1 INFO-VAX	Sat, 06 Jul 2002	Volume 2002 : Issue 369       Contents:9 Every cloud has a silver lining? Hopefully this one does. $ Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications...$ RE: Fearless IPF Prognostications...$ Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications...$ Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications...$ Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications...$ Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications...$ Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications...$ Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications...$ Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications...$ Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications...B How to configure a volumn shadowing system disk on OpenVMS v7.2-1?F Re: How to configure a volumn shadowing system disk on OpenVMS v7.2-1?F Re: How to configure a volumn shadowing system disk on OpenVMS v7.2-1?F Re: How to configure a volumn shadowing system disk on OpenVMS v7.2-1?( Re: IA64 version 2 to be unveiled Monday" Re: LGI_BRK_DISUSER and batch job? Re: Lynx & SSL= Re: New web-page dedicated to ports of PD software to OpenVMS + Re: Only 20% drop in VMS systems (was: wow) + RE: Only 20% drop in VMS systems (was: wow) + Re: Only 20% drop in VMS systems (was: wow)  Re: OpenVMS USB questions  Re: Pascal Editor  post& Re: Suggestion for FAB: virtual memory+ Re: Three HP Press releases (via Bloomberg)  Re: Where to put startup stuff  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------   Date: 6 Jul 02 11:18:07 +0200 ) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) B Subject: Every cloud has a silver lining? Hopefully this one does.) Message-ID: <tpG6oabeEIMm@elias.decus.ch>   N The article at http://www.thescotsman.co.uk/index.cfm?id=725092002 reports 650; job losses at Compaq Erskine, in Scotland's "Silicon Glen".   J Whilst obviously unfortunate for those affected, perhaps this is a case of" "every cloud has a silver lining".  N "Ian McNair, the vice president of Hewlett Packard for Europe, the Middle EastN and Africa, said: "I'm confident that we'll secure the future of the remainingI workers, but no-one in this business can guarantee anything for certain."   G Mr McNair tried to explain the rationale behind the job losses, adding: C "Neither Hewlett Packard or Compaq are producing money-making PCs."   N Wow. The VP of EMEA actually admitting that HP/CPQ aren't making money on PCs.  O "An Executive [the Scottish Executive] spokesman said: "We regret the company's H decision. We understand, however, that it has come about partly due to aL decision by Compaq-Hewlett Packard to focus on the high end, high value sideP of its business and is part of a much larger programme of job cuts worldwide and- throughout Europe, the Middle East and Asia."   L So HPQ are admitting that the high end, high value side of their business isI worthy of focus. What a pleasant change from all the PC emphasis  we have  had to listen to!  __
 Paul Sture Switzerland    ------------------------------   Date: 6 Jul 2002 08:41:36 GMT ( From: nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren)- Subject: Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications... 0 Message-ID: <ag6ag0$c12$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>  , In article <3D264C9F.5D6286BB@videotron.ca>,/ JF Mezei  <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:  >"Terry C. Shannon" wrote:H >> What's more, the Itanium II system doesn't run VMS (yet). From what IM >> understand the folks at Spit Brook will be among the early adopters of the & >> HP Itanium II workstations, though. > O >When will work on wildfire-class IA64 systems begin ?  isn't it a case of IA64 O >having to first learn how to crawl on a workstation before it can even hope to " >run on a wildfire-class machine ?  B To answer your last question first, yes and no.  Yes, it has to beC shown to work reliably and efficiently in practice on a workstation A before anyone will consider it seriously on a medium or large SMP 1 but, no, the work does not have to be serialised.   ? Back around 1999, NEC/Hitachi announced a working 16-way Merced ? chipset, to yawns from the then (?) arrogant Intel.  Last year, > at least SGI had the Itanic ready to roll on the Origin series@ when Intel scuppered it on the slipway.  Rumours are that HP was> close behind and IBM were following all.  All of those systems> were then abandoned, though SGI released a smaller version for development purposes.   ? I am pretty sure that I know what the line-up is this time, and ! shall know for certain next week.   ? The Mark Boslet article you posted shows that such commentators A are as gullible as ever - several of its statements we know to be 3 wrong - but there was one very interesting comment:   K     "It's a very important product for us," says Lisa Hambrick, director of N     Intel's enterprise processor marketing. The high-performance server marketB     is dominated by Unix products. "We're looking to change that."  B If the word "Unix" is merely used as a synonym for "RISC", then it@ means nothing that we don't know.  But, if it REALLY means Unix,> then we have heard something significant.  I am not sure what, though ....   ? My suspicion is the former, though it is possible that parts of 7 Intel still believe in Microsoft's loyalty to Intel :-)      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 334679    ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 09:54:55 -0400' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> - Subject: RE: Fearless IPF Prognostications... T Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4026607FF@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   Nick,   F <<< If the word "Unix" is merely used as a synonym for "RISC", then it$ means nothing that we don't know.<<<  C I also picked up on that. As you mentioned, she likely meant to say  RISC.   C If she did mean UNIX, then the Linux and HP-UX folks might be a tad 	 upset....    :-)    Regards   
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  Hewlett-Packard Canada! Consulting & Integration Services  Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax   : 613-591-4477 Email: Kerry.Main@hp.com     -----Original Message-----2 From: Nick Maclaren [mailto:nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk]=20 Sent: July 6, 2002 4:42 AM To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com - Subject: Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications...     , In article <3D264C9F.5D6286BB@videotron.ca>,/ JF Mezei  <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:  >"Terry C. Shannon" wrote:H >> What's more, the Itanium II system doesn't run VMS (yet). From what I  I >> understand the folks at Spit Brook will be among the early adopters=20 - >> of the HP Itanium II workstations, though.  > J >When will work on wildfire-class IA64 systems begin ?  isn't it a case=20I >of IA64 having to first learn how to crawl on a workstation before it=20 3 >can even hope to run on a wildfire-class machine ?   H To answer your last question first, yes and no.  Yes, it has to be shownD to work reliably and efficiently in practice on a workstation beforeG anyone will consider it seriously on a medium or large SMP but, no, the $ work does not have to be serialised.  H Back around 1999, NEC/Hitachi announced a working 16-way Merced chipset,G to yawns from the then (?) arrogant Intel.  Last year, at least SGI had H the Itanic ready to roll on the Origin series when Intel scuppered it on? the slipway.  Rumours are that HP was close behind and IBM were D following all.  All of those systems were then abandoned, though SGI4 released a smaller version for development purposes.  E I am pretty sure that I know what the line-up is this time, and shall  know for certain next week.   F The Mark Boslet article you posted shows that such commentators are asF gullible as ever - several of its statements we know to be wrong - but' there was one very interesting comment:   H     "It's a very important product for us," says Lisa Hambrick, director ofG     Intel's enterprise processor marketing. The high-performance server  marketB     is dominated by Unix products. "We're looking to change that."  H If the word "Unix" is merely used as a synonym for "RISC", then it meansG nothing that we don't know.  But, if it REALLY means Unix, then we have = heard something significant.  I am not sure what, though ....   E My suspicion is the former, though it is possible that parts of Intel 1 still believe in Microsoft's loyalty to Intel :-)      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 334679    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 13:53:20 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> - Subject: Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications... H Message-ID: <kDCV8.15847$Ggf.11484@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  5 "Nick Maclaren" <nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message * news:ag6ag0$c12$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk... > 0 >....but there was one very interesting comment: > J >     "It's a very important product for us," says Lisa Hambrick, director ofI >     Intel's enterprise processor marketing. The high-performance server  marketD >     is dominated by Unix products. "We're looking to change that." > D > If the word "Unix" is merely used as a synonym for "RISC", then itB > means nothing that we don't know.  But, if it REALLY means Unix,@ > then we have heard something significant.  I am not sure what,
 > though ....  > A > My suspicion is the former, though it is possible that parts of 9 > Intel still believe in Microsoft's loyalty to Intel :-)  >   L As much as Microsoft is reviled in the industry, especially amongst the *ix,E and other high-end o/s crowd, it was Microsoft's 'standardization' of L software on Intel-based platforms that got Intel where it is today.  WithoutG Microsoft, there would not have been the production volume in the 80x86 H family that Intel enjoyed, and hence MUCH of Intel's vast profitability.  I Remember the MS business model for their o/s - at least one cpu per task, L whereas the *ix and other o/s models tend to work on the 'do more with less'7 model. Which one sells more cpu's and support chipsets?   " Intel knows who butters its bread.   ------------------------------   Date: 6 Jul 2002 14:26:20 GMT ( From: nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren)- Subject: Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications... 0 Message-ID: <ag6umc$qbb$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>  H In article <kDCV8.15847$Ggf.11484@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>," John Smith <a@nonymous.com> wrote: > M >As much as Microsoft is reviled in the industry, especially amongst the *ix, F >and other high-end o/s crowd, it was Microsoft's 'standardization' ofM >software on Intel-based platforms that got Intel where it is today.  Without H >Microsoft, there would not have been the production volume in the 80x86I >family that Intel enjoyed, and hence MUCH of Intel's vast profitability.   ? Initially, it was more IBM than Microsoft.  The fact that IBM's D vast marketing power was used to build up competition and eventuallyB eliminate IBM as a player in the PC design arena is an interesting footnote in history ....  J >Remember the MS business model for their o/s - at least one cpu per task,M >whereas the *ix and other o/s models tend to work on the 'do more with less' 8 >model. Which one sells more cpu's and support chipsets? > # >Intel knows who butters its bread.   A A knife can be used to butter bread.  It can also be used to stab > someone in the back.  It was the latter possibility that I was
 referring to.   @ Would YOU trust Microsoft with your business, if you were CEO of Intel?     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 334679    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 14:49:18 GMT 1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> - Subject: Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications... / Message-ID: <OrDV8.253687$nZ3.114310@rwcrnsc53>   5 "Nick Maclaren" <nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message * news:ag6ag0$c12$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk.... > In article <3D264C9F.5D6286BB@videotron.ca>,1 > JF Mezei  <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:  > >"Terry C. Shannon" wrote:J > >> What's more, the Itanium II system doesn't run VMS (yet). From what IK > >> understand the folks at Spit Brook will be among the early adopters of  the ( > >> HP Itanium II workstations, though. > > L > >When will work on wildfire-class IA64 systems begin ?  isn't it a case of IA64I > >having to first learn how to crawl on a workstation before it can even  hope to $ > >run on a wildfire-class machine ? > D > To answer your last question first, yes and no.  Yes, it has to beE > shown to work reliably and efficiently in practice on a workstation C > before anyone will consider it seriously on a medium or large SMP 3 > but, no, the work does not have to be serialised.   K Wasn't my question, but system availability is one gating factor. There are K no operational Wildfire-class McKinley systems from HP yet (Compaq's 32-way K Cyclone box apparently got the deep six in the Clean Room, as did the 4-way H and 8-way Tornado and Typhoon). First large McKinley box is likely to be Superdome with IPF board swap.  A Pre-merger, the VMS and NSK folks started their development on HP H workstations as they were available well before ProLiant DL590/64 Blazer boxes could be had.    ------------------------------   Date: 6 Jul 2002 15:51:32 GMT ( From: nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren)- Subject: Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications... / Message-ID: <ag73m4$li$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>   / In article <OrDV8.253687$nZ3.114310@rwcrnsc53>, 0 Terry C. Shannon <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote: > 6 >"Nick Maclaren" <nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message+ >news:ag6ag0$c12$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk... / >> In article <3D264C9F.5D6286BB@videotron.ca>, 2 >> JF Mezei  <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote: >> >"Terry C. Shannon" wrote: K >> >> What's more, the Itanium II system doesn't run VMS (yet). From what I L >> >> understand the folks at Spit Brook will be among the early adopters of >the) >> >> HP Itanium II workstations, though.  >> >M >> >When will work on wildfire-class IA64 systems begin ?  isn't it a case of  >IA64 J >> >having to first learn how to crawl on a workstation before it can even >hope to% >> >run on a wildfire-class machine ?  >>E >> To answer your last question first, yes and no.  Yes, it has to be F >> shown to work reliably and efficiently in practice on a workstationD >> before anyone will consider it seriously on a medium or large SMP4 >> but, no, the work does not have to be serialised. > L >Wasn't my question, but system availability is one gating factor. There areL >no operational Wildfire-class McKinley systems from HP yet (Compaq's 32-wayL >Cyclone box apparently got the deep six in the Clean Room, as did the 4-wayI >and 8-way Tornado and Typhoon). First large McKinley box is likely to be  >Superdome with IPF board swap.   B That is so, but the development of such things need not be delayedD just because workstations are not available.  I suspect that you areE right that the first large IA-64 box will be a SuperDome, but it will C be interesting to see what HP, SGI, IBM and NEC announce during the 5 rest of this month.  And what they DON'T announce :-)   B >Pre-merger, the VMS and NSK folks started their development on HPI >workstations as they were available well before ProLiant DL590/64 Blazer  >boxes could be had.  : Yes.  My suspicion is that the same will happen this time.     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 334679    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 16:03:20 GMT 1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> - Subject: Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications... . Message-ID: <cxEV8.103779$Uu2.17831@sccrnsc03>  5 "Nick Maclaren" <nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message ) news:ag73m4$li$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk... 1 > In article <OrDV8.253687$nZ3.114310@rwcrnsc53>, 2 > Terry C. Shannon <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote: > > 8 > >"Nick Maclaren" <nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message- > >news:ag6ag0$c12$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk... 1 > >> In article <3D264C9F.5D6286BB@videotron.ca>, 4 > >> JF Mezei  <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote: > >> >"Terry C. Shannon" wrote::K > >> >> What's more, the Itanium II system doesn't run VMS (yet). From whatF IoK > >> >> understand the folks at Spit Brook will be among the early adoptersn of > >the+ > >> >> HP Itanium II workstations, though.  > >> >L > >> >When will work on wildfire-class IA64 systems begin ?  isn't it a case of > >IA64aL > >> >having to first learn how to crawl on a workstation before it can even
 > >hope to' > >> >run on a wildfire-class machine ?c > >>G > >> To answer your last question first, yes and no.  Yes, it has to beeH > >> shown to work reliably and efficiently in practice on a workstationF > >> before anyone will consider it seriously on a medium or large SMP6 > >> but, no, the work does not have to be serialised. > >rJ > >Wasn't my question, but system availability is one gating factor. There are G > >no operational Wildfire-class McKinley systems from HP yet (Compaq's2 32-wayH > >Cyclone box apparently got the deep six in the Clean Room, as did the 4-wayyK > >and 8-way Tornado and Typhoon). First large McKinley box is likely to beE! > >Superdome with IPF board swap.B >iD > That is so, but the development of such things need not be delayedF > just because workstations are not available.  I suspect that you areG > right that the first large IA-64 box will be a SuperDome, but it willlE > be interesting to see what HP, SGI, IBM and NEC announce during theo7 > rest of this month.  And what they DON'T announce :-)e  H Yup. HPQ has had McKinley boxes (workstations, primarily) in house sinceF very early this year. And plenty of work has been done in the McKinley& developers platform, whatever that is.  F Unsure what rival vendors will announce next week, we'll find out soon enuff.   >MD > >Pre-merger, the VMS and NSK folks started their development on HPK > >workstations as they were available well before ProLiant DL590/64 Blazeri > >boxes could be had. >n< > Yes.  My suspicion is that the same will happen this time. >   ' That would be a pretty safe assumption.o   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 13:04:16 -0400m- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>m- Subject: Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications... , Message-ID: <3D27230F.DE220D2E@videotron.ca>   John Smith wrote: G > and other high-end o/s crowd, it was Microsoft's 'standardization' ofpN > software on Intel-based platforms that got Intel where it is today.  WithoutI > Microsoft, there would not have been the production volume in the 80x86  > family that Intel enjoyed,  K No, it was despite Intel and IBM that the "PC" became industry standard. It L was the initial batch of clone makers (one has to acknowledge Compaq in thatN regard in being the first "serious" clone maker) as well as folks like AMD whoN provided what was initially illegal competition which later became established and "de facto" standard.  J It was exactly because of the competition that manufacturers dropped theirJ margins and raised efficiency of their companies to allow for lower prices& which then allowed for higher volumes.  L And it is exactly because Digital refused to follow the pack that Digital no longer exists.  K Now, as long as IA64 remains an Intel proprietary chip used primarily by HP K and available from no other manufacturer, its chances of becoming "industry N standard" are very slim, especially if the 8086 continues to perform better or comparatively. r  L So far, all indications are that IA64 will remain a low volume chip, just as PA-RISC, Sparc, MIPS or Alpha.  L The initial bets were that Intel would bulldoze its way into the "risc" chipN market, and kill off PA-RISC, MIPS and possibly Alpha. When it became apparentG that it wouldn't do that, companies changed their strategies. Alpha was K murdered, others abandonned plans to bet their business on IA64 and I thinkt& that PA-RISC's life was extended some.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 13:07:16 -0400i- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>m- Subject: Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications... , Message-ID: <3D2723C3.CD38FD43@videotron.ca>   "Main, Kerry" wrote:E > I also picked up on that. As you mentioned, she likely meant to sayu > RISC.  > E > If she did mean UNIX, then the Linux and HP-UX folks might be a tad  > upset....B    L Remember the Capellas/Winkler/Carly statements that Windows would eat at the8 underbelly of Unix. (or whatever the exact wording was).  G IA64 may be Windows's big chance at the remaining markets it hasn't yetfN concquered. And Linux may be a godsend for Microsoft. Let Linux take a certainL percentage of workstation market and all of a sudden, Microsoft doesn't lookK as much as a monopoly as it really is and its stealing of enterprise marketn wouldn't be so "monopolistic".   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 13:11:20 -0400d- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>h- Subject: Re: Fearless IPF Prognostications...h, Message-ID: <3D2724B6.D7F7C166@videotron.ca>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:tJ > Yup. HPQ has had McKinley boxes (workstations, primarily) in house sinceH > very early this year. And plenty of work has been done in the McKinley( > developers platform, whatever that is.  N Something which puzzles me. If McKinley was still being debugged last week andK is only now ready to be unveiled, what sort of "McKinley" would those earlyR# workstations have been built with ?   K When building an OS, do you really want to be working on a buggy chip where.G you can't tell if a problem is due to your OS code or the chip itself ?"   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 15:36:58 +0800" From: "KT" <borischan@hotpop3.com>K Subject: How to configure a volumn shadowing system disk on OpenVMS v7.2-1?s+ Message-ID: <3d269d69$1@newsgate.hknet.com>d   As title   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 09:53:16 +0200S) From: Bart Zorn <B.Zorn@xs4all.nospam.nl>-O Subject: Re: How to configure a volumn shadowing system disk on OpenVMS v7.2-1?c/ Message-ID: <3D26A1EC.8050601@xs4all.nospam.nl>6  	 KT wrote:M
 > As title >  >   5 Set the following SYSGEN parameters in MODPARAMS.DAT:   
 SHADOWING = 2D SHADOW_SYS_DISK = 1t. SHADOW_SYS_UNIT = n	! DSAn for the system disk  # Next perform an AUTOGEN and reboot.   I Your system disk should now come up as DSAn, a single member shadow set. >3 Next you can mount an other disk to the shadow set.    HTH,  	 Bart Zorn>   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 14:53:19 +0300r@ From: Veli =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=F6rkk=F6?= <Veli.Korkko@kolumbus.fi>O Subject: Re: How to configure a volumn shadowing system disk on OpenVMS v7.2-1? + Message-ID: <3D26DA2F.44F1353B@kolumbus.fi>o   Bart Zorn wrote: >  > KT wrote:Y > > As title > >o > >o > 7 > Set the following SYSGEN parameters in MODPARAMS.DAT:e >  > SHADOWING = 2s > SHADOW_SYS_DISK = 1m4 > SHADOW_SYS_UNIT = n     ! DSAn for the system disk > % > Next perform an AUTOGEN and reboot.i > J > Your system disk should now come up as DSAn, a single member shadow set.5 > Next you can mount an other disk to the shadow set.r >  > HTH, >  > Bart Zornr  < But don't forget to change ALLOCLASS to non-zero value sinceD HBVS requires it. And if it was 0 prior, your disk names will change= from NODE$DKxx to $N$DKxx so change your mount commands also.r   _velie   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 14:57:40 +0200 ) From: Bart Zorn <B.Zorn@xs4all.nospam.nl> O Subject: Re: How to configure a volumn shadowing system disk on OpenVMS v7.2-1?a- Message-ID: <3D26E944.50100@xs4all.nospam.nl>e   Veli K=F6rkk=F6 wrote: > Bart Zorn wrote: >=20 >>KT wrote:' >> >>>As titlet >>>u >>>r >>7 >>Set the following SYSGEN parameters in MODPARAMS.DAT:e >> >>SHADOWING =3D 2h >>SHADOW_SYS_DISK =3D 1 6 >>SHADOW_SYS_UNIT =3D n     ! DSAn for the system disk >>% >>Next perform an AUTOGEN and reboot.i >>J >>Your system disk should now come up as DSAn, a single member shadow set= =2Et5 >>Next you can mount an other disk to the shadow set.n >> >>HTH, >> >>Bart Zorn  >=20 >=20> > But don't forget to change ALLOCLASS to non-zero value sinceF > HBVS requires it. And if it was 0 prior, your disk names will change? > from NODE$DKxx to $N$DKxx so change your mount commands also.v >=20 > _velim >=20   Blush... Yes I forgot that one!H   Bart   ------------------------------   Date: 6 Jul 2002 15:35:20 GMT3 From: "Who, me?" <who@me.com>-1 Subject: Re: IA64 version 2 to be unveiled Monday 3 Message-ID: <Xns9243751B18ABAwhomecom@199.125.85.9>a  0 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in$ news:3D26199E.1733962@videotron.ca: H >   Some vendors believe that will change. "The marketplace will pick upG > starting in the second half of the year," says Mark Hudson, worldwiderG > marketing manager at HP. "This is an architecture that will be around  > for the next 20 years."r  ( Cough. I wonder if this guy is ex-DEC...   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 19:23:04 +1000@ From: "Antony Wardle" <antony.wardle@nospammmmm.optusnet.com.au>+ Subject: Re: LGI_BRK_DISUSER and batch job? < Message-ID: <3d26b718$0$16289$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>   I would say no, becausea when the batch job starts, the first thing it does is "logs in" and it will fail.    antony      6 "Kiasu Surfer" <verykiasu@hotpop.com> wrote in message2 news:oot9iu4of6qb2ev85nvovgljh88nmjbtti@4ax.com...L If LGI_BRK_DISUSER is set to 1, and its happened that this user login failed andhD marked as intruder, and got his/her account disabled via the earlier
 parameter.G My question is, will his/her original earlier scheduled batch job stillu execute?   Kevine   Regards,  	 Kevin Lai    **************** ** SPAM BLOCK ** ****************? REPLACE "verykiasu" with "iamverykiasu" at verykiasu@hotpop.come   ------------------------------   Date: 6 Jul 2002 14:54:09 GMT / From: Thomas Dickey <dickey@saltmine.radix.net>o Subject: Re: Lynx & SSL * Message-ID: <ag70ah$slg$4@news1.Radix.Net>  4 Christoph Gartmann <gartmann@immunbio.mpg.de> wrote:  Q > Now the question remains: will OpenSSL ever include support for native Multinet:/ > or will Lynx be modified to demangle sockets?D  M I'm not sure (of the former).  For lynx - I'll incorporate changes (but don't1= have an account with enough space to build/test lynx on VMS).r   --  = Thomas E. Dickey <dickey@radix.net> <dickey@herndon4.his.com>a http://dickey.his.como ftp://dickey.his.com   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 17:55:16 +0200r' From: Brass Christof <welcome@spam.not>hF Subject: Re: New web-page dedicated to ports of PD software to OpenVMS( Message-ID: <3D2712E4.448E1D13@spam.not>   Great!!   ( That's exactly one piece that is needed.   JOUKJ wrote: >  > Hi Folks,h > E > I created a new web page (http://nchrem.tnw.tudelft.nl/openvms/) onnE > which I'm planning to give a summary of all Publicdomain software ItI > contributed ports and/or patches to in order to have it run on OpenVMS.hF > The page consists of link to where to get it, what to patch and what; > software it depends on (and links to these dependencies).nF > I hope this page will help to make it easier to find/install/run the > software on OpenVMS. > I > The present page is an initial version. More packages will be added the H > coming weeks, but already contains some nice ports not found elsewhere& > on OpenVMS pages(i.e. Ted & Pfaedit) >  >                  Joukd   -- k? According to the Quality Assurance Institute C/C++/ObjC, PERL, m@ UNIX (incl. Linux) and Windows/XY are regarded as harmful. Java 0 is slow and the class library is badly designed.7 moc dot slupofni at ssarb - please reverse the sequence,   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 13:43:51 GMTc# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>o4 Subject: Re: Only 20% drop in VMS systems (was: wow)F Message-ID: <ruCV8.4992$cpF.2886@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  2 "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> wrote in messageL news:BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4026607FA@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net. ..  G Fwiw, the total numbers of systems in almost all med to large Customers G is shrinking a huge amount these days. Almost every one of these Cust'soH is either considering, investigating or implementing an IT consolidation1 project as a means to reduce their overall costs.l  C And this applies to all platforms. We bid on one RFP here in CanadalF whereby the Govt wanted to reduce the number of small Sun systems fromG 150 down to less than 10. Another Customer has over 1100 NT servers and E wanted this number to shrink to 250 range. Another Customer in CanadayH has approx 115 small VAX and Alpha servers across the country and wantes. to reduce that overall number to less than 10.  H All of these have the same thing in common. Reduce the overall number of? servers with much bigger, higher availability and in many casessG multi-site as well... (IT consolidation 101 says a single site is not ag wise move.)i  E This does not mean these companies are reducing their dependancies oniC that OS. On the contrary, it likely means they are increasing their.F dependancy as a single server being down has a much bigger impact than before.o  " ----------------------------------   Kerry,  J So where are the full page ads that reach senior execs (ie. WSJ, NY Times,H Financial Times, Economist), and the TV ads around CNBC or CNN financial shows?   Say something to the effect of:   J "Want to boost earnings by reducing the number of systems you operate, and0 boost security and reliability at the same time?  ( OpenVMS clusters from HP are the answer.  9 The best reliability and most horsepower in the business.g  - We invented clusters - nobody does it better.D  > OpenVMS - a serious solution for businesses that are serious."  * (c) 2002, John Smith. All rights reserved.  2 or something like the following in a full-page ad:   "                 Javan                SSL             Apache             SSH2             TCP/IP               Perl           Messaging             Routing (insert more buzzwords here)    OpenVMS does it all.        More reliably.      More securely.        At lower cost.           OpenVMS.! The operating system of business.f        Only from HP.     "  * (c) 2002, John Smith. All Rights Reserved.       or   " "                Servers down again?  ( How much revenue did you lose this time?  #            They'll be back up when?u    %      When down-time is NOT an option,h(  choose a computing infrastructure where+  up-time is measured in years, not minutes.y  I From web serving, to file & print serving, to data mining, to high-volumetK transaction processing, nothing is more reliable than OpenVMS clusters from  HP.l  "     We wrote the book on clusters.          Nobody does it better.e  !        OpenVMS - only from HP.  "r  * (c) 2002, John Smith. All Rights Reserved.    H Hammer these messages in over and over. These are VMS's strongest set ofI strengths, and HP should be focusing on this. This is the stuff that will4' show consistent positive sales results.e   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 10:18:59 -0400' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com>c4 Subject: RE: Only 20% drop in VMS systems (was: wow)T Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4023D9267@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   John,e    Some excellent suggestions...=20  D I have no idea of what future marketing stuff is cooking, but what IH have seen is a much healthier respect for OpenVMS internally than beforeD (previous posts have alluded to this) the merger, so we shall see ..   Regards,  
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  Hewlett-Packard Canada! Consulting & Integration Services2 Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax   : 613-591-4477 Email: Kerry.Main@hp.com     -----Original Message-----+ From: John Smith [mailto:a@nonymous.com]=207 Sent: July 6, 2002 9:44 AM To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comw4 Subject: Re: Only 20% drop in VMS systems (was: wow)      2 "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> wrote in messageH news:BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4026607FA@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp. net. .1  G Fwiw, the total numbers of systems in almost all med to large CustomerskG is shrinking a huge amount these days. Almost every one of these Cust's<H is either considering, investigating or implementing an IT consolidation1 project as a means to reduce their overall costs.n  C And this applies to all platforms. We bid on one RFP here in CanadawF whereby the Govt wanted to reduce the number of small Sun systems fromG 150 down to less than 10. Another Customer has over 1100 NT servers andyE wanted this number to shrink to 250 range. Another Customer in CanadarH has approx 115 small VAX and Alpha servers across the country and wantes. to reduce that overall number to less than 10.  H All of these have the same thing in common. Reduce the overall number of? servers with much bigger, higher availability and in many cases>G multi-site as well... (IT consolidation 101 says a single site is not ab wise move.)o  E This does not mean these companies are reducing their dependancies oneC that OS. On the contrary, it likely means they are increasing theiriF dependancy as a single server being down has a much bigger impact than before.r  " ----------------------------------   Kerry,  C So where are the full page ads that reach senior execs (ie. WSJ, NYoE Times, Financial Times, Economist), and the TV ads around CNBC or CNNo financial shows?   Say something to the effect of:y  F "Want to boost earnings by reducing the number of systems you operate,4 and boost security and reliability at the same time?  ( OpenVMS clusters from HP are the answer.  9 The best reliability and most horsepower in the business.h  - We invented clusters - nobody does it better.u  > OpenVMS - a serious solution for businesses that are serious."  * (c) 2002, John Smith. All rights reserved.  2 or something like the following in a full-page ad:   "e                Javaw                SSL             Apache             SSH2             TCP/IP               Perl           Messagingt            Routing (insert more buzzwords here)    OpenVMS does it all.o       More reliably.      More securely.d       At lower cost.           OpenVMS.! The operating system of business.         Only from HP.     "  * (c) 2002, John Smith. All Rights Reserved.       or   "a"                Servers down again?  ( How much revenue did you lose this time?  #            They'll be back up when?o    %      When down-time is NOT an option,o(  choose a computing infrastructure where+  up-time is measured in years, not minutes.n  = From web serving, to file & print serving, to data mining, totA high-volume transaction processing, nothing is more reliable thane OpenVMS clusters from HP.   "     We wrote the book on clusters.          Nobody does it better.d  !        OpenVMS - only from HP.  "a  * (c) 2002, John Smith. All Rights Reserved.    H Hammer these messages in over and over. These are VMS's strongest set ofD strengths, and HP should be focusing on this. This is the stuff that, will show consistent positive sales results.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 14:44:31 GMTt1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> 4 Subject: Re: Only 20% drop in VMS systems (was: wow)? Message-ID: <jnDV8.303302$6m5.276452@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>c  2 "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> wrote in messageL news:BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4023D9267@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net. .. John,r   Some excellent suggestions...m  D I have no idea of what future marketing stuff is cooking, but what IH have seen is a much healthier respect for OpenVMS internally than beforeD (previous posts have alluded to this) the merger, so we shall see ..    K Indeed there is a healthier respect. The VMS V7.3 coverage in the press wastL not accidental or a matter of happenstance. Bob Blatz and his PR folks had a hand in it.p   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 09:27:05 +0200  From: Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl>" Subject: Re: OpenVMS USB questions& Message-ID: <3D269BC9.7020506@home.nl>   Patrick Young wrote:; > I read that there is support for USB under OpenVMS 7.3-1.a > I > At the moment I'm "dicking with" a serial IrDA widget under OpenVMS and.C > am writing (slowly, but I do everything slowly) an IrDA stack. So2F > far I can talk to my Casio Wrist Camera and HP620LX pocket PC at theK > IrLAP level and Set Normal Response Mode (SNRM). I'm at the IrLMP connectd > stage now. > I > What is interesting is that the Casio *came with* a USB IrDA widget andCD > I had to *buy* a serial port IrDA widget to even think about doing > anything under OpenVMS.t > C > Now that OpenVMS has a USB driver I have the following questions:n > I > (1) It was mentioned the driver works with a Lucent USS-344 USB widget. H >     The USS-344 widget looks command/status register compatible with a? >     CMD USB0670. My PC164 has etchings on the board for (fromiF >     the circuit diagram) a CMD USB0670 and USB connector. Looking at= >     the USS-344 docs and the USB0670 these are both OpenHCI:7 >     and the command/status registers look identical. a  L I'm not an expert on these matters, but afaik that is the case with all USB O chipsets. Hence the OpenHCI specification. The problem seems to be (as with so  O much PC related stuff) that a specification is one thing, but really complying oI to the specification is something totally different. From (much) earlier  O discussions about USB I remember that many chipsets had so many errors that it  Q wasn't possible to use them for a reliable driver setup. Since even the built-in tN   Alphaserver USB chipsets are not supported, we can imagine the magnitude of P the problem. If I'm not mistaken the Opti chip is a very low-cost chip that can O be found on many cheap USB cards. Don't know about is reliability, but I would  A go for the CMD, since that brand is well known for it's SCSI etc.    >     The Opti 82C861iH >     is a "drop in" replacement for the USB0670. Since I don't have anyD >     spare PCI slots on my PC164 (due to an over population of SCSIJ >     controllers due to the SRM not supporting U160 - oh forget it - I'veI >     already *bitched* about PC164 SRM device support :-) I'll want/need G >     to look at getting the Opti or CMD chip and soldering it in. Doese% >     this chip work with the driver?r > J > (2) Since it will be a few months before we order and receive our 7.3-1,F >     If Q1 is true, does the driver function under 7.3? and if so canG >     someone send me a copy? I might want to "dick around" with my USB   >     IrDA widget at some point.   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 13:30:20 +0200" From: "Hans Vlems" <hvlems@iae.nl> Subject: Re: Pascal Editor5 Message-ID: <ag6jr8$imb8n$1@ID-143435.news.dfncis.de>u  6 John E. Malmberg <wb8tyw@qsl.network> wrote in message$ news:3D260B7C.3020308@qsl.network... > Hans Vlems wrote:u< > > Shiva MahaDeva <contracer11@uol.com.br> wrote in message: > > news:ddf392ea.0207031653.d28e433@posting.google.com... > >DD > >>Which Editor can I use im my PC to open Vax Pascal files exactlyB > >>how I see these files using Edit/EDT files in the VMS system ?D > >>Id like transfer VAX Pascal files from the VMS system to my PC,0 > >>and vice versa, keeping the Edit/EDT format. > >k  > > Could the answer be NOTEPAD? > J > DOS EDIT or WORDPAD (also known as WRITE) will usually handle text files! > that were not produced on a PC.  >oI > Problems with using NOTEPAD on UNIX text files is a common complaint onu) > the SAMBA newsgroups and mailing lists.- >-I > SAMBA 2.0.6 for OpenVMS can be configured to handle specific extensionsB > as specific file formats.j >:F > IIRC: Advanced Server or Pathworks also allow specifying the defaultF > file format, but it has been a while since I looked at that setting. >  > -Johnr > wb8tyw@qsl.network > Personal Opinion Only  >u  E Correct, but the original post mentioned VAX Pascal files from VMS so  NOTEPAD is an option.HH OTOH it is not that difficult to write a small program to process simple text files to pass them  among VMS, Wxx and unix.   ------------------------------   Date: 6 Jul 02 10:59:54 +0200o) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) 
 Subject: postd) Message-ID: <MRGQyPWhXHM7@elias.decus.ch>0  I Ian McNair, the vice president of Hewlett Packard for Europe, the Middle S   -- e __
 Paul Sture Switzerlandy   ------------------------------  * Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 05:50:46 -0700 (PDT). From: Fabio Cardoso <fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br>/ Subject: Re: Suggestion for FAB: virtual memory-@ Message-ID: <20020706125046.69392.qmail@web20204.mail.yahoo.com>  3 I just would like an Autogen which works integratedl- to Oracle RDB parameters .... we changed the o, Global Buffers and researched to change some6 PQL_ parameters to SYSGEN.Was a pain. And why OVMS 7.33 enters wikth XFC allocating 6GB of my 12 GB RAM????    Regards    FC c2 --- JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:3 > On a Macintosh, (MAC OS 9 and earlier), one had a. > simple setting:e > 3 > You had the RAM amount, and you could then secify  > the total amount of virtuale4 > memory available, (which also dictated the size of > the paging/swapping file > that is created.)e > 6 > For VMS, it would be nice to have a FAQ section that > describes the variousj2 > SYSGEN parameters that dictate the total virtual > address space, and the5 > relationship between that, the page file sizes, and  > the pagefile quota for > each process.l > 2 > As I recall, the guide on performance management > seems to deal a lot with4 > process parameters but not as much with the sysgen > ones that define the > virtual address space.     =====a ========================== Fbio dos Santos Cardoso OpenVMS System Manager Rio de Janeiro - Brazilo fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br ==========================  2 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!?. Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com   ------------------------------   Date: 6 Jul 2002 08:57:26 GMT-( From: nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren)4 Subject: Re: Three HP Press releases (via Bloomberg)0 Message-ID: <ag6bdm$cpt$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>  - In article <87wusaupqh.fsf@prep.synonet.com>,i. Paul Repacholi  <prep@prep.synonet.com> wrote:+ >nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) writes:M >iF >> When I told two OEMs that there was not a hope in hell (probably inG >> those words) of us procuring a system if the users had to sign Intel B >> NDAs, they confirmed that most real customers had told them the >> same. ><C >Funny, I was chatting to some one who did the TW thing and went to G >Compex(?). He asked about the new boxes, and was told he would have touC >sign all sorts of NDAs to get one, and anyone who used it would asj# >well. He was not impressed at all.r  E You don't mean as from next week, surely?  That was part of the cause C of the screaming match between OEMs and Intel last year - they said @ that they could not possibly launch their products encumbered byC Intel NDAs, and Intel wouldn't relinquish them.  Eventually it did, < but by then any half-competent customer had been put off.[*]  ? We do know that Intel are not going to sell the IA-64, up to atl? least the Madison, so anyone who wants hardware details WILL beeB encumbered by an NDA - but that doesn't make it any different from (say) PA-RISC or POWER4.  B I can't say that I envy you VMS people in knowing that the successC of the platform you are moving to will be decided entirely by campss? you (rightly) regard with distrust.  But that is the situation.O@ HP is relying on Intel getting the McKinley established for UnixC and Microsoft systems - and I don't just mean PA-RISC or even Linuxm systems shipped by HP.  G >Another interesting view, is from Intergraph. They have just had a winsB >over intel for pIV patent infringments. The intanic case is stillB >ongoing.  Seems intel offered a cut to settle, IG said no, and isF >holding out for cash on the barrel. Seems they are less than enthusedB >with future prospects. Mind, IG is not a real good pointer to the >future!  A I don't see that it is a major issue.  Intergraph are vanishingly A unlikely to press for (or get) cessation of production, and IntelaA can afford any plausible royalties.  If Intel were short of cash,lC then things would be different - but as far as I know, they aren't.y    @ [*] Rumours are of precisely one big sale - to a Federal quango.     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: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 14:24:48 +0200" From: "Hans Vlems" <hvlems@iae.nl>' Subject: Re: Where to put startup stuffC5 Message-ID: <ag6n1b$j88qh$1@ID-143435.news.dfncis.de>s  8 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3D267BD8.59B274D4@videotron.ca...> > It used to be that a site would put all the startup stuff in SYSTARTUP_V5.COM >rI > So, when you inherited a system, a good study of that file would give ad singleJ > point to follow what went on during system boot, including what software wass7 > started up, what logicals were being defined etc etc.t >yD > But then came that SYSMAN and its STARTUP phases thing, as well as2 > SYLOGICALS.COM and probably other files as well. >oK > Am I being too conservative in sticking to SYSTARTUP_VMS and avoiding thee rest > ?e > L > When you inherit a new system, is there a comprehensive list of files (notK > called by SYSTARTUP_VMS) to look it where the former system manager wouldW have > added customizations ?H In another thread someone wrote that you can guess how long a person has been workingI with VMS from the tools that are used.  This is somewhat similar I think.m SYSTARTUP_V5.COMK and SYSTARTUP_VMS.COM are the the most obvious locations to handle site and  system specificn startup statements.aD The SYLOGICALS procedure (and other SY*.COM) is executed directly by STARTUP.COM and thisF may be undesirable at times (like trying to mount non existing disks).J As for SYSMAN, IMHO it is fancy but too obvious to overlook. Then again if you've been using SYSMAN- then I guess SYSTARTUP_*.COM will be strange.   K I stick to SYSTARTUP_*.COM, call separate command procedures for each task.w SYSTARTUP never changesML and the sequence in which the other procedures are called is fixed (and that! solves many problems and unwanted E side effects). Steps that are not needed just don't have that commandd# procedure on that system (SYSTARTUPTK checks for the presence of a file). That way adding a new node is as simple  as copying a fixed set of files   and usually very little editing. YMMV though, Hans   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2002.369 ************************ng, nothing is more reliable than OpenVMS clusters fro@    A    B    C    D    E    F    G    H    I    J    K    L    M    N    O    P    Q    R    S    T    U    V    W    X    Y    Z    [    \    ]    ^    _    `    a    b    c    d    e    f    g    h    i    j    k    l    m    n    o    p    q    r    s    t    u    v    w    x    y    z    {    |    }    ~                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        