagers, but there are companies that allow you to sell Satellite Dishes, Cell Phones, Security Systems, Long Distance, Calling Cards and more! When you get paid a commission on hundreds of peoples long distance bill, you can make quite an income! V  W So, how do you know that a company has a good reputation and you won't get ripped off?:i  (Companies that are in leading magazines, featured articles, been given awards by top companies, web sites and magazines... this is what you look for. If you would like information send email to: pageus@myrealbox.com with the word RESELLER in the subject line and you will be sent the information.  $ How do I get removed from THIS list?   If you want to continue to receive informative articles like this one just send email to: pageus@myrealbox.com with the words KEEP ME in the subject.iq But if you would like to be removed completely, email pageus@myrealbox.com with the word "REMOVE" in the subject.t    j If the above email address no longer works please try pageus2@myrealbox.com for any of the above commands.                         The Truth About FREE Pagers...   By now you have seen countless emails for getting a FREE PAGER by calling a toll-free number... so what is the TRUTH about this offer? -  First off, you might be wondering "How can a company give away FREE PAGERS?" and still make money? Companies like Motorola sell many different styles of pagers and in most cases, when a new style of pager is released, the older pagers lose appeal to the general audience. Lets take the example of the email which says "FREE PAGER, in your choice of color: Blue, Teal or Black, Call 877-699-7401" In that case the pager is a Motorola T-10 Pager and this pager no longer sells as good as some of their other pag  Here is what happens:s   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 21:11:05 +0100a+ From: Arne Bergseth <Arne.Bergseth@dnv.com> " Subject: Re: TURBOchannel graphics' Message-ID: <3AB667D9.9E29F8AE@dnv.com>    Howard S Shubs wrote:   ) > In article <3AB2AC42.E4C98A34@dnv.com>,e/ >  Arne Bergseth <Arne.Bergseth@dnv.com> wrote:t >e? > >The NetBSD people has picked up some specifications for somep) > >TURBOchannel devices and collected in:VG > >ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/misc/dec-docs/index.html#EK-369AA-ODn >hJ > Pardon, but is that a HTTP reference or an FTP reference?  It's confused
 > as written.  >A  = The URL abowe was pasted from the address line of my browser.n3 It works for me with Netscape 4.7 as it is written.dD The reference is to a HTML document stored on a FTP server I believe   Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 20:44:04 -0500s, From: Howard S Shubs <hshubs@mindspring.com>" Subject: Re: TURBOchannel graphics> Message-ID: <hshubs-AE39D5.20440419032001@news.mindspring.com>  N In article <3AB667D9.9E29F8AE@dnv.com>, Arne Bergseth <Arne.Bergseth@dnv.com>  wrote:  > >The URL abowe was pasted from the address line of my browser.4 >It works for me with Netscape 4.7 as it is written.E >The reference is to a HTML document stored on a FTP server I believe   = Thanks!  I just automatically use an FTP client for FTP URLs.  --   Howard S ShubsD "Run in circles, scream and shout!"  "I hope you have good backups!"   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 11:34:33 -0800 ! From: Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.comeG Subject: Re: VMS-based webservers (was Re: OpenVMS Educational Program) D Message-ID: <OFD46EA4A3.E100960A-ON88256A14.006B6824@foundation.com>  A I didn't think the necessary software had been ported. Thanks fornD correcting me. You can run the same conversation for any package notI available on VMS though, and that was the important part of my point, note the specific app.e   Shane.          D Mark Berryman <Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com> on 03/16/2001 09:57:31 AM   To:   Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com  cc:   D Subject:  VMS-based webservers (was Re: OpenVMS Educational Program)    " Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com wrote: > F > Turn it around, Christof. Why don't people use VMS, if Unix sucks so much?pJ > Because that's where the apps run. If you make those same apps available onJ > VMS then VMS becomes a viable option in many areas where it is currentlyE > not viable now. You try selling a manager VMS for a web server thate serves$ > out Real Networks streaming media: >BA > Manager: I want to provide streaming Real Networks media to ourp
 customers.- > Techie: Can I interest you in a VMS system?s/ > Manager: Does Real Networks server run on it? - > Techie: Well, no, but it's really robust...iE > Manager looks at Techie as if he's grown a second head, and makes al mental4 > note to surf Dice.com looking for a new techie....  B And then we have the problem where people think that VMS cannot doH something when, in fact, it can.  Case in point, my VMS-based web serverE serves out Real Networks streaming media (and Quicktime streaming andnC Media Player streaming).  I am puzzled over why you would think VMS- couldn't do this?d  
 Mark Berrymanc Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 01:40:13 +0000r) From: Christof Brass <brass@infopuls.com>wG Subject: Re: VMS-based webservers (was Re: OpenVMS Educational Program)-, Message-ID: <3AB6B4FD.170D14FF@infopuls.com>   "Doc.Cypher" wrote:i > $ > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > H > On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Mark Berryman <Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com> wrote:% > >Shane.F.Smith@Healthnet.com wrote:n >  > <snip> > O > >> Manager: I want to provide streaming Real Networks media to our customers.n0 > >> Techie: Can I interest you in a VMS system?2 > >> Manager: Does Real Networks server run on it?0 > >> Techie: Well, no, but it's really robust...O > >> Manager looks at Techie as if he's grown a second head, and makes a mental 7 > >> note to surf Dice.com looking for a new techie....e > >aE > >And then we have the problem where people think that VMS cannot dooK > >something when, in fact, it can.  Case in point, my VMS-based web serveroH > >serves out Real Networks streaming media (and Quicktime streaming andF > >Media Player streaming).  I am puzzled over why you would think VMS > >couldn't do this? > >  > >Mark Berryman > >Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Como > F > Oh well, I guess that's a case of back to Dice.com to look for a new > techie. ;) >  > Doc.   [SNIP]  > Gread news people! May I drive the conclusion that it would be> more efficient to put some money in VMS marketing, better than in "UNIX crap on VMS" stuff?= Will it bring more apps to VMS if the people would read aboutt< available apps (in fact this is only bringing them virtually< because technically they are there already) than the wishful% thinking increase anticipated by COE?s; And what if COE brings a lot of "UNIX crap on VMS" apps butJ? nobody will get notice because Compaq will then have decided toh> cut down VMS marketing that they don't have to tell the people about these apps?n   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Mar 2001 11:56:15 CDT= From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.412538.killspam.015a (Wayne Sewell)i* Subject: Re: [Q] skip [vms$common] parsing. Message-ID: <attoxZzhA61a@tachxxsoftxxconsult>  U In article <3AB5B63B.8C7A9F06@gmx.ch>, Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@gmx.ch> writes:t > Martin Vorlaender wrote: >> t >> $ DEFINE DFU$NOSMG 1: >> $ MCR DFU  >> DFU> dir/alias sys$sysdevice: >  > ISLKP1_dmo> mc dfu- > %DCL-W-ACTIMAGE, error activating image DFUcQ > -CLI-E-IMAGEFNF, image file not found $1$DGA1:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.][SYSEXE]DFU.EXE;s > OpenVMS 7.2-1a >   I DFU is not part of VMS.  It is a layered product that can be found on thee freeware cdrom.s     --  O ===============================================================================SM Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxxO: http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-) O ===============================================================================uO Dean Wormer to Flounder: "Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life.":   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 13:09:58 +00007 From: Roy Omond <Roy@Omond.net> * Subject: Re: [Q] skip [vms$common] parsing) Message-ID: <3AB60526.3B5ED675@Omond.net>-   Didier Morandi wrote:-   > Martin Vorlaender wrote: > >r > > $ DEFINE DFU$NOSMG 1
 > > $ MCR DFUe! > > DFU> dir/alias sys$sysdevice:d >d > ISLKP1_dmo> mc dfu- > %DCL-W-ACTIMAGE, error activating image DFU-Q > -CLI-E-IMAGEFNF, image file not found $1$DGA1:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.][SYSEXE]DFU.EXE;- > OpenVMS 7.2-1u  
 Criminal !  8 Shoot the system manager who neglects to install DFU :-)  	 Roy Omondh Blue Bubble Ltd.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 20:12:17 -0600D1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> * Subject: Re: [Q] skip [vms$common] parsing' Message-ID: <3AB6BC81.761F8326@fsi.net>u   Bart Zorn wrote: > # > Install DFU from the freeware CD.d  - NO !!! The freeware CD version is too old !!!a  ) V2.7 and the V2.7-1 ECO are available at    # http://www.djesys.com/freeware/vms/n  H V2.7-1 fixes a problem using file lists that I believe goes back to V2.4G or earlier. I asked Ton to fix it because I needed this to work so thatpH BACKUPs and backup date recording could occur asynchronously on a site I worked last summer.n   -- r David J. Dachterah dba DJE Systemso http://www.djesys.com/  : Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page and Message Board: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/1  F This *IS* an OpenVMS-related newsgroup. So, a certain bias in postings is to be expected.  @ Feel free to exercise your rights of free speech and expression.  F However, attacks against individual posters, or groups of posters, are strongly discouraged.    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.157 ************************