1 INFO-VAX	Mon, 22 Jul 2002	Volume 2002 : Issue 400       Contents: Re: Bill Hancock? $ Re: filename argument in java on VMS> Re: HSV snapshots vs. Spiralog ? (Was: CLI access to HSV's...)+ Re: Itanic2 - the cHumPaq spin continues... + Re: Itanic2 - the cHumPaq spin continues... + Re: Itanic2 - the cHumPaq spin continues... + Re: Itanic2 - the cHumPaq spin continues... + Re: Itanic2 - the cHumPaq spin continues... + Re: Itanic2 - the cHumPaq spin continues...  Re: PS or PDF output5 Re: PW600au problem (probably h/w) - long and tedious ! Re: [Hobbyist] User account setup ! Re: [Hobbyist] User account setup ! Re: [Hobbyist] User account setup   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 16:59:51 -0400  From: Everhart <ge@gce.com>  Subject: Re: Bill Hancock?& Message-ID: <3D3B20C7.3060201@gce.com>   Lyndon Bartels wrote:  > Mark E. Levy wrote:  > N >>Has anybody heard from Bill Hancock lately? I remember his sessions at DECUSN >>many years ago. He should have been a comic. I'd love to get my hands on one >>of his books...  >> >>Mark Levy  >>SMA  >  > I > I remember one of his DECUS speaches too... I haven't laughed that hard  > in a long time...  > G > I remember his "stupid user tricks". And I even gave him a new one...  > ; > "My computer only types capital letters... what's wrong?"  > 0 > I wonder if he ever added that to his list.... >  >  >  > Lyndon >   > Bill was at Exodus for some time. He may be at the successor..   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 20:58:10 GMT . From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER)- Subject: Re: filename argument in java on VMS 4 Message-ID: <CfF_8.36904$Se4.1040363@news.chello.at>  V In article <3D389955.53D75F42@pacbell.net>, Don Sykes <annonymous@pacbell.net> writes: >Try= >$ java "org.apache.lucene.demo.IndexFiles" [.lucene_src.src]   . Why ? The problem seems not to be within JAVA.K DCL complains about too many parameters. So it is obviously the symbol JAVA J being defined as RUN or similar and not a problem with the quotes, in this case.   K But the quote problem is most likely the second on the list of the original 	 poster...    --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atP A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm looking for (a) Network _and_ VMS Job(s)   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Jul 2002 05:01:01 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>G Subject: Re: HSV snapshots vs. Spiralog ? (Was: CLI access to HSV's...) - Message-ID: <87n0skx0c2.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   A Jim.Johnson@software-exploration.nospam.com (Jim Johnson) writes:   G > On 20 Jul 2002 12:08:30 +0800, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>  > wrote:   + > >jlsue <jlsuexxxz@screaminet.com> writes:   E > >> Now it is being done by the hardware and any OS can benefit from  > >> it.   > > >> (Note, I do not mean to imply that the same work done forD > >> host-based snapshots was migrated to hardware, I'd have no idea  > >> if that actually happened.)  F > >So how does the HSV ensure that *at the `split time'* all of the onC > >disk data is consistant? That there are no suprises in the block 	 > >cache?    C > Without knowing how it was actually built, but working from first 
 > principles:    F > How does the HSV ensure that the data is consistent at the time of a > power outage?   K It doesn't! It just hangs on to what ever it has. If you run out of battery @ and the caches and memory hit the floor, well, enjoy the wait...    > It should be the same logic.   --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 21:39:02 GMT  From: sasadmin <jec@nospam.net> 4 Subject: Re: Itanic2 - the cHumPaq spin continues...2 Message-ID: <87vissba5y.fsf@Alethion.systasis.net>   Bill:   B Thanks for the article. I appreciate the time you take to researchB these processor architecture comparisons. I want to understand theD true merit of any substituent in discussions of processor technology abandonment.  = I would ask two things intended to encourage you to keep your  reader in mind as you write:3         1) Provide urls. I know google, spec &c are F         available. However, your criticisms require specific urls, and3         good writing style includes a bibliography.   C         2) The topics you discuss are complex, and it's easy to get D         lost in relative comparisons. Your style combines subjective=         and objective argument techniques; which style can be @         difficult to parse.  You dilute your presentation in theF         following sentence: "... accepted by SPEC it's *well under 50%?         higher* than the 750 MHz 8700's SPECint base" (emphasis E         added). Is the number higher or lower? I will usually re-read B         such sentences to understand the relative magnitude of theB         comparison. Employing "under ... higher" obscures the true         relationship.   B         An example of the subjective/objective conflation is: "AndE         McKinley's integer performance is shown as *noticeably higher B         than* the coming PA8800, in contrast to the estimates I'veB         seen (which *if anything appear conservative*) that PA8800D         will debut with a *score of about 900*..." I would encourage>         you to reduce subjective comments in favor of absolute=         numbers. The subjective case blunts the force of your >         argument when you can obviously present the numbers as<         objective evidence. If you still want to interject aE         subjective remark, present the number. For example, "... will G         debut with a score of N, which is about 900, (my/the generally) C         expected value." This excerpt also illustrates the relative E         magnitude comment: "... (i.e., noticeably higher than, rather $         than lower than, McKinley)."  B To conclude, I don't think you're "preaching to the choir". *EveryC reader on this list* will be asked for their opinion w/r/t/ Itanium F 2. This question may occur in the context of "cocktail party chatter",E or formal dialog. We do our querents a disservice by merely parroting  the party line.    --   Microsoft Free By 2003   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Jul 2002 14:54:03 -0700/ From: Brannon_Batson@yahoo.com (Brannon Batson) 4 Subject: Re: Itanic2 - the cHumPaq spin continues...= Message-ID: <4495ef1f.0207211354.5f718f7e@posting.google.com>   i Ed Wensell III <ewensell3@yahoo.commercial> wrote in message news:<3D3AE62D.5527B8E1@yahoo.commercial>...  > Bill Todd wrote: > > K > > As long as cHumPaq keeps repeating their drivel, I'll keep refuting it. O > > Though I won't stoop to their level and lie, they disgust me and deserve to 	 > > fail.  > J > But preaching to the comp.os.vms choir will accomplish nothing. EveryoneG > that watches COV knows the sermon all too well. And AFAICT, no one in F > the group has the power to print these messages and drop them on the
 > CEO's desk.   
 Which CEO?   Brannon  not speaking for Intel   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Jul 2002 15:03:56 -0700- From: loopnz@hotmail.com (loopnz@hotmail.com) 4 Subject: Re: Itanic2 - the cHumPaq spin continues...< Message-ID: <40ac1f47.0207211403.44ef226@posting.google.com>  u "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message news:<LPt_8.198334$iB1.10663413@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>...   D > But we do glean the new nugget of information on page 29 that "TheI > performance of the Itanium 2 processor's IA-32 engine is expected to be M > comparable with a 300 MHz Pentium Pro."  Wow - that'll sure cut Hammer IA32 M > performance down to size!  Especially since if one runs a code mix heavy on J > the IA32 side the IA32 code will consume most of the available processorE > time even though only running at about 15% of native performance...   F Why again are we VMS users concerned about Hammer? Oh right, Elvis wasB sighted in one of the VMS labs doing a secret VMS port to Hammer -D after he lost his job in accounting trying to cook the books to showF that VMS was making billions of dollars in profits and that Compaq x86) servers were dragging the company down...    ------------------------------    Date: 22 Jul 2002 05:51:27 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>4 Subject: Re: Itanic2 - the cHumPaq spin continues...- Message-ID: <87adokwy00.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   , "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:  B > Just took a look at a shiny-new (this month) HP 'technical whiteE > paper' (a title which seems to preclude the defense that "it's just D > marketing garbage") called "Inside the Intel Itanium 2 Processor",D > and found that HP is continuing Compaq's fine record of lies aboutB > the virtues of the platform.  Just so there's no doubt about the   ...   E > honesty of the company that now owns VMS, here are some highlights: A > (Just to address the possible contention that improved compiler E > technology will eventually realize EPIC's promises that to date are D > purely illusory: the paper itself states, and correctly, that "TheB > Itanium Processor Family requires advanced compilers for optimalE > performance.  Fortunately this type of compiler technology has been E > in development at HP for many years and is now ready for commercial B > release."  In other words, don't expect dramatic improvements on3 > that front: the main work has already been done.)   A Ironically, the one break through that has happened that the EPIC C requires has been by Sun... See the stuff on art in the spec suite.    D > But we do glean the new nugget of information on page 29 that "TheF > performance of the Itanium 2 processor's IA-32 engine is expected toD > be comparable with a 300 MHz Pentium Pro."  Wow - that'll sure cut' > Hammer IA32 performance down to size!   F Funny they use the Pro as the comparison. Wonderfull for 32b code, but@ died in the arse on 8/16 bit stuff, so was a total wipe out with windows.   --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Jul 2002 17:32:14 -0700( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)4 Subject: Re: Itanic2 - the cHumPaq spin continues...= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0207211632.466c7a3f@posting.google.com>   s "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message news:<hkB_8.48171$WsS.22529@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>...  >   F > Which raises another interesting question....just in the same way asI > companies and CEO's are now being raked over the coals for 'cooking the H > books', can a company and CEO be similarly investigated by the SEC forK > deliberately posting misleading performance numbers for their technology? N > The numbers they post for Itanic 2 compared to PA-RISC and Alpha may well beE > justifiable under certain, but not all, circumstances, but are they * > sufficiently 'defensible'? I don't know. > N > What I suspect is that HP will do everything it can to show that Itanic 2 isJ > a better performer than current or next to-be-released PA-RISC and AlphaN > chips. They have a huge motive to do so, even if it means carefully choosingJ > the benchmarks they release to fit the message they want to get out. ForE > some users, the benchmarks that HP chooses to release may fit their N > application/usage perfectly and be an ideal way for them to compare relativeN > performance, while for others the published benchmarks may be the wrong onesD > entirely and either show nothing of value at all, or show that the) > chip/system is not good value for them.  > M > That said, all computer companies do/have done this sort of thing. But that M > does not mean that it is correct to do so - it may be similar in that while K > FASB and GAAP permit some latitude in the categorizing of some accounting K > items, it does not permit the deliberate mis-statements that we have seen I > recently in the books of companies. But then, as we have seen in recent N > discussion here about various benchmarks, some appear to favor one processorL > architecture more than another, or that the way the benchmark is coded can/ > be 'stretched' to fit a particular processor.  > J > Probably the only fair benchmarks are to pick 1000 programmers at randomN > from a wide variety of customers, give them the benchmark specification, putN > them each in a 'clean room' and tell them to code the benchmark and then run; > those 1000 different implementations on all the different K > processors/systems. Then take the results and publish them all, calculate M > the mean and std. deviations, and that would give purchasers a more or less K > 'real world' approximation of performance based on the skills of a random G > sampling of programmers. Not all programmers are experts, not all are J > complete losers either. Most are simply average in their skills, even at > software/hardware vendors. > K > But since HP is not apparently selling OpenVMS to *new* customers (as has N > been quoted may times in c.o.v from a public HP document), all this apparentG > 'fiddling' of the relative performance numbers, if Bill's analysis is M > correct, may only serve to drive existing VMS customers away faster if they F > were at the point in their decision-making processes where they were< > considering whether to stay with, or migrate from OpenVMS.  D hp has not stopped selling vms, they have stated they are selling toF target markets, probably healthcare, finance and govt., and ecommerce,B and outside of that anyone else who is smart enough to want it ...G and benchmarks are run by more test houses than hp, and time will tell, D no one will be able to fudge anything ... but intel cannot afford toF pick the wrong processor ... remember, the alpha goodies don't kick inE till chivano, and those may very well suprise you if epic doesn't cut C the mustard ... intel will not fail, one way or the other they will E produce a viable chip, either an alpha enhanced epic one or switch to E an ev8-ev9 design, one way or the other, they will produce, they have  to!    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 04:08:13 GMT * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>4 Subject: Re: Itanic2 - the cHumPaq spin continues...B Message-ID: <NyL_8.311811$vq.17133223@bin6.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  % <loopnz@hotmail.com> wrote in message 6 news:40ac1f47.0207211403.44ef226@posting.google.com...   ...   4 > Why again are we VMS users concerned about Hammer?  H Because of the likelihood that it will at least prevent Itanic (the only? platform offering VMS any long-term future) from ever achieving L 'commodity'-level volume and pricing, and in the process quite possibly help kill Itanic entirely.    Any other questions?   - bill   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Jul 2002 04:50:59 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> Subject: Re: PS or PDF output - Message-ID: <87r8hwx0ss.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   2 "Hank Vander Waal" <hvanderw@novagate.com> writes:  C > Can anyone tell me what packages are available for creating PS or @ > PDF output files from VMS?  We are looking at creating faxable: > invoices (including the form ) from our VMS application.  < > any suggestions are welcome !!!  Other than move off VMS !  : Why do you want PS or that other stuff for faxing? Tex, orC DECDocument, output a DVI files that can be processed direct to fax E ready data to dump on a fax modem. If you are doing lots of invoices, 9 then the time that could be saved would be well worth it.      --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 19:35:18 GMTn# From: "mhr" <mreilly36@comcast.net>s> Subject: Re: PW600au problem (probably h/w) - long and tediousC Message-ID: <W1E_8.207575$iX5.10860193@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>   G Later 600au's had qlogic 1040 scsi built in; check the controller setuppL (from conole "sho") to best determine if your secondary controller (I assume? its an 810?) is set correctly, particurlarly the soft_term. mhr ; "Lyndon Bartels" <lbartels@pressenter.com> wrote in messagee( news:3D39DC9A.4B6220F1@pressenter.com... > Mark Daniel wrote: > >U# > > Thanks for the input Christoph.- > >-( > > I have changed the disks previously.- > > There is currently nothing on SCSI bus A.  > >mJ > > > dkb0.0.0.1010.0            DKB0                          RZ29B  0016J > > > dkb100.1.0.1010.0          DKB100                        RZ28D  0010J > > > dqb0.0.0.207.0             DQB0        TOSHIBA CD-ROM XM-6202B  1110% > > > dva0.0.0.0.1               DVA0 J > > > mkb600.6.0.1010.0          MKB600                        TLZ09  0172D > > > ewa0.0.0.3.0               EWA0              00-00-F8-76-1C-F6J > > > pka0.7.0.1004.0            PKA0                  SCSI Bus ID 7  5.57D > > > pkb0.7.0.1010.0            PKB0                  SCSI Bus ID 7D > > > pqa0.0.0.107.0             PQA0                       PCI EIDED > > > pqb0.0.0.207.0             PQB0                       PCI EIDE > >fL > > SCSI bus A shows errors on it (the KLAATU$PKA0 device - which is the VMSI > > device for SCSI controller - I think) even without any devices on it.AI > > When there was I would get an error log entry saying the system diskaF& > > (DKA0) had gone into mount verify. > >tF > > Is there any way to disable the on-board SCSI controller I wonder? > >e >  >yE > I didn't think the PWSs had onboard SCSI... onboad IDE yes, but not  > SCSI.b > I > There might be some issues with what cards are in what slots. I seem totJ > remember some issues like that with my 500au when I first set it up. YouF > might want to dig around and see if you can find the old Systems and7 > Options catalog and figure out something from them...  > E > Also, I remember something about my 500au not liking the third SCSI $ > controller. Only two were allowed. >E8 > And some of the older boxes didn't like IDE CD-ROMs... >ME > But that's all from memory of over a year ago. So it might be a bit1
 > inaccurate.a >R >c > Lyndon >e > --I > My opinions are mine and mine alone. They seldom align with those of my' > employer.g >D >8J > The only good thing about putting the cart before the horse is you don't > have > to look at the horse's butt.   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Jul 2002 05:15:05 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>* Subject: Re: [Hobbyist] User account setup- Message-ID: <87it38wzom.fsf@prep.synonet.com>   * Alder <PGDEHMKOKIMD@spammotel.com> writes:   > Peter Weaver wrote:>F > >>>>Sorry to pester this group with questions that would embarrass a > >>>a > >>chimpanzee,) > >>... E > > After just reading through what has been going on here these lasts
 > > two days,s2 > > you might want to rethink that opening line :) > F > You're too kind. :-)  Perhaps the question was not embarrassing, but0 > shooting myself in the foot like this sure is. > ' > >>UAF> modify tbransco/privileges=alla* > >>%UAF-I-MDFYMSG, user record(s) updated > > Try this again but use6 > >    UAF> modify tbransco/privileges=all/DEFPRIV=ALL  hG > EUREKA!  The user account logged in!  So now we revoke privileges one-1 > by one?  Or is there a more dignified approach?C  7 OK, what does DIR/Full sys$share:dcltables have to say?K   -- a< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.P@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Jul 2002 05:18:16 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>* Subject: Re: [Hobbyist] User account setup- Message-ID: <87eldwwzjb.fsf@prep.synonet.com>c  * Alder <PGDEHMKOKIMD@spammotel.com> writes:  C > EUREKA!  The user account logged in!  So now we revoke privilegesn5 > one by one?  Or is there a more dignified approach?t   ::mutter: mutter::  3 What does dir/full sys$share:dcltables.exe;* say...o  9 I suspect your Perl instalation screwed the protection ofm@ the NEW dcltables.exe, and it has not yet been install/replaced.  + (Sorry about the half question post above.)i   -- r< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.e@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 06:24:44 +0200d2 From: martin@radiogaga.harz.de (Martin Vorlaender)* Subject: Re: [Hobbyist] User account setup; Message-ID: <3d3b890c.524144494f47414741@radiogaga.harz.de>n  - Paul Repacholi (prep@prep.synonet.com) wrote:e, > Alder <PGDEHMKOKIMD@spammotel.com> writes:E > > EUREKA!  The user account logged in!  So now we revoke privilegesm7 > > one by one?  Or is there a more dignified approach?o >g > ::mutter: mutter:: >h5 > What does dir/full sys$share:dcltables.exe;* say...a >o; > I suspect your Perl instalation screwed the protection of B > the NEW dcltables.exe, and it has not yet been install/replaced.  F Sorry, but no. Alder wrote in message <3d36ddad$1@obsidian.gov.bc.ca>:  2   $ show security sys$common:[syslib]dcltables.exe  :   SYS$COMMON:[SYSLIB]DCLTABLES.EXE;77 object of class FILE      Owner: [SYSTEM]D      Protection: (System: RWED, Owner: RWED, Group: RWED, World: RE)!      Access Control List: <empty>e  0 and in message <3D39B4B9.9070709@spammotel.com>:  3   $ install list/full/glo sys$library:dcltables.exer  +   DISK$ALPHASYS:<SYS0.SYSCOMMON.SYSLIB>.EXE,5     DCLTABLES;77     Open Hdr Shared            Lnkbla)          Entry access count         = 468k+          Current / Maximum shared   = 5 / 8d'          Global section count       = 1o  %                 Owner:       [SYSTEM]m4                 Protection:  S:RWED,O:RWED,G:RE,W:RE            System Global Sectionss  1   HOBBY$DKA0:<SYS0.SYSCOMMON.SYSLIB>DCLTABLES.EXE 3     INS$82C782E0_001(06000000)              PRM SYS-   Pgltcnt/Refcnt=830/J   208 %                 Owner:       [SYSTEM]h4                 Protection:  S:RWED,O:RWED,G:RE,W:RE    So ;77 is current and installed.   cu,e   Martin -- 5G                            | Martin Vorlaender  |  VMS & WNT programmerl4 Microsoft isn't the Borg:  | work: mv@pdv-systeme.deK the Borg have proper       |       http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/t; networking.                | home: martin@radiogaga.harz.dep   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2002.400 ************************