1 INFO-VAX	Mon, 22 Apr 2002	Volume 2002 : Issue 221       Contents: Re: $QIO and SYSPRV  Re: $QIO and SYSPRV  Re: $QIO and SYSPRV  Re: $QIO and SYSPRV  Re: $QIO and SYSPRV , Re: Anyone using CHARON-VAX for development?, Re: Anyone using CHARON-VAX for development?P Re: auto wiring - was learning how to use a computer (was: Re: Itanium troubles)P Re: auto wiring - was learning how to use a computer (was: Re: Itanium troubles)P Re: auto wiring - was learning how to use a computer (was: Re: Itanium troubles)P Re: auto wiring - was learning how to use a computer (was: Re: Itanium troubles)P Re: auto wiring - was learning how to use a computer (was: Re: Itanium troubles) Re: Blade architectures 1 Correct Syntax for htpasswd.exe_alpha w/CSWS 1.2? 5 Re: Correct Syntax for htpasswd.exe_alpha w/CSWS 1.2?  Re: Itanium troubles- Jessica Felix Designs - Art and all that Jazz > Re: learning how to use a computer (was: Re: Itanium troubles)> Re: learning how to use a computer (was: Re: Itanium troubles) Re: LPRSETUP1 Re: Mails with long lines (> 255 bytes) truncated 8 Re: Manual/Diagrams on how to access interior of XP-1000 Newbie meets OpenVMS ;)  Re: Newbie meets OpenVMS ;)  Re: Newbie meets OpenVMS ;)  Re: Newbie meets OpenVMS ;)  Re: OpenVMS Hobbyist License Pathworks 6.1 exhausting KNBCBs 0 Re: Prediction:  VMS lives, merger or no merger!' Re Smart house wiring - Re: auto wiring + Re: Re Smart house wiring - Re: auto wiring 2 Re: Some Lite Reading from SKC and www.openvms.org2 Re: Some Lite Reading from SKC and www.openvms.org! STANDS PARA FERIAS y EXPOSICIONES P Re: The 'tone' of c.o.v. (was Re: Prediction:  VMS lives, merger or no  merger!)K The 'tone' of c.o.v. (was Re: Prediction:  VMS lives, merger or no merger!) O Re: The 'tone' of c.o.v. (was Re: Prediction:  VMS lives, merger or no merger!) P Re: The 'tone' of c.o.v. (was Re: Prediction:  VMS lives, merger or no merger!) P Re: The 'tone' of c.o.v. (was Re: Prediction:  VMS lives, merger or no merger!) E Re: The Digital 7-year plan - from 1997 to 2004 - from Alpha to IA-64 ) Re: VDDriver problems with large geometry ( Re: VMS Spammer, the lowest form of life( Re: VMS Spammer, the lowest form of life( Re: VMS Spammer, the lowest form of life( Re: VMS Spammer, the lowest form of life( Re: VMS Spammer, the lowest form of life6 Re: XP1000 does not recognize Compaq memory in  Bank 1  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 14:56:42 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>  Subject: Re: $QIO and SYSPRV, Message-ID: <3CC30B68.C60E18FE@videotron.ca>   Mark Daniel wrote: >     EnableSysPrv(); / >     tkptr->AccessFab.fab$l_fop &= ~FAB$M_ASY; 4 >     status = sys$create (&tkptr->AccessFab, 0, 0); >     DisableSysPrv();  M Have you considered SYS$SETAST(0) before the enableSysPrv() and SYS$SETAST(1) R after the DisableSysPrv ? That would prevent the delivery of ASTs between the two.  H I *believe* that privilege is a process thing, so the ASTs would inherit whatever is available.  I Another way of doing this is to write a user written system service. That F enables a subroutine to have privs when the calling programme doesn't.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 07:34:44 +0930 / From: Mark Daniel <Mark.Daniel@wasd.vsm.com.au>  Subject: Re: $QIO and SYSPRV. Message-ID: <3CC3377C.7000100@wasd.vsm.com.au>   JF Mezei wrote:  > Mark Daniel wrote: >  >>    EnableSysPrv(); / >>    tkptr->AccessFab.fab$l_fop &= ~FAB$M_ASY; 4 >>    status = sys$create (&tkptr->AccessFab, 0, 0); >>    DisableSysPrv(); >  > O > Have you considered SYS$SETAST(0) before the enableSysPrv() and SYS$SETAST(1) T > after the DisableSysPrv ? That would prevent the delivery of ASTs between the two. > J > I *believe* that privilege is a process thing, so the ASTs would inherit > whatever is available. > K > Another way of doing this is to write a user written system service. That H > enables a subroutine to have privs when the calling programme doesn't.  K In real life this particular code snippet is executing under user-mode AST  H delivery so there would be no concern that any asynchronous usage would = result in the AST routine operating with enhanced privileges.   9 There are three concerns giving rise to this question ...   L 1) Generally improving my understanding of what's occuring during the whole 
 $QIO process.   K 2) Where an enhanced privilege is required to accomplish a given objective  K (in this case an RMS action) clarifying whether a given privilege needs to  J be present during the entire life of an asynchronous operation or whether K it's role is complete after the $QIO and can be immediately disabled again.   E 3) Perhaps using RMS as a generalized example of the underlying $QIO  J mechanism is stretching it too far and the question should be narrowed to  RMS behaviour only.   $ Thanks for your input Jean-Franois.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 19:36:04 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>  Subject: Re: $QIO and SYSPRV, Message-ID: <3CC34CD0.77A24A0E@videotron.ca>   Mark Daniel wrote:F > 3) Perhaps using RMS as a generalized example of the underlying $QIOK > mechanism is stretching it too far and the question should be narrowed to  > RMS behaviour only.   M Even though the SYS$CREATE does allow to specify success/failure ASTs, I have M seen no indication in the documentatuion that it completes asynchronously. As L a matter of fact, the status code returned by the SYS$CREATE upon completionG of SYS$CREATE has all the various values and one need not check in some M obscure control block for success or failure. (including RMS$_PRV which would O be the expected return code if you do not have privileges to create that file).   H So I would speculate that it is pretty safe to conclude that by the timeT sys$create returns control to your program, you can safely deactivate the privilege.  K I suspect that if some activity continues behind the scenes to complete the G file creation, it would be so low inside the system that your process's ' privileges would be moot at that level.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 10:16:49 +0930 / From: Mark Daniel <Mark.Daniel@wasd.vsm.com.au>  Subject: Re: $QIO and SYSPRV. Message-ID: <3CC35D79.5020300@wasd.vsm.com.au>   JF Mezei wrote:  > Mark Daniel wrote: > F >>3) Perhaps using RMS as a generalized example of the underlying $QIOK >>mechanism is stretching it too far and the question should be narrowed to  >>RMS behaviour only.  >  > O > Even though the SYS$CREATE does allow to specify success/failure ASTs, I have O > seen no indication in the documentatuion that it completes asynchronously. As   L There is the FAB$L_FOP field FAB$V_ASY bit.  What would the purpose of this * be if it couldn't complete asynchronously?  N > a matter of fact, the status code returned by the SYS$CREATE upon completionI > of SYS$CREATE has all the various values and one need not check in some O > obscure control block for success or failure. (including RMS$_PRV which would Q > be the expected return code if you do not have privileges to create that file).   L There is the FAB$L_STS field documented for the completion status (although 0 this in itself does not indicate asynchonicity).  F Certainly there is no RMS$_PENDING listed as a possible return status.  J > So I would speculate that it is pretty safe to conclude that by the timeV > sys$create returns control to your program, you can safely deactivate the privilege. > M > I suspect that if some activity continues behind the scenes to complete the I > file creation, it would be so low inside the system that your process's ) > privileges would be moot at that level.   E With SYS$CREATE there is no RMS$_PENDING listed as a possible return  J status.  Or for $CLOSE, $ENTER, $ERASE, $EXTEND, $OPEN, $REMOVE, $RENAME,  $SEARCH.  D Just musing ... in fact with the exception of $SEARCH it looks like G anything that could possibly manipulate a file header will only happen  L synchronously?  This might imply that all these are process-atomic (at user I mode) and the only operations that can occur asynchronously are the ones  H left, basically reads and writes?  Doesn't sound right, especially when K squared up against Section 2.4 of the RMS Service Reference Manual, where,  L if there had been limitations to asynchronous services you might reasonably E expect to find a list of them.  Of course whether or not the service  E actually is performed asynchronously (that is your code continues to  G execute while the service is performed) or whether it is just notified  D asynchnously (i.e. by triggering the AST routine) while you code is  actually blocked.   L (Now at work) I just thought to drag out my copy of McCoy's VMS File System I Internals, The ACP Functions chapter, which on a casual reading seems to  I imply true asynchronicity (as far as the user-mode process is concerned).   I As a matter of fact this same tome may have clarified my original query.  J In the chapter The XQP and I/O processing, section on $QIO System Service I Dispatching (page 271 in my copy) it actually states that blah-blah, the  I IRP is filled in, then *validated against process privilege*, blah-blah,  H *then* the IRP is given to the driver.  So, my reading of this would be E that regardless of the $QIO (RMS) call I should be able to disable a  K required privilege immediately the asynchronous $QIO returns regardless of  G whether the operation is anywhere near completion at that stage or not.    Am I on the right track?   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 01:07:01 -0400 ( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> Subject: Re: $QIO and SYSPRV, Message-ID: <3CC39A75.3050604@tsoft-inc.com>   Mark Daniel wrote:   > JF Mezei wrote:  >  >> Mark Daniel wrote:  >>H >>> 3) Perhaps using RMS as a generalized example of the underlying $QIOB >>> mechanism is stretching it too far and the question should be  >>> narrowed to  >>> RMS behaviour only.  >> >> >>J >> Even though the SYS$CREATE does allow to specify success/failure ASTs, 	 >> I have > >> seen no indication in the documentatuion that it completes  >> asynchronously. As  >  > I > There is the FAB$L_FOP field FAB$V_ASY bit.  What would the purpose of  1 > this be if it couldn't complete asynchronously?  > E >> a matter of fact, the status code returned by the SYS$CREATE upon  
 >> completion J >> of SYS$CREATE has all the various values and one need not check in someE >> obscure control block for success or failure. (including RMS$_PRV   >> which wouldG >> be the expected return code if you do not have privileges to create   >> that file). >  > D > There is the FAB$L_STS field documented for the completion status < > (although this in itself does not indicate asynchonicity). > H > Certainly there is no RMS$_PENDING listed as a possible return status. > K >> So I would speculate that it is pretty safe to conclude that by the time I >> sys$create returns control to your program, you can safely deactivate   >> the privilege.  >>B >> I suspect that if some activity continues behind the scenes to  >> complete the J >> file creation, it would be so low inside the system that your process's* >> privileges would be moot at that level. >  > G > With SYS$CREATE there is no RMS$_PENDING listed as a possible return  C > status.  Or for $CLOSE, $ENTER, $ERASE, $EXTEND, $OPEN, $REMOVE,   > $RENAME, $SEARCH.  > F > Just musing ... in fact with the exception of $SEARCH it looks like I > anything that could possibly manipulate a file header will only happen  I > synchronously?  This might imply that all these are process-atomic (at  K > user mode) and the only operations that can occur asynchronously are the  J > ones left, basically reads and writes?  Doesn't sound right, especially K > when squared up against Section 2.4 of the RMS Service Reference Manual,  J > where, if there had been limitations to asynchronous services you might J > reasonably expect to find a list of them.  Of course whether or not the B > service actually is performed asynchronously (that is your code H > continues to execute while the service is performed) or whether it is H > just notified asynchnously (i.e. by triggering the AST routine) while  > you code is actually blocked.  > G > (Now at work) I just thought to drag out my copy of McCoy's VMS File  I > System Internals, The ACP Functions chapter, which on a casual reading  I > seems to imply true asynchronicity (as far as the user-mode process is  
 > concerned).  > K > As a matter of fact this same tome may have clarified my original query.  D > In the chapter The XQP and I/O processing, section on $QIO System D > Service Dispatching (page 271 in my copy) it actually states that C > blah-blah, the IRP is filled in, then *validated against process  H > privilege*, blah-blah, *then* the IRP is given to the driver.  So, my K > reading of this would be that regardless of the $QIO (RMS) call I should  G > be able to disable a required privilege immediately the asynchronous  D > $QIO returns regardless of whether the operation is anywhere near " > completion at that stage or not. >  > Am I on the right track? >     P Hell, it sounds reasonable to me.  Don't know how many times I've gotten bitten 4 after saying that, but the number is not small.  :-)  N You'll have to devise some test to insure that the priv is dropped before the 1 activity occurs, and see if the action completes.   N However, in reading your post, it seems that you're assuming that SYSPRV will P allow you to BYPASS all protections.  Have you considered a directory where the L SYSTEM protection mask does not allow access?  It's not something seen very N often, but it is a valid situation.  You may need to consider other temporary  priviledges.   Dave   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 20:41:11 +0200 - From: Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@Free.fr> 5 Subject: Re: Anyone using CHARON-VAX for development? ' Message-ID: <3CC307C8.DFEE9F15@Free.fr>   G I'm surprized to read this. All and every user of the former Charon VAX E hobbyist product (the one which was phased out last year) that I know D noticed that their CPU was 100% busy (as mine was) and if I remember@ well, this was specified in the release notes or somewhere else.   D.   Bart Zorn wrote:  H > I am not using CHARON-VAX for development, but I know of one draw backH > of the product. When running (on Windows, I don't know about the AlphaJ > VMS version), it consumes all available CPU cycles. On a desktop this isF > probably not much of an issue, but on a laptop it is. My laptop soonI > gets too hot to use it on my lap and the battery doen't last very long.  > H > I already mentioned this problem to SRI and they said that they hadn't: > heard of this before, but it seemed worth looking into.y   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 07:59:33 +0200 ) From: Bart Zorn <B.Zorn@xs4all.nospam.nl> 5 Subject: Re: Anyone using CHARON-VAX for development? / Message-ID: <3CC3A6C5.1000203@xs4all.nospam.nl>    Didier Morandi wrote: I > I'm surprized to read this. All and every user of the former Charon VAX G > hobbyist product (the one which was phased out last year) that I know F > noticed that their CPU was 100% busy (as mine was) and if I rememberB > well, this was specified in the release notes or somewhere else. >  > D. >  > Bart Zorn wrote: >  > H >>I am not using CHARON-VAX for development, but I know of one draw backH >>of the product. When running (on Windows, I don't know about the AlphaJ >>VMS version), it consumes all available CPU cycles. On a desktop this isF >>probably not much of an issue, but on a laptop it is. My laptop soonI >>gets too hot to use it on my lap and the battery doen't last very long.  >>H >>I already mentioned this problem to SRI and they said that they hadn't: >>heard of this before, but it seemed worth looking into.y >   D It is not that I didn't know this, it is what makes CHARON-VAX less 1 attractive to use on a laptop (for me, at least).   	 Bart Zorn    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 18:22:28 GMT M From: Wolfgang Rupprecht <wolfgang+gnus20020421T111339@dailyplanet.wsrcc.com>NY Subject: Re: auto wiring - was learning how to use a computer (was: Re: Itanium troubles) / Message-ID: <x78z7g29pa.fsf@capsicum.wsrcc.com>a  / "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network> writes:CE > 48 Volts was not chosen for additional power, it was chosen because?A > the higher the voltage for a given load, the lower the current.a  F The specific load that necessitated this change that I heard mentionedF in the MIT report was electrically operated valves.  It seems that the@ designers want to do away with the overhead cams that run off of@ engine power via the timing belt/chain and put computer operated@ solenoids there instead.  The advantage is that you can not onlyA advance the valve timing, at high RPM but you can also change theSA percentage of time the valve is open.  Very useful if you want toeD squeeze more power out of the engine when operating in "hotrod" modeE at wide-open-throttle, yet still allow for high fuel mileage at otheri times.  D (I'm not sure I'm thrilled about this, since a computer screw-up can) lead to bent valves, cracked blocks etc.)   	 -wolfgangm -- h?        Wolfgang Rupprecht <wolfgang+gnus@dailyplanet.wsrcc.com>e$ 		    http://www.wsrcc.com/wolfgang/O Coming soon: GPS mapping tools for Open Systems. http://www.gnomad-mapping.com/o   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 18:44:35 GMTe* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>Y Subject: Re: auto wiring - was learning how to use a computer (was: Re: Itanium troubles)vA Message-ID: <nMDw8.33584$ro5.3263492@bin6.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>P  I "Wolfgang Rupprecht" <wolfgang+gnus20020421T111339@dailyplanet.wsrcc.com>S: wrote in message news:x78z7g29pa.fsf@capsicum.wsrcc.com...   ...c  H > The specific load that necessitated this change that I heard mentionedH > in the MIT report was electrically operated valves.  It seems that theB > designers want to do away with the overhead cams that run off ofB > engine power via the timing belt/chain and put computer operatedB > solenoids there instead.  The advantage is that you can not onlyC > advance the valve timing, at high RPM but you can also change theeC > percentage of time the valve is open.  Very useful if you want toMF > squeeze more power out of the engine when operating in "hotrod" modeG > at wide-open-throttle, yet still allow for high fuel mileage at othern > times. >mF > (I'm not sure I'm thrilled about this, since a computer screw-up can+ > lead to bent valves, cracked blocks etc.):  K Wow.  At high RPM, each crankshaft revolution takes less than 10 ms.  Every K other revolution, each valve wants to be open for a little more than half a:K rev.  So a solenoid must be strong enough to open the mass of a valve (plus E whatever additional magnetic mass may be necessary), against a strong(K retaining spring (assuming that these are still used to ensure a tight sealA8 while the valve is closed), in a couple of milliseconds.  L I'm no mechanical engineer, but that seems to me as if it might not be easy.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 15:17:33 -0400t* From: Bill Bradley <senator@NOSPAMsgi.net>Y Subject: Re: auto wiring - was learning how to use a computer (was: Re: Itanium troubles)-' Message-ID: <3CC3104D.ABC3AB81@sgi.net>0   Bill Todd wrote:K > "Wolfgang Rupprecht" <wolfgang+gnus20020421T111339@dailyplanet.wsrcc.com>e< > wrote in message news:x78z7g29pa.fsf@capsicum.wsrcc.com...  J > > The specific load that necessitated this change that I heard mentionedJ > > in the MIT report was electrically operated valves.  It seems that theD > > designers want to do away with the overhead cams that run off ofD > > engine power via the timing belt/chain and put computer operatedD > > solenoids there instead.  The advantage is that you can not onlyE > > advance the valve timing, at high RPM but you can also change thetE > > percentage of time the valve is open.  Very useful if you want to H > > squeeze more power out of the engine when operating in "hotrod" modeI > > at wide-open-throttle, yet still allow for high fuel mileage at othern
 > > times. > >gH > > (I'm not sure I'm thrilled about this, since a computer screw-up can- > > lead to bent valves, cracked blocks etc.)n > M > Wow.  At high RPM, each crankshaft revolution takes less than 10 ms.  EveryhM > other revolution, each valve wants to be open for a little more than half adM > rev.  So a solenoid must be strong enough to open the mass of a valve (plustG > whatever additional magnetic mass may be necessary), against a strong M > retaining spring (assuming that these are still used to ensure a tight seals: > while the valve is closed), in a couple of milliseconds. > N > I'm no mechanical engineer, but that seems to me as if it might not be easy. >  > - bill  B 	Actually what it probably means is that the solenoid must open a H valve that allows compressed air to move the engine valve (probably both; opening and closing eliminating the need for the spring).  e   	Bill    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 20:31:53 GMT * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>Y Subject: Re: auto wiring - was learning how to use a computer (was: Re: Itanium troubles)e@ Message-ID: <ZkFw8.17759$Dm.1601160@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  8 "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network> wrote in message$ news:3CC33087.2090201@qsl.network...   ...l  H > A similar issue is the planned smart outlet / wiring that they want to, > replace the deadly ones in the house with. > D > Every appliance / lightbulb would have a micro-chip in it, and theC > outlets / sockets would only deliver power once they verified thec
 > parameters.c > I > Right now, the cost for reliable switches in the outlets exceeds makingtI > this practical.  Also the heat dissipation of the switch in the outlets ? > could be an issue.  Semiconductor light dimmers get real hot.b >h$ > Other than that, the idea is great  K Well, perhaps, aside from making all existing appliances unusable without aeJ suitable adapter plus at least possibly making all new appliances unusable in existing houses.t  H I wired my house using GFIs throughout, and have only the problem that aG fluorescent light can (very rarely) trip one.  Granting that GFIs won't L prevent a shock if I take hold of both the hot and neutral wires at the sameH time, they're supposedly *very* effective at preventing the more typicalH accidents where one completes a circuit between the hot wire and ground.I This solution is inexpensive, involves no problems with heat dissipation,hJ exists today, and is even easy to retrofit, so the need for something like+ what you describe above is not clear to me.A   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 19:35:04 GMTn- From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network>VY Subject: Re: auto wiring - was learning how to use a computer (was: Re: Itanium troubles) * Message-ID: <3CC33087.2090201@qsl.network>   Wolfgang Rupprecht wrote:i2  > "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network> writes:  >?  >> 48 Volts was not chosen for additional power, it was choseniB  >> because the higher the voltage for a given load, the lower the  >> current.  >?  > The specific load that necessitated this change that I hearde@  > mentioned in the MIT report was electrically operated valves.  C That is possibly one of many considerations.  A lot of studies wereGD undertaken to determine the optimum voltages for several components.  * I really do not recall all of the details.  I Some of the information is considered proprietary to the auto companies, rI but much of it is not, as it must be approved by the regulatory agencies  9 before it can be put in, so joint studies are being done.e  E  > It seems that the designers want to do away with the overhead camslA  > that run off of engine power via the timing belt/chain and put -  > computer operated solenoids there instead.E <snip>  G  > (I'm not sure I'm thrilled about this, since a computer screw-up cane,  > lead to bent valves, cracked blocks etc.)  I Just like a number of different mechanical failures.  That is one of the ?I reasons that some of the technology has not yet escaped the laboratories.h  E I think that several models of engines may already be using solinoid i( valves, but again, I really am not sure.  G I have seen some of the design issues that they are trying to work out eG the cost and benefits of.  There are a lot of projects being worked on.v  C There are not only technological, but political, and psychological hI issues as well.  There are some technologies that the consumers will not o( buy, no matter how much better they are.    G A similar issue is the planned smart outlet / wiring that they want to  * replace the deadly ones in the house with.  C Every appliance / lightbulb would have a micro-chip in it, and the oB outlets / sockets would only deliver power once they verified the  parameters.c  H Right now, the cost for reliable switches in the outlets exceeds making H this practical.  Also the heat dissipation of the switch in the outlets = could be an issue.  Semiconductor light dimmers get real hot.o  G Other than that, the idea is great, and would save a lot of lives from  L elecrical shock, unless defective outlets burned the house down around them.   -Johnc wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion OnlyP   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Apr 2002 01:07:24 GMT& From: peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva)  Subject: Re: Blade architectures- Message-ID: <a9vnoc$ssd@web.eng.baileynm.com>r  1 In article <3cc09be6.214118295@news.demon.co.uk>, ) dawks <phil@notsaying.demon.co.uk> wrote:mH > I thought that PPCs do have an execute in place option right down to a > region basis?   M Code in the "ROM" (whether implemented as ROM or Flash), even in the ROM fileeI system image, is executed in place, but there is no way I know of to takezH advantage of that capability for code in RAM or code in a writable flash  file system (eg, HP Safe Store).  I PalmOS does XIP for code in RAM or ROM, one of the reasons it'll run well , in systems with so comparatively little RAM.   -- >+  `-_-'   In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva. E   'U`    "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything."eL                                                        -- nicolai@esperi.org          Disclaimer: WWFD?   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 19:08:24 GMTs$ From: TigerShark62 <reply@group.com>: Subject: Correct Syntax for htpasswd.exe_alpha w/CSWS 1.2?8 Message-ID: <5d36cuc9rjor8e1hk3pvvluolu9687m4vg@4ax.com>  2 Does any one know the correct syntax for htpasswd?  B I've tried to specify the switches as -n and as /n, but they don't
 seem to work.r   Thanx in advance.h   Tony.l   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 23:50:58 +0200c From: Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl>> Subject: Re: Correct Syntax for htpasswd.exe_alpha w/CSWS 1.2?& Message-ID: <3CC33442.8020404@home.nl>  E I am not familiar with htpasswd, but did you try "-n" instead of -n ?i   TigerShark62 wrote:c  3 >Does any one know the correct syntax for htpasswd?o >uC >I've tried to specify the switches as -n and as /n, but they don'ts >seem to work. >  >Thanx in advance. >n >Tony. >s   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 02:24:16 GMTy1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>o Subject: Re: Itanium troublesh' Message-ID: <3CC37710.CB35CEA5@fsi.net>e   Sander Vesik wrote:  > C > In comp.arch Tarjei T. Jensen <tarjei.jensen@kvaerner.com> wrote:  > >M > > "Ketil MaldeJ > >> I mean, why do you expect people to think "product" -- that is, solveK > >> problems for end users who are unwilling to solve them for themselves,c- > >> when there's no motivation for doing so?  > >sM > > If I think product, I solve the problem before it occurs. That saves me asP > > lot of time since I don't have to explain my mistakes over and over again toO > > people. And I save a lot of time for those people as well since they do not,L > > have to spend a lot of time trying to solve a problem which should never > > have been. > > K > > Reading books on usability should be a requirement for all programmers.  > >r > G > Having a clue about how FreeBSD and similar projects happen should beiC > compulsory, so nobody would ever say something as stupid as that..  B Nice attitude - if you want to stay #2 or lower behind Bill Gates.   --   David J. Dachterau dba DJE Systemsg http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/r   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 20:37:14 GMTr From: jessica@sonic.net 6 Subject: Jessica Felix Designs - Art and all that Jazz4 Message-ID: <comp.os.vms.7374d8e0@tempest.sonic.net>  U Khalid, still cooking, departs almost eventually, as the bowl pours among their case.t  < "ART AND ALL THAT JAZZ" is a gallery on the Healdsburg Plaza@ that incorporates the two passions of its owner, Jessica Felix -
 art and jazz.   H Jessica is an artist whose medium is jewelry. She creates what she callsQ "spirited art," specializing in images from indigenous cultures around the world.s    http://www.artandallthatjazz.com   119A Plaza Streete Healdsburg, CA  95448  1-707-433-7900  B They are rejecting inside the evening now, won't walk pears later.                    % What doesn't Ayman recollect quietly?o   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Apr 2002 01:20:49 GMT& From: peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva)G Subject: Re: learning how to use a computer (was: Re: Itanium troubles) , Message-ID: <a9vohh$jo@web.eng.baileynm.com>  0 In article <a9r8vb$ril$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>,) Nick Maclaren <nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote:aE > No, that is the pre-Sterne viewpoint.  He used the layout to CONVEYoH > information, and got liberally flamed for it (in 18th century English,
 > of course).m  A I don't see any conflict between what I wrote and this statement.-  J Layout is part of the presentation, rather than content. Both presentationK and content are used to convey information. I am aware that there are casesdJ where presentation is as critical as content, and cases where presentationL can be used to provide multiple views of the content. That doesn't mean thatK you should force everyone to deal with presentation and content at the same1  time the way WYSIAYG systems do.   --  +  `-_-'   In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva. E   'U`    "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything."-L                                                        -- nicolai@esperi.org          Disclaimer: WWFD?   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Apr 2002 01:16:22 GMT& From: peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva)G Subject: Re: learning how to use a computer (was: Re: Itanium troubles)t, Message-ID: <a9vo96$at@web.eng.baileynm.com>  , In article <3CC1A9A6.1AB22EA1@videotron.ca>,/ JF Mezei  <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:rP > There are many places where the mac will automatically bring up the contextualM > menu. (for instance, in netscape, just hold the button down for a while andnK > you get the dialogue about what you want to do that that image, link etc)D  F Yet another workaround... you know, Hayes actually got a patent on theF idea of using time as part of a command sequence, which they had to doF because too many serial ports didn't have the "second button" of modem control lines available.  A > For applications, every shortcut is shown as part of the menus.d  F In Windows, there are (or were, before Windows 95 screwed it up) a setE of standard shortcuts that let you navigate *any* graphical object oneF the screen with the keyboard. You can still pretty much get around anyE dialog box with just TAB, cursor keys, and RETURN. I REALLY miss thata on the Mac.   D I'm ambivalent about the "paste selection" versus "paste cut buffer"G dichotomy. The best scheme I've run into pastes the cut buffer if thereoA is one, otherwise it pastes the selection, so you can use it bothh ways...a   -- >+  `-_-'   In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.kE   'U`    "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything."HL                                                        -- nicolai@esperi.org          Disclaimer: WWFD?   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 18:57:17 -0500<& From: jlsue <jlsuexxxz@screaminet.com> Subject: Re: LPRSETUPR8 Message-ID: <lpj6cu0u5euafjs6bb1ehl2vasa18a91fd@4ax.com>  > On 19 Apr 2002 11:03:41 -0700, kevin_heikkila@yahoo.com (Kevin Heikkila) wrote:  P >I am looking for DCL that will allow me to add/delete/modify UCX queues without? >using LPRSETUP. Anyone have any such code? Is there such code?n  D I wrote a short DCL program that would open/append the printcap file< to add printers with the desired parameters.  It's  not very
 difficult.  B I really wanted this because I couldn't easily script the supplied+ utility to add  a couple thousand printers.t  ; I also didn't like the way that "rp" entries behaved on the C UCX$LPD_QUEUE for my print servers ... they come in and go out thatiA same queue.  For all served printers.  It would really suck for atC printer to run out of paper and the other 2500 printers had to waittC for that to be resolved.  Plus, we couldn't easily use accountng to, keep track of printer use.  1 Not speaking for anyone, certainly not DEC/Compaqi- (get rid of the xxxz in my address to e-mail)    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 20:09:38 GMTl. From: "M. J. Jerabek" <multivac@jitterati.org>: Subject: Re: Mails with long lines (> 255 bytes) truncatedB Message-ID: <50Fw8.4604$Vy5.2023342354@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>   Hunter,-  J I believe the fix in this source patch is concerned with the email subject lines beingeL longer that 255 characters. The fix we all want is for having the email text portiont0 having lines of text longer than 255 characters.  K Using Outlook Express with HTML mail, I regularly type a paragraph response2 only todL have it clipped after 255 character. MX 5.2 has the fix for this (We use 5.2	 at work),cK but MX V4.2 does not. Since my home Alpha systems cannot afford the license  fee forMG MX V5.2, I use MX V4.2 or will have to switch to using TCPIP server forr OpenVMS 7 SMTP and another mailing list manager software package.p   Am I wrong about this?   Mike Jerabek multivac@jitterati.org  : "Hunter Goatley" <goathunter@goatley.com> wrote in message* news:3cc03b15.89450262@news.process.com...5 > On Fri, 19 Apr 2002 11:19:24 -0400, "Brian Tillman"i. > <tillman_brian@notnoone.notnohow.com> wrote: >eF > >>I am still using MX Mailer (V4.1) on VAX and Alpha (VMS 6.2). FromG > >>time to time I get more and more mail messages from Outlook senders H > >>with very long lines in the body of the mail. These are truncated at
 > >>255 bytesl > >cJ > >First, post messages about MX in vmsnet.mail.mx.  Second, upgrade to MX 4.2t% > >(the last freeware version of MX).a > >lC > >MX V4.x does not have the ability to allow lines longer than 255i characters.o >eH > Not true.  There was a patch released for V4.2 that would allow longerK > lines.  If memory serves, Matt took that out of MX V5.0, added it back in J > with the logical in V5.1, and then converted it to the SET LOCAL command in > V5.2.e >dC > You can find the V4.2 patch in the [.MX.MX042.PATCH] directory on F > ftp.madgoat.com.  The source for that patch can be found in the file' > MX042_SRC_UPDATE_WITH_ANTI_RELAY.ZIP.a >y > Hunter > ------; > Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/m: > goathunter@goatley.com    http://www.goatley.com/hunter/> > New Robert R. McCammon site: http://www.RobertRMcCammon.com/   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 03:04:50 GMTw1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>pA Subject: Re: Manual/Diagrams on how to access interior of XP-1000 ' Message-ID: <3CC38093.EFA1DCEB@fsi.net>a   Petros Dafniotis wrote:t > H > As message says, I need to add a SCSI 3rd party (Seagate) hard disk onB > my XP-1000 (minitower model). The manual does not explain how toC > disassemble interior in order to access the the area above the CD H > where I can add the 3rd hard disk. I can see that I need to remove theG > motherboard before I can access the area but I am hesitant to do thatq > without diagrams.o  * Eeek! That doesn't sound like even Compaq!  F There's GOTTA be a another way to access the drive bays than to removeH the mobo! Look again. Try looking for ways to remove the shield panel on? the opposite side of the chassis, or to remove the front bezel.n   --   David J. Dachterae dba DJE Systemsv http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/m   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Apr 2002 20:56:45 GMT From: vanja@vmsbox.cjb.net  Subject: Newbie meets OpenVMS ;)D Message-ID: <3cc3278c$0$10246$afc38c87@sisyphus.news.be.easynet.net>   Hi!h  cI was lucky to find out that Doc is giving away accounts on his VMS box, and now that I have one, I also have some questions :) I used VMS a lot ages ago, but never got into exploring all the features of the OS. After I started reading a lot of docs, I found out that VMS is way more than I expected, but it also means there are more things to understand.l  i I've read quite many docs, searched Google groups and the web, but some things are not yet clear (to me).p   I wanted to port one UNIX specific project to VMS (as an exercise :), and to learn as much as I can while I'm doing that. The project in question uses Sophos anti-virus library, which works fine on OpenVMS.   Now, the questions :-)   [1] forking/spawning and IPC   It seems that everyone notices first that fork() is missing from OpenVMS, and that vfork() doesn't do what UNIX people would expect it to. In many messages on newsgroups I have seen various suggestions, but I am not sure which one is the right one.   The way my program works is simple - it accepts connections on UNIX domain sockets (will come to this later), and when connection is accepted, if forks a child which handles the actual work.  pAs much as I understand, lib$spawn and sys$creprc require an image (executable) name to be specified, and can not 'inherit' file descriptors and other data from the process that invokes them. exec/system also execute only images. To use threads (which would, probably, be the best way on VMS), I would need to rewrite whole thing, which I don't want to do right now :)  qIf I assume that my program is called SOPHIE.EXE and I want to use sys$creprc - does it mean that I have to use SOPHIE.EXE as image name? Does 'input' and 'output' arguments refer to SYS$INPUT and SYS$OUTPUT? Basically, if main SOPHIE.EXE process receives a connection over TCP/IP (let's assume), how could I spawn another process and hand the socket descriptors to it?   While I'm talking about this, I would also appreciate if someone can tell me what is the best way to implement something like UNIX domain sockets under VMS. The way Sophie works is that daemon process is loaded (with all the virus signature), and waits for connection UNIX domain socket. When connection is established, it (well, child process :) reads input from the client (filenames and directories to be scanned for viruses), and responds through the same socket. What could I use under VMS to achieve sime ilar functionality?w  & [2] Listing functions in shared images  I have a shared image (same like shared library on UNIX or DLL on Windows, right?), but I can't figure out the way to list the symbols (function names, let's say) inside. I have been told that there is one 'entry point' (in this case, it's called DLLGETCLASSOBJECT). Once it is initialized, I can access to API in normal way (if I know it :). But what if I would like to find out symbols from shared images for which I don't have API documentation? I have noticed a LIB$FIND_IMAGE_SYMBOL which (as help says) o "reads universal symbols from the shareable image file." I couldn't find, though, how can I read the universal symbols from the shareable image file :) Is it possible?    I've seen that some people suggested to run the image through the debugger, but I can't understand how to actually load this shareable image into debugger. RUN/DEBUG <image> won't work.i  ] Also, does using /NOTRACEBACK (with linker) really prevents someone from debugging the image?o   [3] "tracing" the execution.  mOn UNIX, there are things like truss/strace/ltrace. It can be extremely useful for debugging and many other purposes. However, I failed to find anything similar on OpenVMS. I have noticed TRACER/SNAPSHOT 'toolset' (if I can say so), but I don't think it will let me 'trace' an execution of SETP0.EXE for example, and show me what was going on 'behind the scenes' :)h  $ Is there something like this on VMS?   [4] Disassemblingc  I might be (very) wrong, but it seems that disassemblers for OpenVMS/Alpha don't exist. The only things I've found were UNMACRO and some DISASM32 (or something similar), which I think were made for VAX. Now, if I would like to disassemble SETP0.EXE or LOGINOUT.EXE, how do I do it? :)   Thanks.    Vanjad   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 17:42:55 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>e$ Subject: Re: Newbie meets OpenVMS ;), Message-ID: <3CC33252.B70A8D51@videotron.ca>   vanja@vmsbox.cjb.net wrote:  > As much as I understand, lib$spawn and sys$creprc require an image (executable) name to be specified, and can not 'inherit' file descriptors and other data from the process that invokes them.u  K Correct. They create a totally different process. However, that process can-K inherit logical names of the parent (as well as DCL symbols in many cases).b  J You could however share data though a global section created by the parentH which holds various tidbits of information and then accessed bythe childM process. Not sure about file descriptors though since the child process wouldh' need to open its own channels to files.   I One way to deal with this is to make your server very AST dependant. EachaM "thread" is really some AST that is queued to execute with a single parameter P that point to a structure that gives it access to all the private data it needs.  M make each AST routine small , short and sassy and make it then queue the nextAL AST needed for that task. This will give you a sort of multi-thread approach3 while all keeping it in one process and one thread.e  K Think of it as a queue of subroutines to be called. If for each client, youn- need to perform 3 tasks, you could then have:   . task1: does a bit, then queues task2 as an ast. task2: does a bit, then queues task3 as an astB task3: does a bit then deallocates the structures for that client.  J so if two clients call at the same time, their tasks would be interleaved,1 giving the impression that they run concurrently.   J In such a scenarion, you MUST ensure that so single task can stop/pause toN wait for something. If it does, the whole process will stop and wait and otherI clients will wait too. Only one AST can execute at a time and if that AST0M waits for something, the system will wait for it to complete before styartinga
 the next one.w    s> If I assume that my program is called SOPHIE.EXE and I want to use sys$creprc - does it mean that I have to use SOPHIE.EXE as image name? Does 'input' and 'output' arguments refer to SYS$INPUT and SYS$OUTPUT? Basically, if main SOPHIE.EXE process receives a connection over TCP/IP (let's assume), how could I spawn another process and hand the socket descriptors to it?   L when you create a process, you need not use the same image name. You can useI anything. You can also create a process that gives you DCL with input ande0 output to your own parent process via mailboxes.I (so your parent process can issue DCL commands to the subprocess and read  results back for instance).p  K >figure out the way to list the symbols (function names, let's say) inside.   5 ANA/IMAGE <shareable image file name> is your friend.'   Or more precisely:  6 PIPE ANA/IMAGE filename.exe | search sys$input symbol:  O This will give you both global symbols as well as entry points for subroutines.       I An by the way, please set your software to abide by internet standards byeM folding lines between 72 and 80 characters instead of allowing each paragraphoI to be sent as one long line. It is a real pain when quoting text from younQ because it was sent in a microsoft way that does not abide by internet standards.    ------------------------------    Date: 21 Apr 2002 21:21:46 -0000= From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]>e$ Subject: Re: Newbie meets OpenVMS ;)5 Message-ID: <20020421212146.9815.qmail@gacracker.org>b  C On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:  >vanja@vmsbox.cjb.net wrote:  J >An by the way, please set your software to abide by internet standards byN >folding lines between 72 and 80 characters instead of allowing each paragraphJ >to be sent as one long line. It is a real pain when quoting text from youG >because it was sent in a microsoft way that does not abide by internet  >standards.T  I I was just trying to figure out a way to say the same. This user is usinghJ Lynx to connect from VMSbox to Usenet, so it ain't M$. I think liberal use" of the <RETURN> key is required :)     Doc. -- s6 The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.K ~ Phineas Taylor Barnum.                             https://vmsbox.cjb.net1   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Apr 2002 22:30:41 GMT From: vanja@vmsbox.cjb.net$ Subject: Re: Newbie meets OpenVMS ;)D Message-ID: <3cc33d91$0$10244$afc38c87@sisyphus.news.be.easynet.net>  F > One way to deal with this is to make your server very AST dependant.C > Each "thread" is really some AST that is queued to execute with aeD > single parameter that point to a structure that gives it access to  > all the private data it needs.  G Ok. Then I'll have to read much more about ASTs :) Programming conceptsh manual talks about this.  D btw: are you aware of some place with source code examples for this?E I've downloaded quite few things for VMS (opensource stuff), but it'si5 quite hard to 'navigate' in those huge sourcefiles :)i  F > > figure out the way to list the symbols (function names, let's say) > > inside.d > 7 > ANA/IMAGE <shareable image file name> is your friend.r >    nD > Or more precisely:                                                 > > > PIPE ANA/IMAGE filename.exe | search sys$input symbol:       > D > This will give you both global symbols as well as entry points for > subroutines.   Tried already :) I get only:  ; $ pipe ana/image libsavi_axp.exe | search sys$input symbol:l#                 symbol: ".$$ABS$$."a+                 symbol: "DLLGETCLASSOBJECT"  $   > > An by the way, please set your software to abide by internetD > standards by folding lines between 72 and 80 characters instead ofC > allowing each paragraph to be sent as one long line. It is a realoD > pain when quoting text from you because it was sent in a microsoft0 > way that does not abide by internet standards.  B Ouch! Sorry :) I'm actually using Lynx (under VMS :), but I pastedD some text which I wrote in editor on my workstation (definitelly not2 a M$ workstation :). Will wrap the lines manually.   Thanks.h   Vanjad   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 03:00:26 GMTa1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>.% Subject: Re: OpenVMS Hobbyist License ' Message-ID: <3CC37F88.A2AA92E0@fsi.net>o   "Doc.Cypher" wrote:h > I > On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote:m > >Barry Skidmore wrote: > >>I > >> What is the status of the OpenVMS Hobbyist License program?  I had aWP > >> license that I let expire in December of last year, and would like to renewK > >> it.  The original web site for this (www.montagar.com/hobbyist/) is no  > >> longer up.  > > C > >OVMS Hobby is alive and well, AFAIK, or was up until the merger.d > >RG > >I'm afraid Montagar's website is not "alive and well" at the moment.e > - > I just got to it from Belgium, at 6:30 GMT.b  : That would have been 01:30 US CDT (Central Daylight Time).   > Either it was a transiente > problem at Montagar,  D Most likely. As of 02:55 GMT (21:55 US CDT), the Montagar website is- responding normally, as is the hobbyist page.   D Maybe just Blackwolf's armies causing trouble, or perhaps Avatar was3 spying on his brother which disrupted the website. F  E Then again, Elinore's magic never was that accurate, anyway (remember0+ the Mountain Fairies's inner sanctuary?)...    -- : David J. Dachteras dba DJE Systems5 http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 23:32:45 GMTe) From: rob.buxton@wcc.govt.nz (Rob Buxton).( Subject: Pathworks 6.1 exhausting KNBCBs2 Message-ID: <3cc349ec.2746776135@news.wcc.govt.nz>   Hi All,e  4 On Pathworks 6.1 under VAX VMS 7.2, TCPIP 5.1 ECO 3.C Two VAX nodes share a common System Disk, two Alphas as Satellites.u  C Occasionally I have the problem where Pathworks on one of the VAXesn' stops accepting drive mapping requests.    Log file error is F  Fri Apr 19 08:19:35 2002 *Error*: Refused Session request from remote0 client PC_CLIENT      (IP Addr: xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx)D  Fri Apr 19 08:19:35 2002  *****   No free KNBCB available...You may' need to re-configure for more clients!!s  F Well, I've already configured for more clients and more clients again.  B Currently set up for 70 Clients with 30 Concurrent signons on each* node. We have a 50 User Pathworks license.  F It seems to me that with this configuration I should not be exhaustingE the number of Clients as the other settings preclude getting close tol 70 clients.y  2 Clients are generally W95, but increasingly w2000.  F We also use External Authentication, but that shouldn't affect things,
 should it?  # Anyone seen or experienced similar?    As always Thanks In Advance,   Rob.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 20:45:08 GMTe# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>n9 Subject: Re: Prediction:  VMS lives, merger or no merger!aH Message-ID: <oxFw8.27851$VLV.22197@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  L 'Fucked-over' just happens to be the right phrase to describe the situation,H and one which everyone cannot fail to understand - unlike 'strategicallyJ re-emphasize', 'cornerstone of our strategy going forward', 'the processor family for the next 25 years'.          A "Doc.Cypher" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in messageH/ news:20020421060830.5195.qmail@gacracker.org...m; > On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote:  >A > <big snip> >-G > I fail to see how resorting to profanity helps put your point across.e >  >  > Doc. > --8 > The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it. > ~ Phineas Taylor Barnum. https://vmsbox.cjb.net   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 21:20:23 GMTr- From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network> 0 Subject: Re Smart house wiring - Re: auto wiring* Message-ID: <3CC34931.6050403@qsl.network>   Bill Todd wrote:: > "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network> wrote in message& > news:3CC33087.2090201@qsl.network... > H >>A similar issue is the planned smart outlet / wiring that they want to, >>replace the deadly ones in the house with. >>D >>Every appliance / lightbulb would have a micro-chip in it, and theC >>outlets / sockets would only deliver power once they verified the 
 >>parameters.4 >> CM > Well, perhaps, aside from making all existing appliances unusable without a L > suitable adapter plus at least possibly making all new appliances unusable > in existing houses  I The idea behind all of this is that the economies of scale will get this gB fabled microchip so cheap that it's cost would not be significant.  I Making an adapter that would bolt around a legacy plug to supply it with :+   it's rated power should not be expensive..  A Since lightbulbs would also have this chip in side of them (heat i> problem?), the adapter could be in the socket.  Not really an < insurmountable problem, once the technology is cheap enough.  H That is one of the big problems after all other parts of the technology G gets solved.  Unless it is cheap enough, no one will buy it, and until h+ everyone buys it, it won't be cheap enough.h  C The other issue is that some of the people working on this, want a o9 single universal jack that is power, phone, network, etc.i  . Of course that really complicates the project.  F As you stated, the GFCI really is the most economical way to go.  One A $10.00 U.S.D. device can protect up to 6 additional outlets when t properly installed.h   -Johne wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opininon Only   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 18:33:55 -0400o! From: pw@panix.com (Paul Wallich) 4 Subject: Re: Re Smart house wiring - Re: auto wiring/ Message-ID: <pw-2104021833550001@192.168.1.100>5  = In article <3CC34931.6050403@qsl.network>, "John E. Malmberg"M <wb8tyw@qsl.network> wrote:$   >Bill Todd wrote:u; >> "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network> wrote in messaget' >> news:3CC33087.2090201@qsl.network...o >> dI >>>A similar issue is the planned smart outlet / wiring that they want tog- >>>replace the deadly ones in the house with.s >>>hE >>>Every appliance / lightbulb would have a micro-chip in it, and theyD >>>outlets / sockets would only deliver power once they verified the >>>parameters. >>> N >> Well, perhaps, aside from making all existing appliances unusable without aM >> suitable adapter plus at least possibly making all new appliances unusablee >> in existing housesa >uJ >The idea behind all of this is that the economies of scale will get this C >fabled microchip so cheap that it's cost would not be significant.  >1J >Making an adapter that would bolt around a legacy plug to supply it with , >  it's rated power should not be expensive.  2 Once you've solved the economies-of-scale issue...K Of course, since people will be buying dozens of these adaptors and leavingiH them in the wall the way that they currently buy 3-to-2-prong "cheaters": most of the safety gains from the new plugs will be moot.   L It seems that architecturally speaking what you're doing is replacing a veryG simple system that does not in fact cause a whole lot of trouble with aeK very complicated one  that will have really bizarre failure modes and that dH will invite workarounds that make the dangers of the current system look trivial.  H This mode of redesign (replacing something simple whose "safety" residesH in basic mechanics and physics with something complicated whose "safety"H resides in a bunch of opaque standards and software/firmware) is all too/ common when silicon goes into mature equipment.g  H No doubt it will eventually happen, but those will be interesting times.   paul   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Apr 2002 18:24:54 -0000= From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]>k; Subject: Re: Some Lite Reading from SKC and www.openvms.orgl5 Message-ID: <20020421182454.2052.qmail@gacracker.org>s  G On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote:p >Constant Readers,   Is there any other sort? ;-)   <snip>  G >PS-- Blatant "sales pitch" (such as it is): If you use www.openvms.orgsH >and/or www.tru64.org as a resource and find the site(s) to be valuable,L >please send an email to the perpetrator of the site(s), kfarmer@farmer.org.F >Ken is looking for such statements to help build his case for greater  >support and buy-in from Compaq.  J I've put up a link to openvms.org on my "shell" accounts page. This shouldK bring in a little bit of traffic from people with little or no knowledge ofiH VMS. It's slow work getting people converted in this way, but when I getD users such as those I've quoted recently, the effort certainly seemsI worthwhile. I just wish I could offer them access to better hardware thandF an ageing 2100. I'd welcome some competition if anyone else feels likeJ putting up a similar service. However, from the accounts of some users theC Compaq trial run program is a little too restrictive and people are F prepared to put up with the poorer performance for a more open system.  G I'm not a regular reader of openvms.org, but when I do visit the site I @ generally spend quite a bit of time catching up on things there.     Doc. -- s6 The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.K ~ Phineas Taylor Barnum.                             https://vmsbox.cjb.netr   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 23:51:23 GMTe* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>; Subject: Re: Some Lite Reading from SKC and www.openvms.orgoC Message-ID: <%fIw8.124474$GS6.12629023@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>R  < "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote in message5 news:LaCw8.37131$%s3.15511040@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net...l > Constant Readers,a >oD > Five new back issues from Shannon Knows Compaq have been posted atL > www.openvms.org.  The issues in question cover the merger and other timelyA > phenemona. They are in PDF format and can be freely downloaded.  >A > J > SKCV9N1 January 3, 2002: Fearless Prognostications - Compaq's Changes in > 2002J > SKCV9N2 January 9, 2002: And Now For Something Completely Different from CPQsL > SKCV9N3 January 17, 2002: Compaq's January Earnings Surprise - Really Good > NewsF > SKCV9N4 February 1, 2002: Compaq Unveils First Blade in the ProLiant > BL-Series E > SKCV9N5 February 7, 2002: Merger Prospects Buoyed By European Uniont Decision >s > Enjoy! >d > -- > Terry C. Shannon > Consultant and Publisher > Shannon Knows Compaq$ > PLEASE NOTE MY *NEW* EMAIL ADDRESS > email: terryshannon@attbi.comp4 > Web (info on SKC):  www.openvms.org, www.tru64.org >l > PS-- Blatant "sales pitch"  I Truth in advertising would require that you describe much of the materiallH you refer to above as a "blatant sales pitch" as well.  Wording like "InK summary, the ProLiant BL e-class is the first step in delivering a completecI portfolio of power and performance for the enterprise.  The BL e-class ishC available today starting at just $1799; ten-packs start at $17,091"nH following a page-long glowing description (without note of any potentialL drawbacks) hardly qualifies as journalism, and a similar lack of objectivity/ leaks through into most of your other material.t  J At least it's not as sticky-sweet as some of the "Don't worry - be happy!"E garbage you've got up at compaqusers.org - where you've even taken tolH referring to yourself in the third person on occasion (do you think thisH contributes in some way to credibility?  I suspect most people really do check the by-line).t  K Detailed commentary on much of your drivel would be redundant with existingeJ discussions (largely in comp.os.vms), but given that you chose to bring upJ the detainees at Guantanamo (is that what you think your subscibers pay toG read?) it's worth noting that latest word seems to be that the Feds aregJ having some difficulty finding any concrete crime - including conspiracy -K to charge them with, and can find no identifiable connection to Sept. 11th.sF Not to be deterred, they're now reportedly considering trying them forI generic association with bad people, something that wasn't even done withtL some *really* bad people after WWII (though it *was* done *by* some of thoseI Really Bad People *during* WWII) - so for the moment you can rest assuredeI that our government isn't devoting undue attention to their human rights.'   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 16:35:46 +0200E  From: ipicstands@infonegocio.com* Subject: STANDS PARA FERIAS y EXPOSICIONES. Message-ID: <m11hmvmkbdq4dne.200420021635@iss>  c                                                                      Alcoletge, 19 de abril de 2002  Seores:  R Son ya ms de 10 aos dedicados al diseo y montaje de stands en ferias de mbito  nacional e internacional.r  M IPIC stands se posiciona en el mercado de la comunicacin para ofrecer a las i\ organizaciones, entidades pblicas y privadas, un servicio integral. Tenemos la posibilidad I de ofrecer cualquier tipo de servicio dentro del area de la comunicacin.:  V Realizamos el montaje de stands para  ferias, exposiciones, congresos, comportamiento  grfico, y rotulacin.  ] Desde la tramitacin con la Organizacin, hasta la realizacin final, pasando por el diseo, sA la estructura , desarrollo de stand , y alquiler del  mobiliario.   U Siempre con la mayor profesionalidad, coordinacin y control ya que contamos con  un tG gran equipo de trabajo bien preparado y habituado al montaje de stands. Q Su implicacin en la innovacin tecnolgica y mejora continua de los procesos de 6R fabricacin, montaje y diseo de stands, garantiza la elevada calidad de nuestros  productos finales.  C Muestras de nuestros diseos  pueden visitarnos en la direccin de    nuestra web: http://www.ipic.es.  l Estamos  a su  disposicin y les adjuntamos diversa documentacin en nuestra web por si fuera de su inters.   Saludos Cordiales,
 Isidro Sentiss ipic@infonegocio.com http://www.ipic.es/l Ipic, SL Tel. 973-197152e Fax.973-196141 LLEIDA-ALCOLETGE   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 02:52:56 GMTa1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> Y Subject: Re: The 'tone' of c.o.v. (was Re: Prediction:  VMS lives, merger or no  merger!) ; Message-ID: <cWKw8.38084$%s3.15852197@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>f  < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message! news:3CC37C52.C3B704E0@fsi.net...e > "Doc.Cypher" wrote:B > >.= > > On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote:-F > > >'Fucked-over' just happens to be the right phrase to describe the
 situation,> > > >and one which everyone cannot fail to understand - unlike 'strategicallyE > > >re-emphasize', 'cornerstone of our strategy going forward', 'they	 processorv# > > >family for the next 25 years'.s > >lD > > Okay, in your opinion it is the right phrase, but it limits your
 readershipK > > because many will simply switch off when they see the profanity. Not tonI > > mention that there used to be someone subscribed via the mailing listl with$ > > a naughty words filter in place. >aJ > "Occupational hazard", as the coyote might say. The point is that anyoneJ > can say pretty much whatever he/she feels like saying, anyway they wannaH > say it because no matter who says what, Compaq/HP/VMS is gonna do what? > it f**king well feels like doing and the customers be damned.l  K Can't argue with that last point. I noted with interest the following quote 3 in Capellas' 1FQ02 earnings teleconference remarks..  I "To begin with, customers are shifting more and more to industry standardmJ systems running Windows and Linux for lower cost solutions..." followed byC gushing praise for ProLiant and 3 percent year-over-year unit sales 	 increase.   G While I don't begrudge MC any of his pride over increased sales (albeit G decreased revenue thanks to margin pressure) I have to wonder from whataK environments these customers are moving. Maybe I'm just old or out of touch K or not with it or whatever, but IMHO every customer who walks away from VMStG or Tru64 (or NSK or MVS or OS/400) is a customer who is totally free ofy "vendor lock."  L Seems to me that high-margin revenue and repeat business are increasingly at risk.h  H What's the likelihood that a ProLiant customer will replace an incumbentB system with a new Compaq box if Dell or Gateway can offer the same= speeds-'n-feeds for, say, ten percent fewer dollars or Euros?r   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Apr 2002 20:51:49 -0000= From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> T Subject: The 'tone' of c.o.v. (was Re: Prediction:  VMS lives, merger or no merger!)5 Message-ID: <20020421205149.8870.qmail@gacracker.org>a  9 On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote:aM >'Fucked-over' just happens to be the right phrase to describe the situation,oI >and one which everyone cannot fail to understand - unlike 'strategically/K >re-emphasize', 'cornerstone of our strategy going forward', 'the processorw >family for the next 25 years'.   K Okay, in your opinion it is the right phrase, but it limits your readership G because many will simply switch off when they see the profanity. Not toUJ mention that there used to be someone subscribed via the mailing list with  a naughty words filter in place.  I My feelings about VMS marketing and some of the 'strategic' decisions aretB not that dissimilar from your own, but I believe that profanity isH counter-productive. Had I been in a bad mood when I read the message youK would have ended up in my killfile for 30 days. I am sure you don't want to E have that effect on your readers. I try to avoid swearing myself, butsG driving in Brussels makes the air in my car turn an unpleasant shade ofM blue :).  F Apart from the infamous Mr Harrison, everybody here seems to be of theG opinion that VMS is one of the finest operating systems ever developed,uK that isn't an easily arrived-at conclusion from much of the posting herein.7H I wish it was, because I refer people here who've only been using the OSJ for a few days. I certainly don't want to sweep the issues many of us haveI with Digital/Compaq management under the carpet, their behaviour has been D inexcusable, and in some respects continues to be so. That should beI pointed out at every opportunity, but it should be remembered that it hasl little impact doing so here.     Doc. -- )6 The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.K ~ Phineas Taylor Barnum.                             https://vmsbox.cjb.nety   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 21:29:32 GMTf1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>oX Subject: Re: The 'tone' of c.o.v. (was Re: Prediction:  VMS lives, merger or no merger!); Message-ID: <0bGw8.37202$%s3.15649847@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>s  J "Doc.Cypher" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message/ news:20020421205149.8870.qmail@gacracker.org...A; > On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote: D > >'Fucked-over' just happens to be the right phrase to describe the
 situation,K > >and one which everyone cannot fail to understand - unlike 'strategically C > >re-emphasize', 'cornerstone of our strategy going forward', 'them	 processor ! > >family for the next 25 years'.V >2B > Okay, in your opinion it is the right phrase, but it limits your
 readershipI > because many will simply switch off when they see the profanity. Not toaL > mention that there used to be someone subscribed via the mailing list with" > a naughty words filter in place. > K > My feelings about VMS marketing and some of the 'strategic' decisions areaD > not that dissimilar from your own, but I believe that profanity isJ > counter-productive. Had I been in a bad mood when I read the message youJ > would have ended up in my killfile for 30 days. I am sure you don't want toG > have that effect on your readers. I try to avoid swearing myself, buteI > driving in Brussels makes the air in my car turn an unpleasant shade of-
 > blue :). >-H > Apart from the infamous Mr Harrison, everybody here seems to be of theI > opinion that VMS is one of the finest operating systems ever developed,gE > that isn't an easily arrived-at conclusion from much of the postingh herein.bJ > I wish it was, because I refer people here who've only been using the OSL > for a few days. I certainly don't want to sweep the issues many of us haveK > with Digital/Compaq management under the carpet, their behaviour has been F > inexcusable, and in some respects continues to be so. That should beK > pointed out at every opportunity, but it should be remembered that it has  > little impact doing so here. >t   Well stated, Doctor!  K What's more, in the very unlikely event that anyone in DECpaq management is J reading this noosegroup, profanity would be an immediate turnoff. Not thatK what certain DECpaq managers have done (overtly, covertly, or via benign oruG malign neglect) to the VMS isn't profane unto itself, discretion is thec< greater part of valor when it comes to discussing the issue.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 17:46:29 -0400e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>cY Subject: Re: The 'tone' of c.o.v. (was Re: Prediction:  VMS lives, merger or no merger!) i, Message-ID: <3CC33328.5FB72321@videotron.ca>   "Doc.Cypher" wrote:eH > Apart from the infamous Mr Harrison, everybody here seems to be of theI > opinion that VMS is one of the finest operating systems ever developed,o  N In all fairness to "Andy boy", I have rarely seen unjustified criticism of VMSN itself at the technical level. He has rightly criticised its marketing and theI uncertainty which reigns about its (lack of) future.  And he has recently L criticised Wildfire performance claims. But I don't recall intensive battles* against VMS at the technical level by him.  M It is pretty hard for him to criticise VMS's clustering for instance since ito0 is still ahead of everyone else (including Sun).   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 02:46:45 GMT11 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>lY Subject: Re: The 'tone' of c.o.v. (was Re: Prediction:  VMS lives, merger or no merger!) n' Message-ID: <3CC37C52.C3B704E0@fsi.net>i   "Doc.Cypher" wrote:3 > ; > On Sun, 21 Apr 2002, "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote:nO > >'Fucked-over' just happens to be the right phrase to describe the situation,oK > >and one which everyone cannot fail to understand - unlike 'strategicallytM > >re-emphasize', 'cornerstone of our strategy going forward', 'the processore! > >family for the next 25 years'.r > M > Okay, in your opinion it is the right phrase, but it limits your readershippI > because many will simply switch off when they see the profanity. Not toiL > mention that there used to be someone subscribed via the mailing list with" > a naughty words filter in place.  H "Occupational hazard", as the coyote might say. The point is that anyoneH can say pretty much whatever he/she feels like saying, anyway they wannaF say it because no matter who says what, Compaq/HP/VMS is gonna do what= it f**king well feels like doing and the customers be damned.a   Prove me wrong.   K > My feelings about VMS marketing and some of the 'strategic' decisions areoD > not that dissimilar from your own, but I believe that profanity is > counter-productive.   > Agreed. At he other extreme, political correctness tends to beC unproductive at best, and a humiliating waste of effort in general,  IMHO.l  6 > Had I been in a bad mood when I read the message you1 > would have ended up in my killfile for 30 days.s  
 Your loss.   > I am sure you don't want torG > have that effect on your readers. I try to avoid swearing myself, butpI > driving in Brussels makes the air in my car turn an unpleasant shade ofq
 > blue :). > H > Apart from the infamous Mr Harrison, everybody here seems to be of theI > opinion that VMS is one of the finest operating systems ever developed, M > that isn't an easily arrived-at conclusion from much of the posting herein.-   WHOA, THAR!.  G Gotta call ya on that one. Between our self-appoint headed cheerleader,eE Bob Ceculski and our resident curmudgeon, Bill Todd, to guy whose sig2E used to read "RIP, VMS" (whoda hell was that, anyway?), even the mostyB casual observer can conlude that while OVMS is worthy of the greatG devotion displayed by the bulk of this group, its management would haveo to improve just to be abysmal.  ; I cannot see how your statement as posted can be justified.,  J > I wish it was, because I refer people here who've only been using the OSL > for a few days. I certainly don't want to sweep the issues many of us haveK > with Digital/Compaq management under the carpet, their behaviour has beenlF > inexcusable, and in some respects continues to be so. That should beK > pointed out at every opportunity, but it should be remembered that it hast > little impact doing so here.  G ...which is why I find even more significant the recent postings in thewE digital media (ComputerWorld, Infoweek) about how Sun was turned backnE from its decision on Solaris/Intel by exactly the kind of postings weu see/make here.  1 Sun listens. This has been proven and documented.t  E Compaq does not listen. This has likewise been proven and documented.    -- d David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systemse http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 14:50:12 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>wN Subject: Re: The Digital 7-year plan - from 1997 to 2004 - from Alpha to IA-64, Message-ID: <3CC309E2.1ED66472@videotron.ca>   the augur wrote:C > OpenVMS on IPF is going to be ridiculous, that's like replacing acF > porche engine with a geo metro engine.  In all sincerity, VMS should > not do the port.  N They have no choice. If they do not do the port, it is tantamount to admittingI that VMS will no longer be sold when the last alpha is sold and that willo= accelerate the percentage of customers making plans to leave.   K The port itself is not important. But doing the port is a necessary evil ateF this point. What they could do is move resources from the port back toL improving VMS and slow down the porting effort. This could be spun in a much better way:'  F 	"we are still comitted to VMS in the very long term, but we feel thatK continued improvement of VMS is more important than moving it to a platformrI that isn't ready yet, so we should focus our efforts on Alpha which stillvN outperforms because in the end, our customers will prefer to stay on Alpha andN will want more improvements on VMS instead of moving to an unproven and slower# architecture with no improvements".h   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 19:54:03 GMT:- From: goathunter@goatley.com (Hunter Goatley) 2 Subject: Re: VDDriver problems with large geometry1 Message-ID: <3cc3187a.277198640@news.process.com>t  L On Sat, 20 Apr 2002 10:18:26 -0400, Glenn Everhart <Everhart@gce.com> wrote:  L >The geometry calculation code in ASNVD is quite old, and overflows at about >32 gigabytes. >aL >I have coded somewhat inelegantly the modification to ASNVD_64.mar which isI >distributed in the vdd64.zip  file generally. I'll get this all onto the1 >next sigtapes.a >lV >For those in need of VD units of such size the new code is below, inserted after someL >existing code which I'll leave in for purposes of helping you find where to >put it. >Glenn Everhartt >'< Glenn's latest VDD64 souces can be found in my archives now.   http://www.process.com/openvms/e  5 ftp://ftp.process.com/vms-freeware/fileserv/vdd64.zipl: http://vms.process.com/ftp/vms-freeware/fileserv/vdd64.zip1 ftp://ftp.tmk.com/vms-freeware/fileserv/vdd64.zipe6 http://www.tmk.com/ftp/vms-freeware/fileserv/vdd64.zip  ) And on the other mirrors within 24 hours.    Hunter ------9 Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/e8 goathunter@goatley.com    http://www.goatley.com/hunter/< New Robert R. McCammon site: http://www.RobertRMcCammon.com/   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 17:08:29 GMTg1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>a1 Subject: Re: VMS Spammer, the lowest form of lifei; Message-ID: <hmCw8.37136$%s3.15517129@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>y  + <david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk> wrote in messageo% news:a9u2im$hs6$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk...tG > In article <cKkw8.36597$%s3.14912793@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>, "Terry C.n) Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> writes:r > >W > >> > >oB > >Yep! I use www.spamcop.net (and pay about $15-20 a year for the
 privilege)I > >for reporting SPAMMERs. Wouldn't bother doing that with Attunity, it's  theeC > >"bare nekkid Brittney Speers" sort of stuff that yanks my chain.  > >c >S0 > The spam reporting service at Spamcop is free.I > You can if you wish pay a small fee which apparently speeds up the spam : > processing and removes banner adverts from the webpages.I > I've never tried this since the free service is generally fairly quick.nG > Spamcop also provides other fee paying services such as filtered maila > accounts.o  G You are correct re: the free service. I upgraded to paid because I keptsH getting "server busy... try later" messages when using the free service.6 Paid service will cost you less than $20 USD per year.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 17:56:17 -0700o% From: Dean Woodward <deanw@rdrop.com>1 Subject: Re: VMS Spammer, the lowest form of lifet) Message-ID: <3CC35FB1.2962F454@rdrop.com>   Dirk Munk wrote: > I > I understand you views, but please look at it from another perspective.o > C >    1. It is about VMS, you are interested in VMS, so it may be ofp >       interest to you.  F It may be, it may not.  If it's of such great interest, he should haveH posted it here, or better yet, forwarded it to Sue, who has (presumably)$ better coverage than just this list.  I >    2. Attunity is a very important piece of middleware. If I understandnI >       it correctly it will provide a kind of universal API to RMS, RdB,o >       DBMS and Oracle.  ' I'm happy for it.  But I don't need it.a  E >    3. In fact it is so important that it is on the standard VMS 7.3p! >       distribution kit (afaik)..   Important for who?  Not me.e  L >    4. Web access to VMS will be extremely important for the future of VMS.  H Our apps are already internet enabled.  (Web browsers, in fact, make forD a lousy base for an interactive data-entry system.  I use them whereC appropriate, but I'm not silly enough to limit myself to being "webh
 enabled'.)  0 > I don't mind receiving this kind of 'spamming'  F I'm happy for you.  I, OTOH, do.  If it'd been posted to c.o.v, then IF wouldn't have minded.  Instead, he's let me know he's a bottom feeder,H and not a very bright thinker, at that, to have gone to great lengths toG get my attention, where he could have gotten the same message across byiH posting it once here, without upsetting myself (or, apparently, a number( of others).  Marketeer, Know thy market.  > > It is specifically directed to people who may be interested.   Key word, 'may'.  F Here's a thought.  Lots of people here haven't the foggiest what we'reB talking about, because they take measures to mask their true emailE address so they don't have to deal with their address being harvestedrE (such as mine was).  Some of those people may have been interested inoG this product, but the message didn't get to them.  If he'd posted it ton# the group, they would have seen it.e    > I do mind the flood of ChineseI > spam I receive daily. My Chinese is not that good that I can understandbJ > what they like to tell me. In fact I don't even have chinese fonts on my > system.  :-)  D I don't see those, because they don't pass my spam filter.  This was9 aimed directly at me, so it got through.  Different case.    ------------------------------    Date: 21 Apr 2002 23:03:41 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 1 Subject: Re: VMS Spammer, the lowest form of lifeo3 Message-ID: <NnkUg7jQZXlc@eisner.encompasserve.org>   G In article <3CC1B6CB.2050409@home.nl>, Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> writes:mI > I understand you views, but please look at it from another perspective.o  : Exactly what part of "Spam is Theft" don't you understand?  C >    1. It is about VMS, you are interested in VMS, so it may be ofm >       interest to you.  D Exactly how do you know this about Del ?  Think carefully before you answer.i  I >    2. Attunity is a very important piece of middleware. If I understand I >       it correctly it will provide a kind of universal API to RMS, RdB,f >       DBMS and Oracle.  G Your attitude of believing what a spammer tells you about their product-
 is revealing.e  E >    3. In fact it is so important that it is on the standard VMS 7.3s! >       distribution kit (afaik).o  - As Display Postscript was on earlier CDROMs ?r  L >    4. Web access to VMS will be extremely important for the future of VMS.  F Then I guess we would want it from a trustworthy vendor, wouldn't we ?  F > I don't mind receiving this kind of 'spamming' . It is specifically + > directed to people who may be interested.i  @ It most decidedly is not.  To the best of my knowledge, the onlyB connection between Del and VMS is that he posts in comp.arch where; many threads are unfortunately cross-posted to comp.os.vms.r  @ So this particular spammer (Attunity) qualifies especially underC Rule 3.  Now _if_ I (who do use VMS) wanted to buy some of whatevervA Attunity is selling, I would certainly run to a competing vendor,eC not only because I don't want a vendor that stupid but also because  of the Boulder Pledge.  , > From: Patricia A. Shaffer <ramsa@swva.net>( > Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.email% > Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 23:26:54 GMTe >  > The Rules of Spamr >  > Rule #0:  Spam is theft. >  > Rule #1:  Spammers lie.r >  [(Proposed)  H >    Sharp's Corollary: Spammers attempt to re-define "spamming" as that >    which they do not do.]  > D > Rule #2:  If a spammer seems to be telling the truth, see Rule #1.H >    Chrissman's Corollary: A spammer, when caught, blames his victims.  >   > Rule #3:  Spammers are stupid.9 >    Krueger's Corollary: Spammer lies are really stupid. 6 >       Pickett's Commentary: Spammer lies are boring.H >    Russell's Corollary: Never underestimate the stupidity of spammers.   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Apr 2002 23:09:53 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)t1 Subject: Re: VMS Spammer, the lowest form of lifet3 Message-ID: <PXdF9uaL7U9P@eisner.encompasserve.org>i  L In article <a9u2im$hs6$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>, david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk writes:q > In article <cKkw8.36597$%s3.14912793@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> writes:- >> >>>- >>L >>Yep! I use www.spamcop.net (and pay about $15-20 a year for the privilege)L >>for reporting SPAMMERs. Wouldn't bother doing that with Attunity, it's theB >>"bare nekkid Brittney Speers" sort of stuff that yanks my chain. >> > 0 > The spam reporting service at Spamcop is free.I > You can if you wish pay a small fee which apparently speeds up the spam0: > processing and removes banner adverts from the webpages.I > I've never tried this since the free service is generally fairly quick.hG > Spamcop also provides other fee paying services such as filtered mailo > accounts.   C The SpamCop Filtering Service costs $30/year.  Normally it requiresg@ two email addresses, one of which forwards out to the filter and> another which receives it back.  My recipe for doing this fromD a single email address using PMDF Deliver is included in the SpamCop FAQs.h  N ==============================================================================I The Boulder Pledge: "Under no circumstances will I ever purchase anythinguJ      offered to me as the result of an unsolicited email message. Nor willI      I forward chain letters, petitions, mass mailings, or virus warnings H      to large numbers of others. This is my contribution to the survival      of the online community."N ==============================================================================   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Apr 2002 23:13:49 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)p1 Subject: Re: VMS Spammer, the lowest form of lifee3 Message-ID: <sbSfV6QMUtBO@eisner.encompasserve.org>n  Q In article <3CC35FB1.2962F454@rdrop.com>, Dean Woodward <deanw@rdrop.com> writes:f > Dirk Munk wrote:  1 >> I don't mind receiving this kind of 'spamming'l > H > I'm happy for you.  I, OTOH, do.  If it'd been posted to c.o.v, then IH > wouldn't have minded.  Instead, he's let me know he's a bottom feeder,J > and not a very bright thinker, at that, to have gone to great lengths toI > get my attention, where he could have gotten the same message across byuJ > posting it once here, without upsetting myself (or, apparently, a number* > of others).  Marketeer, Know thy market.  B And realize that some of us are so resolute about spam that it has; disqualified Attunity from being recommended in the future.h  @ The Boulder Pledge, by the way, was composed by Roger Ebert, who? may be familiar to US television viewers for his movie reviews.f  N ==============================================================================I The Boulder Pledge: "Under no circumstances will I ever purchase anythingeJ      offered to me as the result of an unsolicited email message. Nor willI      I forward chain letters, petitions, mass mailings, or virus warningsDH      to large numbers of others. This is my contribution to the survival      of the online community."N ==============================================================================   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 22:49:17 -0400 2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)? Subject: Re: XP1000 does not recognize Compaq memory in  Bank 1iJ Message-ID: <rdeininger-2104022249170001@1cust13.tnt2.nashua.nh.da.uu.net>  = In article <e54adf36.0204210943.665b6066@posting.google.com>,l. pdafniotis@yahoo.com (Petros Dafniotis) wrote:  A >I purchased two years ago a XP1000 with 512MB (4x128) in Bank 0.e >nN >Now I purchased a Kingston approved 1GB (4x256). REASON: Swiss Francs 1200 vsO >Swiss francs 10,000 for Compaq RAM. I could not justify for the life of me thee >extra cost of Compaq RAM. >R2 >I put Kingston in Bank1 with Compaq RAM in Bank 0# >   RESULT: 4 beeps from the system- > @ >I put Kingston in Bank0 alone and remove Compaq RAM completely.K >   RESULT; Boots ok recognizes extra RAM both in Console prompt and in VMSa >n2 >I put Kingston in Bank 0 and Compaq RAM in Bank1.E >   RESULT: I boot ok, but both Console and OpenVMS REFUSE to see thei Compaq RAM.- >hD >Please help if you can. I do need the 1.5GB ram for my simulations.   A couple of ideas...  H If you have the right manual for the XP1000, you can look up the meaning of the "4 beep" code.e  I Are you SURE you know which slots belong to bank 0 and bank 1?  If you'retB not populating the banks properly, you could get symptoms like you	 describe.g  G I don't know this particular platform, but on some systems you must putyC the largest memory kit in the first bank.  There are almost as many F different configuration rules as there are system types.  Do your docs= describe the configuration rules, and are you following them?g  " Can Kingston offer you any advice?   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2002.221 ************************