1 INFO-VAX	Mon, 30 Dec 2002	Volume 2002 : Issue 722       Contents:7 Re: ";*" vs. ".*" (Was: Re: is VMS really easy to use?) 7 Re: ";*" vs. ".*" (Was: Re: is VMS really easy to use?) 7 Re: ";*" vs. ".*" (Was: Re: is VMS really easy to use?) 1 Re: "VMS will be around long after we retire" ... + Re: Better graphics card for my PWS  600au? 4 Re: Demise of VMS (and most other operating systems)4 Re: Demise of VMS (and most other operating systems)4 deporter the boot message from the console in a file! Re: First Hammer performance test ! Re: First Hammer performance test 9 Re: HP-CUO Membership (Re: DECUS^H^H^H^H^HCUO membership)  Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: is VMS really easy to use? Re: Link errors.& Re: Merry Christmas to all VMS'ers ...- Re: OT: Whoa! Is Sun aiming at VMS's jugular? P please ignore, test message...trying to send without MIME from Ou	tlook/ExchangeP Re: please ignore, test message...trying to send without MIME from Ou	tlook/ExchP Re: please ignore, test message...trying to send without MIME from Ou	tlook/ExchP Re: please ignore, test message...trying to send without MIME from Ou	tlook/ExchP Re: please ignore, test message...trying to send without MIME from Ou	tlook/Exch7 Retrieve RMS Key information at runtime (using Fortran) ; Re: Retrieve RMS Key information at runtime (using Fortran) ; Re: Retrieve RMS Key information at runtime (using Fortran) ; Re: Retrieve RMS Key information at runtime (using Fortran) 9 Re: Star date, Smithsonian date, and VMS datetime formats  Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth  Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth  Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth  Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth  Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth   Re: Webserver advice for VAX/VMS  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:24:09 +0000 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> @ Subject: Re: ";*" vs. ".*" (Was: Re: is VMS really easy to use?)8 Message-ID: <3je01v4oarl4t7pfch18dqfr28tmq3vjiu@4ax.com>  4 On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 15:10:44 +0100, "Chris Clifford"% <chris.clifford@openvms.co.uk> wrote:    > . >"matt" <matt987@hotmail.com> wrote in message* >news:auhj28$9v4$1@helle.btinternet.com... >>M >> It must be a slow day today 'cos now I'm intrigued enough to find out when ! >> and why this syntax got added.  >>E >> Its a bit like dev:<dir> rather than dev:[dir] which most famously 	 >appeared  >> in STABACKIT.COM. >>L >> Time for some digging (although it'd be a lot easier just to ask Hoff :-) >> > J >I seem to remember reading that both <dir> and the '.' syntax for versionG >numbering were included in VMS for the benefit of users migrating from 7 >TOPS-20. They've always been catered for by VMS afaik.   D Yep and I still tend to type a "," instead of ";" for file version.   	 >- Chris.  >    -- Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 07:13:50 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) @ Subject: Re: ";*" vs. ".*" (Was: Re: is VMS really easy to use?)3 Message-ID: <Y3TXn8Ko5Yoa@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ` In article <3je01v4oarl4t7pfch18dqfr28tmq3vjiu@4ax.com>, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:  F > Yep and I still tend to type a "," instead of ";" for file version.   E I suppose you don't get what you want from DCL on those occasions :-)    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 08:45:07 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) @ Subject: Re: ";*" vs. ".*" (Was: Re: is VMS really easy to use?)3 Message-ID: <+$RN0EzACPje@eisner.encompasserve.org>   T In article <auhj28$9v4$1@helle.btinternet.com>, "matt" <matt987@hotmail.com> writes:L > It must be a slow day today 'cos now I'm intrigued enough to find out when  > and why this syntax got added. > M > Its a bit like dev:<dir> rather than dev:[dir] which most famously appeared  > in STABACKIT.COM.  >   C    . for ; got added at the same time as <> for [], about 4.0 IIRC. G    It let RMS parse TOPS-20 file names so you didn't have to quote them !    during DECnet file references.    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 08:12:07 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) : Subject: Re: "VMS will be around long after we retire" ...3 Message-ID: <vLz0wxhU1QvY@eisner.encompasserve.org>   f In article <howard-0EF049.22131623122002@enews.newsguy.com>, Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net> writes:2 > In article <01C2AA6C.EA1D64E0@sulfer.icius.com>,( >  Shane Smith <ssmith@icius.com> wrote: > & >> WASH YOUR MOUTH OUT, CLIFF!!!!!!!!! >>  K >> This would be a major disaster. VMS has won our loyalty through its high J >> quality. Can you imagine what it would be like three years after MS got >> their hands on it?  >  > It would be NT 3.51.  B    Worse, there would be anti-virus products for it, and a market.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 07:48:57 +0100  From: Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl>4 Subject: Re: Better graphics card for my PWS  600au?8 Message-ID: <6sqv0v4ja5gcrmruf4dja3gmq1oumji8dj@4ax.com>  F On Sun, 29 Dec 2002 22:20:24 -0600, Rich Jordan <duodec@speakeasy.net> wrote:  J >I just went through that on my PWS600au. I was running an Elsa (actually B >Powerstorm 4D10T) at 1280x1024x24, which worked but was slow and G >jittery; a long time ago Fred Kleinsorge posted to the effect that at  F >higher resolution and pixel depth, the Elsa was near the edge of its I >capabilities so screen jitters and anomalies could occur, and I believe  G >the recommendation was to stay at lower resolution and/or pixel depth.  > I >Since the powers that be won't make newer cards like the Powerstorm 300  G >or Oxygen work on EV5 systems like ours, the best cards available for  G >VMS are the older TGA2 PowerStorm 3D30 (8-plane) and 4D20 (24 plane),  J >the latter of which is quite hard to find and usually expensive when you G >do, unless you pick one up from someone buying a PWS that ran UNix or  G >VMS and plans on switching to Linux (the TGA2 cards mentioned are not  % >well supported there under XFree86).  > J >I got lucky and picked up a 4D20, paid about twice what a PCI Powerstorm ? >300 cost in the aftermarket, and it works fantastically well.  ? >1280x1024x24, clean, fast, and rock solid on my VRC21 monitor.   A I'm using the same card on my PWS500au, and I'm very satisfied as B well. However I'm running it on 1600 x 1200 on my 21 inch monitor.8 The 4D20 is most likely the best thing for VMS on a PWS.     > > >To change what your Elsa is running at, try editing the file H >SYS$MANAGER:DECW$PRIVATE_SERVER_SETUP.COM  I'm pretty sure you can run F >1024x768x24 with a fairly clean display, or 1280x1024x8 (256 colors)  >without too much issue. > H >BTW, is your card a DEC Elsa or a third party unit?  That might make a G >difference, though I've no direct experience with an aftermarket unit.  >  >Rich Jordan >  >  >Didier Morandi wrote:I >> I have an ELSA GLORIA SYNERGY something in my PWS600au which gives me  I >> only 16 colors or so. What can I do to have "normal" pictures display  F >> with DECwindows? Change a parameter? (which one, where), install a ( >> "real" PC-like card? (which one, how) >>  
 >> Thanks, >>   >> D.    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 08:02:24 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) = Subject: Re: Demise of VMS (and most other operating systems) 3 Message-ID: <PQ8iGqe51NpT@eisner.encompasserve.org>   f In article <hsi80vkkmevs4tnhospjsmjdua3cenvvcv@4ax.com>, John Laird <john@laird-towers.org.uk> writes:M > On 20 Dec 2002 11:15:18 -0600, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob  > Koehler) wrote:  > G >>   I am making no assumption.  This is based on experience.  We FTP a G >>   random length file in binary.  We get a collection of fixed length I >>   512 byte records.  The last record is 0 filled.  A C program reading J >>   the file as a stream file gets the whole last record.  There's no wayF >>   to tell the correct length unless you know that the original file >>   did not end in bytes of 0.  > I > Try setting the record format to "undefined".  RMS $GETs will correctly N > return the number of genuine bytes in the last block, if the file header EOFM > info has been set appropriately.  Whether this will work correctly with the  > C RTL on top, I don't know.  > N > I think "undefined" is a closer fit to a genuine byte stream than any of theC > so-called stream formats, all of which embody some form of record 
 > terminator.   E    Yes, it looks like it is.  So why didn't any of the IP vendors for %    VMS choose it for binary transfer?    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:47:16 +0100 6 From: Arne =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk>= Subject: Re: Demise of VMS (and most other operating systems) ) Message-ID: <3E106A84.6010004@vajhoej.dk>    Bob Koehler wrote:  G >    Yes, it looks like it is.  So why didn't any of the IP vendors for ' >    VMS choose it for binary transfer?     3 Traditionally a VMS binary file has been fixed 512.    Arne   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:17:04 +0100 8 From: "serge.zangheri" <szangheri@grenoble.sema.slb.com>= Subject: deporter the boot message from the console in a file 5 Message-ID: <3E105560.F88A4954@grenoble.sema.slb.com>    Hi, F I would like to get the boot messages from the console in a file or at$ least in a decterm of an another VS.  A I tried to connect the console cable into a TTA serial port of an  another VS. C I configured the tta2 term as opa0 (speed, etc) in order to get the A console messages in this decterm, after I can put them in a file. C I created a term as follow create /term /input=tta2. But there's no F signal on this blank decterm. The cable is well connected on the right tta.   Anyone could help ?  Thanx  Serge    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 08:19:01 -0800( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)* Subject: Re: First Hammer performance test= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0212300819.47d6d4c5@posting.google.com>    Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<3E101AF6.9070004@nospamn.sun.com>... < > Its a bit difficult to sue someone for patent infringement< > if they have licensed the technology from you in the first > place. > - > Or are you forgetting the AMD Digital deal.  > 6 > In reality the people who should be worried and very3 > probably are will be the Intel PC vendors who are 1 > all facing potentially very damaging costs from / > Intergraph which stem from Intergraphs patent  > dispute with Intel.  > 1 > HP among others are in Intergraphs sights. Many 1 > of them may well be regretting not using AMD in  > more of their PC products. > 1 > As an Intel cloner AMD will have been very very 1 > carefull about how they design their processors 1 > making sure that they don't infring any patents  > they havn't licensed.  > 	 > Regards  > Andrew Harrison   9 what is stupid is why do these companies license or steal 8 alpha technology with the huge risk of being caught when5 alpha was for sale ... they could have just bought it 9 instead of trying to reinvent the wheel again and wasting 7 a lot of money in r&d costs ... stupidity!  this is the : same mistake Gates made by trying to steal vms thru Cutler; for NT instead of just buying alpha vms and putting windoze  on top of it ... STUPIDITY!!!    ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 18:00:05 +0000 (UTC) 5 From: "John Wallace" <johnwallace4@yahoo.dotco.dotuk> * Subject: Re: First Hammer performance test/ Message-ID: <auq1j5$bi0$1@venus.btinternet.com>   1 "Shane Smith" <ssmith@icius.com> wrote in message * news:01C2ACC0.8D06DA10@sulfer.icius.com...8 > From: bob@instantwhip.com [mailto:bob@instantwhip.com] >  <snip> > B > I have a vague memory of hearing that the Hammer uses some AlphaG > technology that AMD licensed /before/ the death of Alpha. I think the C > on-chip memory control was part of it, but since I can't find the I > reference this should be taken with a healthy pinch of salt. (I've been G > told there's two ways to spot a genius: First, he has a bad memory. I # > can't remember the other... ;-) )  >  > Shane  (sense of deja vu here)   H Wasn't the EV6 inter-chip bus licensed to AMD, tarted up a bit, and bornK again as Hypertransport???? No idea if that includes memory control or not, H but if you're really interested you could always have a look around e.g.- http://www.hypertransport.org/pr_021401_b.htm    regards  john   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:45:39 +0000 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> B Subject: Re: HP-CUO Membership (Re: DECUS^H^H^H^H^HCUO membership)8 Message-ID: <e8c01vsd0tjekoakm2ot83j87b2v3l16fo@4ax.com>  F On 24 Dec 2002 06:41:03 -0600, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) wrote:  k >In article <3E07BFC5.3239660D@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk>, Steve Reece <SYSTEM@ipl.demon.co.nospam.uk> writes:  > G >> This week, you should receive a copy of Ping, the technical magazine G >> published by the HP/Works user group.  This is being sent out in the J >> hope that HP-CUO members will find it useful and educational.  I have a> >> vested interest here in that I have an article in there.... >>  G >> A copy of HP User, the magazine from the HP-CUA user group should be ; >> finding its way to 'our' members in the near future too.  > B >Are these real magazines (as distinguished from non-text email) ?  F Well "PING" is a real magazine because Vol 4, No. 4, was sitting on myF desk when I got back to work today. Only VMS related article in its 368 pages is Steve Reece's article on the TCPIP IMAP server. -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:59:24 +0100 6 From: Arne =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk>' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? ) Message-ID: <3E10270C.1060105@vajhoej.dk>    Alan E. Feldman wrote:  A > Anyway, we were able to delete some batch jobs from an existing H > session that was still somewhat usable and that freed up memory. LaterD > that very same week he did it again!!! And he also told me he onlyB > wanted to look at the last few screens' worth of the file. (!!!)) > Apparently he never heard of TYPE/TAIL.   " TYPE/TAIL is relative new in VMS !   Arne   ------------------------------   Date: 30 Dec 2002 13:44:33 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? 5 Message-ID: <aupik0$9badv$1@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de>   / In article <v0ved7ie0genc9@corp.supernews.com>, $ 	Z  <zarlenga@conan.ids.net> writes:2 > David J. Dachtera <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote:E >: Actually, you raise an interesting point: when I got my first UNIX I >: system back in 1986, I spent a good couple of months or more trying to I >: figure out how to actually PRINT out the manual pages in hard copy, as F >: opposed to having them scroll up my screen. Sorry, but I still work >: better from hard copy.  > 
 > One way: >  > man ... > x.x  > lpr -r x.x  @ I think he was looking for a way to print the entire manual, not kust the individual pages.   bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------   Date: 30 Dec 2002 13:51:55 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? 5 Message-ID: <aupj1r$9badv$2@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de>   / In article <v0ve1tcb2t1i29@corp.supernews.com>, $ 	Z  <zarlenga@conan.ids.net> writes:/ > Bill Gunshannon <bill@gw5.cs.uofs.edu> wrote: E >: Win2K SP3.  These are lab machines, regularly reloaded using ghost E >: and with no "home grown application or pieces of code".  And, when E >: no one is logged on, there is nothing running that isn't a part of 	 >: Win2K.  > ... F >: Could be Norton, I suppose.  I assume Vshield runs even when no one > B > Impossible.  Norton is not part of Win 2K.  You stated twice now4 > that nothing's running when people are logged off.  ? Actually, giving it some thought, it likely isn't Norton (if it A is in fact running when no one is logged on, I really don't know) @ as I have other machines running the same version of Norton that= do not exhibit this particular behavior.  In the long run, it B really doesn't matter why, it only matters that the Win2K machinesB are the only ones that exhibit this annoying behavior among a very@ heterogenous configuration and that they require more of my time@ than all the other systems, some of which I can literally ignore for months at a time.    bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------   Date: 30 Dec 2002 14:00:16 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? 5 Message-ID: <aupjhg$9badv$3@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de>   = In article <b096a4ee.0212292112.73f57af1@posting.google.com>, 1 	spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman) writes: k > bill@gw5.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote in message news:<aul0gv$83g4p$1@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de>...  > [...] 
 >> And, toF >> place the blame where it properly lies, would VMS let a single taskE >> consume all virtual memory until the machine is no longer usable??  > 5 > Remember the RWMPB state? Here's a fun, true story.  > H > A programmer was "cleaning up" on a development machine and decided toH > look at a very large file (maybe 60-90,000 blocks) and he used the EVEF > editor. (!) The pagefile wasn't big enough and the system locked up.D > Getting a Username prompt would literally take minutes. (He should# > have used EDT!!! Hurray for EDT!)  > A > Anyway, we were able to delete some batch jobs from an existing H > session that was still somewhat usable and that freed up memory. LaterD > that very same week he did it again!!! And he also told me he onlyB > wanted to look at the last few screens' worth of the file. (!!!)) > Apparently he never heard of TYPE/TAIL.  >  > So yes, it would.  > G >> No version of Unix I have running (well, except maybe for Ultrix-11)  >> would allow it. > H > Is that because of quotas you've set up or is it something inherent inH > Unix? I remember that at a previous place I worked a single user could= > hog all available memory to himself on their Unix machines.  >   A And this brings us back to wether or not Unix is as stable/secure B as VMS. It all comes down to the Sys Admining.  Your example aboveC shows a VMS machine set up in such a way that a single user, either C accidentally or on purpose, can deny others the use of the machine. A If I did not have my servers configured to prevent this, it would B bemore common that you think.  For example, in the RealTime course? this past semester the students had to right a program the used > fork().  Can you imagine how many of them accidentally created? programs that actually called fork() repeatedly as fast as they B could becuase they got the logic of the problem wrong?? Because of@ the way the systems are configured the only person denied access? by this was that user (who then has to come see me with his/her = tail between their legs loking for help.)  No other users are B noticably effected.  I only mention Ultrix-11 as it is not as easyA to set user and process quotas and I don't know what the defaults  are off the top of my head.    bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 06:05:13 -0800. From: spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman)' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? = Message-ID: <b096a4ee.0212300605.69942689@posting.google.com>   g JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> wrote in message news:<3E0FEEDB.EA10725E@vl.videotron.ca>...  > "Alan E. Feldman" wrote:J > > A programmer was "cleaning up" on a development machine and decided toJ > > look at a very large file (maybe 60-90,000 blocks) and he used the EVE > > editor. (!)  > N > Sacrilege :-)  I woudl never even consider submitting my all mighty microvax > II to such torture :-) > G > You should know however that this is what the PGFILQUOTA parameter in P > Authorize is for. Not account should have a PGFILQUOTA that si larger than any# > of the page files on your system.   D Yes, I know. However, the programmer had full privs, adjusted quotasE on his own without telling me, and there was nothing I could do about C that for a variety of reasons. I did, however, increase the size of ? the pagefile after the second incident. Moreover, it was only a 4 development machine, and recovery was not difficult.   And that's Pgflquo.    Disclaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldman    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 08:40:40 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) ' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? 3 Message-ID: <H8Mh3Qvmiw6n@eisner.encompasserve.org>   V In article <aufdt7$8g7$1@knossos.btinternet.com>, "matt" <matt987@hotmail.com> writes:! > At least with VMS you can't do:  >  >     rm *.tmp  F    Using VMS means never having to figure out how to delete _only_ the    file named *.c    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 08:42:08 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) ' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? 3 Message-ID: <z8QHEn4D+G7j@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ` In article <augh08$73t0o$1@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:  E > I keep hearing about this mythical accidental "rm -r" that destroys 
 > the system.   D    No myth, been there, seen that.  And yes, simillar has happend to    VMS.    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 08:42:58 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) ' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? 3 Message-ID: <izuMGy8Awn0s@eisner.encompasserve.org>   S In article <v0nr5viumk6c65@corp.supernews.com>, Z  <zarlenga@conan.ids.net> writes:  > AG <ang@xtra.co.nz> wrote:7 > : Ever seen a newbie trying to figure out how to exit * > : [or whatever the term may be] from vi? > 3 > It's kinda like watching someone with TECO or TV.  > > > That's why most people I know use Emacs or vim or some other > more recent editor,       Like EVE.   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 06:54:26 -0800. From: spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman)' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? = Message-ID: <b096a4ee.0212300654.2902d055@posting.google.com>   f "Mark E. Levy" <levy@sysman-NOSPAMinc.com> wrote in message news:<GNQP9.161252$qF3.12100@sccrnsc04>... > Alan E. Feldman wrote:m > > bill@gw5.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote in message news:<aul0gv$83g4p$1@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de>... 	 > > [...]  > >  > >>And, to G > >>place the blame where it properly lies, would VMS let a single task F > >>consume all virtual memory until the machine is no longer usable?? > >  > > 7 > > Remember the RWMPB state? Here's a fun, true story.  > > J > > A programmer was "cleaning up" on a development machine and decided toJ > > look at a very large file (maybe 60-90,000 blocks) and he used the EVEH > > editor. (!) The pagefile wasn't big enough and the system locked up.F > > Getting a Username prompt would literally take minutes. (He should% > > have used EDT!!! Hurray for EDT!)  > > C > > Anyway, we were able to delete some batch jobs from an existing J > > session that was still somewhat usable and that freed up memory. LaterF > > that very same week he did it again!!! And he also told me he onlyD > > wanted to look at the last few screens' worth of the file. (!!!)+ > > Apparently he never heard of TYPE/TAIL.  > >  > > So yes, it would.  > * > Maybe a better way to ask this would be: > I > "Would a PROPERLY CONFIGURED VMS let a single task consume all virtual  0 > memory until the machine is no longer usable?" > G > The system described above should have had a larger pagefile, or the  G > PGFLQUOTA for the account in question should have been smaller. It's  I > also possible that the sysgen parameter WSMAX was set too high for the   > amount of available memory.  >  > ML   You are correct, HOWEVER...   C The developer had full privs and adjusted quotas on his own without B telling me and there was nothing I could do about that for variousA reasons. Making a bigger pagefile would increase the rate of disk = fragmentation, and the app requires a certain minimum largest @ contiguous free space, and I wasn't allowed to get anything like< Diskeeper. I didn't want to copy disks to tape and back moreC frequently just because a developer likes to use EVE to look at the F last few screens of a huge file he's considering for deletion! Also, I@ thought the developer would know better, and would certainly notE repeat the same mistake only 2 or 3 days later, and most importantly, @ it was only a development machine and recovery (luckily) was not difficult. And WSMAX was okay.   Disclaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldman    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 08:58:18 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) ' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? 3 Message-ID: <b1f$v+EUGUH+@eisner.encompasserve.org>   S In article <v0ovkurn7ush97@corp.supernews.com>, Z  <zarlenga@conan.ids.net> writes: # > VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: N > : I don't believe that somebody not well versed in unix "crytology" would beG > : able to "interpolate" "rm -r dir" to mean "remove -recursive dir".   > > > I believe even a novice can learn to use man in a few hours.  B    I believe even a novice can learn to use help in a few minutes.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:08:54 -0600 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> ' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? ' Message-ID: <3E107DA6.C4C71CB8@fsi.net>    Bill Gunshannon wrote: > 1 > In article <v0ved7ie0genc9@corp.supernews.com>, - >         Z  <zarlenga@conan.ids.net> writes: 4 > > David J. Dachtera <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote:G > >: Actually, you raise an interesting point: when I got my first UNIX K > >: system back in 1986, I spent a good couple of months or more trying to K > >: figure out how to actually PRINT out the manual pages in hard copy, as H > >: opposed to having them scroll up my screen. Sorry, but I still work > >: better from hard copy.  > >  > > One way: > >  > > man ... > x.x  > > lpr -r x.x > B > I think he was looking for a way to print the entire manual, not > kust the individual pages.  H Exactly. Geting those two commands took a matter of minutes. Getting the entire "manual" tooks months.    --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 11:14:02 -0600 1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> ' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? ' Message-ID: <3E107EDA.98C08041@fsi.net>    Z wrote: > ( > Dan O'Reilly <dano@process.com> wrote:" > :>>Win 2000 is pretty damn good.? > :>>Not quite Enterprise Critical quality yet, but damn close.  > :>A > :>Compared to what? Win98? NT4?  Certainly not compared to VMS.  > K > : My W2k system crashes regularly 2-3 times a week, with no more use than I > : email and MS-Office.  On the other hand, I've had one crash on my VMS H > : systems that I pound the heck out of in the last 6 months.  And that > : was a hardware fault.  > A > With all due respect, you need a better system manager for your  > Win 2K system.  , So, each W2K desktop needs a SysAdmin ???!!!  E Sheesh! ...but then I guess that's BG's contribution to job creation,  eh? ;-)    --   David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 18:48:24 +0000 (UTC) 5 From: "John Wallace" <johnwallace4@yahoo.dotco.dotuk> ' Subject: Re: is VMS really easy to use? / Message-ID: <auq4dn$m1d$1@helle.btinternet.com>   - "Z" <zarlenga@conan.ids.net> wrote in message ( news:v0q12cf0phcbd@corp.supernews.com.... > Rob Young <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote:; > : Every one of them.  How cost effective would that be or ? > : how realistic would it be to spend that money?  Not likely. < > : Most of us could use more stable Windows too you know... >  > Win 2000 is pretty damn good.  > < > Not quite Enterprise Critical quality yet, but damn close.  1 Really? Not that much closer than Win2K Pro, imo.   I Windows 2000 is indeed a lot better than NT4 on any system I've used. But L MS's current real offering for Enterprise Critical is Datacenter Edition. SoK let's look at that as our point of reference. (I'm ignoring .NET server for L now, though its idea of a set of language-independent runtime libraries does/ sound quite neat, wonder where that came from).   I Windows 2000 Datacenter Edition has SMP and clustering capabilities which J might one day be comparable with a VMS from 10 years ago (or even a recentL Unix). In the meantime its costs of ownership (compulsory support contract?)E need investigating before any purchase decision is made, and also its J availability of quick fixes to the latest MS security flaws. (Fyi: WindowsI Datacentre fixes are not available from MS; you have to get them from the D hardware OEM ie Dell, HPQ, Unisys, etc. They are supposed to undergoJ extensive vendor testing before release, which kind of defeats the "quick"C fix, but never mind. Correction/clarification welcome). The list of A supported hardware for Datacentre Edition is also somewhat short.   J All versions of Windows 2000 (plus NT, XP, etc) seem to have a fundamentalK Win32 architectural flaw which (allegedly) allows anyone capable of running H a program (or piece of code) to acquire privileged access to their localL system. Ie run code fragment non-priv, get immediate admin-class access. See# description of "shatter" exploit at I http://security.tombom.co.uk/moreshatter.html This isn't something MS can K fix, it's part of the Win32 architecture. All it needs is a suitable wit to L put this together with a buffer overflow exploit or the JVM flaw of the weekL and around 100% of the world's Win32 boxes can be 0wned by a bunch of scriptJ kiddies. Where is the equivalent architectural flaw in either VMS or Unix?   have fun john   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:45:01 -0500 & From: "Ed Vogel" <ed.vogel@compaq.com> Subject: Re: Link errors. . Message-ID: <3e105bee$1_2@hpb10302.boi.hp.com>  -     Craig is just about correct when he says:   H | > Did you compile with the qualifier /PREFIX=ALL? If not, I think that | > might fix your problem.  | F | That's the default, at least with non-ancient versions of DEC/CompaqH | C, and we know it's in effect in Lyndon's case because the presence ofE | DECC$ at the beginning of the function name means it's already been E | prefixed.  We also know it won't help him because snprintf() is not H | mentioned in the C RTL documentation for OVMS 7.3-1, nor is it lurking" | in undocumented form in the RTL:B | The "GX" bit right after the dollar sign in the undefined symbolG | warning is interesting.  I suspect it means the compiler believes the D | function has something to do with floating point data and will use, | G_FLOAT for doubles and X_FLOAT for quads.  @     With V6.5, the default is /PREFIX=C99_ENTRIES.  The snprintfE     function is a new function for C99, so the V6.5 compiler prefixed      it.   E     The rest of Craig's analysis is right on the money.  The snprintf  functionL     is (as far as I know) not yet implemented on OpenVMS, thus the undefinedH     symbol.  You should have received an IMPLICITFUNC informational fromJ     the compiler when you compiled the program that contained the snprintf callF     (but maybe not...see below).  The prefixing occures occurs for the reason Craig     describes.  J     Perhaps the problem is that you have your own version of snprintf.  In	 this casesL     the change of the default to be /PREFIX=C99_ENTRIES in V6.5 will "break"H     your application.  This is mentioned in the V6.5 Release Notes along
 with a numbere     of workarounds.e       Hope this helps,       Ed Vogel     Compaq C Engineering.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:04:20 +0000s% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>H/ Subject: Re: Merry Christmas to all VMS'ers ... 8 Message-ID: <l4d01v8muf4t667fuc6du7cusucf972164@4ax.com>  B On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 11:06:13 -0800, Shane Smith <ssmith@icius.com> wrote:  @ >The original Star Wars is a fairy tale set in a science fictionE >universe. Princess kidnapped by evil magician, rescued by prince whoaC >thinks he's a commoner, big battle, prince beats evil magician whoa# >sneaks off so he can be in sequel.  >?F >Give "Enterprise" a try, Brian. It doesn't suck, and the token Vulcan >has a very nice arse. ;-)  C "Token Vulcan"? She's only destined to be one of the most importantOE Vulcan's in "Federation" history. The only person ever to turn down aoF seat on the Federation Council but someone the Federation can't say noB to. First featured in the original series episode covering Spock's arranged marriage.   >Shane >r >-----Original Message-----iC >From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG [mailto:VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG] ( >Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 6:02 AM >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com0 >Subject: Re: Merry Christmas to all VMS'ers ... >  >r9 >In article <3E0B9594.6A9D47BE@vl.videotron.ca>, JF Mezeie* ><jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> writes:# >>VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:nL >>> I've not seen Star Wars either... well, I tried once and found the firstL >>> few minutes *so* stupid that I decided to take a nap instead.  I suppose< >>> that makes me some sort of out-of-touch personality too? >>K >>How can you function in the 21st century if you don't even know about the- >>origins of R2D2 and C3PO?: >>O >>I do hope that you are at least up-to-date with Star Trek.  Hard to imagine a:' >>VMS guy who doesn't follow Star Trek.- > G >I watched the original series when it was an original series.  I never: >really C >got into the new series with Patrick Stewart.  I feel that sciencet >fiction istG >losing in story line and plot to the special effect crowd.  ...and, if> >you'reuD >considering Star Wars to be science fiction you're sadly mistaken.    -- Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 07:53:10 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)O6 Subject: Re: OT: Whoa! Is Sun aiming at VMS's jugular?3 Message-ID: <e4tlor5vJeRe@eisner.encompasserve.org>m  X In article <3E06F0C7.6010606@nospamn.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy writes: > 9 > I have worked in Telco, Retail Government and FinancialaA > services accounts and have worked with many of the applicationsa > vendors in those markets.v      Yep, pretty small world.-   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:16:48 -05000> From: "Koska, John C. (LNG-ALB)" <John.C.Koska@lexisnexis.com>Y Subject: please ignore, test message...trying to send without MIME from Ou	tlook/ExchangeaM Message-ID: <3D35AD137AAAD411A6BA0008C7B1B12D032C3F9F@MBCALBEXC03.BENDER.COM>r  1 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">  <HTML> <HEAD>9 <META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =  charset=3Diso-8859-1">@ <META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
 5.5.2654.19"> G <TITLE>please ignore, test message...trying to send without MIME from =r Outlook/Exchange...</TITLE>" </HEAD>: <BODY>  C <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>This is a test message to see if my mail server =gF and/or personal address setup stops passing Microcrap TNEF stuff and =" MIME to this newsgroup.</FONT></P>  G <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>For those interested what TNEF is, and possibly how =s> Outlook/Exchange combination might not send MIME see...</FONT> </P>   <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>http =C ://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=3Dkb;en-us;241538</FONT>m </P>   <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>:) jck</FONT>e$ <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>John Koska</FONT> </P>   </BODY>o </HTML>    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 09:26:14 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)eY Subject: Re: please ignore, test message...trying to send without MIME from Ou	tlook/Exche3 Message-ID: <qvYTHQbmlpFK@eisner.encompasserve.org>c   In article <3D35AD137AAAD411A6BA0008C7B1B12D032C3F9F@MBCALBEXC03.BENDER.COM>, "Koska, John C. (LNG-ALB)" <John.C.Koska@lexisnexis.com> writes:  E > <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>This is a test message to see if my mail server = H > and/or personal address setup stops passing Microcrap TNEF stuff and =$ > MIME to this newsgroup.</FONT></P>  @ Couldn't you at least run this test in a Microsoft newsgroup :-)   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:52:54 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORGY Subject: Re: please ignore, test message...trying to send without MIME from Ou	tlook/Exch20 Message-ID: <00A19382.762011BE@SendSpamHere.ORG>   In article <3D35AD137AAAD411A6BA0008C7B1B12D032C3F9F@MBCALBEXC03.BENDER.COM>, "Koska, John C. (LNG-ALB)" <John.C.Koska@lexisnexis.com> writes:2 ><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> ><HTML>t ><HEAD>t: ><META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; = >charset=3Diso-8859-1">xA ><META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =K >5.5.2654.19">H ><TITLE>please ignore, test message...trying to send without MIME from = >Outlook/Exchange...</TITLE> ></HEAD> ><BODY>i >rD ><P><FONT SIZE=3D2>This is a test message to see if my mail server =G >and/or personal address setup stops passing Microcrap TNEF stuff and =h# >MIME to this newsgroup.</FONT></P>   ! Looks to me like you have failed.E   --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMm            e5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"     ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 11:30:24 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Y Subject: Re: please ignore, test message...trying to send without MIME from Ou	tlook/Exch 3 Message-ID: <b2i8hQ8vxk6D@eisner.encompasserve.org>p  U In article <00A19382.762011BE@SendSpamHere.ORG>,   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG writes:r  E >><P><FONT SIZE=3D2>This is a test message to see if my mail server =yH >>and/or personal address setup stops passing Microcrap TNEF stuff and =$ >>MIME to this newsgroup.</FONT></P> > # > Looks to me like you have failed..  D I had private mail from him that seemed to indicate (it was in HTML)D he knew it failed and had known it would fail but needed the test inE comp.os.vms to convince his local powers-that-be regarding the issue.6   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 19:11:36 -00004 From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]>Y Subject: Re: please ignore, test message...trying to send without MIME from Ou	tlook/Exchi5 Message-ID: <20021230191136.3237.qmail@gacracker.org>d  > On 30 Dec 2002, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) wrote:  F >>><P><FONT SIZE=3D2>This is a test message to see if my mail server =I >>>and/or personal address setup stops passing Microcrap TNEF stuff and =i% >>>MIME to this newsgroup.</FONT></P>C  E >I had private mail from him that seemed to indicate (it was in HTML)-E >he knew it failed and had known it would fail but needed the test in@F >comp.os.vms to convince his local powers-that-be regarding the issue.  G I'd love to see the emails if they file a bug report with Microsoft. :)c     Doc. --  : Time and money, the psychotropics of the business world...K ~ VAXman                                             https://vmsbox.cjb.net0   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 04:40:05 -0800+ From: usenet_ihc@hotmail.com (Gert de Boom)b@ Subject: Retrieve RMS Key information at runtime (using Fortran)= Message-ID: <12ce5972.0212300440.59a4b65f@posting.google.com>    Hi all,c  ? I want to retrieve information about the keys in an RMS file atiD runtime, i.e. number, size, positions, whether they are segmented or8 not, etc. Currently we are using Fortran (Compaq Fortran. V7.4A-1588-46B4K) as our programming language.  E Using the group search on Google I thought to have found the solutionm@ by using a method described by Steve Lionel (Looping through theE XAB-records to find the XABKEY information; http://tinyurl.com/3xat). D However having tried this, I found out that according to the FortranC user manual (description of FAB$L_XAB) this only works when the KEYm6 keyword is used in the open statement, which we don't.  F Another solution could be to use LIB$SPAWN and then create an FDL fileD using something like this: $analyze/rms_file /fdl myindexedfile.ind.= The second step would be to parse this file for the requested A information. Doing this in a program seems to me a time consumings task.S  C Probably I'm just overlooking the real solution. Any tips, remarks,h solutions, code snippets ?   --+ Thanks in advance and best wishes for 2003,  Gert  E P.S. The tiny URL above was included to prevent wrapping of this fullt URL:   http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&frame=right&th=71b20542a961847f&seekm=1992Jan16.170352.673%40e2big.mko.dec.com#link2   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 06:46:18 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)5D Subject: Re: Retrieve RMS Key information at runtime (using Fortran)3 Message-ID: <XxJTpFCKBJMB@eisner.encompasserve.org>   k In article <12ce5972.0212300440.59a4b65f@posting.google.com>, usenet_ihc@hotmail.com (Gert de Boom) writes:S	 > Hi all,g > A > I want to retrieve information about the keys in an RMS file ateF > runtime, i.e. number, size, positions, whether they are segmented or: > not, etc. Currently we are using Fortran (Compaq Fortran0 > V7.4A-1588-46B4K) as our programming language.  ! 	$ HELP FDL_ROUTINES FDL$GENERATEd  E You may have to rely on a Fortran USEROPEN routine to get the FAB/RABc7 addresses (says this fellow who does not know Fortran).l   ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:49:34 -0600 (CST)9 From: sms@antinode.orgD Subject: Re: Retrieve RMS Key information at runtime (using Fortran)) Message-ID: <02123009493446@antinode.org>F  : From:	SMTP%"Kilgallen@spamcop.net" 30-DEC-2002 06:46:41.52 To:	Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Come CC:	A Subj:	Re: Retrieve RMS Key information at runtime (using Fortran).  * Return-Path: Info-VAX-Request@mvb.saic.com, Received: from mvb.saic.com (198.151.12.104)6 	 by ns.antinode.org (V5.0A-1H, OpenVMS V7.2-1 Alpha);& 	Mon, 30 Dec 2002 06:46:38 -0600 (CST)- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)i X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vmstD Subject: Re: Retrieve RMS Key information at runtime (using Fortran)  Date: 30 Dec 2002 06:46:18 -0600 Organization: LJK Software	 Lines: 12e3 Message-ID: <XxJTpFCKBJMB@eisner.encompasserve.org>wW X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 1041252362 29338 192.135.80.34 (30 Dec 2002 12:46:02 GMT)r X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.nete8 NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:46:02 +0000 (UTC)1 Reply-to: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)s X-Gateway-From: mvb.saic.com To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comf X-Gateway-Source-Info: USENETo  k In article <12ce5972.0212300440.59a4b65f@posting.google.com>, usenet_ihc@hotmail.com (Gert de Boom) writes:f	 > Hi all,& > A > I want to retrieve information about the keys in an RMS file at F > runtime, i.e. number, size, positions, whether they are segmented or: > not, etc. Currently we are using Fortran (Compaq Fortran0 > V7.4A-1588-46B4K) as our programming language.  ! 	$ HELP FDL_ROUTINES FDL$GENERATEc  E You may have to rely on a Fortran USEROPEN routine to get the FAB/RABc7 addresses (says this fellow who does not know Fortran).    ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 09:49:54 -0600 (CST)e From: sms@antinode.orgD Subject: Re: Retrieve RMS Key information at runtime (using Fortran)) Message-ID: <02123009495416@antinode.org>m  5    Oops.  Please pardon that last /EDIT-free FORWARD.e  - From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)oG > You may have to rely on a Fortran USEROPEN routine to get the FAB/RABs9 > addresses (says this fellow who does not know Fortran).   A    As I recall, FOR$RAB(lun) does the job.  Is there yet anything  comparably convenient in C?.  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode.org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 08:47:40 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)-B Subject: Re: Star date, Smithsonian date, and VMS datetime formats3 Message-ID: <JlsTAUgnrd05@eisner.encompasserve.org>:  Z In article <3E093A31.E73A829C@vl.videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei@vl.videotron.ca> writes:K > Are there any plans for VMS to support the star trek star-date format fora
 > output ? > H > We all know that in a few decades, we'll have warp drivce (2063 in ourP > calendar format). Isn't it time for VMS to start supporting the star-date time
 > format ? > O > Merry Christmas, don't eat too much turkey, and a Happy prosperous new year !   D    Not part of VMS, but I did get a stardate program off the net andD    it runs just fine on all my VMS systems.  Stardate is just a form    of Modified Julian Date.p   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2002 19:52:55 GMTi4 From: Brian Inglis <Brian.Inglis@SystematicSw.ab.ca>& Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth8 Message-ID: <g1ku0v0s2vg9gil7rtjb9m30pliqh5np41@4ax.com>  = On 29 Dec 2002 15:50:20 GMT, peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva)a wrote:  * >In article <3E0EFE42.5010602@vajhoej.dk>,9 >Arne =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?=  <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:-9 >> But as several posts here has explained then it reallye= >> a matter about VMS editor design and communication design.r >> j: >> Objectively it has nothing to do with the VAX hardware. > D >Well, VMS was also a fairly "heavy" OS... but if you eliminated theE >OS differences the VAX was still not that impressive. At Berkeley wetC >had both 11/70s and 11/780s running BSD UNIX, and the 11/70s couldrA >handle about twice as many users even though they had less core.d  A VAX interrupt handling was also really "heavy" -- benchmarks witht@ the same I/O device configurations showed that 11/780s could not> handle as many interactive users or SCADA device interrupts as@ 11/70s and other I/O was no faster on the 11/780. This situationA did not get better until terminal servers and LAT were available.1  9 Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis 	Calgary, Alberta, Canadae -- .F Brian.Inglis@CSi.com 	(Brian dot Inglis at SystematicSw dot ab dot ca),     fake address		use address above to reply@ abuse@aol.com tosspam@aol.com abuse@att.com abuse@earthlink.com ? abuse@hotmail.com abuse@mci.com abuse@msn.com abuse@sprint.com fB abuse@yahoo.com abuse@cadvision.com abuse@shaw.ca abuse@telus.com - abuse@ibsystems.com uce@ftc.gov				spam trapse   ------------------------------  ! Date: Mon, 30 Dec 02 12:11:27 GMT  From: jmfbahciv@aol.comp& Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth+ Message-ID: <aupf38$89v$1@bob.news.rcn.net>e  ) In article <3E0EFE42.5010602@vajhoej.dk>,h:    Arne =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote: >jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:  >|, >> In article <3E0DF584.5070705@vajhoej.dk>,= >>    Arne =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:n >>>David Wade wrote:J >>>>>>Its day was about 2-3 years before it was introduced, in that case.  ;) >i >cC >>>>>A lot of those was used for number chrunching at universities.  >e >gK >>>>At this it was great. Unfortunatley in many cases they were not used as9K >>>>number crunchers more as general purpose interactive machines. And thisoH >>>>tended to not show them at their best performance wise. For example  whenH >>>>running the VMS Editor each character was echoed back to the user atI >>>>Application not OS level. So each time a user typed a character theiraH >>>>program needed  to be unswapped, and dispatched to, all so it could  echo theH >>>>character back to the user. On a reasonable busy machibe this would  result3 >>>>in the dreaded "Type Behind" so loved by users.e >e >g >>>????  >>>u= >>>What does that have to do with the speed of the hardware ?s >  >t? >> Everything.  It isn't the speed of the hardware that counts;v@ >> it's the "speed" of the user getting his/her work done.  IOW,/ >> the speed perceived is a subjective metric. , > 4 >It may mean a lot for the subjective impression for >the computer ignorant.n  ; Sirrah!  I assure you that I am not computer ignorant.  Ouro3 customers were not computer ignorant.  All were not : willing to have to sit and wait for a monitor prompt after
 an EX$$.   > 7 >But as several posts here has explained then it really ; >a matter about VMS editor design and communication design..  ? It has to  do with which jobs get picked for computing service.r   >o8 >Objectively it has nothing to do with the VAX hardware.   I see you agree with me. :-)   /BAH  ' Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.0   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 09:05:32 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler).& Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth3 Message-ID: <4UTXMh2qNmqz@eisner.encompasserve.org>2  V In article <aun5js$7u1@web.eng.baileynm.com>, peter@abbnm.com (Peter da Silva) writes:  E > Well, VMS was also a fairly "heavy" OS... but if you eliminated the>F > OS differences the VAX was still not that impressive. At Berkeley weD > had both 11/70s and 11/780s running BSD UNIX, and the 11/70s couldB > handle about twice as many users even though they had less core.  D    OK, I've seen third party core for 11/70's, but who made core for    VAXen?  8-)   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 18:51:43 +0100r* From: Morten Reistad <mrr@reistad.priv.no>& Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth/ Message-ID: <f31qua.377.ln@via.reistad.priv.no>   * According to David Wade <g8mqw@yahoo.com>:1 >"Arne Vajhj" <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote in messagen$ >news:3E0DE2C1.3080507@vajhoej.dk... >> Pete Fenelon wrote: >>C >> > In alt.folklore.computers Arne Vajh?j <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:l? >> >>Actually I think the VAX 8650 was pretty fast in its days.t >> >e >It was.  @ It got beaten by the RISC machines, but they were not mainstreamC until the late eighties. That the VAX managed to (almost) equal ther@ RISC machines in speed and keep the CISC instruction set was an   impressive feat of engineering.   A Intel has also done a great deal of work with the '86 instructionnE set, but it never was anything near the VAX in 'CISCyness', and Intelh1 has redefined performance a few times on the way.n  E Both of these CISC architectures has had staggering development costsn? that would have been a lot smaller with a redefined instructiont; architecture. But these acheivements are still impressive. e  K >> > Its day was about 2-3 years before it was introduced, in that case. ;)p >>A >> A lot of those was used for number chrunching at universities.t >> >TH >At this it was great. Unfortunatley in many cases they were not used asH >number crunchers more as general purpose interactive machines. And thisI >tended to not show them at their best performance wise. For example whenhE >running the VMS Editor each character was echoed back to the user at F >Application not OS level. So each time a user typed a character theirM >program needed  to be unswapped, and dispatched to, all so it could echo the.K >character back to the user. On a reasonable busy machibe this would results0 >in the dreaded "Type Behind" so loved by users. >n >> What were the alternatives ?f >> >o: >Small IBM machines such as the 4381 ?  PR1ME 9000 series?  > This was the time perion of 'one hardware generation too early> for Peecees or RISC workstations'. I was one of those who wentA with the Prime path; and the major reason for this was that Primes
 was not DEC.    B As for the Prime 9000; I saw Prime go stale as a company somewhereI around the introduction of the 9955-II; where the trusty 9950 got anothereD mid-life extention kick. That was the clincher that the high end had gone sour. M  F The Prime series was just as CISCy oriented as the VAX; but there were@ more of a tradition of supporting several instruction and memoryA models.  The 9950 was the first ECL-imlementation of the standard B '50-series hardware, and it soon also had support for the somewhatF sleeker IX mode IA and MM. the 9950 was definately a VAX-killer.It wasC also obvious that this ECL feat was a struggle for the rather smallo organization of Prime.  D Prime ran this series through a lot of generations, the 9950 rapidlyE got a version 2 as the hardware fixes and microcode upgrades came in.iC Then the 9955 and the 9955-II came, all with incremental fifths of  ! extra performance. Then nothing. w  C After a long while the 6xxx series materialized, but by then it wasvC far too late. I wonder why we never saw 2 and 4 processor versions eC of the 9955. Of the 5 major hardware generations Prime had this washI the only one where the top end was never filled in with a multiprocessor.   5 But the busses and the OS supported if quite nicely.    F Thus, Prime had a rather brief time of glory from around '82 to aroundB '86, where things went downhill. At least DEC lasted a lot longer.   -- mrr   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 19:21:43 +0100s* From: Morten Reistad <mrr@reistad.priv.no>& Subject: Re: vax6k.openecs.org rebirth/ Message-ID: <nr2qua.887.ln@via.reistad.priv.no>n  " According to  <jmfbahciv@aol.com>:6 >In article <aukqgl$83lbf$1@ID-135708.news.dfncis.de>,1 >   bill@gw5.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:m6 >>In article <aukotk$82bqm$1@id-40235.news.dfncis.de>,) >>	"David Wade" <g8mqw@yahoo.com> writes: 4 >>> "Arne Vajhj" <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote in message' >>> news:3E0DE2C1.3080507@vajhoej.dk...w >>>> Pete Fenelon wrote: >>>>E >>>> > In alt.folklore.computers Arne Vajh?j <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:nA >>>> >>Actually I think the VAX 8650 was pretty fast in its days.e >>> It was. ! >>>> What were the alternatives ? = >>> Small IBM machines such as the 4381 ?  PR1ME 9000 series?8 [snip]< >>Funny you should mention this.  Back inthe days before the: >>demise of Prime or DEC I worked with both.  Prime almost= >>always beat the VAX on benchmarks (even when DEC fudged theu> >>numbers)  but DEC still almost always won the procurements. / >>Why??  Because DEC had much better marketing.eD >>Too bad DEC didn't see what bad marketing did to Prime and learned >>from their mistakes.  : The demise of Prime was not just bad marketing. It was bad> management in a lot of areas. This was even clearly visible to@ outsiders; especially in the takeover moves they started playing with.0  ? >Was it marketing or was it the support infrastructure that DECd> >had in place?  A lot of customers counted support higher than> >performance; they assumed they would get the performance when >they submitted an SPR.o  @ In Northwestern Europe; normally an outpost for computer serviceD performance, Prime equalled or surpassed DEC in service coverage and> responsiveness.Prime always had a clear focus on good hardwareE engineering and support, and this showed. It was just that managementi% stinked, especially from '85 onwards.o  D >I never saw the "outside" of DEC; I was always under the impression? >that our marketing was a joke and just barely tolerated by the 
 >customers.  a  D In this time frame sales were large ($40k and up) and the sales wereE pretty personal. The vendors were dependent on sales reps that pushed F the goods. This was a person to person thing. There was a reason theseF reps made the kinds of money they did. The customers expected personalG sales, not mass marketing. If you want to sell you hire the right saleseG folks, and let them loose. I never saw a lot of difference between DEC,a9 Prime, IBM, NCR; Sun, SGI, ND or others in this respect. e  ? Back then a service company with lots of software would bet its ? existence on the computer company they used for their computinge> platform. Last minute migrations and upgrades were normal whenE computer vendors did not perform. Vendors tried their best to lock inL1 customers on peripherals, comms gear, memory etc.u  @ We, the customers tried our best to obtain competitive hardware.  D This was a game of trust and distrust. DEC and IBM had shown several@ moves that led us to shun them like the plague; with hairraisingD stories about total disregard for customers that had bet the shop onD their products.  The demise of the '10 was one of these stories. OneF of many. ND and DG also made us very wary, as did the platform choices
 from Wang.  E With the smaller fry you had a lot more leverage as a medium to largenC customer. Only, they learned this game as fast as anyone else.  AndtC they did so many exotic, irrational moves.  Sun and SGI also pickedeA this up. It was only with the internet age that this 'lock in thed! customers growth' game went away.b   -- mrr   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Dec 2002 10:06:43 -0800( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)) Subject: Re: Webserver advice for VAX/VMSe= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0212301006.4a7cfcb9@posting.google.com>s  q goathunter@goatley.com (Hunter Goatley) wrote in message news:<3ff5fed3.0212261434.786ccb6@posting.google.com>...w  nF > While we appreciate your enthusiasm, there's no big conspiracy here. > The facts are these: > B >    - Purveyor sales did not justify continued development of theA >      product, so Process stopped developing it a few years ago.s > > >    - Over those few years, Purveyor has fallen behind in its? >      feature set (it's HTTP V1.0 only, etc).  Making PurveyornE >      competitive again would take a significant Engineering effort.eA >      Significant Engineering effort isn't going to happen for a A >      product that doesn't sell.  And Purveyor doesn't sell well.E >      because people can get and use OSU, WASD, and Apache for free.  > F >    - Some people still want to use Purveyor and we sell licenses for% >      it, although it's unsupported., > D >    - As long as the product produces *some* revenue, it's unlikely0 >      that Process will release it as freeware. > E >    - The Purveyor code base was NOT written by Process, and I'm notnF >      sure we'd even be allowed to release the sources to the public. >  > Hunter > ------; > Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/t > goathunter@goatley.com  @ the only tweaking purveyor needs currently is to make it V3 cert; compatible, and port it to itanium ... I talked to Verisign < engineering, and they assist companies like yourself who own? webservers that use their retiring V1 certificates and they say = the layout change is not that difficult to do ... purveyor is @ bulletproof unlike the other webservers you mention ... we tried@ them all (except wasd) and had major problems ... purveyor, noneA in two years ... http 1.1 isn't what's needed, purveyor functionsu? fine now, just do the V3 cert layout change and port to itanium.= in a few years ... no big deal, or let someone else out therei3 who wants to do it, do it (you know who I mean) ...o   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2002.722 ************************