0 INFO-VAX	Sun, 27 Jan 2002	Volume 2002 : Issue 51      Contents:D Re: Capellas redefines Industry Standard to mean Windows *and* LinuxD Re: Capellas redefines Industry Standard to mean Windows *and* Linux Re: Compaq financial conference P Re: compiler group (was: RE: Gartner Group lies about VMS ... loses   allcredibi& Re: DEBUG: Call stack and RTL question; Re: Gartner Group lies about VMS ... loses all credibility! ; Re: Gartner Group lies about VMS ... loses all credibility! ; Re: Gartner Group lies about VMS ... loses all credibility! ; Re: Gartner Group lies about VMS ... loses all credibility! ; Re: Gartner Group lies about VMS ... loses all credibility! 1 Re: historical evidence of what went wrong at DEC ! Re: I/O Performance on Alpha 4100 ) Re: Inquirer : "Intel *could* can Itanic" ) Re: Inquirer : "Intel *could* can Itanic" ) Re: Inquirer : "Intel *could* can Itanic" ) Re: Inquirer : "Intel *could* can Itanic" ) Re: Inquirer : "Intel *could* can Itanic" ) Re: Inquirer : "Intel *could* can Itanic"  Makefile Re: Makefile RE: Makefile Re: Makefile mount problems on cluster  Re: New VMS newsgroup , vegemite (was Re: Younger recruits versus ex/ VMS system on the sourceforge.net Compile Farm? 3 Re: VMS system on the sourceforge.net Compile Farm? % Re: When to start a new c.o.v thread? ; Re: Younger recruits versus experienced veterans  ( was The   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 26 Jan 2002 16:56:14 -0800( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)M Subject: Re: Capellas redefines Industry Standard to mean Windows *and* Linux < Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0201261656.978ea6b@posting.google.com>  U Jan-Erik Sderholm <aaa@aaa.com> wrote in message news:<3C52AE12.8798EDC8@aaa.com>...  > OK. 7 > But, if everyone whold do that, *WHO* should then buy 6 > the *new* boxes ? If no one does, there would be any* > 2-3 years old boxes either, will there ? >  > Jan-Erik Sderholm.  >  > Bob Ceculski wrote:  > D > > ...no I don't buy the latest and greatest, but I am only several; > > years behind, and that is how you save money buying ...   K the bigger companies w/money buy ... we are talking the small guys here who J always harp about vms being too expensive ... I am showing them that it isK not too expensive for the little guy to run vms ... do you think windows is K cheaper after buying 80000 boxes per one alpha vms server and then spending " 80% of your time in patching bugs!   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 20:46:25 -0500 % From: JF Mezei <jfmezei@videotron.ca> M Subject: Re: Capellas redefines Industry Standard to mean Windows *and* Linux , Message-ID: <3C535BE7.E601C793@videotron.ca>   Bob Ceculski wrote: M > not too expensive for the little guy to run vms ... do you think windows is M > cheaper after buying 80000 boxes per one alpha vms server and then spending $ > 80% of your time in patching bugs!  M The problem for small shops is that due to lack of available software on VMS, H they will also need to maintain another architecture to run the apps not available on VMS.   @ If you have a critical app that is big enough to warrant its ownF infrastructure, then VMS can be justified., But if you have many smallL applications, none of which "requiring" VMS and many which don't run on VMS,S it becomes harder to justify VMS unless you can run both big and small apps on VMS.   K And because VMS has no public visibility, one needds to work much harder to J sell a VMS solution to a potential smaller customer who has no idea of theL value of VMS. And the fact that Compaq doesn't publicly sell VMS, it is also> hard to spin the situation positively in terms of VMS' future.  J We need Compaq's help to penetrate new markets. And right now, not only isK Compaq not providing the help, but it is working against those who wants to K push VMS solutions in markets other than the few remaining ones that Compaq  tolerates VMS in.    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 19:49:08 GMT * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>( Subject: Re: Compaq financial conferenceA Message-ID: <UKD48.33357$vH6.1849926@bin6.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>   2 "JF Mezei" <jfmezei@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3C52F39F.5044F1E5@videotron.ca... > Bill Todd wrote:G > > A client *always* has to be smart enough to resubmit a transaction,  because J > > there are *always* conditions (deadlock being one of the more obvious) that; > > can cause it to fail but make resubmission appropriate.  > L > Have you ever taken a look at POS terminals at stores ? They are very dumbL > terminals. They won't resubmit a transaction. They may report a failure or< > just wait for a confirmation until some very long timeout.  L Exactly.  And when they do so, the human being at the POS terminal is reliedI upon to resubmit the transaction (though the terminal may be smart enough L that it doesn't have to be completely re-keyed-in):  a 'client' isn't always	 software.   I It's fairly silly to create a complex infrastructure to avoid a very rare L event (host failure) that only causes clients to perform an action they haveL to perform in far more common (other) circumstances anyway.  Comm failure isE much easier to handle with retransmissions and message IDs that guard 0 against multiple executions of the same message.  G I'm not going to waste more time discussing this.  If you want to learn L about transaction processing, the best single source I know of is the 1992/3G book "Transaction Processing:  Concepts and Techniques" by Jim Gray and K Andreas Reuter.  If you just want to understand how to *use* something like , RTR, its documentation may well be adequate.   - bill   ------------------------------   Date: 26 Jan 2002 21:51:03 GMT' From: dashw459@aol.comeatspam (Doug W.) Y Subject: Re: compiler group (was: RE: Gartner Group lies about VMS ... loses   allcredibi 9 Message-ID: <20020126165103.09573.00001149@mb-ch.aol.com>    Steve Lionel wrote:   E << For OpenVMS IA64, Intel and Compaq are jointly developing compiler F products and these would continue to have new releases as scheduled by
 Compaq. >>  H Hopefully Intel and Compaq will agree on the priority for a new compilerO feature.  For example, would both Intel and Compaq place equal priority on NUMA  aware compilers?   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 20:51:34 GMT  From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG / Subject: Re: DEBUG: Call stack and RTL question 0 Message-ID: <00A08A09.CBA96E05@SendSpamHere.ORG>  T In article <3C52DF98.E6F0D89B@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei@videotron.ca> writes: >Jesper Naur wrote:  >>   >> Hello JF  >>  I >> You could try the DCL code below. Extract it as SHRLIBSYM.COM, it will  >> analyze aO >> shared image .EXE file and generate a list of the symbols inside that shared , >> image, sorted on offset within the image. > O >Thanks for the code. What I did was to move a few statements around (the stuff O >that triggers the AST) to after the RMS $OPEN/$DISPLAY/$CONNECT and that seems L >to have had a satisfactory result. Still some crashes, but no longer at theM >second invocation of the AST (eg: random now). Got about 50,000 transactions O >done since the early morning this way, and I just restart the failed processes  >now and then. > N >Since the difference between thsi program and last wek's program which didn'tG >crash was the addition of the RMS access to an indexed file, I have to O >conclude that even though all RMS calls seem to be succesful I probably missed L >something and that corrupts the stack somewhere (worng number of arguments)M >and eventually fopen fails deep inside itself. I believe it fails on a queue J >(REMQUEUE if I remember well) and last time I had that, it was because ofK >improper number of arguments that was undetected by the compiler. (eg: the  >rtl/system calls).  > D >There are 3 object modules linked in, and I was baffled because theK >fopen(filename,"w"), the second argument was shown as an offset to another > >object module instead of an offset inside the current module. > K >at school, the assembler I learned was IBM 370, and at times like these, I L >feel I shoudl really know much more about the VAX.  Debugging Alpha must beO >even worse since folks are discouranged from knowing about the alpha assembler  >and architecture.  ! Alpha machine code is far easier.    --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM              J   "And of course, I'm a genius, so people are naturally drawn to my fiery I   intellect.  Their admiration overwhelms their envy!" -- Calvin & Hobbes    ------------------------------    Date: 26 Jan 2002 12:21:31 -0800+ From: davidc@montagar.com (David L. Cathey) D Subject: Re: Gartner Group lies about VMS ... loses all credibility!= Message-ID: <e565ed03.0201261221.37e46571@posting.google.com>   ` "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message news:<3C523428.D080A22D@fsi.net>... > "David L. Cathey" wrote:
 > > [snip]( > > Then how much can you afford to pay? > 7 > This is exactly the point I can't seem to drive home.  > = > What *I* (dba DJE Systems) can afford to pay is immaterial.   B But you are using that as the basis to demonstrate "unaffordable"./ And frankly, it's just not a credible argument.    H > The issue at hand is what the *END USER* (read: my (or your) customer)G > can afford or cost-justify, and VMS ain't it 95% or more of the time.  > J > Could I scrape up a grand for the CSA? Sure. It'd be a lean month or so,5 > but I could without harming the household too much.  > H > But what would it matter? I could devote the rest of my useful life toJ > porting the kitchen sink to VMS - but if no one (or very few) can afford > VMS, what's the point?  H Again, what is your basis for unaffordable?  Real life or your financialJ situation?  You seem to think your boss would be bery interested in a $10KI system - I've shown you one.  Now are you going to make the sale, someone ' else, or are you going to let is slide?     > What can your customer afford? >  > Ask *THEM* !!!  B Actually, I do ask them.  One good customer of mine would NOT have? anything else run his business.  He leases time on a system for H $2000/month, and would not trade it for a Windows solution for anything.I Even with me consulting, he's very happy with his TCO (which is on top of ; the lease price), since very rarely does anything go wrong.   M You don't look at an OpenVMS sale as a 1-time cost.  If you do, and if that's J the only perception you give your customer, OpenVMS will lose and you will lose.   J OpenVMS wins when you can demonstrate to the customer that the TCO for theG system far outweighs the 1-time cost.  The reliability, stability, ease H of management (i.e. it doesn't take 2 MSCE's just to keep the box up) isH where OpenVMS wins.  It wins beause you turn it on and forget it.  There is no blue screen.  M Folks in this newsgroup keep touting how reliable OpenVMS is, how trustworthy H the O/S is, how easy it is to work with, maintain, manage, etc.  Why didF your wife want an Explorer?  Why not a Kia?  A Kia would be more priceE competitive for a vehicle, would it not?  But no, you bought the more N expensive solution, didn't you?  Why?  Is there a reliability factor involved? Maybe there is...   M Don't ask if your customer can afford the price of the box.  As your customer N how much his business depends upon the system being available to his employeesF and customers.  Ask him how much a reboot during prime time costs him.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 15:34:56 -0500 % From: JF Mezei <jfmezei@videotron.ca> D Subject: Re: Gartner Group lies about VMS ... loses all credibility!, Message-ID: <3C5312C2.F0D4B9DD@videotron.ca>   "David L. Cathey" wrote:L > OpenVMS wins when you can demonstrate to the customer that the TCO for the( > system far outweighs the 1-time cost.   M *AND* convince the customer that VMS is a viable solution despite the lack of M visibiliy and public commitment  by Compaq, especially now that Compaq/HP are N saying they will consolidate into industry standard soliution and de-emphasize proprietary ones.     N More mature IT managers will realise that VMS will be available for at least 5L years and that an investment in a VMS based application might still pay off.N But they would not plan on building long term infrastructure on VMS because it! does not have a long term future.   L I.E. you may be able to justify a specific application that runs on VMS, butM it is getting harder and harder to justify VMS as a platform on which you can > build on (since there are fewer applications available to it).   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Jan 2002 13:35:28 -0800+ From: davidc@montagar.com (David L. Cathey) D Subject: Re: Gartner Group lies about VMS ... loses all credibility!= Message-ID: <e565ed03.0201261335.6907e2ee@posting.google.com>   ` "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message news:<3C5227A6.C2B83D98@fsi.net>...G > I snipped the rest of it because we're just going to have to agree to C > disagree on those points. You're so deeply entrenched in your own D > position that you'll never be open enough to see the world from myH > perspective. So, I'll have to chalk that up as another case where whatJ > I'm doing isn't getting the right result, so change my approach - exceptG > I'm convinced that there just is no "right" approach at this point in  > time.   F 	I'm just trying to make sure the difference between "unaffordable" is? you, or the industry in general.  Where are you drawing general 
 conditionsE from your specific case.  When it comes to "CSA is unaffordable", you  acceptC that statement as a fact, but it appears to be based solely on your  personal
 situation.    > "David L. Cathey" wrote: > > K > > You're still not answering the question.  If I could provide an OpenVMS L > > system with a couple Gig's of disk and some basic software licenses, how > > much could you afford?   > E > I'm going to have to make some brash assumptions here - getting the I > details out of you would take too long and maintain too much noise here  > in the ng. > J > I'll assume you're talking about a subscription to a timesharing serviceB > or it's equivalent, including access to compilers, SDKs, etc. as  > available on your setup there.  E Sure.  If $1000/year is steep, why bother suggesting a lease on a new  DS10.   5 > > You never really want to say free, but can't seem O > > to tell me what level above that would satisfy you, either.  No matter what = > > cost I place on this, you'll still claim "Unaffordable!".  > I > Careful about jumping to conclusions, reading in what isn't there, etc. I > I snipped a prime example of that latter point, so I'll not retrieve it  > now.  C I'm looking for a $$$ figure here, to see if it's even worth taking  the @ time to generate a quote here.  Just a ballpark figure.  I'm not jumping D to conclusions, since so far all I've gotten as a price reference is* "$1M glass of water" and "pound of flesh".  2 > > I can't give it to you for less than my cost.  > G > If you can itemize your costs, I'd offer you cost + 20% as a starting G > point in negotiations, with the stipulation that I start getting some J > respect. You can't know where I'm at unless you've been where I've been.D > I've been more than patient and I've swallowed a lot of undeservedG > insults. Had that not happened, I'd probably have offered a full 100%  > mark up.    E Just so you at least don't generalize on the industry just because of B your position.  I'm not looking for markup (20% would be fine).  I justE want to know if you're really in the market, or am I wasting my time.     > > And I suppect that even justN > > paying the electic bill would be too much for you to afford.  I can't takeL > > food out of my kids mouth to provide you a system just because your wife > > wanted an Explorer.  > G > There you go again. Best to stay out of people's family life (word to G > the wise). (Yes, my patience is wearing extremely thin.) ...and don't & > you *DARE* say that I brought it up!  D I'm not going to question your financial decisions, David.  However,	 you can't @ then turn around and state that Compaq is the bad guy here, just because they  were at the end of the wishlist.  Q > > I can't take your claims of unaffordable seriously.  You base those claims ona? > > your personal finances, not on a legitimate business plan. e > E > Doesn't matter. A business can't commit funds it has no source for,lF > either. If you don't have the cash or the credit, you're toast. JustJ > because the entity is only a legal entity instead of a live person makes > no fundamental difference.  B True, but because business A doesn't have the funds, does not mean that> businesses B-Z are also in the same situation.  You just can't crediblyD make the blanket assertion that the CSA program is unaffordable.  If you hade? stated that *you* can't afford it, that would have a completely 	 differentrD story.  You can't afford a Peterbuilt, either, but there are several independentnE truckers on the road that own one - they've made the investment since  their E jobs requires it.  That doesn't make them "unaffordable" or cause theu rest oft9 the industry to believe that they are somehow overpriced.     > > Then you try to T > > paint everyone (all potential ISV's) with your financial brush, which is absurd. > I > ...or so you claim. I speak only for myself and on behalf of anyone wholI > is in or can identify with my position. Others are excluded implicitly.u  B But you don't start out that way, David.  You just state that it's
 unaffordable.-: No disclaimer, no qualifiers, no if's and's or buts - just
 unaffordable.nD Until I seriously questioned that, you kept stating that like it was	 an axoim.a  R > > Sorry David, but there doesn't appear to be a Compaq, Sun, HP, Dell system outP > > there that you can afford.  Anywhere.  That's not the fault of the industry,, > > and you can't blame the industry for it. > . > Then whose "fault" is it? Who set the price?  D It's not a "fault".  It's the way it is.  The price is set to offset	 the costsaC of paying the fabricators, designers, programmers, and other people 	 that needeF to get paid - or else the product wouldn't get made.  Some folks can't afford@ cars, so does this indicate a "problem" where some company is at "fault"?  . Why does someone need to be "blamed" for this?  C This industry is no different than any other.  If you want to play,o	 there areeE investments of some kind that have to be made.  Mechanics have to buy0 theirp@ own tools, messengers buy their own vehicles, CPA's have to take annual% training classes, ... should I go on?   aC > You might do well to consider the percentage of gross income thatoJ > "enterprise" companies allocate for IT spending, then try to apply thoseJ > same criteria to smaller "enterprises" ($10 million gross or less). ThenJ > you might begin to understand. Dunno. I'm sure you've got a comeback for > that, as well.  F I don't pretend to have that kind of budget, but I do know my budget.  I B do know that I've spent more on a laptop this year than I've spent
 on my CSA.  fS > > Isn't irony fun - I just got off the phone with someone who would be interested L > > in buying a development system just like the $10K system I quoted above. > F > Then I guess all these posts aren't so bad after all! You just got aG > prospect! Had we not been discussing such systems, you would probablyaH > have thought of it eventually anyway, but aren't you glad it was fresh > in your mind?d  E It does more than that - and directly related to this topic:  OpenVMSd isD affordable, people are still interested in it and calling even smallC shops about it, and the investments I've made in my business helpedd them! find me to talk to them about it.d  ? Which is counter to about everything you've been saying in thise thread.s   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 22:49:41 GMTo1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>oD Subject: Re: Gartner Group lies about VMS ... loses all credibility!' Message-ID: <3C5333A3.A187C291@fsi.net>   : You might want to read this entire post before responding.   "David L. Cathey" wrote: > b > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message news:<3C5227A6.C2B83D98@fsi.net>...I > > I snipped the rest of it because we're just going to have to agree tonE > > disagree on those points. You're so deeply entrenched in your own F > > position that you'll never be open enough to see the world from myJ > > perspective. So, I'll have to chalk that up as another case where whatL > > I'm doing isn't getting the right result, so change my approach - exceptI > > I'm convinced that there just is no "right" approach at this point in 	 > > time.m > O >         I'm just trying to make sure the difference between "unaffordable" isoA > you, or the industry in general.  Where are you drawing generaln > conditionsG > from your specific case.  When it comes to "CSA is unaffordable", youc > acceptE > that statement as a fact, but it appears to be based solely on yourt
 > personal > situation.  H CSA is what would interest me - but only if the end-user base could also& have a suitably "affordable" solution.  @ I'm guessing you've not had to do a budget and/or get a purchaseH approved in a very long time. Maybe you need some recent experience withH bean counters and "His Excellency, The Royal-High Excheqeur". You'd soonG learn a whole new perspective on what "affordable" means... (...and no,w< it's not the "dollar amount" you so desperately wish for...)   > > "David L. Cathey" wrote: > > > M > > > You're still not answering the question.  If I could provide an OpenVMShN > > > system with a couple Gig's of disk and some basic software licenses, how > > > much could you afford? > >cG > > I'm going to have to make some brash assumptions here - getting the-K > > details out of you would take too long and maintain too much noise here  > > in the ng. > >eL > > I'll assume you're talking about a subscription to a timesharing serviceD > > or it's equivalent, including access to compilers, SDKs, etc. as" > > available on your setup there. > G > Sure.  If $1000/year is steep, why bother suggesting a lease on a newu > DS10.   A Do you understand the difference between an expense and a capitalq acquisition? 'Nuff said?  7 > > > You never really want to say free, but can't seemeQ > > > to tell me what level above that would satisfy you, either.  No matter what-? > > > cost I place on this, you'll still claim "Unaffordable!".S > >aK > > Careful about jumping to conclusions, reading in what isn't there, etc.AK > > I snipped a prime example of that latter point, so I'll not retrieve ita > > now. > E > I'm looking for a $$$ figure here, to see if it's even worth taking  > the>B > time to generate a quote here.  Just a ballpark figure.  I'm not	 > jumpingaF > to conclusions, since so far all I've gotten as a price reference is, > "$1M glass of water" and "pound of flesh". > 3 > > > I can't give it to you for less than my cost.s > >oI > > If you can itemize your costs, I'd offer you cost + 20% as a startingeI > > point in negotiations, with the stipulation that I start getting someeL > > respect. You can't know where I'm at unless you've been where I've been.F > > I've been more than patient and I've swallowed a lot of undeservedI > > insults. Had that not happened, I'd probably have offered a full 100%  > > mark up. > G > Just so you at least don't generalize on the industry just because ofw > your position. t  H Remember - *YOU* are the one making that claim. *I* never did, and never will.l  G ...and "my position" is that of needing to consider what my prospectiveeG customers can budget for (read: "afford") and cost-justify, in light of D the alternatives. It's that "in light of the alternatives" part thatG seems to stymie everyone at/surround Compaq/OpenVMS. (Yeah, I'll regretrF saying that - I can hear your retort already. Same tired rhetoric that) everyone else keeps parroting, I'm sure.)   4 > I'm not looking for markup (20% would be fine).  I > justG > want to know if you're really in the market, or am I wasting my time.s  H Um - I'd be careful about using that "am I wasting my time" crack aroundB someone who is already over threshold. Then again, you don't value+ either me or my opinions; so, flame away...g  " > > > And I suppect that even justP > > > paying the electic bill would be too much for you to afford.  I can't takeN > > > food out of my kids mouth to provide you a system just because your wife > > > wanted an Explorer.T > >(I > > There you go again. Best to stay out of people's family life (word toaI > > the wise). (Yes, my patience is wearing extremely thin.) ...and don'ty( > > you *DARE* say that I brought it up! > F > I'm not going to question your financial decisions, David.  However, > you can'taB > then turn around and state that Compaq is the bad guy here, just > because they" > were at the end of the wishlist.  H Clearly, there is nothing I can say to make that point. Until you get it? through your head that developers and ISVs aren't the issue and G end-users are, and remember I'm talking about a much different class ofiB end-user than the deep-pocketed exception - y'know, the people whoB raised VMS to the pinnacle of its status back in the "glory days",F you're not going to understand, or even make the effort - an example I< fully expect Compaq will follow, ill-advised as that may be.  S > > > I can't take your claims of unaffordable seriously.  You base those claims on'@ > > > your personal finances, not on a legitimate business plan.  H The business plan you keep begging for is this (since it seems you can'tF figure it out on your own): find a market that can afford your productD and that is large enough to cost-justify the effort/expense. No such- market currently exists due to VMS's pricing.a  G The price of the CSA is not now and never has been the issue. The issue : is justifying the effort and expense of doing the port(s).   Get it *NOW*???!!!  G > > Doesn't matter. A business can't commit funds it has no source for, H > > either. If you don't have the cash or the credit, you're toast. JustL > > because the entity is only a legal entity instead of a live person makes > > no fundamental difference. > D > True, but because business A doesn't have the funds, does not mean > that@ > businesses B-Z are also in the same situation.  You just can't
 > crediblyC > make the blanket assertion that the CSA program is unaffordable.    3 Too bad you're stuck in that "all or nothing" mode.    > If	 > you hadsA > stated that *you* can't afford it, that would have a completelyo > differentu	 > story.    F I *HAVE* a completely different story, if you'd take the time to thinkC before you ... well, better shut up before I say anything else I'll1 regret.t  ( > You can't afford a Peterbuilt, either,  F Actually, if trucking were my goal, I probably could. I've been aroundG the financing/property market long enough to understand "leverage". Too D bad that doesn't apply when you're dealing with intangibles - things? that can't be repossessed, like intellectual property and such.,   > but there are severaly
 > independent G > truckers on the road that own one - they've made the investment since  > theiriG > jobs requires it.  That doesn't make them "unaffordable" or cause then	 > rest ofy; > the industry to believe that they are somehow overpriced.   B Well, actually yes it does, but I've learned that I can't win that	 argument.    > > > Then you try toeV > > > paint everyone (all potential ISV's) with your financial brush, which is absurd. > >bK > > ...or so you claim. I speak only for myself and on behalf of anyone whoaK > > is in or can identify with my position. Others are excluded implicitly.c > D > But you don't start out that way, David.  You just state that it's > unaffordable.9< > No disclaimer, no qualifiers, no if's and's or buts - just > unaffordable.s   Cogito, ergo disclamo.  G I'll go ahead and get the legalese typed up, and I'll paste it in aftere4 every sentence, since that's what you seem to need.   > Sorry folks, the S/N ratio is about to get a *LOT* worse here!  F > Until I seriously questioned that, you kept stating that like it was > an axoim.   % No, you made an unfounded assumption.   T > > > Sorry David, but there doesn't appear to be a Compaq, Sun, HP, Dell system outR > > > there that you can afford.  Anywhere.  That's not the fault of the industry,. > > > and you can't blame the industry for it. > > 0 > > Then whose "fault" is it? Who set the price? > F > It's not a "fault".  It's the way it is.  The price is set to offset > the costsnE > of paying the fabricators, designers, programmers, and other peoplel > that needh7 > to get paid - or else the product wouldn't get made. -  A Which brings us to another concept that I seem to be the only onec? capable of grasping: the difference between volume and margin.    B There are *MANY* ways to make a profit, not just one. Get over it.  0 > Why does someone need to be "blamed" for this?  G Ask that same question again when the Enron inquiries are over, or when. VMS finally dies...e  E > This industry is no different than any other.  If you want to play,s > there are'G > investments of some kind that have to be made.  Mechanics have to buyn > theiroB > own tools, messengers buy their own vehicles, CPA's have to take > annual' > training classes, ... should I go on?t  A Yes - until you get to the meat of the matter: if pricing doesn't G support the product (tools, training, housing, clothes, food, etc.) andmE *SIGNIFICANT* (almost forgot to insert that, subjective as it may be),E growth in the product's market, then margins will remain difficult tosG maintain (a key issue in yesterday's webcast) and volumes will continue H to suffer, and business will remain vulnerable to fluctuations in volumeF that could otherwise be tolerated with some difficulty, or even easily	 survived.t  E > > You might do well to consider the percentage of gross income that L > > "enterprise" companies allocate for IT spending, then try to apply thoseL > > same criteria to smaller "enterprises" ($10 million gross or less). ThenL > > you might begin to understand. Dunno. I'm sure you've got a comeback for > > that, as well. > G > I don't pretend to have that kind of budget, but I do know my budget.r > I D > do know that I've spent more on a laptop this year than I've spent > on my CSA.  H Hhmmm... Makes your persistence even more confusing. You should be on my side for that.  U > > > Isn't irony fun - I just got off the phone with someone who would be interestedeN > > > in buying a development system just like the $10K system I quoted above. > >oH > > Then I guess all these posts aren't so bad after all! You just got aI > > prospect! Had we not been discussing such systems, you would probablyaJ > > have thought of it eventually anyway, but aren't you glad it was fresh > > in your mind?f > G > It does more than that - and directly related to this topic:  OpenVMSr > is > affordable,   * Who's making the "blanket statements" now?  $ > people are still interested in it    There's another one!  F ...and when pressed for evidence, you can't (or won't ) cite any. DoesB the word "credibility" mean anything to you? You are accorded moreB credibility than I by token of your long standing association withC Digital and it products. Unproven/unprovable statements strain thatr credibility.  H ...though perhaps only in my eyes. Clearly, some other posters take what? you and others post/report re: VMS as Gospel and not subject to 	 question..   > and calling even smallE > shops about it, and the investments I've made in my business helpedo > them# > find me to talk to them about it.  > A > Which is counter to about everything you've been saying in thisi	 > thread.   C How so? Nothing here or in the past supports that statement. (Hint:m8 You've demonstrated a propensity for brash assumptions.)  > I'm arguing about the affordability (I realize you don't/won'tC understand that term - whatever) of VMS to end-users, while you ande others keep harping on CSA.h  7 What would it take for you to grasp the larger picture?n  G Let that be rhetorical question, by the way. I've invested FAR too muchoG time and effort in this thread already, and clearly the hope for makingd$ a difference here vanished long ago.  ? So, I'll be quitting this thread at this point, leaving another D stalemate. We'll never agree here, anymore than a market/demand willE magically appear for VMS applications that don't currently exist, nore= are they likely to so long as alternatives to VMS remain more  competitive.  . So, go ahead and have the last word. I'm done.   -- e David J. Dachteraa dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 19:07:50 -0500a% From: JF Mezei <jfmezei@videotron.ca>nD Subject: Re: Gartner Group lies about VMS ... loses all credibility!, Message-ID: <3C5344D3.CB9B7BC7@videotron.ca>   "David J. Dachtera" wrote:J > CSA is what would interest me - but only if the end-user base could also( > have a suitably "affordable" solution.   I agree entirely.   L When you look at the Tandem marketplace, because the target customers, it isN pointless for a small outfit to start t write Tandem software. Those customersJ will only buy software from established shops with 7/24 support and provenI track record. And in many cases, the customers have no choice of software.J since only one software outfit was commissioned to write the software (forL instance a nation's POS network where the 5 or 6 large banks got together to8 commission their interbank switching software on Tandem.    J And what is left of VMS is about the same: large corporations want the bigG packages. It then becomes harder for a small outfit to develop softwaretJ because there is no or little market at the low/medium end in VMS anymore.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 02:29:46 GMTe From: Al <alherb2@home.com>t: Subject: Re: historical evidence of what went wrong at DEC1 Message-ID: <260120022129490099%alherb2@home.com>   & THIS is what went wrong with DEC.  :^)  @ In article <u4qh6beql45820@corp.supernews.com>, Michael Zarlenga <zarlenga@conan.ids.net> wrote:r  ? > In comp.os.vms Bon Koehler <koehler@encompasserve.org> wrote:t4 > : > Bob Koehler <koehler@encompasserve.org> wrote:M > : > :    Funny, I do it all the time.  Oh, yeah, I modified somebody else's < > : > :    SD.COM years ago, just like nearly everyone else. > : > ? > : > Bob, are you the same guy who thinks it's very painful tot, > : > write a .ksh to get a wildcard rename? > H > :   No, I only thinks it's painfull to have to keep relearning it whenE > :   forced to change shells.  My sd.com has not needed change sincec6 > :   about the time Berkley ported UNIX to an 11/780. > > > As I told you, I have never been forced to change shells and= > I've worked on Unix boxes set up years ago.  Korn is a verys > popular shell. > ? > How many Unix boxes have you done work on?  I'd say I've been @ > logged onto between between 100 and 200 different boxes in the% > last 4 years, and all have had ksh.t   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 21:05:46 +0100  From: Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl>* Subject: Re: I/O Performance on Alpha 4100& Message-ID: <3C530C1A.2020502@home.nl>   BrianNFO wrote:   N >I haven't posted here in a while, but I'm looking to speed up I/O on an AlphaP >4100 5/400 running VMS 7.2-1.  Most of the devices are things like RZ40-VA, andG >I believe the VA indicates narrow scsi?  I don't know exactly what PCIw >controllers are in use. > E Yes, VA stands for narrow, VW is wide. Grey/beige storage blocks are  ) fast SCSI, blue storage blocks UltraWide.      >n >aM >Applications on this system are I/O bound, and I would think I can make somehK >big improvements through either a caching controller, or a combination new * >controller, wide shelves and wide drives. >sF Like others wrote, the new SCSI-U2W adapters are much faster. Combine B them with 15000 rpm disks, and you will have much faster hardware.A Look at your caching (show mem /cache /full). It depends on your DG application of course, but your read hit rate should be something like  E 90%. If it is lower, and there is no cache memory free, increase the aH size of the cache. The standard size is 6400 blocks, or 3.2 MB. This is E much to low for most systems. Increase it to let's say 128MB (if you aH have that much memory free), and you wil have a much faster system. The   sysgen parameter is VCC_MAXSIZE.   >b >p& >Any suggestions would be appreciated! >s >Brian >,   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 19:25:25 GMT'% From: rw@eircom.net (Russell Wallace)y2 Subject: Re: Inquirer : "Intel *could* can Itanic"/ Message-ID: <3c530277.11677583@news.eircom.net>i  C On Sat, 26 Jan 2002 12:54:50 -0500, JF Mezei <jfmezei@videotron.ca>  wrote:   >Russell Wallace wrote:nF >> What I imagine it does mean is that the people handling VMS and theG >> other proprietary operating systems will have to start working on aneE >> x86-64 port very quickly, if they haven't already. Can anyone fromu >> Compaq comment on this? > J >It would be simpler for Compaq to simply announce an extention to the EV7M >programme with further speed bumps adding another few years to Alpha until agK >replacement can be found. Isn't it what HP did when it became obvious thate: >Intel wouldn't be delivering IA64 anywhere near on-time ?  C Yes, they should definitely do that as well. Prolonged EV7 life foraB the short and medium term, and an x86-64 port as the story for the
 long term.   -- i3 "Mercy to the guilty is treachery to the innocent."  mailto:rw@eircom.net! http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallacep   ------------------------------    Date: 26 Jan 2002 11:57:23 -0800+ From: davidc@montagar.com (David L. Cathey)d2 Subject: Re: Inquirer : "Intel *could* can Itanic"= Message-ID: <e565ed03.0201261157.2d190823@posting.google.com>u  Y JF Mezei <jfmezei@videotron.ca> wrote in message news:<3C519B04.534DE065@videotron.ca>...  > Alan Greig wrote:a$ > > >Does this mean EV8 is on again? > > I > > Nope because Capellas made clear that only "industry standard" is theaD > > future. He defined industry standard as Windows, Linux and Intel > L > If Intel drops IA64, and if Intel were to adopt Alpha and redevelop Alpha,P > then Alpha would magically become Industry Standard simply because it would beI > a prorietary product with the Intel logo on it and Compaq would have now > control over it.  M This would not be the first time that DEC/Compaq divested itself of a productbJ and it became more of an industry standard.  Once DEC sold off the CompactI Tape (DLT) technology to Quantum, there was an almost 10x increase in DLT   F revenues - and more DLT produts available at the local computer store.  G When DEC sold off their last FAB, one of the chips it produced was the tH StrongArm chip - which is still in popular demand for many applications.  I The future of Alpha is still unknown, and Intel (even with Compaq's AlphafJ designers help) still hasn't produced a marketable 64-bit chip.  Alpha hasF over 10 years head start and actual products, and Intel may see fit to capitalize on it.a  I > Compaq defines "industry standard" as something it has no control over.t  D That's generally the case, even for companies other than Compaq.  IfF the industry wanted every computer to come with a slide rule, having aH slide rule would be the industry standard.  Not because Compaq wanted toF sell slide rules, or even made them, but because the industry requires slide rules.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 20:40:15 GMTi  From: cjt <cheljuba@prodigy.net>2 Subject: Re: Inquirer : "Intel *could* can Itanic"+ Message-ID: <3C53145A.148E3287@prodigy.net>a   John Smith wrote:i > J > Now that the currently shipping Microsoft operating systems (XP Pro & XPJ > Home) are built from a common code base, AND that common code base stillL > requires a HAL (hardware abstraction layer)....all Intel/Microsoft have toH > do is fund a HAL for Alpha, stop producing x86 chips, and Alpha is now > 'industry-standard' hardware.   9 That doesn't get the applications recompiled and running.g   <snip lengthy context>   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 20:41:43 GMT   From: cjt <cheljuba@prodigy.net>2 Subject: Re: Inquirer : "Intel *could* can Itanic"+ Message-ID: <3C5314B3.B6F8CE02@prodigy.net>e   Russell Wallace wrote: > C > On 25 Jan 2002 07:27:00 -0800, bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)d > wrote: > " > >Does this mean EV8 is on again? > C > Probably not. Compaq's management have made it clear they want toaC > stick to packaging and services and stay out of the R&D business.. > E > What I imagine it does mean is that the people handling VMS and the*F > other proprietary operating systems will have to start working on anD > x86-64 port very quickly, if they haven't already. Can anyone from > Compaq comment on this?   N No problem.  They should be getting pretty good at changing directions by now.   >  > --5 > "Mercy to the guilty is treachery to the innocent."g > mailto:rw@eircom.net# > http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallacen   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 21:00:13 GMTn* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>2 Subject: Re: Inquirer : "Intel *could* can Itanic"B Message-ID: <xNE48.132200$TC1.9232592@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  - "cjt" <cheljuba@prodigy.net> wrote in messagex% news:3C53145A.148E3287@prodigy.net...  > John Smith wrote:  > >'L > > Now that the currently shipping Microsoft operating systems (XP Pro & XPL > > Home) are built from a common code base, AND that common code base stillK > > requires a HAL (hardware abstraction layer)....all Intel/Microsoft havey toJ > > do is fund a HAL for Alpha, stop producing x86 chips, and Alpha is now! > > 'industry-standard' hardware.N >u; > That doesn't get the applications recompiled and running.c  G With (possibly enhanced) FX!32, application recompilation should not beyG necessary:  they'd still perform a lot better than they would on Itanic K without recompilation (and if you *did* choose to recompile them for Alpha, K they'd also perform a lot better than they would if recompiled for Itanic).a  I Modulo the ability to round out the FX!32 facilities such that they'd runfL all important IA32 executables (ISTR library-conflict issues that would haveC to be addressed, but since it would be effectively a 'new' platformuF presumably unconstrained by the ways Alpha used to support NT the sameJ mechanisms that would be used on Itanic could likely work), Alpha could beK every bit as 'industry-standard' as Itanic ever would be, if Intel chose tooK replace Itanic with Alpha.  The reasons I don't expect it to happen are notf technical in nature.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 16:45:38 -0500e' From: Howard S Shubs <howard@shubs.net>P2 Subject: Re: Inquirer : "Intel *could* can Itanic"< Message-ID: <howard-4ABF18.16453726012002@enews.newsguy.com>  = In article <e565ed03.0201261157.2d190823@posting.google.com>,e-  davidc@montagar.com (David L. Cathey) wrote:   K > The future of Alpha is still unknown, and Intel (even with Compaq's Alpha L > designers help) still hasn't produced a marketable 64-bit chip.  Alpha hasH > over 10 years head start and actual products, and Intel may see fit to > capitalize on it.f  F I expect there are probably powerful internal Intel politics involved 9 here to prevent that, but sense -may- prevail.  Some day.'   -- n Howard S ShubsD "Run in circles, scream and shout!"  "I hope you have good backups!"' Aren't there any networked SJFs around?b   ------------------------------   Date: 26 Jan 2002 20:51:54 GMT From: cljlk@hotmail.com (cljlk)  Subject: Makefilec+ Message-ID: <a2v4ta$alj$1@bob.news.rcn.net>u  F I am new in VAX/VMS system and don't know how to create a makefile for C programs.t< Would anyone please send me a makefile, thus, I can edit it?< Please give me an instructing how to use it on command line. Thanks in advance.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 22:30:34 GMTe' From: Don Sykes <anonymous@pacbell.net>  Subject: Re: Makefilet+ Message-ID: <3C532EA3.58A9F4BB@pacbell.net>n   cljlk wrote: > H > I am new in VAX/VMS system and don't know how to create a makefile for
 > C programs. > > Would anyone please send me a makefile, thus, I can edit it?> > Please give me an instructing how to use it on command line. > Thanks in advance.F I believe there is a GNUmake available for VMS you can use. Other thanB that, VMS has a facility called MMS, which is similar to make, butG you'll need a license. Or you can roll your own - cc + link statements.t   --     Have VMS. Will Travel. Wire Paladin @alphase.com 
 San Franciscor   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 14:39:51 -0800d# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>n Subject: RE: Makefilet9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIKEFLEAAA.tom@kednos.com>o  + go to http://gnv.sourceforge.net/readme.htmm  7 Get the sources and install you will get the following:o           bash$ ls /gnu/biniD     ar.exe        chmod.exe     gzip.exe      rm.exe        tail.exeC     as.exe        cp.exe        install.exe   rmdir.exe     tar.exenE     basename.exe  diff.exe      ls.exe        sed.exe       touch.exe B     bash.exe      egrep.exe     make.exe      set_exe.com   tr.exeE     bzip2.exe     expr.exe      mkdir.exe     sh.exe        uname.exe B     cat.exe       gawk.exe      mv.exe        sleep.exe     wc.exe6     cc.exe        grep.exe      objdump.exe   stat.exe     > -----Original Message-----0 > From: Don Sykes [mailto:anonymous@pacbell.net]* > Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2002 2:31 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com  > Subject: Re: Makefile  >  >  >  >  > cljlk wrote: > > J > > I am new in VAX/VMS system and don't know how to create a makefile for > > C programs. @ > > Would anyone please send me a makefile, thus, I can edit it?@ > > Please give me an instructing how to use it on command line. > > Thanks in advance.H > I believe there is a GNUmake available for VMS you can use. Other thanD > that, VMS has a facility called MMS, which is similar to make, butI > you'll need a license. Or you can roll your own - cc + link statements.u >  > -- D >  > Have VMS. Will Travel. > Wire Paladin @alphase.com  > San Franciscor >    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 23:06:21 -0600hC From: "Craig A. Berry" <craig.berry@nospam.signaltreesolutions.com>. Subject: Re: Makefile = Message-ID: <3C538ACD.5080507@nospam.signaltreesolutions.com>t   Don Sykes wrote:   >  > cljlk wrote: > H >>I am new in VAX/VMS system and don't know how to create a makefile for
 >>C programs.s    H > I believe there is a GNUmake available for VMS you can use. Other thanD > that, VMS has a facility called MMS, which is similar to make, butI > you'll need a license. Or you can roll your own - cc + link statements.t    H There is also the freeware utility MMK which is an MMS look-alike and isG available at <http://www.madgoat.com>. The script for these is called a A "description file" rather than a makefile and its default name iseG "descrip.mms." If you want examples you'll find quite a few of these inrH the packages on the freeware CD or other OpenVMS freeware sites (see theG FAQ). As someone mentioned, there is also GNU make available in the GNV  package.  F The decision about what tool to use depends in part on where the buildG will occur. If it's only on your development machine, then use whatever ? you are most comfortable with. If you are planning to deploy ansH application, be aware that there are no make utilities provided with theD operating system, nor is the C compiler available without a separateB license. People often distribute object code that is linked on the@ target system, though that is just one of several possibilities.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 01:55:02 +0000(1 From: Robert DiRosario <rdirosario@starpower.net>a" Subject: mount problems on cluster- Message-ID: <3C535DF6.5789CF41@starpower.net>e  1 I'm having problems mounting disks on my cluster.l  , If I reboot a node and then do "show dev /m"3 some of my DSSI disks show up with "(remote mount)" 0 listed for the volume label.  If I try to access. the disk I get errors.  I can access the disks just fine from other nodes.   , If I issue the mount commands on a terminal  everything works fine.  2 If I power down everything and boot all the nodes $ from scratch, everything works fine.  2 Why are the DSSI disks not being mounted correctly from sylogicals.com?     In sylogicals.com I have:r  + $mount $2$dia1  disk_d1  /cluster /noassist + $mount $2$dia2  disk_d2  /cluster /noassistd+ $mount $2$dia10 disk_d10 /cluster /noassist + $mount $2$dia11 disk_d11 /cluster /noassiste+ $mount $2$dia12 disk_d12 /cluster /noassiste+ $mount $2$dia13 disk_d13 /cluster /noassist-  0 $mount m48$dka200: disk4      /cluster /noassist0 $mount m48$dkb200: disk1      /cluster /noassist0 $mount m48$dkb300: disk2      /cluster /noassist0 $mount m48$dkb500: disk3      /cluster /noassist  " The cluster system disk is $2$dia0  * I have nodes A (4000/106A), B (4000/106A),- C (4000/105A) and M48 (VAX Station 3100/M48).   , Nodes A, B, and C, disks dia0, dia1 and dia2  and a HSD10 are on one DSSI bus.  2 Nodes A and B, disks dia10, dia11, dia12 and dia13) and a 2nd HSD10 are on a second DSSI bus.r  0 Node C and disks D20, D21 and D22 are on a third1 DSSI bus, but I haven't added mount commands for p those drives yet.c  0 Node m48 is on ethernet and works fine, but it's5 turned off for now.  It has it's page and swap files c4 on a local SCSI disk, and when nodes A, B or C boot 5 they run sypagswpfiles.com and try to use m48's page t2 and swap file.  (A quick search of google turns up4 satellite_page.com as a solution for old versions of4 VMS, but I'm using 7.1.  Is the node name defined by! the time sypagswpfiles.com runs?)i   Thanks Robert   ------------------------------   Date: 26 Jan 2002 15:09:12 CDT= From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.120519.killspam.00c7 (Wayne Sewell)  Subject: Re: New VMS newsgroup. Message-ID: <6ZVmtLD$nHcM@tachxxsoftxxconsult>   In article <2795B75EF003D311801A00A0C906B511011C6C74@cucexec.gbc.getronics.nl>, "Dijk, Jeroen van" <Jeroen.vanDijk@Getronics.com> writes:<< > Please split this newsgroup in to comp.os.vms.advocacy and > comp.os.vms.technical , > the volume of messages is getting too big. > K > Not in the alt tree, because otherwise nobody can find the new newsgroup.   J Who are you directing your request to?  There is no authority that governsO comp.os.vms.  Any net denizen can follow the established procedure to propose ay new newsgroup.  Have at it.'     -- iO ===============================================================================kM Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxxl: http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-)nO =============================================================================== = Society Lady:  Are you familiar with the great wall of China?u5        Curly:  No, but I know a big fence in Chicago!e   ------------------------------   Date: 25 Jan 2002 15:49:40 CDT= From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.120519.killspam.00c7 (Wayne Sewell),5 Subject: vegemite (was Re: Younger recruits versus exe. Message-ID: <LGzzwYtWJViY@tachxxsoftxxconsult>  W In article <u4sdlf9qqftu59@corp.supernews.com>, "Pat Durkin" <durk@nothome.com> writes:    > > > Why did Vegemite, which has been owned by the American KraftG > corporation since 1935 but never exported, become a cultural icon andeE > a staple food in Australian households? Because it's cheap and easyl/ > and, above all, because it tastes fantastic."V >   F I guess it must be an acquired taste.  I tried it once, just once, and7 "fantastic" is not the word I used to describe it.  :-)O     -- nO ===============================================================================rM Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxxi: http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-) O ===============================================================================f= Society Lady:  Are you familiar with the great wall of China?.5        Curly:  No, but I know a big fence in Chicago!r   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 04:50:24 GMTB& From: "C.W.Holeman II" <cwhii@ACM.org>8 Subject: VMS system on the sourceforge.net Compile Farm?' Message-ID: <3C53870D.53EF8F2A@ACM.org>s  O Has anyone looked into having a VMS system on the sourceforge.net Compile Farm?d  D 	https://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=762&group_id=1   -- , C.W.Holeman II  cwhii@acm.org				http://emle.org- http://also.as/cwhii		http://JulianLocals.coml   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 06:07:01 GMT L From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")< Subject: Re: VMS system on the sourceforge.net Compile Farm?8 Message-ID: <00A08A3E.3E5B468E@SSRL04.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  H In article <3C53870D.53EF8F2A@ACM.org>, "C.W.Holeman II" <cwhii@ACM.org> wlB >Has anyone looked into having a VMS system on the sourceforge.net > Compile Farm?l   >sE >	https://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=762&group_id=1e  C I looked up that page, and I see a couple of problems right away.  rI The way the compile farm is set up you need SSH to log in and SCP to get  K your code there and retrieve your binaries.  (User-id and password are alsodL fhe same as on other sourceforge projects, so although they don't explicitlyM say it, they probably need YP/NIS or some other single-sign-in authenticationuM xsystem, which may not run on VMS.)  Compaq has no SSH or SCP and no plans torM provide one; Multinet/TCPware have SSH and (I believe) SCP coming out in 4.4.-K Although no money changes hands in the sourceforge project, it doesn't seemI like legit hobbyist use.  K These problems might not be insurmountable, but to really fix most of them,e: either somebody would have to spend significant money or aH VMS-knowledgeable  person would to devote significant time to persuadingG Compaq and Process to donate hardware and software, and then put in therJ time and effort to keep the system software up to date (but with old RTLs,C etc, available, so precompiled software can run on non-cutting edge H systems).  And even then, the people using it will probably be expectingK autoconf to work.  So for the system to be useful, somebody's going to havedI to be prepared to hold the hands of Linux weenies who never heard of VMS,iJ and who think (correctly) that they're doing VMS big people a big favor by even trying to compile on it.d  L That means that even a well-meaning Compaq couldn't just throw hardware and D licenses at the problem, they'd have to devote a portion of a personK (knowledgeable in both Unix and VMS) to it on an ongoing basis.  This seemsd fairly unlikely.  H While the obvious people to take this on are the ones in the gnv projectJ (as most familiar with both the sourceforge culture and technical issues),J they may need to spend their time on paying work.  Unless some motivated, M competent, knowledgeable volunteer or group of volunteers appears, this just e isn't going to happen.   -- Alant  O ===============================================================================e0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056bM  Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA  94309-0210eO ===============================================================================-   ------------------------------   Date: 26 Jan 2002 15:44:28 CDT= From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.120519.killspam.00c7 (Wayne Sewell)I. Subject: Re: When to start a new c.o.v thread?. Message-ID: <gq33bCw1tgXo@tachxxsoftxxconsult>  P In article <3C50A2AE.32B5D217@ACM.org>, "C.W.Holeman II" <cwhii@ACM.org> writes:Q > What is correct way to launch a new topic that involves a quote from a previousr	 > thread?r >  >  > Hoff Hoffman wrote:o >> o >> In article <2795B75EF003D311801A00A0C906B511011C6C74@cucexec.gbc.getronics.nl>, "Dijk, Jeroen van" <Jeroen.vanDijk@Getronics.com> writes:> >> :Please split this newsgroup in to comp.os.vms.advocacy and >> :comp.os.vms.technical . >> :the volume of messages is getting too big. >> rD >>   Do you actually believe that partitioning the "data" will help? > O > Since the above item provoked my posting is it correct to continue on the old2 > thread5 > or is it correct to do as I did and make a new one?  >       M If you survey the current subject lines, you will see that many of us start atO new subthread by creating a new title that also contains the old title prefixeduJ with "(was: ".  This allows people to realize that it is a new thread, butN there is still a tie to the old thread.  Sometimes this happens several times.    7 For instance, if you followup to a post with a title ofy  ( "Compaq marketing policy drives me nuts"  M and it diverges off to something totally unrelated (as they often do), change  the title as follows:u    C "I love/hate vegemite (was: Compaq marketing policy drives me nuts"w    M If your newsreader allows editing of subject lines, this is trivially easy to2 do.0     --  O ===============================================================================*M Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxx>: http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-)cO ===============================================================================r= Society Lady:  Are you familiar with the great wall of China?u5        Curly:  No, but I know a big fence in Chicago!c   ------------------------------   Date: 24 Jan 2002 20:38:40 CDT= From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.120519.killspam.00c7 (Wayne Sewell)uD Subject: Re: Younger recruits versus experienced veterans  ( was The. Message-ID: <4UWfnxNKVY9J@tachxxsoftxxconsult>  f In article <VA.0000051f.4d861b55@bluewin.delete.ch>, Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.delete.ch> writes:? > In article <3c4f26fe.162580709@news.btopenworld.com>,  wrote:  > G >> Still the one amusing one my German grandmother had trouble with wasa; >> "where's Jim?" "He's in bed with a chesty cow! [cough]".  >> > That's good :-)m >     L Sounds like someone I know (he chesty cow, not the German grandmother).  :-)     -- nO ===============================================================================sM Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxxl: http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-) O =============================================================================== = Society Lady:  Are you familiar with the great wall of China?55        Curly:  No, but I know a big fence in Chicago!u   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2002.051 ************************