1 INFO-VAX	Mon, 09 Dec 2002	Volume 2002 : Issue 679       Contents:1 Re: "VMS will be around long after we retire" ... 1 Re: "VMS will be around long after we retire" ...  Re: death of alpha on slashdot8 Re: GROW YOUR MICROVAX BY 3 MIPS WITH MIRACLE PILL ! ! !; Re: Network question re GigE and NIC 10/100 interface cards 7 Network question re GigE and NIC 10/100 interface cards ; Re: Network question re GigE and NIC 10/100 interface cards - Re: OT: Whoa! Is Sun aiming at VMS's jugular? - Re: OT: Whoa! Is Sun aiming at VMS's jugular? - Re: OT: Whoa! Is Sun aiming at VMS's jugular? - Re: OT: Whoa! Is Sun aiming at VMS's jugular? @ Re: Problem with HSZ50 (access to the CLI from the console port) Re: Quert wrt F$SEARCH()B Re: Request for Discussion, make comp.os.vms a moderated newsgroup% TCPIP v5.1 on Alpha kills same on VAX ) Re: TCPIP v5.1 on Alpha kills same on VAX ) Re: TCPIP v5.1 on Alpha kills same on VAX " [ANNOUNCE] OpenSSL 0.9.6h released  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 00:13:42 +01005 From: "Chris Clifford" <chris.clifford@openvms.co.uk> : Subject: Re: "VMS will be around long after we retire" ..., Message-ID: <3df3d241$1@news.swissonline.ch>  5 "Bob Ceculski" <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote in message 6 news:d7791aa1.0212071335.a5aec50@posting.google.com...  D > no, I find credible all the vms users like myself, incl. the govt.B > and defense, who know and understand the superiority of VMS overC > the other garbage os's out there today ... they are commited, and E > I am commited to continue to use the best os for the last 25 years, A > and for the next 25 years ... intel itself wants vms because it B > knows that vms on itanium will rule the high end for the next 25D > years ... just like it says above, those who have brains are goingD > to use vms, the port will be easy, and alpha will live in itanium.A > Those are the facts ... to keep on denying them is to live in a ; > fantasy world ... I think you underestimate vms users ...   L Unfortunately (and I hate to say this) I take the negative view that you are" the one living in a fantasy world.  L The main selling point of VMS has to be its clustering. Its clustering is of@ little value if applications are not designed to make use of it.  K I can't comment on Northern America but here in Europe real VMS programmers L are extremely scarce. We run two mission-critical disaster tolerant clustersK but the applications running on them nowadays are updated and maintained by K a group of programmers who are not VMS specialists. Highly skilled they may B be at coding but ask them to create an executable which can be runI simultaneously on two nodes in a cluster and automatically fail over in a J short period of time and they really would not know where to start. If oneJ node fails within either of our critical environments, the downtime is theE length of the reboot plus application startup as the applications are ; distributed amongst cluster members without any redundancy.   @ I remember the mass exodus of good quality VMS programmers to NTK environments about 6-7 years ago (thanks Digital) and I have not seen their  numbers replaced.   K If HP is serious about keeping VMS then there's a tremendous amount of work J required to persuade programmers and enthusiastic system managers that VMSI is an interesting environment to work in. HP needs to stress the benefits G not only at a high level to the IT managers but also technically to the : people who would develop in and maintain VMS environments.  I It's not the case that those with brains will use VMS - there is actually I intelligence out there but ignorance plays a major role in choosing other L OSes. As someone who also heads a team looking after one of those other OSesA I can honestly say the alternatives to VMS are truly frightening.    - Chris.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 19:02:05 -0500 ' From: Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> : Subject: Re: "VMS will be around long after we retire" ...< Message-ID: <howard-C756C3.19020508122002@enews.newsguy.com>  , In article <3df3d241$1@news.swissonline.ch>,7  "Chris Clifford" <chris.clifford@openvms.co.uk> wrote:   M > If HP is serious about keeping VMS then there's a tremendous amount of work L > required to persuade programmers and enthusiastic system managers that VMSK > is an interesting environment to work in. HP needs to stress the benefits I > not only at a high level to the IT managers but also technically to the < > people who would develop in and maintain VMS environments.  A What it comes down to for me is, VMS is no longer being used for  G anything interesting.  It's used by large corporations who move slowly  H enough that their inertia hasn't let them change yet.  As time goes on, I the corporations involved will only get bigger and more calcified as the  5 ones with less organizational inertia move elsewhere.   H VMS is on its last breaths.  People can stick with it if they like, but @ the rest of us are bootstrapping into other OSs in order to get * experience people might actually look for.   --  4 Today, on Paper-view: The World Origami Championship   ------------------------------   Date: 8 Dec 2002 13:36:35 -0000 4 From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]>' Subject: Re: death of alpha on slashdot 6 Message-ID: <20021208133635.15861.qmail@nym.alias.net>  7 On 8 Dec 02, p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) wrote: G >In article <ast024$ue8qd$1@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de>, bill@cs.uofs.edu  >(Bill Gunshannon) writes:, >> In article <DkcxqyOjmTBU@elias.decus.ch>,/ >> 	p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) writes:  >>> In article  A >>>> In article <c5cf6e8.0212060511.18e22344@posting.google.com>, . >>>> baby_p_nut@yahoo.com (Baby Peanut) wrote: >>>>  L >>>>>http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/12/06/0326217&mode=thread&tid=173  J >>>> Are those the sort of folks who are being hired to program and manageM >>>> today's wonderful "industry standard" and linux IT solutions?  If so, we $ >>>> are in a whole heap of trouble.  J >>> I'm afraid so. There are some excellent folks out there, when you knowJ >>> how to find them - more often by sheer luck than good management. Many. >>> I would not trust to park my car properly.  D >>> Too much dogma, and belief that their way is the only way, IMHO.  G >> Do you realize how silly that would sound to any non-VMS fanatic who F >> has been reading cov for any short period time??  There are as manyH >> people here who think we live in a "one size fits all" world as there >> are in the Linux camp.   I >Eh? Forgive me if I say that that somewhat illustrates my point. It's OK G >for them to slam us, call us old fashioned etc., but when we criticise - >them, we get shouted down or called "silly".   D If you go back and review the discussion there was when the DeathrowF cluster got /.ed (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/08/31/1431208)F there certainly was an air of "VMS? Irrelevant." to some of the posts.  K As some here may be aware, the usual effect of appearing in a /. article is H for a site to crumple up and do the machine equivalent of have a nervousI breakdown. Well, the cluster stayed up and took the punishment. Although, J this probably gave the bozos trying to fill it up with Eggrop bot programs the impression VMS is slow.   C However, I've kept an eye on the cluster since it was brought to my F attention. It seems that there were a fair number of lurkers in the /.J discussion who, having not had exposure to VMS, or previously been exposedD to this sort of ignorance, had not looked into it. After exposure toH user-level access there are now quite a few new DECUS^WEncompass members& playing with simh and other emulators.  I Bill certainly has a point that some of us in c.o.v. can react and take a I radical stance about VMS, but the real culprits are those responsible for J marketing VMS. If they restrict it to specific markets, and refuse to tellH the truth, i.e. that is was designed to be a *general purpose* operating/ system, then nobody takes that claim seriously.      Doc. --  6 The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.K ~ Phineas Taylor Barnum.                             https://vmsbox.cjb.net    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 00:19:29 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORGA Subject: Re: GROW YOUR MICROVAX BY 3 MIPS WITH MIRACLE PILL ! ! ! 0 Message-ID: <00A18277.35B0FDEB@SendSpamHere.ORG>  b In article <3DF3056F.BE1F9EA3@vl.videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> writes: >Sorry, I couldn't resist....  > L >Since the discussions about OT posts has actually taken more bandwidth thanG >the actual OT stuff, I figured I could contribute some true OT stuff !   A ... but I've never heard any complaints about the size of my VAX.  --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM              5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"     ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 06:48:08 +10000 From: "Matt Muggeridge" <Matt.Muggeridge@hp.com>D Subject: Re: Network question re GigE and NIC 10/100 interface cards0 Message-ID: <NfOI9.6$KV.190504@news.cpqcorp.net>  L You don't mention the purpose of your testing, so I can only guess.  Is thisI for failover testing?  To simulate a failure, perhaps you can disable the G appropriate port on your switch.  By the sound of your configuration, I H would suspect you have managed switches which will have this capability.  L If you are just wanting to test connectivity, then simply pinging the remoteA IP address will verify that.  Are you after connectivity testing?   . Other commands you can burn your fingers with:       TCPIP SET NOINTERFACE xyz      ifconfig xyz down      route delete <dst>  K These are probably a bit harsh for testing any real world situation you are K trying to protect yourself from.  But, if you know what you are doing, then  maybe one of these helps.   . What exactly is the objective of your testing?   Matt.    --= -------------------------------------------------------------  OpenVMS TCP/IP Engineering Enterprise Computing Group Hewlett-Packard Company  Gold Coast, AUSTRALIA = -------------------------------------------------------------     1 "Lee Y T Mah" <lytmah@cha.ab.ca> wrote in message # news:3DF33F48.BD521652@cha.ab.ca... : > Configuration: Three-site, 5-node VMScluster at VMS 7.3. > At site A:    Two ES45's. J >                     Each ES45 has two GigE interface cards (Gig1, Gig2). > 8 >                     Each ES45 has one NIC 10/100 card. > At site B:    Two ES45's. J >                     Each ES45 has two GigE interface cards (Gig1, Gig2). > 8 >                     Each ES45 has one NIC 10/100 card.2 > At site C:    An Alpha with one NIC 10/100 card. > = > The NIC 10/100 interface cards are on a segregated network. > > I can get to any of the 5 nodes via telnet, DECnet, and LAT.I > Up to now, we have been testing the network by physically disconnecting H > the various communication lines from each of the Alpha's.  This can be/ > difficult as the three sites are miles apart. F > At what level and what commands (TCPIP?) can be used to simulate the > disabling  > of the NIC or GigE cards?  > - > Scenario 1: Disable NIC on all four ES45's. ) > Scenario 2: Disable Gig1 on all ES45's. 2 > Scenario 3: Disable Gig1 and Gig2 on all ES45's. >  > TIA. >  >  > -- > Lee  > = > Lee Y T Mah                        Capital Health Authority  >  >  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 05:47:04 -0700 $ From: Lee Y T Mah <lytmah@cha.ab.ca>@ Subject: Network question re GigE and NIC 10/100 interface cards) Message-ID: <3DF33F48.BD521652@cha.ab.ca>   8 Configuration: Three-site, 5-node VMScluster at VMS 7.3. At site A:    Two ES45's. H                     Each ES45 has two GigE interface cards (Gig1, Gig2).  6                     Each ES45 has one NIC 10/100 card. At site B:    Two ES45's. H                     Each ES45 has two GigE interface cards (Gig1, Gig2).  6                     Each ES45 has one NIC 10/100 card.0 At site C:    An Alpha with one NIC 10/100 card.  ; The NIC 10/100 interface cards are on a segregated network. < I can get to any of the 5 nodes via telnet, DECnet, and LAT.G Up to now, we have been testing the network by physically disconnecting F the various communication lines from each of the Alpha's.  This can be- difficult as the three sites are miles apart. D At what level and what commands (TCPIP?) can be used to simulate the	 disabling  of the NIC or GigE cards?   + Scenario 1: Disable NIC on all four ES45's. ' Scenario 2: Disable Gig1 on all ES45's. 0 Scenario 3: Disable Gig1 and Gig2 on all ES45's.   TIA.     -- Lee   ; Lee Y T Mah                        Capital Health Authority    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 15:36:25 -0700 $ From: Lee Y T Mah <lytmah@cha.ab.ca>D Subject: Re: Network question re GigE and NIC 10/100 interface cards) Message-ID: <3DF3C968.CC6852AB@cha.ab.ca>    Matt Muggeridge wrote:  N > You don't mention the purpose of your testing, so I can only guess.  Is thisK > for failover testing?  To simulate a failure, perhaps you can disable the I > appropriate port on your switch.  By the sound of your configuration, I J > would suspect you have managed switches which will have this capability. >   2                 Yes, this is for failover testing.K                 I'll take it up with our network group to see if we can get I                 access to the switches and if they are remote-manageable. H                 We have already determined that the NIC 10/100 cards canK                 hold the cluster together when all the GigE links are down. H                 However, it is inconvenient to have someone at each site'                 in order to do testing.   N > If you are just wanting to test connectivity, then simply pinging the remoteC > IP address will verify that.  Are you after connectivity testing?  > 0 > Other commands you can burn your fingers with: >  >     TCPIP SET NOINTERFACE xyz  >     ifconfig xyz down  >     route delete <dst> >   G                 We tried the SET NOINTERFACE on one of the cards and we A                 had to reconfigure TCPIP to get back the original  characteristics.   > M > These are probably a bit harsh for testing any real world situation you are M > trying to protect yourself from.  But, if you know what you are doing, then  > maybe one of these helps.  > 0 > What exactly is the objective of your testing? >   J                 Our FDDI cluster has been composed of two remote sites forK                 many years but their distance has been only 250 feet apart. L                 We have set up a third site about 8 miles away, connected by2                 two GigE and one NIC 10/100 cards.   >  > Matt.  >  > --? > -------------------------------------------------------------  > OpenVMS TCP/IP Engineering > Enterprise Computing Group > Hewlett-Packard Company  > Gold Coast, AUSTRALIA ? > -------------------------------------------------------------    ------------------------------   Date: 8 Dec 2002 15:07:38 -0800 7 From: jones.computer.srv@worldnet.att.net (Daryl Jones) 6 Subject: Re: OT: Whoa! Is Sun aiming at VMS's jugular?= Message-ID: <8a646952.0212081507.5d62bc6c@posting.google.com>   ` "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message news:<3DF15610.C34D0025@fsi.net>...B > In InfoWorld on-line today... Opponents of both OpenVMS-IA32 andF > Affordable OpenVMS should note the number and price of downloads forE > Solaris Intel, given that availability was announced only recently.  >  > * > SUN PONDERS OFFERING OPEN-SOURCE SOLARIS > - > Posted December 05, 2002 12:58 Pacific Time  > 8 > SAN FRANCISCO -- Sun Microsystems is pondering whether7 > or not to offer Solaris code in an open-source format 6 > to boost deployment of the operating system on Intel8 > hardware, but questions remain about the effectiveness0 > of open source, a Sun official said this week. > 4 > The company is looking at allowing users to access3 > Solaris in an open-source format, noting that the 3 > recent early release program for Solaris 9 on the 4 > Intel x86 platform has generated about 1.4 million/ > downloads for the $20 offering, said Jonathan 6 > Schwartz, Sun executive vice president for software.4 > Schwartz spoke during an interview Tuesday evening8 > prior to a private Sun-sponsored screening of the film > "Solaris" in San Francisco.  >  >  > For the full story: T > http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/12/05/021205hnopensolaris.xml?1206fram >  > ****** > G > Opponents of both OpenVMS-IA32 and Affordable OpenVMS should note the J > number and price of downloads for Solaris Intel, given that availability > was announced only recently. > " > Are there any further questions? >  > The defense rests.   David,  C I have seen several discussion here at comp.os.vms about a Intel 32 C bit version for VMS. I don't understand why you and other's seem to ? scream for the need for OVMS on a 32 bit Intel chip! The 32 bit F architecture has been viewed not a viable solution for computing sinceB the 1990's; thus the Alpha chip! It appears that MicroSoft doesn't> what to support some of the old x86 architecture in its new OSE offerings. If Solaris want to spend their time with x86 architecture, E I think it great! No better way for them to spend dollars in the long E run. Again, the furture of OVMS is not with the Intel 32 bit chip but F with the Intel 64 bit chip. Both HP and Compaq when separated made theD decision to dropped their own chip design efforts and concentrate onE providing software and service solutions. This is where the growth is @ and with that income. Furthermore, I don't see Solaris to be theF computer company to be compared to when talking about OVMS. Now if you7 want to compare Solaris to the PC market, that's great!    Daryl Jones    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 19:42:13 -0500 0 From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca>6 Subject: Re: OT: Whoa! Is Sun aiming at VMS's jugular?/ Message-ID: <3DF3E6CE.4C8B8840@vl.videotron.ca>    Daryl Jones wrote:E > bit version for VMS. I don't understand why you and other's seem to 7 > scream for the need for OVMS on a 32 bit Intel chip!    I There is no demand for VMS on the 8086 because there is no demand for VMS L period. And there is no demand because there is no marketing and VMS is onlyM available on obscure platforms. Put VMS on the 8086, and all of a sudden, you , have the potential of a huge installed base.  M Consider Linux. Guess what really happened ? Some marketing genius made Linux K "cool" so that geeks would try ot on their home 8086 PCs. They liked it and L then talked about it at the office. When the time came to do a pilot projectN (such as a web server), the geek would suggest the company try that cool LinuxK thing since it is better tha Windows and costs less. They go about with the  pilot and voila.  I Now, make VMS available on the 8086 , make the hobbysist more ppoular and J you'll have those geekz trying oiut VMS on their home pCs and perhaps evenH learning about VMS clsuters and realising how lame Unix/windows clustersA really are. Guess what they will want their offices to try next ?        > The 32 bitH > architecture has been viewed not a viable solution for computing since# > the 1990's; thus the Alpha chip!    M May not be viable, but Intel continues to spew these things out and crank out 0 even faster and faster ones. It isn't dead yet.       G > run. Again, the furture of OVMS is not with the Intel 32 bit chip but  > with the Intel 64 bit chip.   F Wrong. IA64 has no bright future. It is stlated to the same low volumeI "Proprietary" life. HP will simply combine VMS (Alpha), Tandem (Mips) and " HP-UX (Parisc) onto the same chip.  F > decision to dropped their own chip design efforts and concentrate on, > providing software and service solutions.   K Carly said that she wants 3rd party to provide software. hard to understand I what Carly's real intenstions are with regards to software. Does she want  software or not ?   N Now, with AMD comming out with Hammer, the 8086 architecture becomes even moreM interesting. HP could simply dump Intel and decide to go with the 64 bit 8086 T for all its servers and just run the 32 bit software on the same hammer on desktops.  N Should engineers bother to port VMS to the 32 bit 8086, or should they port toL 64 bit 8086 ? Porting to 32 bit might have some more challenges than porting to the new 64 bit hammer.   N Which would be easier: port the VAX version of VMS to the 32 bit 8086, or port5 the 64 bit version of VMS on Alpha to 32 buit 8086 ?    N Has the VAX version of VMS benefitted from better restructuring as part of the> port of Alpha, or has it remained very very very tied to VAX ?   ------------------------------  $ Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 02:10:55 +01005 From: "Chris Clifford" <chris.clifford@openvms.co.uk> 6 Subject: Re: OT: Whoa! Is Sun aiming at VMS's jugular?, Message-ID: <3df3edd3$1@news.swissonline.ch>  = "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> wrote in message ) news:3DF3E6CE.4C8B8840@vl.videotron.ca... I > Consider Linux. Guess what really happened ? Some marketing genius made  Linux I > "cool" so that geeks would try ot on their home 8086 PCs. They liked it  and F > then talked about it at the office. When the time came to do a pilot project J > (such as a web server), the geek would suggest the company try that cool Linux I > thing since it is better tha Windows and costs less. They go about with  the  > pilot and voila.  ; Many of these geeks already had UNIX experience either from K university/college or work experience so Linux was particularly interesting ( to them. You can't say the same for VMS.  I From experience (I'm an IT manager myself) - whether right or wrong - the L geeks have little influence in determining the platform of choice. There areL generally two types of managers - the first who is not a technical expert soL is influenced by reports about the IT field from so-called "experts" and theL second who bases platform decisions on his/her own experience as an ex-geek.   > K > Now, make VMS available on the 8086 , make the hobbysist more ppoular and L > you'll have those geekz trying oiut VMS on their home pCs and perhaps evenJ > learning about VMS clsuters and realising how lame Unix/windows clustersC > really are. Guess what they will want their offices to try next ?  >   J I don't think they will. They'll stick with their Linux and continue to beL ignorance about the reasons why the small group of people out there continue' to enthuse over an apparently dead O/S.    - Chris.   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 01:17:02 GMT * From: "Mark E. Levy" <levy@sysman-inc.com>6 Subject: Re: OT: Whoa! Is Sun aiming at VMS's jugular?> Message-ID: <iaSI9.168735$GR5.54788@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>  = "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> wrote in message ) news:3DF3E6CE.4C8B8840@vl.videotron.ca...  > Daryl Jones wrote:G > > bit version for VMS. I don't understand why you and other's seem to 8 > > scream for the need for OVMS on a 32 bit Intel chip! > K > There is no demand for VMS on the 8086 because there is no demand for VMS I > period. And there is no demand because there is no marketing and VMS is  onlyK > available on obscure platforms. Put VMS on the 8086, and all of a sudden,  you . > have the potential of a huge installed base.  J The classis 8x86 architecture, as typically implemented in a M$ compatibleK system, is incapable of supporting OVMS without a severe lobotomizing. Such K lobotomization would be expensive and require significant rewriting, and in ; the end, would only be suitable for a hobbyist application.   E Just a few reasons why this won't work: The 8x86 CPU lacks sufficient K processor modes (KESU). OVMS' current inplementation requires all four, and I to do with less would require significant re-working. As implemented on a L typical PC motherboard, the interrupt structure (if you can call it that) isG nothing compared to the VAX or Alpha vectored interrupts. The memory is I bank-switched with a hole between 640K-1M, as opposed to the VAX or Alpha L linear memory model. There is no real memory management support to speak of. I could go on...  @ In short, shoe-horning OVMS onto the bastardized 1980's era 8x86K architecture just isn't worth it, just to put it in the hands of people who G won't be paying for it anyway. If HP were to do this, the result likely J wouldn't be OVMS as we know and love, but some reliability-impaired subset with a similiar name.    ML   ------------------------------   Date: 08 Dec 2002 22:24:09 GMT) From: wkb@freebie.xs4all.nl (Wilko Bulte) I Subject: Re: Problem with HSZ50 (access to the CLI from the console port) > Message-ID: <3df3c689$0$2229$e4fe514c@dreader6.news.xs4all.nl>  d In <3DF1AA48.1041166@kolumbus.fi> Veli =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=F6rkk=F6?= <Veli.Korkko@kolumbus.fi> writes:   >Manser wrote: >>  h >> nmanser@progis.de (Manser) wrote in message news:<2178d61f.0212051622.1901f7e0@posting.google.com>... >> > Alan Adams <alan.adams@orchard-way.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message news:<4cfd969e4b.Alan.Adams@orchard-way.freeserve.co.uk>... C >> > > In message <2178d61f.0212011011.3a02a8e7@posting.google.com> 2 >> > >           nmanser@progis.de (Manser) wrote: >> > > >> > > > Alan Adams <alan.adams@orchard-way.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message news:<0517399d4b.Alan.Adams@orchard-way.freeserve.co.uk>... G >> > > > > In message <2178d61f.0211281413.31cbdaa4@posting.google.com>    >> Example:   >> HSZ> set this prompt="HSZ02>"P >> Error 4090: Module has invalid serial number.  This controller cannot be used  F Bad news, you probably at some time have suffered a disconnect of the 1 lithium battery that powers the non-volatile RAM.   I There is no field-tool to reprogram the serial#, as the serial# were used  to verify warranty claims.  1 All HSZ50 are out of warranty of course by now ;)    W?   --% |   / o / /_  _   		wilko@FreeBSD.org  |/|/ / / /(  (_)  Bulte				    ------------------------------  $ Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 13:15:50 -00009 From: "covendotartdottalk21dotcom" <postmaster@127.0.0.1> ! Subject: Re: Quert wrt F$SEARCH() 3 Message-ID: <RZydnYCPwtGW226gXTWc2Q@brightview.com>   ; "CSABA HARANGOZO" <csabah@zipworld.com.au> wrote in message / news:yyVH9.427$P5.23031@nasal.pacific.net.au... C > He could also try $TYPE NODE1::NL: . This will give an error like  > this probably:  	 [deletia]   E Sounds like this is my best bet, as it'll involve fairly minimal code  changes.  Thanks!    ------------------------------   Date: 8 Dec 2002 21:32:10 -0000 4 From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]>K Subject: Re: Request for Discussion, make comp.os.vms a moderated newsgroup 6 Message-ID: <20021208213210.27436.qmail@nym.alias.net>  F On Thu, 05 Dec 2002, Mark Berryman <Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com> wrote:   <snip>  H Although the vast majority of "gut" reactions to Mark's initial RFD haveJ been negative, nobody seems to have brought up the mechanics of this. That" can be found at the following URL:  / http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html   J Depending on how any proposal is put together, and on how it is decided toI go forward with the Info-VAX mailing list (and any others that may spring I up), there is obviously a range of possible outcomes. For example, if the C deletion of c.o.v. is voted on as a separate item, then it could be K retained whilst sanctioning the creation of one or both of the proposed new  groups.      Doc. --  6 The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.K ~ Phineas Taylor Barnum.                             https://vmsbox.cjb.net    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 12:13:36 +1100 1 From: Paddy O'Brien <paddy.o'brien@tg.nsw.gov.au> . Subject: TCPIP v5.1 on Alpha kills same on VAX, Message-ID: <3DF3EE40.4030603@tg.nsw.gov.au>  K This weekend I upgraded from TCPIP v5.0 to v5.1 on my Alpha boxes (VMS 7.2)   H One of these is clustered in with a VAXstation.  This had been upgraded H to VMS 7.3 and TCPIP 5.1 about a month ago (all this in preparation for ( corporate wanting to get rid of DECnet).  H Nothing had been changed on the VAX this weekend, but after the upgrade E on Alpha, I have no TCPIP databases on VAX.  What has happened?  The  B earlier installation on the VAX did not trash the Alpha databases.   Regards, Paddy      G ***********************************************************************   C "This electronic message and any attachments may contain privileged > and confidential information intended only for the use of the B addressees named above.  If you are not the intended recipient of C this email, please delete the message and any attachment and advise B the sender.  You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, 7 distribution, reproduction of this email is prohibited.   A If you have received the email in error, please notify TransGrid  A immediately.  Any views expressed in this email are those of the  = individual sender except where the sender expressly and with  C authority states them to be the views of TransGrid.  TransGrid uses > virus scanning software but excludes any liability for viruses contained in any attachment.  < Please note the email address for TransGrid personnel is now$ firstname.lastname@transgrid.com.au"  G ***********************************************************************    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 00:40:37 GMT . From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER)2 Subject: Re: TCPIP v5.1 on Alpha kills same on VAX2 Message-ID: <9ERI9.72530$A9.928403@news.chello.at>  ` In article <3DF3EE40.4030603@tg.nsw.gov.au>, Paddy O'Brien <paddy.o'brien@tg.nsw.gov.au> writes:L >This weekend I upgraded from TCPIP v5.0 to v5.1 on my Alpha boxes (VMS 7.2)  > Any good reason why you still don't use the current versions ?  I >One of these is clustered in with a VAXstation.  This had been upgraded  I >to VMS 7.3 and TCPIP 5.1 about a month ago (all this in preparation for  ) >corporate wanting to get rid of DECnet).   J Please don't. Upgrade to DECnet-Plus and get rid of DECnet protocol on theL LAN by using DECnet-over-TCPIP and make your corporate happy. You will stillI like using usernames in X11 security or RMS attributes from remote or use  COPY instead of FTP.  I >Nothing had been changed on the VAX this weekend, but after the upgrade  F >on Alpha, I have no TCPIP databases on VAX.  What has happened?  The C >earlier installation on the VAX did not trash the Alpha databases.   ? Without more information, I don't think the events are related.    --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 19:54:33 -0500 0 From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca>2 Subject: Re: TCPIP v5.1 on Alpha kills same on VAX/ Message-ID: <3DF3E9B1.E0C0A10D@vl.videotron.ca>    Paddy O'Brien wrote:I > One of these is clustered in with a VAXstation.  This had been upgraded I > to VMS 7.3 and TCPIP 5.1 about a month ago (all this in preparation for * > corporate wanting to get rid of DECnet). > I > Nothing had been changed on the VAX this weekend, but after the upgrade . > on Alpha, I have no TCPIP databases on VAX.   M You need to provide more details.  What "databases" were ruined on the VAX ?    I How is the VAX clustered ? Is its system disk on the VAX, or served by an H Alpha ?  Are there special logical names which you would have modified ?   ------------------------------  + Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 21:55:39 +0100 (CET) 9 From: Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker <levitte@openssl.org> + Subject: [ANNOUNCE] OpenSSL 0.9.6h released : Message-ID: <20021208.215539.34764527.levitte@openssl.org>  " -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----      +   OpenSSL version 0.9.6h release correction +   =========================================   E   A small packaging fault was just discovered.  In crypto/opensslv.h, D   the macro OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER has the value 0x00906080L when itF   should really be 0x0090608fL.  The cause of this fault was a tagging   error in our CVS repository.  A   To solve this issue, the faulty has been corrected, and we have D   rebuilt the 0.9.6h distribution.  The 0.9.6h [engine] distribution   is unaffected by this.  C   The corrected distribution is available for download via HTTP andeC   FTP from the following master locations (you can find the variousl?   FTP mirrors under http://www.openssl.org/source/mirror.html):s  $     o http://www.openssl.org/source/#     o ftp://ftp.openssl.org/source/u     The distributed file name is:f         o openssl-0.9.6h.tar.gzi6         MD5 checksum: 1a0c2bee9f6b0af95ce65106462411f5  ;   The checksum was calculated using the following commands:a  '     openssl md5 < openssl-0.9.6h.tar.gzS  @   Additionally, for those who don't really want to reload a fullA   distribution, the following very small patch file is available:e  )       o openssl-0.9.6h.BOGUS-0.9.6h.patcho     Yours,   The OpenSSL Project Team...  s  =     Mark J. Cox             Ben Laurie          Andy Polyakov5<     Ralf S. Engelschall     Richard Levitte     Geoff Thorpe'     Dr. Stephen Henson      Bodo Mllerl&     Lutz Jnicke            Ulf Mller   -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE------ Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: noconv-  @ iQEVAwUBPfOxX/Ty7ZjgbSyxAQGcjAf8CZdNuDkbM7IO/PDT5HYTJVwGDdIhFmV2@ znAu91zD/zrMICyQC0xjQSOs+j8/5bUzT8NTDjGlkc2DTIYZB/PAhyt5cEtMh8qz@ Q5h82tFmeHAmFr6xedJbbVNV5vjzA3Y/En97By1fl0aCMxnrW3NeIQmDAu5JZ9tg@ PQOXI47sBWV2YvaVjlQ87kjm8GyQkbtPFb3WYhNpWXi3//5FAz+6Mj4NEITw64Fs@ XM5M66jhoaIoGVt3i7w8LEokxE1x4SPbCNAQ24+UnudbCYeg/aB8Y309a4lorsVB8 npToQW+LTuQXst9jTHec9pDWD51CwVbviAKKXWLCl0KWxoay6OcUvA== =Jm+Mg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2002.679 ************************