1 INFO-VAX	Thu, 21 Feb 2002	Volume 2002 : Issue 102       Contents: A problem with a patch Re: A problem with a patch Re: A problem with a patch Re: A problem with a patch Re: A problem with a patch4 Re: Advice wanted: separating input and output tasks" ANN: UnZip V5.50 with VMS binaries. Re: ASTs and threads in OpenVMS 7.2 and higher Re: C-Kermit & HTTP retrieveA Re: Can I change or prevent the change of the revised file date ? . Re: Cisco 2948G-L3 layer three switch with VMS. Re: Cisco 2948G-L3 layer three switch with VMS Re: Couple of Questions  Date on Drives Re: Date on Drives$ Re: DECTERM ERROR MESSAGE???????????B determining objective reality (i.e. Bill Gates bribes DEC/Compaq?) digital  Re: Einstein einstein Re: einstein Re: Einstein, EV7 rules ... more proof of EV8 conspirarcy!0 Re: EV7 rules ... more proof of EV8 conspirarcy!: EV8 ... the true story!  Capellas/Q sell out shareholders!( EV8 and McKinley analysis by Paul DeMone0 Re: F$EXTRACT does parsing before giving result?0 Re: F$EXTRACT does parsing before giving result?8 file orthography in %DELETE-W-SEARCHFAIL: bug or feature< Re: file orthography in %DELETE-W-SEARCHFAIL: bug or featureJ Re: FreeVMS: what are CPQ's feelings likely to be ?, was: Re: MPE/iX users. Having Nfilename Printed at the end of reports= Re: Help on creating a detached process using SYS$CREPRC(...) ) Re: Hewlett offers plan to boost HP stock  Re: HP 88780B and VS4000-90  Re: Itanium troubles Re: Itanium troubles Re: Itanium troubles Re: Itanium troubles Re: Itanium troubles Re: Itanium troubles Re: lib$wait does not wait...  Re: license checksum info  More analyst meger expectations * Re: MPE/iX users form OpenMPE organization* Re: MPE/iX users form OpenMPE organization Re: Network Printer problems Re: Oracle RDB v7.0-1 0 Re: OT gassless cars Was Re: "Crashless Windows"0 Re: OT gassless cars Was Re: "Crashless Windows"0 Re: OT gassless cars Was Re: "Crashless Windows"0 Re: OT gassless cars Was Re: "Crashless Windows"0 Re: OT gassless cars Was Re: "Crashless Windows" Re: OT: "Crashless Windows" 1 Pathworks 32 client with thin client Windows 2000  Re: PGP for OpenVMS? Re: PGP for OpenVMS? Re: PGP for OpenVMS? Re: PGP for OpenVMS? Re: PGP for OpenVMS?= Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare = Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare = Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare = Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare = Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare = Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare = Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare = Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare = Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare = Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare = Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare = Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare = Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare = Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare = Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare 0 POSIX for OpenVMS - is there something similar ?4 Re: POSIX for OpenVMS - is there something similar ?4 Re: POSIX for OpenVMS - is there something similar ?4 Re: POSIX for OpenVMS - is there something similar ?4 Re: POSIX for OpenVMS - is there something similar ?4 RE: POSIX for OpenVMS - is there something similar ?) Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS ) Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS ) Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS ) Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS ) Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS ) Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS ) Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS ) Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS ) Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS ) Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS ) Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS = Proof that EV8 was fantastic ... and Capellas "gave" it away!  Re: Proposal - Hobbyist FAQ  Re: Proposal - Hobbyist FAQ  PW 4 server and 2000/XP clinets  Re: Semaphores# Serving MP3 files via OSU webserver ' Re: Serving MP3 files via OSU webserver ' Re: Serving MP3 files via OSU webserver ' Re: Serving MP3 files via OSU webserver ' Re: Serving MP3 files via OSU webserver L Re: Singular they was Re: Sv: Younger recruits versus experienced veterans (L Re: Singular they was Re: Sv: Younger recruits versus experienced veterans (L RE: Singular they was Re: Sv: Younger recruits versus experienced veterans (P Re: Singular they was Re: Sv: Younger recruits versus experienced veterans ( vet Re: SMTP Spam Filter. 7 RE: Strange status value - when can I expect to get it? 7 Re: Strange status value - when can I expect to get it? 7 Re: Strange status value - when can I expect to get it? ) Re: Survey: Most HP workers oppose merger ) Re: Survey: Most HP workers oppose merger > Re: Sv: Younger recruits versus experienced veterans ( was The& Re: SYSPRV & $GETUAI - Dumb question ? Re: System problem) The fallout from Capellas' Corruption ...  Re: UAF settings for Backup? Re: UAF settings for Backup? Re: UAF settings for Backup? Re: vax h/w type.  Re: vax h/w type.  Re: vax h/w type.  RE: vax h/w type. 8 Re: VAX/VMS mail sending and receiving to other machines Re: VS4000-90 and HP88780B  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 14:04:35 +0100 1 From: "Tomasz Dryjanski" <tdryjanski@hotmail.com>  Subject: A problem with a patch . Message-ID: <a52r9s$296d$1@news2.ipartners.pl>  C I have installed VMS 7.2-1H1, then the VMS721H1_UPDATE-V0400 patch. E And the system is corrupt. Have you got any idea why it has happened?    These are some details:   K The server is Alpha 1000A server with the newest console firmware designed. G I installed VMS using [INITIALIZE], with more or less standard options, L without DECW and DECNet Plus (we use Phase IV). The system booted correctly,H and let me log on with the nice "Welcome to OpenVMS (TM) Alpha Operating" System, Version V7.2-1H1" message.  G Then I installed the mandatory patch, VMS721H1_UPDATE-V0400. During the & installation I received the following:K %PCSI-I-OBJSKP, directory [DECW$INCLUDE] pertains to an option that was not # selected; directory update skipped, I repeated several times, with different DECW directories listed. I thought 5 that it was obvious, and I let installation continue. 5 And the subsequent message, after 80% done, was ugly:  %PCSI-E-READERR, error reading; DKA400:[PATCH.V721H1]DEC-AXPVMS721H1_UPDATE-V0400--4.PCSI;1 1 -DDIS-E-INCSEQCAL, inconsistent sequence of calls # %PCSI-E-OPFAILED,  operation failed 7 I terminated the operation and rebooted. And now I have < "OpenVMS (TM) Alpha Operating System, Version X71Z-P2E" (?!) "%INSTALL-E-OPENIN, error F opening -DISK$ALPHASYS:<SYS0.SYSCOMMON.SYSLIB>DISMNTSHR.EXE; as input" during the boot process,% and the system is not even able to do 
 $ sh dev dH causing access violation (reason mask AC, "Improperly handled condition, image exit forced.")   Thanks in advance for any help.    --   T. D.    ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 14:51:38 +0100* From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER)# Subject: Re: A problem with a patch * Message-ID: <3c74fb6a$1@news.kapsch.co.at>  b In article <a52r9s$296d$1@news2.ipartners.pl>, "Tomasz Dryjanski" <tdryjanski@hotmail.com> writes:D >I have installed VMS 7.2-1H1, then the VMS721H1_UPDATE-V0400 patch.F >And the system is corrupt. Have you got any idea why it has happened?  E Nope. Probably you find a bug in the installation process of the ECO.   O But why did you install V7.2-1H1 at all? V7.2-2 or V7.3 is the better choice...   E And, if you really need V7.2-1H1, then try the installation again but , this time with DECwindows support enabled...   --  < Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER           Tel.    +43 1 81111 2651; Network and OpenVMS system manager  Fax.    +43 1 81111 888 < KAPSCH AG      Wagenseilgasse 1     E-mail  eplan@kapsch.netH A-1121 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist"   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 08:33:52 -0500 5 From: David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com> # Subject: Re: A problem with a patch 2 Message-ID: <B=d0PEBY8tdx7gjwaPEwCivMbvRh@4ax.com>  : Did you install VMS with DecWindows support?  If not, this3 may explain part of the problem.  You might need to  re-install VMS and try again.   6 On Thu, 21 Feb 2002 14:04:35 +0100, "Tomasz Dryjanski" <tdryjanski@hotmail.com> wrote:   D >I have installed VMS 7.2-1H1, then the VMS721H1_UPDATE-V0400 patch.F >And the system is corrupt. Have you got any idea why it has happened? >  >These are some details: > L >The server is Alpha 1000A server with the newest console firmware designed.H >I installed VMS using [INITIALIZE], with more or less standard options,M >without DECW and DECNet Plus (we use Phase IV). The system booted correctly, I >and let me log on with the nice "Welcome to OpenVMS (TM) Alpha Operating # >System, Version V7.2-1H1" message.  > H >Then I installed the mandatory patch, VMS721H1_UPDATE-V0400. During the' >installation I received the following: L >%PCSI-I-OBJSKP, directory [DECW$INCLUDE] pertains to an option that was not$ >selected; directory update skipped,J >repeated several times, with different DECW directories listed. I thought6 >that it was obvious, and I let installation continue.6 >And the subsequent message, after 80% done, was ugly: >%PCSI-E-READERR, error reading < >DKA400:[PATCH.V721H1]DEC-AXPVMS721H1_UPDATE-V0400--4.PCSI;12 >-DDIS-E-INCSEQCAL, inconsistent sequence of calls$ >%PCSI-E-OPFAILED,  operation failed8 >I terminated the operation and rebooted. And now I have= >"OpenVMS (TM) Alpha Operating System, Version X71Z-P2E" (?!)  >"%INSTALL-E-OPENIN, errorG >opening -DISK$ALPHASYS:<SYS0.SYSCOMMON.SYSLIB>DISMNTSHR.EXE; as input"  >during the boot process, & >and the system is not even able to do >$ sh dev d I >causing access violation (reason mask AC, "Improperly handled condition,  >image exit forced.")  >   >Thanks in advance for any help.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 16:27:59 +0200 2 From: Mike Rechtman <michael.rechtman@digital.com># Subject: Re: A problem with a patch + Message-ID: <3C75200E.5A5CC8D1@digital.com>    Tomasz Dryjanski wrote:  > E > I have installed VMS 7.2-1H1, then the VMS721H1_UPDATE-V0400 patch. G > And the system is corrupt. Have you got any idea why it has happened? @ In e.g. OVMS V7.2-1 there is a prerequisite of VMS721_PCSI-V0100 _before_ the UPDATE patch. F It looks as if this is a skipped prerequisite in the docs for V7.2-1H1 I  suggest: D 1. restoring the system /IMAGE backup you made before installing any patches 0 (Or re-installing from scratch to a blank disk.)% 2. Installing the PCSI patch _first_.      ~Mike.G N.B. This is me in a private capacity, and in no way an official Compaq 
 opinion!!\   >  > These are some details:  > M > The server is Alpha 1000A server with the newest console firmware designed. I > I installed VMS using [INITIALIZE], with more or less standard options, N > without DECW and DECNet Plus (we use Phase IV). The system booted correctly,J > and let me log on with the nice "Welcome to OpenVMS (TM) Alpha Operating$ > System, Version V7.2-1H1" message. > I > Then I installed the mandatory patch, VMS721H1_UPDATE-V0400. During the ( > installation I received the following:M > %PCSI-I-OBJSKP, directory [DECW$INCLUDE] pertains to an option that was not % > selected; directory update skipped, K > repeated several times, with different DECW directories listed. I thought 7 > that it was obvious, and I let installation continue. 7 > And the subsequent message, after 80% done, was ugly:   > %PCSI-E-READERR, error reading= > DKA400:[PATCH.V721H1]DEC-AXPVMS721H1_UPDATE-V0400--4.PCSI;1 3 > -DDIS-E-INCSEQCAL, inconsistent sequence of calls % > %PCSI-E-OPFAILED,  operation failed 9 > I terminated the operation and rebooted. And now I have > > "OpenVMS (TM) Alpha Operating System, Version X71Z-P2E" (?!) > "%INSTALL-E-OPENIN, error H > opening -DISK$ALPHASYS:<SYS0.SYSCOMMON.SYSLIB>DISMNTSHR.EXE; as input" > during the boot process,' > and the system is not even able to do  > $ sh dev dJ > causing access violation (reason mask AC, "Improperly handled condition, > image exit forced.") > ! > Thanks in advance for any help.  >  > -- >  > T. D.    --  E --------------------------------------------------------------------- E Usual disclaimer: All opinions are mine alone, perhaps not even that. ? Mike Rechtman                            *rechtman@tzora.co.il* F Kibbutz Tzor'a.                          Voice (home): 972-2-9908337  B   "20% of a job takes 80% of the time, the rest takes another 80%"E ---------------------------------------------------------------------  -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----  Version: 3.1: GCM/CS d(-)pu s:+>:- a++ C++ U-- L-- W++ N++ K? w--- V+++$6 PS+ PE-- t 5? X- tv-- b+ DI+ D-- G e++ h--- r+++ y+++@ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 10:37:03 -0500 5 From: David Beatty <David.Beatty@qwertysasasdfgh.com> # Subject: Re: A problem with a patch 2 Message-ID: <CBR1PDYHZWqzA7KvWtbQyAvp5ond@4ax.com>  3 The patch VMS721_PCSI does not apply to VMS7.2-1H1.   1 On Thu, 21 Feb 2002 16:27:59 +0200, Mike Rechtman % <michael.rechtman@digital.com> wrote:    >Tomasz Dryjanski wrote: >>  F >> I have installed VMS 7.2-1H1, then the VMS721H1_UPDATE-V0400 patch.H >> And the system is corrupt. Have you got any idea why it has happened?A >In e.g. OVMS V7.2-1 there is a prerequisite of VMS721_PCSI-V0100 	 >_before_  >the UPDATE patch.G >It looks as if this is a skipped prerequisite in the docs for V7.2-1H1  >I  suggest:E >1. restoring the system /IMAGE backup you made before installing any  >patches1 >(Or re-installing from scratch to a blank disk.) & >2. Installing the PCSI patch _first_. >  >  >~Mike. H >N.B. This is me in a private capacity, and in no way an official Compaq >opinion!!\  >  >>   >> These are some details: >>  N >> The server is Alpha 1000A server with the newest console firmware designed.J >> I installed VMS using [INITIALIZE], with more or less standard options,O >> without DECW and DECNet Plus (we use Phase IV). The system booted correctly, K >> and let me log on with the nice "Welcome to OpenVMS (TM) Alpha Operating % >> System, Version V7.2-1H1" message.  >>  J >> Then I installed the mandatory patch, VMS721H1_UPDATE-V0400. During the) >> installation I received the following: N >> %PCSI-I-OBJSKP, directory [DECW$INCLUDE] pertains to an option that was not& >> selected; directory update skipped,L >> repeated several times, with different DECW directories listed. I thought8 >> that it was obvious, and I let installation continue.8 >> And the subsequent message, after 80% done, was ugly:! >> %PCSI-E-READERR, error reading > >> DKA400:[PATCH.V721H1]DEC-AXPVMS721H1_UPDATE-V0400--4.PCSI;14 >> -DDIS-E-INCSEQCAL, inconsistent sequence of calls& >> %PCSI-E-OPFAILED,  operation failed: >> I terminated the operation and rebooted. And now I have? >> "OpenVMS (TM) Alpha Operating System, Version X71Z-P2E" (?!)  >> "%INSTALL-E-OPENIN, errorI >> opening -DISK$ALPHASYS:<SYS0.SYSCOMMON.SYSLIB>DISMNTSHR.EXE; as input"  >> during the boot process, ( >> and the system is not even able to do
 >> $ sh dev d K >> causing access violation (reason mask AC, "Improperly handled condition,  >> image exit forced.")  >>  " >> Thanks in advance for any help. >>   >> --  >>   >> T. D.   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Feb 2002 09:18 CST ' From: carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins) = Subject: Re: Advice wanted: separating input and output tasks - Message-ID: <21FEB200209181127@gerg.tamu.edu>   ) >carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins) wrote:  >>... D >>My suggestion (which is a farily typical VMSish way to do things): >>G >>In the AST, don't do the write. Put the message into a queue instead. M >>Then, in the non-AST part of the program check to see if anything is in the J >>queue. If so, pull it off the queue, write it, and check the queue again >>for more messages....  >>I >>This will let each process "fall behind", allowing it to read and storeeJ >>as many messages as it can (based on the working set and pagefile quota)J >>if you dynamically allocate a new buffer for each, freeing them when the >>data is actually written.   H >I can certainly have the AST notify the command interpreter that there I >is data to be handled, but I'm not sure where best to go from there. At nG >present the command interpreter does a blocking read of sys$input for .G >the next command, parses the command and executes it (dirt simple). I 0E >guess I should change that to doing a nonblocking read, then set my sD >process to wait until either read (of a new command or of new user I >output) completes, see what needs to be done and do it? That would best g% >be done with local event flag waits?r  @ Ordinarily, you'd just convert to asynchronous reads for the useD input. Actually, this is probably the real solution to your problem.E As I recall the problem you are trying to solve is in insure that the > users actually get the messages, and do so in a timely manner.  F You could switch to QIOs for the user input, but the easiest way to doD this is probably by using a couple of the SMG routines. The directlyD relevant one being SMG$ENABLE_UNSOLOCITED_INPUT. To use it, you haveD to create a pasteboard via SMG$CREATE_PASTEBOARD and, IIRC, create aG virtual keyboard via SMG$CREATE_VIRTUAL_KEYBOARD (notice a trend in the%D naming of the rouintes?) and then read the data using an SMG routine such as SMG$READ_STRING.  C The routine SMG$ENABLE_UNSOLOCITED_INPUT has an argument for an ASTpB routine that is run when user input is detected, and it allows youA to specify a parameter to pass. If you want to use an event flag, A and you probably do (so that the main process can wait for it, orOF probably wait for either it or the one set by the AST that the mailboxD read triggers) you can pass it to the AST via this parameter insteadC of hardcoding it in the AST routine (which makes it easier to reused= the AST routine in another program, if for no other reason). -  B And, of course, this also makes it easy to do the rest of the userE interface using SMG as well, just to make things pretty (you can havecC a couple of lines at the top or bottom of the screen for user inputw@ scrolling independantly from the rest which you can use for show@ messages, or maybe add a status line or something). If you want.  G >My present code already has a large queue for each user (precisely so SD >the user can fall fairly far behind on messages). It happens to be F >implemented via mailboxes (one large one per user), which apparently J >aren't much in favor anymore (based on your suggestion and JF Mezei's to E >use alternatives). But I think the queues you mention are basically hJ >being used like my present mailboxes? If not, I'd love to know where I'm  >going astray. >  >-- Russell   A Two differences are in the potential size of the buffer and whichvF end is dealing with the overflow. Using the mailbox method, the senderE end has to be coded to deal with the situation where the reader fallsDF so far behind that the mailbox fills up. What does it do? Does it dropE messages? Halt messages for everybody until that one user comes back?mC Buffer messages for each such user (if you do this, for the sake oftC efficiency I'd suggest the buffer just store a pointer to a message B so that the message is only saved once no matter how many users itB is buffered for)? What do you do if the server runs out of virtual memory?v  D With the "pull out of the mailbox and buffer local to the recipient"F the sender only has to worry about this sort of thing if the recipientC hits his virtual memory quota - which could take a lot of messages. ? At that point they have probably done something wrong, like hit C the hold screen button and gone on vacation for a week, and need toDB have their connection declared dead and eliminated. Alternatively,C the client end can decide what to do - such as deleteing the oldestE, buffered message so it can keep a newer one.  C Another difference is in the likely overall memory usage - when youiG create a mailbox with buffer size X, those X bytes of memory are alwaysv@ allocated. Putting most of the buffering on an "as needed" basisC in the client (with perhaps some in the server) is likely to reduce @ the total resource usage (although it is not likely to be a hugeC amount - if you can trim 40000 bytes per mailbox and have 100 userspC connected, that's only a smidge under 4MB which isn't all that much  these days).  < If your messages are short, the maximum sized mailbox buffer> (60000 bytes) is big enough to hold a huge number of messages.= In such a case it can take quite a long pause to make it fill-< up. This does obviously work, since you are doing it. But as9 you asked your question, you are clearly having a problem+- (although "big mailboxs" wasn't actually it).5  B I would say that the primary gain from this suggestion is that allD the I/O in the user interface is now asynchronous. This leads fairlyC directly to a situation where you no longer have the problem of how ? to deliver the messages so that you know the user will get themKC promptly even if they are set to nobroadcast or whatever. Since the7F program isn't waiting on synchronous user I/O it can write the messageD when it gets it. The ability to use smaller mailboxes is pretty much; just a side effect of the way this tends to be implemented.a  B When a message arrives, the client just stops waiting for an eventB flag and writes the message buffer out using the usual I/O routineC (or SMG writes, if you prefer). When the user enters something, thekA client just wakes up or stops waiting for an event flag and readst@ it in using the SMG routine (or you could do it all yourself viaC QIO instead) and then does with it the same thing that it does now,l	 probably.S  ? Most of the problems you were trying to deal with just go away.aC They can set nobroadcast all they want - nothing is being broadcastTD to their terminal anyway. The only thing that is still there is whenD the user does something to stop the display - such as a control-S orB hitting the Hold Screen button. (There is nothing you can do aboutE them going on coffee break and not seeing them before they scroll offmE the screen, I suppose - although with the SMG routines you can definesB a rather large virtual display and allow them to scroll it back if9 they aren't all using terminal windows with scroll bars.)t  B If you want an alternate, and maybe a little simpler to implement,A suggestion, I do have another one: Synchronous I/O with timeouts.dA Still do the synchronous user I/O, but add a timeout - you can dooH this with the SMG$READ_STRING too, by the way. When the user interface'sC read timeout happens, or the read is compeleted and the input acted%< on, check to see if there is anything waiting in the mailbox@ (it can be a synchronous read with the flag that makes it returnD immediately if there is nothing in the mailbox, instead of waiting -@ or, yet another alternative, see if the read event flag has beenB set indicating read completion and then write the buffer and issue@ another asynch read). With a short timeout, say 1 second or someA other interval somewhat shorter than the average interval betweensA messages, you should be able to keep up and not have too much lagt in the messaging.,  3 There are a variety of solutions which should work."   --- Carl   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 16:10:43 GMT-- From: goathunter@goatley.com (Hunter Goatley)1+ Subject: ANN: UnZip V5.50 with VMS binariess0 Message-ID: <3c751a36.98910225@news.process.com>  L Yesterday, the Info-ZIP group released UnZip V5.50.  I've generated binariesI for VMS and added those binaries to the UnZip distribution.  You can findt% UnZip V5.50 for VMS using these URLs:>   http://www.process.com/openvms/   5 ftp://ftp.process.com/vms-freeware/fileserv/unzip.zipT1 ftp://ftp.tmk.com/vms-freeware/fileserv/unzip.zip 6 http://www.tmk.com/ftp/vms-freeware/fileserv/unzip.zip  * and from the mirror sites within 24 hours.  A For those sites who'd rather not use UnZip to unzip the UnZip zipnG file ;-), you can also find an UNZIP.BCK VMS saveset on ftp.process.com  in [.VMS-FREEWARE.FILESERV].  K Of particular note for this release (taken from the original announcement):   L   As far as I know, this is the first non-PKWARE zip extractor that includesL   support for the DEFLATE64 algorithm variant which was introduced by PKWARE   more than a year ago.i     Hunter ------9 Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/l8 goathunter@goatley.com    http://www.goatley.com/hunter/< New Robert R. McCammon site: http://www.RobertRMcCammon.com/   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 07:15:12 GMT)" From: "ohm62" <ohm62@coldmail.com>7 Subject: Re: ASTs and threads in OpenVMS 7.2 and higherV6 Message-ID: <481d8.6758$m15.3250@nwrddc04.gnilink.net>  9 According to a recent article in Compaq's "Ask the guru":o  I If upcalls are enabled, the application AST is executed in the context ofb the initial thread. I If upcalls are disabled, the AST is run in the context of the thread thatT" executed when it became pending...      3 "Vadim Model" <Vadim.Model@srm.ru> wrote in messagee& news:a4vo4q$2jrc$1@josh.sovintel.ru... > Dear OpenVMS gurus,/ >uL > Given a multithreaded application (posix threads), which uses sys$qio withI > ASTs. Which thread processes ASTs? Is there any way to control to which  > thread ASTs are delivered? >9 > Thanks, Regards, >     Vadimn >  >u >s >e   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 16:47:11 +0100 = From: Arne =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vajh=F8j?= <arne.vajhoej@gtech.com>i% Subject: Re: C-Kermit & HTTP retrieve ) Message-ID: <3C75167E.8F8DF04B@gtech.com>    Jan-Erik Sderholm wrote:  > Arne Vajhj wrote:( > > POST requests is not that difficult. > >e9 > > ftp://ftp.hhs.dk/pub/vms/cgi/postaction.c actually dol > > send POST requests.s > Sorry Arne :-) > I > 550 No access to [PUB.VMS.CGI]POSTACTION.C. Requested action not taken.l   It works for me (with NS 4.78).W   But anyway try HTTP:B   http://www.hhs.dk/anonymous/pub/vms/cgi/postaction.c actually do   ------------------------------   Date: 14 FEB 2002 21:42:54 GMT+ From: Dave Greenwood <greenwoodde@ornl.gov> J Subject: Re: Can I change or prevent the change of the revised file date ?2 Message-ID: <14FEB02.21425415@feda34.fed.ornl.gov>  0 In a previous article, Mark <no@mail.com> wrote:B > On Thu, 14 Feb 2002 18:38:39 GMT, system@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >  eV > >In article <dcvn6uc50jutg9guooh3l8ia83bk924t68@4ax.com>, Mark <no@mail.com> writes:Q > >>I need to move files around and modify attributes of the file.  But, in doingpR > >>so, the revised date changes.  Is there a way to prevent the revised date fromK > >>changing on any "set file" command OR is there a utility/way to force a  > >>revised date on a file ? > > F > >The CONVERT utility/command can be used to modify date information. > >e8 > >$ CONVERT/FDL=SYS$INPUT <in-file-spec> <out-file-spc>+ > >DATE; REVISION "06-AUG-1960 12:34:56.78"t > >^ZM >  a >  SL > This is good....very good.  Thank you.  BUT, is there a way to do it on anP > existing file without creating a new version?  It may not be too big a deal if > not.    1 I believe the venerable FILE utility can do this.s  ;   http://vms.process.com/scripts/fileserv/fileserv.com?FILEm   Dave --------------9 Dave Greenwood                Email: Greenwoodde@ORNL.GOVoH Oak Ridge National Lab        %STD-W-DISCLAIMER, I only speak for myself   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 03:21:28 -08005 From: mortimer_mouse@mailandnews.com (Mortimer Mouse)t7 Subject: Re: Cisco 2948G-L3 layer three switch with VMSv= Message-ID: <b05aa881.0202210321.42d85eaa@posting.google.com>r  H > Anyone know if you can cheat by giving multiple interfaces the same IPD > address For example 192.168.nn.1 on multiple ports and this as the@ > default route for hosts connected to that port? A third party,9 > supposedly familiar with the device tells me you can...8 >   A No.  Just like any other Cisco router, the 2948G-L3 will complain F about overlapping subnets if you try it.  Your only recourse is to runF IRB and put all the ports in the same subnet into a bridge group, then; configure the BVI for the bridge group with the IP address.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 12:23:36 +0000e% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> 7 Subject: Re: Cisco 2948G-L3 layer three switch with VMSl8 Message-ID: <79p97u0tjtgamql40aaq143dsn7lja9gnj@4ax.com>  = On 21 Feb 2002 03:21:28 -0800, mortimer_mouse@mailandnews.comx (Mortimer Mouse) wrote:   I >> Anyone know if you can cheat by giving multiple interfaces the same IP E >> address For example 192.168.nn.1 on multiple ports and this as the A >> default route for hosts connected to that port? A third party, : >> supposedly familiar with the device tells me you can... >> v > B >No.  Just like any other Cisco router, the 2948G-L3 will complainG >about overlapping subnets if you try it.  Your only recourse is to runeG >IRB and put all the ports in the same subnet into a bridge group, thenm< >configure the BVI for the bridge group with the IP address.  B What about the suggestion from "joe" to "put all the ports on that4 bridge group in one port channel  group (like 7500'sF do) and on the port channel group, put the IP address. I do it here."?  @ I know the bridge group option is the "normal" way to go but I'mE looking at other options in case we run into the performance problems ' others have reported with L2 switching.t     -- Alan   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:52:27 GMTs! From: Andy <acs@fcgnet.works.net>1  Subject: Re: Couple of Questions> Message-ID: <Xns91BC5A1588038acsfcgnetworksnet@216.166.71.232>  9 "Joe Heimann" <heimann@ecs.umass.edu> enlightened us withl% news:a51u54$eic$1@odo.ecs.umass.edu: e  3 > William Barnett-Lewis <wlewis@mailbag.com> wrote:]
 >> Hello all,lA >> I recently got my hands on a copy of the June 1997 SPL for VMSI2 >> 7.1 and was wondering about a couple of things: > + >> 1) Will Posix 3.0 work on a 7.2 system? a? >> 2) Does it require a separate PAK from the operating system?m3 >> 3) Is is still possible to get a PAK for SoftPC?n0 >> 4) Is there a spread sheet available for VMS? > A > Others have answered the first three questions, I will add thattA > there was a VMS version of Lotus available.  Have no idea if ite > is still around. i  A Well, these guys still sell/support it.... along with Wordperfecte for VMS        	http://www.legacytech.net/e   -Andy-   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 10:23:48 -0600D4 From: "Lucas, Edward A (SAIC)" <Edward.Lucas@bp.com> Subject: Date on Drives-? Message-ID: <EF1DC894691AD5118AF000508BB85FDE034CC4AF@AMCLVX11>b  L I use to have a way, and for the life of me cannot remember (showing my age)  , I have numerous drives.  The drives are old.K Is there a way I could find when a drive was put in service or the date thec drive was built.5 The drives are running, I am unable to pull them out.v- All the drives are (don't laugh) RZ28 drives.o   Edward A. Lucast  Sr. VAX/VMS System Administrator SAIC Phone:  (216) 525-7492 Email:   Lucaea@bp.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 17:57:10 +0100 2 From: "Ren Schelbaum" <rene.schelbaum@datakom.at> Subject: Re: Date on DriveskG Message-ID: <3c7526e0$0$26380$5039e797@newsreader01.highway.telekom.at>y  E "Lucas, Edward A (SAIC)" <Edward.Lucas@bp.com> schrieb im Newsbeitragt9 news:EF1DC894691AD5118AF000508BB85FDE034CC4AF@AMCLVX11...rI > I use to have a way, and for the life of me cannot remember (showing my  age) >t. > I have numerous drives.  The drives are old.I > Is there a way I could find when a drive was put in service or the date  thei > drive was built.7 > The drives are running, I am unable to pull them out.i/ > All the drives are (don't laugh) RZ28 drives.E >N > Edward A. Lucas " > Sr. VAX/VMS System Administrator > SAIC > Phone:  (216) 525-7492 > Email:   Lucaea@bp.com >A >    Hi!n  J If you look at the creation date of the system files in directory [000000]J (eg. BITMAP.SYS), that should indicate the date of the last initialisation of that drive.   regardst   Ren   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 08:04:33 -0000 5 From: "Malcolm" <malcolmix@neverness.freeserve.co.uk>c- Subject: Re: DECTERM ERROR MESSAGE???????????S. Message-ID: <a529l4$81t$1@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>  4 "Carl Perkins" <carl@gerg.tamu.edu> wrote in message' news:20FEB200204381346@gerg.tamu.edu...t7 > Alex.Feliziani@space.gc.ca (Alex Feliziani) writes...xC > }I have a VAX STATION 4000. I created an account on $DISK2 calledeI > }PAYNE. When i try to log into the Payne account i get through up untilsH > }the blue screen where the DecTerm tries to open and then it goes backI > }to the login window. THE FOLLOWING IS WHAT I OBTAIN AFTER ENTERING THEt > }a > }Alex! >wC > By "blue screen", do you mean the one that says "Starting the neweA > OpenVMS desktop" or something like that? That is leading to therC > session manager, not a DECterm (which is just a terminal emulatort
 > window). >  > My guess:t >mC > You created an account, PAYNE, that has it's login device definedr3 > as $DISK2 and login directory defined as [PAYNE].r >b: > But DECwindows can't access the directory either because > 1) it doesn't existL > or? > 2) the PAYNE account can't write to it's own login directory,G+ >    most likely because it doesn't own it.a >eC > Make sure that you have created the directory $DISK2:[PAYNE]. Theg? > authorize utility does not create the directory for you, onlyu > the account. >NI > Make sure that the PAYNE account is the owner of its own home directory G > (i.e. the file $DISK2:[000000]PAYNE.DIR should be owned by PAYNE) andeE > therefore has write permission for it so that it can create all therC > DECwindows configuratin files (the old DECwindows put them all iniA > the login directory, the new one puts most of them in the [.DT]iE > subdirectory, but it needs to be able to create DT.DIR in the logind
 > directory).S >o@ > Make sure that the "Owner" field in the file protection of the> > PAYNE.DIR file allows writing. You might also make sure thatB > there is nothing in the file's ACL that is preventing the write. >,> > Generally, you create the login directory via a command like >e1 > $ create/dir/log disk:[username]/owner=usernamel > G > substituting the username for "username" in the above, which not onlyeF > creates the directory but also assigns it's ownership to the correct
 > account.  " Does the PAYNE account run a menu?  " Put this in LOGIN.COM/SYLOGIN.COM:  H $ if f$mode() .eqs. "INTERACTIVE" .and. f$getjpi("","TERMINAL") .nes. "" $ then $! run the menul [...]e $ endifi  F I encountered this problem. It's because DECwindows starts the sessionL manager as an interactive process with no terminal. You can see this in SHOW USERS.  	 -Malcolm.I -- Malcolm MacArthur   , Subtract nine for e-mail (anti-spam measure) > 
 > --- Carl   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 15:44:14 +0100 (MET)l9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>eK Subject: determining objective reality (i.e. Bill Gates bribes DEC/Compaq?)m; Message-ID: <01KEJHBQ6G3W8ZKA1M@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>t  D There have been a lot of posts here recently bemoaning the death of F ALPHA, the merger with HP, the merger with Compaq, DEC selling things I off etc.  There has also been some speculation that some of the decision sE makers were directly or indirectly in the pay of Gates, the argument  0 being that these bemoaned actions benefit Gates.  @ It is a serious charge, of course, but doesn't sound completely H impossible, especially considering the bad-business practices Microsoft  has already been convicted of.  H If courts are willing to go to quite a lot of trouble to decide whether H or not Microsoft behaved legally in the case of (brace yourself for the C triviality of this compared to real computing issues) the "browser lI wars", it seems to me that they should be willing to look at a much more l severe charge.  G As far as I know, it doesn't cost anything nor is it a risk, financial nF or otherwise, to the initiator of such an accusation.  So why doesn't F someone who lives within the jurisdiction of the relevant courts and, E preferably, has been tangibly affected by these issues, raise such a oA charge?  If there really is something to it, perhaps the courts, lF prosecutors etc will find it out.  If not, then we can concentrate on I more profitable things than pondering whether so and so is in the employ M	 of Gates.'  G Several folks have posted collections of or pointers to "evidence", so i4 it should be an easy matter to take it to the court.  H I DON'T think the justice system is in the pay of Microsoft.  They seem 0 to be rather objective, actually, on this issue.   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Feb 2002 10:07 CSTe' From: carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins)i Subject: digital- Message-ID: <21FEB200210072103@gerg.tamu.edu>   = So I'm flipping through the pages of the new Inform magazine.s= Interestingly, it does mention VMS and VMSclusters in places.h@ More interestingly, I just flipped to pages 40-41. What's there?? An ad with the old block "digital" logo on each page. Very odd. : (It is, of course, from Digital GlobalSoft Ltd, the Compaq subsidiary based in India.)    --- Carl   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 09:14:20 +0100p' From: Brass Christof <welcome@spam.net>  Subject: Re: Einsteine( Message-ID: <3C74AC5C.F3F6C755@spam.net>   "Alan E. Feldman" wrote:  0 > Special Relativity is based on two postulates: > B > Postulate 1: There is no preferred inertial reference frame. AnyG > experiment performed in an inertial reference frame works the same infG > any other inertial reference frame. One cannot find a reference frameeE > that is "at rest" without reference to something else. (An inertialn4 > reference frame is one which is not accelerating.) > H > Postulate 2.: The speed of light is constant in all inertial reference	 > frames.  > G > The second postulate is the result of the Michelson-Morley experimenthG > in which they measured the speed of light in different directions, at C > different times of day, at different times of the year; all in anhA > effort to measure the speed of their laboratory relative to themC > "ether". The ether was postulated to be the medium in which lightnG > "vibrates". Since no variation of speed was ever observed -- and theyhH > did measure it accurately enough to see changes in speed that would beE > caused by various well-known motions of the earth -- one can deducehH > Postulate 2. (The earth orbits the sun at about 18.5 miles per second.C > Thus one would expect to see a variation in the speed of light ofR/ > twice that if measured twice 6 months apart.)e > A > Consequently, Special Relativity is based on experimental data.  > C > Theories mean nothing without experiment. Theories are devised tonE > explain experimental results and to predict new results that can bei > tested by new experiments. >  > Disclaimer: JMHO > Alan E. Feldmanv- > afeldman nononono1274134nonono gfigroup.comi  7 There seem to be two problems with what you explained.    E The Michelson-Morley experiment could only prove that the theorem of nH Newton's mechanics isn't correct. Although they might not have observed H any difference in speed beyond their measurement precision this doesn't I lead to the conclusion of absolut light speed regardless of the inertial - reference frame.  G I also don't understand why you mentioned measurements 6 months apart. m? AFAIK they changed the direction of the light ray to prove the   direction independence.1  E Also, AFAIK this experiment was mainly performed to prove that there .E wasn't a thing like an "ether". I don't remember clearly but I don't nC think that they established different inertial reference frames to s performe the measurements.  E AFAIK Einstein deduced the postulate of the inertial reference frame :H independence of light speed from Maxells equations of electro dynamics. D If you carefully study these equations you'll find that the electro D dynamic force depends on the speed of the electro dynamic field. If ? the speed of this field depends upon the observed speed wrt an .B inertial reference frame you get the contradiction that the force A and its reactio (Newton: actio est reactio) isn't equal. This is a@ a contradiction because you look at the same elements the force > is effective: once from one inertail reference frame e.g. the > one that is emitting the electro dynamic field, once from the > field itself which is moving with ligth speed relative to the  emitting medium.   -- /6 moc dot slupofni at ssarb - please revert the sequence   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:56:09 +0100 (MET) 9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>  Subject: einsteinn; Message-ID: <01KEJ9M8U8EQ8Y7KQF@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>$  1 > Special Relativity is based on two postulates: n  G > The second postulate is the result of the Michelson-Morley experimentc  A > Consequently, Special Relativity is based on experimental data.c  , Except that that is not the way it happened.  H It is not even clear if Einstein was even AWARE of the Michelson-Morley I experiment.  True, IF he was, he COULD HAVE incorporated it into special rF relativity.  He consistently said that it didn't play any part in his G formulation of special relativity.  (Otherwise, he always acknowledged TA experimental input.  For example, he always acknowledged Philipp eG Lenard's excellent work on the photoelectric effect, even after Lenard -/ started attacking him on anti-Semitic grounds.)1  C There is only one reality.  The path to understanding it, however, iG depends on accidents of history.  There are many cases where something gI was arrived at via "first principles" and later showed up in experiment, q? as well as the opposite case, where theory initially explained c experiment..  ) It is a give and take in both directions.o  G In other words, the history of science is in some sense independent of cH science; an extraterrestrial civilisation would agree with us about the I facts of science, but would have an entirely different history.  Art and -3 art history, by contrast, are more closely related.4   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 12:10:52 +0000c% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>s Subject: Re: einstein-8 Message-ID: <veo97uk4vj9j91ctrjt29jecfrjpjngmhg@4ax.com>  8 On Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:56:09 +0100 (MET), Phillip Helbig+ <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> wrote:   2 >> Special Relativity is based on two postulates:  >aH >> The second postulate is the result of the Michelson-Morley experiment >yB >> Consequently, Special Relativity is based on experimental data. >g- >Except that that is not the way it happened.  >mI >It is not even clear if Einstein was even AWARE of the Michelson-Morley  J >experiment.  True, IF he was, he COULD HAVE incorporated it into special   D Suggesting Einstein was not aware of the Michelson-Morley experimentF is like suggesting that Bill Gates has never heard of Ken Olsen's DEC   9 Not that I'm attempting to compare Gates to Einstein here.  G >relativity.  He consistently said that it didn't play any part in his wH >formulation of special relativity.  (Otherwise, he always acknowledged   > And  VMS related code wasn't used to create Windows NT was it?   >l -- Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 08:14:38 -0800. From: SPAMSINK2001@YAHOO.COM (Alan E. Feldman) Subject: Re: EinsteinL= Message-ID: <343f30ae.0202210814.761e7017@posting.google.com>-  W Brass Christof <welcome@spam.net> wrote in message news:<3C74AC5C.F3F6C755@spam.net>...t > "Alan E. Feldman" wrote: > 2 > > Special Relativity is based on two postulates: > > D > > Postulate 1: There is no preferred inertial reference frame. AnyI > > experiment performed in an inertial reference frame works the same inoI > > any other inertial reference frame. One cannot find a reference frameaG > > that is "at rest" without reference to something else. (An inertialu6 > > reference frame is one which is not accelerating.) > > J > > Postulate 2.: The speed of light is constant in all inertial reference > > frames.r > > I > > The second postulate is the result of the Michelson-Morley experimentgI > > in which they measured the speed of light in different directions, at-E > > different times of day, at different times of the year; all in angC > > effort to measure the speed of their laboratory relative to thehE > > "ether". The ether was postulated to be the medium in which light I > > "vibrates". Since no variation of speed was ever observed -- and theyoJ > > did measure it accurately enough to see changes in speed that would beG > > caused by various well-known motions of the earth -- one can deduce J > > Postulate 2. (The earth orbits the sun at about 18.5 miles per second.E > > Thus one would expect to see a variation in the speed of light of 1 > > twice that if measured twice 6 months apart.)8 > > C > > Consequently, Special Relativity is based on experimental data.c > > E > > Theories mean nothing without experiment. Theories are devised to G > > explain experimental results and to predict new results that can be. > > tested by new experiments. > >  > > Disclaimer: JMHO > > Alan E. Feldmano/ > > afeldman nononono1274134nonono gfigroup.comn > 9 > There seem to be two problems with what you explained. ? > G > The Michelson-Morley experiment could only prove that the theorem of  J > Newton's mechanics isn't correct. Although they might not have observed J > any difference in speed beyond their measurement precision this doesn't K > lead to the conclusion of absolut light speed regardless of the inertial   > reference frame.  D It depends what you mean by "prove". Theories are never proved. TheyF are tested by comparing predictions with experiment. As long as no oneE finds any differences, the theory is accepted as the best explanationaB for the time being. And even when theories are proved wrong, it isC often because a measurement was carried out in a new realm, and thecA disproved theory still works fine in its newly limited realm. For A example, take Newtonian Mechanics. No engineer uses relativitstic>< equations for normal work involving macroscopic objects. TheE difference between relativity and Newtonian mechanics is too small tofE make a difference for macrosopic things moving at small speeds (smallt8 relative to the speed of light that is!) in normal life.  E A similar thing happened for conservation of mass and conservation of @ energy. Both were once considered true until E=mc**2 came on theD scene. The two are still true in their new limited domains (i.e., noC energy-mass reactions), but by considering mass as simply a form of-- energy, conservation of energy is again true.0  D Now, back to Michelson-Morley: While it doesn't absolutely prove theB constancy of the speed of light, it does demonstrate important newD physics. And saying the speed of light is absolutely the same in anyC inertial reference frame is certainly much closer to the truth than A Galilean Relativity (in which velocities add in the normal linear B manner) or Newtonian mechanics, if you prefer to use that term. SoA until someone finds something wrong the constancy of the speed of-1 light, it is "proved" for all practicle purposes.m  ? Now, by measuring the speed of light twice, 6 months apart, youn@ measure it in 2 different inertial reference frames with a speed@ difference of 2*18.5=37 miles per second. Since such experimentsF always come up with only one speed, there is at the very least not theD expected amount of change in the speed of light, that is, 37 mps. NoB it doesn't rule out some strange effect like changing the speed ofD light by 1/1000000th of the difference in speeds of the two inertial= reference frames, but obviously some non-Newtonian physics isiD happening here. And until someone comes up with something better, orF shows that there is something wrong with assuming the constancy of theD speed of light, it is quite reasonable to assume that the experiment( shows the speed of light to be constant.  oI > I also don't understand why you mentioned measurements 6 months apart. iA > AFAIK they changed the direction of the light ray to prove the t > direction independence.-  E They did the direction independence, but that's not good enough. What @ if you did that experiment when you were at rest relative to the: ether? Waiting 6 mos. guarantees that at least one of yourE measurements will be moving relative to the postulated ether. And the2C difference in the velocities of the earth at those two times allowsx+ you to test for a known change in velocity.O  D Changing the direction of the light does not give you a new inertialD reference frame. It simply measures your velocity (I am referring toE velocity as a vector, i.e., including both speed and direction in one 6 quantity) relative to the ether in your current frame.   G > Also, AFAIK this experiment was mainly performed to prove that there aG > wasn't a thing like an "ether". I don't remember clearly but I don't gE > think that they established different inertial reference frames to u > performe the measurements.  C Probably the two frames were those of the earth at opposite ends of F its orbit, 6 mos. apart! How else could you come up with two differentF inertial reference frames?! Well, you could take measurements 12 hoursA apart. But the difference in speed is bigger 6 mos. apart (2*18.5dC miles per second vs. 2*1000 miles per hour [at the equator]), hences: the advantage of waiting 6 mos. to repeat your experiment.  G > AFAIK Einstein deduced the postulate of the inertial reference frame cJ > independence of light speed from Maxells equations of electro dynamics. F > If you carefully study these equations you'll find that the electro F > dynamic force depends on the speed of the electro dynamic field. If A > the speed of this field depends upon the observed speed wrt an uD > inertial reference frame you get the contradiction that the force C > and its reactio (Newton: actio est reactio) isn't equal. This is RB > a contradiction because you look at the same elements the force @ > is effective: once from one inertail reference frame e.g. the @ > one that is emitting the electro dynamic field, once from the @ > field itself which is moving with ligth speed relative to the  > emitting medium.  F You may well be right on this one (thanks for catching me on this!). I? do remember that Einstein was either reluctant to cite or nevernB acknowledged the Michelson-Morley experiment. I'll have to do some+ research on that before commenting further.c  @ However, Maxwell's equations were derived from experiment, so ifC Einstein used that he was still using experimental results. You arenD right about the problem of the force depending on the speed of lightC (speed of the electrodynamic field as you put it, which is the samerD thing). This was a great mystery until Einstein came up with Special Relativity.   C Also, Richard P. Feynman and two other physicists (I can't rememberaE how to spell their names) were awarded a Nobel prize for developing a ; method called "renormalization" which was a theoretical (oroE mathematical, if you prefer) trick to almost literally sweep infinitebC terms from a series under the carpet. Their work was strictly aboutrE calculating quantites in quantum mechanics, so that is as theoreticaldE or mathematical as you can get in physics. But it is still related togC the real world, or at least what experiments tell us about the real 6 world. And more importantly, they still got the prize.  @ Of course the criteria for a Nobel prize may have changed in the/ intervening years between Einstein and Feynman.,   Disclaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldmans! afeldman ;d;d;dnonon gfigroup.comd   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 10:02:46 -0800( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)5 Subject: EV7 rules ... more proof of EV8 conspirarcy!g= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0202211002.4fb27792@posting.google.com>s  6 from the inquirer and Terry ... buy the way Terry, you6 are a stockholder ... read the truth about EV8 article5 I posted and tell me if you are outraged and what youe plan on doing about it ...  , Alpha: Undead, and trashing the competition    Fastest chip on earth ) By Terry Shannon, 21/02/2002 16:31:20 BSTn  A ALPHACIDE OR NO, the fastest processor on the planet continues tot! garner sales and bragging rights.aA In CY01 AlphaServer systems broke through the terascale boundary,tC delivering multi-TFLOPS systems to Pittsburgh Supercomputer Center,cD the French Atomic Energy Commission, Los Alamos National Laboratory,< Sandia National Laboratory, the Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute, and Celera Genomics.i  C Omitted from this hit parade are the new Buffalo, NY Bioinformatics E Center and some incremental AlphaServer sales at the Sanger Centre in  Cambridge, UK.  E Compaq won seven of the world's most powerful supercomputing programseC in 2000 and 2001. These include: the most powerful supercomputer inuB Hollywood (Fox Blue Sky Studios; 512 AlphaServer DS10Ls), the mostA powerful bioinformatics supercomputer in the US (Celera Genomics,eE belting out 1.3 TFlops), the largest European bioinformatics computeriE (GeneProt; 1420 AlphaServer DS10L systems delivering 1.9 TFlops), theb= most powerful Linux Supercomputer (Sandia National Labs; 1800,@ processors), the most powerful computer in Europe (French AtomicE Commission, >5 TFlops), the most powerful university supercomputer in D Australia (APAC: Australian Partnership for Advanced Computing), theE most powerful Civilian supercomputer (Pittsburgh Supercomputer CenterFE TCS-1; conservatively rated at 6 TFlops), and last but not least, the C most powerful supercomputer the world has ever known (ASCI Q at Los D Alamos National Labs; which will deliver 30 TFlops by the end of theD year and will scaling up to an incredible 100 Tflops during the next several years.)a  B So much for rumours of the death of Alpha. Further confounding theA Armani Analysts and other alarmist nay-sayers,SKC can confirm the B existence of scads of EV7-based Marvel systems in Marlboro, MA and elsewhere.   B This article is copyright Terry Shannon 2002. He is the editor andD publisher of close Compaq watching newsletter, Shannon knows Compaq.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:42:39 -0500t2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger)9 Subject: Re: EV7 rules ... more proof of EV8 conspirarcy!iJ Message-ID: <rdeininger-2102021342400001@1cust83.tnt1.nashua.nh.da.uu.net>  = In article <d7791aa1.0202211002.4fb27792@posting.google.com>,n) bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote:e  7 >from the inquirer and Terry ... buy the way Terry, yout7 >are a stockholder ... read the truth about EV8 articlec6 >I posted and tell me if you are outraged and what you >plan on doing about it ...h >i- >Alpha: Undead, and trashing the competition q >t >Fastest chip on earth  * >By Terry Shannon, 21/02/2002 16:31:20 BST >aB >ALPHACIDE OR NO, the fastest processor on the planet continues to" >garner sales and bragging rights.B >In CY01 AlphaServer systems broke through the terascale boundary,D >delivering multi-TFLOPS systems to Pittsburgh Supercomputer Center,E >the French Atomic Energy Commission, Los Alamos National Laboratory,h= >Sandia National Laboratory, the Japan Atomic Energy Research   >Institute, and Celera Genomics.  J And these are all EV68s, or older.  The EV7 systems haven't escaped beyond the walls of CPQ yet.i   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 08:31:54 -0800( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)C Subject: EV8 ... the true story!  Capellas/Q sell out shareholders!r= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0202210831.5a181896@posting.google.com>e  < everyone wishing to learn the true story about EV8 must read> this fascinating article ... the link follows along w/summary!  I http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?section=columns&AID=RWT021802145442e  
 Conclusion  A The defunct Alpha EV8 design was arguably the most aggressive andsE ambitious high end microprocessor design ever publicly disclosed. Hadn? it been completed and functioned as its designers intended, andfF brought to market within a reasonable time frame, it would have likelyE taken the performance leadership crown against all contenders, as hadpE three previous generations of Alpha microprocessors. Although the EV7fF should prove to be an outstanding technical success, and possibly evenF a minor commercial one too, it will forever stand in the shadow of theD EV8 and Compaq&#8217;s decision to trap the Arana in a corporate web, of intrigue and quickly and quietly kill it.   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 08:23:35 -08001 From: keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) 1 Subject: EV8 and McKinley analysis by Paul DeMone = Message-ID: <cf15391e.0202210823.75169959@posting.google.com>   D Paul DeMone of RealWorldTech has done an analysis of the EV8 and the( McKinley based on the ISSCC papers.  SeeI http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?section=columns&AID=RWT021802145442    Some interesting conclusions:n  A EV8: "It would have likely taken the performance leadership crownhB against all contenders, as had three previous generations of AlphaC microprocessors. Although the EV7 should prove to be an outstandingeC technical success, and possibly even a minor commercial one too, its> will forever stand in the shadow of the EV8 and Compaq&#8217;sE decision to trap the Arana in a corporate web of intrigue and quicklyt and quietly kill it."   B McKinley: "A well designed chip with an incredibly capable on-chip? cache hierarchy. That cache hierarchy, combined with many otheriF measures to minimize instruction execution latency as well as increase> the clock rate, should help McKinley overcome the burden of anA ill-conceived and misguided instruction set architecture to yielde> respectable integer and floating point performance levels.  ByF offering decent high end performance at relatively low costs (from itsE chip merchant business model and potential economies of scale), IntelnD and its business partners will likely see strong customer acceptance7 when it officially releases McKinley later this year. "e? ---------------------------------------------------------------e? Keith Parris | parris at encompasserve dot org | Consulting on:y> Clusters, Disaster Tolerance, Performance, I/O, Storage & SANs   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 15:39:17 GMTe8 From: hammond@not@peek.ppb.cpqcorp.net (Charlie Hammond)9 Subject: Re: F$EXTRACT does parsing before giving result?r. Message-ID: <Fw8d8.36$fL6.99@news.cpqcorp.net>  U In article <3C7483CE.CD83F521@gmx.fr>, Didier Morandi <Didier.Morandi@gmx.fr> writes:>M >Has anyone noticed that the F$EXTRACT lexical function sometimes seems to dosO >parsing and substitution of "embedded two quotes to one" and embedded variabletI >substitution? (by "embedded" I mean "within a quoted string") instead ofiL >returning what you want, i.e. the genuine string it is supposed to extract.  F Two consecutive double quotes within a qouted string seem to be pretty8 consistently handled as a single double quote character.  A $ write sys$output f$extract(0,80,"This is a ""demo"" of string")s This is a "demo" of string1 $ write sys$output "This is a ""demo"" of string"  This is a "demo" of string4 $ x = f$extract(0,80,"This is a ""demo"" of string") $ sho sym xr"   X = "This is a "demo" of string"$ $ x = "This is a ""demo"" of string" $ sho sym xd"   X = "This is a "demo" of string"   >  LINE = "l  F It appears to me that there is a syntax error in this write statement.
 Should it be:P  H $ write sys$output "This is ""demo"" No ''i' for VMS Eng at ","''today'"H                                                               ^^       ^ -- pK     Charlie Hammond -- Compaq Computer Corporation -- Pompano Beach  FL USAlH        (hammond@not@peek.ppb.cpqcorp.net -- remove "@not" when replying)J       All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 16:06:35 GMT 8 From: hammond@not@peek.ppb.cpqcorp.net (Charlie Hammond)9 Subject: Re: F$EXTRACT does parsing before giving result?s/ Message-ID: <fW8d8.38$fL6.200@news.cpqcorp.net>   D I bit more "experimenting" suggest that both F$LOCATE and F$EXTRACT - consistently treat imbeded two-double quotes.   . $ write sys$output f$locate("*","ABC""*""DEF") 4u/ $ write sys$output f$extract(4,1,"ABC""*""DEF")i *t* $ write sys$output f$locate("*","ABC*DEF") 3r+ $ write sys$output f$extract(3,1,"ABC*DEF")d *e   So does assignment:    $ x = "ABC""*""DEF"t $ sho sym x    X = "ABC"*"DEF"r" $ write sys$output f$locate("*",x) 4e  = But if you force a variable to contain pairs of double qoutesa: and use the variable name rather than the quoted string...   $ x = "ABC""""*""""DEF"c $ sho sym xh   X = "ABC""*""DEF"e" $ write sys$output f$locate("*",x) 5   * ..then each of the double quotes "counts".  9 So, pairs of double quotes ARE treated diferently if they59 are in a quoted string constant, vs. being in a variable.a  B All of which may be confusing, but seems normal and correct to me.   -- rK     Charlie Hammond -- Compaq Computer Corporation -- Pompano Beach  FL USAaH        (hammond@not@peek.ppb.cpqcorp.net -- remove "@not" when replying)J       All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's.   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 16:04:42 +0100 (MET)d9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> A Subject: file orthography in %DELETE-W-SEARCHFAIL: bug or featureh; Message-ID: <01KEJIE22BN68ZKA1M@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>e   $ delete abcdef.%%%%%%;sL %DELETE-W-SEARCHFAIL, error searching for DISK$FOO:[BAR]ABCDEF.^%^%^%^%^%^%; -RMS-E-FNF, file not found  I It seems that at some point the escape character ^ was introduced in the aC output of this message.  OK, I know that % is a valid character in eH ODS-5, but a) the disk is not ODS-5, neither is the parse-style setting H of the process extended nor does this occur with other characters which  are valid in ODS-5 names.s   Bug or feature?    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 17:49:47 -0000s5 From: "Malcolm" <malcolmix@neverness.freeserve.co.uk>cE Subject: Re: file orthography in %DELETE-W-SEARCHFAIL: bug or featurex. Message-ID: <a53but$1du$1@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>  F "Phillip Helbig" <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> wrote in message5 news:01KEJIE22BN68ZKA1M@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com...n > $ delete abcdef.%%%%%%;a+ > %DELETE-W-SEARCHFAIL, error searching form" DISK$FOO:[BAR]ABCDEF.^%^%^%^%^%^%; > -RMS-E-FNF, file not found >lJ > It seems that at some point the escape character ^ was introduced in theD > output of this message.  OK, I know that % is a valid character inI > ODS-5, but a) the disk is not ODS-5, neither is the parse-style settingrI > of the process extended nor does this occur with other characters whicho > are valid in ODS-5 names.  >e > Bug or feature?M >eG Feature of extending the wildcard support to handle extended parsing, Id guess...  J It seems that, once it's done its wildcard parsing, if it doesn't find any> files that match abcdef.%%%%%%%, it wil look for a file calledH abcdef.%%%%%%. It then failed to find that, giving you the error message above.  K I've seen this as well, but as I said, only when it couldn't find any filese to match the wildcard.   Example:   eisner> set proc /pars=extee eisner> create abc.def *EXIT* eisner> create abc.fgh *EXIT* eisner> dirn  5 Directory EISNER$DRA3:[DECUSERVE_USER.MACARTHUR.TEST]    ABC.DEF;1           ABC.FGH;1n   Total of 2 files.d eisner> delete abc.%%%; /loeF %DELETE-I-FILDEL, EISNER$DRA3:[DECUSERVE_USER.MACARTHUR.TEST]ABC.DEF;1	 deleted (a	 3 blocks)lF %DELETE-I-FILDEL, EISNER$DRA3:[DECUSERVE_USER.MACARTHUR.TEST]ABC.FGH;1	 deleted ( 	 3 blocks)r+ %DELETE-I-TOTAL, 2 files deleted (6 blocks)  eisner> delete abc.%%%; /loh) %DELETE-W-SEARCHFAIL, error searching forr& EISNER$DRA3:[DECUSERVE_USER.MACARTHUR. TEST]abc.^%^%^%; -RMS-E-FNF, file not found eisner>  eisner> set proc /pars=tradn eisner> create abc.def *EXIT* eisner> create abc.fgh *EXIT* eisner> dir   5 Directory EISNER$DRA3:[DECUSERVE_USER.MACARTHUR.TEST]t   ABC.DEF;1           ABC.FGH;1e   Total of 2 files.t eisner> del abc.%%%n? %DELETE-E-DELVER, explicit version number or wild card required  eisner> del abc.%%%.*d eisner> del abc.%%%.*a) %DELETE-W-SEARCHFAIL, error searching for-& EISNER$DRA3:[DECUSERVE_USER.MACARTHUR. TEST]ABC.^%^%^%;*d -RMS-E-FNF, file not found  E The real question is whether this should be removed from the wildcards/ routines when the parse style is traditional...n  L Hmm. Just tried another test there, and I can't create a file called abc.%%% ;)  	 -Malcolm.    -- Malcolm MacArthura  , Subtract nine for e-mail (anti-spam measure)   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Feb 2002 18:21:32 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)vS Subject: Re: FreeVMS: what are CPQ's feelings likely to be ?, was: Re: MPE/iX usersc, Message-ID: <a53drc$2o3j$3@info.cs.uofs.edu>  = In article <d7791aa1.0202201709.161e9091@posting.google.com>,n+  bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) writes:a |>+ |> then call it something else ... rememberb |> d |>    V --> W indows
 |>    M --> N 
 |>    S --> Ti   Or:r      H --> I      A --> B      L --> M   bill   -- yJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   i   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:27:58 -0500[- From: "Peter Weaver" <peter.weaver@stelco.ca>i7 Subject: Having Nfilename Printed at the end of reportsd2 Message-ID: <A%ad8.17526$X2.198262@nnrp1.uunet.ca>  L I posted this before in vmsnet.networks.tcp-ip.tcpware without much luck andL ran it by the support people at Process without much luck, one of our peopleL tried contacting HP only to be told that HP only "supports printing from theI Windows platform." So I'll try again to see if anyone knows what is goinge on.e  I VMS version does not play a part in this, TCPWare version does not play aeE part in this. What we can duplicate in the lab is that the node name,aL filename and printer type play a part. Form definitions, queue names, device: libraries and file contents all do not affect the results.  I When we print a file that has a 9.3 character name from a VMS system thataH has a 14 character node name to either a HP LaserJet 5N or a HP LaserJetL 4001N we see the name of the file followed by an N printed at the end of the page.i  I If we change either the length of the node name or the length of the fileoB name we do not get the Nfilename printed at the end of the report.  L For example, we have a node called 1234.stelco.ca and we print a file a fileL called 123456789.123 on a LJ 5N we see the text N123456789.123 at the end ofJ the report. If we change the node to be 12345.stelco.ca or change the fileJ name to be 123.123 and print the report we do not see the Nfilename at theJ end of the report. We have been able to consistently duplicate the problem, on one of our machines by changing its name.  H If the printer is using a reset module (/SEPARATE=(RESET=(NORMAL)) whereH NORMAL contains a soft reset instruction) the text appears on a separateK piece of paper after the reset. If the printer does not have a reset module ' then the text appears on the same page.n  G I do not have a complete list of the other printers that the networkingaK people have tested but they say the other HP and Xerox printers they testeda do not do this.r  L Using TCPDUMP shows that TCPWare is not appending the text to the end of theJ report. Using a sniffer shows that the only difference between the packetsI is the length of the IP headers, the data packets are the same. (I hope IEI used the correct terms there, I'm not a networking expert, but the people-  who looked at the packets are :)  E The main problem is that now that we are asking the users about this,mL various people are saying that they see these extra pages and have just beenL throwing them away, but these users are not on nodes that have 14 charactersK in the name. So there must be some other condition that we have missed that  causes this.   So my questions are; 1. Has anyone else seen this?U+ 2. Does anyone know what the real cause is?sJ 3. Does anyone know a way to get HP to look at this even though we can not duplicate it on Windows?   Peterl  " Follow-ups are set for comp.os.vms   --E AOL CD Use #3415; As a handy prop when trying to explain the sport ofn% Curling to your Mother and your Wife.    ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 08:36:47 -0600 From: briggs@encompasserve.orgF Subject: Re: Help on creating a detached process using SYS$CREPRC(...)3 Message-ID: <YM+Cy6XmpDJU@eisner.encompasserve.org>   [ In article <2c0966c2.0202201333.7e8224aa@posting.google.com>, hchen3@uwo.ca (Sammy) writes:t > Hi:n > H >   I am trying to write a simple C++ program which creates a "DETACHED"F > process (the process will live even if the parent died) to load JVM,
 > but I amD > a bit confused about the usage of SYS$CREPRC. I have seen similiar > topics ono3 > this newsgroup, but I just need a bit more help.   > " > Here is the sample code I wrote: > 0 > //it only displays the java help, not loading 8 > //JVM at this point since the code will be much longer > int main() > {i >   char * hey = "java -help";$ >   struct dsc$descriptor_d command;' >   command.dsc$w_length = strlen(hey);c( >   command.dsc$b_dtype = DSC$K_DTYPE_T;( >   command.dsc$b_class = DSC$K_CLASS_D;  >   command.dsc$a_pointer = hey; >  >   unsigned int pid;o >   unsigned int base = 4; > / >   $DESCRIPTOR(DCL,"SYS$SYSTEM:LOGINOUT.EXE");e' >   $DESCRIPTOR(procName,"Sammy_Test");t# >   $DESCRIPTOR(output,"test.log");c >   @ >   if (SYS$CREPRC(&pid, &DCL, &command, &output, &output, 0, 0, > &procName, base,* >       0, 0, PRC$M_DETACH) != SS$_NORMAL)  A Passing address of writeable cell as pidadr by reference.  Check.a  A Passing "SYS$SYSTEM:LOGINOUT.EXE" as image by descriptor.  Check.e  5 Passing "java -help" as input by descriptor.  *BZZZT*o  C   This is your major problem.  Described further at the end of this    post.l  3 Passing "test.log" as output by descriptor.  Check.0  3 Passing "test.log as error by descriptor.  Harmlessc  @   SYS$SYSTEM:LOGINOUT.EXE doesn't use the SYS$ERROR logical nameE   as a file.  It uses it as a conduit for passing context informationrE   to processes created in the context of DECnet and the batch system.8A   Without the flags (in the stsflg parameter) set to indicate thetC   creation of such a process, the SYS$ERROR logical name is ignoreds2   and the error parameter is, consequently a NOOP.  D   LOGINOUT will arrange things to that SYS$ERROR ends up pointing to2   the same place that SYS$OUTPUT does in any case.  A Passing default (0 by value) for prvadr and quota.  Should be OK.n  A   Because you are running SYS$SYSTEM:LOGINOUT.EXE and because younA   did not specify the PRC$M_NOUAF flag, privileges and quotas for3A   the created process are going to come from the UAF based on the A   user name of the creating process.  I'm not sure if you pick upv?   base priority as well, but explicitly specifying it is a goodtB   move -- that way SYS$SYSTEM:LOGINOUT runs at priority 4 until it.   figures out what priority the UAF calls for.  4 Passing "Sammy_Test" as prcnam by descriptor.  Check  $ Passing 4 as baspri by value.  Check  8 Passing default (0 by value) for uic and mbxunit.  Check  / Passing PRC$M_DETACH as stsflg by value.  Checki  F Checking status against SS$_NORMAL.  At least you checked.  Good move.  C   Checking status codes for an exact match is not always wise.  The!@   low order bit conveys success or failure information.  And the>   low order three bits combine to convey severity information.  F   So one might test   ( status & 1 )   /* STS$M_SUCCESS if you care */  <   Or   ( status & 7 ) == 1   /* STS$K_SUCCESS if you care */  I   The choice is largely a matter of taste, paranoia and exact behavior of 1   the routine whose status code is being tested. i    C Your big problem is the input parameter.  You need to pass the name C of a file containing DCL commands.  You can't pass a single commandm3 directly.  The typical move is to create a mailbox:i  ; 	status = sys$crembx ( blah blah, mailbox-name, blah blah )d; 	status = sys$getdvi ( blah blah, mailbox-name, blah blah )sB 	status = sys$creprc ( blah blah, mailbox-device-name, blah blah )  " 	open ( mailbox-name for writing )" 	write ( mailbox-name, "java -h" )! 	write ( mailbox-name, "logout" )o  A Since you and your detached process are not in the same job tree,uB you won't (by default) find your mailbox device name catalogued inI the same logical name table (LNM$TEMPORARY_MAILBOX => LNM$JOB by default)e> So you need to use $GETDVI to retrieve the actual device name.  C Note that mailbox I/O is synchronous by default.  The writer stallsl= until the reader reads.	 You can use the $QIO interface to doeE non-blocking mailbox I/O.  And robust programming pretty much demandsm that.f   	John Briggs   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:35:23 -0500h; From: "Brian Tillman" <tillman_brian@notnoone.notnohow.com>l2 Subject: Re: Hewlett offers plan to boost HP stock$ Message-ID: <3c753dee$1@news.si.com>  ) >I'm sure most of you have seen this, butaF >http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/business/2708611.htm  H Interesting.  I can't see this page using MSIE V6, but I can see it with Mosaic V3.6 on OpenVMS VAX V7.2u --A Brian Tillman                   Internet: tillman_brian at si.comiA Smiths Aerospace                          tillman at swdev.si.comi= 3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS      Addresses modified to preventc< Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991     SPAM.  Replace "at" with "@"8        This opinion doesn't represent that of my company   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:38:28 -0500 ; From: "Brian Tillman" <tillman_brian@notnoone.notnohow.com>i$ Subject: Re: HP 88780B and VS4000-90$ Message-ID: <3c753ea7$1@news.si.com>  E >Backup needs its tapes mounted /foreign.  This is normal.  When doesrD >it break?  When you "$ mount/for MKA300:" (optionally, /nowrite) or% >when you execute the backup command?-  J For years now, BACKUP hasn't needed you to MOUNT/FOREIGN, as it will do it for you. --A Brian Tillman                   Internet: tillman_brian at si.comfA Smiths Aerospace                          tillman at swdev.si.coma= 3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS      Addresses modified to preventc< Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991     SPAM.  Replace "at" with "@"8        This opinion doesn't represent that of my company   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:21:38 +0100D$ From: "Dr. Dweeb" <Dweeb@NoSpam.com> Subject: Re: Itanium troublesT/ Message-ID: <ZC5d8.69$lj4.1925@news.get2net.dk>g   Clip ..t >oL > HP and Compaq are not stupid. They probably have a very good idea of where they want to go.  J The jury is out on this and I remain unconvinced that these people (CarleyK and Curly) are not just thinking with their collective "big swinging dicks"a2 a process not at all related to rationmal thought.  L History will tell, but as y'all know, I think VMS is a goner in all this andI that it is very intentional.  I can see no other evidence to the contrarytA other than trivial window dressing, a virtual repeat of the Alpha  crucifixion process.   Dweebo   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:35:35 GMTT# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>y Subject: Re: Itanium troublesf. Message-ID: <HI6d8.999$4xE.378@news1.bloor.is>  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3C742550.2B04EB12@videotron.ca... >"H >....at which point, either IA64 will work respectably, VMS will be deadE anyways, or some other target will have been selected for a VMS port.a >o >t  L Now if I were Microsoft, I might be thinking that I have the most to lose in an Itanic/McKinley fiasco.   Why?  < Because if I was busy pushing Windows 2004/2005/2006 Server/K DataCenter/Enterprise and my customers didn't have a decent platform to run3F it on, then I'd be at risk of losing them to unix on Power, to unix on% Solaris, to linux on almost anything.v  - And that is clearly unpalatable to Mr. Gates.cK Maybe Microsoft will do a deal with Compaq to revive Alpha. It might be theXD cheapest way for Microsoft to ensure the growth of its higher priced	 products.c   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 14:20:31 GMT"2 From: "George N. White III" <WhiteG@dfo-mpo.gc.ca> Subject: Re: Itanium troublestJ Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.4.44.0202211007410.210522-100000@wendigo.bio.dfo.ca>  $ On 20 Feb 2002, Nick Maclaren wrote:  H > |> Many were brainwashed into thinking that IA64 would become industryE > |> standard and take over the world. Compaq such as Compaq murderednG > |> their own faster chip in anticipation of that. Itr is those peoplerI > |> who are trembling in their pants because they realise now how stupidn4 > |> their decisions to bet their lives on IA64 was. > A > That is so.  But most of them (not Compaq) have now resusciatedaD > their own alternative strategies - certainly NEC, HP and SGI have,A > and IBM never announced the replacement of theirs.  So they nowpB > have a genuine option if the McKinley flops or disappears out of> > sight.  Similarly, the OEMs without their own chips have theA > option of AMD's Hammer - or even buying in MIPS, PA-RISC, SPARC- > or POWER4 systems!  J Certainly SGI and MIPS have not made the advances that one would expect if@ MIPS development efforts had not waivered. If SGI had a strongerI commitment to MIPS would we now have machines similar to POWER4 from SGI?    --D George N. White III <gnw3@acm.org> Bedford Institute of Oceanography   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Feb 2002 14:39:57 GMT( From: nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) Subject: Re: Itanium troublest0 Message-ID: <a530rt$d9u$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>  J In article <Pine.SGI.4.44.0202211007410.210522-100000@wendigo.bio.dfo.ca>,4 "George N. White III" <WhiteG@dfo-mpo.gc.ca> writes: |> oM |> Certainly SGI and MIPS have not made the advances that one would expect if-C |> MIPS development efforts had not waivered. If SGI had a strongerrL |> commitment to MIPS would we now have machines similar to POWER4 from SGI?  A Unlikely.  SGI are taking a different path.  However, my guess isdB that we would now have 1 GHz MIPS chips in the Origin 3000 series,C and they might well be quad issue.  Whether the memory system wouldh be any faster is less clear.  A But, to forestall Alexis Cousein, the CURRENT committment to MIPSO@ is pretty solid.  There was a (say) 18 month glitch, but that is@ long past and the MIPS line is slowly but steadily making up the lost ground.     Regards, Nick Maclaren,* University of Cambridge Computing Service,> New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QH, England. Email:  nmm1@cam.ac.uk/ Tel.:  +44 1223 334761    Fax:  +44 1223 334679o   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 16:16:34 GMTt* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> Subject: Re: Itanium troublessB Message-ID: <C39d8.137047$Aw2.9822324@bin7.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  . "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message( news:HI6d8.999$4xE.378@news1.bloor.is... >e< > "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message( > news:3C742550.2B04EB12@videotron.ca... > >oJ > >....at which point, either IA64 will work respectably, VMS will be deadG > anyways, or some other target will have been selected for a VMS port.E > >  > >r >iK > Now if I were Microsoft, I might be thinking that I have the most to lose  in > an Itanic/McKinley fiasco. >d > Why? >e> > Because if I was busy pushing Windows 2004/2005/2006 Server/I > DataCenter/Enterprise and my customers didn't have a decent platform toR run:H > it on, then I'd be at risk of losing them to unix on Power, to unix on' > Solaris, to linux on almost anything.n > / > And that is clearly unpalatable to Mr. Gates. I > Maybe Microsoft will do a deal with Compaq to revive Alpha. It might beR theFF > cheapest way for Microsoft to ensure the growth of its higher priced > products.E  F Since the future of Itanic is still in doubt, and Hammer will be alongI within a year (in just a few months, for early trials), there's reason toaF expect MS to take a wait-and-see attitude:  Compaq's actions have madeI reviving Alpha at least as risky as that, and while Compaq's survival may.K depend heavily on Itanic MS's does not (unless Hammer - and Yamhill - don'tA cut the mustard).^  J And if MS tried to do a deal with *anyone* to revive Alpha, wouldn't it doI it with Intel (which would also have its own incentive if Itanic sank andnF Yamhill didn't fill the void to Intel's satisfaction)?  Given a choiceI between depending on Compaq and depending on Intel, which would you take?    - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 14:02:01 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>B Subject: Re: Itanium troublesF, Message-ID: <3C754427.43696BF2@videotron.ca>   Nick Maclaren wrote:  C > But, to forestall Alexis Cousein, the CURRENT committment to MIPS0B > is pretty solid.  There was a (say) 18 month glitch, but that isB > long past and the MIPS line is slowly but steadily making up the > lost ground.  G Does this mean that Tandem could remain on MIPS if it were allowed to ?-   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 05:59:39 -0800+ From: stephane_paquin@hotmail.com (SPaquin)l& Subject: Re: lib$wait does not wait...< Message-ID: <fdd7874.0202210559.36f44b03@posting.google.com>  F Unfortunately, this is VMS 6.2. No flag argument to lib$wait. It would have been so nice...  - I will have to use sys$setimr and sys$waitfr.t   Thanks to those who replied. Stephane  e "Richard Maher" <maher_rj@hotmail.c0m> wrote in message news:<a520cv$6en$1@knossos.btinternet.com>...  > Hi,t > N > If you're not in an AST try the lib$k_nowake flag. The Rdb (or VMS?) releaseM > notes have a good description of what happens and an algorithm for ensuringi% > that your $wake is for your $hiber.p >  > Regards Richard Maher. > 8 > SPaquin <stephane_paquin@hotmail.com> wrote in message8 > news:fdd7874.0202201347.7f93ccb2@posting.google.com...J > > In a detached process using sys$hiber and sys$wake in ASTs, I have theG > > problem that a lib$wait call does not wait long enough. The process I > > gets awaken before the end of the wait period. I suppose this relatesfE > > to lib$wait being in fact translated to sys$schdwk, sys$hiber andfH > > sys$wake and that an IO call completes, the AST is fired and makes a
 > > sys$wake.a > >t@ > > Now once this is understood, how can I make sure the processJ > > effectively waits for the specified amount of time ? What other system > > services should I use ?w > >n) > > Thanks everyone for your suggestions.t > > Stephane   ------------------------------   Date: 13 FEB 2002 15:37:21 GMT+ From: Dave Greenwood <greenwoodde@ornl.gov>s" Subject: Re: license checksum info2 Message-ID: <13FEB02.15372189@feda01.fed.ornl.gov>  = In a previous article, "pos" <prosullivan@hotmail.com> wrote:pM > Even if you DO perform a license enable, watch what happens when you reboot 2 > the system: none of your licenses are enabled... >  s >  h9 > "WILLIAM WEBB" <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov> wrote in message() > news:0033000052787483000002L032*@MHS...n >   5 > IMHO, he should have also told you that when you doe8 > a LICENSE ISSUE <product_name> it disables the license9 > and that you have to do a LICENSE ENABLE <product_name>e7 > afterwards if you want to continue using the license.   A Of course, you can always COPY your license database file and used  !   LICENSE ISSUE /DATABASE=newfiled   Dave --------------9 Dave Greenwood                Email: Greenwoodde@ORNL.GOVfH Oak Ridge National Lab        %STD-W-DISCLAIMER, I only speak for myself   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:40:58 GMTI# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>e( Subject: More analyst meger expectations+ Message-ID: <KN6d8.51$qQ.32@news2.bloor.is>     HP merger opponent gains support 338n 02/20/02 04:55 PMh Source: News.com URL:J http://investor.cnet.com/investor/news/newsitem/0-9900-1028-8868179-0.html  K A Wall Street analyst on Wednesday said she agrees with many points made byhH dissident Hewlett-Packard board member Walter Hewlett, including that HPA should reconsider a spinoff of its lucrative printing and imagingo businesses.t  G In a research note issued late Wednesday, Prudential Securities analystnL Kimberly Alexy wrote that she recently met with Hewlett and agrees with someL of his criticism of the proposed $22 billion acquisition of Compaq Computer.I While many analysts have issued their own analysis of the merger, Alexy's-I report was one of the few to offer a point-by-point critique of Hewlett'se opposition.:  I Compaq and HP announced their intentions to merge last year, but the planYI has run into sharp criticism from some descendants of HP's founders. MosteJ notably, as an HP director, Hewlett voted to pursue the merger, but he has. since launched a public campaign to derail it.  L After viewing a presentation by Hewlett, Alexy wrote, "We tend to agree withJ Hewlett's points and continue to oppose the proposed transaction." But sheK added, "With or without the deal, however, we believe the near-term outlooke for HP remains murky."  I In particular, Alexy was intrigued with Hewlett's endorsement of spinning K off the printing and imaging division into a separate business--a move HP'siK board considered at the time it spun off its test and measurement business,o now called Agilent.s  K "According to Hewlett, a three-way spin was viewed as overly complex at the J time and the board preferred a two-step approach with a chance to reassessF the...spin-off after Agilent was complete," Alexy wrote. "He feels theG greater focus and accountability from separate boards and separate CEOsu( would be a net positive for both sides."  L When HP announced the Agilent spinoff in March 1999, then-CEO Lou Platt saidI the company had considered spinning off the printing division but decidedd0 there was too much overlap with the PC business.  C If completed, the HP-Compaq merger would be the largest in the techaI industry's history, leading to massive consolidation in the PC sector anddL greatly altering two of the industry's oldest icons. As shareholders prepareL to cast their votes next month, they are being heavily lobbied by proponents and opponents.  J In her report, Alexy agreed with Hewlett's contention that HP shareholdersK would face a greater risk as the volatile PC business diluted the lucrativex printer and imaging businesses.8  L She also agreed with Hewlett's analysis that the deal would dilute the valueG of HP's shares and that the merger would lead to a cost savings of $2.2o7 billion, rather than the $2.5 billion HP has projected.r  G On the other hand, Alexy disagreed with Hewlett's assessment that HP isY* paying too high a price to acquire Compaq.  H "We believe (share price) to revenue is a more fair way to value Compaq,G given that the earnings are severely depressed and (price per share) to$H earnings is somewhat irrelevant," she said. "Using the (price-to-revenue; model), HP's purchase price for Compaq strikes us as fair."n  I A spokeswoman for Hewlett said her client still feels HP is paying a hugeiL premium for Compaq and declined to comment on Alexy's method for valuing the deal.   C Representatives from HP were not immediately available for comment.S  I In crunching the numbers, other analysts have different conclusions aboutCD the merits of the pending merger. Steven Milunovich, a Merrill LynchI analyst, is recommending that investors snap up HP shares on expectationsSH the merger will go through. George Elling, an analyst with Deutsche Banc! Alex Brown, also favors a merger..  I "We remain of the opinion that the merger with Compaq would significantlyoH enhance (HP's) long-term prospects," he wrote in a recent research note.  J In addition to commenting on Hewlett's financial analysis, Alexy concludedI the merger would be defeated by a narrow margin of 55 percent against thea2 deal. Shareholders will cast their votes March 19.  I "In an all-out marketing war, we would give HP management the upper hand.nJ However, when it comes to substance--we favor the Hewlett argument," AlexyE said. "While we still believe investors will ultimately vote down the K proposed merger, we believe the HP marketing machine has been effective anda< we would concede that momentum is in HP management's favor."  J Several other analysts said HP's stronger-than-expected earnings last week0 would help boost the deal's chances of approval.  F Milunovich said he now thinks the merger has a "better than 50 percentH chance" of being OK'd, while Bear Stearns analyst Andrew Neff noted thatK HP's leaders can point to two quarters of better performance to bolster itsM# case that it can handle the merger.u  I "It appears that investors are being swayed by management's arguments andt; are concerned by the lack of alternatives," Milunovich saidl        J ***  [interesting that the analysts think that deal would dilute the valueK of HP shares, but that they think the purchase price is fair - kind of like L saying "Buying this bucket of sh*t wasn't such a good idea, but we got it at a terrific price."]t   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 15:44:02 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>3 Subject: Re: MPE/iX users form OpenMPE organizationu- Message-ID: <87sn7vuvnh.fsf@prep.synonet.com>h    david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk writes:  F > Looks to me that HP still believe they can get most of the MPE usersF > to move to HP-UX and don't want a competing MPE whether open sourced9 > or owned by someone else competing for those customers.   I No they will move, with much pain, to orible. And tell HP to never darken H their door ever again. For anything. One site has posted that when theirD 3000s go, the 9000s will be scrapped, as well as any other HP stuff.  % Way to boost customer sales, right...h   -- e< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.-@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 12:39:20 +0000 (UTC)  From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk3 Subject: Re: MPE/iX users form OpenMPE organizatione* Message-ID: <a52ppn$kc$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>  \ In article <87sn7vuvnh.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes:! >david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk writes:s >IG >> Looks to me that HP still believe they can get most of the MPE users G >> to move to HP-UX and don't want a competing MPE whether open sourcedh: >> or owned by someone else competing for those customers. >.J >No they will move, with much pain, to orible. And tell HP to never darkenI >their door ever again. For anything. One site has posted that when theiraE >3000s go, the 9000s will be scrapped, as well as any other HP stuff.i >n& >Way to boost customer sales, right... >a  I I said HP still believe it. I didn't say that is what will really happen.c  
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Feb 2002 04:57 CSTa' From: carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins)e% Subject: Re: Network Printer problemst- Message-ID: <21FEB200204575343@gerg.tamu.edu>e  * "David Lee" <phongle@kornet.net> writes...I }Yes, I am able to print from either of my server.  It must  be somethingT4 }wrong with my network configuration.  When I do the }$ucx ping my_printerg0 }it said %Lib-E-keyNotFou, key not found in tree }ping - unknown host my_printera  5 Are you certain that the node in question is actually.$ running UCX (a.k.a. TCPIP Services)?   This is what I get:  $ ucx ping gerg.tamu.edu' %LIB-E-KEYNOTFOU, key not found in treec  ping: unknown host gerg.tamu.edu  3 But then again, I am not actually running UCX. I amt running Multinet:   # $ multinet ping/num=3 gerg.tamu.edue9 PING gergl1.GERG.TAMU.EDU (165.91.230.247): 56 data bytes 2 64 bytes from 165.91.230.247: icmp_seq=0 time=0 ms2 64 bytes from 165.91.230.247: icmp_seq=1 time=0 ms2 64 bytes from 165.91.230.247: icmp_seq=2 time=0 ms    , ----gergl1.GERG.TAMU.EDU PING Statistics----9 3 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 0% packet loss $ round-trip (ms)  min/avg/max = 0/0/0  7 This system came with the "factory installed software",t7 so it does have UCX on the system disk and the commands-8 are in the command table (shich I may do something about9 at some point, as well as the entry in the help) - I justI8 don't run the startup for it so the processes for it are/ not running, the images are not installed, etc.0  < At the very least, it looks like you are not running the DNS= part of it (or maybe do not have it properly configured - bute2 I'd expect some other error if that was the case).  9 Do a SHOW SYSTEM and see if there are any of the relevanto; processes running (TCPIP$INET_ACP is the main one in recenti@ versions, I think the DNS would be TCIP$BIND_SERVER or something@ like that). You can also do an INSTALL LIST to see if the images for it are installed.w   --- Carl   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 16:08:03 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> Subject: Re: Oracle RDB v7.0-1- Message-ID: <87ofijuujg.fsf@prep.synonet.com>i  ( A Bonaveidogo <Asena@fsc.com.fj> writes:   > This is what I did.... m > D > a)	transfer a copy of dti$share from another node which is running > openvms 7.1-2S           ^^^^^e  I > b)	apply this command to install the image  (my machine runs on openvms. > 7.2-1)   ^^^^^g! > 			install add /open/share/prot 9 > c)	execute rmonstart and it works.... no error message. 3 > 			I could see RDMS_Monitor when I do show systemr > # > Now I've got another problem.....  > ? > When invoking the database I got the following error message;e > ? > 	%GSR-E-DB-UNKNOWN, database is not known to specified engine.  F I think  you MUST have the correct version of the library to have even? a chance of it working. Get the latest 7.2 copy, and try again.w     -- >< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 10:09:22 +0000g% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>o9 Subject: Re: OT gassless cars Was Re: "Crashless Windows"o8 Message-ID: <r7h97u8a04ae02qj6vdhucughiuru34v4u@4ax.com>  / On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 23:34:55 GMT, Tim Llewellyn,' <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:      > L >according to a recent motoring programon TV in the UK people are converting- >diesel cars to run on ordinary cooking oil. e  D Have you ever seen "Mr Trippy" the Hemp Ice Cream Van which tours UKE events? It runs on hemp diesel and all the products it sells are hemp-B based.  Used to be linked at www.hemp.co.uk but I can't see it anyE more even though most of he products it sold (including the deliciouss ice cream) are there  E German government is currently taking legal action against some folks F processing vegetable diesel commercially. Seems they want to tax it at? the same rate as OIL based fuels Other European governments are2* apparently watching the situation closely.     -- Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 04:34:39 -0800) From: P.Young@unsw.EDU.AU (Patrick Young) 9 Subject: Re: OT gassless cars Was Re: "Crashless Windows"m= Message-ID: <55f85d77.0202210434.2908924e@posting.google.com>/  ` "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message news:<3C7467BC.4B170F36@fsi.net>... > Tim Llewellyn wrote: > > O > > according to a recent motoring programon TV in the UK people are converting / > > diesel cars to run on ordinary cooking oil.i > ( > Is it any cheaper/cleaner than diesel?  < Yup and Yup. There is an Australian magazine that has in theB past described this, "Renew". There is no real conversion requiredD for conventional engines - unless you use computer controlled and/or common rail injection.  B I currently use diesel in my turbo diesel Hilux pickup, however ifB the price of diesel goes back to AUS$1.0 (US$0.5198) cents a litreD I might consider it (currently - well yesterday, AUS$0.81(US$0.4210)C a litre it's not really worth the worry). At AUS$1.0 I would try toaF source home heating oil used in some states during the 1ms time period- that is winter here or use such alternatives.   # While we are (so far) off topic....p  B I have tried (used) engine oil mixed with diesel - this provides aF greater power output (not that I need it - a properly turbocharged 2.8G litre diesel beats a number of petrol(gas pig) vehicles off the mark tot= the speed limit). Need to _BE VERY CAREFUL_ about fuel filter- maintenance.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 08:19:07 -0500o From: William_Bochnik@acml.com9 Subject: Re: OT gassless cars Was Re: "Crashless Windows"k> Message-ID: <OF4E0E5235.4FFDCE62-ON85256B67.00491527@acml.com>  ; I doubt that you could buy cooking oil in the US for 0.42 a 8 litre, but I may be wrong.  Economy of scale might help.        [                                                                                            M[                       P.Young@unsw.EDU                                                     -[                       .AU                             To:  Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com           e[                                                       cc:                                   [                       02/21/2002 07:34         Subject: Re: OT gassless cars Was Re:        [                       AM                       "Crashless Windows"                         i[                       Please respond                                                       r[                       to P.Young                                                           c[                                                                                            p[                                                                                                   < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message# news:<3C7467BC.4B170F36@fsi.net>...y > Tim Llewellyn wrote: > > @ > > according to a recent motoring programon TV in the UK people are converting/ > > diesel cars to run on ordinary cooking oil.e >i( > Is it any cheaper/cleaner than diesel?  < Yup and Yup. There is an Australian magazine that has in the9 past described this, "Renew". There is no real conversion$ required= for conventional engines - unless you use computer controlledo and/or common rail injection.  ? I currently use diesel in my turbo diesel Hilux pickup, howeverl if< the price of diesel goes back to AUS$1.0 (US$0.5198) cents a litree0 I might consider it (currently - well yesterday, AUS$0.81(US$0.4210)r@ a litre it's not really worth the worry). At AUS$1.0 I would try to? source home heating oil used in some states during the 1ms timen period- that is winter here or use such alternatives.o  # While we are (so far) off topic....e  @ I have tried (used) engine oil mixed with diesel - this provides ar5 greater power output (not that I need it - a properly< turbocharged 2.8? litre diesel beats a number of petrol(gas pig) vehicles off then mark to = the speed limit). Need to _BE VERY CAREFUL_ about fuel filterS maintenance.          F ______________________________________________________________________;  The information contained in this transmission may containc@ privileged and confidential information and is intended only forA the use of the person(s) name above.  If you are not the intended-= recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for deliveringf3 this message to the intended recipient, any review,o@ dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication? is strictly prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient,eA please contact the sender immediately by reply e-mail and destroyQ# all copies of the original message.o   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 15:06:43 +0000/ From: Roy Omond <Roy@Omond.net>n9 Subject: Re: OT gassless cars Was Re: "Crashless Windows" ( Message-ID: <3C750D04.73AED05@Omond.net>   William_Bochnik@acml.com wrote:k  = > I doubt that you could buy cooking oil in the US for 0.42 ai: > litre, but I may be wrong.  Economy of scale might help.  ; Maybe so, but as far as I understand (at least for those inS5 the UK), they are using *used* cooking oil, obviouslyt6 filtered.  There was one chap on the TV about 2 months: ago who was getting his used oil for *free* from the local3 fish-and-chip shop, of which there are many in thiss; country (fish-and-chips is the staple diet of quite a largea$ number in this impoverished land :-)   Sounded tempting to me ...  	 Roy Omondh Blue Bubble Ltd.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 17:30:50 GMTs4 From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk>9 Subject: Re: OT gassless cars Was Re: "Crashless Windows"c0 Message-ID: <3C752DB1.2C5EF25C@blueyonder.co.uk>   "David J. Dachtera" wrote: >  > Tim Llewellyn wrote: > >g > > "David J. Dachtera" wrote: > >uH > > > As to pollution, e-mail me privately (anyone!) and I'll share someK > > > long-lost research (*NOT* mine! let me make that unmistakably clear!) H > > > with you. It's possible today, and it's been possible for going onL > > > twenty(20) years - without tons of batteries and without combustion ofM > > > any kind. One of the necessary elements is radioactive (deuterium), the  > > > other (gallium) is not.i > > O > > according to a recent motoring programon TV in the UK people are convertingd/ > > diesel cars to run on ordinary cooking oil.e > ( > Is it any cheaper/cleaner than diesel?  ,N well, you can apparently use used cooking oil which the food industry tends toO just dump otherwise.  Cleanliness, I can't remember the details on that, sorry.n  X However, apparently it is necessary in the UK to pay fuel tax on any cooking oil you use to run your car :-(. g   -- o Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk  h  C Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of u! my employers or service provider.u   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:51:27 GMTr# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>o$ Subject: Re: OT: "Crashless Windows"+ Message-ID: <zX6d8.56$qQ.55@news2.bloor.is>g  A "Tim Llewellyn" <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in messagey* news:3C743581.4148D6EA@blueyonder.co.uk... >h >eE > yes, I assumed hardened comp.os.vms readers would assume a tinge ofu
 sarcasm in
 > my comment.n >u( > But, would those happy people be happy. > if they knew anything about race conditions? >f  = Unfortunately most people don't know how to think critically.$  J On the one hand, that creates opportunities for intelligent people such as
 ourselves.F On the other hand, it's usually the non-critical thinkers that rise toG positions of management. These are the people who most closely resemblei Dilbert's pointy-hair boss.     L I once worked at a financial services company where we had a Chief OperatingB Officer who relied heavily on the firm's head of IT for technologyD direction. That in and of itself should have been no major cause forK concern, as that sort of thing is commonplace. However in this instance, itpI was a case of the uninformed relying on the misinformed. Needless to say,r. the resulting decisions were of dubious value.   [cynicism off]   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 06:08:49 -08006 From: andrew.rycroft@intrinsitech.com (Andrew Rycroft): Subject: Pathworks 32 client with thin client Windows 2000= Message-ID: <58ba0101.0202210608.25e2a823@posting.google.com>h   Hi,e  E Has anyone had any experience with setting up the Pathworks 32 client.C in the MS Thin client environment ? I am looking at setting up somefC thin client which previoulsy were PCs to map drives from an OpenVMSeD Pathworks/Advaneced Server system, and need to lcarify any potential problems that may occur ?e   Thanks Andrew   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 12:19:06 +0000 (UTC)t From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk Subject: Re: PGP for OpenVMS?g* Message-ID: <a52ojq$1o$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>  [ In article <3C743695.20558.B9E7D59@localhost>, "Stanley F. Quayle" <stan@stanq.com> writes:vE >> Does anyone know if there is a PGP port for OpenVMS? We would like A >> to use it on our OpenVMS boxes. Any help would be appreciated!t >  >Well, yes and no. >e? >For non-commercial use, PGP version 2.7 is available.  It can eD >interoperate with the latest versions of PGP (6.5, last I checked) B >only if the 6.5 site installs some obscure "compatibility mode"). >0E >For commercial use, ViaCrypt licensed and sold 2.7 for VMS (VAX and  E >Alpha).  However, they were bought out some years ago by the people e@ >who own PGP (Network Associates?), and VMS support was dropped. > D >I contacted the new company about getting an update, and they said D >they'd be glad to resurrect the product for $100,000.  My client's * >running all PGP through a Unix box now... >o >   " There was a port of GNUPG to VMS. O Unfortunately I don't know how current it is (the latest GNUPG at www.gnupg.orgk2 appears to be GnuPG 1.0.6) or where to pick it up.    
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 09:33:17 -0800< From: alphaman-nixspam@hsv.sungardtrust.com (Aaron Sakovich) Subject: Re: PGP for OpenVMS?t= Message-ID: <8af17fe1.0202210933.2c6d5fdf@posting.google.com>t  j fraley@usfca.edu (Michael Fraley) wrote in message news:<slrna78tns.7t.fraley@cumquat.ca.sprintbbd.net>... > Hello, > D > Does anyone know if there is a PGP port for OpenVMS? We would like@ > to use it on our OpenVMS boxes. Any help would be appreciated!  F Search this newsgroup for "gpg" or "gnupg", an open source replacement< for PGP.  It has been ported, is more current, and eminently interoperable with PGP.t   Aaron    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 18:13:33 GMTC' From: Don Sykes <anonymous@pacbell.net>  Subject: Re: PGP for OpenVMS? + Message-ID: <3C7539E0.4138FFC4@pacbell.net>s   "Stanley F. Quayle" wrote: > F > > Does anyone know if there is a PGP port for OpenVMS? We would likeB > > to use it on our OpenVMS boxes. Any help would be appreciated! >  > Well, yes and no.: > ? > For non-commercial use, PGP version 2.7 is available.  It caniD > interoperate with the latest versions of PGP (6.5, last I checked)C > only if the 6.5 site installs some obscure "compatibility mode").o > E > For commercial use, ViaCrypt licensed and sold 2.7 for VMS (VAX and E > Alpha).  However, they were bought out some years ago by the people A > who own PGP (Network Associates?), and VMS support was dropped.o > D > I contacted the new company about getting an update, and they saidD > they'd be glad to resurrect the product for $100,000.  My client's+ > running all PGP through a Unix box now...    I'll port it for half that.a   >  > --Stan Quaylew# > President, Quayle Consulting Inc.  >  > ----------I > Stanley F. Quayle, P.E.   N8SQ   +1 614-868-1363   Fax: +1 614 868-1671i3 > 8572 North Spring Ct. NW, Pickerington, OH  43147e? > Preferred address:  stan@stanq.com       http://www.stanq.com-   -- -   Have VMS. Will Travel. Wire Paladin @alphase.com 
 San Franciscou   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 18:13:49 GMT ' From: Steve Thompson <smt@vgersoft.com>v Subject: Re: PGP for OpenVMS?iH Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0202211316280.27906-100000@vger.vgersoft.com>  % On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Don Sykes wrote:a   > "Stanley F. Quayle" wrote: > >rH > > > Does anyone know if there is a PGP port for OpenVMS? We would likeD > > > to use it on our OpenVMS boxes. Any help would be appreciated! > >  > > Well, yes and no.I > >vA > > For non-commercial use, PGP version 2.7 is available.  It canYF > > interoperate with the latest versions of PGP (6.5, last I checked)E > > only if the 6.5 site installs some obscure "compatibility mode").  > >tG > > For commercial use, ViaCrypt licensed and sold 2.7 for VMS (VAX and)G > > Alpha).  However, they were bought out some years ago by the peoplebC > > who own PGP (Network Associates?), and VMS support was dropped.2 > >7F > > I contacted the new company about getting an update, and they saidF > > they'd be glad to resurrect the product for $100,000.  My client's- > > running all PGP through a Unix box now...w >  > I'll port it for half that."   I'll do it for $25 K :-)   steve    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:42:27 -0500a; From: "Brian Tillman" <tillman_brian@notnoone.notnohow.com>s Subject: Re: PGP for OpenVMS?t$ Message-ID: <3c753f96$1@news.si.com>  D >For commercial use, ViaCrypt licensed and sold 2.7 for VMS (VAX andD >Alpha).  However, they were bought out some years ago by the people@ >who own PGP (Network Associates?), and VMS support was dropped.  H Last know version was PGP 4.01 Business Edition, Copyright (c) 1990-1997/ Pretty Good Privacy, Inc.  That's what we have.  --A Brian Tillman                   Internet: tillman_brian at si.comtA Smiths Aerospace                          tillman at swdev.si.comg= 3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS      Addresses modified to prevent-< Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991     SPAM.  Replace "at" with "@"8        This opinion doesn't represent that of my company   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 08:28:31 GMTa" From: "ohm62" <ohm62@coldmail.com>F Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare4 Message-ID: <Pc2d8.4924$ss5.80@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>   > > Czajanek wrote:n > >i= > > > Until yet there is no possibility in TCPWARE to trigger^9 > > > the performance of our OpenVMS Advanced Server likea: > > > "$ucx set prot /tcp=noacknoledge" or something else.; > > > Therefore our client users report a very slow server.p  I Did you try to increase the TCP window size (send and receive buffers) toaE 32Kb?  Communications with Windows clients is faster this way, as thenH default values in Windows world appear quite larger than the defaults on
 OpenVMS...   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 09:25:26 +0000p% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>CF Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare8 Message-ID: <9be97u4t28jmnk0gepotk25hk11ac0915m@4ax.com>   [Posted and emailed]  7 On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 11:26:34 -0500, "McCarthy Kevin P."h <McCarthyKP@BWSC.ORG> wrote:  H >We are on the verge of moving all of our Pathworks shares to NT/Win2000I >servers because of this.  We are running Pathworks 6.1 and TCPware on aneG >ES40 833 MHz with HSG 80s and Gig Ethernet, but for serving data filesuF >to AutoCAD 2002 a 866 MHz Win NT server is 1 or 2 orders of magnitude= >faster.  A single user with winzip made our PW server crawl.t  E With  UCX SET PROT TCP/NODELAY_ACK I see uploads to Pathworks servers C go from 300KB/sec to around 3MBsec. Unfortunately, as you say, thispE workaround does not seem to be available for TCPWARE. But for extremelF slow read performance you want to stick the Pathworks cache way up (if@ you have not already done so) The default is ludicrously low. InE ADMIN/CONFIG (was this still run by a .COM file in 6.1?) I have  DatamB Cache Size (Kbytes): 65536. I get about 5MB/sec on read with this.  C This with ES40s and dual HSZ80 controllers so you should be able to ) get at least this performance as well.   p  I >I think that The Pathwork groups priorities are not in the right places.nD >They talk about how they have "fixed" the printer bits; well it was  ( I suspect they are way under resourced.   A >broken for so long that we always used NT print queues on the NT-	 >servers.7 >2 >Kevin McCarthy@  >Boston Water & Sewer Commission >h >a >-----Original Message-----t. >From: Alan Greig [mailto:a.greig@virgin.net] 0 >Posted At: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 6:50 AM >Posted To: vmspH >Conversation: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWareG >Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare  > E >On 20 Feb 2002 03:13:38 -0800, czajanek@scholze.de (Czajanek) wrote:i >" >e >>> >>Our Platform is Alpha 2100 4/275, 3CPU, 1GB RAM, 80 MB SCSI,; >>OpenVMS 7.2.1 with serveral ECO's, Advanced Server 7.2 A.t >>C >>We have tested (we hope we have tested ;-) all performance screwsfC >>we could reach. The only screw we couldn't reach is the described C >>one because we have TCPware and not UCX. The Performance increase G >>by using the described parameter was tested by Compaq and we need it.r >hG >I know of sites which have dropped Pathworks precisely because of thisiF >problem and have informed Compaq. Despite this the last I was told itD >was not a priority fix due to design limitations. TCPWARE vendor isD >absolutely correct that pathworks should provide the config optionsD >and not force a system manager to change global params just to work >around Pathworks stupidity. >dF >Note I have seen performance increases close to 1000% never mind 200%" >when UCX is the underlying stack. >0 >> >>Thank you for your response. >>
 >>U. Czajanekj   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 09:26:49 +00002% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>bF Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare8 Message-ID: <89f97uc86kh3a6n5o6pe92sfaospl77ifp@4ax.com>  / On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 19:54:40 GMT, Tim Llewellyn ' <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:    >  >  >"Dr. Dweeb" wrote:  >>  ' >> Does UCX actually cost anything ????  >-F >only if your system doesn't have an appropriate NAS or EIP licence orB >whatever it is called this year. I guess older hardware might not >have this.   > I thought all 2100s came with a UCX license as part of the NAS package.         -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 09:34:30 +0000 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> F Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare8 Message-ID: <elf97uk648rt42ivuj533feh4ucorc2c14@4ax.com>  E On Thu, 21 Feb 2002 08:28:31 GMT, "ohm62" <ohm62@coldmail.com> wrote:    >  >> > Czajanek wrote: >> >> >> > > Until yet there is no possibility in TCPWARE to trigger: >> > > the performance of our OpenVMS Advanced Server like; >> > > "$ucx set prot /tcp=noacknoledge" or something else..< >> > > Therefore our client users report a very slow server. >>J >Did you try to increase the TCP window size (send and receive buffers) toF >32Kb?  Communications with Windows clients is faster this way, as theI >default values in Windows world appear quite larger than the defaults on  >OpenVMS...   D With the delayed ack problem acks are delayed by greater than 1/10thE sec. On fast ethernet this means that you would have to have a window 3 size of around 1MB to keep streaming. Not possible!e   >. >    -- Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 11:51:26 +0100* From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER)F Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare* Message-ID: <3c74d12e$1@news.kapsch.co.at>  P In article <K$ZYzSYgP8NT@mcduck.acs.wmich.edu>, grant@rigel.cc.wmich.edu writes:G >I went back to the 1996 Systems & Options Catalog, and the 2100A 4/275sJ >came with the NAS200 license (QL-23EAG-AA) which included TCP/IP ServicesE >for OpenVMS Alpha (as well as Motif, DCPS, Pathworks, DECnet, etc.).I >e, >And I know that current systems include it. >lG >It shouldn't cost anything to switch -- in fact, it should save money.   / Yup, the license for UCX/TCPIP should be there.SM Every system since the Alphas came out (IIRC 1992, and before when the VS4000_L came out - IIRC 1990) included a NAS (server at least a NAS200 [or a NAS300,A NAS400], worstation first a NAS250, later only a NAS150) license.   F Only problem seems to be how the maintenance of this license (package)J was treated the last years. Maybe an NAS update license (to get permissionM to run the lastest/greatest/current version of everything in the NAS package)oA is required, BUT if MOTIF was used and upgraded and license paid,n? then the UCX part of the NAS license should be current as well.y  B So I agree, running UCX/TCPIP should save money and not cost moneyH (but I still prefer TCPware on my servers and I want to see a definitive- solution for PATHWORKS over TCPware, too !!!)e   --  < Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER           Tel.    +43 1 81111 2651; Network and OpenVMS system manager  Fax.    +43 1 81111 888t< KAPSCH AG      Wagenseilgasse 1     E-mail  eplan@kapsch.netH A-1121 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist"   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:11:28 +0000 (UTC)  From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.ukF Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare+ Message-ID: <a52kl0$sd3$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>f  d In article <c6aeb53c.0202201104.6154247c@posting.google.com>, czajanek@scholze.de (Czajanek) writes:f >Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> wrote in message news:<52377ukabhi0n0luannvgi8rgjjcs5ufsg@4ax.com>...G >> On 20 Feb 2002 03:13:38 -0800, czajanek@scholze.de (Czajanek) wrote:w >>   >> l >> >D >I love OpenVMS and i don't want to use Linux- or Microsoft- servers9 >to attach our PC-Clients. Are there any alternatives for>C >OpenVMS Advanced Server (formerly Pathworks) for the VMS-Platform?  >v= >Buying UCX is too expensive, but performance increases up topC >1000% let my heart beat. If i can' t catch a solution I have to goT+ >to my chief telling him to cancel OpenVMS.  >    You could try Samba.  N Also check your licenses you may well find you already have a license for UCX.I Digital/Compaq sort of see-sawed at various periods between supplying thesN license as standard with all systems and not supplying it. See if you have anyC NAS licenses these included UCX as well as other things like Motif.e  
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University      >Best Regards, long live OpenVMS >e >U. Czajanek   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 04:07:28 -0800$ From: czajanek@scholze.de (Czajanek)F Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare= Message-ID: <c6aeb53c.0202210407.764aff6a@posting.google.com>u  r karcher@thuria.waisman.wisc.edu (Carl Karcher) wrote in message news:<20FEB02.21372200@thuria.waisman.wisc.edu>...> > In a previous article, "Dr. Dweeb" <Dweeb@NoSpam.com> wrote:( > ->Does UCX actually cost anything ???? > G > Every Alphaserver (1000A, 1200, ES40) I've bought in the last several:C > years included a UCX or TCPIP license. Perhaps Czajanek's 2100 isg > before that.  A No licenses are registerd on our Alpha 2100, but it's a good idea.= to serach for the license paper in our dungeon. If it is true A that there was a licence PAK for UCX shipped with our Server I'lle* find it. Better TCPWare dies than OpenVMS.   Thank you!!e   U. Czajanek    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:56:12 +0000h% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>aF Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare8 Message-ID: <06n97usb93ge0a2t6fd3q5qbc57kfbtd8b@4ax.com>  C On 21 Feb 2002 11:51:26 +0100, eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER)y wrote:     >bC >So I agree, running UCX/TCPIP should save money and not cost moneyoI >(but I still prefer TCPware on my servers and I want to see a definitivem. >solution for PATHWORKS over TCPware, too !!!)  F It should be possible for Process to have their version of PWIP driver@ perform the equivalent of the appropriate setsockopt to turn off= delayed acks. Has anyone asked them why they cannot do this?.r  D Pathworks engineering told me that they couldn't just have PathworksB set this option because of shortcuts taken by the PWIP driver. Now@ either TCPWARE doesn't use the same shortcuts in which case justE patching Pathworks to set the option would work or else Process could2F explicitly turn off delayed acks in the IP stack for PWIP connections.  E I presume TCPWARE supports the appropriate setsockopt (and equivalentnD for QIO) so the underlying stack must be able to do this. Can anyone verify this?  F Note the underlying problem is in the algorithms used by Windows TCPIPF stack which don't trigger excessive delayed acks when talking to otherF Windows systems but do to systems religiously following the RFCs (suchF as VMS). Therefore you either clone the windows behaviour or just give* up on delayed acks to get the performance.  ) This s how it was explained to me anyway.l  0 Here's the help for a system running TCPIP (UCX)   ( $  help tcpip prog sock comm setsock argC                                    results in the default behavior.l@                TCP_NODELACK         When specified, disables the algorithm thatE                                     gathers outstanding data that hass not beenB                                     acknowledged and sends it in a
 single packetyE                                     when acknowledgement is received.M Takes an2                                     integer value.A                                     Under most circumstances, TCP 
 sends data>                                     when it is presented. When outstanding dataF                                     has not yet been acknowledged, TCP gathersa(  small amounts of the data into a single?                                     packet and sends it when anh acknowledgement(C                                     is received. This functionalityr	 can causet?                                     significant delays for somen
 clients (such-D                                     as windowing systems that send a	 stream ofxE                                     events from the mouse that do notS expect-                                     replies).o     -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 12:26:26 +0000e% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>,F Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare8 Message-ID: <nqp97uob6kaclfa9fbcc5uf30udf2a843c@4ax.com>  D On 21 Feb 2002 04:07:28 -0800, czajanek@scholze.de (Czajanek) wrote:  s >karcher@thuria.waisman.wisc.edu (Carl Karcher) wrote in message news:<20FEB02.21372200@thuria.waisman.wisc.edu>...-? >> In a previous article, "Dr. Dweeb" <Dweeb@NoSpam.com> wrote: ) >> ->Does UCX actually cost anything ????u >> :H >> Every Alphaserver (1000A, 1200, ES40) I've bought in the last severalD >> years included a UCX or TCPIP license. Perhaps Czajanek's 2100 is >> before that.W >oB >No licenses are registerd on our Alpha 2100, but it's a good idea> >to serach for the license paper in our dungeon. If it is trueB >that there was a licence PAK for UCX shipped with our Server I'll+ >find it. Better TCPWare dies than OpenVMS.   < Keep in mind that the license may be NAS-nnn rather than UCX   >Thank you!! >r >U. Czajanek   -- Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 14:46:57 +0100* From: eplan@kapsch.net (Peter LANGSTOEGER)F Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare* Message-ID: <3c74fa51$1@news.kapsch.co.at>  ` In article <nqp97uob6kaclfa9fbcc5uf30udf2a843c@4ax.com>, Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:E >On 21 Feb 2002 04:07:28 -0800, czajanek@scholze.de (Czajanek) wrote: t >>karcher@thuria.waisman.wisc.edu (Carl Karcher) wrote in message news:<20FEB02.21372200@thuria.waisman.wisc.edu>...@ >>> In a previous article, "Dr. Dweeb" <Dweeb@NoSpam.com> wrote:* >>> ->Does UCX actually cost anything ???? >>> I >>> Every Alphaserver (1000A, 1200, ES40) I've bought in the last severalPE >>> years included a UCX or TCPIP license. Perhaps Czajanek's 2100 is  >>> before that. >>C >>No licenses are registerd on our Alpha 2100, but it's a good ideaR? >>to serach for the license paper in our dungeon. If it is true9C >>that there was a licence PAK for UCX shipped with our Server I'lla, >>find it. Better TCPWare dies than OpenVMS. >s= >Keep in mind that the license may be NAS-nnn rather than UCX    Rather NET-APP-SUP-xx0 ...   --  < Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER           Tel.    +43 1 81111 2651; Network and OpenVMS system manager  Fax.    +43 1 81111 888e< KAPSCH AG      Wagenseilgasse 1     E-mail  eplan@kapsch.netH A-1121 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist"   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 06:27:57 -0800$ From: czajanek@scholze.de (Czajanek)F Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare= Message-ID: <c6aeb53c.0202210627.3053eab1@posting.google.com>   ^ "ohm62" <ohm62@coldmail.com> wrote in message news:<Pc2d8.4924$ss5.80@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>... > > > Czajanek wrote:  > > >0? > > > > Until yet there is no possibility in TCPWARE to triggerw; > > > > the performance of our OpenVMS Advanced Server like:< > > > > "$ucx set prot /tcp=noacknoledge" or something else.= > > > > Therefore our client users report a very slow server.n > K > Did you try to increase the TCP window size (send and receive buffers) to@G > 32Kb?  Communications with Windows clients is faster this way, as theMJ > default values in Windows world appear quite larger than the defaults on > OpenVMS...   Tahnk you for your response,  5 but what do you mean with window size. In TCPware you1; can change the BG device buffers. Other parameter I haven'tc; found. But if you have an idea in tuning the buffers please  tell me.   U. Czajanekr   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 06:51:37 -0800% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>SF Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare) Message-ID: <a531hp01e3k@drn.newsguy.com>n  C In article <3c74fa51$1@news.kapsch.co.at>, eplan@kapsch.net says...-  > >>Keep in mind that the license may be NAS-nnn rather than UCX >m >Rather NET-APP-SUP-xx0 ...e   Oops. Brain failureA   >e >-- = >Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER           Tel.    +43 1 81111 2651.< >Network and OpenVMS system manager  Fax.    +43 1 81111 888= >KAPSCH AG      Wagenseilgasse 1     E-mail  eplan@kapsch.netoI >A-1121 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              "I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist"r   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 17:44:53 GMTv4 From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk>F Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare0 Message-ID: <3C7530FC.CDE51ED7@blueyonder.co.uk>   Alan Greig wrote:i > 1 > On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 19:54:40 GMT, Tim Llewellyn-) > <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:0 >  > >2 > >0 > >"Dr. Dweeb" wrote:. > >>) > >> Does UCX actually cost anything ????  > >OH > >only if your system doesn't have an appropriate NAS or EIP licence orD > >whatever it is called this year. I guess older hardware might not
 > >have this.C > @ > I thought all 2100s came with a UCX license as part of the NAS
 > package. >    Alan  E I have no reason to dispute this. I either didn't notice the specifica6 machine type or it wasn't in the post I responded too.   regardsE  r -- b Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk  u  C Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of e! my employers or service provider.o   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 18:25:49 +0100 2 From: martin@radiogaga.harz.de (Martin Vorlaender)F Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare; Message-ID: <3c752d9d.524144494f47414741@radiogaga.harz.de>o  & Alan Greig (a.greig@virgin.net) wrote:H > It should be possible for Process to have their version of PWIP driverB > perform the equivalent of the appropriate setsockopt to turn off? > delayed acks. Has anyone asked them why they cannot do this?.i  @ There's a D/E request queued to implement the equivalent of UCX'< SET PROTOCOL TCP /NODELAY_ACK (upon Mr Czajanek's inquiry to- Process' german first-level support - me ;-). < But doing it in the PWIP driver seems like a good idea, too.  G > I presume TCPWARE supports the appropriate setsockopt (and equivalentbF > for QIO) so the underlying stack must be able to do this. Can anyone > verify this?  E I presume so, too. When quickly skimming through the docs, I couldn'taC find it, though (but then, I didn't find it in the network C header E files on an UCX system, either...). Someone being deeper into networkP) programming than me please chime in here.r  H > Note the underlying problem is in the algorithms used by Windows TCPIPH > stack which don't trigger excessive delayed acks when talking to otherH > Windows systems but do to systems religiously following the RFCs (suchH > as VMS). Therefore you either clone the windows behaviour or just give, > up on delayed acks to get the performance.  I Well, of course it's Microsoft that's guilty of messing it up (again) :-)r   cu,    Martin --  H    Emacs would be a great   | Martin Vorlaender  |  VMS & WNT programmer5    operating system,        | work: mv@pdv-systeme.de H    if only it came with     |   http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/<    a decent editor...       | home: martin@radiogaga.harz.de   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 12:01:44 -0600n( From: David Harrold <DHarrold@wi.rr.com>F Subject: Re: Poor Performance with OpenVMS Advanced Server and TCPWare2 Message-ID: <a53cm7$4m3$1@newsreader.mailgate.org>  I On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 20:13:13 +0100, "Dr. Dweeb" <Dweeb@NoSpam.com> wrote:o  % >Does UCX actually cost anything ????u >r >Dweeb.c >   N Yes it does.  The license is usually covered when you purchase a system with aN NAS or EIP kit.  However, that license is only good for the current version ofI UCX/TCPIP.  If you bought a box years ago, when UCX V4.1 was current, andeF didn't put the license on the maintenance contract, you are still onlyJ licensed for UCX V4.1, you will have to buy and upgrade license to use theN current version.  And place it on your maintenance contract if you want to use future versions.   Dave Harrold      N ..............................................................................N David Harrold                              E-Mail: David_Harrold at aurora.orgI Sr. Software Systems Engineer              Phone:          (414) 647-6204nI                                            Pager:          (414) 941-4634 G Aurora Health Care                         Fax:          (414) 647-4999i 3031 W. Montana Street Milwaukee, WI 53215g   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 08:48:39 +01008( From: Rainer Lehrig <lehrig@t-online.de>9 Subject: POSIX for OpenVMS - is there something similar ?t+ Message-ID: <3C74A657.D6A56B5C@t-online.de>   6 The product "POSIX for OpenVMS" was retired in VMS 7.2H If I got it right you had the opportunity to run a unix compatible shell "psx>". G Within this shell you could use files in unix syntax. - Exactly this ise what I'm searching for.d   Problem:< I have a portable GUI library Qt (http://www.trolltech.com).D This library runs on all Unix-Systems, Windows and MAC and embedded.0 I have ported an older version of Qt to OpenVMS.< There you had "only" to handle the filenames (VMS <-> UNIX).  C I'm searching for a subsystem like "POSIX for OpenVMS", which would = allow me to run programs which think of files in unix syntax. > (DEVICE:[dir.subdir]file.ext  <-> /device/dir/subdir/file.ext)   Yours:
 Rainer Lehrigp   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 19:12:04 +0010V% From: paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.au-= Subject: Re: POSIX for OpenVMS - is there something similar ?m5 Message-ID: <01KEJP0I6502005CYC@tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au>   7 >The product "POSIX for OpenVMS" was retired in VMS 7.2   L IIRC, Posix was retired about the 6.2 arena.  That's when I think I lost it.  * It's not on my current 7.2, nor a 7.1 box.   Regards, Paddy   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 08:23:13 GMTIL From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")= Subject: Re: POSIX for OpenVMS - is there something similar ?e8 Message-ID: <00A09DF6.69E5FD1E@SSRL04.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  V In article <3C74A657.D6A56B5C@t-online.de>, Rainer Lehrig <lehrig@t-online.de> writes:7 >The product "POSIX for OpenVMS" was retired in VMS 7.2 I >If I got it right you had the opportunity to run a unix compatible shell 	 >"psx>".  H >Within this shell you could use files in unix syntax. - Exactly this is >what I'm searching for. >s	 >Problem:y= >I have a portable GUI library Qt (http://www.trolltech.com).aE >This library runs on all Unix-Systems, Windows and MAC and embedded.o1 >I have ported an older version of Qt to OpenVMS./= >There you had "only" to handle the filenames (VMS <-> UNIX).  >wD >I'm searching for a subsystem like "POSIX for OpenVMS", which would> >allow me to run programs which think of files in unix syntax.? >(DEVICE:[dir.subdir]file.ext  <-> /device/dir/subdir/file.ext)g    M I could be mistaken, but I think the Compaq C RTL will do this for you.  Justs0 use Unix filespecs.  From Help CC Language Topic   CC     Language_topicss       Valid_File_Specifications-  J        In Compaq C source programs, you can include both OpenVMS and UNIX*I        style file specifications.  Combinations of the two specificationse%        are not supported by Compaq C.a  3        Example of a valid UNIX* file specification:i  +             beatle!/dba0/lennon/songs.lis.3w  6        Example of an invalid UNIX* file specification:  /             BEATLE::DBA0:[LENNON.C]/songs.lis.3.             ----------.       * UNIX is a trademark of The Open Group.     -- Alanl    O ===============================================================================a0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056yM  Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA  94309-0210 O ===============================================================================c   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 09:04:36 -0000y* From: "Richard Brodie" <R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk>= Subject: Re: POSIX for OpenVMS - is there something similar ? , Message-ID: <a52d6s$12r2@newton.cc.rl.ac.uk>  [ "Rainer Lehrig" <lehrig@t-online.de> wrote in message news:3C74A657.D6A56B5C@t-online.de...h  E > I'm searching for a subsystem like "POSIX for OpenVMS", which wouldd? > allow me to run programs which think of files in unix syntax.z@ > (DEVICE:[dir.subdir]file.ext  <-> /device/dir/subdir/file.ext)  F The official replacement for POSIX is the C runtime. Get a recent copy8 of the C compiler and documentation set and try it. See:V http://www.openvms.compaq.com/commercial/c/5763p002.htm#408_decshellfilespecifications   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:08:50 +0100e- From: Jouk Jansen <joukj@hrem.stm.tudelft.nl>w= Subject: Re: POSIX for OpenVMS - is there something similar ??3 Message-ID: <3C74D542.2FB3492B@hrem.stm.tudelft.nl>u   Rainer Lehrig wrote: > 8 > The product "POSIX for OpenVMS" was retired in VMS 7.2J > If I got it right you had the opportunity to run a unix compatible shell	 > "psx>".dI > Within this shell you could use files in unix syntax. - Exactly this ist > what I'm searching for.r > 
 > Problem:> > I have a portable GUI library Qt (http://www.trolltech.com).F > This library runs on all Unix-Systems, Windows and MAC and embedded.2 > I have ported an older version of Qt to OpenVMS.> > There you had "only" to handle the filenames (VMS <-> UNIX). > E > I'm searching for a subsystem like "POSIX for OpenVMS", which wouldt? > allow me to run programs which think of files in unix syntax.P@ > (DEVICE:[dir.subdir]file.ext  <-> /device/dir/subdir/file.ext) > ; I think you will have to look for the following 2 packages:a 1) The OpenVMS porting library:e? http://www.openvms.compaq.com/openvms/products/ips/porting.html & which is a great help at compile time. 2) GNV% http://gnv.sourceforge.net/readme.htmi For a Unix-like shell.                   Jouk   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 06:19:15 -0800k# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>n= Subject: RE: POSIX for OpenVMS - is there something similar ?k9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIGEBLEDAA.tom@kednos.com>s  J That is hardly the same thing.  That's like saying the current replacement" for your house is a pile of lumber   > -----Original Message-----1 > From: Richard Brodie [mailto:R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk] + > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 1:05 AMv > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Coml? > Subject: Re: POSIX for OpenVMS - is there something similar ?o >  >  > 8 > "Rainer Lehrig" <lehrig@t-online.de> wrote in message ' > news:3C74A657.D6A56B5C@t-online.de...e > G > > I'm searching for a subsystem like "POSIX for OpenVMS", which wouldoA > > allow me to run programs which think of files in unix syntax.dB > > (DEVICE:[dir.subdir]file.ext  <-> /device/dir/subdir/file.ext) > H > The official replacement for POSIX is the C runtime. Get a recent copy: > of the C compiler and documentation set and try it. See:D > http://www.openvms.compaq.com/commercial/c/5763p002.htm#408_decshe > llfilespecifications >  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 00:11:47 -0500 ( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>2 Subject: Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS, Message-ID: <3C748193.3040703@tsoft-inc.com>   JF Mezei wrote:    > David Froble wrote:  > , >>The VAX to Alpha move was rather easy, andJ >>didn't require new applications, or re-implementation of applications in >>a new environment. >> > M > Unless you were in messaging where all your gateways could not be ported to L > Alpha because Message Router was not ported. Remember that Digital used toL > have an extensive portfolio of applications and Palmer used the VAX->ALPHAL > excuse as a means to abandon many of those applications. There is not muchJ > left to abandon in a ALPHA->IA64 migration, but remember that Compaq hasN > stated that products that are "mature" won't be ported with a few exceptions > (such as FMS).      B There was a time when DECUS filled some of such gaps.  If the new C Encompass really wanted to be meaningful to it's members, it would xF petition Compaq for the source code to all products not migrated from C VAX to Alpha, and all products that will not be migrated to IA-64. eG Members who so wished could then port any part of such a portfolio for iH private use, for use by any encompass member, and even selling the port E work to potential customers.  (I will defend the last possibility by zH saying that if someone with an enterprising nature perceives a need for H one of those products, and puts their labor into a port, they should be G compensated for their effort.)  ((I would NOT endorse Encompass making CE any money from the availability of the products, nor from the freely , donated work of members.))    M > When you look at decwindows applications such as DECwrite, DECcalc etc, how>H > many of those will be ported to IA64 ? With the "hope" that affordableI > workstation might be available on IA64, it won't do much of there is noe, > application left to make use of x-windows.    
 See above.    - >>The VMS port to IA-64 (and possibly others) J >>addresses such issues, and places VMS users is a very different position! >>than that enjoyed by MPE users.  >> > O > No, Not all all. Remember that MPE had originally been slated to be ported tonN > IA64, as was Tru64. So VMS *could* still be handled the same way as MPE. Not. > saying it will or won't, just that it could.    G Come on JF, give me a break.  Another read of my post will show that I rH used the words "so far".  I was stating today's reality, not tomorrow's D conjecture and/or crystal ball reading.  There are no guarantees on F anything in this world.  So far, (see,those words again), the port to H IA-64 is on, and the result should provide an OS which is easily ported  to other 64 bit platforms.    H >>performance of IA-64, they should still acknowledge that VMS users are+ >>being treated much better than MPE users.o >> > N > Are they ? What if the timing is different and HP has the same thing plannedO > for VMS once it gets its hands on it ?  If Carly is smart, she would at leasteL > wait for HP-UX to get revamped with the Tru64 stuff, at which point cancelK > further VMS development and invite customers to take advantage of all theK$ > clustering etc available on HP-UX.    E See above.  Hey, the merger is still in doubt.  Myself, I'm thinking  C that the Hewlett's and Packards might be successful.  Aren't there y' enough problems without imagining more?A    E >>In contrast, another post indicated that HP declined to sell MPE toAE >>another entity to allow support of MPE users, nor to opensource the-
 >>product. >> > M > If they sell MPE as a viable unit, the lose 100% of customers to that othercM > company. If they kill and bury MPE, they keep a certain percentage of thosecF > customers, initially a high percentage on maintence and then a lower8 > percentage who decide to stay with HP and go to HP-UX.    F My hope for HP, and any other company that shafts their customers, is   loss of 100% of those customers.    N > As far as irate customers defecting, one thing to take into consideration isO > what customers already have. If they have other HP/Digital products in house,r% > then it becomes harder to leave HP.o    I I don't see why.  If it's other hardware, keep it, but don't replace the C MPE stuff with HP gear.s    N > For instance, a customer pissed off at the death of Tru64 might want to dumpP > HP ASAP, but if they also have some VMS and perhaps HP-UX, what are they to doN > ? The cheapest solution is to stick with HP and migrate from Tru64 to HP-UX.    E You use IBM to run the applications previously on Tru64.  Their Unix tG isn't the worst in the world.  Power4 sure isn't a loser.  If you were -C using Alpha for it's performance, then HP sure isn't going to have i@ anything to offer.  What, look forward to IA-64?  Not too smart.  F Regardless, if customers want to be treated fairly, then they have to I draw the line at kissing the dick that was so recently up their back end.d     Dave     -- a4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com6 T-Soft, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 03:06:27 -0500A- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>m2 Subject: Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS, Message-ID: <3C74AA71.75431B1B@videotron.ca>   David Froble wrote:nI > used the words "so far".  I was stating today's reality, not tomorrow'sv) > conjecture and/or crystal ball reading.E  J Fair enough. However, prior to MPE's death announcement, you have to admitP that MPE was in the same stage as VMS is today. (to be ported to IA64 etc etc.).  J What I do not know is how much work had been done on migrating MPE to IA64  prior to the death announcement.  J Remember that the 450 integration staff are not allowed to talk about whatG will happen once Carly takes over what is left of Digital. So while the0K current Compaq policy to continue support of VMS and port it to IA64 may beeI somewhat credible there is no telling what HP really has in store for theyM products that Compaq inherited, except for Tru64 whose fate is known. We knowyM that HP intends to kill Compaq's consumer wintel business but keep its servernM business and distribution channels. But HP has been conspicuously quiet about-4 VMS. So we really cannot say what it intends to do.   G > anything in this world.  So far, (see,those words again), the port toi > IA-64 is on, e  H The problem is that Compaq's intentions have become irrelevant. HP is inM charge (unless the takeover is canned). And Carly has stated that the productrM roadmaps will be clearly defined as soon as the merger is approved. Hopefullyr9 they will provide a clear statement for VMS at that time.a  L There are too many options with regards to VMS to really know what HP reallyL intends to do. The fact that Compaq tried to kill VMS but decided against itN due to the knowledge that it would lose customers and much revenus leads me toC believe that HP would not want to radically kill VMS as it did MPE.s  L HP could accelerate the retirement of Alpha, at which point the port to IA64L would get higher priority and perhaps faster schedule. Or HP could decide toL keep VMS on Alpha, essentially announcing its end of life after EV79, with aG promise to port many of its features to either HP-UX or Windows to ease.< migrations over time. And there are plenty of other options.  I I do not know if MPE had anything of value or any "star" engineers as VMSeN does. HP seems to have simply shut down MPE without any residual value. In theG case of Alpha, Compaq was able to negotiate some unknown value from thehL killing of ALpha and transfer of IP, engineers and compilers folks to Intel.  G Now, one possibility is that HP might see greater value in donating VMStN engineers and IP to some partner such as Microsoft than in paying for the portT to IA64 etc. If that is its intentions, it may want to act sooner rather than later.  L We just don't know what HP really intends to do with VMS. But Carly has madeT it known that as soon as she takes control, she'll be acting decisevely and quickly.  F > See above.  Hey, the merger is still in doubt.  Myself, I'm thinkingD > that the Hewlett's and Packards might be successful.  Aren't there) > enough problems without imagining more?e  G Well, I frankly don't care. I have written off Compaq either way. TheirW8 intentions to focus on Wintel do not interest me at all.  G > My hope for HP, and any other company that shafts their customers, is " > loss of 100% of those customers.    J The problem is that accountants often do not have the same emotions as theD religious zealots that support VMS (or Apple for that matter). If HPJ integrates in HP-UX the portions of Tru64 that made customers choose Tru64M over Solaris, then there is a good chance that customers will have to swallowaG their emotions and choose the logical platform to migrate to since thatoI migration will be easiest and offer the least number of missing features.r  F > You use IBM to run the applications previously on Tru64.  Their UnixH > isn't the worst in the world.  Power4 sure isn't a loser.  If you wereD > using Alpha for it's performance, then HP sure isn't going to haveB > anything to offer.  What, look forward to IA-64?  Not too smart.  L But if you used Tru64 for clustering, then HP-US with Trucluster might still be superior to Solaris or AIX.    G > Regardless, if customers want to be treated fairly, then they have to-K > draw the line at kissing the dick that was so recently up their back end.i  N So far, Compaq has been better than Digital at knowing the pain threasholds ofL VMS customers. They have kept it just below the threshold, so while customerK aren't happy with the way Compaq is handling VMS, they aren't mad enough toeN leave in drives. I stronmgly suspect that HP will do the same should it choose to keep VMS for a while.   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 15:37:25 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>2 Subject: Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS- Message-ID: <87wux7uvyi.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   6 "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes:  1 > "VMS Fan" <VMSfan@hotmail.com> wrote in messageh9 > news:d0a53e6e.0202191843.53f77e91@posting.google.com...n  @ > > I've often seen the profitability of VMS presented here as aC > > reason why Compaq wouldn't possibly kill it.  Unfortunately, it-@ > > appears profitability wasn't enough to save the HP e3000 andE > > MPE/iX.  It's also interesting that HP apparently had a policy ofiC > > refusing to release any data as to the products' profitability.T  < > > From http://www.3000newswire.com/FN-OnExtra68-01Nov.html  D > Yep. My only rejoinder comes from a senior CPQ person who said "if; > we had to kill one of the OSes, we killed the right one."y  ; > It remains to be seen if the CPQ person has a single-shot:2 > bolt-action rifle or a double-barrelled shotgun!  # Was that a reference to T64 or MPE?u  F I've used T64 and HPUX... You don't want to go there, really.  HPUS isB the pits... Opps, Freud seems to have won out here. ;) But you areC going to go from IMO the least bad of the unixes, T64, to the worstT HPUX...t  F If he meant MPE, then there is a sort of logic to that. MPE has a rock= stable user base, and miniscule revinue. So it is financiallytB 'underperforming'. As they say in the new customer friendly jaron; "Live with it."h   -- .< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.s@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 09:42:00 +0000 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>.2 Subject: Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS8 Message-ID: <n1g97ukren4l9rdr9tj2cirqjp7f2nn59s@4ax.com>  F On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 20:13:15 -0500, David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote:    I >While some are upset of the handling of Alpha EV8, and the current poor uH >performance of IA-64, they should still acknowledge that VMS users are G >being treated much better than MPE users.  Regardless of the reasons, p  D Until the merger dust settles we have no way of knowing if VMS usersE are being treated better than MPE users. The Aberdeen Group have saidoE specifically that they believe getting rid of MPE now is a prelude toN the cancellation of VMS.    I >such size of the revenue stream, and possibly others, VMS users are, so  I >far, being given a relatively (with respect to MPE and others) painless = >path to the future. >-E >In contrast, another post indicated that HP declined to sell MPE to  E >another entity to allow support of MPE users, nor to opensource the AE >product.  HP is saying to their customers that they have to move to =J >another platform.  Since there is always one, I wonder which current MPE ' >customer will stick with HP?  Suckers!2 >: >Dave0   -- Alan   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 05:20:14 -0500h- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>22 Subject: Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS, Message-ID: <3C74C9C0.479EEF32@videotron.ca>   Alan Greig wrote: F > Until the merger dust settles we have no way of knowing if VMS users* > are being treated better than MPE users.  N What I find interesting is that Compaq would have announced the death of Tru64N so quickly, yet the future of VMS remains totally void of information from HP.  N Perhaps because of the direct overlap between 2 proprietary Unixes, HP felt itN needed to release that information right away since it was pretty obvious thatJ only one would survive. On the other hand, Compaq should have stated as itM does with VMS: until further notice, the port to IA64 is going as as planned.eN This way, it makes it clear that should the merger fail, Tru64 is still alive.  M Capellas may have made a very serious error in assuming that the merger wouldf go through unchallenged.    N At the time the HP board voted, it is correct to state that Carly knew that MrD Hewlett, while viting YES as a board member, would not vote YES as aM shareholder ? Or did that come out only after Capellas had already started toh/ burn bridges by announcing the death of Tru64 ?W   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 10:40:29 -00004 From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]>2 Subject: Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS6 Message-ID: <20020221104029.27688.qmail@gacracker.org>  A On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@mmaz.com> wrote:r   <snip>  F >Compaq is clueless to what the VMS community needs, in fact they are H >sending out goofy Education questionnaires trying to determine type of H >education support the VMS people have been screaming for, because that D >is what they seem to have interpreted as a lack of VMS Resources...  : VMS certainly needs education support. However, not of theJ revenue-generating sort that Compaq will be looking to promote. VMS shouldK be a noticable part of the university education programme if there is to benG a steady stream of graduates who look on it favourably. As far as I can I see, little or nothing is being done to get people exposure to VMS duringt college.     Doc. -- e6 The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.K ~ Phineas Taylor Barnum.                              http://vmsbox.cjb.net:   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:57:56 +0000 % From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> 2 Subject: Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS8 Message-ID: <c4o97u4l99b13fm2ms3cejncq5vlegogso@4ax.com>  , On Thu, 21 Feb 2002 05:20:14 -0500, JF Mezei% <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:    >aO >At the time the HP board voted, it is correct to state that Carly knew that MrdE >Hewlett, while viting YES as a board member, would not vote YES as a N >shareholder ? Or did that come out only after Capellas had already started to  D According to Walter Hewlett, Carly was well aware at the time of the original HP board vote.f  0 >burn bridges by announcing the death of Tru64 ?   -- Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 05:37:47 -0800( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)2 Subject: Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS< Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0202210537.9668487@posting.google.com>  a JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message news:<3C74AA71.75431B1B@videotron.ca>...p > David Froble wrote:nK > > used the words "so far".  I was stating today's reality, not tomorrow'su+ > > conjecture and/or crystal ball reading.  > L > Fair enough. However, prior to MPE's death announcement, you have to admitR > that MPE was in the same stage as VMS is today. (to be ported to IA64 etc etc.). > N > We just don't know what HP really intends to do with VMS. But Carly has madeV > it known that as soon as she takes control, she'll be acting decisevely and quickly. >   G the military and government will have a big say in this as vms is their H only secure os used throughout ... jstars to name another, and they willH not be moving to "no security" windoze or linux or unix anytime soon ...   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 09:57:28 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) 2 Subject: Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS3 Message-ID: <ths3A0j3uaPp@eisner.encompasserve.org>r  g In article <d7791aa1.0202210537.9668487@posting.google.com>, bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) writes:g > I > the military and government will have a big say in this as vms is theireJ > only secure os used throughout ... jstars to name another, and they willJ > not be moving to "no security" windoze or linux or unix anytime soon ...    > 	Actually... No Such Agency has a hardened Linux as a desktop.  3 http://slashdot.org/articles/00/12/22/0157229.shtmlc  , NSA Releases High Security Version Of Linux   G We had an extremely interesting submission from Ted T'so,, Linux kernelkL developer, who also has an obvious interest in security, given his work withO Kerberos[?]. He wrote in concerning the release by the NSA (Yes, that NSA) of a B high security version of Linux. I've included his comments below.   I tytso writes: "I recently attended a DARPA workshop which focused on high K security open source operating systems. It turns out that parts of the U.S.nL government are really interested this topic; having an operating system withO the necessary high-security features which they need, and for which source codeaL is available, would be a really good thing for them. Among other things, forK example, it would mean that they wouldn't have to live in terror about whataI might happen if Sun, IBM, SGI, et. al decided to pull the plug on TrustedhN Solaris, Trusted AIX, or Trusted IRIX. And they're serious enough that DARPA's& willing to throw money at the problem.  L While I was at this workshop, I met some folks from the NSA and they told me@ about a really neat project that they've been working on, calledM Security-enhanced Linux. One of the cool things about it is that it separates M enforcement and policy. So selinux can easily support many different securityeB policies, from the old (some would say outdated/silly) Multi-LevelL Secure/Bell-LaPadula model, to Domain-Type enforcement and Rule-Based AccessI Control models. So if you think that high-security features means the oldmO silly, Secret / Top Secret / CMW bullshit, and needing to make sure that Secret N windows don't get expose events from Top Secret windows, think again. A numberI of folks have found Domain Type Enforcement and Rule-Based Access Control J systems very useful for securing Web servers and other real world systems.  O The NSA folks just recently got permission to make their stuff available on thetM Web. It's just a proof of concept, and no doubt a lot of changes will need toeL made before people will accept integrating it into the kernel, but they haveM released a working system (both kernel and userspace patches --- RPM's aren't N quite ready yet) based on Linux 2.2 and RedHat 6.1. So it's definitely worth aN look, and in fact some folks with specialized needs might find it useful, even though it's a prototype.   				Robr   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Feb 2002 17:43:40 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)h2 Subject: Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS, Message-ID: <a53bkc$2o3j$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>  , In article <3C745CA4.74E03540@videotron.ca>,0  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: |>, |> When Digital was a one trick pony (VMS),   6 When was DEC ever a "one trick pony" in the OS world??  F The only architecture I know of that I think only had one OS availableG was MIPS and I think there were rumors of work on VMS as well as Ultrixe; having been done for it before it was ababndoned wholesale.n   bill   -- eJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:55:51 -0500e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>62 Subject: Re: Profitability and the survival of VMS, Message-ID: <3C7542B6.A2D73E7A@videotron.ca>   Bob Ceculski wrote: I > the military and government will have a big say in this as vms is their J > only secure os used throughout ... jstars to name another, and they willJ > not be moving to "no security" windoze or linux or unix anytime soon ...  I Did the military and government move when HP announced the death of MPE ?n  I HP's lawyers will have this thing all prepared according to the contractswI Compaq had signed with the military. The military will get the X years of  promised support on VMS.   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 08:20:58 -0800( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)F Subject: Proof that EV8 was fantastic ... and Capellas "gave" it away!= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0202210820.3c4ac5d0@posting.google.com>C  < shareholders at Q ought to be outraged as Capellas cost them: a ton of money ... Capellas padded his own pocket and also; helped out competitors by giving away EV8, which by readingy@ the following summary, shows it would have ruled the chip world!: link to full article also included ... read and be amazed!: look at the spec ests ... Shareholders should be outraged!+ How much did Sun pay Capellas to scrap EV8?b  I http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?section=columns&AID=RWT021802145442t  ' Multithreading: The Spider&#8217;s Bite,E The enormous potential of SMT is shown by the expectation that it can = approximately double the instruction throughput of an alreadyhF impressive monster like the EV8 at the cost of only about 6% extra dieC area over a single threaded version of the design. That is a biggervD speedup than can be typically achieved by duplicating the entire MPUF as done in a 2 way SMP system! The EV8 combines an incredibly powerfulD processor core, unequaled at exploiting either ILP and TLP, with the; EV7 scalability hardware (integrated router, interprocessor = communication links, and memory controllers). An aggressivelyoC out-of-order execution, 8 wide issue superscalar RISC core like thehE EV8 would have likely achieved leadership performance all on its own.rA But when its SMT capabilities are combined with existing, proven,VF auto-parallelizing compiler technology, even many FP intensive computeD tasks written as single threaded programs might see a further 30% to 50% speedup.  D It must come as no small relief to Compaq&#8217;s competitors in theD high end systems market, as well as Intel, that EV8 will never reach@ silicon, let alone commercial shipment. Had it been delivered inD anything approaching a timely manner it would have likely achieved aD performance domination over all other 64 bit competitors at least asC great as occurred at the introductions of the EV4, EV5, or EV6. TheuE potential of the EV8 design is shown in Table 2 in the context of thetC McKinley and EV7 as well as a 0.13 um, third generation IA64 devicet code named Madison.e  D                    McKinley        EV7          Madison          EV8  hC Introduction         2H02          2H02         2H03 est.      2H04  est.   D Technology        0.18 um Al    0.18 um Cu     0.13 um Cu    0.13 um SOI/Cu  .F Clock Speed        1.0 GHz       1.2 GHz      1.8 GHz est.     1.8 GHz  uD On-chip Cache     3.0 MB L3     1.75 MB L2     6.0 MB L3      3.0 MB L2  lC SPECint_base2k     800 est.      1050 est.      1250 est.      2000s est.   < SPECint_fp2k      1400 est.      1500 est.      2200 est.    3200/4500* est.   t" *Auto-parallelized, run with SMT.   F The EV8&#8217;s cancellation is also a major blow to the proponents of? SMT. Although the so-called hyper threading capabilities in thetD Pentium 4 comprise basically the same form of SMT as would have been= implemented in the EV8, the x86 chip&#8217;s frugal executionnF resources, inherent chip and system level bottlenecks, and support forA only two threads seem to limit instruction throughput increase torC about 20% in practice. There are reports that the UltraSPARC-V willr= incorporate SMT, but Sun has failed to demonstrate mastery of > out-of-order execution processor design, virtually a precursor? technology to SMT. That fact, as well as its worsening business E situation, suggests healthy scepticism about when, or even if, an SMTAE capable US-V might reach the market. A cynical observer might alreadySC be pondering which remaining MPU players Sun might approach to pawneE its US-V design team off on. To "compaqt" its workforce, so to speak.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 08:48:44 +0100 ' From: Brass Christof <welcome@spam.net>i$ Subject: Re: Proposal - Hobbyist FAQ( Message-ID: <3C74A65C.B7E01543@spam.net>   "David J. Dachtera" wrote: >  > Brass Christof wrote: 
 > > [snip]
 > > He wrote: J > > "a tutorial on how to use Forms (since it's on the hobbyist PAK list." > ; > ...and you expect a newbie to understand the distinction?-  ? There wasn't any distinction necessary until you threw in some  : pieces of information that made the situation complicated.  , What you did was anything else than helpful.   -- .6 moc dot slupofni at ssarb - please revert the sequence   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 19:05:04 +0010g% From: paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.au@$ Subject: Re: Proposal - Hobbyist FAQ5 Message-ID: <01KEJORTFA6A005GI4@tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au>   	 Christof:C   >"David J. Dachtera" wrote:. >> o >> Brass Christof wrote: >> > [snip]t >> > He wrote:K >> > "a tutorial on how to use Forms (since it's on the hobbyist PAK list."l >>  < >> ...and you expect a newbie to understand the distinction? >'@ >There wasn't any distinction necessary until you threw in some ; >pieces of information that made the situation complicated.r >Q- >What you did was anything else than helpful.h  O I've lost the original of this thread (I'm on INFO-VAX), but I felt that David  M was more than helpful.  "Forms" in my world means a multitude of things, but a mainly FMS.   M I felt that David covered the possibilities very adequately.  The originator UL was after all a proclaimed "newbie".  He could easily have meant any of the  options that David mentioned.o   Regards, Paddy   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 08:23:10 -0600t1 From: "Dave Gudewicz" <david.gudewicz@abbott.com>c( Subject: PW 4 server and 2000/XP clinets8 Message-ID: <a52vtk$ohq$1@fizban.fizban.pprd.abbott.com>  < Since this is probably a PW server issue, I'll post it here.  I Seems like Windows 2000/XP clients can map to drives on PW v4 servers butmC can't see any files.  Older client platforms work fine; W9x, NT....0  8 Anyone here know why?  And yes I know that PW v4 is old.   Dave...u   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 07:47:51 GMT-" From: "ohm62" <ohm62@coldmail.com> Subject: Re: Semaphoresl6 Message-ID: <HC1d8.4876$ss5.3578@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>  I >    Are these POSIX threads semaphores?  If so, they should be availableaI >    on VMS.  If not, can you convert thse code to use something from the. >    POSIX thread library? >r  , SVR4 semaphores != POSIX threads semaphores.  L With the former, one may  protect shared resources from concurrent access by multiple processes.d  A ASAIK, the PThread library on OpenVMS doesn't allow inter-processh= synchronization.  Only inter-thread, within a same process...r  E I went through the fun of emulating System V IPCs on OpenVMS: ftok(),cD semget(), semop(), semctl(), shmget(), shmctl(), msgget(), msgctl(),D msgsnd(), msgrcv(), ...  This is really interesting stuff to do, butG honestly, I'd really prefer it to be provided by the O/S...  PreservingsH performance and keeping the coherence of shared data structures used forJ their control is a challenge, when client processes may die abruptly while performing listed operations.n  L Note that in a single operation, semop() may manipulate a set of semaphores,F instead of a single one, which has no equivalent in the OpenVMS systemA services.  Semaphores may be counted or switch-like.   Porting anDH application that uses semop() on a single semaphore at a time, without aH count might be easier to do by replacing those directly with the OpenVMSF lock manager $ENQW, $DEQ, ...  Single, counted semaphores may still beG implemented somewhat easily using OpenVMS lock value block to store the G count in a naturally shared data area of reasonably fast access and thePA coherence of which is easily maintained.   However, if the portednJ application is using semaphore sets extensively, incrementing/decrementingJ multiple semaphores at a time, fetching and using statistics via semctl(),I and performance is not a major issue, then a System V IPC emulation layera might be desirable...      -- Ol.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 09:15:45 +0000t( From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1>, Subject: Serving MP3 files via OSU webserver) Message-ID: <3C74BAC1.4E653768@127.0.0.1>r  @ I'm having an interesting problem serving MP3 files from the OSU/ webserver (VAX/VMS 7.2-1, OSU 3.7, TCPIP 5.1A.)r  E I'm creating an MP3 on a wintel platform, then FTPing this to the VMSs
 box (binary).   ( FTPing it back to the wintel works fine.  F However if I include a standard formed link in a webpage, clicking theG link fills the browser window with gibberish (Netscape/IE). Right clicktG to SAVE AS, then playing the file on a (various) wintel systems results0G in a file that 'jitters' when played using Winamp or media player. I'veuA come to the conclusion that the [OSU] webserver is corrupting the0 transfer of8	 the file.r  3 WAV format works absolutely fine via the webserver.<  > Is there something I've missed? Have others seen this problem?  F I've not tried Apache yet (we do have an Alpha in the cluster) but I'dC be interested in any related comments or experiences. Thanking you.S   --  ( Regards, Nic Clews CSC Computer Sciences nclews at csc dot come   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 05:07:02 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>g0 Subject: Re: Serving MP3 files via OSU webserver, Message-ID: <3C74C6A9.4506F6CF@videotron.ca>   Nic Clews wrote: > B > I'm having an interesting problem serving MP3 files from the OSU1 > webserver (VAX/VMS 7.2-1, OSU 3.7, TCPIP 5.1A.)n  C Make sure that the OSU configuration has a definition for mp3 files   0 in www_system:http_suffixes.conf (default file):   something line r .NEXT .mp3 audio/mp3 BINARY 1.0   D (not sure about "audio/mp3", you can lookup the official mime type).G If by default, it is served as a text file because of its unknown, thatu* explains the behavious you have described.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:31:50 +00001( From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1>0 Subject: Re: Serving MP3 files via OSU webserver) Message-ID: <3C74DAA6.536A1491@127.0.0.1>t   JF Mezei wrote:hE > Make sure that the OSU configuration has a definition for mp3 filesS > 2 > in www_system:http_suffixes.conf (default file): > something line! > .NEXT .mp3 audio/mp3 BINARY 1.0  > F > (not sure about "audio/mp3", you can lookup the official mime type).  F Exactly! Thank you, (and also to Ted Allwood for the email also sayingD similar). I restarted the server (did I need to do that?) and it now& works fine. This was the line I added:    .NEXT .mp3 audio/mpeg BINARY 1.0   --  ( Regards, Nic Clews CSC Computer Sciences nclews at csc dot comF   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Feb 2002 10:10:38 GMT3 From: gartmann@immunbio.mpg.de (Christoph Gartmann) 0 Subject: Re: Serving MP3 files via OSU webserver0 Message-ID: <a52h2u$63p$1@n.ruf.uni-freiburg.de>  T In article <3C74BAC1.4E653768@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> writes:A >I'm having an interesting problem serving MP3 files from the OSU 0 >webserver (VAX/VMS 7.2-1, OSU 3.7, TCPIP 5.1A.) > F >I'm creating an MP3 on a wintel platform, then FTPing this to the VMS >box (binary). >s) >FTPing it back to the wintel works fine.l >nG >However if I include a standard formed link in a webpage, clicking the H >link fills the browser window with gibberish (Netscape/IE). Right clickH >to SAVE AS, then playing the file on a (various) wintel systems resultsH >in a file that 'jitters' when played using Winamp or media player. I'veB >come to the conclusion that the [OSU] webserver is corrupting the >transfer of
 >the file. >r4 >WAV format works absolutely fine via the webserver. >r? >Is there something I've missed? Have others seen this problem?e  J The OSU server treats this file a text or something similar and tells thisM to the browser. The broswer then assumes that it is able to display the data.oI And if you tell the browser to save the file it will perform some sort ofcK carriage-return & line-feed conversion so that the resulting "text" is reale% text on the browsers system platform.   O What you need to do is to edit HTTP_SUFFIXES.CONF and add a line for .MP3, e.g.y!   .NEXT .mp3 video/mp3 BINARY 1.0rJ Important is the "binary" tag to get the file properly transferred. If youJ choose a better string than "video/mp3" your browser might even be capableD of starting the proper application to actually display the MP3-file.   Regards,    Christoph Gartmanni  H -- --------------------------------------------------------------------+H | Max-Planck-Institut fuer      Phone   : +49-761-5108-464   Fax: -452 |H | Immunbiologie                                                        |H | Postfach 1169                 Internet: gartmann@immunbio.mpg.de     |H | D-79011  Freiburg, FRG                                               |H +--------- http://www.immunbio.mpg.de/home/english/menue.html ---------+   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:55:26 -0500,- From: "Richard D. Piccard" <piccard@ohio.edu>r0 Subject: Re: Serving MP3 files via OSU webserver( Message-ID: <3C752680.6AD4E8FD@ohio.edu>  A Perhaps you have never told the OSU Web server what MIME type and ) sub-type to claim when it sends the file?e  ) $ search www_root:[system]*.conf.0 ".mp3"e   ******************************& WWW_ROOT:[SYSTEM]HTTP_SUFFIXES.CONF;16  " .NEXT .mp3 audio/x-mpeg BINARY 1.0     								RDPs     Nic Clews wrote: > B > I'm having an interesting problem serving MP3 files from the OSU1 > webserver (VAX/VMS 7.2-1, OSU 3.7, TCPIP 5.1A.)l > G > I'm creating an MP3 on a wintel platform, then FTPing this to the VMS  > box (binary).e > * > FTPing it back to the wintel works fine. > H > However if I include a standard formed link in a webpage, clicking theI > link fills the browser window with gibberish (Netscape/IE). Right clicksI > to SAVE AS, then playing the file on a (various) wintel systems results I > in a file that 'jitters' when played using Winamp or media player. I'veSC > come to the conclusion that the [OSU] webserver is corrupting the 
 > transfer of  > the file.o > 5 > WAV format works absolutely fine via the webserver.e > @ > Is there something I've missed? Have others seen this problem? > H > I've not tried Apache yet (we do have an Alpha in the cluster) but I'dE > be interested in any related comments or experiences. Thanking you.i >  > --* > Regards, Nic Clews CSC Computer Sciences > nclews at csc dot com    --  B ==================================================================B Dick Piccard                           Academic Technology ManagerB piccard@ohio.edu                                 Computer ServicesB http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~piccard/                Ohio University   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 09:57:48 -0000c. From: "Ken Hagan" <K.Hagan@thermoteknix.co.uk>U Subject: Re: Singular they was Re: Sv: Younger recruits versus experienced veterans (iB Message-ID: <1014285398.11194.0.nnrp-12.3e31ffea@news.demon.co.uk>  6 "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu> wrote... >eE > Maybe i shouldn't have slept through all those english classes, but D > I read the above as "everyone" being plural, not singular and THEYB > as agreeing with it.  Surely 'every" implies more than just one. >f > bill. > (Who doesn't claim to be an english expert.)   Everyone is singular.d Everyone are not plural.  D But, yes, you've hit on the psychological reason why so many EnglishB speakers don't mind getting it "wrong", and since we (whoever "we"D might be) don't have an Academie, the nearest we'll get to "correct" English is what people use.o  F There are many English speakers who have "resolved" the s/h/it problemF by simply declaring that "they" is an acceptable third person singularE pronoun, and takes the plural form of its verb even when used in thatn context.  D For such people, it is the use of "he" in this situation which jars,: since it is (to their ears) clearly exclusively masculine.  D Similarly, you are either singular or plural, but thou art singular.   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 08:26:06 -0800. From: SPAMSINK2001@YAHOO.COM (Alan E. Feldman)U Subject: Re: Singular they was Re: Sv: Younger recruits versus experienced veterans (s= Message-ID: <343f30ae.0202210826.6e091ceb@posting.google.com>2  x "Ken Hagan" <K.Hagan@thermoteknix.co.uk> wrote in message news:<1014285398.11194.0.nnrp-12.3e31ffea@news.demon.co.uk>...8 > "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu> wrote... > > G > > Maybe i shouldn't have slept through all those english classes, but F > > I read the above as "everyone" being plural, not singular and THEYD > > as agreeing with it.  Surely 'every" implies more than just one. > >  > > bill0 > > (Who doesn't claim to be an english expert.) >  > Everyone is singular.t > Everyone are not plural. > F > But, yes, you've hit on the psychological reason why so many EnglishD > speakers don't mind getting it "wrong", and since we (whoever "we"F > might be) don't have an Academie, the nearest we'll get to "correct" > English is what people use.t > H > There are many English speakers who have "resolved" the s/h/it problemH > by simply declaring that "they" is an acceptable third person singularG > pronoun, and takes the plural form of its verb even when used in thats
 > context. > F > For such people, it is the use of "he" in this situation which jars,< > since it is (to their ears) clearly exclusively masculine. > F > Similarly, you are either singular or plural, but thou art singular.   Come on, would you say  $     Everyone took his coat with him.      or would you say  )     Everyone took their coats with them.    D See the Usage Note for everyone in the American Heritage Dictionary.   Disclaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldman  afeldman ;a;a;a;a gfigroup.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 08:49:13 -0800a# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>rU Subject: RE: Singular they was Re: Sv: Younger recruits versus experienced veterans (,9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIAECCEDAA.tom@kednos.com>n   > -----Original Message-----7 > From: Alan E. Feldman [mailto:SPAMSINK2001@YAHOO.COM]n+ > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 8:26 AMs > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comt@ > Subject: Re: Singular they was Re: Sv: Younger recruits versus > experienced veterans ( >e >n; > "Ken Hagan" <K.Hagan@thermoteknix.co.uk> wrote in messagen@ > news:<1014285398.11194.0.nnrp-12.3e31ffea@news.demon.co.uk>...: > > "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu> wrote... > > > I > > > Maybe i shouldn't have slept through all those english classes, butyH > > > I read the above as "everyone" being plural, not singular and THEYF > > > as agreeing with it.  Surely 'every" implies more than just one. > > >i
 > > > bill2 > > > (Who doesn't claim to be an english expert.) > >l > > Everyone is singular.t > > Everyone are not plural. > > H > > But, yes, you've hit on the psychological reason why so many EnglishF > > speakers don't mind getting it "wrong", and since we (whoever "we"H > > might be) don't have an Academie, the nearest we'll get to "correct" > > English is what people use.n > >aJ > > There are many English speakers who have "resolved" the s/h/it problemJ > > by simply declaring that "they" is an acceptable third person singularI > > pronoun, and takes the plural form of its verb even when used in thaty > > context. > >oH > > For such people, it is the use of "he" in this situation which jars,> > > since it is (to their ears) clearly exclusively masculine. > >fH > > Similarly, you are either singular or plural, but thou art singular.  K Of course, when thou prevailed you was the plural form, but then the dativebL forms of these pronouns, thee and ye have also disappeared.  When addressingL someone in the polite form a number of languages use the third person plural> "Have they eaten?"  Swedish uses 2nd person plural (as French)3 and sometimes third person singular "Has he eaten?"k  F But in italian everyone is She when addressed in the polite form, Lei!L But the discussion was about an acceptable form of the third person singuar.C which in germanic languages (to which english belongs) can be "one"  >v > Come on, would you say > & >     Everyone took his coat with him. >w > or would you say > * >     Everyone took their coats with them. > F > See the Usage Note for everyone in the American Heritage Dictionary. >- > Disclaimer: JMHO > Alan E. Feldmana  > afeldman ;a;a;a;a gfigroup.com >o   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 18:22:23 GMTy' From: CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> Y Subject: Re: Singular they was Re: Sv: Younger recruits versus experienced veterans ( veth) Message-ID: <3C753655.DBF32618@yahoo.com>.   "Alan E. Feldman" wrote: >  ... snip ... >  > Come on, would you say > & >     Everyone took his coat with him. >  > or would you say > * >     Everyone took their coats with them.  = Except I would say "Everybody took his coat with him" for theu> first example.  The second sounds fine to me.  Don't ask me to justify it.a   --  @ Chuck F (cbfalconer@yahoo.com) (cbfalconer@XXXXworldnet.att.net);    Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.a=    (Remove "XXXX" from reply address. yahoo works unmodified)i0    mailto:uce@ftc.gov  (for spambots to harvest)   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 08:53:52 -0800. From: brad.madison@mail.tds.net (Brad Spencer) Subject: Re: SMTP Spam Filter.= Message-ID: <e8ace99d.0202210853.1937d672@posting.google.com>.  Z "Barry Treahy, Jr." <Treahy@mmaz.com> wrote in message news:<3C692F4E.3090909@mmaz.com>... > Michael Austin wrote:n > J > >>The orbs.org site closed up shop last year, got into legal trouble andI > >>decided to close instead of trying to stay in operation under tighter L > >>rules.  There are three sites out there trying to serve the same purposeJ > >>as ORBS, don't happen to have their URL's though.  I have not seen oneA > >>of their test messages in the spam trap here recently though.  > >> > >>Joe Heimann' > >> > >>heimann@ecs.umass.edua > >> > > K > >Thanks for the heads up.  I guess I will remove that section of code.  I.J > >will still use an indexed file and track my own spammers list.  I wouldJ > >like to find some sort of DNS-lookup site that is tracking some of thisG > >garbage.  but it is like trying to stop the Mississippi River with aS  > >bucket that is full of holes. > >uH > orbs.org may be gone, but orbz.org is still around as are many others ! > which do work to some extent...a >     9 For somewhat comprehensive spam-fighting information see:i) http://www.spamfaq.net/spamfighting.shtmlu  E Alan Brown (final operator of ORBS) apparently reads and occasionallyd# posts to news.admin.net-abuse.emaile  B (There's a short section in the FAQ about relay spam honeypots.  IF contributed that.  For two years I've run a VMS relay spam honeypot onF a [laugh if you wish] Vaxstation 4000/90.)  The relay spam honeypot isC a low-volume email server.  It is possible to simply and accurately,1 separate relay spam from other email on a server.   F You can do many things which bring some measure of harm to the spammerE if you run a relay spam honeypot (a relay spam honeypot in Moscow hasrF trapped ~ 1.7 million spam messages recently, where 1 message = 1 spamF recipient.  Most of the spam was 48-recipient, so the actual number of files is about 1.7 million/48.)s  D  This page (<http://www.corpit.ru/cgi-bin/h0n5yp0t>) was a real-timeD log of incoming spam (date, source IP, size, number of recipients.) A Now it shows a summary of the captured spam.  The Moscow operatoryD (Michael Tokarev) got tired of dealing with the spam or the honeypotA might still be in operation.  The honeypot was an old 486 runningeF Linux.  It accepted port 25 traffic on several different IP addresses.  F (The discrepancy between the 1.7 million figure and the 1210508 figureF on the web page arises because the web page was for only a single spam/ run.  The web page was created during the run.)g  D Most of the dialup addresses listed are UU.net.  UU.net was referredF to the same web page: they could watch a real-time listing of the spamD as it was trapped in Moscow.  The IP addresses almost certainly wereC spoofed: the spam was sent by a high-speed-linked system elsewhere,sF with the ACKs going to the dialup.  UU.net blocks outgoing port 25 (or
 so its said.)B   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 08:41:20 -0500i* From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>@ Subject: RE: Strange status value - when can I expect to get it?- Message-ID: <0033000053853417000002L072*@MHS>   @ =0AAnother example of d|i|g|i|t|a|l/Compaq humor that I recently discovered:m  B While looking through the 7.3 Alpha Partitioning and Galaxy Guide,? (AA-REZQC-TE, Sept 2001) I came across the following Galaxy SDAt command in section 2.14.3.2:  
 SHOW GLOCK  B SHOW GLOCK displays Galaxy lock structures.  Default is display of base GLOCK structures.  < (Explanatory note: Glock GmbH is an Austrian manufacturer of.  high-quality, polymer-frame semiauto pistols)   WWWebb   -----Original Message-----/ From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET + Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 11:54 PMaB To: Webb, William W Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET@ Subject: RE: Strange status value - when can I expect to get it?     Phillip Helbig wrote:o >oH > > SS$_ is the symbolic rendition of the System facility code that VMS=  B > > displays as %SYSTEM-.  It has nothing to do with Secure Shell. >g8 > %USER-E-TYPETOFAST, user typed message before thinking >v > :-(n >>E > Seeing SS in connection with FISH (which is a freeware secure-shellP0 > client for VMS) made me think of secure shell.  H which *was*. This tools has been discontinued and is being replaced wit= h    http://www.free.lp.se/bamse/   which will do SSH v2.l     D.=    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 10:49:50 -0500d- From: "Peter Weaver" <peter.weaver@stelco.ca>.@ Subject: Re: Strange status value - when can I expect to get it?2 Message-ID: <GG8d8.17407$X2.197628@nnrp1.uunet.ca>  ? "Hoff Hoffman" <hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam> wrote in message5' news:GqYc8.6$fL6.31@news.cpqcorp.net...2 >...F >   I'm not in a position to, um, pre-emptively admit the existence of+ >   any (other) easter eggs within OpenVMS.  >...  G I don't know if this is an Easter Egg or something real, but I stumbledwC across this a few months back and I started wondering who Katie is.X  * $ write sys$output "''f$mess(%X13f30074)'"+ %KATIE-F-DEVNOTMBX, device is not a mailboxl   --E AOL CD Use #3415; As a handy prop when trying to explain the sport ofs% Curling to your Mother and your Wife.v   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 10:09:51 -0600 From: briggs@encompasserve.org@ Subject: Re: Strange status value - when can I expect to get it?3 Message-ID: <wD8Taw17F6M1@eisner.encompasserve.org>-  b In article <GG8d8.17407$X2.197628@nnrp1.uunet.ca>, "Peter Weaver" <peter.weaver@stelco.ca> writes:A > "Hoff Hoffman" <hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam> wrote in messageu) > news:GqYc8.6$fL6.31@news.cpqcorp.net...4 >>...@G >>   I'm not in a position to, um, pre-emptively admit the existence oft, >>   any (other) easter eggs within OpenVMS. >>...b > I > I don't know if this is an Easter Egg or something real, but I stumbledtE > across this a few months back and I started wondering who Katie is.t > , > $ write sys$output "''f$mess(%X13f30074)'"- > %KATIE-F-DEVNOTMBX, device is not a mailboxc  E Well, bit 15 (STS$V_FAC_SP) is clear.  So it's not a message specific.B to KATIE.  And bit 27 (STS$V_CUST_DEF) is clear.  So it's a Compaq? facility number.  And bit 28 (STS$V_INHIB_MSG) is clear so thisiI particular error code was presumably returned by a utility that displayedr" its own termination error message.  F The Katie facility is %x3f3 (Bits 16-27 -- STS$V_FAC_NO, STS$S_FAC_NO)  = $ HELP /MESSAGE /FACILITY=? doesn't list it.  It is buried in 1 SYS$MESSAGE:SYSMSG.EXE right between TPU and BUS.    	John Briggs   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 14:06:15 GMTa4 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net>2 Subject: Re: Survey: Most HP workers oppose merger9 Message-ID: <r97d8.6935$ro5.2991114@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>e  > "Michael Austin" <maustin@firstdbasource.com> wrote in message, news:3C745F1A.9E2B13D1@firstdbasource.com... > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:d > >3B > > "Michael Austin" <maustin@firstdbasource.com> wrote in message0 > > news:3C745685.41FCF786@firstdbasource.com...< > > > Unfortunately, what the employees think is irrelevant. > >pA > > Unless, of course, they have shares of stock they can vote...r >oA > Then the question is: "What percentage of stock is owned by the-@ > employees who are willing to vote,  and is it enough to make a > difference?"  J Indeed it is. I have a hunch that institutional investors control the vast majority of the stock!   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Feb 2002 10:25 CST9' From: carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins) 2 Subject: Re: Survey: Most HP workers oppose merger- Message-ID: <21FEB200210250069@gerg.tamu.edu>   8 "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@mediaone.net> writes...? }"Michael Austin" <maustin@firstdbasource.com> wrote in messageu- }news:3C745F1A.9E2B13D1@firstdbasource.com...  }> "Terry C. Shannon" wrote: }> >C }> > "Michael Austin" <maustin@firstdbasource.com> wrote in message 1 }> > news:3C745685.41FCF786@firstdbasource.com... = }> > > Unfortunately, what the employees think is irrelevant.* }> >B }> > Unless, of course, they have shares of stock they can vote... }>B }> Then the question is: "What percentage of stock is owned by theA }> employees who are willing to vote,  and is it enough to make ae }> difference?"  } K }Indeed it is. I have a hunch that institutional investors control the vastn }majority of the stock!   7 Majority, yes. Vast majority? Depends on whether or not . you consider 57% to be in the "vast" category.   --- Carl   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Feb 2002 05:32 CST(' From: carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins) G Subject: Re: Sv: Younger recruits versus experienced veterans ( was The - Message-ID: <21FEB200205321962@gerg.tamu.edu>a  1 koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes...UF }   Nobel prohibitted any mathematics prizes (his wife ran off with a  }   mathematician).   8 This is an interesting point except for one small thing:   Nobel was never married.   --- Carl   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:02:48 +0300 4 From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" <Laishev@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU>/ Subject: Re: SYSPRV & $GETUAI - Dumb question ?C0 Message-ID: <3C74C5C8.70611F44@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU>   Hello Richard,; 	thanks for the great example. At the time a fighting with:PI -SYSTEM-F-NOSHRIMG, privileged shareable image cannot have outbound callse   Richard Maher wrote: >  > Hi,C > J > I entered this note on the 11th January. If you don't accept attachmentsM > then you can do a search of Google for "maher" around that time as there iscL > also a text version somewhere.  If you'd like to use this software or need0 > some consultancy then feel free to contact me. > N > Unfortunately Stephen Hoffman says the $getuai version is UNsafe :-( If onlyD > we had Dustin then we could start on Marathon Man II. Put him in aK > dentists's chair, crack open a tooth and ask "Why isn't it bloody safe?".a > K > The attached are DCL command files containing everything you need for two'I > UWSS examples that access the UAF for users without privs. One uses RMSa% > directly and the other uses $getuail >  > Regards Richard Maher. > F > PS. Sorry for the inevitable mime that attachments seem to generate. 	No problemo. Thanks!n   -- r Cheers, F +OpenVMS [Sys|Net] HardWorker .......................................+E  Russia,Delta Telecom Inc,                    Cel:  +7 (901) 971-3222gE  191119,St.Petersburg,Transportny per. 3                     116-3222nF +http://starlet.deltatel.ru ................. SysMan rides HailStorm +   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Feb 2002 06:03 CST ' From: carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins)  Subject: Re: System problemi- Message-ID: <21FEB200206031351@gerg.tamu.edu>a  8 karcher@thuria.waisman.wisc.edu (Carl Karcher) writes...E }In a previous article, "Ferry Bolhar" <bol@adv.magwien.gv.at> wrote:2K }->IIRC, the maximum size of a single page file is 1048575 (hex %x000FFFFF)R
 }->blocks. } E }Since my pagefile was over 2 million blocks I said "huh" and checkedD
 }this out: } E }The 1048575 block limit is for Vax and Alpha VMS V1.5. For Alpha VMSi= }V6.1 and later it's 1048575 * 16 or 1677200 blocks since thef! }page size on Alpha is 16 blocks.u }--nH }-- Carl Karcher, Waisman Computing Services, Waisman Center, UW-Madison3 }--                      karcher@waisman.wisc.edu     A I can't verify the figure, but you made a transcription error and C dropped a "7" out of the resulting number: 1048575 * 16 = 16777200.   ' Which would allow 8GB instead of 512MB.    --- Carl   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 10:08:26 -0800( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)2 Subject: The fallout from Capellas' Corruption ...= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0202211008.4008f60d@posting.google.com>   4 This is the result of the corruption by Capellas and5 Palmer and others at Compaq/Dec through the years ...i this will be their legacy ...   I http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT070101205659&PageNum=6p  ) Building A Better Mousetrap is Not EnoughaE If you observe rapidly changing fields of endeavor, like the computerp@ and electronics industries, over time you eventually come to theF paradoxical conclusion that superior technology often loses out to its@ inferiors. The 68000 lost out to the 8086. Beta lost out to VHS.E Multics lost out to lesser operating systems. And now Alpha loses outuD to IA64. The best explanation why this often happens is that backersE of inferior technology recognize its deficiency and simply try harderr: to sell their product. They strenuously try to make up forE shortcomings through non-technical means that often prove decisive ifa? the gap isn&#8217;t too large. These means include high poweredyE marketing, skillful exploitation of political and regulatory factors,DF and getting to market first to take advantage of the so-called networkB effect. Conversely, superior technologies are often created within@ organizations dominated by an engineering culture. Techies oftenB expect everyone to think like techies and falsely assume customersD will readily appreciate the mathematical beauty or abstract elegance@ of a superior technology, and will buy it for its own sake. As aB result they seriously undervalue the need to actively market theirE superior technology. A good example of this principle is the Motorolar9 68000&#8217;s failure to dominate the 8086 in the face ofe= Intel&#8217;s "operation crush" in the late 1970&#8217;s [6].r  E The question of Alpha&#8217;s marketing viability is a sore point for C many Alpha users and observers of the technical scene. Although thevD marketing ineptitude of the late great Digital Equipment CorporationC is still legendary among veteran computer users, the passing of theaC Alpha to Compaq was supposed to change all that. Compaq became veryi= successful by selling other people&#8217;s technology. But ifc@ anything, Alpha marketing got worse, possibly because of rivalryF between the newcomer and existing x86 product divisions which may haveF felt threatened or jealous. Many technical and academic computer usersF report eerily similar anecdotes of expending great effort to obtain anF Alpha evaluation unit or even purchase multiple systems from Compaq orD its distributors only to give up in exasperation. I had one of thoseE experiences myself several years ago. This contrasts sharply with theaA generally swift reaction that the slightest hint of interest willo? invoke from a well-oiled selling machine like Sun Microsystems.v  F Alpha&#8217;s economic viability simply comes down to market share andC margin. The total market for high-end 64-bit MPUs is perhaps on the B order of a million parts per year, and these drive system sales of@ over $40 billion per year. At best, Alpha had a 10 to 15% marketE share. So it would be at a serious disadvantage in economies of scaleeA when MIPS, PA-RISC, and even Xeon to some extent, are replaced by < IA64, and commoditization of 64-bit hardware reduces marginsD throughout the industry. There is little doubt that Alpha, generallyE and widely regarded as the best architecture and processor technology D in existence, could have achieved much higher sales and market shareD over its lifetime if competently marketed and supported by a stable,E forward looking corporation. Compaq was likely quite truthful when it F asserted that it couldn&#8217;t keep Alpha going as a viable business.D Samsung and API Networks can&#8217;t escape their share of the blameD either, as they seemed far more interested in price gouging existingB customers than adding value or expanding the overall market. It isD rumored that at various times in its short life Alpha technology was; offered to Intel, Apple, and Sun, and was rejected due to acB combination of valid business concerns and not invented here (NIH)E syndrome. It is interesting to hypothesis what might have happened if)$ events had taken a different course.   Summary and ConclusionF It is sad to see a superior technology fall victim to the shortcomingsF of its owner rather than any fault of its own. This is made worse when? the inferior technology that succeeds it does so because of the2C business acumen and economic clout of its owner rather than throughSF merit. This is now happening for 64-bit computing like it did 15 yearsF ago in the 32-bit world. The interests of high end computer buyers andA users everywhere are hurt in some small measure by Compaq&#8217;sh@ announcement, even those who have never even seen an Alpha basedB system, let alone bought and used one, because of the accompanying7 reduction of choice and competition in the marketplace.r  = Intel&#8217;s Borg-like assimilation of Alpha technology is a A significant development in the high-end 64-bit microprocessor ands@ system world, even though the full effect won&#8217;t be felt byD competitors for years to come. Perhaps resistance is futile over theD long run, but no one should expect either IBM or Sun Microsystems toF submit without a long and bruising fight. Short of a revolutionary newC development in computing, IA64 may be the last clean sheet of paperrC ISA created for non-embedded applications for an indefinite period. F The example set by the x86 suggests the 64-bit world will have to live) with some mistakes for a long, long time.h   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 02:06:51 GMTi) From: James Norris <jnorris@metronet.com>q% Subject: Re: UAF settings for Backup?(, Message-ID: <3C7455F2.3029479D@metronet.com>   Rick Dyson wrote:o   >. > $ MCR SYSGEN > SYSGEN>  USE ACTIVEo > SYSGEN>  SHOW WSMAXbR > Parameter Name           Current    Default     Min.      Max.     Unit  DynamicR > --------------           -------    -------    -------   -------   ----  -------L > WSMAX                     1091584       4096      1024    8388608 PageletsI >  internal value             68224        256        64     524288 Pagesw >hR > What is the "internal value" and should I use 1,091,584 or 68,224 for the Backup+ > account's UAF quotas of WSQUOTA=WSEXTENT?   T 1091384 pagelets are the same amount of memory as 68224 pages.  The "internal value"% is what the page tables actually use.f  ; Set WSEXTENT to the same value as WSMAX (1091584 pagelets).o   Jim/   ------------------------------   Date: 21 FEB 2002 13:58:09 GMT2 From: karcher@kort.waisman.wisc.edu (Carl Karcher)% Subject: Re: UAF settings for Backup?c4 Message-ID: <21FEB02.13580988@kort.waisman.wisc.edu>  ? In a previous article, Rick Dyson <Rick-Dyson@UIowa.EDU> wrote:e  R ->--------------           -------    -------    -------   -------   ----  -------O ->WSMAX                     1091584       4096      1024    8388608 Pagelets    O -> internal value             68224        256        64     524288 Pages      u -> hR ->What is the "internal value" and should I use 1,091,584 or 68,224 for the Backup+ ->account's UAF quotas of WSQUOTA=WSEXTENT?   C The internal value reflects the page size of Alpha being 8192 byteseB instead of 512 like on Vaxen. So on alphas: pagelets / 16 = pages.  G I'd be careful about setting the WSquota to 1091584 though. If you have D a sufficient channelcnt and fillm, backup will open lots and lots ofF files (which is the idea) but when there are long ACL's on those filesA (e.g. in Pathworks share) you can exhaust PAGEDYN amazingly fast.s  G Before jacking up the backup quotas that far I'd recommend you do it in0H steps and keep and eye on Pagedyn (sho mem/pool/ful) while the backup isH running. If you don't have ACL's on the files then this probably doesn't matter.x   --G -- Carl Karcher, Waisman Computing Services, Waisman Center, UW-Madisonm2 --                      karcher@waisman.wisc.edu     ------------------------------    Date: 21 Feb 2002 07:22:56 -0800% From: mb301@hotmail.com (Mark Bowman)G% Subject: Re: UAF settings for Backup?g= Message-ID: <1d08b916.0202210722.3f1e7588@posting.google.com>i  X Rick Dyson <Rick-Dyson@UIowa.EDU> wrote in message news:<3C7420E7.408794A5@UIowa.EDU>...N > In the OpenVMS System Manager's Manual for suggested settings for an accountL > running Backup, it suggests that the UAF quotas be assigned like WSQUOTA =
 > WSEXTENTP > which both should be set to the value of the SYSGEN WSMAX parameter value.  In > my case, I get:i > $ > $ MCR SYSMAN Parameters Show WSMAXR > Parameter Name            Current    Default    Minimum    Maximum Unit  DynamicR > --------------            -------    -------    -------    ------- ----  -------R > WSMAX                     1091584       4096       1024    8388608 Pagelets      > , > HOWEVER, if I look from SYSGEN I get this: >  > $ MCR SYSGEN > SYSGEN>  USE ACTIVEd > SYSGEN>  SHOW WSMAX R > Parameter Name           Current    Default     Min.      Max.     Unit  DynamicR > --------------           -------    -------    -------   -------   ----  -------O > WSMAX                     1091584       4096      1024    8388608 Pagelets   oO >  internal value             68224        256        64     524288 Pages      s > R > What is the "internal value" and should I use 1,091,584 or 68,224 for the Backup+ > account's UAF quotas of WSQUOTA=WSEXTENT?e >  > Thanks for the help! > Rick  P For some background reading on getting backups to run faster try this good link.  N http://www.compaq.com/support/asktima/operating_systems/VAX-DISP-APR-90-1.html@ http://www.openvms.compaq.com:8000/73final/6017/6017pro_045.html  1 These are the quotas we use on our Alpha cluster.o  9 Maxjobs:         0  Fillm:     10000  Bytlm:       600000-9 Maxacctjobs:     0  Shrfillm:      0  Pbytlm:           0m9 Maxdetach:       0  BIOlm:       300  JTquota:       8192uI Prclm:          30  DIOlm:      4096  WSdef:            0 <infinite quotasI Prio:            4  ASTlm:      4096  WSquo:            0 <infinite quotavI Queprio:         0  TQElm:        60  WSextent:         0 <infinite quotad9 CPU:        (none)  Enqlm:     32767  Pgflquo:     250000q     Regards    Mark   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Feb 2002 09:35 CSTn' From: carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins)i Subject: Re: vax h/w type.- Message-ID: <21FEB200209351223@gerg.tamu.edu>g  ' hoffman@xdelta.zko.dec.nospam writes... v }In article <bc0e3bd8.0202201020.4a17718d@posting.google.com>, pat.saunders@sis.securicor.co.uk (pat saunders) writes:B }:  Is there any way to find out the type of Vax I am using in VMS }:5.5-2. } I }  It's been a gazillion years since I've (knowingly :-) used an OpenVMS iH }  release this ancient, but I'd first try to use the following command: }  }    SHOW LICENSE/CHARGE } C }  Others have pointed you at various arguments for the DCL lexicalr@ }  function f$getsyi, and these will also work quite admirably. O } ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------dO }      For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.openvms.compaq.com    -O } --------------------------- pure personal opinion --------------------------- M }   Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoffman#xdelta.zko.dec.coms   "Admirably" is debateable - a$& $ Write SYS$Output F$GetSYI("HW_NAME")5 may not tell you the model number - for example on mys7 VAXstation 3100 model 48, also running V5.5-2, it givesr8 the "VAXstation 3100" part, but not the "model 48" part.   $ show lic/charge - gives the somewhat odd information indicatingr4 "This is a VAXstation 3100, hardware model type 148"4 which is somewhat better, but not an exact match for the actual model number of 48.   --- Carl   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 10:20:31 -0600 (CST)l From: sms@antinode.org Subject: Re: vax h/w type.) Message-ID: <02022110203122@antinode.org>a  ' From: carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins)t   > [...]t( > $ Write SYS$Output F$GetSYI("HW_NAME")7 > may not tell you the model number - for example on mya9 > VAXstation 3100 model 48, also running V5.5-2, it gives : > the "VAXstation 3100" part, but not the "model 48" part. >  > $ show lic/charge / > gives the somewhat odd information indicating"6 > "This is a VAXstation 3100, hardware model type 148"6 > which is somewhat better, but not an exact match for  > the actual model number of 48.  D    Considering that the only difference of which I'm aware between aF model 30/38 and a model 38/48 is the size of the box, I'd be amazed if> the CPU knew which it was.  On my VAXsta 3100 model 38, I get:  + WUSS $ Write SYS$Output F$GetSYI("HW_NAME")t VAXstation 3100/GPX    WUSS $ show lic/charge( VMS/LMF Charge Information for node WUSS6 This is a VAXstation 3100/GPX, hardware model type 149  +    I don't think my model 38 is a model 49.u  + WUSS $ Write SYS$Output F$GetSYI("version")s V7.2      H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  C    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-9818  (voice, home)-C    382 South Warwick Street        (+1) 763-781-0308  (voice, work)gG    Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547      (+1) 763-781-0309  (facsimile, work)p9    sms@antinode.org                sms@provis.com  (work)2   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 17:33:17 GMT 4 From: Tim Llewellyn <tim.llewellyn@blueyonder.co.uk> Subject: Re: vax h/w type.0 Message-ID: <3C752E44.E641A4C6@blueyonder.co.uk>   "John E. Malmberg" wrote:a >  > Christopher Smith wrote: > >- > > $MAIL SYSTEM& > > SUBJECT: What kind of VAX is this? > >0 > > Hi, D > > Can you read the back panel and tell me the model number of this
 > > computer?q > >o > > ^Z > >- > C > When I have tried that, the responses are usually on the line of:h >  > VT340l > LA120  > Letterwriter 100 > VT420E > VT320I   Z :-) either that or the end user manages to pull out the network cable from the back of the VAX.   -- e Tim.Llewellyn@cableinet.co.uk  I  C Standard disclaimer applies. My views in no way represent those of r! my employers or service provider.i   ------------------------------   Date: 21 Feb 2002 18:18:16 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)c Subject: RE: vax h/w type., Message-ID: <a53dl8$2o3j$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>  L In article <3B55D7F383B0D31197D9009027541CBF1A1A3989@cmiexch1.cmi.itds.com>,.  Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com> writes: |> > -----Original Message-----a+ |> > From: pat.saunders@sis.securicor.co.ukl |> n |> > Hi,E |> >   Is there any way to find out the type of Vax I am using in VMSr |> > 5.5-2.v |> e
 |> Umm...  |> e |> $MAIL SYSTEMr% |> SUBJECT: What kind of VAX is this?a |>   |> Hi,C |> Can you read the back panel and tell me the model number of thisN |> computer? |> n |> ^Zr |> e |> $ |>  D Considering how many KA630's I have swapped out in favor of KA650's,> I don't think this method has any guarantee of being accurate.    bill   -- tJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   j   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 13:11:54 -0500 ; From: "Brian Tillman" <tillman_brian@notnoone.notnohow.com> A Subject: Re: VAX/VMS mail sending and receiving to other machines $ Message-ID: <3c75386d$1@news.si.com>  5 >I'd like to know how it is possible to use PC with aS6 >mail client (and/or server) to connect with vms mail.  G Enable POP serving on your VMS side and read your VMS mail with your PC  client.  Works for me. --A Brian Tillman                   Internet: tillman_brian at si.com A Smiths Aerospace                          tillman at swdev.si.comt= 3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS      Addresses modified to prevent < Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991     SPAM.  Replace "at" with "@"8        This opinion doesn't represent that of my company   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 09:46:56 -0500 % From: Jim Agnew <agnew@mail2.vcu.edu>-# Subject: Re: VS4000-90 and HP88780BF, Message-ID: <3C750860.9000600@mail2.vcu.edu>   JF Mezei wrote:  > me wrote:f > J >>I can mount the tape can the prompt returns to me.  When I Backup/verifyI >>MKA300:FILENAME.bak DKA600:[DIRECTORY] it then asks for the drive to bed >>MOUNT/FOREIGN.   >> > O > That is what backup wants. Or simply not issue the MOUNT and let it BACKUP dor  > the mounting the way it wants. > N > Another option is to mount the tape non-foreign and attempt to copy specificO > file name (namely: the save set to disk and then use backup on the disk file.i > M > Alternatively, mount the tape foreign, then copy files sequentially to disknP > until end of file and the find the relevant file and use backup on it (you may% > have to use set file/attrib on it).r >    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2002.102 ************************pens is that backersE of inferior technology recognize its deficiency and simply try harderr: to sell their product. They strenuously try to make up forE shortcomings through non-technical means that often prove decisive ifa? the gap isn&#8217;t too large.gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    gU    