1 INFO-VAX	Fri, 21 Sep 2001	Volume 2001 : Issue 525       Contents:
 alpha 7305 RE: alpha 7305 Re: alpha 7305 Re: Alphaserver 8400 Re: Alphaserver 8400 CETS session information$ Compaq announces some TPC benchmarks( Re: Compaq announces some TPC benchmarks$ Re: Compaq staff walk out of meeting, Re: Compaq to add non-MS icons to Windows XP Re: cpio ported to OpenVMS?  Re: Decnet Copy problem  Re: Exceed and OpenVms 7.3 Re: F$CVUI Syntax   RE: Feeling Better about Itanium: How do I add a carbon copy to mime headers within OpenVMS?. How do I send an attachment with OpenVMS mail?2 Re: How do I send an attachment with OpenVMS mail?2 Re: How do I send an attachment with OpenVMS mail?$ How resource directory works in DLM? Info about motif and OS version 9 Re: It's getting to that point - BASIC programmers needed 9 Re: It's getting to that point - BASIC programmers needed " Re: OT: Let's make one thing clear" Re: OT: Let's make one thing clear" Re: OT: Let's make one thing clear" Re: OT: Let's make one thing clear" Re: OT: Let's make one thing clear Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center  Re: Signal handler example Re: Signal handler example Re: Signal handler example Re: Signal handler example! Re: SuSE Linux Desupports ALPHA ? D Re: The most hated country in the world ( was Re: Bomb The Mosques )D Re: The most hated country in the world ( was Re: Bomb The Mosques )( Re: VAX-Alpha Migration: COBOL/BASIC/FMS( Re: VAX-Alpha Migration: COBOL/BASIC/FMS( Re: VAX-Alpha Migration: COBOL/BASIC/FMS Watching the cookie crumble  Re: Watching the cookie crumble  Re: Watching the cookie crumble  Re: Watching the cookie crumble  Re: Watching the cookie crumble  Re: Watching the cookie crumble  Re: Watching the cookie crumble  Re: We are back from CETS  Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center Re: World Trade Center  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 15:40:18 -0700 0 From: "Hank Vander Waal" <hvanderw@novagate.com> Subject: alpha 7305 ; Message-ID: <000401c14225$3a40e840$9c96a8c6@manufact5l8vs8>   $ Can the Alpha 7300 series run VMS ??   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 20:41:49 +0100 5 From: "Steeples, Oliver" <Oliver.Steeples@compaq.com>  Subject: RE: alpha 7305 P Message-ID: <F498D199EDB12D468CD2C66680D3080101DDE641@reoexc04.emea.cpqcorp.net>  7 Nope, it has a cut down SRM console that only allows NT   E Digital Server 7000 Model 7305  - AlphaServer 4100 5/533 NT V4.0 SP3     -----Original Message-----5 From: Hank Vander Waal [mailto:hvanderw@novagate.com] + Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 11:40 PM  To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com  Subject: alpha 7305     $ Can the Alpha 7300 series run VMS ??   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 01:56:52 GMT + From: Jeff Campbell <jcampbell@ins-msi.com>  Subject: Re: alpha 7305 + Message-ID: <3BAA96B5.4796C065@ins-msi.com>    "Steeples, Oliver" wrote:  > 9 > Nope, it has a cut down SRM console that only allows NT  > F > Digital Server 7000 Model 7305  - AlphaServer 4100 5/533 NT V4.0 SP3 >  > -----Original Message-----7 > From: Hank Vander Waal [mailto:hvanderw@novagate.com] - > Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 11:40 PM  > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com  > Subject: alpha 7305  > & > Can the Alpha 7300 series run VMS ??  D I have a DS 3305 and a DS 5305 (yeah eBay!). Both can be made to runB VMS and Tru64 UNIX. I don't have access to a "White Box" 4100 (the/ DS 7305) but you could try the following on it:   /    1) the machine must boot to the SRM console.   5    2) SET the environmental variable BOOT_RESET to ON       3) edit the nvram script:       >>>  edit nvram   "    4) and add the following lines:            10 SET SRM_BOOT ON             20 e       5) INITialize the machine.   A The SRM editor is basic-like. Typing a '?' at the editor's prompt B will give a brief list of commands. The line numbers are required.> If there are any other commands in the nvram script change the  line numbers above as necessary.  4 The contents of the nvram script can be viewed with:    >>> cat nvram   HTH,  
 Jeff Campbell  n8wxs@arrl.net   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 21:28:35 +0100 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>  Subject: Re: Alphaserver 8400 ) Message-ID: <3BAA5172.2638DCD@virgin.net>    Dirk Munk wrote:  L > Well, unless your supplier comes up with a very good reason why you need aL > 8400, I frankly would not trust him anymore. Seems he has a unused 8400 in >   R It's not quite an ordinary suupplier relationship here.  As part of an outsourcingP agreement they proposed to upgrade some VAX equipment and the 8400 was what theyQ wanted to supply. I'm talking about one of the world's biggest IT companies here.  Begins with an "E".     Q > stock somewhere, and tries to sell it to a customer who is stupid enough not to  > know what he is doing.Q > And please, don't forget the storage. With most applications the performance of O > the storage is more important than the performance of the system. Go for SAN, Q > it's the only real option that Compaq offers anyway these days, and it is realy  > veeeeeryyyyyyy fast. >   / Yep, they proposed HSZ80s. I'd expected HSG80s.   N I think they were desperate to try and keep costs down as they are aware of anS in-house bid in competition. That's the best interpretation I can put on it anyway.    --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 07:25:18 +0200  From: Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> Subject: Re: Alphaserver 8400 ' Message-ID: <3BAACF3E.82751DDC@home.nl>    Alan Greig wrote:    > Dirk Munk wrote: > N > > Well, unless your supplier comes up with a very good reason why you need aN > > 8400, I frankly would not trust him anymore. Seems he has a unused 8400 in > >  > T > It's not quite an ordinary suupplier relationship here.  As part of an outsourcingR > agreement they proposed to upgrade some VAX equipment and the 8400 was what theyS > wanted to supply. I'm talking about one of the world's biggest IT companies here.  > Begins with an "E".  > S > > stock somewhere, and tries to sell it to a customer who is stupid enough not to  > > know what he is doing.S > > And please, don't forget the storage. With most applications the performance of Q > > the storage is more important than the performance of the system. Go for SAN, S > > it's the only real option that Compaq offers anyway these days, and it is realy  > > veeeeeryyyyyyy fast. > >  > 1 > Yep, they proposed HSZ80s. I'd expected HSG80s.   U The HSZ80 is end-of-life (or will be very soon). All HSJ (CI) and HSZ (SCSI) stuff is U end-of-life, The only thing that remains is fibrechannel and DAS storage in the shape  of normal SCSI controllers.    >  > P > I think they were desperate to try and keep costs down as they are aware of anU > in-house bid in competition. That's the best interpretation I can put on it anyway.  >  > -- > Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 21:37:16 -0500 , From: "Glenn C. Everhart" <Everhart@GCE.com>! Subject: CETS session information ' Message-ID: <3BAA618C.3883A19F@GCE.com>   > Since Chompaq isn't making the CETS material available online,? if anyone who presented at CETS has anything they would like to ; share, please send me the material and I will get it on the @ sigtapes (sig CD actually) which will be out in a few weeks max.  > There has been a great deal of VMS material released since the last sigtapes.  @ Email to everhart@gce.com or contact me via email preferably for	 the info.   B BTW yes there are a couple full collections of the material I have< in preparation. I have not forgotten, but have a number more< CDs to burn. Those awaiting the collections may go ahead and= remind me but I will also go back and find those to whom they 	 are owed.    Glenn Everhart   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:14:12 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> - Subject: Compaq announces some TPC benchmarks , Message-ID: <3BAA4E0F.940129F0@videotron.ca>  3 Compaq XXXXXXX Servers Achieve First-Ever 1 Billion 4   Transactions-Per-Day In TPC-C Validated Benchmark      9/19/01 3:01pm    E   HOUSTON, Sept. 19 /PRNewswire/ -- Compaq Computer Corp. (NYSE: CPQ) A   today announced that a 32-node cluster of market-leading Compaq 5   servers has achieved a new world-record performance J   TPC-C benchmark result of 709,220.08 transactions per minute (tpmC) at aI   cost of only $14.96 per tpmC. This result leads the industry for price: M   performance in the Transaction Processing Council Top Ten list of clustered K   TPC-C benchmarks (www.tpc.org ). This benchmark represents the equivalent Q   of processing more than 1 billion transactions per day, or in real-world terms, H   more than triple the transactions handled daily, worldwide, by a large1   consumer credit card payment processing system.     B So far, that announcement should have belonged to VMS right ? High. performance, clustering, serious applications.   But:   xxxxx = ProLiant(TM) DL760F   The benchmark was achieved on scale-out configuration of 32 ProLiantH   DL760 servers, each with eight 900MHz Intel(R) Pentium(R) III Xeon(TM)F   processors, running Microsoft(R) Windows(R) 2000 Advanced Server and3   Microsoft SQL(R) Server 2000 Enterprise Edition.    N Another example of Compaq really beleiving that its Wintel crap will take over@ true enterprise stuff. Imagine this, a 32 node wintel cluster !.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 21:42:10 +0100 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> 1 Subject: Re: Compaq announces some TPC benchmarks * Message-ID: <3BAA54A2.F71C92B2@virgin.net>   JF Mezei wrote:   P > Another example of Compaq really beleiving that its Wintel crap will take overB > true enterprise stuff. Imagine this, a 32 node wintel cluster !.  Q Saw that announcement as well. Just couldn't bring myself to comment. No sign yet T that Compaq intend to do anything other than continue to be a glorified PC supplier.N Doubtless they will do their best to infect HP with the same terminal disease.   --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 18:36:10 -0300 @ From: Leandro =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Guimar=E3es?= Faria Corsetti Dutra - Subject: Re: Compaq staff walk out of meeting & Message-ID: <3BAA614A.4000409@mac.com>   Bill Todd wrote:   > J > Don't confuse research with development:  Microsoft has a truly enviableM > complement of top-notch research people (IBM may have more, but I'm sure no   Q 	The problem is, I will only believe any research department in any company when  M it acknowledges it has to dump SQL and develop and implement Tutorial or any   other really relational D.      I  > one else comes close), and they by and large get to work on the things M  > they're interested in rather than stuff expected to bring in revenue a few   > quarters out.  O 	And what hope there can be of insulating the R&D from the complete mediocrity   of the parent company?  D 	What if these people where hired exactly because they didn't pose a  I threat to prevailing mediocrity?  I know for sure that they didn't try to   J hire Date, McGoveran, Pascal or Darwen, but some OODB yes-sayers.  Granted3 this is not OS development, but I see a trend here.          --     _ G / \ Leandro Guimares Faria Corsetti Dutra           +55 (11) 246 96 07 G \ / http://geocities.com./lgdutra/       BRASIL      +55 (43) 322 89 71 H   X  http://tutoriald.sourceforge.net./     mailto:lgcdutra@terra.com.brG / \ Campanha fita ASCII, contra correio HTML    mailto:leandrod@mac.com    ------------------------------    Date: 20 Sep 2001 17:01:22 -0700- From: afeldman@gfigroup.com (Alan E. Feldman) 5 Subject: Re: Compaq to add non-MS icons to Windows XP = Message-ID: <af1e4ce6.0109201601.5911182e@posting.google.com>   a JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message news:<3B9A36C8.62476131@videotron.ca>...  > "Alan E. Feldman" wrote:G > > "But as soon as Compaq announced that it had reached a deal to make H > > America Online its featured online service, Microsoft announced thatI > > if PC makers chose to place any competing software or services on the G > > desktop screen, they had to put three Microsoft icons on as well -- J > > one for the Internet Explorer browser, one for Microsoft Media Player,* > > and one for its MSN Internet service." > > G > > Therefore, I don't think that Compaq scored any brownie points with 6 > > this one. And MS is clearly being "bossy" as well. > N > 1- Have you noticed the Radio Shack ads on US TV ? They push Compaq machinesL > that come with some free subscription to MSN. So while there may be an AOLB > icon on the desktop, there is a better deal with MSN in the box.  > Nope, I didn't see them. Free MSN? Big deal. It's still a rip:  ? My home ISP, Dellnet, was bought out by MSN in January 2001. We > Dellnet customers were told that this was an "upgrade". It wasD anything but. Everything about "Dellnet by MSN" is worse, often muchD worse, than Dellnet. Fortunately, it's free for 12 mos. Meanwhile, IA have signed up with a DSL provider. Therefore, even a free MSN is B likely not as good a deal as AOL. I can't believe AOL is that bad.   > P > 2-Just because Compaq announces that it gets advertising money from AOL to putP > its logo on the desktop doesn't mean that Compaq also won't put the "standard"K > stuff that comes with windows does it ? Or did they strike an "exclusive" F > rights with AOL that prevents them from putting MSN on the desktop ?  E Of course they'll put MS stuff on it. But the point is that Compaq is ? not just a puppet of MS. Would MS put AOL on PC's? I think not! E Therefore, while this may not upset MS much, I still think they would D prefer not to have AOL on the desktop. Also, if the non-MS companiesE are paying CPQ $1 billion dollars or so like the article said they're F probably expecting significant business from this. So I don't think MS1 sent any thank you notes to CPQ, AOL, and Disney.   C I think we're discussing the degree to which Compaq is in lock-step D with MS, and all I am saying is that it is not 100%, which I believe- others in the group have claimed. That's all.   > (I would have posted sooner, but with having to evacuate Lower9 Manhattan on 9/11/01, etc., I just didn't feel up to it.)    Disclaimer: JMHO Alan FeldmanA afeldman&gfigroup.com (I just work there, and I don't even *know*  their opinions on this.)   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 19:34:34 -0500 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> $ Subject: Re: cpio ported to OpenVMS?& Message-ID: <3BAA8B1A.8830CC8@fsi.net>   Arne Vajhj wrote: >  > "David J. Dachtera" wrote: > > Arne Vajhj wrote: > > > Didier Morandi wrote: ) > > > > jamese@beast.dtsw.army.mil wrote: E > > > > > Does any one have any info about a port of cpio to OpenVMS?  > > > > * > > > > W H A T   I S   CPIO ????????????? > > > = > > > A common Unix utility. A very old Unix utility I think.  > > < > > Seems to be compilation of (unsplit?), g(un)zip and tar. >  > ???? > & > CPIO is way older than GZIP/GUNZIP ! > 6 > And I do not think it is that related to TAR either.  # I guess no one told FreeBSD then...    --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 08:08:42 +0800 ' From: "Kenneth" <chehon@netvigator.com>   Subject: Re: Decnet Copy problem0 Message-ID: <9oe06k$88t1@imsp212.netvigator.com>  9 1, Set host B is working fine in any node in the cluster. I 2. B can DECnet copy from any node (except itself), but no other node can  DECnet copy from B.     @ "Tim Llewellyn" <tim.llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk> wrote in message) news:3BAA0D6D.6D315438@cableinet.co.uk...  >  >c > Kenneth wrote: > >u > > The exact error message is:p > >a > > In Node B: > > ========== > > $ NCL SHOW NODE Bt/ > > NCL-E-REQUESTFAILED, command failed due to:e8 > > -CML-E-SESSPROB, error returned from session control1 > > -IPC-E-TIMEDOUT, no response from applicationI@ > > -NET-F-REMOTEDISCONN, connection disconnected by remote user >aI > Doesn't look good. DECNET name resolution is not working on B probably.m >? > > I > > When use $NCL SHOW NODE 0, it will work as it only read from it's owns
 > > database.a > >m0 > > DECnet copy will return the following error:  > > $ DIR B"USERNAME PASSWORD"::H > > %DIRECT-E-OPENIN, error opening B"USERNAME PASSWORD"::*.*;* as input3 > > -RMS-E-FND, ACP file or directory lookup failedr. > > -SYSTEM-F-LINKEXIT, network partner exited > >aG > > But on the other hand, it could DECnet copy from other nodes in thed network,7 > > but not the other node can DECnet copy from Node B.d > >e >n: > so, I repeat my previous question, what is the result of? > a "$ set host b" from a? ie is there any DECNET functionalityd > at all from A to B?: >:F > Also, are you saying you can copy from other nodes to B but not fromA > A to B, or that you can copy from A to other nodes but not fromr	 > A to B?n > 	 > regardsl > -- > Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uka >eD > Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of# > my employers or service provider.h   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 20:02:40 -0500c1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>e# Subject: Re: Exceed and OpenVms 7.3S' Message-ID: <3BAA91B0.12F97F5F@fsi.net>S   Frdrick FRANCILLETTE wrote:B > G > I'm using a PC with Reflection to connect to our Alpha servers. Now I 3 > would like to try Exceed to have CDE environment. F > I'm not familiar at all with DECWindows so the first tests I've done > are unsuccessfull. > Thanks for any help.  F Rather depends which TCP/IP stack you're running on VMS and whether itB provides an XDM server. I can do that from W/95+Exceed to my Alpha/ running OpenVMS V7.1-2 and Multinet V4.2 Rev A.e  * (Hmmm... Gotta upgrade my VMS, I guess...)   -- l David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systemsr http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/-   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 19:15:13 +0100 $ From: "Paul Lowe" <lowe@clara.co.uk> Subject: Re: F$CVUI Syntax5 Message-ID: <2nqq7.73598$y_3.5251988@nnrp3.clara.net>   5 Yup - couldn't see the wood for the trees - it works.-   Thanks very much!e    8 "Pat Rankin" <rankin@eql14.caltech.edu> wrote in message+ news:19SEP200114053576@eql14.caltech.edu...p8 > In article <XY5q7.68620$y_3.4991153@nnrp3.clara.net>,\+ >  "Paul Lowe" <lowe@clara.co.uk> writes...hG > > I wrote a DCL command file several years ago to convert a series ofe ASCII L > > values to their character counterpart.  I've long-since left the company IVL > > wrote the code for, and need to rewrite it, but can't remember how I didH > > it!  can F$CVUI convert an ASCII value to its character counterpart?E > > I know that F$CVUI(0,8,"A") will give its ASCII value - whats the  reversee > > syntax?5 >M: > $ X = "." !make a symbol containing a string of length 1B > $ X[0,8] = 65 !store 8 bits of data into it starting at offset 0 > $ show symbol Xe >   X = "A"e >t4 >                 Pat Rankin, rankin@eql.caltech.edu   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 17:48:53 -0400 * From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>) Subject: RE: Feeling Better about Itanium - Message-ID: <0033000035892560000002L002*@MHS>   ; =0AAh, but POSIX is coming back to VMS as part of DII-COE--   6 First as an add-on, like it used to be, and later with, the interfaces fully integrated into the OS.   WWWebb   > -----Original Message-----1 > From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETt, > Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 1:20 PMD > To: Webb, William W Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET+ > Subject: RE: Feeling Better about Itaniumr >: > 0 > In article <3BAA2055.6030204@mac.com>, Leandro$ > =3D?ISO-8859-1?Q?Guimar=3DE3es?=3D2 > Faria Corsetti Dutra  writes: > Bill Todd wrote: > >  > >>? > >> Higher-end servers won't be 'commodities' in anything likel > the same sense:o > >m > > 8 > > But IBM (and perhaps Sun) will have a big advantage, > selling high-end- > > servers  while sticking to POSIX systems.r > H > That sounds good in theory, but the fact that VMS dumped Posix suppor= tT> > for a while would tend to indicate it is not much of a sales > differentiator., >=   ------------------------------    Date: 20 Sep 2001 14:14:21 -0700$ From: john_20_28_2000@yahoo.com (jm)C Subject: How do I add a carbon copy to mime headers within OpenVMS?s= Message-ID: <c67e4bdd.0109201314.5d613678@posting.google.com>   B How do I add a carbon copy to mime headers within OpenVMS?  I keep getting an error.  Thank you.    ------------------------------    Date: 20 Sep 2001 14:09:34 -0700$ From: john_20_28_2000@yahoo.com (jm)7 Subject: How do I send an attachment with OpenVMS mail? = Message-ID: <c67e4bdd.0109201309.6a5f6a88@posting.google.com>   @ How do I send an attachment with OpenVMS mail?  I also have smtp. installed.  OpenVMS version 7.2-1.  Thank you.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 22:07:32 GMTp. From: Burnie M <burniem.NOSPAM@ozemail.com.au>; Subject: Re: How do I send an attachment with OpenVMS mail?N8 Message-ID: <o4qkqtsqak313daua3sbtghghlsu5un16a@4ax.com>  D On 20 Sep 2001 14:09:34 -0700, john_20_28_2000@yahoo.com (jm) wrote:  A >How do I send an attachment with OpenVMS mail?  I also have smtpo/ >installed.  OpenVMS version 7.2-1.  Thank you.     : I don't believe this is possible with stand VMSmail but...  # RCM comes with a UUENCODE utility.  5 I believe it may also be in some versions of TCPIP v50   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 23:07:18 GMTv2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman); Subject: Re: How do I send an attachment with OpenVMS mail?e1 Message-ID: <GEuq7.434$YP.16584@news.cpqcorp.net>h  d In article <c67e4bdd.0109201309.6a5f6a88@posting.google.com>, john_20_28_2000@yahoo.com (jm) writes:A :How do I send an attachment with OpenVMS mail?  I also have smtpo/ :installed.  OpenVMS version 7.2-1.  Thank you.g  6   Via the MIME utility or MPACK or other similar tool.C   MIME is part of OpenVMS.  MPACK is Freeware.  Various third-partye#   TCP/IP stacks include MIME tools.   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: 20 Sep 2001 22:27:51 -0700" From: ndodderi@yahoo.com (Natesha)- Subject: How resource directory works in DLM?e= Message-ID: <786739d6.0109202127.5638837a@posting.google.com>s  F I understood that resource directory node number will be calculated by! generating hash on resource name.C  ? For example in cluster of 4 nodes, 3rd node is down. If hashingdF function generates node 3 as a directory node. How it works ? and some other doubts are  / 1. What happens when the node, which is holding  directory enries, goes down? -2 Is that directory information is replicated on the0 entire cluster? If yes, How I can achieve this ?  , 2. What happens when Master node goes down? 1 I understood that information will re-master, but  sorry I didn't get it.   Thanks for your help.y Natesha.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 09:55:09 +0530 $ From: "upadhyaya" <ups@hotvoice.com>( Subject: Info about motif and OS version1 Message-ID: <Ehzq7.435$YP.16124@news.cpqcorp.net>   D >  What happens?  Simple mis-positioning, or (for instance) does the >  emulator fail?m=   What do you mean by mis-positioning? is it something like -o%  create/term/detach/wind=(x=-10,y=10) 4   In the above case decterm is not displayed at all.    G >  Please provide the specific OpenVMS and DECwindows versions, and theeD >  specific ECOs involved, and the details of the specific X Windows >  emulator(s) involved.' X window emulator is eXcursion V7.2.181,   sindhu $ product show productm< ----------------------------------- ----------- ------------5 PRODUCT                             KIT TYPE    STATE1< ----------------------------------- ----------- ------------9 DEC AXPVMS DECNET_OSI V7.1          Full LP     Availablec9 DEC AXPVMS DWMOTIF V1.2-4           Full LP     Availablew9 DEC AXPVMS INTERNET_PRODUCTS V1.1   Platform    Availablee9 DEC AXPVMS NS_NAV_EXPORT V2.0-21    Full LP     Availabler9 DEC AXPVMS OPENVMS V7.1             Platform    Availablec9 DEC AXPVMS OSAK V3.0-M              Full LP     Availablet9 DEC AXPVMS OSU_HTTPD V2.0-A         Full LP     Availablen9 DEC AXPVMS RTR V4.1-291             Full LP     Availables9 DEC AXPVMS TCPIP V5.0-9             Full LP     Available(9 DEC AXPVMS TNT V3.0-A               Full LP     Available 9 DEC AXPVMS VMS V7.1                 Oper System Availablei< ----------------------------------- ----------- ------------   Sarayu $ product show product < ----------------------------------- ----------- ------------5 PRODUCT                             KIT TYPE    STATE < ----------------------------------- ----------- ------------9 DEC AXPVMS DECNET_OSI V7.1          Full LP     Availableo9 DEC AXPVMS DWMOTIF V1.2-4           Full LP     Availablee9 DEC AXPVMS OPENVMS V7.1             Platform    Availabler9 DEC AXPVMS RTR V4.1-291             Full LP     Availablev9 DEC AXPVMS TCPIP V5.0-9             Full LP     Available 9 DEC AXPVMS TNT V3.2                 Full LP     Availablet9 DEC AXPVMS VMS V7.1                 Oper System Available,< ----------------------------------- ----------- ------------   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 12:51:37 -0700n' From: David Mathog <mathog@caltech.edu>eB Subject: Re: It's getting to that point - BASIC programmers needed+ Message-ID: <3BAA48C9.2B2D3612@caltech.edu>e   David Spencer wrote:   >l >aE > I'm running a commercial enterprise. If I recall correctly, they'reeB > some legal barriers to using the SSL layer on OSU for my type of > operation, not technical.   C The RSA patent expired.  Anyone know if there are any other issues?e   Regards,   David Mathog mathog@caltech.edu   ------------------------------    Date: 20 Sep 2001 16:24:56 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)eB Subject: Re: It's getting to that point - BASIC programmers needed3 Message-ID: <jvFTcXS1qGBT@eisner.encompasserve.org>o  U In article <3BAA48C9.2B2D3612@caltech.edu>, David Mathog <mathog@caltech.edu> writes:  > David Spencer wrote: >  >> >>F >> I'm running a commercial enterprise. If I recall correctly, they'reC >> some legal barriers to using the SSL layer on OSU for my type ofy >> operation, not technical. > E > The RSA patent expired.  Anyone know if there are any other issues?d  I There is always the issue of what agreements covered the SSL code in OSU.oH While the RSA patent was in effect, some agreements were signed that did$ extend beyond the end of the patent.  I If that is an issue, someone could write a new SSL segment for OSU unless @ there was a fear that implementing RC4 would bring legal action.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 14:39:05 -0400 5 From: David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com>s+ Subject: Re: OT: Let's make one thing clearG2 Message-ID: <IDeqO2xr=3vET6fg6M4SEnnnwXlk@4ax.com>  . On 20 Sep 2001 17:18:53 +0200, Jan Vorbrueggen8 <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:  . >young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) writes: > C >> 	Compare and contrast that to the Stasi.  I understand there was E >> 	little left of their secrets.  But that's all in the past, right?r > M >Not at all, to both - there's such a large amount left over that today, more-M >than ten years later, only a small amount has been analysed; and it is stilli, >very much in the present in people's minds. > A >> 	Speaking of which...  nah... your collective past is too easy1  >> 	to beat you up about, right? >MG >Right, because then I might start asking about _your_ collective past.1 >v >	Jann  D     Jan, I suspect Rob's remark was a sly reference to Nazi Germany.. I seriously doubt you were involved with that.   David R. Beattyu   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 21:21:03 +0100c% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> + Subject: Re: OT: Let's make one thing cleare* Message-ID: <3BAA4FAE.E2BEB151@virgin.net>   Dan O'Reilly wrote:   K > So, who are to be the arbitrators of this?  The Supreme Court has neitheriK > the authority nor the clearance to release this stuff.  BY DEFINITION thesI > intelligence organs of the nation along with the president are the onlyv? > entities with sufficient authority and clearances to do this.h >s   Dan,  N I'm fairly sure your Supreme Court can review classified information should itQ decide to accept a petition. Even the classification and security policies of the.L US are subject to its own courts of Law.  Occasionally the Supreme Court has- ordered documents to be released as I recall.   P Similarly, in the UK, the courts can force the release of classified information but this rarely happens. --
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 15:21:50 -0600w% From: Dan O'Reilly <dano@process.com>r+ Subject: Re: OT: Let's make one thing clear B Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20010920151345.00afde80@raptor.psccos.com>  ( At 02:21 PM 9/20/2001, Alan Greig wrote:     >Dan O'Reilly wrote: >eM > > So, who are to be the arbitrators of this?  The Supreme Court has neithersM > > the authority nor the clearance to release this stuff.  BY DEFINITION thehK > > intelligence organs of the nation along with the president are the onlySA > > entities with sufficient authority and clearances to do this.f > >W >d >Dan,  > O >I'm fairly sure your Supreme Court can review classified information should itkL >decide to accept a petition. Even the classification and security policies  >of the M >US are subject to its own courts of Law.  Occasionally the Supreme Court hasp. >ordered documents to be released as I recall.  L Can they physically?  Sure.  Should they as a matter of course?  No, there'sJ just too much of it for it to be done in the normal course of things.  AndH I'll be there's a certain amount of classified information that even theG Supreme Court couldn't get access to - because they would never know it L existed in the first place.  Furthermore, while it's fine to have the threatH of oversight over an agency, intelligence agencies by definition have toO operate in the dark.  That's not saying they shouldn't be answerable to anyone,-K but it should take an ultimate, huge, major fight to bring all of what theyyL do into the light of day, even years after the fact.  In fact, it's the factH that there's been too much oversight and too many ludicrous restrictionsF placed upon the US intelligence agencies in the last 30-40 years, thatD undoubtedly contributed to lack of warning about last week's events.  F >Similarly, in the UK, the courts can force the release of classified  >information >but this rarely happens.l  K Exactly the same thing here.  But what Jan wanted was for some entity to benF where you could go to say "please review this and tell me if it can beG declassified".  It takes a MAJOR amount of litigation (in terms of many K years) for that to happen in this country, and that's as it should be.  FortL example, for all the hype around JFK's assassination, there are still sealedF government records of some of the proceedings.  35+ years of the pressM bitching about it and trying to sue, trying to force it into the open, hasn'tj made it happen.o   ------I +-------------------------------+---------------------------------------+iI | Dan O'Reilly                  |                                       |xI | Principal Engineer            |  "Why should I care about posterity?  |lI | Process Software              |   What's posterity ever done for me?" |8I | http://www.process.com        |                    -- Groucho Marx    |eI +-------------------------------+---------------------------------------+    ------------------------------   Date: 20 Sep 2001 21:40:33 GMT' From: dashw459@aol.comeatspam (Doug W.) + Subject: Re: OT: Let's make one thing clearI9 Message-ID: <20010920174033.21598.00001526@mb-cg.aol.com>t   API London, 19-Sep-2001g    O   Today Followers of Bill Todd took to the streets as civil war broke out amongCJ their members.  Trouble began after Mr. Todd  distributed yet another newsO release containing provocative sceanarios where violence against Londoner DavidWF Dachtera would become necessary.  In typical fashion, Mr Todd employedI unassailable logic as well as his renowned morality and ethics to justify-J violent opposition to Mr. Dachtera's low cost plan to address terriorism. L Sources close to Mr Dachtera have reported him to be in hiding.  However, heN may simply be unable to communicate due to problems with the cheap software he is known to favor.      K   A recent spate of confusing events has plagued the Followers of Todd.  MroN Todd had spent considerable energy using his talents to rationalize US foreignI policy when Plan 9 was unexpectedly released by Dr Jan Vorbrueggen.  Dr VoN claims to have serendipitiously discovered the basis of Plan 9 while wathing aL movie.  In a move that surprised the the Followers of Todd, Dr V provided anO uncharacteristically large amount of detail on Plan 9 (more than four terse but4K related sentences).  Plan 9 provides NYC with a nonmilitary defense againstcF terrorism.  The plan does have a certain logical appeal.  Briefly Dr VH advocates defending NYC with a simple change of the building codes.  AllJ buildings greater than 30 stories will be required to have a mosque on the	 rooftop. '      aH   The Followers of Todd quickly embraced Plan 9 although some digruntledO members of the group drew attention to its accidental invention rather than thegO abilities of its author.  One of the disgruntled, Mr. Dachtera pointed out Plan K 9 was not a low cost solution and began implementing his own plan to combatuL terrorism without violence.  David's plan calls for the creation of an eliteM squad of unarmed London Bobbies.  The Bobbies are to be parachuted into KabulyG to maintain order.  It is well known no one would dare to harm a Bobby.0      M   Mr Todd fearful of losing control of the Followers and unable to pass up an J opportunity to preach began work on yet another solution.  Using  the fullH power of an Internet search engine, his well known experience in foreignL policy, superior moral sense and wisdom lacking any wit, Mr Todd has come upL with a plan that has no logical flaws.  Full details of Mr Todds plan may beL found spread across thousands of internet pages.  To date any purported flawJ has been shown not to exist by Mr Todd himself at least 3 times before theN bogus flaw was actually noticed.  The stupidity of all who question the latest Todd plan is readily apparent.      G   Although no one has actually managed to read the entire Todd plan, anoL examination of small pieces of it atest to the brilliance of its author.  MrO Todd proposes to give lower Manhattan to Afaghanstan as reparation for a litanyoK of past US injustices. At first blush this may seem radical but Mr Todd has0O assembled an impressive array of facts to support his position.  Mr Todd pointscN out that his latest plan is indeed a low cost solution.  Most of the importantK businesses are relocating to New Jersey as there is no longer any space foreO them.  Following last weeks events a great deal of Manhattan is vacant, damagedSJ or destroyed.  Rebuilding would be terribly expensive.  Also Manhattan hasJ proven to be difficult to evacuate.  We can not bear the responsibility ofI injuring people in a future evacuation which will undoubtedly be required.K unless it is given to Afghanistan.  Manhattan once had a purpose but in itsiO current state its just not working. When something is not working one must havetM the courage to change it.  Its better to avoid expenses and an unwinnable war 8 against terrorism by ceding Manhattan to Afghanistan.             ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 19:27:02 -0400t' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>o+ Subject: Re: OT: Let's make one thing cleari( Message-ID: <9odttc$si2$1@pyrite.mv.net>  4 "Doug W." <dashw459@aol.comeatspam> wrote in message3 news:20010920174033.21598.00001526@mb-cg.aol.com...u >d > API London, 19-Sep-2001   K It's true that I don't see much humor in the current debate (though I don't I believe I'm alone in that).  But you've managed to inject some, and quite  competently.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 13:56:02 -0400s5 From: David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com>g( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center2 Message-ID: <ziuqO+Gccw2pF6o5IjEAa4OPLand@4ax.com>  B On Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:12:38 +0000 (UTC), david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk (D.Webb) wrote:   k >In article <LgSqOwV2hzOHmxGEeXZAhel2bnkU@4ax.com>, David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com> writes:7D >>On Thu, 20 Sep 2001 14:39:50 +0000 (UTC), david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk >>(D.Webb) wrote:S >>m >>>In article <x+apO6dpmylR4ghOw=bgBMbMSABu@4ax.com>, David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com> writes: H >>>>On Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:03:45 +0200, John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch>
 >>>>wrote:J >>>>>Now that's interesting.  There was a recent move - led by the Swiss IL >>>>>think - to stop or greatly reduce arms sales throughout the world.  TheE >>>>>idea was that a reduction in sales will should stop a lot of then >>>>>violence and civil unrest.s >>>>> L >>>>>IRC, most countries supported the idea ... but the US voted against it. >>>>>  >>>>>  >>>>>John McLean >>>>F >>>>    Absolutely the U.S. voted against it.  The proposal would haveE >>>>violated the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (Right to 7 >>>>Keep and Bear Arms). >>>> >>>cN >>>How does a ban on selling arms internationally break the second amendment ?I >>>The US already has some export restrictions on Arms sales doesn't it ?e >>>0M >>>For that matter are there not any restrictions in the US to selling guns ? 8 >>>ie could someone sell a gun to say a 5 year old kid ? >>F >>    I don't remember the exact wording of the resolution, but it wasE >>done in such a way as to severely restrict or ban handgun sales to P >>normal, law abiding citizens.a >>D >>    There are plenty of restrictions against gun sales in the U.S.= >>If memory serves, there are over 20,000 laws regarding gun dD >>restrictions is the U.S.  I'm not sure about sales to minors, but A >>my instinct tells me that minors cannot purchase guns.  I know -' >>convicted felons cannot own firearms.n >> >i >r= >Ok. There are currently restrictions on gun sales in the US.-= >So does the second amendment actually mention selling guns ?mI >Or is it as suggested by "Right to keep and bear arms" purely to do with6, >the ability of US citizens to own firearms. > I >I honestly don't know what the Second amendment says so it could well bee$ >it explicitly mentions arms sales. J >Does it since otherwise I fail to see how restricting arms sales even to N >normal law abiding citizens can break it - and you have already admitted thatL >sales to other groups are restricted without breaking the second amendment. >s  0     From http://www.usconstitution.net/const.txt  D A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free C State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be  
 infringed.  ?     The meaning of the Militia at that time was all able-bodied-= male citizens.  Since the Bill of Rights primarily spells outr: rights, the proper meaning is exactly what the main clause: states, that the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.n  ?     The right is a proper right in that it stems from the right > of self-defense, which stems from the right to self-ownership.  B     As far as the constitutionality of all the gun laws, that's an entirely different subject..   > J >>>>    Your implied assertion that less guns equates to less violence is  >>>>not necessarily correct. >>>> >>>oM >>>Experience in other countries tends to suggest less guns lead to less gun iK >>>related fatalities.  Although people in countries without widespread gun-J >>>ownership can use other means to kill people - knives etc Those methods) >>>tend not to be as "efficient" as guns.-- >>>I have not heard of any drive-by Knifings._ >>: >>    What you don't hear about is how many times guns are; >>used by citizens to thwart crime.  U.S. estimates are 1-2D< >>million annually and in only 2% of those is the gun fired. >>See = >>http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/36733.htm.l >>9 >>    One of the other things you don't hear about is howL@ >>violent crime is going down in the U.S.  Public schools in theA >>U.S. are also becoming safer, the recent tragedies in San Diegol >>and Columbine included.  >>< >>    John Lott did some interesting research regarding guns@ >>and violent crime in his book "More Guns, Less Crime".  A page< >>that contains links to his online articles can be found at# >>http://www.tsra.com/LottPage.htm.o >>< >>    Also interesting is that violent crime in the U.K. has5 >>increased in recent years at the same time that gun % >>sales are being further restricted.- >> >-& >Mostly assaults, street muggings etc.P >I believe the murder/manslaughter rate in the UK is still far below that in theP >US as a percentage of population (even when including the Terrorist outrages of% >the combatants in Northern Ireland).  >u  :     That will require further research on my part, because! I honestly don't know the answer.V   David R. Beatty    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 20:38:18 +0200i& From: John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch>( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center* Message-ID: <3BAA379A.201C3B65@dplanet.ch>   Rob Young wrote: > T > In article <9ocffk$f7j$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> writes: >  > >rN > > So it may well be high time for people who believe that a massive militaryP > > campaign is a really bad idea to start making their voices heard more widely. > > than in local 'communities' like this one. > >o > F >         Perhaps if all 10% of you get a bullhorn you might be heard. > 3 > http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr010914b.aspi > L > The vast majority of Americans support the general idea of military actionJ > against the groups or nations responsible for Tuesday's attacks. SupportM > levels, in fact, are generally at or around an extraordinary 90% level. TheqQ > most recent Gallup/CNN/USA Today poll, conducted Sept. 14-15, shows that 88% of K > Americans say they think the United States should take military action inIQ > retaliation for Tuesday's attacks. This is very little changed from the resultsaQ > of a Tuesday night Gallup/CNN/USA Today poll -- conducted immediately after the Q > attacks -- that found a total of 92% of Americans who supported military action K > of some type. In both polls, 10% or less were willing to say they did nothL > support military strikes in retaliation for the terrorist attacks. Two ABCI > News/Washington Post polls also found that 93%-94% of Americans supportSH > military action against "the groups or nations responsible for today'sN > attacks." A CBS News/New York Times poll conducted Thursday and Friday found  > 85% supported military action. > I >         Maybe you can recruit Jerry Brown and that lady from Californiaa >         to join in.x > % >                                 Rob   G Please repeat after me - Just because lot's of people say something, iti doesn't mean that it is right.     John McLean(   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 11:42:03 -0700r0 From: Mark Berryman <Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com>( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center+ Message-ID: <3BA9D60B.BB18815@Mvb.Saic.Com>    Bill Todd wrote: > : > "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message/ > news:nx41my1If2D9@eisner.encompasserve.org... N > > In article <9ocffk$f7j$1@pyrite.mv.net>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>	 > writes:o > >1 > > >oG > > > So it may well be high time for people who believe that a massive 
 > militaryK > > > campaign is a really bad idea to start making their voices heard moree > widely0 > > > than in local 'communities' like this one. > > >t > > @ > > Perhaps if all 10% of you get a bullhorn you might be heard. > ) > Fuck off, Rob - you're a waste of time.< >  > - bill  H This sort of personal attack is not acceptable in this newsgroup.  (ThisF is not the only such personal attack to appear lately but it is one of the more egregious).  ? I've got a ton of mail asking what can be done about all of theoG off-topic posting that has been going on here recently (the e-mail sidetH of these discussions stays fairly clean but the newsgroup side currentlyB depends on the manners of its participants).  Most of this mail is5 asking what it takes to make the newsgroup moderated.l  E This discussion has degenerated.  Badly.  As I understand it, many ofoF you would prefer not to moderate this newsgroup.  But this discussion,F and its associated heated tempers, has caused a groundswell of supportH to do so.  To prevent the need to take any action on this I am repeatingE what has been asked by others previously: please take this discussion-D elsewhere (and in any discsussion anyone participates in here, don't make it personal).  
 Mark BerrymanO Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com Info-VAX administrator   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 20:44:51 +0200a& From: John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch>( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center) Message-ID: <3BAA3923.22E5588@dplanet.ch>    "D.Webb" wrote:o >     J > I honestly don't know what the Second amendment says so it could well be$ > it explicitly mentions arms sales.  D I've read the full text of the Second Amendment on the web.  I can't: remember the URL and it would take a long time to find it.  F The Second amendment is a little ambiguous and it only takes a sligtlyF generous reading of it to say that it gives *individuals* the right toG bear arms.  A more common interpretation - sometimes by those without aaG vested interest :-)  - says that it permits each of the states to raise?( their own militia in defence of the USA.  H Now at least one of those founding fathers is supposed to have said thatC the Amendments should, over time, be amended and perhaps this needsa! doing in light of modern culture.o     John McLean    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 20:53:58 +0200r& From: John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch>( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center* Message-ID: <3BAA3B46.6B93533C@dplanet.ch>   > >rE > >    Absolutely the U.S. voted against it.  The proposal would havesC > >violated the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (Right to  > >Keep and Bear Arms).  > >y > M > How does a ban on selling arms internationally break the second amendment ?a    H Now something interesting for anyone who has stayed with this discussion (???).  G It Switzerland, where I live, there is a ban on a the sale of marijuana B but every citizen has the right to possess some for one's own use.  G A clear case of there being no conflict between any Right to own versush a Right to sell.  F Hey, if you want to swap your Rolex watch for some, that's not a sale,
 it's a swap !w      
 John McLea   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 21:05:23 +0000 (UTC)m' From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk (D.Webb)o( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center+ Message-ID: <9odlmj$agl$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>i  j In article <ziuqO+Gccw2pF6o5IjEAa4OPLand@4ax.com>, David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com> writes:C >On Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:12:38 +0000 (UTC), david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk' >(D.Webb) wrote: > l >>In article <LgSqOwV2hzOHmxGEeXZAhel2bnkU@4ax.com>, David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com> writes:E >>>On Thu, 20 Sep 2001 14:39:50 +0000 (UTC), david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.ukr >>>(D.Webb) wrote: >>>dn >>>>In article <x+apO6dpmylR4ghOw=bgBMbMSABu@4ax.com>, David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com> writes:I >>>>>On Wed, 19 Sep 2001 22:03:45 +0200, John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch>- >>>>>wrote:-K >>>>>>Now that's interesting.  There was a recent move - led by the Swiss I-M >>>>>>think - to stop or greatly reduce arms sales throughout the world.  TheuF >>>>>>idea was that a reduction in sales will should stop a lot of the  >>>>>>violence and civil unrest. >>>>>>M >>>>>>IRC, most countries supported the idea ... but the US voted against it.e >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>John McLeanh >>>>>bG >>>>>    Absolutely the U.S. voted against it.  The proposal would have F >>>>>violated the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (Right to  >>>>>Keep and Bear Arms).e >>>>>  >>>>O >>>>How does a ban on selling arms internationally break the second amendment ?tJ >>>>The US already has some export restrictions on Arms sales doesn't it ? >>>>N >>>>For that matter are there not any restrictions in the US to selling guns ?9 >>>>ie could someone sell a gun to say a 5 year old kid ?o >>>lG >>>    I don't remember the exact wording of the resolution, but it waseF >>>done in such a way as to severely restrict or ban handgun sales to   >>>normal, law abiding citizens. >>>nE >>>    There are plenty of restrictions against gun sales in the U.S.s> >>>If memory serves, there are over 20,000 laws regarding gun E >>>restrictions is the U.S.  I'm not sure about sales to minors, but tB >>>my instinct tells me that minors cannot purchase guns.  I know ( >>>convicted felons cannot own firearms. >>>  >> >>> >>Ok. There are currently restrictions on gun sales in the US.> >>So does the second amendment actually mention selling guns ?J >>Or is it as suggested by "Right to keep and bear arms" purely to do with- >>the ability of US citizens to own firearms.a >>J >>I honestly don't know what the Second amendment says so it could well be% >>it explicitly mentions arms sales. cK >>Does it since otherwise I fail to see how restricting arms sales even to sO >>normal law abiding citizens can break it - and you have already admitted thatrM >>sales to other groups are restricted without breaking the second amendment.  >> >n1 >    From http://www.usconstitution.net/const.txtl >eE >A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free nD >State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be  >infringed.i >e@ >    The meaning of the Militia at that time was all able-bodied> >male citizens.  Since the Bill of Rights primarily spells out; >rights, the proper meaning is exactly what the main clauseU; >states, that the right of the people to keep and bear Armsk >shall not be infringed. >o@ >    The right is a proper right in that it stems from the right? >of self-defense, which stems from the right to self-ownership.  >TC >    As far as the constitutionality of all the gun laws, that's ano >entirely different subject. >n  G From the above it doesn't look to me as though the second amendment haslH anything to say about the right to sell arms. The right to sell arms is , not the same as right to keep and bear arms. (eg I In the UK, being over the age of 18, I have the right to own and consume a alcoholic beverages.I That does not mean that I have the right to open my house up as a pub and  sell alcoholic drinks. )n      N Hence I still don't see why blocking a motion to ban or reduce arm sales wouldJ be stopped by the US because of the second amendment. It seems more likelyM the US stopped it because of the power of the American gun lobby in American tJ politics. Who would obviously be concerned at any moves which made it more# difficult for them to buy weapons.      
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 18:22:21 -0400 ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>r( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center( Message-ID: <9odq3v$omq$1@pyrite.mv.net>  B "David Beatty" <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com> wrote in message, news:ziuqO+Gccw2pF6o5IjEAa4OPLand@4ax.com...   ...r  2 >     From http://www.usconstitution.net/const.txt >oE > A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free D > State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be > infringed. >-A >     The meaning of the Militia at that time was all able-bodied  > male citizens.  L Largely because all such, rather than specialized enforcement agencies, were@ assumed to take shared responsibility for the common protection.  /   Since the Bill of Rights primarily spells outa< > rights, the proper meaning is exactly what the main clause< > states, that the right of the people to keep and bear Arms > shall not be infringed.   K The qualification 'well regulated', and the explanation 'being necessary to-L the security of a free State', make it clear that the intent of the right is2 for the common (as distinct from individual) good.  J Whether the explanation still holds is questionable.  But the extension ofJ the right is sufficiently unambiguous that attempting to change it without4 enacting a Constitutional amendment would be unwise.   >lA >     The right is a proper right in that it stems from the rightt@ > of self-defense, which stems from the right to self-ownership.  L The wording in the Constitution quite clearly indicates that the right stems= from the right/obligation of *community* defense (see above).    >>D >     As far as the constitutionality of all the gun laws, that's an > entirely different subject.e  ? The phrase 'well regulated' is quite suggestive in this regard.-   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 19:38:41 -0400a+ From: "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com> ( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center+ Message-ID: <9odumh$otq$1@bob.news.rcn.net>i  2 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote in message" news:9ocffk$f7j$1@pyrite.mv.net... >e: > "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message/ > news:4mWXpBglCAxE@eisner.encompasserve.org...u >n > ...  >7, > > tell us all how you are going to fix it. >eK > An actually reasonable statement, though perhaps not quite in the way youU > meant it.  >eK > I think it's time for those of us who feel there's a real problem to stopeJ > bothering with whackos like Rob and start trying to put our efforts intoL > more productive areas.  One reason is because last night CNN chose to air,B > in parallel, on both its regular and 'headline news' channels, aF > professionally-created (half-hour?) film on the evils of the Taliban
 > government.h  I You are referring to "Behind the Veil", a special report by Saira Shah ofvG Independant Television News in London. Yesterday's showing was a repeat./ airing - it originally aired several weeks ago.i  F Given that Ms. Shah works for ITN, I doubt the piece was made for CNN. --
 John Saundersi jws@ma.ultranet.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 19:53:06 -0400e' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>g( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center' Message-ID: <9odve4$d1$1@pyrite.mv.net>6  6 "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com> wrote in message% news:9odumh$otq$1@bob.news.rcn.net...e4 > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote in message$ > news:9ocffk$f7j$1@pyrite.mv.net... > >i< > > "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message1 > > news:4mWXpBglCAxE@eisner.encompasserve.org...m > >  > > ...l > > . > > > tell us all how you are going to fix it. > >nI > > An actually reasonable statement, though perhaps not quite in the waye youg
 > > meant it.  > > H > > I think it's time for those of us who feel there's a real problem to stopL > > bothering with whackos like Rob and start trying to put our efforts intoI > > more productive areas.  One reason is because last night CNN chose toa air,D > > in parallel, on both its regular and 'headline news' channels, aH > > professionally-created (half-hour?) film on the evils of the Taliban > > government.  >hK > You are referring to "Behind the Veil", a special report by Saira Shah ofwI > Independant Television News in London. Yesterday's showing was a repeati1 > airing - it originally aired several weeks ago.f >eH > Given that Ms. Shah works for ITN, I doubt the piece was made for CNN.  J I did not mean to suggest that they had commissioned it, merely that their; decision to air simultaneously on their two news channels anH carefully-crafted product that was neither news nor straight documentaryJ (though it may or may not have materially misrepresented anything:  I'm no= expert on Afghanistan) was unusual enough to raise questions.o   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 23:09:48 -0400i+ From: "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com>i( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center+ Message-ID: <9oeb2d$obg$1@bob.news.rcn.net>e  2 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote in message! news:9odve4$d1$1@pyrite.mv.net...  >t8 > "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com> wrote in message' > news:9odumh$otq$1@bob.news.rcn.net...o6 > > "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote in message& > > news:9ocffk$f7j$1@pyrite.mv.net... > > >d> > > > "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message3 > > > news:4mWXpBglCAxE@eisner.encompasserve.org...s > > >.	 > > > ...> > > >n0 > > > > tell us all how you are going to fix it. > > >pK > > > An actually reasonable statement, though perhaps not quite in the wayi > youh > > > meant it.r > > >nJ > > > I think it's time for those of us who feel there's a real problem to > stopI > > > bothering with whackos like Rob and start trying to put our effortsg intoK > > > more productive areas.  One reason is because last night CNN chose too > air,F > > > in parallel, on both its regular and 'headline news' channels, aJ > > > professionally-created (half-hour?) film on the evils of the Taliban > > > government.o > > J > > You are referring to "Behind the Veil", a special report by Saira Shah ofK > > Independant Television News in London. Yesterday's showing was a repeat:3 > > airing - it originally aired several weeks ago.0 > >5J > > Given that Ms. Shah works for ITN, I doubt the piece was made for CNN. >,L > I did not mean to suggest that they had commissioned it, merely that their= > decision to air simultaneously on their two news channels apJ > carefully-crafted product that was neither news nor straight documentaryL > (though it may or may not have materially misrepresented anything:  I'm no? > expert on Afghanistan) was unusual enough to raise questions.w  % In what way was it not a documentary?  --
 John Saundersr jws@ma.ultranet.como   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 23:53:55 -0400p' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> ( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center( Message-ID: <9oedhl$a9q$1@pyrite.mv.net>  6 "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com> wrote in message% news:9oeb2d$obg$1@bob.news.rcn.net...y' > In what way was it not a documentary?t  J The most obvious difference was in the presence of background music chosenJ to highlight the message being presented.  The accompanying commentary wasJ also heavily laden with value judgements while rather light on surroundingK details.  The result in no way attempted to present a comprehensive picturee& and leave judgements up to the viewer.  D As I said, I don't know that anything was actively falsified or evenI seriously misleading, only that this was *not* a simple report:  it had arI message to present, and presented it very consistently - very much like asJ couple of WW II propaganda films I remember seeing in my youth, which alsoE may not have falsified anything but also were hardly straight 'news'.r   - bill   > -- > John SaundersC > jws@ma.ultranet.como >i >n >    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 00:52:49 -0400 + From: "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com>o( Subject: Re: OT:: Re: World Trade Center+ Message-ID: <9oeh3h$qp1$1@bob.news.rcn.net>e  2 "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com> wrote in message" news:9oedhl$a9q$1@pyrite.mv.net... >:8 > "John Saunders" <jws@ma.ultranet.com> wrote in message' > news:9oeb2d$obg$1@bob.news.rcn.net... ) > > In what way was it not a documentary?g >rL > The most obvious difference was in the presence of background music chosenL > to highlight the message being presented.  The accompanying commentary wasL > also heavily laden with value judgements while rather light on surroundingE > details.  The result in no way attempted to present a comprehensivek picture ( > and leave judgements up to the viewer. >oF > As I said, I don't know that anything was actively falsified or evenK > seriously misleading, only that this was *not* a simple report:  it had aeK > message to present, and presented it very consistently - very much like a L > couple of WW II propaganda films I remember seeing in my youth, which alsoG > may not have falsified anything but also were hardly straight 'news'.h  K I guess I missed the propaganda. I did see the woman getting her head blown $ off in the football stadium, though. --
 John Saundersi jws@ma.ultranet.coms   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 18:25:53 GMTo2 From: hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman)# Subject: Re: Signal handler example 1 Message-ID: <Rwqq7.427$YP.16467@news.cpqcorp.net>o   In article <craig.berry-5F2D6C.12092220092001@newsrump.sjc.telocity.net>, "Craig A. Berry" <craig.berry@nospam.SignalTreeSolutions.com> writes: 2 :In article <gVnq7.420$YP.16423@news.cpqcorp.net>,5 : hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) wrote:v :sI :>   The Freeware MXRN tool uses a signal handler, as does the Perl port,p :iH :I don't think Perl does, unless this is something you folks have added D :to the version of Perl you support.  If so, or if you've added any G :other bug fixes or enhancements, please roll these back into the open d& :source version when you get a chance.  H   Perl 5.5.3 module perl.c uses OpenVMS signals, specifically requestingG   activation of the OpenVMS debugger via the OpenVMS signal handler anduI   the SS$_DEBUG condition value.  Perl 5.5.3 module dl_vms.c establishes  J   the findsym_handler signal handler -- using a call to vaxc$establish -- E   to handle any potential errors from a lib$find_image_symbol call.  o  7   Do I really need to roll these "changes" back in? :-)a  N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------N       For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------L    Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 23:24:10 +0400o4 From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" <Laishev@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU># Subject: Re: Signal handler example 0 Message-ID: <3BAA425A.7BE013B3@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU>   Thanks Hoff!     Hoff Hoffman wrote:r > i > In article <3BA99E23.A473936F@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU>, "Ruslan R. Laishev" <Laishev@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU> writes:hN > :       I looking for a C example of using an user written condition handler  > :established by lib$establish. > F >   You can use lib$establish directly, but the vaxc$establish call isG >   also compatible with the the C signal mechanism -- if you are usingeE >   C signals (as differentiated from OpenVMS signals in C), you wills& >   likely want to use vaxc$establish. > J >   At its simplest, insert the following call into the top of the routine  >   that will field the signals: > ' >     vaxc$establish( lib$sig_to_ret );  > H >   The Freeware MXRN tool uses a signal handler, as does the Perl port,H >   as does the zip tool.  There are other examples around, and you willG >   want to review the OpenVMS programming concepts documentation.  (AsbI >   a start, you can search for any routines that call the CLI$ routines,i! >   as the CLI$ routines signal.)+ > K >   The following pair of routines could have easily been coded as a singlew% >   routine.  (But obviously wasn't.)0 >  >   ...v > #include <chfdef.h>  > #include <ssdef.h> > #include <stdio.h> > #include <stdlib.h>x > #include <stsdef.h>v >   ...@ > 5 > static int Mumble$$SignalHandler( void *, void * );5 >  >   ...,, >   vaxc$establish( Mumble$$SignalHandler ); >   ...> >  > ..# > #if defined( __VAX ) && ( __VAX )c > .. > static int, > Mumble$$SignalHandler( void *SA, void *MA) >     {1 >     int RetStat;9 >     struct chf$signal_array *SignalArray = (void *) SA;>5 >     struct chf$mech_array *MechArray = (void *) MA;d3 >     int DepthCharge = MechArray->chf$l_mch_depth;d >  >     if ( DEBUG_ROUTINES )lW >         fprintf( Mumble$L_LogFile, "Mumble: entering (VAX) Mumble$$SignalHandler(), ci+ >             SignalArray->chf$l_sig_name);m > : >     if (( SignalArray->chf$l_sig_name == SS$_UNWIND ) ||7 >         ( SignalArray->chf$l_sig_name == SS$_DEBUG ))A >         return SS$_RESIGNAL; > D >     RetStat = $VMS_STATUS_SEVERITY( SignalArray->chf$l_sig_name );) >     if (( RetStat == STS$K_SUCCESS ) || $ >         ( RetStat == STS$K_INFO )) >         return SS$_CONTINUE; >  >     DepthCharge = 1;. >     RetStat = sys$unwind( &DepthCharge, 0 ); >  >     return SS$_NORMAL; >     }  > #endif > ..' > #if defined( __ALPHA ) && ( __ALPHA )i > .. > static int- > Mumble$$SignalHandler( void *SA, void *MA )a >     {l >     int RetStat; >     int i;9 >     struct chf$signal_array *SignalArray = (void *) SA;d5 >     struct chf$mech_array *MechArray = (void *) MA;n7 >     __int64 DepthCharge = MechArray->chf$q_mch_depth;  >     int *SigArg; >  >     if ( DEBUG_ROUTINES )nW >         fprintf( Mumble$L_LogFile, "Mumble: entering (Alpha) Mumble$$SignalHandler(),n- >             SignalArray->chf$is_sig_name );r > # >     if ( Mumble$L_DbgLevel > 99 )n >         {r1 >         SigArg = &SignalArray->chf$is_sig_args;nB >         for ( i = 0; i < SignalArray->chf$is_sig_args + 1; i++ )K >             fprintf( Mumble$L_LogFile, "Mumble: SigArg[0x0%x] = 0x0%x\n", . >                 i, *(int *)( SigArg + i ) ); >         }m > ; >     if (( SignalArray->chf$is_sig_name == SS$_UNWIND ) ||s7 >        ( SignalArray->chf$is_sig_name == SS$_DEBUG ))  >         return SS$_RESIGNAL; > E >     RetStat = $VMS_STATUS_SEVERITY( SignalArray->chf$is_sig_name );o) >     if (( RetStat == STS$K_SUCCESS ) ||l$ >         ( RetStat == STS$K_INFO )) >         return SS$_CONTINUE; >  >     DepthCharge = 1;. >     RetStat = sys$unwind( &DepthCharge, 0 ); >     return SS$_NORMAL; >     }w > #endif > .. > 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   -- n Cheers, Ruslan.a? +----------------pure personal opinion------------------------+ 9     RADIUS Server for OpenVMS project - www.radiusvms.comt6       vms-isps@dls.net - Forum for ISP running OpenVMS)                 Mobile: +7 (901) 971-3222    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 15:16:47 -0500aC From: "Craig A. Berry" <craig.berry@nospam.SignalTreeSolutions.com> # Subject: Re: Signal handler examplenI Message-ID: <craig.berry-D755D6.15164720092001@newsrump.sjc.telocity.net>o  1 In article <Rwqq7.427$YP.16467@news.cpqcorp.net>,r4  hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) wrote:  L > In article <craig.berry-5F2D6C.12092220092001@newsrump.sjc.telocity.net>, G > "Craig A. Berry" <craig.berry@nospam.SignalTreeSolutions.com> writes:k4 > :In article <gVnq7.420$YP.16423@news.cpqcorp.net>,7 > : hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) wrote:  > :cK > :>   The Freeware MXRN tool uses a signal handler, as does the Perl port,  > :eJ > :I don't think Perl does, unless this is something you folks have added F > :to the version of Perl you support.  If so, or if you've added any I > :other bug fixes or enhancements, please roll these back into the open v( > :source version when you get a chance. > J >   Perl 5.5.3 module perl.c uses OpenVMS signals, specifically requestingI >   activation of the OpenVMS debugger via the OpenVMS signal handler andi$ >   the SS$_DEBUG condition value.    B Right, but wouldn't that -- like any other lib$signal call -- use E whatever condition handler was in effect, user-supplied or otherwise.c  + >   Perl 5.5.3 module dl_vms.c establishes  L >   the findsym_handler signal handler -- using a call to vaxc$establish -- G >   to handle any potential errors from a lib$find_image_symbol call.  M  G Oops, forgot about that one, and missed it in my search since dl_vms.c s% is a generated file (from dl_vms.xs).o  9 >   Do I really need to roll these "changes" back in? :-)   C Obviously not ;-).  But if anything interesting did change between l 5.5.3A1 and 5.5.3A2, do tell.a   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 15:40:55 -0500eC From: "Craig A. Berry" <craig.berry@nospam.SignalTreeSolutions.com>o# Subject: Re: Signal handler exampleoI Message-ID: <craig.berry-204004.15405520092001@newsrump.sjc.telocity.net>h  0 In article <01092013423529@beast.dtsw.army.mil>,"  jamese@beast.dtsw.army.mil wrote:  H > "Craig A. Berry" <craig.berry@nospam.SignalTreeSolutions.com> wrote on$ > Thu, 20 Sep 2001 12:09:22 -0500 in@ > <craig.berry-5F2D6C.12092220092001@newsrump.sjc.telocity.net>: > 5 > > In article <gVnq7.420$YP.16423@news.cpqcorp.net>,n8 > >  hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) wrote: > > L > > >   The Freeware MXRN tool uses a signal handler, as does the Perl port, > > K > > I don't think Perl does, unless this is something you folks have added e' > > to the version of Perl you support.  > ; > I use these in all my Perl scripts, since at least 5.5.3:e >  > use English;D > $SIG{INT} = \&sighandle;        # routine for <Ctrl-C> or <Ctrl-Y> > sub sighandle {- >     my( $sig) = @_;eI >     print( STDERR "\nCaught SIG$sig -- shutting down $PROGRAM_NAME\n");c >     exit(0); > }: > + > Isn't this done with a "signal handler" ?$  F That's done via the C RTL's emulation of POSIX signals, which I think G under the hood does use a VMS condition handler (also called exception sG handler).  See the C RTL docs for sigaction() for more info.  My point .A was that the C code in which Perl is written does not explicitly eH establish its own condition handler, but as Hoff has pointed out that's D not entirely true since it does establish one to trap blow-ups that & occur while loading a shareable image.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 19:39:14 GMTe0 From: Monty Brandenberg <mcbinc@ne.mediaone.net>* Subject: Re: SuSE Linux Desupports ALPHA ?. Message-ID: <3BAA4606.2AD9C39@ne.mediaone.net>   Peter da Silva wrote:a > + > In article <3BA879D8.FEAE030C@gtech.com>,eA > Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?=  <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com> wrote:t? > > Nobody wants to spend ressource sdeveloping for a platform,d > > that is a dead end . > [...]- > http://www.linux.sgi.com/    Ouch!i   -- eM Monty Brandenberg, Software Consultant                              MCB, Inc.uM mcbinc@world.std.com                                          P.O. Box 426188 M mcbinc@ne.mediaone.net                              Cambridge, MA  02142-0021: 617.864.6907   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 22:56:08 GMTs2 From: "H1Dunc" <duncwremovethis@nospamhotmail.com>M Subject: Re: The most hated country in the world ( was Re: Bomb The Mosques )aB Message-ID: <cuuq7.1701$98.7040@news1.rivrw1.nsw.optushome.com.au>  ; "Israel Raj T" <israelrt@optushome.com.au> wrote in message@2 news:39reqtg29v53s2a6t3cv52bad9se56ftfi@4ax.com...; > Terrorists seem to become worse by orders of magnitude...a  5 that's because its had a warm nest in which to grow -   ; Root it out, discred it as a response to 'perceived wrongs' A make it anathema. Make the world a better place for our children.    ------------------------------    Date: 20 Sep 2001 17:41:53 -0700- From: afeldman@gfigroup.com (Alan E. Feldman)tM Subject: Re: The most hated country in the world ( was Re: Bomb The Mosques )n= Message-ID: <af1e4ce6.0109201641.74a14f31@posting.google.com>o  | "Hamid AzizPOP_Server=pop.freeuk.net" <hsaziz@freeuk.com> wrote in message news:<3U_p7.66356$TB2.5342724@nnrp4.clara.net>...A > "Robert Deininger" <rdeininger@mindspring.com> wrote in messager [snip]J > The fact is that the US Government, its secret agencies and its powerfulB > Corporations are responsible for death, destruction, plundering,I > impoversiment, subversion, insurrections, destabilization of states and N > large scale suffering throughout the world. They have financed and supportedN > terrorists, toppled Democratic Governments and established dictatorships and > tyrants in many countries.  B I think you exaggerate. There is plenty, *plenty* of suffering notA related to the U.S. And you ignore all the financial aid the U.S. C gives to many countries. The Marshall Plan. e.g. And read the quoteu below.  > Also, are you saying that Osama bin Laden actually cares aboutD anyone's suffering? I don't think so. And bin Laden is not exactly a pauper.1   [snip]  > Quoted from http://www.objectiveamerican.com/lastthreedays.cfm  A [Q:] Don't you think the U.S. kind of deserves what it got in thelB WTC/Pentagon bombings? I mean, our treatment of Muslim nations has> been pretty bad, hasn't it? Shouldn't we have expected them to eventually strike back?s &#8212;Sensitive in Seattle   > [A:] Well, first of all, no innocent people ever deserve to beB slaughtered. What kind of savage ethical code do you subscribe to,C anyway? Second, most Muslims the world over have nothing to do with C terrorism and most probably harbor no ill will toward the U.S. SomeaE do, sure. Not most. This is not an U.S. vs. the Muslims problem. ThisrF is a good guys vs. the bad guys problem: U.S. and Muslim good guys vs.: terrorist bad guys (whether of the Muslim or other creed).  F Third, I have no idea why you think we have treated the Muslim nationsB badly. Was it bad treatment to spend billions rescuing Kuwait fromF Saddam Hussein and rebuilding the hundreds of oil wells? Was it bad to> defend Saudi Arabia and several other Muslim states from IraqiC predation&#8212;which we do to this very day? Was it anti-Muslim tor; send billions in aid to Egypt and scores of millions to theoA Palestinians? Was it anti-Muslim to help the Bosnian followers of A Mohammed beat back the ethnic-cleansing Yugoslav Reds? Was it badn? treatment to maintain good relations with Jordan for many years-B running? Was it bad to protect the religious freedom of Muslims inD this nation and speak up for that freedom in the UN and other forumsD worldwide? Was it anti-Muslim to help Uzbekistan and other ex-SovietD Muslim states to build their economies and defend themselves againstC Russian intimidation? The list goes on and on. No, we haven't saved0F every oppressed Muslim everywhere. But who could? Give me a break. TheF U.S. has done more for Muslims and their freedoms than any other major? nation has&#8212;and I don't care what the propaganda of a few,9@ unrepresentative, fanatical Muslims says. You should pay no moreF attention to that than to the propaganda of renegade white supremacist Christians in the U.S.   Disclaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldmane8 afeldman&gfigroup.com  (I am not speaking for gfigroup.)   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 12:17:05 -0600w From: Kevin Handy <kth@srv.net>e1 Subject: Re: VAX-Alpha Migration: COBOL/BASIC/FMSe' Message-ID: <3BAA32A1.33324B2A@srv.net>n  ! norm.raphael@jamesbury.com wrote:i > 2 > We have an app that we need to migrate that uses > FMS, COBOL, and BASIC. > 4 > Does anyone have any tips on what compiler options1 > we should use and/or what to watch out for when  > recompiling the pieces?l  F Make sure that all of your parameters are passed based on the functionD definition. On VAX, you can get away with this. On Alpha, it usually> crashes the program. The Alpha is much more sensitive to this.  D ie. (BASIC) Function defined as 'function real test(real value)' and' called as 'test(1%)' can cause a crash.D  B If you are using prototypes (ie 'extern real function test(real)')   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 14:20:11 -0700s2 From: "Randy Park" <rjpark@mindspring.com.nospaam>1 Subject: Re: VAX-Alpha Migration: COBOL/BASIC/FMS 2 Message-ID: <9odmnl$sk9$1@slb4.atl.mindspring.net>  - <norm.raphael@jamesbury.com> wrote in messages. news:C2256ACD.005D72A1.00@jklh21.valmet.com... >e >c >a2 > We have an app that we need to migrate that uses > FMS, COBOL, and BASIC. >h4 > Does anyone have any tips on what compiler options1 > we should use and/or what to watch out for when  > recompiling the pieces?v >e >  >  > -Normi >I  5 If your Basic code is pretty old and you use a lot of 2 "Double" floating point for representing data that5 if designed correctly would probably use a more exacts2 data type, then you may encounter some problems if6 attempt to continue to use "Double" floating.  This is2 because Alpha does not have native D-Float and the3 compiler will usually, but not always, convert datai2 to G-Float prior to performing operations on them.3 Converting data to G-Float from D-Float will result-* in the dropping of 3 bits of significance.  4 This can be a problem if you have some data that has3 undergone the D to G to D conversion being comparedf5 with data that has not undergone this conversion, andg4 then you perform an 'equals to' or a 'not equals to'
 operation.  5 I have personally encountered Basic language softwareC: that ran as expected on Vax, but not as expected on Alpha,0 due to the way the compiler handled '=' and '<>'9 comparisons on D-float data.  Use of the REAL(,) functionw5 in key locations of your code can frequently overcomea7 this problem.  Be sure not to share D-Float between Vaxo
 and Alpha.  ; Note:  To those that want to respond that D-Float shouldn't 6 be used, my response is that while you are technically7 correct, rewriting an application that had it's originsp8 on a PDP-11, where the D-Float data type was the correct0 solution, is not always always a prudent choice.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:32:17 -0500a' From: "Butler,Jim" <JBUTLER@cerner.com>u1 Subject: Re: VAX-Alpha Migration: COBOL/BASIC/FMS M Message-ID: <D15ED542E12BD3119FFE00805F6551F00C5C98AE@mailwhqnews.cerner.com>l  E Been almost 8 years now and we were porting to unix at the same time,a
 but in COBOL,l) Compile found a few things and then . . .-1 had to mess around with the DECLARATIVES section.-E had some code that worked fine on the VAX (some type of comparison ofwF different variable types?), but was technically an undefined behavior,  which was not the same on Alpha.B Problem moving NUMERICs to alpha fields (sorry, don't remember theF problem, but we added numeric checks before these moves and move ZEROS if not numeric)mA Seems like if you 100% properly use NUMERICS you wouldn't see thea problems we did." Maybe had to init NUMERICS to 1 ?   G We had a large volume of COBOL code, but technically speaking, the port<= of the COBOL was far easier than the system level MACRO code.e  G After all the code porting, we did extensive runtime testing to certifya/ the Alpha code worked the same as the VAX code.b   Hope this helps.  
 Jim Butler Cerner Corp.        -----Original Message-----D From: norm.raphael@jamesbury.com [mailto:norm.raphael@jamesbury.com]0 Posted At: Thursday, September 20, 2001 12:03 PM Posted To: comp.os.vms2 Conversation: VAX-Alpha Migration: COBOL/BASIC/FMS- Subject: VAX-Alpha Migration: COBOL/BASIC/FMSa          0 We have an app that we need to migrate that uses FMS, COBOL, and BASIC.  2 Does anyone have any tips on what compiler options/ we should use and/or what to watch out for when, recompiling the pieces?l       -Normo   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 11:13:34 -0700i' From: David Mathog <mathog@caltech.edu>t$ Subject: Watching the cookie crumble+ Message-ID: <3BAA31CE.A5F081D8@caltech.edu>   C HP and Compaq stock prices have been collapsing at an alarming rateaG since the merger was announced.  Compaq was trading under $8/share when B I last looked.  It's a sick metaphor, and it's not exact, but it'sH almost as if these two pillars of the computer industry are somehow likeE the two towers of the WTC.   I can't get the image of "HP" painted on H one,  "Compaq" painted on the other, out of my head.  The collapse won'tE be quite so complete, and  mercifully nobody's going to die, but veryvH nearly the same number of people will be displaced.  Meanwhile Carly andB Curly are yacking up a storm of unsupported positive spin, tellingH everybody everywhere that everything will be alright.  More or less likeH the poor misguided (and probably deceased) soul who went on the intercomG and told the fleeing workers to return to their offices.   While CompaqlF and HP weren't blown up by terrorists, being sunk by bad management is, still a rotten thing to happen to a company.  E How low can they go?  When Compaq gets down to $5/share do the boardse  finally give up this folly, sackH their CEOs, and try something that makes sense?  If HP gets down too farF does somebody buy them,  tear out the profitable printer business, andH flush the rest of it?  Ditto for Compaq with regard to Tandem and maybe,H VMS?  Or is it the express elevator all the way to the basement for both
 companies?   Regards,   David Mathog mathog@caltech.edu   ------------------------------   Date: 20 Sep 2001 21:45:23 GMT) From: leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerry Leslie)A( Subject: Re: Watching the cookie crumble' Message-ID: <9odo1j$t1j$1@joe.rice.edu>   ( David Mathog (mathog@caltech.edu) wrote:
 : [ snip ]G : How low can they go?  When Compaq gets down to $5/share do the boardslF : finally give up this folly, sack their CEOs, and try something that I : makes sense?  If HP gets down too far does somebody buy them, tear out >H : the profitable printer business, and flush the rest of it?  Ditto for E : Compaq with regard to Tandem and maybe, VMS?  Or is it the express  : : elevator all the way to the basement for both companies? :x From:   4    http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-7082776.html@    HP-Compaq: Breaking up is hard to do -  Tech News -  CNET.com  H   "...According to documents filed with the U.S. Securities and ExchangeC    Commission, either company could be forced to pay a $675 millionlG    breakup fee to the other if it is responsible for the failure of the     multibillion-dollar deal.  I    Specifically, one of the companies would be liable to pay the other ifaG    its shareholders were to fail to approve the deal, if its board were C    to change or withdraw approval of the deal, or if one of the two-I    companies were to cause the deal to be delayed beyond May 30, 2002, orS*    Aug. 30 under certain circumstances..."   --Jerry Leslie   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 22:09:23 GMTo. From: Burnie M <burniem.NOSPAM@ozemail.com.au>( Subject: Re: Watching the cookie crumble8 Message-ID: <0aqkqtsgnschn52h20nn24n35q5i0g5f56@4ax.com>  @ On 20 Sep 2001 21:45:23 GMT, leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerry Leslie) wrote:  ) >David Mathog (mathog@caltech.edu) wrote:  >: [ snip ]oH >: How low can they go?  When Compaq gets down to $5/share do the boardsG >: finally give up this folly, sack their CEOs, and try something that gJ >: makes sense?  If HP gets down too far does somebody buy them, tear out I >: the profitable printer business, and flush the rest of it?  Ditto for <F >: Compaq with regard to Tandem and maybe, VMS?  Or is it the express ; >: elevator all the way to the basement for both companies?2 >: >From: >u5 >   http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-7082776.html@A >   HP-Compaq: Breaking up is hard to do -  Tech News -  CNET.comY >6I >  "...According to documents filed with the U.S. Securities and ExchangeoD >   Commission, either company could be forced to pay a $675 millionH >   breakup fee to the other if it is responsible for the failure of the >   multibillion-dollar deal.t >hJ >   Specifically, one of the companies would be liable to pay the other ifH >   its shareholders were to fail to approve the deal, if its board wereD >   to change or withdraw approval of the deal, or if one of the twoJ >   companies were to cause the deal to be delayed beyond May 30, 2002, or+ >   Aug. 30 under certain circumstances..."  >  >--Jerry Leslieo     Others have asked but;C how is this legal if the shareholders have not already approved thei deal ?   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:14:40 -0600v% From: Dan O'Reilly <dano@process.com>d( Subject: Re: Watching the cookie crumbleB Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20010920161218.00affbe0@raptor.psccos.com>  & At 04:09 PM 9/20/2001, Burnie M wrote:A >On 20 Sep 2001 21:45:23 GMT, leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerry Leslie)t >wrote:f > + > >David Mathog (mathog@caltech.edu) wrote:t
 > >: [ snip ]bJ > >: How low can they go?  When Compaq gets down to $5/share do the boardsH > >: finally give up this folly, sack their CEOs, and try something thatK > >: makes sense?  If HP gets down too far does somebody buy them, tear outrJ > >: the profitable printer business, and flush the rest of it?  Ditto forG > >: Compaq with regard to Tandem and maybe, VMS?  Or is it the express = > >: elevator all the way to the basement for both companies?s > >: > >From: > >:7 > >   http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-7082776.htmltC > >   HP-Compaq: Breaking up is hard to do -  Tech News -  CNET.comr > >2K > >  "...According to documents filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange$F > >   Commission, either company could be forced to pay a $675 millionJ > >   breakup fee to the other if it is responsible for the failure of the > >   multibillion-dollar deal.  > >'L > >   Specifically, one of the companies would be liable to pay the other ifJ > >   its shareholders were to fail to approve the deal, if its board wereF > >   to change or withdraw approval of the deal, or if one of the twoL > >   companies were to cause the deal to be delayed beyond May 30, 2002, or- > >   Aug. 30 under certain circumstances..."s > >n > >--Jerry LeslieE >) >  >Others have asked but; D >how is this legal if the shareholders have not already approved the >deal ?l  I It's quite common; in fact, it's pretty much the norm in deals this size.oM I believe it's designed to make it very expensive for company A to enter into(K multiple deals to sell itself.  For example, when MCI broke up with BritisheM Telecom in 1998, I think there was something like $200m involved there.  MoredM recently, I think UAL had to pay US Air something like $700m for the deal nota! going thru just this past summer.      ------I +-------------------------------+---------------------------------------+ I | Dan O'Reilly                  |                                       |rI | Principal Engineer            |  "Why should I care about posterity?  |aI | Process Software              |   What's posterity ever done for me?" |5I | http://www.process.com        |                    -- Groucho Marx    |nI +-------------------------------+---------------------------------------+-   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 18:47:54 -0400r- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>I( Subject: Re: Watching the cookie crumble, Message-ID: <3BAA7213.D9AEC498@videotron.ca>   Jerry Leslie wrote: K >    Specifically, one of the companies would be liable to pay the other if-I >    its shareholders were to fail to approve the deal, if its board weren0 >    to change or withdraw approval of the deal,  N Similar clauses existed in the UA-US airlines merger, but when both widthdrew, there were no penalties.  J The problem is that Compaq has no reason to widthdraw since its purpose inH life has evaporated. If it is unable to make money selling wintel boxes,N Compaq has no reason to continue to live. So Compaq is essentially selling itsF VMS/UNIX/Tandem stuff it never wanted to HP, closing up most of the PC1 business and giving HP the keys to its customers.e   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 22:34:16 GMT-& From: "john nixon" <jnixon@cfl.rr.com>( Subject: Re: Watching the cookie crumble> Message-ID: <I9uq7.187232$aZ.33078217@typhoon.tampabay.rr.com>  ; "Burnie M" <burniem.NOSPAM@ozemail.com.au> wrote in messageo2 news:0aqkqtsgnschn52h20nn24n35q5i0g5f56@4ax.com... >n > Others have asked but;E > how is this legal if the shareholders have not already approved theb > deal ? >"  J The shareholders do not have to approve each and every action of the boardJ of directors.  They elect the board to handle the majority of actions, andL the stockholders only have to approve specific actions.  The board can enterK into contracts.  The shareholders must approve corporate structure changes.t   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 19:14:06 -0400t' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>i( Subject: Re: Watching the cookie crumble( Message-ID: <9odt50$r9j$1@pyrite.mv.net>  1 "john nixon" <jnixon@cfl.rr.com> wrote in messageg8 news:I9uq7.187232$aZ.33078217@typhoon.tampabay.rr.com... >.= > "Burnie M" <burniem.NOSPAM@ozemail.com.au> wrote in messager4 > news:0aqkqtsgnschn52h20nn24n35q5i0g5f56@4ax.com... > >o > > Others have asked but;G > > how is this legal if the shareholders have not already approved thet
 > > deal ? > >e >rL > The shareholders do not have to approve each and every action of the boardL > of directors.  They elect the board to handle the majority of actions, andH > the stockholders only have to approve specific actions.  The board can enterlD > into contracts.  The shareholders must approve corporate structure changes.  I If that's a legal constraint, then its purpose is clearly (and apparentlydJ deliberately) undermined by this kind of 'poison pill' that management hasK agreed to.  Whether that's sufficient to have it declared invalid I have no. idea.a   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 15:59:03 -0400u- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>o" Subject: Re: We are back from CETS+ Message-ID: <3BAA4A83.7051494@videotron.ca>I   john nixon wrote:  > J > I wonder if the people that did register for CETS agree with the idea ofJ > keeping the information from  those us us that for one reason or another > could not register or attend.S  M The way I see it, the organisation thinks that there wasn't much value to thedJ conference, so they have to try to give customers as much justification asb possible for the money they paid, hence giving them preferential treatment to documents/materials.  * In my opinion, this is not a healthy sign.  L What HPaq should do is simply short circuit this policy by publishing all of< the HPaq on the vms website, available to all VMS customers.    K I think that Compaq should tell that user group (whatever its name might be L this week) that now is not the time to become "proprietary" with informationP and that the user group should disseminate all the information to all customers.  L Then again, Compaq doesn't care about "all customers", it only cares about a@ few customers who have already gotten that information directly.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 13:42:19 -0400t5 From: David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com>  Subject: Re: World Trade Centerd2 Message-ID: <8SmqO4Zy3NV6POYKNtmC4YIlkeRm@4ax.com>  . On 20 Sep 2001 17:27:26 +0200, Jan Vorbrueggen8 <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:  8 >David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com> writes: >-< >>     2.  That by being a C.E.O., he is somehow indebted toA >>          U.S. corporations moreso that he is to U.S. citizens.O >AM >Although I can see no way that my remark insinuates that - but you obviouslymN >do - it is clear that he is. He would not have been elected without financialL >support from US companies. Of course, no US president in recent history hasN >been, but the moeny that was spent on the incumbent's campaign was egregious.K >And of course all those thousands of lobbyists in the Beltway are there to " >further John Doe's interests, eh? >A% >Go read Carl Schurz's autobiography.T   Whatever ...    >> Am I being overly sensitive?  >  >Yes.n   Whatever ...   >> Perhaps ... but how often< >> has a direct attack against U.S. citizens resulted in the? >> loss of this many lives or the potentially negative economic-5 >> impact (one conervative estimate at $315 billion).0 >s' >"conservative $315 billion"? Bullshit.o >o >	Jan   0     When the article is posted into the archives+ at http://www.objectiveamerican.com/ I will., post a link and you can decide for yourself.   David R. Beatty6   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 13:35:51 -0400n5 From: David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com>  Subject: Re: World Trade Centera2 Message-ID: <gCeqOwKBJhr4sj76m59QJkcjELyD@4ax.com>  C On Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:28:00 +0100, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>I wrote:  1 >On Thu, 20 Sep 2001 10:13:47 -0400, David BeattyD* ><David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com> wrote: >t9 >>Am I being overly sensitive?  Perhaps ... but how oftena; >>has a direct attack against U.S. citizens resulted in thec> >>loss of this many lives or the potentially negative economic4 >>impact (one conervative estimate at $315 billion). >tA >After watching a tape of Monday night's Letterman and talking tonD >American colleagues I am just beginning to understand how hard last? >Tuesday's events  hit the American psyche. It is true I hadn'tfG >factored the magnitude of the shock (difficult to find a suitable wordcF >here and I know shock doesn't do it justice) into some of my replies. >p! >I will try to keep this in mind.a >t  3     Thanks, Alan.  I for one greatly appreciate it.a  :     You are correct in your observation on just how deeply< personal the attack is to U.S. citizens.  Since last Tuesday= I've felt like someone punched me in the gut.  I've attempted 8 to not overreact to many of the negative remarks made in' these threads, but it hasn't been easy.    David R. Beattyl   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 14:01:29 -0400e2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) Subject: Re: World Trade CenterhL Message-ID: <rdeininger-2009011401300001@user-2ivebb9.dialup.mindspring.com>  J In article <00256ACD.00508C54.00@quegw01.btyp>, Steve.Spires@yellgroup.com wrote:  N > Contact:   Tel: 3063  -  IS - Infrastructure, 1st Floor, Bridge Street Plaza >  > P > And I think I made the point in a post elsewhere, didn't Congress okay $30m of, > aid for the Taliban just a few months ago?  H As I understand it, it was  meant to help block the export of heroin.  IG believe this aid package is loosely along the lines of the non-violenctdH policies that folks like Bill Todd have been advocating -- maybe if they< weren't so POOR, they wouldn't have to export all that dope.  I As a result of this aid, the America-haters out there will forever accuser% the U.S. of "supporting the Taliban".s   -- o Robert Deininger rdeininger@mindspring.comi   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 20:37:12 +0200 & From: John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> Subject: Re: World Trade Centera* Message-ID: <3BAA3758.94997EDF@dplanet.ch>   Jim Johnson wrote: > 0 > On 20 Sep 2001 17:27:26 +0200, Jan Vorbrueggen: > <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote: > : > >David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com> writes: > > > > >>     2.  That by being a C.E.O., he is somehow indebted toC > >>          U.S. corporations moreso that he is to U.S. citizens.  > > O > >Although I can see no way that my remark insinuates that - but you obviouslyaP > >do - it is clear that he is. He would not have been elected without financialN > >support from US companies. Of course, no US president in recent history hasP > >been, but the moeny that was spent on the incumbent's campaign was egregious.M > >And of course all those thousands of lobbyists in the Beltway are there tow$ > >further John Doe's interests, eh? > >l' > >Go read Carl Schurz's autobiography.- > >-! > >> Am I being overly sensitive?  > >i > >Yes.a > B > No.  As an expat American I am also completely disgusted by thisE > thread.  I see no reason for your original comment, and I certainlyc# > see no reason for your follow-up.g > G > Manners alone would suggest that your comments are in poor taste juste6 > now - REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT YOU BELIEVE THEM. > G > The topic of this newsgroup would suggest that it is off-topic, as ito0 > has nothing to do with either VMS or with WTC. > G > Finally, to claim that you can't see the only obvious implications of H > your original remark is, at best, silly, and at worst a brazen attempt9 > at a Clintonesque redefinition of the English language.e >  > Jim.  - Not off-topic as regards WTC, not inaccurate.p  A Consider a historical piece of US intervention in Chile to deposetG Allende who was democratically elected.  It is well documented that thenG CIA action was to protect American commercial interests in that countryw8 because Allended had promised to nationalise industries.  D Fast forward to the present.  Despite World Court directives, the USE refuses to drop tarrifs on a number of imports in order to protect USmG commercial interests.  True teh "banana-wars" in trade with teh EU havekF ceased but the US still refuses to drop tariffs and other restrictions- on such things as imports of Australian lamb.t  E Historically and currently the US government acts like an umbrella torE commercial interests.  (Note that the European Union has outlawed any B kind of government involvement and financial support of business.)  D With this in mind is it not all that unreasonable for many people toB consider the president, as the head of government, to be the CEO.,D regardless of how distasteful that tag may seem to people in the US.     John McLeana   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 20:46:37 +0200C& From: John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> Subject: Re: World Trade Center * Message-ID: <3BAA398D.A1E3CBDE@dplanet.ch>   Paul Repacholi wrote:d > - > leslie@clio.rice.edu (Jerry Leslie) writes:h > K > >   http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/special/terror/response/1050877t > >aA > >   "The abject failure of the Taliban government to ensure thelJ > >    availability of food and basic health services has left millions ofM > >    Afghans dependent on international aid for their survival. Ironically, K > >    the United States is the biggest single donor, providing $80 millioncC > >    of the $140 million in annual U.N. humanitarian assistance."o > < > They do have a real nice stadium in Kabul though, US gift. > , > Pity about the penalty shootouts though...   (wryly and with black humour)o$ Gives a new meaning to "hung match".     John     >  > --> > Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,9 > +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.oB >                                              West Australia 60760 > Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.H > EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 18:58:11 GMTm? From: Jim.Johnson@software-exploration.nospam.com (Jim Johnson)q Subject: Re: World Trade Center.0 Message-ID: <3baa399e.22664519@news.demon.co.uk>  D On Thu, 20 Sep 2001 20:37:12 +0200, John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> wrote:   >i >o >Jim Johnson wrote:  >> W1 >> On 20 Sep 2001 17:27:26 +0200, Jan Vorbrueggenf; >> <jan@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:  >> g; >> >David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com> writes:t >> >? >> >>     2.  That by being a C.E.O., he is somehow indebted tooD >> >>          U.S. corporations moreso that he is to U.S. citizens. >> >P >> >Although I can see no way that my remark insinuates that - but you obviouslyQ >> >do - it is clear that he is. He would not have been elected without financialBO >> >support from US companies. Of course, no US president in recent history haseQ >> >been, but the moeny that was spent on the incumbent's campaign was egregious.uN >> >And of course all those thousands of lobbyists in the Beltway are there to% >> >further John Doe's interests, eh?b >> >( >> >Go read Carl Schurz's autobiography. >> >" >> >> Am I being overly sensitive? >> > >> >Yes. >> hC >> No.  As an expat American I am also completely disgusted by thisoF >> thread.  I see no reason for your original comment, and I certainly$ >> see no reason for your follow-up. >> bH >> Manners alone would suggest that your comments are in poor taste just7 >> now - REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT YOU BELIEVE THEM.  >>  H >> The topic of this newsgroup would suggest that it is off-topic, as it1 >> has nothing to do with either VMS or with WTC.4 >> 0H >> Finally, to claim that you can't see the only obvious implications ofI >> your original remark is, at best, silly, and at worst a brazen attempto: >> at a Clintonesque redefinition of the English language. >> 4 >> Jim.  >l. >Not off-topic as regards WTC, not inaccurate. >DB >Consider a historical piece of US intervention in Chile to deposeH >Allende who was democratically elected.  It is well documented that theH >CIA action was to protect American commercial interests in that country9 >because Allended had promised to nationalise industries.t  8 So, Osama hit New York in retaliation?  What's the link?   >tE >Fast forward to the present.  Despite World Court directives, the USOF >refuses to drop tarrifs on a number of imports in order to protect USH >commercial interests.  True teh "banana-wars" in trade with teh EU haveG >ceased but the US still refuses to drop tariffs and other restrictionsw. >on such things as imports of Australian lamb.  D So, Osama had some export holdings that were being hurt?  What's the link?m   >cF >Historically and currently the US government acts like an umbrella toF >commercial interests.  (Note that the European Union has outlawed anyC >kind of government involvement and financial support of business.)   C And the direct link to the WTC is?  I've worked out that you have aa9 chip on your shoulder, but how does that link to the WTC?o   > E >With this in mind is it not all that unreasonable for many people toeC >consider the president, as the head of government, to be the CEO.,tE >regardless of how distasteful that tag may seem to people in the US.   % Please re-read my reply.  Especially:v  E Manners alone would suggest that your comments are in poor taste justp4 now - REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT YOU BELIEVE THEM.    @ I see no direct link between anything you have just said and theE fuel-air kamikaze bombing of New York and Washington.  Without such asA link this thread is, at my most polite, pointlessly ill-mannered.d   Jim.   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Sep 2001 02:43:29 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> Subject: Re: World Trade Center-- Message-ID: <87y9n9n1ny.fsf@prep.synonet.com>-  7 Martin Knoblauch <Martin.Knoblauch@TeraPort.de> writes:   E >  So, very careful what you (the US government/media) try to sell asu > "war".  C MAke prosecuting anyone a bit tricky if the defence council invokesi the Geneva Convention...   -- /< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.-@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 22:17:13 +0200 & From: John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> Subject: Re: World Trade Center-* Message-ID: <3BAA4EC9.C577AAFF@dplanet.ch>   Jim Johnson wrote: > F > On Thu, 20 Sep 2001 20:37:12 +0200, John McLean <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> > wrote: >  > >U  J > >> Finally, to claim that you can't see the only obvious implications ofK > >> your original remark is, at best, silly, and at worst a brazen attempte< > >> at a Clintonesque redefinition of the English language. > >>	 > >> Jim.s > >e0 > >Not off-topic as regards WTC, not inaccurate. > >iD > >Consider a historical piece of US intervention in Chile to deposeJ > >Allende who was democratically elected.  It is well documented that theJ > >CIA action was to protect American commercial interests in that country; > >because Allended had promised to nationalise industries.b > : > So, Osama hit New York in retaliation?  What's the link? >  > >rG > >Fast forward to the present.  Despite World Court directives, the UScH > >refuses to drop tarrifs on a number of imports in order to protect USJ > >commercial interests.  True teh "banana-wars" in trade with teh EU haveI > >ceased but the US still refuses to drop tariffs and other restrictionsa0 > >on such things as imports of Australian lamb. > F > So, Osama had some export holdings that were being hurt?  What's the > link?  >  > >dH > >Historically and currently the US government acts like an umbrella toH > >commercial interests.  (Note that the European Union has outlawed anyE > >kind of government involvement and financial support of business.): > E > And the direct link to the WTC is?  I've worked out that you have aj; > chip on your shoulder, but how does that link to the WTC?1 >  > >3G > >With this in mind is it not all that unreasonable for many people toaE > >consider the president, as the head of government, to be the CEO.,@G > >regardless of how distasteful that tag may seem to people in the US.e > ' > Please re-read my reply.  Especially:  > G > Manners alone would suggest that your comments are in poor taste justy6 > now - REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT YOU BELIEVE THEM. > B > I see no direct link between anything you have just said and theG > fuel-air kamikaze bombing of New York and Washington.  Without such aTC > link this thread is, at my most polite, pointlessly ill-mannered.' >  > Jim.  H This came about from your comment (and comments by others that preceededB it) with respect to the president being referred to as "the CEO ofB America".  I make no claim about any direct link to the WTC.  ThisF thread has spawned several subthreads which all retain the same title.  F I have no chip on my shoulder.  To put it simply I believe that peopleC should be spending time looking at *why* the WTC & Pentagon attacks.3 occurred and *only then* taking appropriate action.p  G Talking with Swiss colleagues I find that they are very concerned abouttH the US response being a very rapid reach for weapons.  They have seriousD and genuine fears for the consequences of US reactions.  It would beD counterproductive to quote some of their comments so I will just say! that they are far from impressed.s  B It would appear that there is little more that can be said in thisF discussion.  If people were not polarised before this thread got up toG speed, then I am sure they are by now.  Perhaps agreeing to disagree isl& all the agreement that can be reached.     John McLeanu   ------------------------------    Date: 20 Sep 2001 16:02:30 -0500- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)t Subject: Re: World Trade Center 3 Message-ID: <EVYN0eqzlVP$@eisner.encompasserve.org>e  c In article <3BAA17F3.85558C07@TeraPort.de>, Martin Knoblauch <Martin.Knoblauch@TeraPort.de> writes:i   I wrote: >> American precedent:  ThomasH >>    Jefferson signed a declaration of war against the Barbary pirates. >> > F >  I think here we tend to disagree. Unless you can find a nation or aA > nation-leader who "ordered" the WTC attack, you are not at war.   9    What nation do you think Barbary pirates qualifies as?7   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:38:48 -0600 (MDT)t" From: John Nebel <nebel@csdco.com> Subject: Re: World Trade Center>G Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.21.0109201614570.25374-100000@athena.csdco.com>.   Jan,  G The degree of complexity may be different.  I don't know the details ofyI the events of which you speak, however, the WTC situation appears to havet4 required a good amount of planning and coordination.  E Hate-motivation might work for a car bomb, or mowing people down withoF automatic rifles, but I believe cooler heads are required to sustain a- horror on the magnitude the WTC and Pentagon.n   John  & On 20 Sep 2001, Jan Vorbrueggen wrote:  & > John Nebel <nebel@csdco.com> writes: > I > > A Persian friend agreed with an analysis that a terrorist network, asiN > > opposed to governments, really can't function very well nor in a sustainedN > > manner.  As he said, their heads are so full of hate there is not room for > > much else. > M > Experience with, for instance, Germany's domestic terrorism in the 70's andsN > 80's shows otherwise. And I think it would be fair to say they where severlyI > hampered by (mainly financial) resources, not their ability to functionn > "rationally".i >  > 	Jan >    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 18:52:50 -0400 ' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>< Subject: Re: World Trade Center ( Message-ID: <9odrt4$qd9$1@pyrite.mv.net>  L "Jim Johnson" <Jim.Johnson@software-exploration.nospam.com> wrote in message* news:3baa399e.22664519@news.demon.co.uk...   ...   ' > Please re-read my reply.  Especially:t > G > Manners alone would suggest that your comments are in poor taste justt6 > now - REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT YOU BELIEVE THEM.  3 That's a very important point indeed to respond to.m  E Without being able to speak for others, the *precise* reason I became G involved in this thread was to raise a strong objection to a major, andLH dangerous, over-reaction (specifically, the assertion that we should notH simply pursue the perpetrators of the WTC attack but eliminate - withoutJ noticeable regard for collateral damage - anyone else who we thought might pose a future threat):  L "we eliminate them. Period.  And you do it before they can do it to you.  IfJ that sounds overly brutal, too bad.  It's not a problem at all.  You wasteK them with extreme prejudice and with any and all means you have available."e  G When people turn shock and grief into uncontrolled anger that advocatesnJ fatal consequences for uninvolved parties, matters of 'poor taste' tend toL take a back seat until the more important problem is resolved.  The decreaseI in civility didn't happen immediately, but when it became clear that such0I irresponsible and dangerous sentiments weren't going to be repudiated butTH instead strengthened the resulting polarization was probably inevitable.  I That polarization is continuing, and being fostered by the statement fromrH Dubya himself that "You're either with us, or your with the terrorists."B That's simplistic bullshit, and fully justifies (not that previousH statements hadn't already) the level of respect he's been accorded here.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 19:10:19 -0400o' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>e Subject: Re: World Trade Centere( Message-ID: <9odstt$r97$1@pyrite.mv.net>  3 "John McLean" <mcleanj@dplanet.ch> wrote in message $ news:3BAA4EC9.C577AAFF@dplanet.ch...   ...t  H > I have no chip on my shoulder.  To put it simply I believe that peopleE > should be spending time looking at *why* the WTC & Pentagon attacksg5 > occurred and *only then* taking appropriate action.-  K Since many people have so persistently misunderstood my own insistence thatdH looking at root causes is of critical importance, I'll take exception toK your literal statement above (which you may not have meant this way) beforenI someone else latches onto it as a 'reason' to discredit everything you've  said.v  L I see no reason whatsoever to delay *appropriate* action until we understandK (assuming we don't already) the root causes behind the WTC/Pentagon attack:oG seeking out the perpetrators and bringing them to justice (or if that'saB infeasible simply eliminating them if the evidence of their directK involvement is of very-close-to-legal-conviction quality) is something thato can happen immediately.,  K The haste to pursue a far wider 'war', without regard for anything like duenE process, and the underlying sentiment that 'collateral damage' is (ifoI regrettable) fully justified are what's really dangerous.  It's very mucheJ like throwing gasoline on a forest fire to extinguish it:  while it's trueK that if the fire is very small and the amount of gasoline you dump on it ismL sufficient to completely block its oxygen supply you *might* succeed (thoughI in the process polluting a much larger area than the fire was consuming),aH it's far more likely that you'll only make a bad sitatution dramatically worse.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 19:35:17 -0400u' From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@foo.mv.com>  Subject: Re: World Trade Centerw( Message-ID: <9oducm$su4$1@pyrite.mv.net>  @ "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote in message+ news:Yhpq7.424$YP.16346@news.cpqcorp.net...t< > Bill Todd wrote in message <9oak8b$ie8$1@pyrite.mv.net>... > > H > >The first step in persuasion is making some attempt to understand and reactaF > >to what the person you're trying to persuade is saying.  Should you decideH > >to do so and start debating issues rather than misconceptions, actual > >progress might well occur.  > >r >  >a > Ditto right back at ya.o  ? Do we really have fourth-graders developing software in ZK now?o  F Take the last, detailed post I responded to you with, and respond with similar detail (and relevance).r   - bill   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2001.525 ************************