1 INFO-VAX	Tue, 11 Jun 2002	Volume 2002 : Issue 322       Contents: Re: "Tru64 and OpenVMS Times"  Re: "Tru64 and OpenVMS Times"  7.3 Upgrade 4 Re: A dvdwrite(r)-Program: save 4.3 GB on a DVD-R(W)4 Re: A dvdwrite(r)-Program: save 4.3 GB on a DVD-R(W)& RE: Alpha to ia64: where is the issue?& RE: Alpha to ia64: where is the issue?& RE: Alpha to ia64: where is the issue?3 Re: Another analyst says VMS port won't be finished 3 Re: Another analyst says VMS port won't be finished 3 Re: Another analyst says VMS port won't be finished 3 Re: Another analyst says VMS port won't be finished 3 Re: Another analyst says VMS port won't be finished  C++ name mangling  RE: C++ name mangling  Re: C++ name mangling  Re: C++ name mangling # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # RE: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday # Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday = Re: China to launch cyber attacks soon, be on VMS or bye-bye!  Re: Could linux become VMS?  Re: Could linux become VMS?  Re: Could linux become VMS?  Re: Could linux become VMS?  Re: Could linux become VMS?  RE: Could linux become VMS?  Re: Could linux become VMS?  Re: Could linux become VMS?  Re: Could linux become VMS?  Re: Could linux become VMS?  Re: Could linux become VMS?  Re: DFO and ODS-5 6 Re: DFO and ODS-5 - Is quality control eally that bad? ECO Patches  Re: ECO Patches  Re: ECO Patches  Re: Fibre Disk vs. SCSI Disk Re: hobbyist (mini)merge Re: INITIALIZE and PCs0 Re: Mounting shadowset system disks across a SAN0 Re: Mounting shadowset system disks across a SAN0 Re: Mounting shadowset system disks across a SAN0 Re: Mounting shadowset system disks across a SAN Re: Newsreader for OpenVMS 7.2 Re: No new Alpha sales Re: No new Alpha salesD nofe on KZPAC disks ( was Re: For all you hobbyists: IDE on SCSI !!) Re: Open Letter to HP  Re: Open Letter to HP  Re: Open Letter to HP  Re: Open Letter to HP  Re: Open Letter to HP  Re: Open Letter to HP  Re: Open Letter to HP  Re: Open Letter to HP G Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading) G Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading) G Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading) G RE: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading) G Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading) G Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading) G Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading) G Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading) G Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading) G Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading) G Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading) G Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading) G Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading) G Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading) ' Re: strange double comparison behaviour ' Re: strange double comparison behaviour ' Re: strange double comparison behaviour ' Re: strange double comparison behaviour  Re: SYSMAN default parameters ' Re: SYSMAN default parameters - REVISED ' Re: SYSMAN default parameters - REVISED $ Re: TCP socket communication queries& Re: tpc/ip file server for VMS systems Re: VMS Monitoring a User 6 Re: VMS Monitoring a User - hammer and chisel approach< Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most cases< Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most cases< Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most cases< Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most cases< Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most cases< Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most cases< Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most cases< Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most cases  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:41:55 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> & Subject: Re: "Tru64 and OpenVMS Times"J Message-ID: <nemN8.248813$ah_.161542@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  = It doesn't if it's not trademarked that way. Ask your lawyer.     < "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote in message' news:dodN8.149278$352.7367@sccrnsc02...  > 4 > "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> wrote in message > L news:BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4023D9138@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net. > .. > Phillip -  > I > Re: HPS name change ..there are likely a number of reasons for changing D > this name - not the least of which is HP Services is HPS .. Compaq. > Global Services used to be shortened to CGS. > I > That is a very good reason. I initially planned to call SKC SKHPS as in G > Shannon Knows High Performance Systems. I was advised by a senior HPQ K > executive to go with another name  because HPS does in fact equal Hewlett  > Packard Services.  >  >    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 13:13:04 GMT 1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> & Subject: Re: "Tru64 and OpenVMS Times"< Message-ID: <AHmN8.12927$6m5.3302@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>  J I already had one go-around with the Q's lawyers. Q has deeper pcokets andA more lawyers than do I. Hence I elected not to get enbroiled in a ' controversy that I would end up losing!   . "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in messageD news:nemN8.248813$ah_.161542@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...? > It doesn't if it's not trademarked that way. Ask your lawyer.  >  > > > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote in message) > news:dodN8.149278$352.7367@sccrnsc02...  > > 6 > > "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> wrote in message > >  > L news:BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4023D9138@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net. > > ..
 > > Phillip -  > > K > > Re: HPS name change ..there are likely a number of reasons for changing F > > this name - not the least of which is HP Services is HPS .. Compaq0 > > Global Services used to be shortened to CGS. > > K > > That is a very good reason. I initially planned to call SKC SKHPS as in I > > Shannon Knows High Performance Systems. I was advised by a senior HPQ E > > executive to go with another name  because HPS does in fact equal  Hewlett  > > Packard Services.  > >  > >  >  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:10:37 -0500 4 From: "Lucas, Edward A (SAIC)" <Edward.Lucas@bp.com> Subject: 7.3 Upgrade? Message-ID: <EF1DC894691AD5118AF000508BB85FDE034CC679@AMCLVX11>    Hello everyone  H I am getting ready to upgrade a VAX from 7.1 to 7.2 and once I am done I1 need to upgrade an Alpha cluster from 7.1 to 7.3.    Is anyone aware of any issues ?    Thank you in advance.      Edward A. Lucas   Sr. VAX/VMS System Administrator SAIC Phone:  (216) 525-7492 Email:   Lucaea@bp.com   ------------------------------  / Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:22:24 +0200 (MET DST) & From: Rudolf Wingert <win@fom.fgan.de>= Subject: Re: A dvdwrite(r)-Program: save 4.3 GB on a DVD-R(W) 6 Message-ID: <200206110622.IAA02454@sinet1.fom.fgan.de>   Hello,   Atlant Schmidt wrotes:   >>> 2 Also, yes, DQDRIVER is perfectly happy reading DVD6 discs. But most real-world DVD discs are written using5 the UDF file system. Last I knew, VMS didn't know how 6 to read that file system. But a 4.7GB ODS-2 DVD should work just fine.  <<<   C Is it possible to mount it with the UCX V4.2 or TCPip 5.1 services?    TIA and regards Rudolf Wingert   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:20:23 -0400 2 From: Atlant Schmidt <atlantnospam@mindspring.com>= Subject: Re: A dvdwrite(r)-Program: save 4.3 GB on a DVD-R(W) . Message-ID: <3D062347.2DAE5C5C@mindspring.com>   Rudolf Wingert wrote:   4 > Also, yes, DQDRIVER is perfectly happy reading DVD8 > discs. But most real-world DVD discs are written using7 > the UDF file system. Last I knew, VMS didn't know how 8 > to read that file system. But a 4.7GB ODS-2 DVD should > work just fine.  > <<<  > E > Is it possible to mount it with the UCX V4.2 or TCPip 5.1 services?    I'm sorry but I don't know.    Atlant   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 06:45:41 -0400 ' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> / Subject: RE: Alpha to ia64: where is the issue? T Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4023D9154@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   David,  F >>> Of course, the problem there is WhineBloze's nasty little habit ofG assuming it can write a "harmless" signature to (i.e., trash the zeroth A block of) every disk it sees, unless this is finally corrected by  then.<<<  G As Rob mentioned, in a SAN you can disable an OS from seeing devices on @ other OS's by either using zoning or something called "selectiveE presentation" (enable specific devices for access by only servers you  designate).   E While there are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches, both 2 ensure that the concern you raise does not happen.  A Fwiw, the same approach is used in a SAN to separate prod and dev 
 environments.    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-----9 From: David J. Dachtera [mailto:djesys.nospam@fsi.net]=20  Sent: June 11, 2002 12:44 AM To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com / Subject: Re: Alpha to ia64: where is the issue?      "Main, Kerry" wrote: >=20 > Arne,  >=20F > >>>   2) even if it is just a re-compile, then there are still costs< >      (hardware and software purchase, testing etc.etc.)<<< >=20H > While you are correct, something to keep in mind from a developers and  H > support point of view - assuming a SAN is in place, the same system=20I > IPF HW will be able to be used in the future to test and support not=20 I > only multiple versions of OpenVMS, but also W64 (whenever it becomes=20 I > available), HP-UX, or Linux. Simply point the boot device to another=20  > part of the SAN.  B Of course, the problem there is WhineBloze's nasty little habit ofG assuming it can write a "harmless" signature to (i.e., trash the zeroth G block of) every disk it sees, unless this is finally corrected by then.    --=20  David J. Dachtera  dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  H Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 12:00:53 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) / Subject: RE: Alpha to ia64: where is the issue? 3 Message-ID: <fSkAIeYDi7lC@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ~ In article <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4023D9154@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>, "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> writes: > David, > G >>>> Of course, the problem there is WhineBloze's nasty little habit of I > assuming it can write a "harmless" signature to (i.e., trash the zeroth C > block of) every disk it sees, unless this is finally corrected by 
 > then.<<< > I > As Rob mentioned, in a SAN you can disable an OS from seeing devices on B > other OS's by either using zoning or something called "selectiveG > presentation" (enable specific devices for access by only servers you 
 > designate).  > G > While there are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches, both 4 > ensure that the concern you raise does not happen. > C > Fwiw, the same approach is used in a SAN to separate prod and dev  > environments.  >   5 	Depending on storage environment and nomenclature...   D 	Some storage providers have large boxes with large port counts such> 	that it is not uncommon to have all your storage zoned out byC 	operating system such that the path from server to storage is only C 	shared by that OS.  And as Kerry points out you would then use the A 	storage provider's toolset to "present" the storage to the host.   A 	SunOS at one time was something to be cognizant about as it does @ 	SCSI-2 only.  VMS is SCSI-3 command set, NT is either or SCSI-2 	SCSI-3.  AIX SCSI-3.   C 	In Compaq's case, they don't have the large port count - 4 in fact > 	on HSV (fibre ports from storage box to switch, for instance B 	Hitachi in their Lightning series has 32 fibre ports, IIRC.  EMC A 	in the 8430 has up to 16 fibre ports, not sure how many ports on 2 	the 8730 but wouldn't be surprised if it was 32).  E 	Some vendors do the storage presentation for you.  In Compaq's case, B 	they have a slick interface for the Enterprise Storage Array (HSV% 	controllers) to do the presentation.   A 	All this to say, yes you have to present the storage properly or B 	NT/2000 will see more than it needs to and scribble on it.  It isF 	a presentation issue that everyone has to get correct and normally doE 	except for the poor sap we heard about at a CETS.  He didn't present A 	properly and the NT box promptly scribbled on his Sun databases.    				Rob    ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 12:06:07 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) / Subject: RE: Alpha to ia64: where is the issue? 3 Message-ID: <cbYfCUQFowza@eisner.encompasserve.org>   a In article <fSkAIeYDi7lC@eisner.encompasserve.org>, young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) writes:  > In article <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF4023D9154@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>, "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> writes:	 >> David,  >>  H >>>>> Of course, the problem there is WhineBloze's nasty little habit ofJ >> assuming it can write a "harmless" signature to (i.e., trash the zerothD >> block of) every disk it sees, unless this is finally corrected by >> then.<<<  >>  J >> As Rob mentioned, in a SAN you can disable an OS from seeing devices onC >> other OS's by either using zoning or something called "selective H >> presentation" (enable specific devices for access by only servers you >> designate). >>  H >> While there are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches, both5 >> ensure that the concern you raise does not happen.  >>  D >> Fwiw, the same approach is used in a SAN to separate prod and dev >> environments. >>   > 7 > 	Depending on storage environment and nomenclature...  > F > 	Some storage providers have large boxes with large port counts such@ > 	that it is not uncommon to have all your storage zoned out byE > 	operating system such that the path from server to storage is only E > 	shared by that OS.  And as Kerry points out you would then use the C > 	storage provider's toolset to "present" the storage to the host.  > C > 	SunOS at one time was something to be cognizant about as it does B > 	SCSI-2 only.  VMS is SCSI-3 command set, NT is either or SCSI-2 > 	SCSI-3.  AIX SCSI-3.  > E > 	In Compaq's case, they don't have the large port count - 4 in fact @ > 	on HSV (fibre ports from storage box to switch, for instance D > 	Hitachi in their Lightning series has 32 fibre ports, IIRC.  EMC C > 	in the 8430 has up to 16 fibre ports, not sure how many ports on 4 > 	the 8730 but wouldn't be surprised if it was 32). > G > 	Some vendors do the storage presentation for you.  In Compaq's case, D > 	they have a slick interface for the Enterprise Storage Array (HSV' > 	controllers) to do the presentation.  >   % 	Make that "Enterprise Virtual Array"   > 	I'm already annoyed at the acronym EVA and seldom refer to it 	that way.	    				Rob    ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 02:39:32 -07006 From: philipp.lewis@deutsche-boerse.com (philip lewis)< Subject: Re: Another analyst says VMS port won't be finished= Message-ID: <4ad76487.0206110139.5cdd909c@posting.google.com>O  l "Sue Skonetski" <susan.skonetski@compaq.com> wrote in message news:<srLJ8.10$CS4.409688@news.cpqcorp.net>... > Folksm > L > Not to discredit analysts who only have to be right aprox 15% of the time.I > Since some of them are amazing.  However they do not make money tellinghN > their customers "you made the correct decision and you do not need to change > your direction." > K > We are porting, it is going well and there a load of engineers working on'D > the port, and if I gave details it would blow the booting contest. > K > Everyone has a right to believe what they want, but for the last 10 yearsS > analysts have been telling use >     not going to do xm >     will be dead in a year# >     company does not support them  >  > We end up doing x  > We are still hereiF > We get a large budget from what ever company we work for every year.E > We do grow, we do get new customers and we do cool technical stuff.a >   B And every year your CEO and other high levels send out unequivocalF messages that VMS is going away and/or the FUTURE is Windoze, get withB it now.  The public perception is that VMS & Alpha ceased to EXISTD long ago.  Aside from people who ACTUALLY WORK with VMS currently, IE have met few who are aware that it even survived the Digital - CompaQ @ merger, and Alpha got killed under Bob Palmers regin didnt it ?   > Make up your own mind. >  >  > Sue  >  >  >  clip ..a   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 13:19:29 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> < Subject: Re: Another analyst says VMS port won't be finishedI Message-ID: <BNmN8.279896$t8_.90186@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>   < "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote in message% news:MqdN8.34755$pw3.813@sccrnsc03...V > K > Filing a lawsuit seems a waste of time. An alternate approach might be to E > take all the positive commentary from the likes of Giga, Meta, IDC, J > Illuminata, DHBA, the Standish Group, et al, and stack it up against theI > negative commentary from one analyst firm. In other words, who ya gonnac > trust....r  L The one that's right - and that depends on one's perception at the time, not the facts ex post.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 14:21:50 GMTe1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> < Subject: Re: Another analyst says VMS port won't be finished< Message-ID: <2InN8.13687$6m5.3787@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>  . "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in messageC news:BNmN8.279896$t8_.90186@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...  > > > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote in message' > news:MqdN8.34755$pw3.813@sccrnsc03...e > >HJ > > Filing a lawsuit seems a waste of time. An alternate approach might be toG > > take all the positive commentary from the likes of Giga, Meta, IDC,eL > > Illuminata, DHBA, the Standish Group, et al, and stack it up against theK > > negative commentary from one analyst firm. In other words, who ya gonna 
 > > trust....e >pJ > The one that's right - and that depends on one's perception at the time, notV > the facts ex post.  G That is quite true. Historically Illuminata, Standish, and Brown have aaL pretty good record. Thing is, they lack the showmanship and salemanship of a Gartner. So it goes...   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 15:26:48 GMTa# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>S< Subject: Re: Another analyst says VMS port won't be finishedJ Message-ID: <YEoN8.249017$ah_.204612@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  < "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote in message6 news:2InN8.13687$6m5.3787@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net... >g0 > "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in messageE > news:BNmN8.279896$t8_.90186@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...e > >a@ > > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote in message) > > news:MqdN8.34755$pw3.813@sccrnsc03...a > > > L > > > Filing a lawsuit seems a waste of time. An alternate approach might be > toI > > > take all the positive commentary from the likes of Giga, Meta, IDC,pJ > > > Illuminata, DHBA, the Standish Group, et al, and stack it up against theaG > > > negative commentary from one analyst firm. In other words, who yay gonnal > > > trust....e > > L > > The one that's right - and that depends on one's perception at the time, > not' > > the facts ex post. >sI > That is quite true. Historically Illuminata, Standish, and Brown have atL > pretty good record. Thing is, they lack the showmanship and salemanship of a' > Gartner. So it goes...    L Just like DEC and Compaq and now (seemingly) HP seem to lack with respect to OpenVMS vs. Sun/Solaris.  * Sun and Microsoft both prove Barnum right.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 15:44:52 GMT11 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> < Subject: Re: Another analyst says VMS port won't be finished; Message-ID: <UVoN8.10375$R61.195@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>e  @ "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message news:YEoN8.249017 > >hK > > That is quite true. Historically Illuminata, Standish, and Brown have asK > > pretty good record. Thing is, they lack the showmanship and salemanshipe of > a0 > > Gartner. So it goes... >3 >aK > Just like DEC and Compaq and now (seemingly) HP seem to lack with respect. to > OpenVMS vs. Sun/Solaris. >s, > Sun and Microsoft both prove Barnum right.  H Sad but true. Would that IT managers followed their own instincts ratherK than being gulled by probability factors. VMS is a good OS, so is Tru64 and K HP-UX, and truth be told, IBM has some pretty good stuff, too. Sure, you'llnJ pay through the nose for it, but if a client told me that he/she was beingG forced to leave Alpha/VMS for a non-HPQ solution, the first alternative-> vendor I would suggest is IBM. (Unless the change of venue was7 fault-tolerant related, whereupon I'd suggest NonStop.)n  I Sun would be a bit farther down the list. If Sun were to recommit to IPF, 3 their story would (IMHO) look a lot more plausible.  >p   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 06:13:37 -0700, From: bubbapig@hotmail.com (Jeffrey Cameron) Subject: C++ name mangling= Message-ID: <b22333b7.0206110513.4f72fa82@posting.google.com>w   Hi all,s  A I have a c++ module I am trying to integrate with some PL/I code.a< Hence when I compile the object module I need to turn symbol@ decoration/mangling off. AS suggested in the manuals and in thisF newsgroup FAQ I use the extern "C" qualifier to the function prototype I wish to share.  3 i declare the forward declaration in my .h file as:.  : extern "C" void inventory(char *, char *, int &, short &);   ( I have also tried: )  
 extern "C" {s3     void inventory(char *, char *, int &, short &);h }   < with the actual function declaration in the .cpp file I use:  . void inventory(char *, char *, int &, short &) {  //some code... }   C MY problem is that when I try and link it with the remainder of the @ object files to get the executable image I get LINK errors aboutD UNDEFINED SYMBOLS listing inventory as the symbol whichis undefined.F So I did some investigating and used analyze/object on the object fileD produced and lo and behold inventory was defined in the symbol tableA as INVENTORY_KPCPC.. in other words a mangled name. Is there some8E cases where the C++ compiler overlooks the extern "C" declaration andp) mangles or decorates the name regardless?o  B p.s. this function is NOT overloaded or have a template associated< with it, its pretty plain vanilla (very nearly plain C code)   Thanks in advance  JEff   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 06:17:39 -0700-# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>u Subject: RE: C++ name mangling9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIGEIJFCAA.tom@kednos.com>R  > If it is nearly C code why not make it C code, and forget C++,$ or better yet, rewrite it in PL/I.     >-----Original Message-----t4 >From: Jeffrey Cameron [mailto:bubbapig@hotmail.com]% >Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 6:14 AMr >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >Subject: C++ name mangling  >n >  >Hi all, >oB >I have a c++ module I am trying to integrate with some PL/I code.= >Hence when I compile the object module I need to turn symbol4A >decoration/mangling off. AS suggested in the manuals and in this-G >newsgroup FAQ I use the extern "C" qualifier to the function prototypem >I wish to share.t >t4 >i declare the forward declaration in my .h file as: >m; >extern "C" void inventory(char *, char *, int &, short &);m >s >( I have also tried: )e >w >extern "C"l >{4 >    void inventory(char *, char *, int &, short &); >} >s= >with the actual function declaration in the .cpp file I use:. >s/ >void inventory(char *, char *, int &, short &)l >{ >//some code...  >} >VD >MY problem is that when I try and link it with the remainder of theA >object files to get the executable image I get LINK errors about E >UNDEFINED SYMBOLS listing inventory as the symbol whichis undefined. G >So I did some investigating and used analyze/object on the object fileRE >produced and lo and behold inventory was defined in the symbol table4B >as INVENTORY_KPCPC.. in other words a mangled name. Is there someF >cases where the C++ compiler overlooks the extern "C" declaration and* >mangles or decorates the name regardless? >iC >p.s. this function is NOT overloaded or have a template associatedf= >with it, its pretty plain vanilla (very nearly plain C code)u >n >Thanks in advance >JEffd >c >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.m; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).c@ >Version: 6.0.370 / Virus Database: 205 - Release Date: 6/5/2002 >d ---g& Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.: Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).? Version: 6.0.370 / Virus Database: 205 - Release Date: 6/5/2002e   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 14:39:32 +0100a* From: "Richard Brodie" <R.Brodie@rl.ac.uk> Subject: Re: C++ name mangling+ Message-ID: <ae4ui0$jrg@newton.cc.rl.ac.uk>   9 "Jeffrey Cameron" <bubbapig@hotmail.com> wrote in message:7 news:b22333b7.0206110513.4f72fa82@posting.google.com...    > Is there someiG > cases where the C++ compiler overlooks the extern "C" declaration andy+ > mangles or decorates the name regardless?e  M If you don't include the forward declaration in the definition file, perhaps.f   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 09:06:42 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)  Subject: Re: C++ name mangling3 Message-ID: <6pskxc4nI2kf@eisner.encompasserve.org>w  l In article <b22333b7.0206110513.4f72fa82@posting.google.com>, bubbapig@hotmail.com (Jeffrey Cameron) writes: > 5 > i declare the forward declaration in my .h file as:.  >    "forward declaration"?  in C?  This isn't Pascal, you know.  < > extern "C" void inventory(char *, char *, int &, short &);  D    OK, so now you have a prototype that declares there's an extern C1    function with particular parameters somewhere.s   > extern "C" > { 5 >     void inventory(char *, char *, int &, short &);  > }/      IIRC, same as above.i  > > with the actual function declaration in the .cpp file I use: > 0 > void inventory(char *, char *, int &, short &) > {: > //some code... > }@  F    Now you have created a C++ function (not extern "C", so it is name G    mangled) which happnes to have a similar name and parameters as the eE    extern "C" function you promised.  No problem for C++, it can dealtH    with that:  similar names, similar parameters, one's name mangled andF    the other's not.  Unfortunately you can't deal with it because it's    not what you meant to do.  8    You need the extern "C" where the actual function is.   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 00:05:00 -0600+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) , Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday3 Message-ID: <Dbog2+ZYGMVP@eisner.encompasserve.org>i  [ In article <3D05871B.C10901FC@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:  > Rob Young wrote: >> ah >> In article <ae2a9q$ck1$1@fizban.pprd.abbott.com>, "Dave Gudewicz" <david.gudewicz@abbott.com> writes:; >> > I am 5 for 5 with messages to and from Scott Stallard.i >> > >>  H >>         That's because you are a professional.  My initial impression >>         Oct.  1998. > F > ...and the rest of us are Swiss Cheese? (...or chopped liver, if you
 > prefer.) >   ; 	Of course not.  I'd get writer's cramp if I had to mentionr; 	all the folks in this forum that I personally met that areu 	professionals - in my opinion.o   				Robl   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:22:07 GMTt1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>y, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday: Message-ID: <PqiN8.8602$R61.532@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3D058BB3.9C75D4FC@videotron.ca... > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:nH > > Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ were able to take HP-UX and endow it withB > > ALL the goodness of VMS (clustering, DLM, security, stability, reliability,I > > enhanced management, dynamic partitioning, Galaxy, etc, etc) would it  really- > > make any difference if VMS still existed?  >aJ > Depends if they add stuff to HP-UX just to say it has it, or if they add stuff K > to really give it all the functionality and reliability that is expected.    Agreed 100 percent!   J > Everyone claims to have clustering, so it won't be hard to add enough to HP-UXh( > to allow HP-UX to also claim the same.  0 Yeah, the TruCluster stuff would be a  big help. >bL > I find your use of "hypothetically speaking" interesting. Seems to me thatJ > this is what HP intends to do anyways. They have admitted that they will beL > initially transfering clustering from tru64 to HP-UX and I think they left thec > door opened to do more.c  J Quite possibly so. Obviously they will transfer Tru64 clustering to HP-UX,3 beyond that I haven't a clue what the game plan is!4   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:23:05 GMTh1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>t, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday+ Message-ID: <JriN8.8248$nZ3.1171@rwcrnsc53>s  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3D058DBD.F80D02C7@videotron.ca... > re: VMS parts ported to HP-UX  > D > The *smart* thing to do would be to continue to make VMS more Unix
 compatible1 > and then get HP-UX  applications ported to VMS.   L That would be a good thing, too. I thought COE compliance might help in this regard.. >>K > It is always easier to upgrade to a better system than to downgrade to an  > inferior system.   Amen!u   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 11:12:02 +0000 (UTC)p From: david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday+ Message-ID: <ae4lu2$i2p$2@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>g  ` In article <UudN8.34769$pw3.1398@sccrnsc03>, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> writes: >t8 >"Tony Scandora" <Scandora@cmt.anl.gov> wrote in message& >news:ae2h7a$thb$1@milo.mcs.anl.gov... >..y >> >SJ >Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ were able to take HP-UX and endow it withL >ALL the goodness of VMS (clustering, DLM, security, stability, reliability,M >enhanced management, dynamic partitioning, Galaxy, etc, etc) would it reallyd* >make any difference if VMS still existed? >C >Just wondering. >pJ Hypothetically speaking, If I was to take an Ape, give him a bigger brain,K speech,the ability to walk upright (ala Planet of the Apes) would it reallyn- make any difference if mankind didn't exist ?i  L Given the starting points I think the challenge is pretty much equivalent :)    
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 06:54:21 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) , Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday3 Message-ID: <mVwNCYTSw$0C@eisner.encompasserve.org>a  j In article <i_eN8.177$hm1.55@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, "C.W.Holeman II" <cwhii5@ACM5.org> writes: > Terry C. Shannon wrote:3 > L >> Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ were able to take HP-UX and endow it withA >> ALL the goodness of VMS (clustering, DLM, security, stability,8L >> reliability, enhanced management, dynamic partitioning, Galaxy, etc, etc)< >> would it really make any difference if VMS still existed? > G > Does any Unix or anything else have logical names with search lists?   > Just wondering.t  + It certainly sounds easy for them to add...w     ...compared to ASTs.   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 06:16:05 -0600 (MDT)t" From: John Nebel <nebel@csdco.com>, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterdayG Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.21.0206110609430.16225-100000@athena.csdco.com>b  , On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Terry C. Shannon wrote:   > 9 > "Tony Scandora" <Scandora@cmt.anl.gov> wrote in messagel' > news:ae2h7a$thb$1@milo.mcs.anl.gov...n > .d > > H > > HP's prime software is Windows, HP-UX, with some of Tru64 eventually > foldedL > > in, and Linux.  VMS and NSK will be funded, but don't expect them to get > thekL > > corporate visibility of Windows, HP-UX, or Linux.  I'd like to know some > ofL > > what she couldn't repeat in public, but a corporation has good reason toN > > keep some of its numbers and plans private.  I think what Sue posted about) > > Carly's visit to ZKO is a Good Thing.a > D > No doubt. At least the lady now knows what VMS and Tru64 UNIX are. > J > It seems to me that HPQ is stronger in Unix (and Linux) than in Windows.: > Perhaps some decent halo effect from CPQ in that regard. >  > K > Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ were able to take HP-UX and endow it with-M > ALL the goodness of VMS (clustering, DLM, security, stability, reliability,mN > enhanced management, dynamic partitioning, Galaxy, etc, etc) would it really+ > make any difference if VMS still existed?s >  > Just wondering.o >  >  >   F It would change the system cost and operational risks enough to make a+ change of vendor an attractive proposition.l  F Somewhat more harshly, if pigs had wings, they could fly.  They don't, they can't.v  
 John Nebel   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 06:27:01 -0600 (MDT)," From: John Nebel <nebel@csdco.com>, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterdayG Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.21.0206110619360.16225-100000@athena.csdco.com>e  ? On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr wrote:-  b > In article <UudN8.34769$pw3.1398@sccrnsc03>, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> writes: > >n: > >"Tony Scandora" <Scandora@cmt.anl.gov> wrote in message( > >news:ae2h7a$thb$1@milo.mcs.anl.gov... > >. > >>I > >> HP's prime software is Windows, HP-UX, with some of Tru64 eventuallye	 > >folded9M > >> in, and Linux.  VMS and NSK will be funded, but don't expect them to get" > >theM > >> corporate visibility of Windows, HP-UX, or Linux.  I'd like to know some  > >of M > >> what she couldn't repeat in public, but a corporation has good reason to O > >> keep some of its numbers and plans private.  I think what Sue posted abouta* > >> Carly's visit to ZKO is a Good Thing. > > E > >No doubt. At least the lady now knows what VMS and Tru64 UNIX are.  > >,K > >It seems to me that HPQ is stronger in Unix (and Linux) than in Windows. ; > >Perhaps some decent halo effect from CPQ in that regard.  > >t > >uL > >Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ were able to take HP-UX and endow it withN > >ALL the goodness of VMS (clustering, DLM, security, stability, reliability,O > >enhanced management, dynamic partitioning, Galaxy, etc, etc) would it really , > >make any difference if VMS still existed? > L > Does that etc, etc, include compatibility for VMS binaries, VMS-compatibleM > compilers, VMS system services, and support for mixed-architecture clustersnK > with real VMS systems?   Does this imaginary HP/UX run on VAX and Alpha? t > M > I'm not being arbitrary with these additional requirements.  The market for$C > VMS is primarily in the existing (eroding) installed base. If HPQCM > discontinued VMS in favor of HP/UX without providing the things I mentioned8L > in the last paragraph, then HPQ would be screwing the installed base (likeF > that's never happened).  Even with very agreeable deals for forkliftH > upgrades, you still have to port your applications, and if it isn't atJ > least as easy as VAX->Alpha, you might as well go to some platform whoseG > vendor you can trust not to try pushing you off the new platform onto I > Windows.  A super-enhanced HP/UX with a whole VMS checklist of features,I > might be an atractive option ab initio, but a customer with a homegrownlJ > applications portfolio would probably sleep better on an adequate systemH > with either a committed vendor - IBM, Sun - or whose fate isn't in the- > hands of any one vendor (eg, xBSD, Linux).)  > 	 > -- Alant > Q > =============================================================================== 2 >  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUO >  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056RO >  Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA  94309-02101Q > ===============================================================================w >  >    Alan,   J The cost of continuing with VMS is pretty darn low, especially consideringG how little care and feeding it takes.  I don't see any way a transitionaG could be arranged that wouldn't force an analysis of what was available I from other manufacturers.  Such would almost have to have a bias against   HP for having forced it.  ( Your list of alternatives appears right.  
 John Nebel   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:34:56 -0500y1 From: "Dave Gudewicz" <david.gudewicz@abbott.com> , Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday1 Message-ID: <ae4ucs$r7s$1@fizban.pprd.abbott.com>h  2 Another VMS has UNIX hasn't issue.  File versions.   -- Dave...t  L Let me make the superstitions of a nation and I care not who makes its laws. -----Mark Twain(  3 "C.W.Holeman II" <cwhii5@ACM5.org> wrote in message 9 news:i_eN8.177$hm1.55@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...h > Terry C. Shannon wrote:r >oH > > Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ were able to take HP-UX and endow it withB > > ALL the goodness of VMS (clustering, DLM, security, stability,H > > reliability, enhanced management, dynamic partitioning, Galaxy, etc, etc)= > > would it really make any difference if VMS still existed?a >sF > Does any Unix or anything else have logical names with search lists? > Just wondering.e >e > -- > C.W.Holeman II > cwhii5@ACM5.orga > remove the fives > http://also.as/cwhii   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 09:15:15 -0400n* From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>, Subject: RE: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday- Message-ID: <0033000067559228000002L082*@MHS>s  H =0A> Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ were able to take HP-UX and endow = it with H > ALL the goodness of VMS (clustering, DLM, security, stability, reliab= ility,H > enhanced management, dynamic partitioning, Galaxy, etc, etc) would it=  really + > make any difference if VMS still existed?h  9 They'd have spend a whole heap of money unnecessarily anda8 causd untold thousands of man-years of software engineer frustration.  8 Search c.o.v. for NT and jewelry for additional opinion.   WWWebb   -----Original Message-----/ From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET $ Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 10:49 PMB To: Webb, William W Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET, Subject: RE: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday    7 "Tony Scandora" <Scandora@cmt.anl.gov> wrote in message % news:ae2h7a$thb$1@milo.mcs.anl.gov...m .t >sF > HP's prime software is Windows, HP-UX, with some of Tru64 eventually foldedH > in, and Linux.  VMS and NSK will be funded, but don't expect them to = get0 the3H > corporate visibility of Windows, HP-UX, or Linux.  I'd like to know s= ome  ofH > what she couldn't repeat in public, but a corporation has good reason=  toeH > keep some of its numbers and plans private.  I think what Sue posted = about ' > Carly's visit to ZKO is a Good Thing.r  B No doubt. At least the lady now knows what VMS and Tru64 UNIX are.  H It seems to me that HPQ is stronger in Unix (and Linux) than in Windows= .H8 Perhaps some decent halo effect from CPQ in that regard.    H Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ were able to take HP-UX and endow it wi= thH ALL the goodness of VMS (clustering, DLM, security, stability, reliabil= ity,H enhanced management, dynamic partitioning, Galaxy, etc, etc) would it r= eallye) make any difference if VMS still existed?i   Just wondering.=   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 09:06:51 -0500v1 From: "Dave Gudewicz" <david.gudewicz@abbott.com>n, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday1 Message-ID: <ae508k$rhl$1@fizban.pprd.abbott.com>p  7 Some IOIs from my e-mail exchanges with Scott Stallard.s  L I believe Scott knows what VMS is and he also knows what market share is allK about.  I also believe he is not anti-VMS.  VMS is a strategic product.  Is J it more "strategic" than other products with larger market share?  I think not.  I I also think that after last week's visit to ZKO, Carly also has a betterf
 feel for VMS.   I Some items to make VMS "more strategic".  #1 Get more apps running on it.PJ #2 Get it back in the edu space.  #3 Keep the OS development stream going.  L I think #3 is being done and if VMS on IA-64 pans out, #1 should follow.  #2 needs some work.  K If readers here have ideas about this - and I've said this many times now -tI send your constructively worded cards and letters to the powers that be @ A hp.  Discussing them here is OK too, but hardly cause for change.d -- Dave...v  L Let me make the superstitions of a nation and I care not who makes its laws. -----Mark Twain/  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3D050DD2.4FF18529@videotron.ca... > Dave Gudewicz wrote: > >3: > > I am 5 for 5 with messages to and from Scott Stallard. >-H > Since Scott Stallard seems to be the culprit in this case, would it be moreC > effective to reach both the guy under him and the guy above him ?D >aG > If he is the one who wants VMS customers to move to Unix, then he can> respond H > anything to please you and yet continue to state that he will help VMS > customers go to HP-UX. >hH > There are two possibilities: Stallard acts on his own and the policies statedG > by Stallard don't represent official HP policy. Or Stallard is just ah soldieri( > pushing policies set by his superiors. >-G > Only by seing the response from his superiors can one even attempt tor judgeKK > where the "we expect VMS customers to move to UNIX over time" comes from.c   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 08:36:47 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)o, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday3 Message-ID: <upqMZQeg4fTv@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ` In article <UudN8.34769$pw3.1398@sccrnsc03>, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> writes: > K > Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ were able to take HP-UX and endow it withtM > ALL the goodness of VMS (clustering, DLM, security, stability, reliability,vN > enhanced management, dynamic partitioning, Galaxy, etc, etc) would it really+ > make any difference if VMS still existed?c  H    Security, DCL, LIB$... routines, SYS$... routines, a decent real-time    capability, ...       I won't be holding my breath.   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 08:43:16 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) , Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday3 Message-ID: <t4BgMFb7Ht3D@eisner.encompasserve.org>   c In article <mVwNCYTSw$0C@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:el > In article <i_eN8.177$hm1.55@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, "C.W.Holeman II" <cwhii5@ACM5.org> writes:H >> Does any Unix or anything else have logical names with search lists?  >> Just wondering. > - > It certainly sounds easy for them to add...s >  >  > ...compared to ASTs.  G    TruCluster claimns to have the equivalent of blocking ASTs.  If theyvE    can start in that direction, they can keep moving closer.  Much of>C    the behaviour of ASTs can be done with threads, even though theyc    are different.a   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:24:45 -0700a' From: David Mathog <mathog@caltech.edu>s, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday+ Message-ID: <3D06163D.7A6419BE@caltech.edu>r   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:. >rK > Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ were able to take HP-UX and endow it withrM > ALL the goodness of VMS (clustering, DLM, security, stability, reliability,aN > enhanced management, dynamic partitioning, Galaxy, etc, etc) would it really+ > make any difference if VMS still existed?t  N Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ completed the VMS port to Itanium and achievedI full DII/COE functionality could they make the resulting operating system>J the upgrade path for HP-UX?  I'm not entirely joking about this - it mightJ actually be easier to bolt the unixy pieces on top of VMS than it would beI to stuff the key VMS pieces underneath the skin of an existing unix.  AndoJ my experience has been that it's a lot easier to port Unix software to VMS than the other way around.   Regards,   David Mathog mathog@caltech.edu   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 15:47:08 GMT 1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>d, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday< Message-ID: <0YoN8.14002$6m5.3227@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>  < "Dave Gudewicz" <david.gudewicz@abbott.com> wrote in message+ news:ae508k$rhl$1@fizban.pprd.abbott.com... 9 > Some IOIs from my e-mail exchanges with Scott Stallard.  >bJ > I believe Scott knows what VMS is and he also knows what market share is alloI > about.  I also believe he is not anti-VMS.  VMS is a strategic product.t IsL > it more "strategic" than other products with larger market share?  I think > not. >hK > I also think that after last week's visit to ZKO, Carly also has a betters > feel for VMS.i >tK > Some items to make VMS "more strategic".  #1 Get more apps running on it.-L > #2 Get it back in the edu space.  #3 Keep the OS development stream going. >oJ > I think #3 is being done and if VMS on IA-64 pans out, #1 should follow. #2 > needs some work.  I #2 does need some work, but I note with interest that CPQ some months agosJ sent a questionnaire to all its VMS edu customers. So apparently Edu is on the radar screen.t   >nG > If readers here have ideas about this - and I've said this many timesn now --K > send your constructively worded cards and letters to the powers that be @tC > hp.  Discussing them here is OK too, but hardly cause for change.e  E Yep. By all means stay constructive. There's plenty to criticize, bute@ constructive ideas will get you further than griping every time!   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 15:48:47 GMT:1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>u, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday+ Message-ID: <zZoN8.10252$nZ3.622@rwcrnsc53>n  : "Bob Koehler" <koehler@encompasserve.org> wrote in message- news:upqMZQeg4fTv@eisner.encompasserve.org...aA > In article <UudN8.34769$pw3.1398@sccrnsc03>, "Terry C. Shannon"   <terryshannon@attbi.com> writes: > >wH > > Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ were able to take HP-UX and endow it withB > > ALL the goodness of VMS (clustering, DLM, security, stability, reliability,I > > enhanced management, dynamic partitioning, Galaxy, etc, etc) would it  really- > > make any difference if VMS still existed?h >aJ >    Security, DCL, LIB$... routines, SYS$... routines, a decent real-time >    capability, ... >y" >    I won't be holding my breath.  J Nor will I because I don't look good as a Smurf. But back to the question:J if HP-UX inherited all the good attributes of VMS, would it matter much if> VMS found itself subject to the EERP some years down the road?   Just wondering.e   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 15:50:45 GMTe1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>e, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday< Message-ID: <p%oN8.14019$6m5.3482@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>  4 "David Mathog" <mathog@caltech.edu> wrote in message% news:3D06163D.7A6419BE@caltech.edu...H > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:L > >gH > > Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ were able to take HP-UX and endow it withB > > ALL the goodness of VMS (clustering, DLM, security, stability, reliability,I > > enhanced management, dynamic partitioning, Galaxy, etc, etc) would it  really- > > make any difference if VMS still existed?  >tG > Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ completed the VMS port to Itanium and- achievedK > full DII/COE functionality could they make the resulting operating systemn > the upgrade path for HP-UX?c  1 I'm not a ZKOland expert, but it seems plausible.P  / > I'm not entirely joking about this - it mightoL > actually be easier to bolt the unixy pieces on top of VMS than it would beK > to stuff the key VMS pieces underneath the skin of an existing unix.  AndgL > my experience has been that it's a lot easier to port Unix software to VMS > than the other way around.  J It would be nice to see history repeat itself. Note that it's pretty earlyK in the game, and I doubt that the HP-UX folks have a complete game plan ando) timetable for the Tru64 organ transplant.u   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 11:18:23 -0400d( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday, Message-ID: <3D0614BF.3010906@tsoft-inc.com>   Terry C. Shannon wrote:r    K > Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ were able to take HP-UX and endow it with.M > ALL the goodness of VMS (clustering, DLM, security, stability, reliability,tN > enhanced management, dynamic partitioning, Galaxy, etc, etc) would it really+ > make any difference if VMS still existed?b >  > Just wondering.     O Wonder no more.  What languages does HP UX support?  What languages does Tru64 aP support?  Compare that with the languages supported under VMS by DEC/Compaq/HP, O and also by third parties.  These languages are still active because there are rO users/applications using said languages.  In my case it's VAX/DEC BASIC.  Many uN of the old RSTS/E users had Basic and Dibol applications, which they're still L running.  It's my impression that PL/I is used, and I don't know what other Q operating systems it will work with, and also important, work in the same manner 0 as with VMS.  Q I like VMS, but if I had to rank what was important, it would be the language in gL which my applications are written first, and the OS second.  Of course, the 5 applications use VMS services, so both are important.a      Q It's not just the OS, it's the robust development environment, which gets a good   workout from the users.m   Dave   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 16:26:16 GMT,* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterdayB Message-ID: <IwpN8.202214$Kp.18542215@bin7.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  : "Bob Koehler" <koehler@encompasserve.org> wrote in message- news:t4BgMFb7Ht3D@eisner.encompasserve.org...tK > In article <mVwNCYTSw$0C@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.nets (Larry Kilgallen) writes: C > > In article <i_eN8.177$hm1.55@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,X* "C.W.Holeman II" <cwhii5@ACM5.org> writes:I > >> Does any Unix or anything else have logical names with search lists?  > >> Just wondering. > >a/ > > It certainly sounds easy for them to add...H > >r > >e > > ...compared to ASTs. >iI >    TruCluster claimns to have the equivalent of blocking ASTs.  If theybG >    can start in that direction, they can keep moving closer.  Much ofoE >    the behaviour of ASTs can be done with threads, even though theys >    are different.d  K And much of the behavior of an Alpha can be done with a PDP-11, even thoughc7 they are different.  Just a small matter of programing.r   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 16:31:57 GMT * From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterdayB Message-ID: <1CpN8.131973$4i.12431089@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  < "Dave Gudewicz" <david.gudewicz@abbott.com> wrote in message+ news:ae508k$rhl$1@fizban.pprd.abbott.com...w9 > Some IOIs from my e-mail exchanges with Scott Stallard.e >iJ > I believe Scott knows what VMS is and he also knows what market share is alllI > about.  I also believe he is not anti-VMS.  VMS is a strategic product.e IsL > it more "strategic" than other products with larger market share?  I think > not. >oK > I also think that after last week's visit to ZKO, Carly also has a bettera > feel for VMS.e  < I'm so happy for you.  Me, I'll wait to see what she *does*.   >pK > Some items to make VMS "more strategic".  #1 Get more apps running on it.hL > #2 Get it back in the edu space.  #3 Keep the OS development stream going. >yJ > I think #3 is being done and if VMS on IA-64 pans out, #1 should follow.  G In other words, *if* VMS survives the level of attrition it's currentlyoL looking at for the next two years, then it's just possible that the downwardH slide will be stopped short of zero when it becomes available on Itanic.   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 16:36:46 GMT=* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterdayB Message-ID: <yGpN8.197790$Gs.18672089@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  < "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote in message% news:zZoN8.10252$nZ3.622@rwcrnsc53...a   ...    > But back to the question:hL > if HP-UX inherited all the good attributes of VMS, would it matter much if@ > VMS found itself subject to the EERP some years down the road? >b > Just wondering.-  K It's not clear why you've had difficulty understanding the responses you'vez already received on this.m  K 'All the good attributes of VMS' means VMS in its entirety.  On Alpha.  AndbJ VAX.  With the same stability and without reduced performance or increased cost.  Period.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 18:50:14 +0200M' From: Brass Christof <welcome@spam.not>M, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday( Message-ID: <3D062A46.6F9EA9D4@spam.not>   "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:  > 9 > "Tony Scandora" <Scandora@cmt.anl.gov> wrote in message ' > news:ae2h7a$thb$1@milo.mcs.anl.gov...M > .u > >nH > > HP's prime software is Windows, HP-UX, with some of Tru64 eventually > foldedL > > in, and Linux.  VMS and NSK will be funded, but don't expect them to get > thedL > > corporate visibility of Windows, HP-UX, or Linux.  I'd like to know some > ofL > > what she couldn't repeat in public, but a corporation has good reason toN > > keep some of its numbers and plans private.  I think what Sue posted about) > > Carly's visit to ZKO is a Good Thing.B > D > No doubt. At least the lady now knows what VMS and Tru64 UNIX are. > J > It seems to me that HPQ is stronger in Unix (and Linux) than in Windows.: > Perhaps some decent halo effect from CPQ in that regard. > K > Hypothetically speaking, if HPQ were able to take HP-UX and endow it withcM > ALL the goodness of VMS (clustering, DLM, security, stability, reliability,aN > enhanced management, dynamic partitioning, Galaxy, etc, etc) would it really+ > make any difference if VMS still existed?s >  > Just wondering.r  H It makes a fundemental difference because the design matters in the end H for many reasons like efficiency, stability, speed of development, ease  of administration a.s.o..e   -- d7 moc dot slupofni at ssarb - please reverse the sequenceN   ------------------------------   Date: 11 Jun 02 18:56:13 +0200) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)r, Subject: Re: Carly was here in ZKO yesterday) Message-ID: <YBQcVK2mc8Nz@elias.decus.ch>p  _ In article <JriN8.8248$nZ3.1171@rwcrnsc53>, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> writes:S > < > "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message( > news:3D058DBD.F80D02C7@videotron.ca...  >> re: VMS parts ported to HP-UX >>E >> The *smart* thing to do would be to continue to make VMS more Unixt > compatible2 >> and then get HP-UX  applications ported to VMS. > N > That would be a good thing, too. I thought COE compliance might help in this	 > regard.   N What really impressed me in Hoff's presentation of the DII-COE stuff last yearN was that it was Solaris compatible. I had an immediate vision of being able to) port all those apps which run on Solaris.   M All the more interesting in the light of today's thread on the future of Sun.rM Don't want to deal with Sun any more? There could be an alternative migrationrL path in the form of DII-COE on VMS, at the very least as a stick to beat Sun" over the head in negotiations. :-)   >>L >> It is always easier to upgrade to a better system than to downgrade to an >> inferior system.g >  > Amen!t >  >  __
 Paul Sture Switzerlandn   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 11:24:33 -0400I; From: "Brian Tillman" <tillman_brian@notnoone.notnohow.com>vF Subject: Re: China to launch cyber attacks soon, be on VMS or bye-bye!$ Message-ID: <3d061637$1@news.si.com>  ( >May be brazilians ! ! ! We are bad !!!!  L Bad enough that we block most of the Brazilian mail routers.  Don't like the SPAM.i --A Brian Tillman                   Internet: tillman_brian at si.comfA Smiths Aerospace                          tillman at swdev.si.comp= 3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS      Addresses modified to preventh< Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991     SPAM.  Replace "at" with "@"8        This opinion doesn't represent that of my company   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 01:51:12 -0500 C From: "Craig A. Berry" <craig.berry@nospam.SignalTreeSolutions.com>e$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?H Message-ID: <craig.berry-E073CF.01511211062002@news.directvinternet.com>  ' In article <3D058592.1AF7C0BC@fsi.net>,e3  "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote:e   > Aristotle SnowNasis wrote:  VMS can be so obtuse at times,. > B > Examples, please? Hard to understand the reference without them.  G Well, how about having to learn how to disable the windowing system so sA you can install the license that allows you to run the windowing rG system?  I've also never seen AUTOGEN successfully increase the number oG of global sections; it always loops endlessly through multiple reboots t9 but never actually changes anything until you whack in a eA MIN_GBLSECTIONS to modparams.dat.  The only thing that makes the :H experience of a first-timer installing VMS reasonable is the experience D of a first-timer installing Linux.  We already do better than that, 9 which isn't saying much, but we don't do well enough IMO.e  ( > > whereas MOST Unix have configuration& > > files in centrally located areas.   I As does VMS, though the definition of "central" may not be the same, and -J there are a variety of security, efficiency, and useability reasons that  B the windoze .ini file approach is not right for every facility or  application.  + >> Also, help on VMS is quite brief and noteL > > always very helpful. On the other hand, man pages, while sometimes beingN > > tautological are full of information, especially that parts that describe . > > the files used in such-and-such a program. > F > That's what documentation is for. However, since none comes with theJ > average UN*X variant, the man pages are about all there is - ANYWHERE! -  F I think the commercial Unices do a bit better than that, Dave.  Tru64  certainly does.e  F >  Even today, there is still a great preference for hard-copy doc.'s.  A The difference between hard copy and electronic is a pint of ink.n  M > > By the way, I'm an administrator on several unix and vms platforms (vax &s > > alpha).M  E You'd really do well, then, Aristotle, to acquaint yourself with the o; thousands of pages of excellent documentation available at sG <http://www.openvms.compaq.com/doc>.  These are also included in every WE OpenVMS software distribution.  If you don't know how to install the sA documentation on your OpenVMS system (or any other HTML- or PDF-  F capable system for that matter) please ask for help here or call your  support center.s   E > > Overall, VMS has stood still for years while Unix has marched on t  E Patently false.  Does VMS have room to grow?  Sure.  But how many of o your Unices can do Galaxy?   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 06:55:26 +0000 (UTC) * From: Osmo Kujala <kujala@tukki.cc.jyu.fi>$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?, Message-ID: <ae46su$ugt$1@mordred.cc.jyu.fi>  $ RLC <rlc@magicalsoftware.com> wrote:  M >> How about: Lets try to change feature xyz. WHAT? NO SOURCE! DONE WITH VMS!a  N > Actually, source listings have been available practically since day 1 of VMS  , Yes, but it's not like with Linux or *BSD...   Osmo   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:00:32 +0100e( From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1>$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?) Message-ID: <3D05BC30.6B9E72D1@127.0.0.1>E   Osmo Kujala wrote: > & > RLC <rlc@magicalsoftware.com> wrote: > O > >> How about: Lets try to change feature xyz. WHAT? NO SOURCE! DONE WITH VMS!  > P > > Actually, source listings have been available practically since day 1 of VMS > . > Yes, but it's not like with Linux or *BSD...  7 This is why there is a fundamental difference with VMS.x  E Say, if you were given the sources to VMS and recompiled some part of 5 the kernel, then VMS fell over, where is the problem?   E When you have high level support for your systems, and you have folksnF picking around in the mass of bits left after a crash, everybody needsE to be singing from the same hymnsheet, or you may as well not bother.d   -- d( Regards, Nic Clews CSC Computer Sciences nclews at csc dot com.   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:57:29 +0000 (UTC) * From: Osmo Kujala <kujala@tukki.cc.jyu.fi>$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?, Message-ID: <ae4l2p$ssq$2@mordred.cc.jyu.fi>  ) Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> wrote:r > Osmo Kujala wrote: >>  ' >> RLC <rlc@magicalsoftware.com> wrote:. >>  P >> >> How about: Lets try to change feature xyz. WHAT? NO SOURCE! DONE WITH VMS!  J As clarification/reminder: I wrote above line when speculating how hacker C would react, not containing an opinion that sources should be open.d   >> eQ >> > Actually, source listings have been available practically since day 1 of VMSh >> f/ >> Yes, but it's not like with Linux or *BSD...m  9 > This is why there is a fundamental difference with VMS.e  G > Say, if you were given the sources to VMS and recompiled some part ofh7 > the kernel, then VMS fell over, where is the problem?t  G > When you have high level support for your systems, and you have folkswH > picking around in the mass of bits left after a crash, everybody needsG > to be singing from the same hymnsheet, or you may as well not bother.n  7 agreed, like I said unix-likes are more hacker friendlyi   Osmo   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 14:14:53 +0100-U From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com>c$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?0 Message-ID: <ae4t4d$f4h$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   David J. Dachtera wrote:   > Aristotle SnowNasis wrote:  F > That's what documentation is for. However, since none comes with theJ > average UN*X variant, the man pages are about all there is - ANYWHERE! -I > other than things like the on-line FreeBSD doc.'s and such. Even today,U9 > there is still a great preference for hard-copy doc.'s.n >  >     D I have to dissagree. Solaris for example comes with something calledA answerbook which is full doumentation on CD. If you don't want tocG use that and have a browser connected to the internet then docs.sun.com.B and or sunsolve also provide full documentation and patch reports.   Regardsn Andrew Harrisono   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 09:44:33 -0400f# From: "Dan Allen" <dallen@nist.gov>t$ Subject: RE: Could linux become VMS?: Message-ID: <NEBBIALHDHJMJINPGMOAEECHEMAA.dallen@nist.gov>   > -----Original Message-----> > From: kujala@tukki.cc.jyu.fi [mailto:kujala@tukki.cc.jyu.fi]& > Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 2:55 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comy& > Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS? >  > & > RLC <rlc@magicalsoftware.com> wrote: > O > >> How about: Lets try to change feature xyz. WHAT? NO SOURCE! DONE WITH VMS!e > P > > Actually, source listings have been available practically since day 1 of VMS > . > Yes, but it's not like with Linux or *BSD... >  > Osmo > P 	Actually, source, not just source listings was available with V1.  I still have* 	the V1.2 (?) source tapes in my basement.   	Dan   ------------------------------   Date: 11 Jun 2002 14:00:38 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)n$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?, Message-ID: <ae4vq6$24l0$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>  ' In article <3D058592.1AF7C0BC@fsi.net>, 4  "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes: |> -G |> That's what documentation is for. However, since none comes with theiI |> average UN*X variant, the man pages are about all there is - ANYWHERE!a  & Haven't been to the bookstore lately??  A Waldens, B. Dalton, Barnes & Noble.  All of them around here have!> racks of third party books on Unix in general, Linux or BSD in: particular and even more dedicated subjects like SysAdmin.  , Just a quick glance at my bookshelf reveals:  0 "Introducing the UNIX System", McGraw-Hill, 1983? "UNIX System V Primer (Revised Edition)", The Waite Group, 1987o2 "UNIX System Administration", Harcourt Brace, 1987H "UNIX SYSTEM Administration Handbook (2nd Edition)", Prentice Hall, 1994H "UNIX SYSTEM Administration Handbook (3rd Edition)", Prentice Hall, 20014 "LINUX Administration Handbook", Prentice Hall, 2002  F And that is hardly exhaustive.  And what books are available for VMS??   billE PS. As an aside, I would strongly recommend those last two for peoplecC who need to do UNIX and/or Linux Admin work.  Really good books and@4 I don't say that just cause I know the authors.  :-)   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   t   ------------------------------   Date: 11 Jun 2002 14:56:06 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)o$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?, Message-ID: <ae5326$25o3$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>  , In article <ae4l2p$ssq$2@mordred.cc.jyu.fi>,-  Osmo Kujala <kujala@tukki.cc.jyu.fi> writes: , |> Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> wrote: |> > Osmo Kujala wrote:n |> >> * |> >> RLC <rlc@magicalsoftware.com> wrote: |> >> S |> >> >> How about: Lets try to change feature xyz. WHAT? NO SOURCE! DONE WITH VMS!n |>  M |> As clarification/reminder: I wrote above line when speculating how hacker nF |> would react, not containing an opinion that sources should be open. |> ,  H Actually, copies of VMS source CD's have gone on Ebay a number of times.G Surely everyone here doesn't expect that the bnuyers are legitimate VMSeF licensees??  If they haven't been bought by at least one hacker, it isH very likely because no hacker cares about an OS as insignificant as VMS.   Security by obscurity.   bill   -- dJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   D   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 10:25:12 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)r$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?3 Message-ID: <wk5$5XOAz18W@eisner.encompasserve.org>r  ` In article <ae5326$25o3$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:. > In article <ae4l2p$ssq$2@mordred.cc.jyu.fi>,/ >  Osmo Kujala <kujala@tukki.cc.jyu.fi> writes: . > |> Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> wrote: > |> > Osmo Kujala wrote:p > |> >> , > |> >> RLC <rlc@magicalsoftware.com> wrote: > |> >> U > |> >> >> How about: Lets try to change feature xyz. WHAT? NO SOURCE! DONE WITH VMS!f > |>  O > |> As clarification/reminder: I wrote above line when speculating how hacker ,H > |> would react, not containing an opinion that sources should be open. > |> e > J > Actually, copies of VMS source CD's have gone on Ebay a number of times.I > Surely everyone here doesn't expect that the bnuyers are legitimate VMSU
 > licensees??o  K Or legitimate licensees of the VMS Source Listings kit -- even less likely.-   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 11:52:19 -0600- From: frey@encompasserve.org (Sharon Guthrie)u$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?3 Message-ID: <pfE0Er74rQaE@eisner.encompasserve.org>   M >> >and what goes in them.  I suspect someone who doesn't know VMS would moan P >> >about having to learn AUTOGEN and MODPARAMS.  Once you know your stuff, it's< >> >pretty easy to configure either a Linux or a VMS system. >> b, >> I'd agree. VMS can be so obtuse at times,  E 	Once knew an experienced computer guy who bemoaned having to log in.:O Supposedly his background was in IBM mainframes, but I always thought that you VL logged into those also, but what do I know?  He acted alot more like he was M used to peecees, however this was in the mid-eighties, even before Win95 was  L available, so that experience couldn't have been too terribly long.  At the E time, he was in his mid-fifties and had a couple decades of computer rD experience.  It took him *months* before he quit muttering over the  username/password prompts.I 	Just goes to show ya...  also remember that often people complain about o# anything they're not familiar with.o   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 18:43:38 +0200e' From: Brass Christof <welcome@spam.not>-$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?( Message-ID: <3D0628BA.591BCCE7@spam.not>   Aristotle SnowNasis wrote: > J > In article <adoch4$jga$1@milo.mcs.anl.gov>, Scandora@cmt.anl.gov says... > >>7 > >"Brass Christof" <welcome@spam.not> wrote in messagej% > >news:3CFF3B6D.ED24C47D@spam.not...f' > >> "Scandora, Anthony (35048)" wrote:: > >> ...A > >> > > Did I mention that UNIX is shit/crap and C fits well in?i > >> >R > >> > There is a lot not to like about it, but once properly configured, UNIX canN > >> > run reliably and do a lot of work, and most of what's wrong with C alsoO > >> > applies to BLISS and to Macro.  A lot can be said about .ascid v. .ascizt8 > >> > strings, but that's a lanugage independent issue. > >>A > >> The point is how much time you need to get it in that state.t@ > >> Having BLISS and Macro similar flaws doesn't make C better. > >h > >sM > >It's annoying, but not too difficult to learn where those config files arehL > >and what goes in them.  I suspect someone who doesn't know VMS would moanO > >about having to learn AUTOGEN and MODPARAMS.  Once you know your stuff, it's ; > >pretty easy to configure either a Linux or a VMS system.  > P > I'd agree. VMS can be so obtuse at times, whereas MOST Unix have configurationL > files in centrally located areas. Also, help on VMS is quite brief and notJ > always very helpful. On the other hand, man pages, while sometimes beingO > tautological are full of information, especially that parts that describe the ( > files used in such-and-such a program.  A The commands' parameters and options are a complete mess on UNIX.   B The standardised API for UNIX is that low level that tons of code  are duplicated with the apps.t  K > By the way, I'm an administrator on several unix and vms platforms (vax & 	 > alpha).i > Q > Overall, VMS has stood still for years while Unix has marched on (especially toeP > the degree of products provided by the likes of HP, Sun, Compaq to enhance the > "unix experience"...)o  * Why isn't there anything like CDL on UNIX?  D A mature OS should provide a more complete base and more concise API
 than UNIX.  K > >Similar language flaws don't make C worse, either.  C can't be condemnedg- > >unless BLISS and Macro are also condemned.s > >>L > >> > VMS advocacy would be better served by touting its advantages than byG > >> > calling products that do a lot of useful work and the people whot0 > >> > create them perjorative and vulgar names. > >>D > >> VMS is cleanly designed while UNIX is not. This is a difference9 > >> which is independent of the implementation language.h > >fO > >What's under the hood of my car is interesting to me and fun to learn about,aJ > >but not as important to me as the fact that the car was easy to buy, itM > >starts when I turn the key, and it gives me a nice ride to where I want to,E > >go.  Likewise, I stand in admiration of the outstanding design andeM > >implementation of VMS, but what matters to most computer users is that the % > >system runs applications reliably.e  D Completely agreed from that point of view. But on the long term it's
 important F how the services are implemented because this influences the stability and  costs for further development.  F The same reason applies to C and PERL development. It doesn't deliver F quality at acceptable costs. Therefore it's important to look under to hood.f  N > It strikes me as rather snobbish to describe VMS as "cleanly designed". SureQ > Unix started its life as an experimental OS and grew from that and subsequentlyyQ > inherited a few flaws, it has been tightened up over the years to prove to be ar > very stable and reliable OS.  B I read that VMS was designed in an organised way, but UNIX wasn't G but instead was developed in a more experimental trial and error style.   2 What do you think isn't cleanly designed with VMS?   > >> > >> Who created UNIX? > >hM > >A couple of PDP-7 hackers at Bell Labs way back in ancient history.  MajorSM > >later development was done at Berkeley, which is also known for LSD, whichnH > >some don't think is a coincidence.  All that is irrelevant.  For manyM > >applications, Linux is easy to configure and runs applications reliably onc > >cheap commodity hardware. > H > With software that is generally free and not a bitch to license... :-)  ? But honestly this wasn't the case in the first decade, at least4
 according B to the UNIX-haters Handbook from which the LSD quote may have been taken.  C I completely agree that there are many cases where you can use UNIXe boxes H to accomplish a task and more often than not you have to if you want to G avoid an even greater mess with other wide spread OSs because the apps h= aren't available for VMS. But this is not a technical reason.n  D Anyway to come back to the topic: I'm sure something like the Linux @ history is not appropriate for VMS and will probably not happen A because the number of people that think the VMS way is too small.    -- h7 moc dot slupofni at ssarb - please reverse the sequence    ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 06:56:24 -0700" From: ewilts@ewilts.org (Ed Wilts) Subject: Re: DFO and ODS-5= Message-ID: <995e39b6.0206110556.549e4c0f@posting.google.com>   d Rudolf Wingert <win@fom.fgan.de> wrote in message news:<200206050611.IAA18488@sinet1.fom.fgan.de>... > Hello, > F > the problem is not the DFO and ODS5. If you look right, you will see# > that the disk is mounted via NFS:o  E Actually, if you read the earlier post, the device was definitely notBE mounted via NFS.  Just because the volume label happened to be NFS001eB doesn't mean it's an NFS volume.  It happened to be labeled NFS001B since we're the NFS server, not the client.  It's also why it's an
 ODS-5 volume.l    > > >DFO>show nfs001/free/volume< > > >%DFG-W-NOTODSDEV, NFS001 is not an ODS-2 mounted device  D The problem ended up being that DFO 2.6 does *not* support ODS-5.  IF downloaded ECO1 from the ftp server and it's now behaving as expected.E  Thanks to Howard in Victoria for pointing me in the right direction.c   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 16:18:02 +0100e% From: Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net>e? Subject: Re: DFO and ODS-5 - Is quality control eally that bad?e8 Message-ID: <st4cgugp8if9267diioidkfl3jec39qhns@4ax.com>  B On 11 Jun 2002 06:56:24 -0700, ewilts@ewilts.org (Ed Wilts) wrote:  ! >> > >DFO>show nfs001/free/volumea= >> > >%DFG-W-NOTODSDEV, NFS001 is not an ODS-2 mounted device@ >rE >The problem ended up being that DFO 2.6 does *not* support ODS-5.  I1  E If that's true then how the hell did that get out of the door and whod has been shot?  G >downloaded ECO1 from the ftp server and it's now behaving as expected. F > Thanks to Howard in Victoria for pointing me in the right direction.   -- Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 04:03:40 -0700$ From: issinoho@slayme.com (issinoho) Subject: ECO Patches< Message-ID: <d0141774.0206110303.3a600ed@posting.google.com>   Guys,s  9 A few questions about ECO patches, if you will indulge...e  F 1. If I have a series of dependent kits, do I have to install and thenB reboot after each one, or can I install them all at the same time?  8 2. What's the best way of applying the kits clusterwide?  A 3. How can I tell which, if any, kits are currently applied on myt systems?  # 4. Any other gotchas to be wary of?d   Thanks for you time.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 14:58:52 +0300i* From: Mike Rechtman <rechtman@tzora.co.il> Subject: Re: ECO Patches( Message-ID: <3D05E5FC.10203@tzora.co.il>  B On later versions of OpenVMS, you can see which patches have been   installed using PCSI by entering $ PRODUCT SHOW HISTORY  D On an Alpha you call see what has been installed using VMSINSTAL by / examining the file SYS$UPDATE:VMSINSTAL.HISTORYy  G On a VAX the only way to check what has been installed using VMSINSTAL <E is by looking for Release notes (or sometimes DAT files) in SYS$HELP.n  I Of course you could always check the ECO dates and file-lists, and check eB   image files using ANAL/IMAGE, but thats too much like hard work.   Mike   issinoho wrote:e   > Guys,e > ; > A few questions about ECO patches, if you will indulge...i > H > 1. If I have a series of dependent kits, do I have to install and thenD > reboot after each one, or can I install them all at the same time? > : > 2. What's the best way of applying the kits clusterwide? > C > 3. How can I tell which, if any, kits are currently applied on my-
 > systems? > % > 4. Any other gotchas to be wary of?s >  > Thanks for you time. >      -- R  & New to c.o.vms? allow me to recommend:6 http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~rechtman/post_hlp.htmE --------------------------------------------------------------------- E Usual disclaimer: All opinions are mine alone, perhaps not even that.s? Mike Rechtman                            *rechtman@tzora.co.il*dE Kibbutz Tzor'a.                          Voice (home):(972)-2-9908337 C    "20% of a job takes 80% of the time, the rest takes another 80%" E ---------------------------------------------------------------------u   ------------------------------   Date: 11 Jun 02 19:11:38 +0200) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)o Subject: Re: ECO Patches) Message-ID: <V9E7eaASvE$B@elias.decus.ch>a  c In article <d0141774.0206110303.3a600ed@posting.google.com>, issinoho@slayme.com (issinoho) writes:a > Guys,  > ; > A few questions about ECO patches, if you will indulge...h > H > 1. If I have a series of dependent kits, do I have to install and thenD > reboot after each one, or can I install them all at the same time? >   J There's no way I'll reboot after every kit. It simply takes too much time.? If necessary I will do a minimum boot to install multiple kits.d  L You need to analyze the cover letters carefully to determine what you can do safely and what you can't.  : > 2. What's the best way of applying the kits clusterwide?  , Do you have shared or separate system disks?   > C > 3. How can I tell which, if any, kits are currently applied on my-
 > systems?   For kits for VMS V7.2 onwards:   $ PRODUCT SHOW HISTORY  E For earlier versions, on Alpha, look in SYS$UPDATE:VMSINSTAL.HISTORY.D   > % > 4. Any other gotchas to be wary of?e >   2 What version of VMS are you running? VAX or Alpha?  K As a general rule, I try to apply ECO kits with at least the network up andrO running, so that I can do a SET HOST/LOG=KIT_LOGS:kit_name.log. That way I have % my own record of what I did and when.o  L I will also drop a shadowset member out of the system disk prior to applyingF the ECO (particularly for multiple ECOS) so that if it all goes wrong,> reverting to the version before the ECO is just a reboot away.   __
 Paul Sture Switzerlande   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 07:26:39 GMTb. From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER)% Subject: Re: Fibre Disk vs. SCSI Disk 5 Message-ID: <PChN8.197698$305.2658285@news.chello.at>a  n In article <ae3enk$t4s$1@nsnmrro2-gest.nuria.telefonica-data.net>, "Steven Thompson" <steven@omga.biz> writes: >The arguments are good.  & Which ones? They are partly opposite ?  K >                        So where do do put your money? Just how many disks4 >are you going to buy?  % Sorry, I should have made it clearer..E It was a discussion I only watched. The SAN is used ONLY with NT5 andTM happens to be a one with Fibre Disks now. No specific (I/O) requirements wereeI stated. And least not during the discussion(s) I had the chance to watch. L Capacity was 'as much as the money lasts' (I assume some lower 100GB number)? and reason was 'replace the - existing and now to small - DAS'.eG I was not part of the discussion(s), because I had no arguments at all.s  ( So, you are on the fibre-disk side now ?( Or is this a typical 'it depends' case ?   Thanks for respondingI   -- m Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER"% Network and OpenVMS system specialistA E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atP A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm looking for (a) Network _and_ VMS Job(s)   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 14:40:23 +0100 (MET)A9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> ! Subject: Re: hobbyist (mini)mergea; Message-ID: <01KIT3HISTC6984WQP@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>n  F > The need for a merge really has nothing to do with what type of pathE > one uses to reach the disks.  The requirements are the same whetherwG > you are accessing the disk directly (as in a SCSI cluster) or via them > VMS MSCP Server over a LAN.i   Right.   > A merge will be required if: > G > 2) There are at least 2 shadowset members left in the shadowset after|C > the node leaves (such that a write operation in progress from the-E > departed node might have reached one or more of the members but not  > all of the members)j  I If I just have two members altogether, then it will always be full copy, >
 not merge?  > > A Mini-merge can be done instead of a Full Merge if the diskG > controller supports the MSCP Volume Shadowing Assists (in particular,mE > Write History Logging).  HSJ and HSD controller models tend to have>C > this feature.  If you have the VMS MSCP Server serving local SCSIU2 > disks, the write-logging capability isn't there.  7 Right---no capability, so another reason for full copy.w  G > If the node leaving the cluster unexpectedly also takes a member away I > with it, that member will need to be the subject of a Full Copy when itu > returns.    I That's why I mentioned non-MSCP paths.  If the node leaves, it will take yH the disk with it, since it is only accessible to other nodes via MSCP.  H Thus, if I understand all correctly, a third reason why, in my case, it " will always be copy and not merge.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 09:13:01 -0400n! From: Jim Agnew <jpagnew@vcu.edu>h Subject: Re: INITIALIZE and PCsc' Message-ID: <3D05F75D.1B994C88@vcu.edu>   D it's perfectly doable... however, that was under dos and win 3.x ...H i've not done it in a long time with the intention of using it...  i wasB checking disks using pc-tools diskfix to test for bad spots 'cuz i2 didn't have a spare vax then to ana/disk on... ;-)   "ther's always a way"u       Tom Simpson wrote: > N > Reformat it from the PC - fdisk and reformat, that is...  I'm sure I've done > it before, > but it's been awhile.s > 
 > Regards, > Tomd > H > "Phillip Helbig" <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> wrote in message7 > news:01KIS1HFLYRI96WQWC@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com...wK > > I took a SCSI disk which had been connected to a PC and connected it to>I > > a VMS box.  Could see it at the console, could see it from VMS, could L > > INITIALIZE it.  What about the reverse direction---take a SCSI disk fromC > > a VMS box and connect it up to a PC.  Obviously, if it has beenEL > > INITIALIZED by VMS, the PC can't use it as it is.  Is it possible to getL > > it into a PC-usable state from the PC itself, or does one need to format5 > > (in some sense of the word) somewhere else first?-   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:53:56 -0400r  From: norm.raphael@jamesbury.com9 Subject: Re: Mounting shadowset system disks across a SANn? Message-ID: <OF566486E0.C6E14260-ON85256BD5.005132CE@metso.com>o   Keith,   Thanks for the insites.   H I have been using HBVS data shadowsets over FDDI using MTI StingRayIII'sJ which do FDDI-SCSI with HSC emulation, so each system has a direct connectH to the storage and the MSCP issues do not obtain.  Since one cannot boot fromH FDDI, however, the issue of SYSTEM-DISK shadow volumes at multiple sitesI did not come into play; each system has a local-scsi-bus shadow-pair as a  system disk.
 Your comment:t  8     I do know that a cluster-common system disk, despite:     being shadowed, can still be a single point of failure<     for an entire cluster, in the event someone accidentally6     does a DELETE *.*;* or something.  Having multiple8     system disks is more work to manage, but can allow a,     cluster to survive this type of failure.  ! seems to me to be right on point.r   -Normh        E keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) on 06/10/2002 10:48:38 PM-  = Please respond to keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris)e   To:    Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com cc:n< Subject:    Re: Mounting shadowset system disks across a SAN    + norm.raphael@jamesbury.com wrote in messaget; news:<OFD8FC3770.B1DF3E2E-ON85256BD1.00517611@metso.com>...aC > In the April 2001 white paper "Fibre Channel in Disaster-Toleranto= > OpenVMS Cluster System" it say in footnote 2 on page 5 thatc@ > "mounting system disk shadow sets in DT configurations on both > sites is not recommended."  ; At this point in the white paper, they are still discussing E traditional disaster-tolerant cluster theory (they won't get to Fibrea Channel until Page 7).  A Prior to Fibre Channel, it was not feasible in practice to have alA shared, common system disk for the entire cluster and try to boota> systems from it at both sites.  This was because all access toC shadowset members at the opposite site was via the VMS MSCP Server,iC and so you didn't have any access to remote disks until there was a D VMS system booted (or at least far enough along in its boot sequence9 for the VMS MSCP Server to be active) at the remote site.   F Let's say you did have a shared system disk between sites.  You boot aF system at one site first, and since it cannot yet see any disks at theF opposite site, it must form a single-member shadowset of the member atE its own site.  Next, you boot a system at the other site, and it must E boot from the local member of the system disk at its site, since fromaC the boot prompt it cannot see the disks at the opposite site.  WhensD VMS on that system gets far enough along in the boot to try to mountE the system disk as a shadowset, it discovers that the local member itoF has booted from had been removed from the shadowset, and is now out ofA date, and the node crashes with a Shadowing Detected Inconsistentn State bugcheck.a  A > In a meeting yesterday, I was told that enhancements to OpenVMSs, > made since this was published negate this. >s3 > What is correct and why (feel free to elaborate)?e  C With Fibre Channel, it now becomes theoretically possible to have ahE shared, common system disk between sites, because (with an inter-siteaD FC link) you don't need the VMS MSCP server to be in place to accessD the remote site's member of a system disk shadowset.  Although it isD now possible, I still have some serious doubts as to whether, from aB high-availability standpoint, this is really a good thing to do orF not, and I haven't had the chance to play with it and discover all the! ramifications in actual practice.e  D I do know that a cluster-common system disk, despite being shadowed,D can still be a single point of failure for an entire cluster, in theD event someone accidentally does a DELETE *.*;* or something.  HavingE multiple system disks is more work to manage, but can allow a clusterw  to survive this type of failure.: ----------------------------------------------------------: Keith Parris | parris <at> DECUServe <dot> decus <dot> org   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 17:05:20 +0100 (MET)r9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>o9 Subject: Re: Mounting shadowset system disks across a SANr; Message-ID: <01KIT8HBASFO96WTPR@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>t  : >     I do know that a cluster-common system disk, despite< >     being shadowed, can still be a single point of failure> >     for an entire cluster, in the event someone accidentally8 >     does a DELETE *.*;* or something.  Having multiple: >     system disks is more work to manage, but can allow a. >     cluster to survive this type of failure.   Well, there is s      SYSMAN> DO DELETE *.*;*  , Real stupidity is difficult to prevent.  :-|  E Granted, even if shadowed, a single system disk is a single point of  I failure.  Why do people do this at all?  Probably so that they only have nH to manage 1 system disk.  This does have its advantages, of course.  On G the other hand, such a single system disk will have multiple roots, so lH one could STILL just maintain one system disk and then propagate copies @ of it to the others; all the node-specific stuff will be in the H corresponding root, so no need to "change the node name etc".  In other B words, each machine could have its own system disk but would have G multiple roots, even though it uses just one.  This sounds like a good hI compromise between ease of maintenance and robustness.  With this setup,  G if someone DOES do DELETE *.*;* on a system disk, a copy of one of the aB others will serve as a replacement.  (Still no protection against   SYSMAN> DO DELETE *.*;* though.)   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 10:23:40 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)i9 Subject: Re: Mounting shadowset system disks across a SANh3 Message-ID: <8YX3znmvyC5I@eisner.encompasserve.org>   w In article <01KIT8HBASFO96WTPR@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>, Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> writes:V; >>     I do know that a cluster-common system disk, despitee= >>     being shadowed, can still be a single point of failurei? >>     for an entire cluster, in the event someone accidentally-9 >>     does a DELETE *.*;* or something.  Having multiplee; >>     system disks is more work to manage, but can allow a / >>     cluster to survive this type of failure.  >  > Well, there is @ >  >    SYSMAN> DO DELETE *.*;* > . > Real stupidity is difficult to prevent.  :-|  ' That is why VMS can boot from CDROM :-)O   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 19:18:10 +0300 * From: Mike Rechtman <rechtman@tzora.co.il>9 Subject: Re: Mounting shadowset system disks across a SANe( Message-ID: <3D0622C2.60307@tzora.co.il>  I I think a good principle in this case would be "put all your eggs in one r basket, AND WATCH THAT BASKET!"   . Nothing is foolproof - fools are too clever...   Mike   Larry Kilgallen wrote:  y > In article <01KIT8HBASFO96WTPR@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>, Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> writes:  > ; >>>    I do know that a cluster-common system disk, despitec= >>>    being shadowed, can still be a single point of failuret? >>>    for an entire cluster, in the event someone accidentallyu9 >>>    does a DELETE *.*;* or something.  Having multiplet; >>>    system disks is more work to manage, but can allow at/ >>>    cluster to survive this type of failure.3 >>>@ >>Well, there is u >> >>   SYSMAN> DO DELETE *.*;* >>. >>Real stupidity is difficult to prevent.  :-| >> > ) > That is why VMS can boot from CDROM :-)n >      -- d  & New to c.o.vms? allow me to recommend:6 http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~rechtman/post_hlp.htmE ---------------------------------------------------------------------sE Usual disclaimer: All opinions are mine alone, perhaps not even that.x? Mike Rechtman                            *rechtman@tzora.co.il*iE Kibbutz Tzor'a.                          Voice (home):(972)-2-99083371C    "20% of a job takes 80% of the time, the rest takes another 80%"cE ---------------------------------------------------------------------.   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 11:33:21 -0400e; From: "Brian Tillman" <tillman_brian@notnoone.notnohow.com>t' Subject: Re: Newsreader for OpenVMS 7.2a" Message-ID: <3d061847@news.si.com>  K >Does BULLETIN use article numbers or msg id's to keep track of the messaget >list?  J I don't know.  I haven't examined the source in enough detail to determine" that.  You're welcome to, however. --A Brian Tillman                   Internet: tillman_brian at si.com5A Smiths Aerospace                          tillman at swdev.si.comE= 3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS      Addresses modified to preventr< Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991     SPAM.  Replace "at" with "@"8        This opinion doesn't represent that of my company   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 13:12:43 +0100nU From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com>e Subject: Re: No new Alpha saless0 Message-ID: <ae4pfv$e26$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Bob Ceculski wrote:f   > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com> wrote in message news:<ae2cmb$kl3$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...e >  >>Bob Ceculski wrote:u >> >>9 >>So you don't dispute the claim that neither the 8400 or.9 >>the WildFire can deliver on the performance claims madee >>for them by Compaq/Digital.a >>8 >>You and Rob seem to be birds of a feather, don't worry9 >>about the current boxes not being competitive just wait?7 >>for the next box. This has been Rob's refrain since Il7 >>started posting to this group, it appears to be yourst
 >>as well. >>	 >>Regardss >>Andrew Harrison  >> > E > we didn't say that ... current boxes are very competitve and future. > one will have no competition!- >     > So if you claim that the current boxes are competitive produce? some actual results that demonstrate this. Oh I forgot actually ; being able to back up the inflated claims made for Alpha onl4 this newsgroup has never been a strong point has it.   Where are the numbers ?0  9 Thats what you should ask yourself ? Why is it that I can ; make the claim that Alpha isn't the performance leader that-8 the Alpha advocates say it is, backing my claims up with> published benchmarks from Compag and the other vendors without8 anyone producing any performance results that counter my claims.h  8 Isn't a bit pathetic to keep claiming something that has; never been justified and has been comprehensively refuted ?   > This isn't new. Its current manifestation is the WildFire hype7 before that we had the 8400/GS140 again all hype and non# actual numbers to back the hype up.n   Regards  Andrew Harrisona   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 16:22:42 GMTm2 From: "Andrew Dodd" <Andrew.J.Dodd@HP.spamfreecom> Subject: Re: No new Alpha salesi2 Message-ID: <mtpN8.13$kJ4.487593@news.cpqcorp.net>  8 I got very confused as to who was being linked with who.  J There is a danger of rewriting history here. The 8400 was a very succesfulI system - we sold thousands, outselling just about everything else. At thekH time. That was certainly backed up by shipment figures at the time. Do ID still have the press announcements - no. Is there any point in goingH backwards? I certainly don't wish to it's history. Sure you had to tradeK slots - that wasn't uncommon. To bring that up to date how many 104 CPU 15Kr@ do SUN expect to sell of the config used to get the best SPECjbbI performance? You want some I/O as well? Well you'll have to take out someIL CPUs. Benchmarking is a game. You post the best figure you can regardless of whether it matches reality.k  H The Alpha processor is still a performance leader - in the ES45 it beats? just about all others. Hence it's use in all kinds of demanding I opportunities. GS series can be beaten on some benchmarks by other higher-L CPU count systems - which I have always acknowledged. Compaq hasn't done anyA really high end benchmarks for a while but I do believe, based onPF extrapolation and customer specific benchmarks - which I would love toE discuss but I can't, that Wildfire can match anybody else's similarlyiJ configured systems. At the moment the really high end is elsewhere. Others+ may feel that is a cop out - suit yourself.   4 We will wait and see what EV7 based systems achieve.   --" Andrew Dodd - not speaking for HP. Pre-Sales Account Consultant HP Computer LtdA www.hp.com/uk/   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 08:07:47 -07001 From: nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett)gM Subject: nofe on KZPAC disks ( was Re: For all you hobbyists: IDE on SCSI !!)n- Message-ID: <QXlJoUSoMF0W@malvm7.mala.bc.ca.>n  > In article <cf15391e.0206101925.53a48255@posting.google.com>, 6    keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) writes:  N > Dirk Munk <munk@home.nl> wrote in message news:<3D0126A7.9040702@home.nl>...F >> Characteristics: 1C4D4408 dir,qsvbl,fod,shr,avl,mnt,elg,idv,odv,rnd7 >>                   25010201 clu,nnm,nlt,scsi,nofe,dtn 4 >                                               ^^^^J >> So it seems it does not support Forced Error operations.  Now I have to3 >> check how serious that is for shadow operations.A > F > If VMS needs to write a Forced-Error flag on a disk with "nofe" set,B > it cannot do that, and it will remove the entire member from the< > shadowset instead, because it can no longer guarantee data > consistency.      Getting a bit off topic...h  B    I have a VMS 7.2-2 system with disks on a KZPAC. I just checked@ a couple of drives on this controller and notice that DRA0 showsA the "nofe" flag, but DRA1 doesn't. Both are 2 member Raid-1 sets.  DRA0 is the system disk.  1    Why would one have nofe and not the other one?    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 13:02:03 +0100nU From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com>f Subject: Re: Open Letter to HP0 Message-ID: <ae4ors$dtc$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Keith Parris wrote:n  c > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message news:<3D05283A.1026AF57@videotron.ca>...i >  >>"Main, Kerry" wrote: >>D >>>In the past - absolutely.  What about the future? Can it meet theK >>>volumes required to keep SPARC competitive? What about Linux futures andg >>>its impact on Solaris/SPARC?i >>>-P >>If Sun maintains higher volumes than HP, then Sun will be in a better position# >>to keep Sparc alive than HP will.a >> > F > HP today already has higher Unix marketshare (and thus volumes) than > Sun. >      ROTFLs   Rubbish.  < The latest Dataquest and IDC numbers dissagree entirely with9 you claim, in fact movement is the other way. This is forM both revenues and units.  $ What is the source of your numbers ?    F > I noticed an editorial in the latest issue of VAR Business Magazine,C > entitled "It's Time for You to Get Out of the Sun Market."  A fewj
 > samples: > G > "For the resellers and integrators of Sun products, filing Chapter 11uH > or shuttering operations is becoming a way of life.  Many Sun VARs areD > living on the edge of financial ruin or being propped up by one ofE > Sun's two distribution partners.  That's Sun's dirty little secret,i > say its partners." >     C This is old news, the second user market was flooded with equipmentrC from dot.com failures etc but most of this has been worked through.   > In addition most of this equipment is/was Sun's older E series= rather and V or F series and because of this is having a muchh reduced effect anyway,    ? All you need to do is read the current IDC/Dataquest worldwide.      Regards  Andrew Harrisone   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 13:57:30 +0100hU From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com>r Subject: Re: Open Letter to HP0 Message-ID: <ae4s3r$eps$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Bill Todd wrote:  % > "Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy"i@ > <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com> wrote in message, > news:ae2gbt$lp8$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com... >  >> >>Rob Young wrote:7 >>The market IA-64 needs to suceed in isn't HPC its the-9 >>commecial server market which is dominated by apps thatr >>are integer based. >>7 >>Even at 1.5x the performance of the Itanium would pute: >>Itanium 2 at the back of the pack on integer performance >>if measured by SPECint.t >> > K > The recent Intel numbers divulged at tecchannel (?) suggest closer to 2x.IJ > Then again, Merced never lived up to the numbers Intel claimed for it asK > recently as this year (0.5 SPECint2K/MHz).  Sounds as if we'll know in at  > most a month now.t >     @ Intel seem currently to be claiming between 1.5 and 2x dependingD on what the CPU is doing. Even 2 will not make Itanium 2 competitive% when it becomes available in systems.t      J >>>We would be naive to believe Intel with Alpha engineering to supplementH >>>their design staffs won't make IA64 very competitive in the integer /2 >>>commercial space.  It is only a matter of time. >>>p > L > LOL.  It was 'only a matter of time' that changed Merced from the platformL > that was going to take over the world to being a complete and embarrassingF > dud.  And 'only a matter of time' that caused Alpha to fall from itsE > performance pinnacle to just being a leader - and then into demise.  >  > ; >>And thats before you realise that the engineers you refert9 >>to have not been very sucessfull at doing what you hopew) >>they will do for IA-64 on Alpha itself.- >> > M > The engineers Rob is referring to have an exemplary record of doing exactlyiM > that.  It's the server group (not the chip group) that has come up short inc) > larger-than-4-processor configurations.  >     E Well yes and no, Alpha has always been poor at delivering applicationi? throughput for large servers, This may be CPU, it may be systemn@ it may be OS or it may be app tuning. But there is one aspect of> Alpha which though non technical should not be ignored, costs.  ? Alpha mainly because of the costs of the FAB starved Digital ofo: cash, if they had had the money they spend on building and; running the FAB on designing interconnects, OS R&D etc thene> they may have been in a better possition. This is not directly@ the fault of the Alpha designers, it was a bad business decision< possibly chosing to be FABless like Sun would have delivered; a similar processor but not at the punitive costs that were  eventually realised.     > 8 >>Its probably unfair to place the blame at the doors of5 >>the Alpha engineers themselves, nice processor samei2 >>about the system but the fact is that Alpha does5 >>not deliver on the claims made for it in this spaces >>and hasn't for a long time.o >> > H > Actually, it has delivered quite respectably in the 4-processor server > space. >     6 The ES40/45 were/are competitive boxes as was the 4100; but this is impinging on Pentium space where cost/packagingt= heat etc become importand and is at the edge of the Itanium 1r and 2 market positions.,     Regardsu   Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 13:07:47 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>t Subject: Re: Open Letter to HPJ Message-ID: <DCmN8.279804$t8_.255492@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  2 "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> wrote in messageL news:BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF402660763@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net. .. JF -  H >>> And replace Alpha with IA64 and HP no longer has the chip that gives it the performance edge.<<<o  > Imho - You are basing this statement on current IA64-1 systemsD performance. The OpenVMS initial release will be on IA64-3 or IA64-4H systems (or whatever the official naming standard is going to be ..). AnE analogy to Alpha would be that OpenVMS on IPF is being developed on aiA EV4 class system with the expectation that its initial productiond) shipment will be on an EV68 class system.a  H In the meantime, current Customers will be able to continue to use AlphaG EV7 or EV79 based systems as alternatives if they feel the IA64 serverssD available at the time when OpenVMS is initially released do not meet their expectations.-     Kerry,  A You are missing one important thing in all of this, and so is HP.S  C It's the fact that once people's impressions are colored it takes auJ monumental effort to persuade them that their first impressions are wrong.  L IA-64-1 or -2 is released.....they perform not very well......customers makeL a porting decision at that point in time, not bothering to wait for -3 or -4	 releases.c  K The Senior Executive Vice-President of XYZ Corp. makes the decision to fund I their ports to AIX because he has to do something to earn his pay betweentI lunch and the time he leave the office early to play a round of golf withmJ the IBM sales critter. And since the Senior Executive Vice-President wantsJ to be Chairman & CEO some day, he will NOT reverse his decision to port toI AIX. He'll say it is a strategic and necessary move given the *perceived*nK (my emphasis) failings of IA64-(whatever version)....the Board will nod itslK collective head, and that will be it. (and if you think that the Board willeE challenge a 'technical' decision ......... look at the HP board as andL example - not a true technologist among them to call the unix/windoze bluff,2 and most other corporate boards are no different).  K The (lack of) brain trust at Compaq should never have cancelled Alpha until D such time as IA64 was deliverable on par with Alpha. They could haveH announced that they were going to do the port as a hedge, and they wouldH have avoided many defections since last June 25th. While they were at itJ they could have said that they were porting to Power4 too, because withoutK Alpha the VMS group might as well be simply a O/S software vendor much liketK Oracle is a db (and related software) company. Power4 was probably a better-G technical choice to port to than IA64, and in the long term it probablymJ would have been to Compaq's advantage to align itself with IBM rather than Intel.  J Rest assured that nobody today is buying OpenVMS on Alpha just so they can8 port to IA64 (if, as, and when) it may be a viable chip.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 13:12:22 GMTs# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>  Subject: Re: Open Letter to HPJ Message-ID: <WGmN8.248819$ah_.149464@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3D054A4B.E5476CF4@videotron.ca... > H > No, the problem is that every VMS sale that is delayed by years due to IA64G > being delayed, is going to make VMS look bad on the books due to poors sales.  H Wrong.... virtually every VMS sales that is delayed by one or more years( will be a sale that is PERMANENTLY lost.   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 06:38:52 -0700" From: ewilts@ewilts.org (Ed Wilts) Subject: Re: Open Letter to HP= Message-ID: <995e39b6.0206110538.2e585949@posting.google.com>c  u keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) wrote in message news:<cf15391e.0206101956.bcd41cf@posting.google.com>...a  F > I noticed an editorial in the latest issue of VAR Business Magazine,C > entitled "It's Time for You to Get Out of the Sun Market."  A fewd
 > samples:  0 For those looking for the whole article, it's atG http://www.varbusiness.com/sections/columns/columns.asp?ArticleID=35611   	    .../Edo   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 16:42:24 +0100uU From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com>r Subject: Re: Open Letter to HP0 Message-ID: <ae55p1$i1f$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Rob Young wrote:  q > In article <jh6N8.175829$%y.17283803@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:  >  > < >>>And thats before you realise that the engineers you refer: >>>to have not been very sucessfull at doing what you hope* >>>they will do for IA-64 on Alpha itself. >>>-M >>The engineers Rob is referring to have an exemplary record of doing exactly,M >>that.  It's the server group (not the chip group) that has come up short ino) >>larger-than-4-processor configurations.  >> >>9 >>>Its probably unfair to place the blame at the doors ofo6 >>>the Alpha engineers themselves, nice processor same3 >>>about the system but the fact is that Alpha does-6 >>>not deliver on the claims made for it in this space >>>and hasn't for a long time. >>>TH >>Actually, it has delivered quite respectably in the 4-processor server >>space. >> >> > 6 > 	And if slide 31 is any indication of things to come > 	(linear scaling of STREAM), > > > http://www.eecs.umich.edu/vlsi_seminar/f01/slides/bannon.pdf >     A As you probably know linear scaling with STREAMS is not difficult ? on a NUMA system because STREAMS can be parallelised and can be., run using CPU's and memory local to the CPU.  > This is how the WildFire number was obtained. It also explains? why IBM's P690 STREAMS number was a dissapointment, the versionRB of AIX they used for the result did not support CPU->Local Memory.  @ Running STREAMS locally one does not get hit by any interconnectA latency issues which as you know was the downfall of the WildFire_ box.   Regardse Andrew Harrisonm   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 17:06:09 +0100uU From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com>m Subject: Re: Open Letter to HP0 Message-ID: <ae575h$ihg$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Main, Kerry wrote:   > Andrew, Andrew ... > >  > 8 >>>>So where will you be if IA-64 doesn't deliver ???<<< >>>> > ! > Lets turn the question around -i > J > "Where will Sun be if the volumes and performance for future SPARC based% > Solaris solutions doesn't deliver?"r    C We have alsways had this problem as have Compaq and HP, Compaq withb( Alpha/Tru64 and HP with HP-PA and HP-UX.  B HP is in a slightly better position than Compaq was because of the@ profits generated by printing consumables. But to lose your highC end datacenter solutions and the source of most of your high margin B business is not a prospect that will excite Sun, Compaq, HP or the new HP.a    7 > Come on now, you can deliver better fud than that .. e >  > :-)  >     5 So are you impressed by the performance of Itanium ??h  < Was it what you expected from the HP and Intel hype prior to availability ??u  : You seem perfectly happy to claim that SPARC and Sun's are8 slow while abjectly failing to justify these claims, you9 seem perfectly happy to claim that Alpha and AlphaServersc6 are fast again while abjectly failing to justify these claims.g  5 But anything that questions your rather limitted view'4 of the world and the new order of IA-64 and industry8 standard computing by suggesting with facts to back them6 up that IA-64 isn't necessarely the sucess you take it to be and thats FUD !!   Interesting.  : You don't perhaps remember that my posting was in response7 to Robs FUD about Sun and SPARC. Remember I have market-6 share, performance and price performance numbers in my favour which you don't..     > F >>>>We are talking about a long term future, in case you hadn't worked >>>> > it out yet. :):):):)<<<  > J > Mmm... I guess you have different Customers than I do - most of mine areI > not looking beyond 8-10 years right now. Course, in 8-10 years, most ofsH > them feel that is enough time to move their OpenVMS based applicationsG > to another HW platform (IA64-3 or IA64-4) since OpenVMS is OpenVMS ..s. > And mixed clusters are supported ... Right ? >     @ So why are you hypothesising about something that is approachingB this timeframe. Itanium 1 isn't going to take the market by storm,; Itanium II if only 1.5-2 x faster than Itanium I and at itsh9 price point and environmentals isn't either so by defaultl9 we are talking about Itanium III/IV as being the CPU thate5 will deliver the knockout blow to all the other CPU'se in the market.  > You said "Where will Sun be if the volumes and performance for6 future SPARC based Solaris solutions doesn't deliver?"  9 The current UltraSPARC III/IV roadmap delivers enough CPUe8 throughput to compete very adequately with Itanium II so: you seem to be raising a point which you yourself say that6 few people will be interested in. Ever the spin doctor8 shame you made the mistake of doing it in the same post.    9 As I said earlier As ever its a pleasure to converse withc4 someone of your analytical abilities, it remains so.   regardsm Andrew Harrisong   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 11:41:30 -0400 ( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> Subject: Re: Open Letter to HP, Message-ID: <3D061A2A.7070600@tsoft-inc.com>   John Smith wrote:A  4 > "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> wrote in messageN > news:BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF402660763@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net. > .. > JF - >  > H >>>>And replace Alpha with IA64 and HP no longer has the chip that gives >>>> > it the performance edge.<<<  > @ > Imho - You are basing this statement on current IA64-1 systemsF > performance. The OpenVMS initial release will be on IA64-3 or IA64-4J > systems (or whatever the official naming standard is going to be ..). AnG > analogy to Alpha would be that OpenVMS on IPF is being developed on a C > EV4 class system with the expectation that its initial production + > shipment will be on an EV68 class system.s    N But, Alpha hasn't done too poorly in it's steady progression.  IA-64 has done Q very poorly.  It started when, 1995 or earlier?  It just got it's first chip out iO the door recently?  Now we're expected to believe that all problems are solved eO and performance increases will come quickly?  The history doesn't justify such  M optimism.  It's still EPIC, and all that's really in the roadmaps is process KJ shrinks and some more cache.  Sure doesn't leave me with the warm fuzzies.    J > In the meantime, current Customers will be able to continue to use AlphaI > EV7 or EV79 based systems as alternatives if they feel the IA64 serverseF > available at the time when OpenVMS is initially released do not meet > their expectations.r    Q But, there is a hard stop down the road.  Yes, there could be additional process eM shrinks of EV7 after the EV79 chips.  But, EV7 is the end of the road.  That sQ argument can only last so long.  Should IA-64 crater, or be shot down by Hammer, 3/ eventually Alpha users will hit that hard stop.      >  > Kerry, > C > You are missing one important thing in all of this, and so is HP.s > E > It's the fact that once people's impressions are colored it takes aiL > monumental effort to persuade them that their first impressions are wrong. > N > IA-64-1 or -2 is released.....they perform not very well......customers makeN > a porting decision at that point in time, not bothering to wait for -3 or -4 > releases.  > M > The Senior Executive Vice-President of XYZ Corp. makes the decision to fundiK > their ports to AIX because he has to do something to earn his pay between K > lunch and the time he leave the office early to play a round of golf withaL > the IBM sales critter. And since the Senior Executive Vice-President wantsL > to be Chairman & CEO some day, he will NOT reverse his decision to port toK > AIX. He'll say it is a strategic and necessary move given the *perceived*iM > (my emphasis) failings of IA64-(whatever version)....the Board will nod its M > collective head, and that will be it. (and if you think that the Board willrG > challenge a 'technical' decision ......... look at the HP board as aneN > example - not a true technologist among them to call the unix/windoze bluff,4 > and most other corporate boards are no different). >  > The (lack of) brainu    3 Please change the above to '(significant lack of)'.o  9 > trust at Compaq should never have cancelled Alpha until F > such time as IA64 was deliverable on par with Alpha. They could haveJ > announced that they were going to do the port as a hedge, and they would4 > have avoided many defections since last June 25th.    Q Actually, it's very possible that this would have increased the sales of VMS and sO Tru64.  Potential users that are Intel/Microsoft worshippers would look at the rL port and feel that they could run VMS or Tru64 on a (hawk, spit!) "industry N standard" platform, which would also run windoz should they wish, and be more O comfortable with a purchase.  All the arguments that Compaq threw out would be vN valid, and, Alpha would be a viable backup, thus avoiding the feeling by many O that VMS was now truly dead.  You cannot say that feeling doesn't exist, I can c0 cite specific customers who truly feel this way.   > While they were at ittL > they could have said that they were porting to Power4 too, because withoutM > Alpha the VMS group might as well be simply a O/S software vendor much likeyM > Oracle is a db (and related software) company. Power4 was probably a better I > technical choice to port to than IA64, and in the long term it probablynL > would have been to Compaq's advantage to align itself with IBM rather than > Intel. > L > Rest assured that nobody today is buying OpenVMS on Alpha just so they can: > port to IA64 (if, as, and when) it may be a viable chip.   Dave   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 09:52:10 +0100.( From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1>P Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading)( Message-ID: <3D05BA3A.D7605B1@127.0.0.1>   david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk wrote:e > ^ > In article <3D011B79.6516718B@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:
 > >re: SSH > > O > >Ok, just a sanity check here. Is unencrypted telnet really that dangerous inv > >terms of risk ? > >h > Yes.N > VMS is a very secure operating system. However a system is only as secure asG > its weakest link. Telnet passes usernames and passwords in the clear.h  B And shout that LOUD and CLEAR for those ditching DECNet and LAT as
 protocols.  A Your security policies mean nothing. "Oh, lets insist they have ae@ numeric and a non alpha numeric in the password". Makes spotting passwords easier.   H Anyone in the UK interested in a DECUS (sic) session on the realities of	 security?   A Drop a private email or say here, and I'll see what I can come upn7 with... I've got stories that'll straighten your curls.a   -- t( Regards, Nic Clews CSC Computer Sciences nclews at csc dot com    ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:20:21 +0000 (UTC)i* From: Osmo Kujala <kujala@tukki.cc.jyu.fi>P Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading), Message-ID: <ae4it5$ssq$1@mordred.cc.jyu.fi>  ) Bob Ceculski <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote: ` > Osmo Kujala <kujala@tukki.cc.jyu.fi> wrote in message news:<adnmh9$4f3$1@mordred.cc.jyu.fi>...Y >> Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com> wrote:  >>  @ >> > OpenVMS is not a volume desktop OS and nothing like SunRays@ >> > exist in the OpenVMS space to provide server based desktops >> ... >>  L >> OpenVMS is good OS for desktop and has better that SunRays "server based"K >> environment. OpenVMS doesn't have volume because DEC/Compaq/HP choose ton >> give volume for Windows. :-( J >> (They even actively invented trick's to keep OpenVMS hardware far away  >> from low cost level.)M >> Diskless VAX or Alpha workstations can easily be added to cluster as full mK >> members. Some of those workstations may be with disk and act as servers 9N >> and can of course be used as workstation same time (if the disks are quiet  >> enough).t >> mI >> If the flexibility (all-purpose nature) of OpenVMS is not used I don'tcD >> understand how it could survive. Think for example a small officeF >> for which OpenVMS would be very good for server, but they need someM >> workstations too. If there's not available OpenVMS desktops they certainlyi( >> try to use Wintel for the server too. >>  L >> OpenVMS can, and has survived as niche OS. But that isn't interesting andI >> not for us. We have now near 100 servers in our computer room. Most ofmJ >> them PC:s with Linux, unix, Windows etc. . Sure OpenVMS would have muchG >> to offer for that. Would make lots of empty space there and make thecI >> services more reliable and easier to maintain. BUT when OpenVMS is so lN >> neglected and kept secret, I would never even suggest to increase its use.  >> e >> My opinions >>               Osmo   K > so you are running 100 servers instead of several, or maybe even two, andf% > costing yourself a ton of money ...c  H No, we are doing poor man's computing. Even recycled PC:s. It would cost@ huge extra to convert to OpenVMS and keep running reliably. You G see, if some of those little servers now crash, it's not a big deal. WeeD have many. But if we integrate to a few big systems, they must have ? doubled components etc. to get same service availability level. F (I easily understand that for commercial companies OpenVMS offers goodF cost of ownership, although both software and hardware are expensive.)  I Even if we had money for that, it would not be good decision. As a school E we must have systems, which are common in the world. Of course I keep J our little VMS cluster running, but not many seems to be interested in it.  H Besides, unix or linux is good enough for us. They are as good as VMS inI our enviroment. Most problems with security or reliability are from humandD source. Of course some desing features are better in VMS (no buffer J owerflows, world unreadable password file,...), but their relevance is notI so high to us, and then there are other things that are better in unixes.   J If we had to concentrate to one OS.......the hardest thing would be to get rid of Windows. It's so sad.   Osmo   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:52:05 +0000 (UTC)n From: david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.ukP Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading)+ Message-ID: <ae4kol$i2p$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>o  ` In article <ae2vim$14br$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:- >In article <3D015A9C.2A89BBAF@videotron.ca>,y1 > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:a >|> "Zane H. Healy" wrote:Q >|> Also, assume you manage the network backbone. You have access to all the datanO >|> that transits in the backbone. But when you telnet to the router that feedsnP >|> one departmental lan, someone with an ethermon on that LAN will not see yourR >|> telnet session to the router and hence won't be able to capture the managementL >|> passord for the router. But if you do this from a de]artmental lan, thenJ >|> anyone on that lan will be able to ethermon you and see what you type. > G >Not unless they are using old equipment (hubs rather than switches) orrF >have deliberately engineered the lack of security into their network. > E >I have switches and even lock down the ports to prevent someone from.B >plugging in a box that I do not have administrative control over.C >Wireless is still a problem, but even it can be secured to a large- >extent. >-K The introduction of switched networks stopped your general hacker sniffing jK networks for a number of years but the availability of tools such as dsniff.5 means that in general that happy period is long past.r  B For more information on the insecurity of switched networks see :-  E http://maverick.giac.org/newlook/resources/IDFAQ/switched_network.htmM      
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University     >|> K >|> Are ISPs and internet backbine networks really so untrustworthy that anu; >|> average telnet session is considered such a high risk ?  >.@ >Counting packets going in and out of my departments lan I can't@ >imagine any ISP paying for a box capable of actually extractingB >usable information from its customers traffic.  After all, we all) >know what 98% of that traffic really is.u >o >billo >o >-- K >Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves"E >bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.r >University of Scranton   |eB >Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>      ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 07:25:33 -0400 ' From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com>oP Subject: RE: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading)T Message-ID: <BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF402660766@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net>   Osmo -  F >>> You see, if some of those little servers now crash, it's not a big deal.<<<  H Today perhaps. I also know that schools are beginning (some have always)C demanded high availability for selected application area's, because B there is always a huge amount of stress when servers go down rightE around exam time, when big assignements are due, or when registrationo! for a new session is in progress.g   As to the comment -pD >>> But if we integrate to a few big systems, they must have doubled: components etc. to get same service availability level.<<<  G Perhaps this does not apply to your environment, but one of the hottestsE topics for almost all med-large corp's today is IT Consolidation - one all platforms.=20a   Big drivers for this are:S? - lower overall costs. A few big systems properly config'ed cand@ typically be maintained by less staff (number 1 IT cost for mostB companies). Admittably, these centralized staff are typically more0 senior experienced and higher trained resources.G - being much more proactive - big driver is to fix problems BEFORE they  impact the business.=201A - increase service levels e.g. availability, performance. Yes, ITpH Consolidation does require much more focus on availability features likeB clustering - hence the requirement for more senior and experienced
 resources.A - increased security. Maintaining access to 10 or less servers ise? typically much easier to maintain than a hundred. (yes, you caneD implement distributed security features like kerberos, but you stillH need to maintain  each system so that an individual system does not have some back door) B - business continuity (BC) and disaster recovery (DR). Fire in theF datacenter is good example where the rest of the facility is fine, butG the computer room is gone. Now what? Since 9/11, this is a huge concernrG by all med-large businesses. Implementing BC and DR is much easier with  fewer systems than many.  H >>>> As a school we must have systems, which are common in the world.<<<  A Do you mean like teaching Java on a high availability cluster?=20e  G While there are still some issues with Java, it might be interesting toh note the following trends:  D http://news.com.com/2009-1001-868454.html?tag=3Ddd.ne.dtx.nl-sty.0 = (March,c 2002)lH "Although recent studies show that older technologies are still the mainE languages used by software developers, Java is beginning to close thee gap."i  F "And market research firm Evans Data has reported that more people areB using Java while the number of C and C++ developers is declining."  B "That trend is reflected in academia as well. At the Massachusetts@ Institute of Technology, the computer science department in 1997H replaced Microsoft's C++ with Java as the primary software language that> students are required to learn. This spring, the University of@ California at Berkeley offered 25 Java courses and only seven on Microsoft languages.  A "In my mind, Java is rapidly going to displace all the languages, F particularly C++," MIT associate professor Daniel Jackson said, notingE that undergraduate students are increasingly teaching themselves some,G Java even before attending his classes. In two years, the College BoardpH will switch from C++ to Java for the computer science advanced placementD tests that high school students take to get credit for college-level	 courses."   G >>> If we had to concentrate to one OS.......the hardest thing would bef& to get rid of Windows. It's so sad.<<<  D I would suggest that moving to one OS is almost always NOT the right solution.=20  D However, if indeed the school does decide to centralize, because theB number of users will be much higher, then the centralized platformD absolutely will require much higher RASS (reliability, availability,F scalability and security) than the current environment. This gets evenF more critical when the school decides to start offering online courses. from remote students from just about anywhere.   Regards,    
 Kerry Main Senior Consultantg Hewlett-Packard Canada! Consulting & Integration Servicest Voice: 613-592-4660s Fax   : 613-591-4477 Email: Kerry.Main@hp.com     -----Original Message-----4 From: Osmo Kujala [mailto:kujala@tukki.cc.jyu.fi]=20 Sent: June 11, 2002 6:20 AMi To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComeG Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in1 Reading)    ) Bob Ceculski <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote:f: > Osmo Kujala <kujala@tukki.cc.jyu.fi> wrote in message=20* > news:<adnmh9$4f3$1@mordred.cc.jyu.fi>...' >> Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy=20c7 >> <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com> wrote:5 >>=200I >> > OpenVMS is not a volume desktop OS and nothing like SunRays exist=20l: >> > in the OpenVMS space to provide server based desktops >> ... >>=20oH >> OpenVMS is good OS for desktop and has better that SunRays "server=20H >> based" environment. OpenVMS doesn't have volume because DEC/Compaq/HP  I >> choose to give volume for Windows. :-( (They even actively invented=20eB >> trick's to keep OpenVMS hardware far away from low cost level.)G >> Diskless VAX or Alpha workstations can easily be added to cluster asp full=20 B >> members. Some of those workstations may be with disk and act as
 servers=20G >> and can of course be used as workstation same time (if the disks aret quiet=20 >> enough).r >>=20uF >> If the flexibility (all-purpose nature) of OpenVMS is not used I=20F >> don't understand how it could survive. Think for example a small=20H >> office for which OpenVMS would be very good for server, but they need  H >> some workstations too. If there's not available OpenVMS desktops they  2 >> certainly try to use Wintel for the server too. >>=20 H >> OpenVMS can, and has survived as niche OS. But that isn't interesting  H >> and not for us. We have now near 100 servers in our computer room.=20H >> Most of them PC:s with Linux, unix, Windows etc. . Sure OpenVMS would  H >> have much to offer for that. Would make lots of empty space there and  F >> make the services more reliable and easier to maintain. BUT when=20I >> OpenVMS is so neglected and kept secret, I would never even suggest=20o >> to increase its use.h >>=20  >> My opinions >>               Osmol  J > so you are running 100 servers instead of several, or maybe even two,=20) > and costing yourself a ton of money ...   H No, we are doing poor man's computing. Even recycled PC:s. It would costB huge extra to convert to OpenVMS and keep running reliably. You=20G see, if some of those little servers now crash, it's not a big deal. WeuF have many. But if we integrate to a few big systems, they must have=20B doubled components etc. to get same service availability level. (IH easily understand that for commercial companies OpenVMS offers good costA of ownership, although both software and hardware are expensive.)   B Even if we had money for that, it would not be good decision. As aG school we must have systems, which are common in the world. Of course I H keep our little VMS cluster running, but not many seems to be interested in it.  H Besides, unix or linux is good enough for us. They are as good as VMS inC our enviroment. Most problems with security or reliability are fromoB human source. Of course some desing features are better in VMS (no	 buffer=20dF owerflows, world unreadable password file,...), but their relevance isE not so high to us, and then there are other things that are better ini unixes.   F If we had to concentrate to one OS.......the hardest thing would be to  get rid of Windows. It's so sad.   Osmo   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 11:30:48 +0000 (UTC)l From: david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.ukP Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading)+ Message-ID: <ae4n18$i2p$3@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>   S In article <3D05BA3A.D7605B1@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> writes:t  >david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk wrote: >>  _ >> In article <3D011B79.6516718B@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes:o >> >re: SSHh >> >P >> >Ok, just a sanity check here. Is unencrypted telnet really that dangerous in >> >terms of risk ?  >> > >> Yes.hO >> VMS is a very secure operating system. However a system is only as secure as H >> its weakest link. Telnet passes usernames and passwords in the clear. > C >And shout that LOUD and CLEAR for those ditching DECNet and LAT ase >protocols.  >sO Apart from the fact that hackers know less about these protocols are DECNET and 4 LAT actually any better in this regard than TELNET ?O With DECNET you can of course use proxies but is that any better than DEC TCPIP/N services use of proxies (which of course is better than the general Unix - any. user can setup their own .rhosts file policy).  B >Your security policies mean nothing. "Oh, lets insist they have aA >numeric and a non alpha numeric in the password". Makes spotting  >passwords easier. >rI >Anyone in the UK interested in a DECUS (sic) session on the realities of 
 >security? >nB >Drop a private email or say here, and I'll see what I can come up8 >with... I've got stories that'll straighten your curls. >l   I for one would be interested.    
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   >-- ) >Regards, Nic Clews CSC Computer Sciences  >nclews at csc dot com   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:29:48 GMTm# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> P Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading)J Message-ID: <03mN8.248807$ah_.178083@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  H Your arguments all make an effective case for OpenVMS to be installed at$ med-large companies, and at schools.  I The problem with this is that ComHpaq couldn't handle the increased salesAK volume in VMS-based servers as the company has gotten used to selling fewery and fewer each year. :-(  F The sales growth would throw the company into disarray just as much asJ further decline in sales.  No, upon reflection, the decline in sales wouldI be much more easily handled...the company has been preparing for this forn years.      2 "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> wrote in messageL news:BE56C50EA024184DAF48F0B9A47F5CF402660766@kaoexc01.americas.cpqcorp.net. .. Osmo -  F >>> You see, if some of those little servers now crash, it's not a big deal.<<<  H Today perhaps. I also know that schools are beginning (some have always)C demanded high availability for selected application area's, because>B there is always a huge amount of stress when servers go down rightE around exam time, when big assignements are due, or when registrationi! for a new session is in progress.u   As to the comment -aD >>> But if we integrate to a few big systems, they must have doubled: components etc. to get same service availability level.<<<  G Perhaps this does not apply to your environment, but one of the hottestoE topics for almost all med-large corp's today is IT Consolidation - onn all platforms.   Big drivers for this are:/? - lower overall costs. A few big systems properly config'ed cane@ typically be maintained by less staff (number 1 IT cost for mostB companies). Admittably, these centralized staff are typically more0 senior experienced and higher trained resources.G - being much more proactive - big driver is to fix problems BEFORE theyc impact the business.A - increase service levels e.g. availability, performance. Yes, ITmH Consolidation does require much more focus on availability features likeB clustering - hence the requirement for more senior and experienced
 resources.A - increased security. Maintaining access to 10 or less servers is>? typically much easier to maintain than a hundred. (yes, you can D implement distributed security features like kerberos, but you stillH need to maintain  each system so that an individual system does not have some back door)nB - business continuity (BC) and disaster recovery (DR). Fire in theF datacenter is good example where the rest of the facility is fine, butG the computer room is gone. Now what? Since 9/11, this is a huge concern G by all med-large businesses. Implementing BC and DR is much easier witht fewer systems than many.   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 13:23:05 GMT # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>gP Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading)J Message-ID: <ZQmN8.279920$t8_.122426@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  5 "Nic Clews" <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> wrote in message " news:3D05BA3A.D7605B1@127.0.0.1... > J > Anyone in the UK interested in a DECUS (sic) session on the realities of > security?t > C > Drop a private email or say here, and I'll see what I can come up 9 > with... I've got stories that'll straighten your curls.  >m    A I like scary stories - like the Windows World Domination one. :-)s   Please regale us.a   ------------------------------   Date: 11 Jun 2002 13:46:18 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)cP Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading), Message-ID: <ae4uva$2445$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>  4 In article <10JUN02.22152804@kort.waisman.wisc.edu>,5  karcher@kort.waisman.wisc.edu (Carl Karcher) writes:tL |> In a previous article, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote: |>  K |> ->Not unless they are using old equipment (hubs rather than switches) or J |> ->have deliberately engineered the lack of security into their network.	 |> -> ...x |>  H |> Having a switched network doesn't mean traffic can't be sniffed. It's |> just not as easy: |>  J |> See: <http://www.sans.org/newlook/resources/IDFAQ/switched_network.htm>  2 Two people pointed me at this webpage.  I read it.  E First, his imporoper use of the jargon of the networking biz makes medE doubt it has any value whatsoever beyond the usual InfoBiz trade rag.m  	 Example: c  8 >>          Step 1: Node A transmits a frame to Node C. K >>          Step 2: The hub will broadcast this frame to each active port. m  G Actually, the hub will "re-transmit" the frame.  "Broadcast" has a veryu+ specific meaning in the networking world.     D And, as for dsniff, it is more a package of hacker tools that happenE to include a run-of-the-mill sniffer by the same name.  No where doestG it explain where this program gets the majik power to change the designd of the switch hardware.a  < The only mention we get of sniffing in switched networks is:  E >>        As you can see, a switched network does not lend itself to o6 >>        sniffing as easily as a non-switched network  1 Now there's an understatement if I ever saw one!!)  7 >>        does since it does not broadcast most frames.t  A And there's the "broadcast" word again!!  Hubs don't "broadcast" o non-broadcast frames either.  C Of course, at this point we wander off to talking about "spoofing", F "flooding" and "duplicating" all of which are something very differentC from sniffing.  Of course, all three of them require the ability tonB sniff and being as he doesn't explain how that is going to be done= in a switched network, well, you can see where this is going.l  B He is correct that security was not the original planned intention> in switched networks, but it is a very desirable and virtually% impossible to circumvent side effect.   A When the host on Port-1 talks to the host on Port-2 their trafficr? goes back and forth between Port-1 and Port-2. There is nothingtA that a program running on the host on Port-7 can do to modify the B hardware of the switch to change that.  The only possibility would@ be to sniff broadcast traffic, learn the MAC address of the hostD you want to attack, change your MAC address to his and try to hijack@ his session.  On all managed switches (we are talking about real@ work environments here, and not your $10 home network, I assume)C you can (and should) turn on the security feature which would cause B that users port to go dead as soon as the change in MAC address is	 detected.   E The days of sniffing a rapidly dwindling.  In any properly engineered C business network it is a non-issue.  After all, we're just a schoolcC and we have pretty much eliminated it here.  The only place I still C run hubs are for small interconnects in physically secure locations6B (like may server room hidden backbone.)  And as they age, they areE also being replaced with switches.  Surely a business concerned abouth@ security would be more willing to spend the extra money for this
 security??   bill   -- rJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   >   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 14:35:08 +0000 (UTC)c From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.ukP Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading)+ Message-ID: <ae51qs$lrf$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>s  ` In article <ae4uva$2445$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:5 >In article <10JUN02.22152804@kort.waisman.wisc.edu>,a6 > karcher@kort.waisman.wisc.edu (Carl Karcher) writes:M >|> In a previous article, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:e >|> L >|> ->Not unless they are using old equipment (hubs rather than switches) orK >|> ->have deliberately engineered the lack of security into their network.l
 >|> -> ... >|> I >|> Having a switched network doesn't mean traffic can't be sniffed. It's  >|> just not as easy:i >|> K >|> See: <http://www.sans.org/newlook/resources/IDFAQ/switched_network.htm>  >n3 >Two people pointed me at this webpage.  I read it.r >sF >First, his imporoper use of the jargon of the networking biz makes meF >doubt it has any value whatsoever beyond the usual InfoBiz trade rag. >t  O Considering this is on the SANS Institute website I would trust their knowledge 4 of security and TCPIP a lot more than I would yours.    
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University  
 >Example:  > 9 >>>          Step 1: Node A transmits a frame to Node C. hL >>>          Step 2: The hub will broadcast this frame to each active port.  >wH >Actually, the hub will "re-transmit" the frame.  "Broadcast" has a very, >specific meaning in the networking world.   >iE >And, as for dsniff, it is more a package of hacker tools that happen F >to include a run-of-the-mill sniffer by the same name.  No where doesH >it explain where this program gets the majik power to change the design >of the switch hardware. > = >The only mention we get of sniffing in switched networks is:  > F >>>        As you can see, a switched network does not lend itself to 7 >>>        sniffing as easily as a non-switched networkr >r2 >Now there's an understatement if I ever saw one!! >f8 >>>        does since it does not broadcast most frames. >tB >And there's the "broadcast" word again!!  Hubs don't "broadcast"  >non-broadcast frames either.e >iD >Of course, at this point we wander off to talking about "spoofing",G >"flooding" and "duplicating" all of which are something very differentfD >from sniffing.  Of course, all three of them require the ability toC >sniff and being as he doesn't explain how that is going to be donea> >in a switched network, well, you can see where this is going. >eC >He is correct that security was not the original planned intentiont? >in switched networks, but it is a very desirable and virtually & >impossible to circumvent side effect. >cB >When the host on Port-1 talks to the host on Port-2 their traffic@ >goes back and forth between Port-1 and Port-2. There is nothingB >that a program running on the host on Port-7 can do to modify theC >hardware of the switch to change that.  The only possibility would A >be to sniff broadcast traffic, learn the MAC address of the hostiE >you want to attack, change your MAC address to his and try to hijackuA >his session.  On all managed switches (we are talking about reallA >work environments here, and not your $10 home network, I assume)lD >you can (and should) turn on the security feature which would causeC >that users port to go dead as soon as the change in MAC address isn
 >detected. >rF >The days of sniffing a rapidly dwindling.  In any properly engineeredD >business network it is a non-issue.  After all, we're just a schoolD >and we have pretty much eliminated it here.  The only place I stillD >run hubs are for small interconnects in physically secure locationsC >(like may server room hidden backbone.)  And as they age, they areXF >also being replaced with switches.  Surely a business concerned aboutA >security would be more willing to spend the extra money for thisw >security??o >j >billj >@ >-- K >Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolves>E >bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.v >University of Scranton   |2B >Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>      ------------------------------   Date: 11 Jun 2002 14:51:57 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)oP Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading), Message-ID: <ae52qd$25o3$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>  ( In article <3D05BA3A.D7605B1@127.0.0.1>,+  Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> writes:V" |> david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk wrote: |> >  ; |> > In article <3D011B79.6516718B@videotron.ca>, JF Mezei cK |> >                                             <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron  .ca> writes:
 |> > >re: SSHd |> > >R |> > >Ok, just a sanity check here. Is unencrypted telnet really that dangerous in |> > >terms of risk ?b |> > >	 |> > Yes.nQ |> > VMS is a very secure operating system. However a system is only as secure as J |> > its weakest link. Telnet passes usernames and passwords in the clear. |> ,E |> And shout that LOUD and CLEAR for those ditching DECNet and LAT ase
 |> protocols.h  H Is DECNET encrypted??  I didn't think so, but I could be wrong.  If not,A it is just as susceptable to sniffing as any TCPIP application.  >   |> tD |> Your security policies mean nothing. "Oh, lets insist they have aC |> numeric and a non alpha numeric in the password". Makes spotting  |> passwords easier.  > That's not how it's done.  It's much easier.  If you see a new@ connection being opened up on the TELNET port you merely capture@ the first 1K (or less actually) of traffic between the two hosts: and reassemble it.  The first thing you should see is the ; Login:/Password: dialog.  Of course, I would guess the sameo> could be done for DECNET except that none of the little dweebs= who actually write this stuff knows VMS exists or even cares.y  B And, it does require a sniffable LAN!!  Get those managed switches installed today!!=   bill   -- eJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   o   ------------------------------   Date: 11 Jun 2002 14:59:44 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)mP Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading), Message-ID: <ae5390$25o3$3@info.cs.uofs.edu>  + In article <ae4kol$i2p$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>, !  david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk writes:e |> ,E |> For more information on the insecurity of switched networks see :-n |> eH |> http://maverick.giac.org/newlook/resources/IDFAQ/switched_network.htm  H Been there, read it.  Nowhere does it explain how you can get around theF fact that traffic for other ports wil not show up on the port with theI sniffer.  And, the three attacks he lists as threats to switched networksw> will not work with anything beyond the $10 home market switch.   bill   -- WJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   4   ------------------------------   Date: 11 Jun 2002 15:08:34 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)dP Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading), Message-ID: <ae53pi$25o3$4@info.cs.uofs.edu>  + In article <ae4n18$i2p$3@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>,t!  david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk writes:  |> yR |> Apart from the fact that hackers know less about these protocols are DECNET and7 |> LAT actually any better in this regard than TELNET ?>  G That was my question.  Are DECNET and LAT encrypted??  How are they any  less sniffable than TCPIP??  f  C "hackers know less about these protocols" == security by obscurity.fB Can you bet your business on this any more than you can on TCPIP??  R |> With DECNET you can of course use proxies but is that any better than DEC TCPIPQ |> services use of proxies (which of course is better than the general Unix - anyo1 |> user can setup their own .rhosts file policy).n  5 Under Unix, I can prevent "any user" from doing that.p  A As has been said in the past, Unix is only as secure as the AdminnE makes it.  It is sad that most admins are still living in a differentrH time when social norms made much of this security hardening unnecessary.F But it is not the fault of Unix that so many don't secure their boxes.G Example: For how many years after the Morris Worm did most Unix systems @ (including SunOS) ship with a version of sendmail that was stillD susceptable?  A fixed version of sendmail was available within days.   bill   -- iJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   m   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 16:28:31 +0100s( From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1>P Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading)) Message-ID: <3D06171F.D8DF2966@127.0.0.1>    John Smith wrote:- > 7 > "Nic Clews" <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> wrote in messagey$ > news:3D05BA3A.D7605B1@127.0.0.1... > >wL > > Anyone in the UK interested in a DECUS (sic) session on the realities of
 > > security?  > >cE > > Drop a private email or say here, and I'll see what I can come upp; > > with... I've got stories that'll straighten your curls.r > >K > C > I like scary stories - like the Windows World Domination one. :-)0 >  > Please regale us..  E OK, and I've had a private email or two. I'll deliver this in the UK,nH but as ever I'll make sure the presentation material is available on theC web. I've dropped the hint to the events person in the UK, keep thes- mails coming and I'll pass on the support :-)a  C It'll have VMS leanings, but security is a wider subject of course.i -- h( Regards, Nic Clews CSC Computer Sciences nclews at csc dot coms   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 16:51:27 +0000 (UTC)g From: david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.ukP Subject: Re: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading)+ Message-ID: <ae59qf$or3$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>   L In article <ae51qs$lrf$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>, david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes:a >In article <ae4uva$2445$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:o6 >>In article <10JUN02.22152804@kort.waisman.wisc.edu>,7 >> karcher@kort.waisman.wisc.edu (Carl Karcher) writes:tN >>|> In a previous article, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote: >>|> eJ >>|> Having a switched network doesn't mean traffic can't be sniffed. It's >>|> just not as easy: >>|> iL >>|> See: <http://www.sans.org/newlook/resources/IDFAQ/switched_network.htm> >>4 >>Two people pointed me at this webpage.  I read it. >>G >>First, his imporoper use of the jargon of the networking biz makes meaG >>doubt it has any value whatsoever beyond the usual InfoBiz trade rag.h >> > P >Considering this is on the SANS Institute website I would trust their knowledge5 >of security and TCPIP a lot more than I would yours.s >eJ Also you might want to look at some of the other articles on this subject # published at about the same time eg(  D http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/05/29/000529opswatch.xml   andf  ; http://www.ntsecurity.net/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=8878    andg  B http://www.linuxsecurity.com/feature_stories/feature_story-89.html      
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 14:50:26 +0200c- From: "Martin Hoogenboom" <martinh@xs4all.nl>R0 Subject: Re: strange double comparison behaviour3 Message-ID: <003001c21146$df8fee90$32a76dc2@wws00b>r   Hi,o  ; I am only a craftsmen in carpenting but one thing i know ise< that 1 mtr = 1 mtr but no yardstick is the same as te other.9 The only way to make sure your work fits is always to usei the same (your own) yardstick.: I this case you are comparing two eight-byte strings where7 a difference in one bit will show up. When representing : these strings as a reals rounded to 5 decimals, the (very)9 smal differences get lost. You may try to subtract te one-" from the other to find the spills.  " Never use different yardsticks !!    Martin   ----- Original Message ----- D! From: "wing" <wingwong@witty.com>a To: <Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com>a$ Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 6:33 AM, Subject: strange double comparison behaviour     > Hi,r > H > The following program fails to compare double values 1.9.  All doublesF > a, b, c, are expected to be 1.9.  With printf, a, b, d are 1.9 but dE > give 0.  Moreover, (a==b) gives false result, (fails to check 1.9 =e > 1.9).y [CUT]e   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:57:12 -0400 2 From: norm lastovica <norman.lastovica@oracle.com>0 Subject: Re: strange double comparison behaviour' Message-ID: <3D05F3A8.50106@oracle.com>s  8 I've not actually studied your program to look for bugs,4 but before you continue down this path, I'd strongly> suggest that you read and understand Goldberg's article titled? "What every computer scientist should know about floating-point  arithmetic".  ; http://www.acm.org/pubs/toc/Abstracts/0360-0300/103163.htmlu   wing wrote:t   > Hi,m > H > The following program fails to compare double values 1.9.  All doublesF > a, b, c, are expected to be 1.9.  With printf, a, b, d are 1.9 but dE > give 0.  Moreover, (a==b) gives false result, (fails to check 1.9 =o > 1.9).a > : > Moreover, the output in openvms and pc are not the same. > * > --- output of the program in openvms --- > a:    1.90000g > b:    1.90000  > c:    1.90000  > d:    0.00000e > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9  > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9  > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9  > % > --- output of the program in pc ---o > a:    1.90000f > b:    1.90000  > c:    1.90000t > d:    0.00000' > a == b returns trueI > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9> > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9  >  > --- the source code ---t > #include <stdlib.h>o > #include <stdio.h> > #include <string.h>o > #include <iostream.h>t > #include <math.h>  > ) > int my_atoi(const char* src, int len) {f, >   // Make a null-terminated version of src# >   char* buf=(char*)malloc(len+1);m >   strncpy(buf,src,len);t >    >   buf[len] = NULL; i >  n >   int i=atoi(buf); >   delete buf; 
 >   return i;n > }b > > > double my_atof(const char* src, int len, int decimalPoint) { >   if (decimalPoint<=0)' >     return (double)my_atoi(src, len);n > / >   int intPart=my_atoi(src, len-decimalPoint);e< >   int decPart=my_atoi(src+len-decimalPoint, decimalPoint); >  h >   double value=decPart;h& >   for (int i=0;i<decimalPoint;i++) { >     value=value/10;1 >   }r! >   return (double)intPart+value;r > }n > 
 > int main(){  > $ >    char* src          = "0000190"; >    int   len          = 7; >    int   decimalPoint = 2; >   >    char* src2         = "1.9"; > 0 >    double a = my_atof(src, len, decimalPoint); >    double b = atof(src2);t3 >    double c = atof(src) * pow(10, -decimalPoint);r >    double d = 0;F >    sscanf(   src, "%*.*lf", (len - decimalPoint), decimalPoint, &d); >  >    printf("a: %10.5lf\n", a);  >    printf("b: %10.5lf\n", b);u >    printf("c: %10.5lf\n", c);h >    printf("d: %10.5lf\n", d);t >  >    if ( a == b)f >    {& >       cout << "a == b returns true " >            << endl;k
 >    }else >    {$ >       cout << "ooops, 1.9 != 1.9 " >            << endl;m >    } >    if ( b == c)l >    {& >       cout << "b == c returns true " >            << endl; 
 >    }else >    {$ >       cout << "ooops, 1.9 != 1.9 " >            << endl;l >    } >    if ( b == d)c >    {& >       cout << "b == d returns true " >            << endl;g
 >    }else >    {$ >       cout << "ooops, 1.9 != 1.9 " >            << endl;  >    } > }m > " > Thanks in advance for any ideas. >  > Wing >      --  > norman lastovica / oracle rdb engineering / usa / 610.696.4685   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 11:49:34 -0400 ( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>0 Subject: Re: strange double comparison behaviour* Message-ID: <3D061C0E.60502@tsoft-inc.com>  O I assume that you're using D-floating on Alpha.  Known problem.  Alpha doesn't $P support D-float.  All operations on D-float have the data converted to G-float, Q the operation completed, and the data returned to D-float format.  G-Float has 3 m! bits less precision then D-float.m  S I think I have the above right.  I think G-float is the IEEE floating point format.u   Dave     wing wrote:e   > Hi,| > H > The following program fails to compare double values 1.9.  All doublesF > a, b, c, are expected to be 1.9.  With printf, a, b, d are 1.9 but dE > give 0.  Moreover, (a==b) gives false result, (fails to check 1.9 =c > 1.9).  > : > Moreover, the output in openvms and pc are not the same. > * > --- output of the program in openvms --- > a:    1.90000T > b:    1.90000  > c:    1.90000e > d:    0.00000s > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9  > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9  > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9  > % > --- output of the program in pc ---b > a:    1.90000n > b:    1.90000  > c:    1.90000  > d:    0.00000N > a == b returns trueo > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9e > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9  >  > --- the source code ---o > #include <stdlib.h>M > #include <stdio.h> > #include <string.h>r > #include <iostream.h>> > #include <math.h>d > ) > int my_atoi(const char* src, int len) { , >   // Make a null-terminated version of src# >   char* buf=(char*)malloc(len+1);e >   strncpy(buf,src,len);  >    >   buf[len] = NULL; y >  e >   int i=atoi(buf); >   delete buf; 
 >   return i;f > }n > > > double my_atof(const char* src, int len, int decimalPoint) { >   if (decimalPoint<=0)' >     return (double)my_atoi(src, len);l > / >   int intPart=my_atoi(src, len-decimalPoint); < >   int decPart=my_atoi(src+len-decimalPoint, decimalPoint); >  o >   double value=decPart;o& >   for (int i=0;i<decimalPoint;i++) { >     value=value/10;s >   }n! >   return (double)intPart+value;s > }l > 
 > int main(){  > $ >    char* src          = "0000190"; >    int   len          = 7; >    int   decimalPoint = 2; >   >    char* src2         = "1.9"; > 0 >    double a = my_atof(src, len, decimalPoint); >    double b = atof(src2);i3 >    double c = atof(src) * pow(10, -decimalPoint);o >    double d = 0;F >    sscanf(   src, "%*.*lf", (len - decimalPoint), decimalPoint, &d); >  >    printf("a: %10.5lf\n", a);  >    printf("b: %10.5lf\n", b);l >    printf("c: %10.5lf\n", c);e >    printf("d: %10.5lf\n", d);  >  >    if ( a == b)d >    {& >       cout << "a == b returns true " >            << endl;a
 >    }else >    {$ >       cout << "ooops, 1.9 != 1.9 " >            << endl;  >    } >    if ( b == c)t >    {& >       cout << "b == c returns true " >            << endl;o
 >    }else >    {$ >       cout << "ooops, 1.9 != 1.9 " >            << endl;- >    } >    if ( b == d)i >    {& >       cout << "b == d returns true " >            << endl; 
 >    }else >    {$ >       cout << "ooops, 1.9 != 1.9 " >            << endl;f >    } > }a > " > Thanks in advance for any ideas. >  > Wing >    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:07:21 -0700 2 From: "Randy Park" <rjpark@mindspring.com.nospaam>0 Subject: Re: strange double comparison behaviour2 Message-ID: <ae5aoi$apf$1@slb7.atl.mindspring.net>  + Dave is right if the assumptions are right.o7 If you are using D-float format you will encounter thisd7 problem.  Operations involving D-float get converted to 3 G-float and then back.  Comparisons do not have the 6 conversion done.  == and != comparisons do not compare5 values of the data, but compare bit patterns.  If onel7 data item has gone through the D-G-D conversion and theu5 other has not, then depending upon the value you have 9 the bit pattern in the last 3 bits may be different. Thish: will occur for value 1.9 (and 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.6, 1.7 and 1.8, but not 1.5).  6 If however you are using G-float format, then you need2 to read and learn about how floating point data is3 represented by the cpu and why the value 1.9 cannot 4 be accurately represented and why comparing 1.9 with8 a value that should be 1.9 will result in them not being8 equal.  The correct way to test if floating point values7 are equal on almost any cpu is to subtract one from then9 other and if the absolute value of the difference is lesso8 than some arbitrary small value, then the numbers can be considered equal.$  3 David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> wrote in message1$ news:3D061C0E.60502@tsoft-inc.com...H > I assume that you're using D-floating on Alpha.  Known problem.  Alpha doesn't3H > support D-float.  All operations on D-float have the data converted to G-float,L > the operation completed, and the data returned to D-float format.  G-Float has 3 # > bits less precision then D-float.t >tG > I think I have the above right.  I think G-float is the IEEE floatingn
 point format.  >y > Dave >r >n
 > wing wrote:e >  > > Hi,  > >aJ > > The following program fails to compare double values 1.9.  All doublesH > > a, b, c, are expected to be 1.9.  With printf, a, b, d are 1.9 but dG > > give 0.  Moreover, (a==b) gives false result, (fails to check 1.9 = 	 > > 1.9).o > >e< > > Moreover, the output in openvms and pc are not the same. > >P, > > --- output of the program in openvms --- > > a:    1.90000  > > b:    1.90000e > > c:    1.90000c > > d:    0.00000m > > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9M > > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9w > > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9n > >w' > > --- output of the program in pc ---e > > a:    1.90000b > > b:    1.90000h > > c:    1.90000e > > d:    0.00000i > > a == b returns true  > > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9t > > ooops, 1.9 != 1.9e > >  > > --- the source code ---e > > #include <stdlib.h>: > > #include <stdio.h> > > #include <string.h>l > > #include <iostream.h>  > > #include <math.h>  > >s+ > > int my_atoi(const char* src, int len) {s. > >   // Make a null-terminated version of src% > >   char* buf=(char*)malloc(len+1);s > >   strncpy(buf,src,len);  > >e > >   buf[len] = NULL; > >  > >   int i=atoi(buf); > >   delete buf;v > >   return i;t > > }  > > @ > > double my_atof(const char* src, int len, int decimalPoint) { > >   if (decimalPoint<=0)) > >     return (double)my_atoi(src, len);  > >-1 > >   int intPart=my_atoi(src, len-decimalPoint);5> > >   int decPart=my_atoi(src+len-decimalPoint, decimalPoint); > >: > >   double value=decPart;O( > >   for (int i=0;i<decimalPoint;i++) { > >     value=value/10;3 > >   }s# > >   return (double)intPart+value;1 > > }. > >c > > int main(){a > >.& > >    char* src          = "0000190"; > >    int   len          = 7; > >    int   decimalPoint = 2; > >t" > >    char* src2         = "1.9"; > >D2 > >    double a = my_atof(src, len, decimalPoint); > >    double b = atof(src2);a5 > >    double c = atof(src) * pow(10, -decimalPoint);  > >    double d = 0;H > >    sscanf(   src, "%*.*lf", (len - decimalPoint), decimalPoint, &d); > >t! > >    printf("a: %10.5lf\n", a); ! > >    printf("b: %10.5lf\n", b); ! > >    printf("c: %10.5lf\n", c); ! > >    printf("d: %10.5lf\n", d);e > >  > >    if ( a == b). > >    {( > >       cout << "a == b returns true " > >            << endl;c > >    }else > >    {& > >       cout << "ooops, 1.9 != 1.9 " > >            << endl;- > >    } > >    if ( b == c)  > >    {( > >       cout << "b == c returns true " > >            << endl;  > >    }else > >    {& > >       cout << "ooops, 1.9 != 1.9 " > >            << endl;- > >    } > >    if ( b == d). > >    {( > >       cout << "b == d returns true " > >            << endl;u > >    }else > >    {& > >       cout << "ooops, 1.9 != 1.9 " > >            << endl;  > >    } > > }T > >a$ > > Thanks in advance for any ideas. > >> > > Wing > >  >s   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 06:52:52 -0700- From: zroundtree@oasys.com (Zoltan Roundtree)t& Subject: Re: SYSMAN default parameters= Message-ID: <bf1b7500.0206110552.4e04f77f@posting.google.com>T  r zroundtree@oasys.com (Zoltan Roundtree) wrote in message news:<bf1b7500.0206101406.62d56cc9@posting.google.com>...D > Is it possible to modify the sysman/sysgen parameters? ie> ijoblim  F The question should be: Is it possible to modify the DEFAULT params of sysman/sysgen?   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:46:18 -0400i1 From: "Mark D. Jilson" <jilly@clarityconnect.com> 0 Subject: Re: SYSMAN default parameters - REVISED2 Message-ID: <3D060D3A.D054A2FA@clarityconnect.com>  A Well all things are possible with the right tools ;*)  But you'llxC probably be better served if you explain exactly why you want to do G this.  As has been previously mentioned these values are encoded in thepG SYSGEN image itself and there is no way to change the DEFAULT, MIN, MAX 2 settings, you can only change the CURRENT setting.   Zoltan Roundtree wrote:s > < > Is it possible to modify the DEFAULT sysman/sysgen params?   -- nC Jilly	- Working from Home in the Chemung River Valley - Waverly, NY 0 	- jilly@clarityconnect.com			- Brett Bodine fan+ 	- Mark.Jilson@hp.com				- since 1975 or so0 	- http://www.jilly.baka.com   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 10:21:50 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)10 Subject: Re: SYSMAN default parameters - REVISED3 Message-ID: <6mbGtaQc4cXg@eisner.encompasserve.org>g  f In article <3D060D3A.D054A2FA@clarityconnect.com>, "Mark D. Jilson" <jilly@clarityconnect.com> writes:C > Well all things are possible with the right tools ;*)  But you'll E > probably be better served if you explain exactly why you want to dosI > this.  As has been previously mentioned these values are encoded in thehI > SYSGEN image itself and there is no way to change the DEFAULT, MIN, MAX'4 > settings, you can only change the CURRENT setting. >  > Zoltan Roundtree wrote:u >> e= >> Is it possible to modify the DEFAULT sysman/sysgen params?h  % If you just have a favorite set, try:e   	READ MY_FAVORITE_SETI   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 16:37:59 +1000w* From: James Cameron <james.cameron@hp.com>- Subject: Re: TCP socket communication queries 9 Message-ID: <pan.2002.06.11.16.37.55.595847.13842@hp.com>   / On Thu, 06 Jun 2002 12:00:12 +1000, wing wrote:xB > Is there any chance of data loss in socket communication betweenI > processes within a openvms machine?  The socket option is non-blocking.t  C Socket options like non-blocking shouldn't make any difference.  By I design, the TCP/IP protocols should prevent data loss in this situation. lH However, there may be software defects that cause data loss.  Failing toJ check return status in your application is one of the most common defects.  I If the socket is set non-blocking, and you ask the socket API to give you>H data from the peer, and there is no data available, then the read() call! will return an error EWOULDBLOCK.>  E As Matt said, any TCP/IP program using TCP as a transport needs to be @ prepared to have the boundaries for the stream be changed by theH transport.  Despite a server doing a write() of an 80 byte buffer, it isH quite possible for the client to read() that as any combination of bytesH ... 80 returns of 1 byte each, two returns of 40 bytes, or one return ofB 80 bytes .... but they will be guaranteed to be in the same order.   --
 James Cameronn   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:39:49 -0400t; From: "Brian Tillman" <tillman_brian@notnoone.notnohow.com>l/ Subject: Re: tpc/ip file server for VMS systemsw$ Message-ID: <3d0627da$1@news.si.com>  K >Is it possible/practical to setup LINUX/BSD to provide file/print serviceso* >for VMS/AXP (OVMS 6.2) system(s) over IP?  K Certainly it's possible, but we have found it better for our VMS systems toeJ provide the print services for our Unix systems.  They can't do LPR/LPD as reliably as can the VMS system.l --A Brian Tillman                   Internet: tillman_brian at si.com0A Smiths Aerospace                          tillman at swdev.si.com = 3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS      Addresses modified to prevent < Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991     SPAM.  Replace "at" with "@"8        This opinion doesn't represent that of my company   ------------------------------  + Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 11:28:55 -0500 (CDT)n? From: "Doc.Cypher" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]>h" Subject: Re: VMS Monitoring a User< Message-ID: <200206111628.g5BGStYw022773@cryptofortress.com>  C On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote:l >Hoff Hoffman wrote:G >>   The mechanism that prevents this is the "Privilege".  There are noaF >>   "Privileges" that prevent misuse of "Privileges".  If you want toH >>   prevent users from killing other jobs or other unsocial behaviours,F >>   remove GROUP or WORLD and all heavy privileges from the untrusted >>   users.d > O >If an employee "was" trusted and granted privileges and you SUSPECT abuse, youCL >then need to present sufficient proof when you confront the user and remove@ >his privileges (either just the VMS ones, or the paycheck one). >s >nI >What if the user is using some utility written by programmers that has a O >trojan "joke" in it that scans for process names that match an employee's name K >and then deletes that process, and that portion is only effective when the & >utility runs from a privileged user ? >iM >In such a case, the action would appear to come from the "trusted user", butoM >said user would be unaware of what he is actually doing, thinking he is justn> >running that utility that everyone is running at the company.  I Actually, in such a case the user in question should be at the very least K reprimanded for running an untrusted executable under a privileged account.      Doc. -- u6 The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.K ~ Phineas Taylor Barnum.                             https://vmsbox.cjb.net    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 01:49:40 -0500o+ From: "Stuart Johnson" <ssj152@charter.net>g? Subject: Re: VMS Monitoring a User - hammer and chisel approach0/ Message-ID: <ugb7c55t5at2e7@corp.supernews.com>o   Ab,9  L First, a simple suggestion: if you are using terminals (not PC's and Telnet,G etc.), have you considered having an engineer / technician tap into themH user's terminal line and echo the output of his TX line to a PC  runningD kermit or equivalent "capture" mode? It could even be to a hard-copy character printer.  L If you capture the data, you could grep (search) through the file once a dayH and see what keystrokes he/she is hitting, searching for the name of theG user(s) he/she is abusing as your search target. This is a VERY LITERALnH response to your question about monitoring, but has the advantage of notB requiring you to do anything or be there during the problem user'sJ activities. I'd call this a hammer and chisel kind of approach. It is also sneaky.a  K I hope this helps you a little; the real solution is NO PRIVILEGE for usersnF other than what is REQUIRED to fulfill the job requirements. Also, theE requirements have to be filtered though someone that KNOWS the OS and;D security issues. It is, in my experience, extremely difficult to get management buyoff on this!   Regards, Stuart Johnson  1 "Ab" <spammitplease@yahoo.co.in> wrote in message 6 news:9f100812.0206070001.9ffd7ac@posting.google.com... > Hi AllE >   We have OpenVMS 6.2 .. want to monitor a user for the commands hec > executes. E >  We have a problem with some privileged user logging in and killing G > other logins (other users logged in are automatically logged out). WeeC > want to monitor that user and create logs of the commands that hemF > executes with time information. Is there any VMS utility that allows > us to do this. >  Thanks in Advance >  >   Ab   ------------------------------   Date: 11 Jun 2002 06:02:19 GMT- From: djweath@attglobal.net (Dave Weatherall)=E Subject: Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most cases 5 Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-4yS4VVluVOzj@localhost>   A On Mon, 10 Jun 2002 15:38:45 UTC, david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk wrote:   ^ > In article <ADYMY2hEkG+r@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)    Snippeda  7 > >For some reason, I cannot figure out what CDL means.a > >s > , > From the context of Brass Christof's post  > 0 > " A decent port would make use of specific VMS4 > features where appropriate like CDL with carefully7 > chosen parameter types (and qualifier names) that fitp4 > in and like using RMS instead of flat/stream files6 > and with standard installation procedures like PCSI. > "  > P > I'd assumed he meant "Command definition language" - though that should reallyQ > be the Command definition utility (CDU) ie having the program support VMS styleoP > qualifiers and parameters rather than having to define it as a foreign command, > with Unix style qualifiers and parameters.  F It's certainly one of the areas which will make porting our  stuff to E Solaris, um, 'not straightforward'. We use it to parse command lines t? in our text file input, not just the 'normal' use from foreign gC commands on the VMS command lines. Saves a load of string handling.0   -- : Cheers - Dave.   ------------------------------   Date: 11 Jun 2002 06:02:21 GMT- From: djweath@attglobal.net (Dave Weatherall) E Subject: Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most casesb5 Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-5zJvLt33InPt@localhost>.  2 On Mon, 10 Jun 2002 20:35:06 UTC, "Tony Scandora"  <Scandora@cmt.anl.gov> wrote:i  L > Right.  The ancient, scorned DECshell product for VAX had the only VMS tarI > that ever worked reliably for me.  Of course, it was VAX only and neverfK > heard of ODS-5.  Other than DECshell's tar.exe, which runs just fine as a K > DCL foreign command without the rest of the DECshell environment, I founduJ > the simplest and most reliable way to unpack tarballs on VMS is to go toN > UNIX, unpack there, zip up with Info-ZIP on UNIX, and unzip with Info-ZIP on > VMS.  F Umm. Tried that with TCL 8 two weeks ago. To be precise I used WinZip F on W2K. Of course, some of the file attributes got lost. Some I fixed  others not.m   OT:;  D Anybody want a DCL  command procedure to build TCL V8. I don't like F MAKE much anyway and the version I tried, winged about missing system D rules so I tweaked it to a DCL procedure with CC and LINK commands. C The only trouble is LINK winges about not finding IOTCL and FCNTL. iF After a bit of thought it struck me that that ties up with a prototypeD complaint about defining 'ioctl' as  a function implicitly. Yeah if C the prototype had worked (i.e. been applied) it would have applied .: whatever magic is required to translate it to 'DECC$IOCTL'  C Anybody know why DECC 6.01 on Alpha/VMS 6.2 might have the problem.    Cheers - Dave.   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 06:37:44 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)"E Subject: Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most caseso3 Message-ID: <QgYVyEEEY$iM@eisner.encompasserve.org>   Z In article <ae32id$vp8$1@milo.mcs.anl.gov>, "Tony Scandora" <Scandora@cmt.anl.gov> writes:  J > That is a great example of a problem DII-COE might be able to solve.  IfK > DII-COE actually works, it will be able to run UNIX software correctly on   E The DII-COE software most of us will never see (as distinguished from C the VMS _support_ for DII-COE which we will all see) is written for1C Unix, so the VMS Development folks working on the support certainlyuB have to make use of the Unix tools they port, giving it a workout.  N > VMS.  One might ask for VMS-only software or real VMS ports of software, butN > good software written for UNIX exists, and could be useful if it ran well onN > VMS without the prohibitive professional time necessary for a real VMS port.  B Somehow I doubt a trivial port of the average Unix utility handles: rooted directories correctly without further modification.   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 06:23:53 -0700) From: P.Young@unsw.EDU.AU (Patrick Young)aE Subject: Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most cases1= Message-ID: <55f85d77.0206110523.47de6d3f@posting.google.com>   W Brass Christof <welcome@spam.not> wrote in message news:<3D0236BA.7C35EDFC@spam.not>...g > Patrick Young wrote:8 > > Wrong. I've personally found with such software that: > > (a) it may very well run better, and (b) you can track: > > down and kill the bugs quickly as there is no "blaming2 > > it on the O/S". The CRTL on the other hand.... >s7 > This is a very interesting remark. Could you mention a > an app of sufficient size?  < I mostly deal in small stuff to satisfy *my* immediate needsB (I'm a selfish person) ie: bpalogin (grabbed from linux and allowsF my OpenVMS box to authenticate to Bigpond cable modem service) throughA to PHP 4.0.2 for Apache which I needed before it was released foruC OpenVMS (there was also a mod Perl in there but it ended up being a 
 bad example).   E "Apache/1.3.9 (OpenVMS) mod_sepass_auth/1.21 PHP/4.0.2 mod_perl/1.24"a  F AbiWord interested me at some point - got it to partially do somethingH with it's own tests, however I'm not big on C++ as mentioned (nor really
 like it).   A The big problem in any regard is the CRTL - the real "meat in thec= sandwich". I would not like to be a developer for it. In somee@ cases you will ignore it, recode using OpenVMS APIs and then endC up swearing at C. In this NG it is clear that some people are black   and white (and end up hating C).  1 > > In many cases yes - do it every time you can.t > 5 > Tell me a typical business case and tell me a site  . > which operates with one OS - preferably VMS! >   : Sorry, I did not put that very clearly - we are not a site9 that operates one O/S. I've helped get it down to a small = number (OpenVMS, Tru64, Novell, Window(tm) variants). Solaris:; raises it's ugly head sometimes, but only when insisted on.t  9 > From what I know Tru64 has its merits and gained a lot  : > from DEC engineering. It is for sure not a typical UNIX ' > technically and not wrt market share.   = It is very reliable as long as you set it up right out of thei, box and then be carefull with it. We run 1803 Oracle 8 database instances on a DS10 for teaching.   < Hmmm, hwmangler and dsfmangler don't get my vote, and WTF do9 you need to redo all this if moving all disks to a new HWi. platform with the same SRM reported config????  < Does it like to corrupt it's own DB? (dsfmgr -V -F -v thinks the world is just perfect):i   # pwd) /devices/rdisk # ls dsk82* dsk9*(> dsk82a  dsk82b  dsk82c  dsk82d  dsk82e  dsk82f  dsk82g  dsk82h # dsfmgr -m dsk82 dsk9: dsfmgr: ERROR: move missing device is not supported: dsk82+ dsfmgr: ERROR move failed: Invalid argument  # disklabel -e dsk82c( 1061 1t	 # dsk82c:1   type: SWXCR  q  write new label? [y]: n  re-edit the label? [y]: n1 # dsfmgr -e dsk82 dsk9, dsfmgr: NOTE: exchange missing device: dsk82+ dsfmgr: NOTE: exchange missing device: dsk9DM dsfmgr: ERROR: second device node: /dev/disk/dsk9a: No such file or directoryc8 dsfmgr: ERROR exchange failed: No such file or directory   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 06:34:57 -0700) From: P.Young@unsw.EDU.AU (Patrick Young)pE Subject: Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most casesp= Message-ID: <55f85d77.0206110534.4b639f18@posting.google.com>   h Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) wrote in message news:<ADYMY2hEkG+r@eisner.encompasserve.org>...G > I had occasion to use VMSTAR recently to package up some files.  From J > what I can see, the latest-and-greatest (which I used) is VMSTAR V3.4-1. ....G > originating in a rooted directory.  It not only missed files but also I > regressed into not understanding ODS-5.  Certainly Backup, Copy and anyi ....K Paranoia sets in (and makes me feel depressed) - send me enough information  to reproduce this please   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 08:44:49 -0500 C From: "Craig A. Berry" <craig.berry@nospam.SignalTreeSolutions.com>iE Subject: Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most cases5H Message-ID: <craig.berry-3AA5E6.08444911062002@news.directvinternet.com>  5 In article <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-5zJvLt33InPt@localhost>,2/  djweath@attglobal.net (Dave Weatherall) wrote:s  F > Anybody want a DCL  command procedure to build TCL V8. I don't like H > MAKE much anyway and the version I tried, winged about missing system F > rules so I tweaked it to a DCL procedure with CC and LINK commands. E > The only trouble is LINK winges about not finding IOTCL and FCNTL. -H > After a bit of thought it struck me that that ties up with a prototypeF > complaint about defining 'ioctl' as  a function implicitly. Yeah if E > the prototype had worked (i.e. been applied) it would have applied r< > whatever magic is required to translate it to 'DECC$IOCTL' > E > Anybody know why DECC 6.01 on Alpha/VMS 6.2 might have the problem.n  H Your C compiler is recent enough to know about ioctl() and fcntl(), but A your C RTL may not be, or the C RTL may not support them on your  > version of VMS.  For example, if you'll find this in stropts.h   #if __CRTL_VER >= 700000001     int ioctl (int __sd, int __r, void * __argp);	 #endif  F so on VMS 6.2 the prototype may not available because the function is H not available.  I'm not sure when fcntl() became available but it still . doesn't do locking as many UNIX apps expect.    D In principle the tables in Appendix B of the C RTL reference manual G should tell you which functions became available when, but I don't see RH either ioctl or fcntl listed there at all, so the headers are probablly  a more reliable guide.   ------------------------------    Date: 11 Jun 2002 08:38:55 -0700) From: P.Young@unsw.EDU.AU (Patrick Young)hE Subject: Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most casesa= Message-ID: <55f85d77.0206110738.5545e6b1@posting.google.com>o  _ "Tony Scandora" <Scandora@cmt.anl.gov> wrote in message news:<ae32id$vp8$1@milo.mcs.anl.gov>...LL > Right.  The ancient, scorned DECshell product for VAX had the only VMS tarI > that ever worked reliably for me.  Of course, it was VAX only and neversK > heard of ODS-5.  Other than DECshell's tar.exe, which runs just fine as a_K > DCL foreign command without the rest of the DECshell environment, I found0J > the simplest and most reliable way to unpack tarballs on VMS is to go toN > UNIX, unpack there, zip up with Info-ZIP on UNIX, and unzip with Info-ZIP on > VMS.   OK, I'm pissed off.+  I What is it with VMSTAR that is the problem - TELL ME NOW SO I CAN FIX IT!n  ; *Bitching* without reading the documentation does not help.i   ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 16:03:14 GMTn From: lbohan@spamless..dbc.comE Subject: Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most cases,8 Message-ID: <3j7cgus6k3cmlqphlactknhcrmc0o31ekh@4ax.com>  D On 11 Jun 2002 06:02:21 GMT, djweath@attglobal.net (Dave Weatherall) wrote:   >OT: >eE >Anybody want a DCL  command procedure to build TCL V8. I don't like aG >MAKE much anyway and the version I tried, winged about missing system iE >rules so I tweaked it to a DCL procedure with CC and LINK commands. iD >The only trouble is LINK winges about not finding IOTCL and FCNTL. G >After a bit of thought it struck me that that ties up with a prototypeeE >complaint about defining 'ioctl' as  a function implicitly. Yeah if  D >the prototype had worked (i.e. been applied) it would have applied ; >whatever magic is required to translate it to 'DECC$IOCTL'w > D >Anybody know why DECC 6.01 on Alpha/VMS 6.2 might have the problem. >- >Cheers - Dave.-  6 Where did you get the version of TCL you started with? was a it a standard distro ?  E I'd looked at getting Tcl/Tk to fly on VMS, now && then, in the past,s1 and wondered if it's worth another try, nowadays./   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2002.322 ************************