1 INFO-VAX	Wed, 19 Jun 2002	Volume 2002 : Issue 338       Contents: RE: A PL/I question ...  RE: A PL/I question ... ) Re: A Proposal for All C.O.V. to Consider ) Re: A Proposal for All C.O.V. to Consider < Re: Advanced Server V7.3 - "limit on concurrent connections"< Re: Advanced Server V7.3 - "limit on concurrent connections" Re: ALL-IN-1 anniversary Re: Alphaserver 300 problem  Re: ANN: Updated JUMP  Re: ANN: Updated JUMP  asm is in the index 9 Re: Call or email hp ... they will answer your questions! 4 Re: can VMS mail block e-mail from certian address'?4 Re: can VMS mail block e-mail from certian address'?4 Re: can VMS mail block e-mail from certian address'?4 Re: can VMS mail block e-mail from certian address'?$ Re: CONNECT:Direct wildcard transfer Console hang solved (almost) Re: Could linux become VMS?  Re: Could linux become VMS?  RE: Could linux become VMS?  Re: Could linux become VMS?  Re: Could linux become VMS?  Re: Could linux become VMS?  Re: Could linux become VMS? 8 Re: Disaster Tolerant advertising using Fortune magazine? Re: Interesting ZDnet post about Tandem -- Can VMS do the same? ? Re: Interesting ZDnet post about Tandem -- Can VMS do the same?   Middle European DST change rules$ Re: Middle European DST change rules, Re: My conversation with Linus about VMS ..., Re: My conversation with Linus about VMS ..., Re: My conversation with Linus about VMS ..., Re: My conversation with Linus about VMS ..., Re: My conversation with Linus about VMS ..., Re: My conversation with Linus about VMS ..." Re: Need DECNet packet informationP New Executive-Class Conference/Training Facility in Northern Lake County, Illino< RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs< RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs< Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs< RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs< RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs< NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMS@ Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMS@ Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMS@ Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMS@ Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMS@ Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMS@ Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMS@ Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMS@ Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMS@ Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMS2 OpenVMS Job in Brasilia / Brazil - ATT: John OxleyG 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) 0 Re: OT: JF's reputation (Was: Please Read - ...) OVMS 7.3 BACKUP problem 8 Re: Request for path balancing (Was: Re: Carly was here)" Re: rooted devices and /TRANS=CONC" Re: rooted devices and /TRANS=CONC" Re: rooted devices and /TRANS=CONC! Re: Sun/Slowaris future in doubt!  RE: unix history RE: unix history Re: unix historyP VMS MARKETING VOLUNTEERS, LTD. Biz Card Example ( was Re: A Proposal for All C.OP Re: VMS MARKETING VOLUNTEERS, LTD. Biz Card Example ( was Re: A Proposal for All Re: VMS V7.3-1 Info < 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: [OT] Why Software is So Bad..." Re: [OT] Why Software is So Bad..." Re: [OT] Why Software is So Bad..." Re: [OT] Why Software is So Bad... Re: __asm__ in DEC CXX  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 08:23:32 -0700 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>   Subject: RE: A PL/I question ...9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIOEHEFDAA.tom@kednos.com>   > Another suggestion, why not use SDL, this is precisely what it was invented for.    >-----Original Message----- 4 >From: Jeffrey Cameron [mailto:bubbapig@hotmail.com]% >Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 7:42 AM  >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >Subject: A PL/I question ...  >  > + >I have two procedures which I call from C:  > / >/************ C CODE ************************/  >  >#include <descrip.h>  > / >extern "C" char *get_filename(void *, void *); , >extern "C" void *print_out(void *, void *); > < >/* where I use the void * pointers rather then arguments as >declarators */  >  >..  >..  >..  >  >int num = 12; >short val = 1;   >struct dsc$descriptor_ubs desc;A >/* there are three other fields which i fill in correctly for an 7 >unaligned bit string but do not have right on me :) */ ! >desc.dsc$a_base = (char*)(&val);  >desc.dsc$l_pos = 0L;  >  >print_out(&num, &desc);( >char *temp = get_filename(&num, &desc); > 6 >/****************** PL/I Code **********************/ > > >get_filename: proc (indx, in_temparg) returns (char(80) var); >   >dcl indx         fixed bin(31); >dcl in_temparg   bit(1);  >dcl filename     char(80) var;  >  >put skip list (indx); >put skip list (in_temparg); >  >return (filename) >  >end get_filename; > / >/*------------------------------------------*/  > " >print_out: proc (param1, param2); >   >dcl param1       fixed bin(31); >dcl param2       bit(1);  >  >put skip list (param1); >put skip list (param2); >  >end print_out;  > E >/***************************** END CODE ***************************/  > C >The problem is this, the print_out procedure is a test stub I made C >which works fine, it prints out both the bit and the integer value F >correctly which are passed into it. You'll notice I do NOT modify the >structure in any way. > G >When I call the get_filename procedure though the addresses and values D >for both parameters are screwed and lead to access violation when I >try to print. > E >THEY ARE THE EXACT SAME PARAMETER LISTS!!! The only difference is in F >the names and the fact that one procedure returns something while theB >other does not. What the heck is going on here guys? Is this someF >obscure bug? Or a piece of the calling standard I am unfamiliar with? >How do I get around this? > D >p.s. I am compiling the C with all the compiler options for sharingF >code with other psects /EXTERN=COMMOM/nomember_alignment/noopt ... et >al. IF that helps at all? >  >Thanks again in advance! 
 >Jeff Cameron  >  >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. ; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). @ >Version: 6.0.370 / Virus Database: 205 - Release Date: 6/5/2002 >  --- & 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: 6/5/2002    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 11:09:18 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)   Subject: RE: A PL/I question ...3 Message-ID: <PrL1vQCevsOI@eisner.encompasserve.org>   _ In article <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIOEHEFDAA.tom@kednos.com>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes: @ > Another suggestion, why not use SDL, this is precisely what it > was invented for.   G And Tom is _much_ too shy to mention it, but SDL is written in PL/I :-)    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 11:40:00 -0600+ From: kuhrt@encompasserve.org (Marty Kuhrt) 2 Subject: Re: A Proposal for All C.O.V. to Consider3 Message-ID: <KLsKWiMMEkiK@eisner.encompasserve.org>   [ In article <3D0FF671.BBA21049@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:  > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:  >>  N >> There is a cheaper way to do this, and one that tends to embarrass the hell >> out of marketeers.  >>  K >> I went to VISTAPRINT.COM and got some business cards made up. They read:  >>  ! >> VMS Marketing Volunteers, LTD.  >> VMS: The Secure Business OS >>   >> Terry C. Shannon  >> VMS Evangelist  >>   >> address and contact info. >>  N >> Cost of cards: ten bucks. Look on face of marketeer or senior HPQ exec when- >> they are presented with a card: PRICELESS!  > H > O.k., folks! Others proposed it, John detailed it, now Terry has named > it!  > ! > "VMS Marketing Volunteers, LTD"  > H > I have Avery's biz card software on my Wintel PC here. I'm gonna printI > up a bunch of 'em. ...and even if I have to go into debt to pay for the F > St. Louis symposium (probably won't get a session accepted, but it'sH > only a five-hour drive from here), I'm gonna pass those out to all the > HPQ brass I can find!  > E > ..and remember: if you haven't already registered for St. Louis, be , > *SURE* to state that as your company name! > A > Imagine - all those badges walking around saying "VMS Marketing  > Volunteers, LTD".  >   + How about VMS Marketing Specialists, LTD?    Then the TLA would be VMS, LTD.   E or SpinDoctors, or Supplicants, or SpecialEdStudents, or Sucks, or...    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 12:10:24 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 2 Subject: Re: A Proposal for All C.O.V. to Consider3 Message-ID: <x5+07JNq8y0c@eisner.encompasserve.org>   a In article <KLsKWiMMEkiK@eisner.encompasserve.org>, kuhrt@encompasserve.org (Marty Kuhrt) writes:   - > How about VMS Marketing Specialists, LTD?   ! > Then the TLA would be VMS, LTD.   & Self-referential, like Gnu's Not Unix.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 08:11:47 +0100 + From: Ray Swadling <ray@rgscomputing.co.uk> E Subject: Re: Advanced Server V7.3 - "limit on concurrent connections" 8 Message-ID: <q4b0huk06j110tuofbrdmegjc2ft99qcfa@4ax.com>  3 On Tue, 18 Jun 2002 17:05:37 -0400, "Brad McCusker" " <brad.mccusker@charter.net> wrote:   > G >> So I now am pretty sure its just a licensing problem as I'm using up  >> my 5 licenses.  > J >I agree, this is a licensing issue.  I'm curious what they gave you for aM >temp PAK.  What is the "PWLMXXXCA07.03" part look like?  Is it that specific  >string? >  > C What I had first of all was the usual 0 units license PAK with a 60  day expiry.   F I had logged a call with Hpaq and Hans Hosang from the Utrecht SupportA Centre has informed me that Advanced Server doesn't recognise the E traditional 0 unit PAKS, they must be an actual number of units thats # a multiple of 100 (100 per client).   D I now have a 35000 unit PAK and pwlicense now tells me I can have up to 350 client connects.   D Interestingly, it also seems that temp and legit PAKs cannot both beE active at the same time. I had to disable my original 5 legit PAKs to E get the temp one recognised. I have seem this particular issue before  so was aware of that one.   @ I guess its just a pity that this layered product interacts withD licenses in a different way to the other products....even fooled the+ UK Hpaq people who provide temp PAKs.......   A Anyway, problem solved now, just got to get the order for the new + licenses through our purchasing department.      Ray.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 13:35:18 GMT ( From: "Mark E. Levy" <mlevy70@attbi.com>E Subject: Re: Advanced Server V7.3 - "limit on concurrent connections" = Message-ID: <pM%P8.77518$R61.26675@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net>   8 "Ray Swadling" <ray@rgscomputing.co.uk> wrote in message  B > I guess its just a pity that this layered product interacts withF > licenses in a different way to the other products....even fooled the- > UK Hpaq people who provide temp PAKs.......   L This is not a Pathworks issue, it's the way that certain classes of licensesK work. Only the first is loaded. To make the rest apply as well, you have to 7 manually modify each of them using the /COMBINE option:   8 $ license modify PWLMxxxCA07.03 /auth=<each one>/combine  F Do this for each active license. Then unload/reload PWLMxxxCA07.03 and restart Pathworks.  	 Mark Levy  SMA    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 08:50:47 GMT , From: "Bob Knowles" <bob.knowles@compaq.com>! Subject: Re: ALL-IN-1 anniversary 1 Message-ID: <HBXP8.6$qK1.181378@news.cpqcorp.net>   : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3D0F6FAE.B68C42C5@videotron.ca... .  .  .  > I > Well, I wish I could fill out your form, but you only allow those sites  thatL > started up to 1985 to fill the form. I doubt you have 200 customers dating, > back that far worldwide that still use A1.  H Good point JF - I'll fix this. Getting stuff onto the OpenVMS web server? isn't an instantaneous process though, so give me a day or two.    b    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 12:24:19 GMT - From: "guppy99@flash.net" <guppy99@flash.net> $ Subject: Re: Alphaserver 300 problem( Message-ID: <3D1077F1.1080307@flash.net>  B Sounds like you have a problem with the memory.  Try reseating or  rearranging the SIMMS.     William Barnett-Lewis wrote:  H > Last week I picked up an Alphaserver 300. 192mb/2x1gb/cd/mach64 video.J > When I got it set up, it was in ARC mode. I followed the instructions inH > the manual I downloaded from hpaq's website and used the menu to reset@ > it for VMS mode. After power cycling, all it does it sit with  > 	 > eb ...   > F > in the upper left hand corner of the screen. From what little I haveI > been able to find so far, this is a "Failed to detect CPU speed" error. J > If this is the case, what are my options for further trouble shooting orJ > repair? I hope to reseat everything possible tomorrow evening after someB > further research (and perhaps tips from here). My goal is to run > Hobbyist VMS on it.  >  > TIA, > 	 > William  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 09:12:55 +0100 4 From: "Chris Sharman" <chris.sharman@ccagroup.co.uk> Subject: Re: ANN: Updated JUMPA Message-ID: <1024474375.5894.0.nnrp-08.9e989e7e@news.demon.co.uk>   @ "Kenneth H. Fairfield" <My.Full.Name@intel.com> wrote in message" news:3D0F8F46.79D85C3@intel.com...H >     On a related note, how would you compare JUMP to Hunter's HGLOGIN?G > More or fewer features/flexibility?  Different or the same underlying ; > mechanisms (psuedo-terminal, persona services, whatever)?   L Jump does extensive auditing, and provides a config table of who can be who.> Eg, Mark designates Pete to cover for him in event of absence.J A jump proxy is set up to allow this, so Pete can 'become' Mark anytime he wants.J It's highly flexible, so that lots of independent relationships can be set up. J It's also logged, so Mark can check what use Pete has made of the facility anytime.  L Before we discovered jump, users used to hand their passwords out to achieveK the same access, but without any auditing. Now there's no excuse for giving 5 out passwords, and we find a lot less of it going on.    Chris    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 09:14:45 +0100 4 From: "Chris Sharman" <chris.sharman@ccagroup.co.uk> Subject: Re: ANN: Updated JUMPA Message-ID: <1024474484.5944.0.nnrp-08.9e989e7e@news.demon.co.uk>   : "Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message- news:y0dNi3$26dmP@eisner.encompasserve.org... J > In article <3d0f9732.110104752@news.process.com>, goathunter@goatley.com (Hunter Goatley) writes: > ! > > This is from the JUMP readme: A > > ------------------------------------------------------------- L > > JUMP allows a user to login exactly  as another user without a password. > A > I doubt they would be able to make the same accesses within the F > VMS Registry as the real user, since the tool likely cannot recreateI > the user's Windows NT credentials on the VMS system without a password.  > : > Microsoft crypto might be bad, but it is not _that_ bad.  I With JUMP/EXACT, they have a subprocess logged in as who they want to be: 6 the only thing they don't have is the actual password.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:34:26 GMT , From: "Kenneth Block" <krblock@computer.org> Subject: asm is in the index2 Message-ID: <SD0Q8.18$kT1.411773@news.cpqcorp.net>  I The problem is not the index, because ASM is in the index, the problem is $ that it says that it is unsupported.  L http://www.openvms.compaq.com/commercial/cplus/alpha_doc/ugvimpl.html#index_ x_240   # Click on ASM directive and it says:  2.2.13 asm Declarations ? In the compiler, asm declarations produce a compile-time error.       J It looks like the online help was updated, but not the Using Guide. CompaqE is working on correcting this. Please report problems. The follow arei? instructions for reporting problems in the Compaq C++ compiler.p  K Customers with support contracts can contact support. In the US and Canada,eJ call, toll-free, 1-800-354-9000. In other countries, support phone numbers are available on the web ata5 http://www.compaq.com/alphaserver/support_phone.html.   : Free support is limited to bug reports that can be sent toI compaq_cxx.bugs@compaq.com. Send a complete but short example reproducing % the problem, including the following:n  ,   a.. Compiler and operating system versionsF   b.. All necessary sources (such as INCLUDE files and module sources)   c.. Data files8   d.. Commands used to compile, link and run the program5   e.. Expected results and incorrect results obtainedlJ Please try to reduce the problem to as small a source as possible, because0 we may be unable to diagnose large applications.  E We answer most quickly those problem reports that include a small butkI complete reproducible example, along with descriptions of the compile andrH link options used and the exact text of any diagnostic messages or otherI incorrect results. Reports that include only program fragments or involve 7 very large applications generally will not be accepted.t  G Please note that this is not a "programming consulting service" and you L should have clear evidence of a product problem before contacting us. If you9 need consulting services, please contact Compaq Services.e  J If your question is about how to use some aspect of the product, or how toH program using Compaq C++, visit the newsgroup comp.os.vms, where you can? post questions and share experiences with other Open VMS users.n   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 17:42:33 GMTh5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>nB Subject: Re: Call or email hp ... they will answer your questions!2 Message-ID: <do3Q8.29$hW1.537734@news.cpqcorp.net>  A David J. Dachtera wrote in message <3D0E5626.EBF15498@fsi.net>...e   >0H >Gee - now if we could get Rich in the loop on our sales cycle, maybe HEH >could explain the so-called "dead end" Alpha to our prospects who throw >that back in our face...  >n  L Please contact Sue Skonetski.  If you need help closing the deal and believeD that Mark, or even Rich is what you need to do it...  all things are	 possible.s   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 12:58:16 +0000 (UTC)t From: david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk= Subject: Re: can VMS mail block e-mail from certian address'?o+ Message-ID: <aepv57$m74$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>   f In article <3D0F79F4.BB6ECCB8@firstdbasource.com>, Michael Austin <maustin@firstdbasource.com> writes: >Michael Young wrote:- >> - >> Hello experts,1 >>  M >> Can someone walk me through setting up my e-mail acct to block e-mail fromnL >> certian e-mail address'?  I'm using the MAIL program that comes with VMS. >> 2P >> Sorry if I haven't given enough info to help you show me where to start.  I'm >> new to this.  >>   >> Regards,t >> Michael Young >> d >> Electro Sonic, Winnipeg% >> Phone (204)783-3105, (800)665-1358u >> Fax   (204)774-7288( >> e-mail:wpg_michael@esonic.e-sonic.com >  >example?  o > B >other than mail, what transports are you using? What TCPIP stack? >n >--   9 VMS MAIL itself cannot block mail from a particular user. L You either need to get your system manager to put in blocks. I think all theK VMS TCPIP stack's implementations of SMTP now include spamblocking options.T> MX and PMDF if used add in extra functionality in that regard.E PMDF even includes a web interface to allow users to select their own2 individual blocking.  G The other alternative is to get a public domain program called DELIVER. 9 (PMDF also has its own inbuilt improved version of this).e  K DELIVER is a general mail handling program which screens and processes yourd2 incoming mail according to guidelines you provide.   SeeuW http://www.pmdf.process.com/ftp/documentation/html/user_vms/book_3.html#chapter_deliver.  M for a description of DELIVER (This is PMDFs version but is basically the sameA as the public domain version).  H The public domain version of DELIVER is available on the FreeWare 4.0 CD  : http://www.openvms.compaq.com/freeware/freeware40/deliver/    
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 09:56:05 -0400s4 From: wpg_michael@esonic.e-sonic.com (Michael Young)= Subject: Re: can VMS mail block e-mail from certian address'?n/ Message-ID: <02061909560546@esonic.e-sonic.com>   ! >Date: 18 Jun 2002 13:11:50 -0600r. >From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)> >Subject: Re: can VMS mail block e-mail from certian address'?4 >Message-ID: <CSyXQ0$b0gn0@eisner.encompasserve.org> >eh >>In article <02061812365835@esonic.e-sonic.com>, wpg_michael@esonic.e-sonic.com (Michael Young) writes: >> Hello experts,d >> eM >> Can someone walk me through setting up my e-mail acct to block e-mail from L >> certian e-mail address'?  I'm using the MAIL program that comes with VMS. >> rP >> Sorry if I haven't given enough info to help you show me where to start.  I'm >> new to this.  >eH >   You need to get your system manager to do this.  Where to start thenG >   depends on how the mail is getting to you.  Most likely it's coming-E >   in via SMTP and the different IP stacks available for VMS providem >   different capabilities.o   Thanks Bob,R  M I was hoping there was a file in my home directory I could edit myself, sigh.c  2 How about a command procedure which:	- spawns mail& 					- SELECT/FROM_SUBSTRING=OPER_EAST 					- DELETE/ALL?  N Would that be worth a try?  I can't get our system manager involved with this.   Regards,
 Michael Young    Electro Sonic, Winnipegr" Phone (204)783-3105, (800)665-1358 Fax   (204)774-7288w% e-mail:wpg_michael@esonic.e-sonic.comi   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 15:43:10 +0000 (UTC)o- From: lewis@spyder.mitre.org (Keith A. Lewis)i= Subject: Re: can VMS mail block e-mail from certian address'?a. Message-ID: <aeq8qe$8a0$1@newslocal.mitre.org>   wpg_michael@esonic.e-sonic.com (Michael Young) writes in article <02061812365835@esonic.e-sonic.com> dated Tue, 18 Jun 2002 12:36:58 -0400:vK >Can someone walk me through setting up my e-mail acct to block e-mail from,J >certian e-mail address'?  I'm using the MAIL program that comes with VMS.  J The idea from your own subsequent post should work.  Here's a template for you.    Put this line in your LOGIN.COM:  0 $ FILTER :== spawn/nowait @sys$login:filter.com	  ' And create this file called FILTER.COM:e  
 $! FILTER.COM4 $ mail( select newmail/from="spammer1@site1.com" del/alll( select newmail/from="spammer2@site2.com" del/alle, purge	! optional, empties WASTEBASKET folder $!  I Then before you check your mail, do a FILTER.  If somebody is mailbombingeI you and you are in danger of using up your disk space, you could run this-9 procedure in a batch job which repeats every few minutes.P  * No administrator intervention is required.  + --Keith Lewis              klewis$mitre.orgd> The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 10:34:48 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) = Subject: Re: can VMS mail block e-mail from certian address'?t3 Message-ID: <0lCSUGuSFVcq@eisner.encompasserve.org>s  f In article <02061909560546@esonic.e-sonic.com>, wpg_michael@esonic.e-sonic.com (Michael Young) writes:  O > I was hoping there was a file in my home directory I could edit myself, sigh.   B That is what you get if your system manager installs PMDF DELIVER.C You get a file in your SYS$LOGIN called MAIL.DELIVERY which you cane edit to achieve various goals.   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 05:14:07 -07008 From: xavier.nicolovici@citicorp.com (Xavier Nicolovici)- Subject: Re: CONNECT:Direct wildcard transfer < Message-ID: <e033a250.0206190414.fcfb27b@posting.google.com>   Thanks Tom,	  @ That's the kind of information I need. I was just expecting that  someone has a working script ;-)  F I do not have access to the VMS platform and did wanted to provide theE script to our engineers. Now, as it seems to be very simple, it shoud ! not be a problem to implement it.n  , The choice of CONNECT:Direct wasn't mine ;-)    X "Tom Simpson" <simpsont@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<RuOP8.435$EP.340@sccrnsc03>...; > How about something like this?     This is from memory...s >  > $LOOP:8 > $     cur_file = f$search("DISK$USER:[TEST]FUBAR.*",1)0 > $     if cur_file .eqs. "" Then Goto loop_exit > $!) > $     COPY 'cur_file'   <to where ever>a > $! > $     Goto loopr > $!
 > $LOOP_EXIT:  > $ exit > 4 > My condolences on your choice of Connect:Direct... > 
 > Regards, > TomV > G > "Xavier Nicolovici" <xavier.nicolovici@citicorp.com> wrote in messagei9 > news:e033a250.0206180656.768a3fc0@posting.google.com...i > > Hi,e > > I > > I'm currently trying to set up a file transfer between a VMS platformtD > > and an NT one. We have concluded to use, for various reason, the/ > > CONNECT:Direct tool from Sterling Commerce.  > >nH > > I would like to transfer a set of file from this VMS platform to theH > > NT one, but the only information I have about those file is the fileH > > name pattern. A random generated number is added to the filename, inG > > order to avoid file overwritting (the file are created from time to 
 > > time). > >VI > > Now, CONNECT:Direct can not perform wildcard file transfer, and I wastG > > wondering, for this simple task, if someone has already developed anI > > small script that loops in a particular VMS area, and search for eacht> > > existing file to perform a call to the CONNECT:Dircet API. > >  > > Many thanks in advance,m > >r > > Xavier Nicolovicis   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 10:33:32 -0700" From: cstranslations@msn.com (Joe)% Subject: Console hang solved (almost)r= Message-ID: <d56d1c2d.0206190933.6dc128e4@posting.google.com>c  ; Thanks for all replies both to the news group and off line.n  C I've tracked down the nightly disappearance of the console login toeB the nightly running of a batch job someone put together to stop/idC most INTERACTIVE users every night at 23:45. DTLOGIN is the hint...i  ? Still have problems with the logon screen not reappearing aftersD logging off from the console. While playing around with this part of the problem this morning...e  A If I (telnet) in and DELETE [.DT...]*.*;* I can then logon on theSE console and get the logon screen back when logging off. At that point E any subsequent console logons I attempt leave me with the gray basket(< weave (until I remove [.dt...]*.*;* as above). Seems to be a7 protection thing. If I enable BYPASS by default (UAF => B modify/defpriv=bypass) the logout runs all the way through and the& console redisplays the logon screen...  > I'm not seeing anything in the protection settings on the "dt"D directory tree (for as long as I've been staring at it it would have# to jump off the screen and hit me).x  : Is there something afoul in the below protection settings?? Is there something I'm not think of (or not aware of) - default @ settings for decwindows, default protection setting a la SYSGEN?  C I wouldn't think one would have to have bypass on by default to log  off of the console...s   joe   " Directory __DKB500:[IAC.FOOBAR.DT]  # APPMANAGER.DIR;1     (RWE,RWE,RWE,)s! DESKTOP.DIR;1        (RWE,RWED,,)c& ERRORLOG.;1          (RWED,RWED,RWED,)& ERRORLOG.OLD;1       (RWED,RWED,RWED,)# HELP.DIR;1           (RWE,RWE,RWE,) # ICONS.DIR;1          (RWE,RWE,RWE,)_# SESSIONS.DIR;1       (RWE,RWE,RWE,)-# TMP.DIR;1            (RWE,RWE,RWE,)-) TRASH.DIR;1          (RWE,RWED,RWED,RWED):# TYPES.DIR;1          (RWE,RWE,RWE,)@   Total of 10 files.  + Directory __DKB500:[IAC.FOOBAR.DT.SESSIONS]H  # CURRENT.DIR;1        (RWE,RWE,RWE,) & DTWMFP.SESSION;1     (RWED,RWED,RWED,)     Total of 2 files.   3 Directory __DKB500:[IAC.FOOBAR.DT.SESSIONS.CURRENT]o  & DT.RESOURCES;1       (RWED,RWED,RWED,)& DT.SESSION;1         (RWED,RWED,RWED,)& DT.SETTINGS;1        (RWED,RWED,RWED,)# DT089913.;1          (RWD,RWD,RWD,)I   Total of 4 files.w  ( Directory __DKB500:[IAC.FOOBAR.DT.TRASH]  # .TRASHINFO;1         (RWD,RWD,RWD,)n   Total of 1 file.  ( Directory __DKB500:[IAC.FOOBAR.DT.TYPES]  % FP_DYNAMIC.DIR;1     (RWE,RWED,RE,RE)d   Total of 1 file.  ' Grand total of 5 directories, 18 files.e   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jun 2002 12:07:42 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)s$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?+ Message-ID: <aeps6e$5pt$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>n  B In article <xkMP8.273674$%y.23374911@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>,-  "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:i |> tA |> "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message*) |> news:aenpl3$279m$1@info.cs.uofs.edu...* |>   |> ... |> nG |> > Failure implies they tried and couldn't do it.  The fact is it was F |> > never wanted and the OS (actually, the file system, of which UnixD |> > is capable of supporting more than one, meaning a versioning FSF |> > could be added if anyone really wanted it) doesn't provide things |> > the users don't want. |> iL |> Unfortunately, it frequently also fails to provide things that users *do* |> want.   Like???    |> sM |> I happen to agree that file versioning (at least as implemented in VMS) is*H |> an idea that never seemed to offer sufficient benefit to overcome theM |> inertia of existing environments' lack of support for it, and hence now isnM |> likely more trouble than it's worth (since it's just one more way in whicheK |> VMS is out of step with the rest of the world - and a noticeably awkwardeL |> way, since file access is a major aspect of the way systems interact with1 |> the wider heterogeneous external environment).o  G And, it's really pretty easy to manually keep backups if you want them.hF On the other hand I have seen numerous students (back when VMS was theG main student system here) have quota problems because they were unaware H of the versioning and had lot's of copies of files they didn't know were there and really didn't want.    |> t4 |> OTOH, case-sensitive file-naming is a Unix crock   F Matter of opinion.  Not only do I like it, but I make very good use ofI the ability.  As do many others I know.  People here compared the commandvI structure to natural language and called the Unix commands flawed because J they were not full words.  I don;t know about you, but I don't use a mono-G case natural language so it seems the same logic should dictate that myi  filenames be mixed-case as well.  G |>                                                   (which will becomerM |> increasingly awkward for Unix - as versions are for VMS - unless the world  |> turns away from Windows), 0  G Why??  Windows also supports mixed-case.  As a matter of fact, there isiF no need translation for a Unix filesystem mounted on my Win2K box like( there is for the same FS mounted on VMS.  F |>                           the absence of standardized record-accessB |> mechanisms in Unix (as contrasted with VMS) is an impediment to" |> cross-application data-sharing   H Unless one uses some form of DB, which in the Unix world is likely to beI available on many platforms, all structure contained inthe file is in theuI application and thus if the application moves so does the structure.  The@J only possible problem is endian-ness.  Of course, that is also a potentialK problem for VMS as long as it runs on more than one architecture, VAX/Alpha " now, VAX/Alpha/IA64 in the future.    J |>                                 (while I believe that RMS could benefitJ |> significantly from a major interface cleanup/simplification effort, its& |> *functions* are decidedly useful),   H If I understand how RMS works, it seems to me that it could be overlayedK on the Unix filesystem.  I can think of only two reasons for this not being.E done.  The proprietary nature of RMS making it technically or legallyeH impossible (not likely) or nobody on Unix misses it so nobody is willing- to expend the effort needed to port the code.t  L |>                                     and the hodge-podge of mechanisms theH |> various Unixes have added over the decades to handle asynchronous I/OM |> contrast unfavorably with VMS's clean and comprehensive support of it fromo	 |> Day 1.s  . Don't know enough about this to comment on it.   |> fO |> No system is perfect in providing everything users want and *only* what theyt1 |> want, if only because needs vary among users. r  K Isn't that what I said??  Why are there nearly a dozen shells (not countingoI locally written ones)??  Because every user doesn't feel comfortable withhH BASH.  What options are offered on VMS beyond DCL??  That being just one example.  M |>                                               The advantage of providing aaG |> richer environment is that people can just use the parts they need;    6 This sounds like a description of Unix to me, not VMS.  J |>                                                                     theI |> disadvantage is that it's difficult to insulate them *completely* fromlM |> additional complexity introduced by parts they may not need, and VMS could 7 |> certainly benefit from additional work in this area.h   bill   --  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>       ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 07:46:21 -0600- From: koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)a$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?3 Message-ID: <0yivyR+sCnMg@eisner.encompasserve.org>   _ In article <aeps6e$5pt$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:dD > In article <xkMP8.273674$%y.23374911@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>,/ >  "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:h > I > |>                                                   (which will becomeeO > |> increasingly awkward for Unix - as versions are for VMS - unless the worldw > |> turns away from Windows), r > I > Why??  Windows also supports mixed-case.  As a matter of fact, there isdH > no need translation for a Unix filesystem mounted on my Win2K box like* > there is for the same FS mounted on VMS.  G    Windows is mixed case, like VMS since ODS-5 came along.  That is not G    the same as case-sensitive which is just bad human interface design.a   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 09:06:30 -0400-( From: "Daniel P Allen" <dallen@nist.gov>$ Subject: RE: Could linux become VMS?: Message-ID: <PHECLHHFDGKPFDHKILFNKEPMCDAA.dallen@nist.gov>  K I believe NTFS is case-sensitive.  The Windows interface masks that. If you9H write network code ala Samba to a "windows" file server you will see the case sensitive behavior.   Dan-   > -----Original Message-----6 > From: Bob Koehler [mailto:koehler@encompasserve.org]( > Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 9:46 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComI& > Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS? >r >i- > In article <aeps6e$5pt$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>,m5 > bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:rF > > In article <xkMP8.273674$%y.23374911@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>,1 > >  "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:> > >iK > > |>                                                   (which will becomet@ > > |> increasingly awkward for Unix - as versions are for VMS - > unless the world  > > |> turns away from Windows), > >hK > > Why??  Windows also supports mixed-case.  As a matter of fact, there isIJ > > no need translation for a Unix filesystem mounted on my Win2K box like, > > there is for the same FS mounted on VMS. >rI >    Windows is mixed case, like VMS since ODS-5 came along.  That is notwI >    the same as case-sensitive which is just bad human interface design.  >g >    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:13:38 GMT)* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?A Message-ID: <mk0Q8.23923$8i1.1506384@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>/  3 "Daniel P Allen" <dallen@nist.gov> wrote in messageo4 news:PHECLHHFDGKPFDHKILFNKEPMCDAA.dallen@nist.gov...I > I believe NTFS is case-sensitive.  The Windows interface masks that. Ifn youiJ > write network code ala Samba to a "windows" file server you will see the > case sensitive behavior.  A Both NTFS and FAT support mixed-case names.  FAT does not supporttJ case-sensitivity at all, whereas NTFS supports *optional* case-sensitivityC (which in combination with case-insensitivity can only be supportednL efficiently within the file system), but only for the POSIX personality:  asJ you noted, it's not available through the Win32 personality, hence neitherI constitutes support in Windows nor changes the fact that Windows does noteA interact comfortably with a case-sensitive environment like Unix.I   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 14:42:02 GMT.* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?B Message-ID: <_K0Q8.308997$Gs.24397014@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  > "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message% news:aeps6e$5pt$1@info.cs.uofs.edu...>D > In article <xkMP8.273674$%y.23374911@bin4.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>,/ >  "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:d   ...   I > |> Unfortunately, it frequently also fails to provide things that usersm *do*
 > |> want. >.	 > Like???l  K Do you always respond immediately without reading farther?  Or is that yourr" idea of a witty rhetorical retort?   ...n  5 > |> OTOH, case-sensitive file-naming is a Unix crockc >y > Matter of opinion.  L Not any more than most facts.  The only people who seem to appreciate it areC Unix bigots (quite similar, in fact, to the situation with VMS file?I versioning); the rest of the world (including a significant proportion ofoK the Unix base) recognizes it for what it is:  an unfortunate remnant of the2K original non-design that would be difficult to correct after all this time.-  4   Not only do I like it, but I make very good use ofK > the ability.  As do many others I know.  People here compared the commandlK > structure to natural language and called the Unix commands flawed because.L > they were not full words.  I don;t know about you, but I don't use a mono-I > case natural language so it seems the same logic should dictate that myn" > filenames be mixed-case as well.  J You clearly don't understand the difference between mixed-case support andE case-sensitive look-ups.  The former is desirable and consistent with ( natural language; the latter is neither.   ...   H > |>                           the absence of standardized record-accessD > |> mechanisms in Unix (as contrasted with VMS) is an impediment to# > |> cross-application data-sharingr >iJ > Unless one uses some form of DB, which in the Unix world is likely to be > available on many platforms,  C 'Some form of DB' which is 'likely to be available' hardly meets myo/ understanding of the word 'standardized' above.u  -  all structure contained inthe file is in thecF > application and thus if the application moves so does the structure.  G No, there's an intermediate formating layer created by the language onedH codes in - the most obvious problem being use of different end-of-recordL delimiters in different languages.  Not all the world codes in C/C++, but onL Unix if they don't then they can't share data across applications written inE different languages even if those applications otherwise agree on its  content.  H Furthermore, there's no consistent way to handle variable-length recordsD containing binary data, even across applications written in a single	 language.d   ...y  L > |>                                 (while I believe that RMS could benefitL > |> significantly from a major interface cleanup/simplification effort, its' > |> *functions* are decidedly useful),- >-J > If I understand how RMS works, it seems to me that it could be overlayedG > on the Unix filesystem.  I can think of only two reasons for this nota being G > done.  The proprietary nature of RMS making it technically or legallymJ > impossible (not likely) or nobody on Unix misses it so nobody is willing/ > to expend the effort needed to port the code.e  K IIRC RMS look-alikes have already appeared; they certainly have on Windows.N@ However, since they are not part of Unix per se, there's no more= standardization on them than on any of the other multifarious I record-management mechanisms that have appeared on Unix to compensate for33 its deficiencies in that area - which was my point.    ...s  L > |> No system is perfect in providing everything users want and *only* what they2 > |> want, if only because needs vary among users. > D > Isn't that what I said??  Why are there nearly a dozen shells (not counting > locally written ones)??   F Quite possibly because they're still trying to come up with one that'sJ generally liked.  That's one of the significant differences between actualE design and trial-and-error approaches:  a dozen solutions to the same F problem, all only slightly different, is not a feature to be proud of.   ...a  C > |>                                               The advantage of, providing aNH > |> richer environment is that people can just use the parts they need; >a8 > This sounds like a description of Unix to me, not VMS.  H Since you've already expressed ignorance in such areas as asynchrony, itJ seems more likely that you're simply unaware of the kinds of richness thatK other environments offer.  If Unix satisfies your needs, that's no problem: F just don't make the assumption that it satisfies everyone else's needs
 equally well.f   - bill   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 17:18:59 +0100 (MET)p9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> $ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?; Message-ID: <01KJ4FE96G3296WTPR@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>N  7 > > |> OTOH, case-sensitive file-naming is a Unix crockn > >  > > Matter of opinion. > N > Not any more than most facts.  The only people who seem to appreciate it areE > Unix bigots (quite similar, in fact, to the situation with VMS filesK > versioning); the rest of the world (including a significant proportion ofpM > the Unix base) recognizes it for what it is:  an unfortunate remnant of thetM > original non-design that would be difficult to correct after all this time.h  B I think I remember reading somewhere that tabs in makefiles are a I similar remnant.  IIRC, it was not even an intended feature at the time,  G but just an oversight, but the developer didn't want to correct it due .H to backward compatibility---he already had 5(!) users of the utility at 	 the time!    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 16:44:54 GMT 5 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com>o$ Subject: Re: Could linux become VMS?2 Message-ID: <ay2Q8.26$iV1.502945@news.cpqcorp.net>  $ Bill Gunshannon wrote in message ...  ? >A rather strange view of the world.  So then, do all VMS userseA >the exact same car, eat the exact same diet, read the exact samee >books, etc.?? >v  G Yes.  We all drive BMW Z3's, eat rare Prime Rib washed down with Anchor 4 Steam, and have graduated from Tolkien to Pratchett.   ;-)s   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 12:39:05 GMTf# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>tA Subject: Re: Disaster Tolerant advertising using Fortune magazineoG Message-ID: <JX_P8.79998$831.6882@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>0  < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message! news:3D0FF78B.BA6C75BF@fsi.net...L >; > Careful, everyone! >DI > Remember how DEC / Q (/ HP?) work: just before they axe something, theyWF > promote the hell out of it. (Why? Your guess is as good as their's!) >W  K They advertise something once, then look at the sales numbers the following,A week. When the sales numbers don't go up immediately.............   J I wonder when they will ever understand that VMS is not a 'commodity' like hamburgers or gasoline.1  F Unfortunately selling VMS is a lot like selling aircraft carriers...itL doesn't happen very often (relatively speaking) but you make good money when you do.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 16:29:42 +0100 U From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com>SH Subject: Re: Interesting ZDnet post about Tandem -- Can VMS do the same?0 Message-ID: <aeq817$dsa$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Bill Todd wrote:  : > "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message/ > news:MwCJ39LGqhkW@eisner.encompasserve.org...  >  > ...  >  > ) >>Here is a prognostication.  I'm willing B >>to wager that Itanium servers have the highest price performance9 >>metrics for 64-bit servers - until Hamster comes along.. >>6 >>http://news.com.com/2100-1001-936936.html?tag=fd_top >>K >>However, Sun's prices go up steeply. A four-processor server with 16GB of>K >>memory costs $46,995, and a four-processor model with 32GB of memory goes  >> > forF > 
 >>$99,995. >> >>[snip] >>H >>A four-processor Itanium 2 system will cost about $41,000 with 32GB of >>	 > memory,, > E >>said Vaughn Mackie, enterprise platform marketing manager at Intel,i >>
 > speaking atd >  >>a media event Friday.n >> > K > You must have read a different version of the article than the one I justt( > read using your URL above, which says: > H > "A four-processor Itanium 2 system will cost about $41,000 with 8GB ofM > memory, said Vaughn Mackie, enterprise platform marketing manager at Intel, $ > speaking at a media event Friday." > G > The difference between 32 GB and 8 GB for the $41K Itanic2 system (aswM > contrasted with Sun's 16 GB for $47K) makes a significant difference in theh. > price/performance conclusion one might draw. >     . Rob's not very strong on facts as we all know.  > The Sun V480R supports 256/512MB and 1GB DIMMS' the 1 GB DIMMS? are expensive at the moment hence the hike for the 32 GB systeme> however as you can see the 16 GB V480 is despite claims to the? contrary very competitive with a Itanium II in systems. It alson? has the huge advantage of actually having a decent portfolio ofr native apps.   Regards  Andrew Harrisone   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 16:55:59 +0100>U From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com> H Subject: Re: Interesting ZDnet post about Tandem -- Can VMS do the same?0 Message-ID: <aeq9ig$edf$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>  ( Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy wrote:   >  >  > Bill Todd wrote: > ; >> "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message-0 >> news:MwCJ39LGqhkW@eisner.encompasserve.org... >> >> ... >> >>+ >>> Here is a prognostication.  I'm willing D >>> to wager that Itanium servers have the highest price performance; >>> metrics for 64-bit servers - until Hamster comes along.u >>> 8 >>> http://news.com.com/2100-1001-936936.html?tag=fd_top >>>sF >>> However, Sun's prices go up steeply. A four-processor server with  >>> 16GB ofxI >>> memory costs $46,995, and a four-processor model with 32GB of memory o >>> goes >>>  >> for >> >>> $99,995. >>>n
 >>> [snip] >>>dJ >>> A four-processor Itanium 2 system will cost about $41,000 with 32GB of >>>o
 >> memory,    G >>> said Vaughn Mackie, enterprise platform marketing manager at Intel,x >>>d >> speaking at >> >>> a media event Friday.a >>>r    B Intel also seem to be indicating that there will be big price cuts" in the IA-64 market place as well.  ? According to Compaqs online pricing tool their Itanium 1 Serverl7 with 8 GB of RAM and 4 Itanium I CPU's currently costs.e  @ 62,000 dollars, adding another 8 GB or RAM to make it comparableB to the Sun V480R adds another 18,000 dollars giving you a whopping4 80,000 vs a much faster box that comes in at 46,995.   Regardsi Andrew Harrisonr   ------------------------------    Date: 18 Jun 2002 23:10:32 -0700% From: bart.zorn@xs4all.nl (Bart Zorn) ) Subject: Middle European DST change rulesn= Message-ID: <9a924482.0206182210.5cafb23b@posting.google.com>r   On March 15, 2001 I wrote:   > Hello all!  $ > The TDF change is due soon, again.  M > I am running OpenVMS G7.3 (EFT2) on my home Alpha, and to my dismay I foundhD > out that the rule for the TDF changes in Europe are wrong (again).  K > I don't recall which ECO it was, but finally we got it right in DTSS. ThenM > rule for western Europe (+0100 standard, +0200 day light saving) should be:t  2 > 1 3600 MET 0 MET-1MET DST-2,M3.5.0/02,M10.5.0/03  H > Essential is, that we  change the time on the last sunday of march and8 > october. I thought that is the case is the US as well.  6 > HOWEVER, the new time changing code gives us, again:  2 > 1 3600 MET 0 MET-1MET DST-2,M3.4.0/02,M10.4.0/03  4 > just like we had in the early days of DECnet-plus.  ' > Or am I missing something altogether?f  J > Now that I am on the subject, could we have standard timezone names like > +0100 and +0200, please?  
 > Regards,   > Bart Zorn    Charlie Hammond answered:t  K > I have verified that the situation desribed below still exists in recent,nN > internal baelevels of OpenVMS version 7.3, and I have reported this problem.K > I cannot make any promise or prediction about getting this fixed for the e > V7.3 release.o    E It is always possible that I missed something, but I still can't find B a solution to this problem. It seems that something has been done. The TDF change rule now looks:  # MET-1MET DST-2,M3.5.0/02,M10.4.0/03   C So the switch to daylight saving is correct, but the switch back istC not. This means that the first time I have a problem with this will|B be in october 2004. OK, that still a long time to go. But why thisE (simple?) problem cannot be solved once and forever (give or take new. regulations) is beyond me.  A Maybe the solution is to document (and I mean really document andaD not the sorry excuse for documentation that is taken over from Un*x)B the procedure to implement one's own time zone rules! Part of this= documentaion should include the way to install this new rule.i8 I have managed to compile one, but failed to install it.   Regards,  	 Bart Zorn    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 11:24:01 GMTo. From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER)- Subject: Re: Middle European DST change rules 5 Message-ID: <lRZP8.292738$305.4223319@news.chello.at>   e In article <9a924482.0206182210.5cafb23b@posting.google.com>, bart.zorn@xs4all.nl (Bart Zorn) writes:d >On March 15, 2001 I wrote:e% >> The TDF change is due soon, again.. >hN >> I am running OpenVMS G7.3 (EFT2) on my home Alpha, and to my dismay I foundE >> out that the rule for the TDF changes in Europe are wrong (again).3 >0L >> I don't recall which ECO it was, but finally we got it right in DTSS. TheN >> rule for western Europe (+0100 standard, +0200 day light saving) should be: >S3 >> 1 3600 MET 0 MET-1MET DST-2,M3.5.0/02,M10.5.0/03. > I >> Essential is, that we  change the time on the last sunday of march andt9 >> october. I thought that is the case is the US as well.s >-7 >> HOWEVER, the new time changing code gives us, again:r > 3 >> 1 3600 MET 0 MET-1MET DST-2,M3.4.0/02,M10.4.0/03V >M5 >> just like we had in the early days of DECnet-plus.r >i( >> Or am I missing something altogether? >>K >> Now that I am on the subject, could we have standard timezone names likek >> +0100 and +0200, please?n >a >> Regards,c >, >> Bart Zorn >" >Charlie Hammond answered: >sL >> I have verified that the situation desribed below still exists in recent,O >> internal baelevels of OpenVMS version 7.3, and I have reported this problem.eL >> I cannot make any promise or prediction about getting this fixed for the  >> V7.3 release. > F >It is always possible that I missed something, but I still can't findC >a solution to this problem. It seems that something has been done.t >The TDF change rule now looks:i > $ >MET-1MET DST-2,M3.5.0/02,M10.4.0/03  A Strange. I had no wrong timezone rules for a couple of years now,aF and I live in the same timezone. Perhaps, because I started with DTSS.  G I do however have problems on VAX switching the timezone automatically, E since I disabled DECdts and run now NTP alone. On Alpha, there is the3D AUTO_DLIGHT_SAV parameter in SYSGEN/SYSMAN, but on VAX there is none# and no automatic switching happens.F  F btw: TCPware's new switching rules are also on my To-Fix list, becauseC the rules didn't work on my first attempt to use them (correct ruleSF is assumed, but time becomes UTC instead of local time) and so I endedF again on manual timechanges (in TCPWARE:TCPWARE_CONFIGURE.COM) twice a# year just like the decade before...N  D >So the switch to daylight saving is correct, but the switch back isD >not. This means that the first time I have a problem with this willC >be in october 2004. OK, that still a long time to go. But why thisvF >(simple?) problem cannot be solved once and forever (give or take new >regulations) is beyond me.f  F Because I can't see the real reason, why it happened to you and not meH I can't give a good hint (except to fix the rule by yourself of course).   VAX$ d SYS$UPDATE:*TIME*   Directory SYS$COMMON:[SYSUPD]e    DTSS$INSTALL_TIMEZONE_RULE.COM;1N                      48  20-OCT-1998 14:21:31.03  [SYSTEM]         (RWD,RWD,,) DTSS$TIMEZONE_RULES.DAT;1lN                      12   8-MAR-2001 11:46:31.07  [SYSTEM]         (RWD,RWD,,)  % VAX$ SEA SYS$UPDATE:*TIME*.DAT " MET"b2 MET-1MET_DST-2,M3.5.0/2,M10.5.0/3            ! MET  !MET +1:00!MET_DST +2:00    ALPHA$ d SYS$UPDATE:*TIME*   Directory SYS$COMMON:[SYSUPD]d    DTSS$INSTALL_TIMEZONE_RULE.COM;1N                      43  18-JAN-2001 10:52:17.09  [SYSTEM]         (RWD,RWD,,) DTSS$TIMEZONE_RULES.DAT;1 N                      12   5-FEB-2001 15:00:00.30  [SYSTEM]         (RWD,RWD,,)  ' ALPHA$ SEA SYS$UPDATE:*TIME*.DAT " MET"o2 MET-1MET_DST-2,M3.5.0/2,M10.5.0/3            ! MET          !MET +1:00!MET_DST +2:00  ( So, rule is identical, comments are not.  8 This files are for DTSS of course, but the produced file= SYS$SYSTEM:DTSS$TIMEZONE_DIFFERENTIAL.DAT seems to be honoredrI by OpenVMS without DTSS, too. Don't ask me why. Maybe again in October...d  B >Maybe the solution is to document (and I mean really document andE >not the sorry excuse for documentation that is taken over from Un*x)nC >the procedure to implement one's own time zone rules! Part of thisg> >documentaion should include the way to install this new rule.9 >I have managed to compile one, but failed to install it.-   Sorry, not yet...u   -- i Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGERl% Network and OpenVMS system specialistd E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atP A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm looking for (a) Network _and_ VMS Job(s)   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jun 2002 02:14 CDTg' From: carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins) 5 Subject: Re: My conversation with Linus about VMS ...d- Message-ID: <19JUN200202142683@gerg.tamu.edu>t  . "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes...@ }"Atlant Schmidt" <atlantnospam@mindspring.com> wrote in message) }news:3D0F2A17.379E4459@mindspring.com...v }> Carl Perkins wrote: }....SG }> > Learning SEARCH is vastly more simple for English speakers - it issI }> > an actual word that describes what you want to do. DCL is like that:eI }> > is it simply a question of finding out which of the various possiblehI }> > words which you already know that could apply to an operation is thelE }> > right one. This is considerably easier than learning the varioustC }> > dialects of the martian language that Unix shells tend to use.  }>3 }> You understand that this is pretty much a mattert1 }> of opinion. "Uhh, LOCATE, FIND, SEEK, oh yeah,n/ }> SEARCH!" It's not much improved over "grep".a4 }> And most computer professionals are well-aware of }> what grep is and does.l } E }I'm afraid that in the above you have descended into utter bullshit.i } M }1.  Disputing the assertion that it's easier to learn a command that uses ani@ }appropriately-descriptive word in one's native language than an9 }otherwise-meaningless sequence of letters is ridiculous.e  E What, you can't picture him sitting there the first time he wanted to E determine if something was in a file saying to himself, "Uhh, LOCATE,n# FIND, SEEK, SEARCH, oh yeah, GREP!"   E Well, OK - I can't see that either. I bet he didn't find it that easy H the first time. Or the second. Or probably the third, fourth, and fifth.  L }2.  The only computer professionals who have the slightest clue what 'grep'J }means are those who have been sufficiently exposed to Unix's use of it toC }remember it.  Whether this constitutes 'most' of them is extremelynA }questionable, given the percentage who know nothing but Windows.a  A Most computer professionals could use a CLI that only made use ofaA four keys ("-", ".", <space>, and <return>) which required you topA enter everything in morse code spelling out grammatically correct ? English language statements and questions. It would be a simpledC matter of spending the effort to learn it. Anybody who already knewt; morse code would not find this very difficult. .... --- .--o: ... .- .-. -..  -.-. --- ..- .-.. -..  .. -  -... . ..--..  ? Just because professionals could learn to use such an interfacer does not make it a good idea.   8 }3.  Extend the relevant population to include ancillaryL }(non-computer-professional) users of a system and the percentage who have aK }clue what 'grep' is becomes miniscule compared with those who could make ap, }reasonable guess at what 'search' might do. } K }I've never seen the slightest indication that people not already inured toeJ }Unix's arcane command syntax find it in any way preferable.  By contrast,J }when DEC introduced DCL the response from users was *extremely* positive:L }even those already accustomed to more arcane commands such as MCR's who hadC }to relearn and in some cases type more characters accepted it as a M }worthwhile improvement, and non-professionals who had to use the system werep/ }downright effusive in their preference for it.o } G }The fact that some people who have *already* gone through the learningWM }process may find Unix-style gibberish preferable is hardly an endorsement ofaA }its general desirability:  if you want to convince anyone of its F }'superiority', you'll need to produce something in the way of actual,7 }comparative evidence beyond your own personal opinion.s }  }- billg  @ He says the Unix shells are "terse". I think a better term wouldA be "arcane". The High Priests find it easy, once they have becometE trained in its use. (Much like the Latin was for the educated classesr@ in the medieval period - I had 4 years of it myself back in highA school and it was rather interesting, but I wouldn't suggest thattC all high school classes be taught in it. The medieval Europeans didrE think all higher education should be in Latin instead of their nativeyE tongue, for some reasons that I don't understand and a few that I do.- This seems similar to me.)  H We used to have a VAXcluster (later a VMScluster) here at Texas A&M thatH was accessable to all students, faculty, and staff. Every year thousandsD of new students of all majors would learn how to use it. They did soF mainly via a rather brief handout, and a few minutes of explanation inF any class that actually required its use, and were supported by a helpE desk staffed almost entirely by part-time student workers. There wereoE also various public Unix systems - these were avoided like the plague- by most non-CS majors. -   --- Carl   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jun 2002 12:56:49 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)r5 Subject: Re: My conversation with Linus about VMS ...1+ Message-ID: <aepv2h$6sa$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>   B In article <A5NP8.312165$Kp.24003835@bin7.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>,-  "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:  |> eJ |> Yes, I have.  They benefit noticeably from having commands that reflectD |> their native language, though that is far from the entire battle.  E Do I sense american imperialism here??  What percentage of the modernwB world has English as their native language??  I can't say for sureG but I doubt that there is a German version of DCL with all the commandsiB translated.  Any of our continental Europeans care to educate me??   |> kL |> Fine.  DCL will let you define Unix shell equivalent commands.  That saysN |> nothing about what the majority of users will prefer, especially while theyO |> are still in the process of becoming acquainted with a machine and haven't aa& |> clue that it might be customizable.  C And the exact same is true for Unix shells, as has been stated hereeD many times before.  I gave up the idea of trying to make one OS lookD like another years ago.  It usually results in lower and not greater
 productivity.q   |> n |> >. |> > What part of this ("MY PREFERENCE") can't |> > you understand? |> iM |> The part that makes it relevant to this discussion, which is about generale3 |> approachability rather than one person's biases..  C All he is trying to say is the same thing I have been saying.  The eE computer and thus the OS it runs are tools.  The machine is the slave D of the user and not the other way around.  The VMS way isn't necess-F arily  the right way to do things.  The Unix way isn't necessarily theF right way to do things.  The right way to do things is the the way theE user wants to do things.  The way that will allow the user to be the l most productive.   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>   V   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jun 2002 13:15:32 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)n5 Subject: Re: My conversation with Linus about VMS ...a+ Message-ID: <aeq05k$7hv$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>a  8 In article <ah8vgugohj17ud29qejhqlesviqpbiadq2@4ax.com>,)  jlsue <jlsuexxxz@screaminet.com> writes:  |>G |> Hey!  When I started my professional career in 1985, I had basically1I |> no knowledge of DCL or the CLI.  But within days perusing HELP and theeG |> DCL dictionary, I could easily write code in DCL command procedures.o |>    8 Well, as long as we're down to anecdotal information....  H The first time I sat down to s Unix machine was as a systems programmer.I I came from (in order of experience) IBM1401, IBM4300, Univac-1100, Prime H 850, UCSD P-System. RT-11.  I was given a box running a System III cloneG and told to make a user interface that looked like UCSD Pascal's Menus.sG I had never seen a shell before and I had never seen the C language.  I$D knew none of the Unix commands.  I had the first version of my shellH running in two days.  Not much of a learning curve considering that noneH of my prior experience was with any OS that even vaguely resembled Unix.  G If you know nothing about an OS and its related UI, one is just as hardwE or easy to learn as another.  I found the man pages and the Bell LabscF papers that shipped with Unix at that time to be easy to read and veryC helpfull.  I got the job done.  Luckily, that shell never went intopE production use.  Why you ask??  Because as soon as any user, at everyeG level from programmers to managers, started using the system they found D that the UCSD Pascal Menu system they were so used to was cumbersome6 and much weaker than the native interface.  Go figure.  H |> The Language was not a big hurdle because it was similar to my spokenI |> language, and looking at the list of commands I could easily narrow it E |> down to a short list of 2-3 that I needed to review to determine a $ |> proper match.  THAT is usability.  G But the same is true of Unix.  I have been using Unix for over 20 yearsrF and I'll bet there are commands I don't know and have never used.  ButE the ones I use all the time, I have learned intimately.  And so it isVE with every OS I use.  I am as comfortable with RT-11 and RSTS as I amhE with Unix.  I was equally comfortable with Primos and EXEC-8.  I have-E had to work with all of these since the IBM's at the system level and D have grown to appreciate the fact that there is more than one way toC get the job done.  One way isn't necessarily better than any other,r just different.2   bill   --  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>   ,   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 15:04:00 GMT1* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>5 Subject: Re: My conversation with Linus about VMS .../A Message-ID: <A31Q8.24266$8i1.1538838@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>f  > "Bill Gunshannon" <bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu> wrote in message% news:aepv2h$6sa$1@info.cs.uofs.edu...cD > In article <A5NP8.312165$Kp.24003835@bin7.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>,/ >  "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:E > |>L > |> Yes, I have.  They benefit noticeably from having commands that reflectF > |> their native language, though that is far from the entire battle. >?( > Do I sense american imperialism here??   LOL.     What percentage of the modernt. > world has English as their native language??  I Irrelevant.  If you reread my statement above, it says absolutely nothing F about English (which was intentional):  the discussion (or at least myJ participation in it) has been about the comparative ease of use of crypticG vs. natural-language commands.  If DCL does not provide facilities thataC allow use of natural-language commands in other languages this is aT= deficiency, but one that should be fairly easily rectifiable.g  H Of course, back when both VMS and Unix were created, the computing world predominantly used English.|   ...   I > |> Fine.  DCL will let you define Unix shell equivalent commands.  Thate saysK > |> nothing about what the majority of users will prefer, especially while  theyG > |> are still in the process of becoming acquainted with a machine ando	 haven't af( > |> clue that it might be customizable. >), > And the exact same is true for Unix shells  H No, it's not.  The difference is that VMS *starts* with natural-languageL commands and allows users to change them should they choose to, whereas UnixL *starts* with crypticisms and allows users to change them should they chooseJ to.  Once again, you seem to have failed to understand the full meaning ofH the statement to which you responded:  not all defaults are equally goodA choices, and the fact that they can be changed does not erase thegK consequences of an original poor choice (a sword that cuts both ways, sinceoJ RMS default behavior can be significantly less efficient than Unix default+ behavior in common file access situations).I   - bill   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jun 2002 14:49:05 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)l5 Subject: Re: My conversation with Linus about VMS ...o+ Message-ID: <aeq5l1$a9s$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>h  - In article <19JUN200202142683@gerg.tamu.edu>,.*  carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins) writes: |> hD |> Most computer professionals could use a CLI that only made use ofD |> four keys ("-", ".", <space>, and <return>) which required you toD |> enter everything in morse code spelling out grammatically correctB |> English language statements and questions. It would be a simpleF |> matter of spending the effort to learn it. Anybody who already knew> |> morse code would not find this very difficult. .... --- .--= |> ... .- .-. -..  -.-. --- ..- .-.. -..  .. -  -... . ..--..o  # "How sard would it be?"   Hmmmm....   = As a point of curiosity, we just got rid of a big honking UPS < that used to beep whenever there was a problem.  As far as I> know, I was the only one who recognized that the beeps were in> fact error codes in morse.  Everyone else just heard an alarm.   |>  B |> Just because professionals could learn to use such an interface  |> does not make it a good idea.  = Just because one professional likes an interface doesn't makes it the best for everyone else.   |> .C |> He says the Unix shells are "terse". I think a better term wouldnD |> be "arcane". The High Priests find it easy, once they have become |> trained in its use. v  D Well, thank you.  Our students appreciate the compliment.  According@ to your logic they have graduated to "High Priest" status by theC second week. And all that without us offering a single class on theaE user interface of Unix. (The first class that actually addresses UnixaB is "Operating Systems" in the junior or senior year and it doesn't talk about commands at all!)  H |>                     (Much like the Latin was for the educated classesC |> in the medieval period - I had 4 years of it myself back in highaD |> school and it was rather interesting, but I wouldn't suggest thatF |> all high school classes be taught in it. The medieval Europeans didH |> think all higher education should be in Latin instead of their nativeH |> tongue, for some reasons that I don't understand and a few that I do. |> This seems similar to me.)w  E The reason for the use of Latin in higher education in medieval timesyD is common knowledge.  It was the only language that was likely to beF common among a large group of educated people from many nations.  ThisF was due to its use by Christianity, but had a nice side effect. (As anF aside, this was also the reason why the Catholic Church maintained theG use of Latin for official business for so long.  I have personally been7D involved in at least one conversation where the only common language/ among the participants turned out to be Latin.)!  A Just as in the case of Latin, there was a reason for the originale@ choice of terse commands.  I have explained it many times before? and won't bore people with restating it now.  Its continued use(E is the result of 1) inertia, 2) compatability and 3) user preference.-  A Just as ther eis no reason to abandon DCL on VMS and make all theTB users learn something new there appears to be no desire among UnixC users, both old and new, to change.  After all, it would be trivialeC to allow the use of english (or any other language for that matter)i@ language names for commands and to create a shell handle command@ abbreviation.  Even changing the way modifiers is handled can beB easily and transparently handled.  Linux could have included a DCLD clone.  Apparently there was not enough demand for anyone to bother.     |> nK |> We used to have a VAXcluster (later a VMScluster) here at Texas A&M thatdK |> was accessable to all students, faculty, and staff. Every year thousands G |> of new students of all majors would learn how to use it. They did so I |> mainly via a rather brief handout, and a few minutes of explanation in I |> any class that actually required its use, and were supported by a helpaH |> desk staffed almost entirely by part-time student workers. There wereH |> also various public Unix systems - these were avoided like the plague |> by most non-CS majors.   E And the experience here is and has been the exact opposite.  We stilloF have an OpenVMS/Alpha available for general faculty/staff/student use.F It is usually idle.  On the other hand, as long as I have been the SysG Admin here in the CS Dept.  I have had to handle requests from faculty, B staff and students from outside the department for accounts on ourB machines because they don't want to use the VMS machine.  And this@ with the VMS machine having a history of use pre-dating any UnixF system here.  (I set up the first Unix system upon my arrival about 151 years ago, prior to that there was no Unix here.)h  A Just more proof that people are different and so to should be then tools they use.>   bill@ PS.  Carl, pickup your phone, give Willis Marti a call, and tell him I said "Hi".  :-)e   -- >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>   a   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 10:16:07 -0700( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)5 Subject: Re: My conversation with Linus about VMS ...o= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0206190916.7749db98@posting.google.com>e  \ carl@gerg.tamu.edu (Carl Perkins) wrote in message news:<19JUN200202142683@gerg.tamu.edu>... > J > We used to have a VAXcluster (later a VMScluster) here at Texas A&M thatJ > was accessable to all students, faculty, and staff. Every year thousandsF > of new students of all majors would learn how to use it. They did soH > mainly via a rather brief handout, and a few minutes of explanation inH > any class that actually required its use, and were supported by a helpG > desk staffed almost entirely by part-time student workers. There werenG > also various public Unix systems - these were avoided like the plagueo > by most non-CS majors.   > 
 > --- Carl  E since you said "used to" have a vms cluster, now that you don't, doess/ that mean no non CIS majors use the system now?a   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 06:43:56 GMTe. From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter LANGSTOEGER)+ Subject: Re: Need DECNet packet information.5 Message-ID: <MKVP8.290143$305.4194896@news.chello.at>.  c In article <399504c6.0206180428.550facd8@posting.google.com>, fs63@volcanomail.com (Tim C.) writes:tE >Mr. Hoffman, Have you by chance heard anything new on the gatekeeperaC >being offline?  I'm not sure who to email at DEC/Compaq/HP to ask.    Well, I'm not Hoff...r   $ ftp gatekeeper.dec.com 220- *** /etc/motd.ftp ***#      Original by:  Paul Vixie, 1992a-      Last Revised: Richard Schedler, May 2001e  O      Gatekeeper.dec.com is an unsupported service of Compaq Corporate Research.dI      Use entirely at your own risk - no warranty is expressed or implied.oI      Complaints and questions should be sent to <gw-archives@pa.dec.com>.   O      EXPORT CONTROL NOTE: Non-U.S. FTP users are required by law to follow U.S. M      export control restrictions, which means that if you see ITAR controlledoL      software or software with encryption functionality here, you should notP      download it. The file 00README-Legal-Rules-Regs contains an official statem entsC      concerning U.S. export controls, and should be carefully read.aO 220 gatekeeper.research.compaq.com FTP server (Version 5.182 Mon Apr 3 17:48:00t PDT 2000) ready. _Username [eplan]: anonymous+ 331 Guest login ok, send ident as password. 
 _Password: 550 Can't set guest privileges.y $h  7 So, they obviously changed a little bit to annoy us ;-)"& And the speed is, well, interesting...  = >I am still trying to get to this documentation on DECNet IV.w  ; Try google. There is a cached version which seems uptodate.y   --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGERo% Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atP A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm looking for (a) Network _and_ VMS Job(s)   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 10:15:01 -07002 From: info@lakecountymeetings.com (Vicki Elbrecht)Y Subject: New Executive-Class Conference/Training Facility in Northern Lake County, Illino < Message-ID: <acf28216.0206190915.37ff528@posting.google.com>  A The perfect location for your company's next meeting and training ? session is located in Gurnee, Illinois at I-94 and I-132 (GranddB Avenue), within easy reach of both the Chicago and Milwaukee metro areas.O -------------------------------------------------------------------------------o  ? Visit the Lake County Business and Conference Centre website atvC www.lakecountymeetings.com to view information about this executive-E quality conference and training facility, conveniently located at thet@ I-94 and I-132 (Grand Avenue) interchange in the Grand Tri-State: Business Park in Gurnee, Illinois. We are offering special> introductory rates. Please pass this info on to anyone in yourF organization who might be requiring high-end meeting space. They'll be, happy you let them know of this opportunity!     Best Regards,    Vicki Elbrecht President/Ownera0 Lake County Business and Conference Centre, Inc.! 1225 Tri-State Parkway, Suite 501e Gurnee, IL  60031  (847) 855-5600$ E-Mail:  info@lakecountymeetings.com  e Shown by Appointment Onlyu   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 09:20:33 -0400n* From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>E Subject: RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vsl- Message-ID: <0033000068673187000002L072*@MHS>o  , =0Ad|i|g|i|t|a|l had a bolt-on called SEVMS.  9 Properly configured, it moved things up to the "B" level.u  8 One of the many things that HP ought to resurrect, IMHO.   WWWebb   -----Original Message-----/ From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET & Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 9:11 AMB To: Webb, William W Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETE Subject: RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs      system@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >>H > In article <3D10563D.63F8F38B@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127= 0.0.1> writes: > >{...snip...}>H > >Some companies (e.g. Point Secure) can provide add ons which can mak= e % > >passing wind a security violation.T >eF > Why is it that other security add-ons are never mentioned, only thisF > PointSecure, when discussing VMS security.  There are other securityF > add-ons that have existed in VMS history long before PointSecure was  > still wetting diapers/nappies.  F Name them then (todays challenge). I'm not refuting it, and I'm all in$ favour of a balanced representation.  H I remember once an auditor coming to view some systems I managed and he=  H brought something on a tape that we had extreme trouble getting to work= .oH In the end I gave him the output from some of my DCL procedures and the= y C seemed to exceed the quoted functionality of his so called security- tool.a   --? Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Sciencess nclews at csc dot com=   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 06:38:24 -0700.# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>7E Subject: RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vst9 Message-ID: <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJICEHBFDAA.tom@kednos.com>   5 A quick google indcates it didn't make it passed 6.2..  2 Of course the Orange Book has been replaced by the Common Criteria.   >-----Original Message-----r2 >From: WILLIAM WEBB [mailto:WWEBB1@email.usps.gov]' >Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 6:21 AMe >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComF >Subject: RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs >1 >B >0* >d|i|g|i|t|a|l had a bolt-on called SEVMS. >1: >Properly configured, it moved things up to the "B" level. >a9 >One of the many things that HP ought to resurrect, IMHO.  >a >WWWebbe >a >-----Original Message----- 0 >From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET' >Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 9:11 AMeC >To: Webb, William W Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETaF >Subject: RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs >U >. >system@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:O >>7 >> In article <3D10563D.63F8F38B@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews a ><sendspamhere@1270.0.1> >writes: > >{...snip...}I >> >Some companies (e.g. Point Secure) can provide add ons which can makee& >> >passing wind a security violation. >>G >> Why is it that other security add-ons are never mentioned, only thissG >> PointSecure, when discussing VMS security.  There are other securityhG >> add-ons that have existed in VMS history long before PointSecure wast! >> still wetting diapers/nappies.h >tG >Name them then (todays challenge). I'm not refuting it, and I'm all inb% >favour of a balanced representation.l >uH >I remember once an auditor coming to view some systems I managed and heJ >brought something on a tape that we had extreme trouble getting to work..I >In the end I gave him the output from some of my DCL procedures and theyiD >seemed to exceed the quoted functionality of his so called security >tool. >  >-- @ >Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Sciences >nclews at csc dot com >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.a; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).P@ >Version: 6.0.370 / Virus Database: 205 - Release Date: 6/5/2002 >B ---t& 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: 6/5/2002u   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 15:55:51 +0100 (MET) 9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> E Subject: Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vsn; Message-ID: <01KJ4CII230O96WTPR@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>   + > d|i|g|i|t|a|l had a bolt-on called SEVMS.  > ; > Properly configured, it moved things up to the "B" level.> >u: > One of the many things that HP ought to resurrect, IMHO.  B I think Hoff mentioned here a while back that VERY few folks were E interested in buying this.  Lack of marketing?  Maybe.  On the other sF hand, how many folks need SEVMS instead of VMS and are willing to pay  the premium?   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 12:08:36 -0400 * From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>E Subject: RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vsf- Message-ID: <0033000068703658000002L082*@MHS>a  & =0AYou are correct, on the second, and! I'll take your word on the first.   3 I've got the Common Criteria CD, but haven't gotteno( time to do much besides skim bits of it.   WWWebb   -----Original Message-----  From: tom@kednos.com at INTERNET& Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 9:46 AMB To: Webb, William W Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETE Subject: RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vst    5 A quick google indcates it didn't make it passed 6.2.i  2 Of course the Orange Book has been replaced by the Common Criteria.   >-----Original Message----- 2 >From: WILLIAM WEBB [mailto:WWEBB1@email.usps.gov]' >Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 6:21 AMt >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.ComF >Subject: RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs >  >l >e* >d|i|g|i|t|a|l had a bolt-on called SEVMS. > : >Properly configured, it moved things up to the "B" level. > 9 >One of the many things that HP ought to resurrect, IMHO.  >c >WWWebb  >e >-----Original Message-----n0 >From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNET' >Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 9:11 AMoC >To: Webb, William W Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETiF >Subject: RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs >y >s >system@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:t >>6 >> In article <3D10563D.63F8F38B@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews ><sendspamhere@1270.0.1> >writes: > >{...snip...}H >> >Some companies (e.g. Point Secure) can provide add ons which can ma= ke& >> >passing wind a security violation. >>H >> Why is it that other security add-ons are never mentioned, only this=  H >> PointSecure, when discussing VMS security.  There are other security=  H >> add-ons that have existed in VMS history long before PointSecure was=  ! >> still wetting diapers/nappies.c >RH >Name them then (todays challenge). I'm not refuting it, and I'm all in=  % >favour of a balanced representation.0 >2H >I remember once an auditor coming to view some systems I managed and h= esH >brought something on a tape that we had extreme trouble getting to wor= k..-H >In the end I gave him the output from some of my DCL procedures and th= eyD >seemed to exceed the quoted functionality of his so called security >tool. >q >--o@ >Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Sciences >nclews at csc dot com >---' >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.d; >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).-@ >Version: 6.0.370 / Virus Database: 205 - Release Date: 6/5/2002 >s ---i& 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: 6/5/2002=   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 12:28:54 -0400r* From: WILLIAM WEBB <WWEBB1@email.usps.gov>E Subject: RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs - Message-ID: <0033000068707706000002L062*@MHS>e  4 =0AThis thread brings to mind the eternal conundrum-   Which is the greater curse:"( the competent or incompetent DP auditor?  0 WWWebb, who's dealt with specimens of both types. (and is no closer to finding an answer to this$  question than he was a decade ago.)     -----Original Message-----/ From: Info-VAX-Request@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETu' Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 12:19 PMuB To: Webb, William W Raleigh, NC; Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com at INTERNETE Subject: RE: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs     H In article <3D10A77D.11EAACD1@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0= 0.1> writes:(  C > Part of the problem was the auditor wasn't VMS literate, I wasn'tr8 > convinced he understood what he was looking at anyway!  D I dealt with a client's Internal Auditor in the VMS V2-V3 timeframe,- and needless to say he had an MVS background.r  9 He wanted auditing of each command issued by an operator,i; but I convinced him that an audit trail saying the operatorn: typed RUN FOO would not help a whole lot because FOO could# be doing anything behind our backs.a  : I convinced him it would be necessary to modify VMS itself* to audit things like system service calls.  : I did not convince him to pay me by the hour (customer had/ a source (not listings) kit) to do the work :-(i  : But then for VMS V4, DEC added auditing to get their first1 C2 evaluation (V4.2) and the world was right :-)=s   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 06:33:42 GMTn( From: "C.W.Holeman II" <cwhii5@ACM5.org>E Subject: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMS.D Message-ID: <aBVP8.4534$Fv1.478828@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>   In:i  I The Inevitability of Failure: The Flawed Assumption of Security in Modernp         Computing Environments? http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/doc/inevitability/inevitability.htmln  G         The computer industry has not accepted the critical role of theaF         operating system to security, as evidenced by the inadequaciesI         of the basic protection mechanisms provided by current mainstreamr         operating systems.  L it states the OS has a critical role in security. How does VMS stand up whenE compared to the "current mainstream operating systems" ? (Some thing y+ specific not just a general comment please)s   -- y C.W.Holeman II cwhii5@ACM5.orgd remove the fives http://also.as/cwhii   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 11:00:29 +0100l( From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1>I Subject: Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMS ) Message-ID: <3D10563D.63F8F38B@127.0.0.1>s   "C.W.Holeman II" wrote:  >  > In:  > K > The Inevitability of Failure: The Flawed Assumption of Security in Moderna  >         Computing EnvironmentsA > http://www.nsa.gov/selinux/doc/inevitability/inevitability.htmll >  > N > it states the OS has a critical role in security. How does VMS stand up whenF > compared to the "current mainstream operating systems" ? (Some thing- > specific not just a general comment please)   G This is part of the story. I'm planning a UK usergroup talk on SecuritynA which is aimed at making people think wider than merely setting aeH security policy and having an operating system that is made to adhere to it.l  E VMS stands up exceptionally well. No doubt others will tell you about H the "third place" that VMS got for being "cool and unhackable" at DEFCONH 9 last year. THird place may not sound too hot, but the problem was, theH overall position was based on how well you hacked into others' system asB well, and the VMS guys didn't launch a great assault on the othersE systems, all of which I believe were breached. Only VMS stayed up allr the time, and unhacked.e  / details (can't find it, anyone got a reference)-    VMS out of the box is very good.  B VMS after some configuration reading the documentation can be made 'draconian'.  E Some companies (e.g. Point Secure) can provide add ons which can maken" passing wind a security violation.  > All of this is provided on a system whose privileged modes areH inherently well protected from authorized users, yet can be arranged notF to get in the way of them needing to complete work on the system whichF such may be required. The number of operating systems that can provideC that level of control can probably be counted on the fingers of one H hand, and definitely does not include anything that came out of Redmond.  G While this does not specifically answer your question, I hope it's whetnA your appetite sufficiently for you to discover just how complex a E security environment you can set up on VMS, and believe me, it works.n  < http://www.openvms.compaq.com:8000/73final/6346/6346pro.html  @ This is the OpenVMS security manual, it not only makes very goodC reading, it also, when read from cover to cover, provides importantwF advice than can be applied to any operating system so giving you clues/ to what is needed in securing that environment.n   --  ? Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Sciencesa nclews at csc dot com-   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 12:48:43 GMTe From: system@SendSpamHere.ORGcI Subject: Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMS90 Message-ID: <00A0FAF6.9497E078@SendSpamHere.ORG>  T In article <3D10563D.63F8F38B@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> writes:
 >{...snip...}nF >Some companies (e.g. Point Secure) can provide add ons which can make# >passing wind a security violation.   D Why is it that other security add-ons are never mentioned, only thisD PointSecure, when discussing VMS security.  There are other securityD add-ons that have existed in VMS history long before PointSecure was still wetting diapers/nappies.  r --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM             n5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"     ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 13:56:32 +0100l( From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1>I Subject: Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMSi) Message-ID: <3D107F80.3378A0A8@127.0.0.1>d   system@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > V > In article <3D10563D.63F8F38B@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> writes: > >{...snip...}bH > >Some companies (e.g. Point Secure) can provide add ons which can make% > >passing wind a security violation.e > F > Why is it that other security add-ons are never mentioned, only thisF > PointSecure, when discussing VMS security.  There are other securityF > add-ons that have existed in VMS history long before PointSecure was  > still wetting diapers/nappies.  F Name them then (todays challenge). I'm not refuting it, and I'm all in$ favour of a balanced representation.  G I remember once an auditor coming to view some systems I managed and heaH brought something on a tape that we had extreme trouble getting to work.H In the end I gave him the output from some of my DCL procedures and theyC seemed to exceed the quoted functionality of his so called securityi tool.h   -- j? Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Sciences  nclews at csc dot come   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 08:48:28 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)dI Subject: Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMSd3 Message-ID: <RbDNDqdmgsaJ@eisner.encompasserve.org>M  T In article <3D107F80.3378A0A8@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> writes:  > system@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >> tW >> In article <3D10563D.63F8F38B@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> writes:i >> >{...snip...}I >> >Some companies (e.g. Point Secure) can provide add ons which can makeh& >> >passing wind a security violation. >>  G >> Why is it that other security add-ons are never mentioned, only thisgG >> PointSecure, when discussing VMS security.  There are other security G >> add-ons that have existed in VMS history long before PointSecure wasa! >> still wetting diapers/nappies.t > H > Name them then (todays challenge). I'm not refuting it, and I'm all in& > favour of a balanced representation.  8 	LJK/Security - http://www.ljk.com/ljk/ljk_security.html  I > I remember once an auditor coming to view some systems I managed and he J > brought something on a tape that we had extreme trouble getting to work.J > In the end I gave him the output from some of my DCL procedures and theyE > seemed to exceed the quoted functionality of his so called security0 > tool.M  G Many security assessment functions can be performed with extensive DCL,,E but there is a certain ease-of-use factor that some treasure (such asP* those who are not being paid by the hour).   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 15:07:58 GMT  From: system@SendSpamHere.ORG9I Subject: Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMS 0 Message-ID: <00A0FB0A.083B3C7D@SendSpamHere.ORG>  c In article <RbDNDqdmgsaJ@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:>U >In article <3D107F80.3378A0A8@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> writes:g! >> system@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:  >>> X >>> In article <3D10563D.63F8F38B@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> writes: >>> >{...snip...}eJ >>> >Some companies (e.g. Point Secure) can provide add ons which can make' >>> >passing wind a security violation.e >>> H >>> Why is it that other security add-ons are never mentioned, only thisH >>> PointSecure, when discussing VMS security.  There are other securityH >>> add-ons that have existed in VMS history long before PointSecure was" >>> still wetting diapers/nappies. >>  I >> Name them then (todays challenge). I'm not refuting it, and I'm all ino' >> favour of a balanced representation.o >o9 >	LJK/Security - http://www.ljk.com/ljk/ljk_security.htmle   That's certainly a good one.   Here's yet another.-  0 http://www.Legacy-2000.com/Products/products.htm  I At least I know I can contact either LJK or Legacy and get a demo versionaI of the product(s).  Sorry the same can't be said of PointSecure -- I know G as I've tried.  I couldn't guarantee them a sale so I was sloughed off.e      J >> I remember once an auditor coming to view some systems I managed and heK >> brought something on a tape that we had extreme trouble getting to work.eK >> In the end I gave him the output from some of my DCL procedures and theyBF >> seemed to exceed the quoted functionality of his so called security >> tool. >-H >Many security assessment functions can be performed with extensive DCL,F >but there is a certain ease-of-use factor that some treasure (such as+ >those who are not being paid by the hour).t  J Many of these tools also prepare reports which are easier to digest by theJ morons hired by the really-big-corporations to do the security audit.  NotJ that doing something with DCL couldn't produce similar reports, but why doJ it only for some idiot that's going to ask if the ROOT account password is. secure and if the password file is shadowed?   --O VAXman- OpenVMS APE certification number: AAA-0001     VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM3            ,5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" .   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 16:47:09 +0100c( From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1>I Subject: Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMSn) Message-ID: <3D10A77D.11EAACD1@127.0.0.1>M   Larry Kilgallen wrote: > V > In article <3D107F80.3378A0A8@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> writes:" > > system@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >mJ > > Name them then (todays challenge). I'm not refuting it, and I'm all in( > > favour of a balanced representation. > A >         LJK/Security - http://www.ljk.com/ljk/ljk_security.htmlb  @ I'll have a peek myself! HECK, that's a wide version support, it< approaches my management version experience, which is scary.  K > > I remember once an auditor coming to view some systems I managed and he L > > brought something on a tape that we had extreme trouble getting to work.L > > In the end I gave him the output from some of my DCL procedures and theyG > > seemed to exceed the quoted functionality of his so called securityV	 > > tool.. > I > Many security assessment functions can be performed with extensive DCL,cG > but there is a certain ease-of-use factor that some treasure (such ast, > those who are not being paid by the hour).  D The issue was he needed information. It was based on UAFPROBE (DECUS, Fortran based), which 'read' the SYSUAF.LIS.  E We also used AbilityVSM (V2.x) which had security checking functions.u  A Part of the problem was the auditor wasn't VMS literate, I wasn'tI6 convinced he understood what he was looking at anyway!   --  ? Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Sciencesn nclews at csc dot com>   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 10:41:26 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)YI Subject: Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMSn3 Message-ID: <SfH+MYjm+PlV@eisner.encompasserve.org>   P In article <00A0FB0A.083B3C7D@SendSpamHere.ORG>, system@SendSpamHere.ORG writes:e > In article <RbDNDqdmgsaJ@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:u  I >>Many security assessment functions can be performed with extensive DCL,5G >>but there is a certain ease-of-use factor that some treasure (such aso, >>those who are not being paid by the hour). > L > Many of these tools also prepare reports which are easier to digest by theL > morons hired by the really-big-corporations to do the security audit.  NotL > that doing something with DCL couldn't produce similar reports, but why doL > it only for some idiot that's going to ask if the ROOT account password is0 > secure and if the password file is shadowed?    F There are also some folks who judge the degree of work being performedE by their employees on the basis of how thick the report is.  For thisBE purpose (and only this purpose) you can tune LJK/Security to say thatAF you view it as a security violation for any user to have TMPMBX or for+ any file to allow Read access to the Owner.d  D Well, I suppose that approach can also be good if you own stock in a paper mill :-)   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 11:15:40 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)sI Subject: Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMSd3 Message-ID: <6DVNEsLlGRnb@eisner.encompasserve.org>i  T In article <3D10A77D.11EAACD1@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> writes:  C > Part of the problem was the auditor wasn't VMS literate, I wasn't>8 > convinced he understood what he was looking at anyway!  D I dealt with a client's Internal Auditor in the VMS V2-V3 timeframe,- and needless to say he had an MVS background.n  9 He wanted auditing of each command issued by an operator,i; but I convinced him that an audit trail saying the operatori: typed RUN FOO would not help a whole lot because FOO could# be doing anything behind our backs.   : I convinced him it would be necessary to modify VMS itself* to audit things like system service calls.  : I did not convince him to pay me by the hour (customer had/ a source (not listings) kit) to do the work :-(2  : But then for VMS V4, DEC added auditing to get their first0 C2 evaluation (V4.2) and the world was right :-)   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 13:55:19 -0400o From: G Everhart <ge@gce.com>dI Subject: Re: NSA: Security in current mainstream operating systems vs VMSe$ Message-ID: <3D10C587.20800@gce.com>   Another security add-on: Safety.C5 See your local sigtapes for copies, with sources yet.m; It too can make VMS positively Draconian, or pretty sneaky.s   See also http://users.rcn.com/gce for the SPD7   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 06:20:10 -0700 (PDT)i. From: Fabio Cardoso <fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br>; Subject: OpenVMS Job in Brasilia / Brazil - ATT: John Oxleys> Message-ID: <20020619132010.273.qmail@web20202.mail.yahoo.com>   John  6 I lost your e-mail ! There is an OpenVMS job available  2 in Brasilia / Brazil. You must connect to the home( page: www.politec.com.br (in portuguese)   Regards    FC 0   =====0 ========================== Fbio dos Santos Cardoso OpenVMS System Manager Rio de Janeiro - Brazil" fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br ==========================  2 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!?0 Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.comg   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 12:22:25 +0000 (UTC)9 From: david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.ukP Subject: RE: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading)+ Message-ID: <aept21$lh2$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>   ` In article <aennr1$267e$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:, >In article <aen4m3$nkv$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>," > david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes: >|> . >|> No 1969 is definitely when Unix was born. = >|> First used in anger by the BTL Patent department in 1970.e >eA >Care to back that one up??  I have never seen anything that evencB >hinted at dis-satisfaction by the typists using the original Unix2 >at Bell Labs.  Something on DR's homepage maybe?? >aF Sorry Bill must be a British colloquialism.  Means used in a real lifeE production environment rather than being a test/ experimental system.g- Has nothing to do with anybody getting angry.n  Q >|> The first edition of the  "UNIX PROGRAMMER'S MANUAL [by] K. Thompson [and] D.r* >|> M. Ritchie" is dated November 3, 1971. >|> Q >|> The fact it wasn't widely available outside of AT&T until 1974 is irrelevent.- >-B >The fact it wasn't widely available outside of AT&T until 1974 isA >primarily a legal thing and had nothing to do with the viabilitya >of the OS.a >g; I never said anything at all about the viability of the OS.2   >|>  >|> Seen >|> 3 >|> http://virtual.park.uga.edu/hc/unixhistory.htmlA >m5 >Nothing there about the Patent Dept. being angry....m >s >bill/  
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jun 2002 17:20:26 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)bP Subject: RE: OpenVMS, Volume Desktop OS (Re: Mark Gorham's Beer Bash in Reading)+ Message-ID: <aeqegq$e68$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>t  + In article <aept21$lh2$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>, !  david20@alpha1.mdx.ac.uk writes:dc |> In article <aennr1$267e$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:l/ |> >In article <aen4m3$nkv$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>, % |> > david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes:  |> >|> -1 |> >|> No 1969 is definitely when Unix was born. :@ |> >|> First used in anger by the BTL Patent department in 1970. |> >D |> >Care to back that one up??  I have never seen anything that evenE |> >hinted at dis-satisfaction by the typists using the original Unix 5 |> >at Bell Labs.  Something on DR's homepage maybe??t |> >I |> Sorry Bill must be a British colloquialism.  Means used in a real lifevH |> production environment rather than being a test/ experimental system.0 |> Has nothing to do with anybody getting angry.  E Ah yes, but then, that was a management decision. They only agreed too buy one PDP-11.f   bill   -- eJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 19:10:35 +0010u% From: paddy.o'brien@zzz.tg.nsw.gov.aub9 Subject: Re: OT: JF's reputation (Was: Please Read - ...)a5 Message-ID: <01KJ4JCFBSPE001J6V@tgmail.tg.nsw.gov.au>r  N I know this is somewhat out of date, but I've been on leave most of this year.J Within this thread that should never have happened, I am expressing a few 3 opinions and Chris' post was a nice starting point.h  I I do not know how many newsgroups this went to or that JF is on.  I just  J subscribe to Info-VAX, but some of the unknown names who have contributed $ imply to me that there were several.   Chris Smith wrote:   >> -----Original Message-----d7 >> From: elde@hurricane.net [mailto:elde@hurricane.net]  >lA >> Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:e@ >> >It's just some nasty troll using anonymous remailers to try  >> and damage JF's >> >reputation.  >mH >> I don't see why they would bother..  JF's pretty much trashed his own. >> reputation here about as much as it can be.  O Utter crap on c.o.v.  I think JF's reputation is safe.  He has his beliefs and nH I agree with many of them.  Regardless, he has the right to express his N opinions and his opponents theirs.  c.o.v has many of us on both sides of the ) camp, whatever the current camp might be.v   >In defense of JF: >nD >I don't think it's that bad.  Sure, he argues with people, but he'sG >clearly not an idiot -- I hope at least everyone would agree that he's @ >not an idiot in the sense of the people who wrote that message.  J Agreed, as above.  Many of us are argumentative.  Remember the expression  "Devil's advocate"?o  C >Sure, he makes assertions that he can't back up as to Compaq/HP's eE >motives, but so do many other people (on both sides of the perpetual-B >argument).  Honestly, the way things are panning out, I think JF @ >may even be on the right track.  Is there one of us who hasn't 1 >considered that?  We'll all know in a few years.e  O How many of us can back up any of our assertions as to how Carly/Curly will be .O thinking/acting in a few weeks time.  I find JF's comments (and others) always e worth considering.  B >The fact that he can't (doesn't?) back up his assertions too wellD >doesn't mean he's wrong.  HPaq is very "hush hush" about this wholeB >VMS thing, and that doesn't seem good to me, either.  JF has madeA >his guess, and I will assume that he's sticking with it until het >sees a better explanation.  r  M Agreed.  Not agreed with the "too well", from what I see in my little world, (( he has often "hit the nail on the head".  E >Does his jaded manner in this whole thing earn him a bad reputation?-B >I don't think it should.  There are plenty of people here who've E >got all the reason in the world to be more jaded than JF.  He's justmF >the one who actually _does_ it :)  (Specifically I speak of a couple - >of people who I hope have found jobs by now)c  L Jaded?  Yes, I am loosing the ability to actually work effectively as I see O it.  Our corporate ISG (comprising accountants and economists, and no-one with aN IT backgrounds) has made the policy not to have VMS on any corporate machines O -- Gartner told them that because of the millions we pay them.  I (the group I cN work in) am the last bastion of a company that was VMS for about 20 years.  I  am just as jaded as JF.   B >At any rate, I, for one, can't blame him at all for his attitude.   Yeah, my previous paragraph.  E >Of course, if JF, Andrew, Rob, and some others, can come to a mutualcF >disagreement, all the better.  :)  (Note that I like all of the aboveE >people fine, too, I just would prefer to see more _constructive_ andh( >forward looking [and civil!] arguments)  G Agreed.  And definitely about the "civil".  I don't see that those you iN mentioned and several others who have strong opinions (and many civil) should L agree.  Each is trying, one way or th'other to express an opinion about VMS.  E >The solutions to many problems are to be found in honest differencesc >of opinion.  J I'm glad you made this summary point.  We are both trying to say the same  thing.   Regards, Paddy   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 18:32:53 +040024 From: "Ruslan R. Laishev" <Laishev@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU>  Subject: OVMS 7.3 BACKUP problem/ Message-ID: <3D109615.9010704@SMTP.DeltaTel.RU>    Hi All!>A I have a problem with BACKUP behaviour after upgrade to OVMS 7.3,a. 	/CONFIRMATION qualifier does not work anymore& 	/SINCE=BACKUP as well does not effect   Just for demonstration:n9 $ back/reco/since=backup *.* sys$login:zz.bck /save /conf J DTV3::LAISHEV 18:21:12 BACKUP    CPU=00:00:55.31 PF=24088 IO=80754 MEM=305>   Last file scanned: $1$DUA123:[AR_ORA4]T0001S0000009834.ARC;18   Saveset volume:1, saveset block:15 (32256 byte blocks)J DTV3::LAISHEV 18:21:14 BACKUP    CPU=00:00:55.36 PF=24126 IO=80855 MEM=311>   Last file scanned: $1$DUA123:[AR_ORA4]T0001S0000009834.ARC;18   Saveset volume:1, saveset block:24 (32256 byte blocks)J DTV3::LAISHEV 18:21:14 BACKUP    CPU=00:00:55.40 PF=24130 IO=80914 MEM=312>   Last file scanned: $1$DUA123:[AR_ORA4]T0001S0000009834.ARC;18   Saveset volume:1, saveset block:31 (32256 byte blocks)    $ dir /full T0001S0000009834.ARC   Directory $1$DUA123:[AR_ORA4]s  = T0001S0000009834.ARC;1                    File ID:  (220,5,0)s8 Size:       137522/137550     Owner:    [ORACLE,ORACLE7]" Created:    7-JUN-2002 16:07:17.68& Revised:    7-JUN-2002 16:08:03.91 (2) Expires:   <None specified>1" Backup:    17-JUN-2002 12:03:20.56 Effective: <None specified>e Recording: <None specified>o File organization:  Sequential Shelved state:      Online  Caching attribute:  WritethroughH File attributes:    Allocation: 137550, Extend: 0, Global buffer count: ( 0, No version limit, Contiguous best try1 Record format:      Fixed length 512 byte recordst Record attributes:  None RMS attributes:     None Journaling enabled: None= File protection:    System:RWED, Owner:RWED, Group:RE, World:  Access Cntrl List:  None Client attributes:  None  & Total of 1 file, 137522/137550 blocks.      - 	Is there someone who have the same problem ?  	Is there any secret ECOs ?- 	  	TIA.e   -- o Cheers, F +OpenVMS [Sys|Net] HardWorker .......................................+G    Russia,Delta Telecom Inc,                    Cel:  +7 (901) 971-3222uG    191119,St.Petersburg,Transportny per. 3                     116-3222yF +http://starlet.deltatel.ru ................. SysMan rides HailStorm +   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 16:18:38 +0100iU From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com>0A Subject: Re: Request for path balancing (Was: Re: Carly was here)r0 Message-ID: <aeq7cf$dmv$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Rob Young wrote:   > In article <aenlap$hhm$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com> writes: >  >> >>Rob Young wrote: >> >> >>>In article <aen424$c3b$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <andrew_nospam.harrison_remove_this@sun#.com> writes:m > G >>Solaris MPXIO will work with Sun and EMC storage, I have never lookedaH >>at if it works with HP or IBM frankly we hardly ever see them attached) >>to Sun's as storage but it should work., >> >  > 	This is informative, thanks.t > > > 	I think very few people (any?) are doing MPXIO + EMC.  Why?7 > 	No record in google.com nor groups.google.com so theh: > 	hidden Solaris + MPXIO + EMC users are very few indeed. >     + Well that could be for a couple of reasons.i   1. t6 PowerPath, EMC like to make money selling software and, 	PowerPath licenses all add to the revenues.   2.  8 Veritas, many customers have standardised on VxVM across; 	their UNIX platforms, the one I deal with uses it on HP-UX 8 	and Solaris, Veritas comes with DMP, DMP gets used as a 	matter of course.  D This does not alter the fact that your conjecture is untrue, Solaris@ does support path balancing. Arn't you glad that I corrected youB before people mistakenly got the impression that it was a facility$ that was only available for OpenVMS.  6 You do want people to be properly informed don't you ?    - As ever its a joy to converse with you :):):)    Regardsr Andrew Harrisone   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 06:21:14 -0700. From: SPAMSINK2001@YAHOO.COM (Alan E. Feldman)+ Subject: Re: rooted devices and /TRANS=CONC = Message-ID: <343f30ae.0206190521.511ccbd3@posting.google.com>h  ? Comments interspersed below with a new example included! (well,t
 slightly new)s  ` "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message news:<3D0FEFBC.3DF012C9@fsi.net>... > "Alan E. Feldman" wrote: > > d > > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message news:<3D0E94E4.28AAA3E5@fsi.net>...
 > > [snip]N > > > I was looking for another example to underscore the point, but instead I! > > > turned up more strangeness:  > > >.% > > > DJAS01::DDACHTERA$ def djd dka0o) > > > DJAS01::DDACHTERA$ dir djd:[000000] ' > > > %DIRECT-W-NOFILES, no files found 5 > > > DJAS01::DDACHTERA$ say f$parse( "djd:[000000]")  > > > DKA0:[000000]DKA0.;s. > > > DJAS01::DDACHTERA$ def djd sys$sysdeviceA > > > %DCL-I-SUPERSEDE, previous value of DJD has been supersededa) > > > DJAS01::DDACHTERA$ dir djd:[000000]t > > >i& > > > Directory SYS$SYSDEVICE:[000000] > > >uC > > > 000000.DIR;1               1/4        22-MAY-2000 14:48:08.28  >  [merciful snip]C > > > VOLSET.SYS;1               0/0        22-MAY-2000 14:48:08.28i > > > (RWED,RWED,RE,)o > > > , > > > Total of 13 files, 39950/39968 blocks.0 > > > DJAS01::DDACHTERA$ sh log/fu sys$sysdeviceG > > >    "SYS$SYSDEVICE" [exec] = "DJAS01$DKA300:" [concealed,terminal]e > > > (LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE)/ > > > DJAS01::DDACHTERA$ def djd dka0/tran=conc A > > > %DCL-I-SUPERSEDE, previous value of DJD has been supersededm) > > > DJAS01::DDACHTERA$ dir djd:[000000]J; > > > %DIRECT-E-OPENIN, error opening DJD:[000000] as inputaG > > > -RMS-F-DEV, error in device name or inappropriate device type fori > > > operation5G > > > DJAS01::DDACHTERA$ say f$parse( "djd:[000000]",,,, "syntax_only")o > > >s > > > DJAS01::DDACHTERA$ > > >oL > > > Now, don't *THAT* just beat all??!! Even when the logical name equatesJ > > > to a(n unterminated) device name instead of another logical name, it > > > *STILL* doesn't work!t > > C > > Of course that didn't work. You typed a device name without theoD > > trailing colon! It was *you* who pointed this out in one of your > > previous posts!f > D > So, why should it matter if "DJD" translates to "DKA0" or "BBB" or > "WTF"?    C It matters because when VMS is presented with a file-spec argument,rD the first thing it does is check for the leftmost component and whatE it ends with. If it ends with a space, Return, or colon, VMS (or RMS,BB or the program, or whatever) checks if the leftmost component is a5 logical name. So let's analyze the above three cases.n     $ DEFINE AAA DKA0-  B AAA  --  No delimiters here. It ends with a space. Is it a logical name? Yes. Let's translate it!  C DKA0  --  No delimiters here. It ends with a space. Is it a logicalsE name? Nope. Well, it must be a file name. Bzzzzzt. You need the colon F for it to be interpreted as a device name. This makes sense. If we had instead done   $ DEFINE AAA DKA0:  2 then we would get the desired effect. Next case...     $ DEFINE AAA BBB   $ DEFINE BBB DKA0:  B AAA  --  No delimeters; it ends with a space; so translate it is a logical name. Result, BBB.  B BBB  --  No delimiters here; it ends with a space. Is it a logical name? YES! Translate it.  B DKA0: --  We have a delimiter! But it's a trailing colon. So let'sE check if DKA0 is a logical name: ... survey says ... Nope! It's not aiD logical name. Ladies and gentlemen, we have our final answer: DKA0:, which is a device.     That's why it matters.    E WTF -- I don't know what WTF is. Well, I think I see what it is as an(0 acronym. VMS won't recognize it as such, though.    C > Perhaps you should re-read your own quote from the documentation:a >   > > Now, from the User's Manual: > > F > > When the system reads a file specification or device name in a DCLJ > > command line, it examines the file specification or device name to seeE > > whether the leftmost component is a logical name. If the leftmostuH > > component ends with a colon, space, comma, or a line terminator (forF > > example, Return), the system attempts to translate it as a logicalF > > name. If the leftmost component ends with any other character, the> > > system does not attempt to translate it as a logical name. > & > Let me highlight the key item there: > G > "If the leftmost component ends with a colon, space, comma, or a line0J > terminator (for example, Return), the system attempts to translate it asJ > a logical name. If the leftmost component ends with any other character,A > the system does not attempt to translate it as a logical name."  > F > Now applying that iteratively, "BBB" (the translation of your "AAA")H > ends with "B", not a colon (":"); likewise, "DKA0" (the translation ofJ > my "DJD") ends with "0", not a colon. So, this (what you're seeing) *IS* > the documented behavior.    ' Well, yes and no. You forgot this part:p  < "Logical name translation can be iterative: after the system
 translatesB a logical name, it repeats the translation process for any logical8 names it finds contained within the first logical name."    E Is BBB not "contained withing the first logical name", AAA? It is. SotE it should get translated. And it *DOES* get translated AS LONG AS YOUG; DON'T INCLUDE /TRANS=CONC IN YOUR "DEFINE AAA BBB" command.k     New example:   $ SHOW LOG AAA$    "AAA" = "BBB" (LNM$PROCESS_TABLE)( 1  "BBB" = "DKA100:" (LNM$PROCESS_TABLE) $ DIREC/TOTAL AAA   a Directory DKA100:[FELDMAN]  b Total of 74 files.    C See how it works? AAA translates to BBB, which is a perfectly validt> file-spec. It also happens to be another logical name and getsD translated. No illegal file-specs here at all. Now, let's do exactlyA the same thing except we add /TRAN=CONC to the "$ DEFINE AAA BBB"a command:     $ DEFINE AAA BBB/TRAN=CONC; %DCL-I-SUPERSEDE, previous value of AAA has been supersededf $ DIREC/TOTAL AAAM, %DIRECT-E-OPENIN, error opening AAA as inputA -RMS-F-DEV, error in device name or inappropriate device type forw	 operationa $     C See how /TRAN=CONC suddenly causes the DIR AAA command to fail? WhyyC does /TRAN=CONC have anything to do with this? For some reason, youdF can "get away" with not using the trailing colon only if you don't addC /TRAN=CONC. And that's fine, but we wonder "Why is that?". Why does E the presence of /TRAN=CONC affect the translation? It affects commandeE output, and that makes sense, since that is its main purpose. But whyMD does it affect the underlying translation process? Yes, something inD the code does that, of course. And if we looked at the code we would probably say either:    # 1.) OOOhhhhhhhhhhh, I see now; or, s  C 2.) Why did they put that silly construct/logic/whatever in there? 6     That is the mystery.     Your <  %     $ WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "ALAN FELDMAN 0  > example was the most relevant thing you've posted about this.     C I claim that the documentation is ***not clear*** about whether youtC should include a trailing colon in the equivalence name in a DEFINE > statement ***WHEN THE EQUIVALENCE NAME IS ALSO ANOTHER LOGICALF NAME***. Experience proves that you should include it when the logicalB name will be a file-spec. When the LNM will be a queue name, it isE actually better to *NOT* include a trailing colon, as a previous postn of mine made clear.      Disclaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldman? afeldman gfigroup com    ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 15:46:15 +0100 (MET)o9 From: Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>s+ Subject: Re: rooted devices and /TRANS=CONC ; Message-ID: <01KJ4C5NH3R696WTPR@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>g  E > See how /TRAN=CONC suddenly causes the DIR AAA command to fail? WhyeE > does /TRAN=CONC have anything to do with this? For some reason, you|H > can "get away" with not using the trailing colon only if you don't addE > /TRAN=CONC. And that's fine, but we wonder "Why is that?". Why does-G > the presence of /TRAN=CONC affect the translation? It affects commandmG > output, and that makes sense, since that is its main purpose. But why:F > does it affect the underlying translation process? Yes, something inF > the code does that, of course. And if we looked at the code we would > probably say either: >  > % > 1.) OOOhhhhhhhhhhh, I see now; or, m > E > 2.) Why did they put that silly construct/logic/whatever in there?   >  >  > That is the mystery.  H Good summary.  It seems like /TRAN=CONC behaves like /TRAN=TERM in this  case.u  E > I claim that the documentation is ***not clear*** about whether you E > should include a trailing colon in the equivalence name in a DEFINEu@ > statement ***WHEN THE EQUIVALENCE NAME IS ALSO ANOTHER LOGICALH > NAME***. Experience proves that you should include it when the logicalD > name will be a file-spec. When the LNM will be a queue name, it isG > actually better to *NOT* include a trailing colon, as a previous posth > of mine made clear.o  F Good summary.  With device names, there is the colon-as-separator and I colon-as-part-of-file-spec, which is not the case with queue names, mail e4 addresses (logicals are GREAT for mail aliases) etc.   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 08:47:12 -0700. From: SPAMSINK2001@YAHOO.COM (Alan E. Feldman)+ Subject: Re: rooted devices and /TRANS=CONCt< Message-ID: <343f30ae.0206190747.c20dd71@posting.google.com>   Comments interspersed:   "Gotfryd Smolik, VMS lists" <gotfryd@stanpol.com.pl> wrote in message news:<Pine.LNX.4.21.0206182222130.18149-100000@irys.stanpol.com.pl>...( > On 18 Jun 2002, Alan E. Feldman wrote: > 5 > >+"David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> [...]  >  [...Alan/David again...]vK > >+> > > Hhmmm... F$PARSE() returns a null string - *BUT* that's what it's ? > >+> > > SUPPOSED to do! Now that "SY0" means "DJAS01@DKA300:"  > 	 >  Agree.  >  > [...]eG > >+> Because it makes no difference. If you don't correctly format thesK > >+> translation (read: "equivalence") string, the /TRANSLATION_ATTRIBUTESwJ > >+> (if any, other than the default) make no fundamental difference. TheJ > >+> difference you'll see, if any, will be determined by how the subject8 > >+> (command) program processes its parameter strings. > >+. > >+Yes it does. I even posted the difference. >   >  Must (at least partly) agree.E >  The differrence not necessary must have the source in the "command B > program process[ing]", but may be in the PARSE system operation. > [...]"N > >+> > > > Then there is the famous DEFINE HOME SYS$LOGIN bug for SET DEFAULT5 > >+> > > > which I already discussed in this thread.g	 > >+> > > N > >+> > > Note, whoever, that SYS$LOGIN is not only already a logical name, itR > >+> > > indicates both a device and a directory path. I believe you'll find that2 > >+> > > *THIS* distinction makes the difference. >  [...]+ > >+Yes. And I repeat. Difference for what?n > E >  Althout it is risky say "what other person may think" :) will say:aB > the point, that (differrently than most command) SET DEFAULT may6 > be suposed to "privately parse" the given parameter.B >  *Not* using system parsing is IMO bad practice - excluding someD > exception; SET DEF IMO may classify as "proper" exception :) - theA > code "may know" that process default directory are saved in two  > separate places etc. >  > [...]nK > >+> You "meant" "BBB:", but what you told it was "BBB". No matter how youiK > >+> slice it, BBB[FELDMAN]myfile.txt is not now, never has been and nevero' > >+> will be a valid filespec string. . >  [...]F > >+So it works, even though BBB[FELDMAN] isn't a valid file-spec. But@ > >+when you do exactly the same thing with /trans=conc added... >  [...]H > >+suddenly it fails. So, why is VMS "smart enough" to do it "right" in > >+the first case?  > B >  Alan, alow a person with terrible English (to be precise: me !)4 > describe with other words the CONCEALED attribute. > D >  Admit it as pointer to *system kernel* function(s) (PARSE and all> > binded): "do not allow the user or code seing the real name,D > use the logical name instead when you present or return the name". > 4 > >+No, but DKA100:[FELDMAN] *is* a valid file-spec. > < >  Really. But the system function is *allowed* to translate; > the 'stack' of logicals names - *and* 'present' the names0= > to the higher code level(s), *but* with CONCEALED attributeb? > the system function is still allowed to translate - but *not*e4 > allowed to return anything hidden in the logical !> >  And - be aware - the file name parsing is done withing RMS,; > *not* system QIO. Then - like any other code - RMS is not 9 > allowed to "know" that the CONCEALED logical translatesn > to anything !R    D How can RMS access/set up a channel for/whatever a file if it is not& allowed to know the final translation?    6 >  Then a non-concealed name "AAA" *can* be translated6 > in *second* step to something like "DKA0:", but when< > concelaed "BBB" translates to "XXX" - the the presentation0 > of ":" in deeper translation is *not* allowed.    B Actually, this is the only case when it does work with /TRAN=CONC,@ when AAA translates to BBB:. When AAA translates to BBB with BBBA having the concealed attribute for AAA, then you must include theR colon for it to work.4    : >  Of course - 'concealing' a logicals is not protected :)8 > with something like privileges etc., the code even can; > check the name, but - IMO - this is a *GREAT* VMS featurex< > (the fact, that the code "know" the LOGICAL, *even if uses > names returned from RMS* !).A >  The fact, that a "normal" code is not aware whether the "BBB:"eE > device really is "DKA100:" - is the feature, and little differrence:9 > with translation of logicals with and without CONCEALED, > - is the cost of the feature.t    A I think only the command output is "not aware" of what BBB reallyu translates to.     > ! > >+ Now, from the User's Manual:o > : >  Even if my opinion may be corrected (by Hoff, supose ;): > - with regards to Hoff !) or flamed (by someone) - will : > comment: do not assume User Manual or HELP be something  > accurate.e > [OT]6 >  The count of simplification is enought big :), when: > you b.ex. read "...requires SYSPRV..." you may be nearly9 > sure that in reality 'SYSPRV nearly always allows that' ; > - but NOT that SYSPRV is the only or lowest requirements,r7 > not only BYPASS - but also GRPPRV or no privilege can:! > be the "proper" requirements :). > [EOT]n > F > >+When the system reads a file specification or device name in a DCLJ > >+command line, it examines the file specification or device name to seeE > >+whether the leftmost component is a logical name. If the leftmost H > >+component ends with a colon, space, comma, or a line terminator (forF > >+example, Return), the system attempts to translate it as a logicalF > >+name. If the leftmost component ends with any other character, the> > >+system does not attempt to translate it as a logical name. > " >  Really... Check something like:. > $ DIR SYS$NODE"SYSTEM the_proper_password":: > : > ...and light me up, whether the '"' character in English8 > is named "colon, space, comma, or a line terminator" !7 >  My query applies to my disclaimer -:) even if littler > irony is not excluded ! ;)    C Well, if you consider SYS$NODE"SYSTEM pwd" to be the node-spec (andtD the manual tells you that this is so, somewhere it does), then it isE also the "leftmost component" and is properly followed by two colons,a  and the manual is then accurate.     > [...] J > >+Logical name translation can be iterative: after the system translatesF > >+a logical name, it repeats the translation process for any logical; > >+names it finds contained within the first logical name.e > >+J > >+Now, BBB is clearly a logical name "contained within the first logicalA > >+name". So BBB is then translated to DKA100: which in front ofc7 > >+[FELDMAN] forms a perfectly valid file-spec string.r > 
 >  Really.< >  But, when RMS checks the filename *before* starts to OPENA > it - it checks the parsing. But the returned by system function . > name has invalid syntax - then is rejected !    & So why is this affected by /TRAN=CONC?     >  > [...] - > >+> The fact that "BBB" is itself a logical > > >+> name makes no fundamental difference, and neither do the > >+> /TRANSLATION_ATTRIBUTES. > >+4 > >+I've already demonstrated that that is not true. > 8 >  As before -:) - must (at least partly) agree. But not > with the reason and: > [...]cL > >+> > What I don't understand is why VMS is "smart enough" to do the right >  > ..."smartness" :)a >  It is consistent !f    , What is consistent and how is it consistent?   > J > >+> On the other hand, if you make it a rule to *ALWAYS* properly formatN > >+> your translation (read: "equivalence") strings, you'll be a much happier > >+> camper in the long run.x > >+: > >+I do "properly" format my equivalence strings. Agreed. > + >  Include my "agree" also to collection :)d > [...]a >  >  Regards - Gotfryd   Disclaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldman- afeldman gfigroup com    ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jun 2002 15:21:39 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)s* Subject: Re: Sun/Slowaris future in doubt!+ Message-ID: <aeq7i3$amn$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>J  = In article <hxMP8.89777$6m5.75361@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net>,Y4  "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> writes:L |> Wasn't it DATAMATION that declared the death of the mainframe back in the |> early-mid 1990s?   5 And Byte that asked in September 1992 "Is UNIX Dead?"   F What would we do without such paragons of information in our industry?   bill   -- sJ 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>   1   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jun 2002 11:48:00 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)n Subject: RE: unix historyt+ Message-ID: <aepr1h$4o5$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>J  9 In article <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIOEFGFDAA.tom@kednos.com>,"&  "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes: |>   |>   |> >-----Original Message-----< |> >From: Bill Gunshannon [mailto:bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu]( |> >Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 8:59 AM |> >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com' |> >Subject: Re: unix historyh |> > |> >- |> >In article <oMUmVMMuRfcg@elias.decus.ch>,r0 |> > p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) writes: |> >|> o |> >|> r9 |> >|> So which of the BSDs would you recommend, and why?n |> >C |> >Of course, for the PDP-11 most people recommend BSD 2.11 but mypG |> >preference is for Ultrix-11, although that's not really a BSD.  :-)r |> lF |> Are you sure about that? I always thought that it was derived from E |> BSD4.1, to which I had the sources.  It certainly behaved like it.l  . Straight from the PDP-11 Software Source Book:C      "This native UNIX system, based on AT&T's Version 7 Unix Time-e+       Sharing System, Seventh Edition....."l  A It had the same ancestry as BSD 4.1 but was developed separately.eF Although much of what BSD did found it's way into it, like networking.> There is a liberal sprinkling of UCB Copyrights throughout the6 sources.  And many utilities as well, like csh and vi.  A It is interesting to note from the same book that there were also @ other version 7 clones as well as System III and System V clones> available for the PDP-11.  Ultrix-11 is the only one I know to have survived. t   bill   -- -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>   e   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jun 2002 11:49:10 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)d Subject: RE: unix history,+ Message-ID: <aepr3m$4o5$2@info.cs.uofs.edu>S  3 In article <FkUZhfc3od4I@eisner.encompasserve.org>, 0  koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:b |> In article <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIOEFGFDAA.tom@kednos.com>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes: |> >>nD |> >>Of course, for the PDP-11 most people recommend BSD 2.11 but myH |> >>preference is for Ultrix-11, although that's not really a BSD.  :-) |> > lH |> > Are you sure about that? I always thought that it was derived from G |> > BSD4.1, to which I had the sources.  It certainly behaved like it.l |> >     |> eK |>    Considering Ultrix-32 was BSD 4.2 with some pieces of 4.3, I'd reallye, |>    be suprized if Ultrix-11 was System V.  E BSD 4.x and System V were not the only options.  See my previous postm on this subject.   bill   -- cJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 12:10:03 -0600B From: clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP (Simon Clubley) Subject: Re: unix historyt3 Message-ID: <bO3faFC3Cq$H@eisner.encompasserve.org>*  ` In article <aenlcs$24rn$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>, bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: > E > Even among the existing BSD's there is enough to differentiate themaD > to make it a serious engineering decision.  If you mean on generalF > terms, assuming x86, Alpha or PPC, up until a few months ago I wouldC > have said FreeBSD.  I would still recommend it, but maybe not the*C > latest release.  The product is superior, but the packaging seemsUD > to have fallen on bad times with the departure of some of the core > team members.$ >   F In that case, which version of FreeBSD do you recommend that newcomers to FreeBSD start with ?D   Thanks for any information,    Simon.   -- sB Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP       + Microsoft: The Lada of the computing world.e   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 15:36:13 GMT 1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>EY Subject: VMS MARKETING VOLUNTEERS, LTD. Biz Card Example ( was Re: A Proposal for All C.Oo. Message-ID: <Nx1Q8.249435$352.20298@sccrnsc02>  < "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in message  news:3D0FFC80.F01D8F2@fsi.net... > "David J. Dachtera" wrote: > >  > > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:s > > >DL > > > There is a cheaper way to do this, and one that tends to embarrass the hell > > > out of marketeers. > > >tH > > > I went to VISTAPRINT.COM and got some business cards made up. They read:, > > > $ > > > VMS Marketing Volunteers, LTD.! > > > VMS: The Secure Business OSr > > >o > > > Terry C. Shannon > > > VMS Evangelist > > >  > > > address and contact info.u > > > L > > > Cost of cards: ten bucks. Look on face of marketeer or senior HPQ exec when0 > > > they are presented with a card: PRICELESS! > > J > > O.k., folks! Others proposed it, John detailed it, now Terry has named > > it!t > > # > > "VMS Marketing Volunteers, LTD"r > > J > > I have Avery's biz card software on my Wintel PC here. I'm gonna printK > > up a bunch of 'em. ...and even if I have to go into debt to pay for thelH > > St. Louis symposium (probably won't get a session accepted, but it'sJ > > only a five-hour drive from here), I'm gonna pass those out to all the > > HPQ brass I can find!  > >AG > > ..and remember: if you haven't already registered for St. Louis, ben. > > *SURE* to state that as your company name! > >wC > > Imagine - all those badges walking around saying "VMS Marketingn > > Volunteers, LTD".p > >  > > Be still, my beating heart!m  I I have a hastily-shot 325KB JPEG of my original VMS MARKETING VOLUNTEERS,-J LTD. biz card that I'd be glad to send to anyone who'd like to take a look@ (a professional photographer I am not, but you'll get the idea).J VISTAPRINT.COM will print you up 250 of these puppies for about ten-twelve bucks. Money well spent, sez I.e  7 Drop me a line if you'd like me to mail you the JPEG...C  
 charlie matco  terryshannon@attbi.com   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 09:14:27 -0700 (PDT)n. From: Fabio Cardoso <fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br>Y Subject: Re: VMS MARKETING VOLUNTEERS, LTD. Biz Card Example ( was Re: A Proposal for Alle@ Message-ID: <20020619161427.83753.qmail@web20207.mail.yahoo.com>  , The great problem with VMS MARKETING is that+ HP/Compaq dont have a staff to do that .... 0 I am saying here in Brazil .... there are just 2) VMS specialists at Compaq/Brazil (SEs)...:     REgards.   FC h6 --- "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote: > 6 > "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> wrote in	 > messagey" > news:3D0FFC80.F01D8F2@fsi.net... > > "David J. Dachtera" wrote: > > >n > > > "Terry C. Shannon" wrote:t > > > >n2 > > > > There is a cheaper way to do this, and one > that tends to embarrass thet > hell > > > > out of marketeers. > > > > 6 > > > > I went to VISTAPRINT.COM and got some business > cards made up. Theyv > read:o > > > >i& > > > > VMS Marketing Volunteers, LTD.# > > > > VMS: The Secure Business OSa > > > >m > > > > Terry C. Shannon > > > > VMS Evangelist > > > >o! > > > > address and contact info.a > > > >o1 > > > > Cost of cards: ten bucks. Look on face ofc > marketeer or senior HPQ exec > when2 > > > > they are presented with a card: PRICELESS! > > > 4 > > > O.k., folks! Others proposed it, John detailed > it, now Terry has named-	 > > > it!e > > >n% > > > "VMS Marketing Volunteers, LTD"1 > > >C6 > > > I have Avery's biz card software on my Wintel PC > here. I'm gonna print34 > > > up a bunch of 'em. ...and even if I have to go > into debt to pay for the/ > > > St. Louis symposium (probably won't get ao > session accepted, but it's2 > > > only a five-hour drive from here), I'm gonna > pass those out to all the  > > > HPQ brass I can find!d > > >h, > > > ..and remember: if you haven't already > registered for St. Louis, be0 > > > *SURE* to state that as your company name! > > >h6 > > > Imagine - all those badges walking around saying > "VMS Marketing > > > Volunteers, LTD".. > > > ! > > > Be still, my beating heart!  > 5 > I have a hastily-shot 325KB JPEG of my original VMS: > MARKETING VOLUNTEERS,h2 > LTD. biz card that I'd be glad to send to anyone > who'd like to take a looke3 > (a professional photographer I am not, but you'll  > get the idea)./ > VISTAPRINT.COM will print you up 250 of these  > puppies for about ten-twelve! > bucks. Money well spent, sez I.t > 1 > Drop me a line if you'd like me to mail you the.	 > JPEG...f >  > charlie matcoy > terryshannon@attbi.com >  >      =====g ========================== Fbio dos Santos Cardoso OpenVMS System Manager Rio de Janeiro - Brazila fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br ==========================  2 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!?0 Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 07:14:15 -0400 2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) Subject: Re: VMS V7.3-1 InfoK Message-ID: <rdeininger-1906020714150001@11cust11.tnt1.nashua.nh.da.uu.net>   0 In article <3d0f99f4.76493571@news.uoregon.edu>,: rickm123@oregon456.uoregon789.edu (Rick Millhollin) wrote:  C >Does anyone know of any VMS V7.3-1 new features/release notes infobC >available online?  I'm trying to decide whether to upgrade to V7.3sE >soon, or wait for V7.3-1 and it's first round of patches.  Thanks...r  4 AFAIK, the 7.3-1 release notes aren't available yet.  I I'd suggest 7.3 (plus patches) now, WITH XFC DISABLED.  If you're runningo; anything older than 7.2-2, you need to upgrade soon anyway.v  J If you upgrade to 7.3, you might as well upgrade to TCPIP V5.3 at the sameH time.  Then you can leave TCPIP alone when you eventually upgrade to VMS 7.3-1u  J It's likely to be mid-August by the time V7.3-1 is in your hands.  I don'tD know your academic schedule, but I suspect you don't want to rush an( upgrade just before the semester begins.   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 02:37:55 -0700' From: r_eclipse@hotmail.com (r eclipse) E Subject: Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most caseso= Message-ID: <aa1c3851.0206190137.40314fb6@posting.google.com>i  J Do you know of any group that may be willing to buy out VMS os from HP andO try to revive and grow it themseleves? HP says it will support VMS but my guessl* is they may wanna dump it sooner or later.        W Brass Christof <welcome@spam.not> wrote in message news:<3D01D48B.7D519CD2@spam.not>...t2 > Suggestions to port apps developed on other OSs ' > come up in this NG from time to time.t > 8 > To satisfy VMS users it is normally not sufficient to 8 > simply port apps while not really integrating it into 4 > VMS. A decent port would make use of specific VMS 5 > features where appropriate like CDL with carefully  8 > chosen parameter types (and qualifier names) that fit 5 > in and like using RMS instead of flat/stream files o6 > and with standard installation procedures like PCSI. > 8 > To satisfy VMS users it is normally not sufficient to 6 > simply port apps while not improving their quality. 6 > Unfortunately a lot of SW is written in a quick and 5 > dirty manner or in crap PLs like C or C++. If this  8 > SW is adapted that it can be compiled for VMS it will 7 > run as unreliable as on other OSs which are expected f2 > to be rebooted daily (Windoze) or weekly (UNIX). > 1 > Having more than one OS isn't an issue in most o6 > environments as PC type HW is cheap. Most commodity 5 > SW like browsers, office apps, small databases and  4 > most open source SW run on PC type HW. Do we need 2 > unreliable and misbehaving SW that isn't really 3 > integrated into VMS? Are there people that would a3 > like to run that kind of SW on their VMS systems "3 > taking the risk that this SW is interfering with a > clean and stable VMS apps? > 1 > Is there a chance to avoid other OSs? How many  2 > apps have to be ported to VMS and maintained in 3 > a current version that VMS can be the only OS in r > a certain environment? > 0 > As long as the vast majority of managers make 2 > decisions not based on technical facts VMS will $ > not gain substantial market share.0 > As long as the vast majority of managers make / > decisions not based on mid term perspectives h0 > like TCO VMS will not gain substantial market  > share.0 > As long as the vast majority of managers make - > decisions not based on quality aspects but R. > instead gaze at the time to market VMS will $ > not gain substantail market share. > 2 > As long as the vast majority of programmers use 1 > crap languages like C or C++ the vast majority n0 > of SW will not reach a level of quality which  > qualifies for use under VMS.2 > As long as the vast majority of compiler and OS - > vendors offer only a compiler for the crap p/ > language C this trend towards crap languages t# > will not end or even turn around.  > / > We should accept that most people (managers, +1 > programmers, customers) think differently than  . > necessary for a substantial success of VMS.  > , > Of course there are still areas where VMS , > could shine like production line or power / > station control, stock exchange and internet  0 > shops that should be available 24x7 hours per 2 > week. Trying to compete with other OSs in areas 0 > where VMS' advantages aren't really necessary / > is not a good idea. Instead forces should be c+ > focused on the areas where VMS is a much p& > better and a really needed solution. > / > Sorry that I didn't find a chance to mention t > that UNIX is crap also.e   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 12:50:35 GMT.# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>bE Subject: Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most casessI Message-ID: <v6%P8.398128$t8_.21943@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>i  E HP is unlikely to sell the IP rights to VMS to anyone for any amount."  H Tell me why they would want to have a competitor in the marketplace thatK actively promotes a superior alternative to anything else they could offer.t  E On the other hand, without a ready supply of Alpha chips with ongoingrH development thereof, and without a viable IA64 platform, VMS is probably7 worthless unless a port to Power4 architecture is done.     4 "r eclipse" <r_eclipse@hotmail.com> wrote in message7 news:aa1c3851.0206190137.40314fb6@posting.google.com...eL > Do you know of any group that may be willing to buy out VMS os from HP andK > try to revive and grow it themseleves? HP says it will support VMS but my  guess-, > is they may wanna dump it sooner or later. >h >e >a > 4 > Brass Christof <welcome@spam.not> wrote in message$ news:<3D01D48B.7D519CD2@spam.not>...3 > > Suggestions to port apps developed on other OSs ) > > come up in this NG from time to time.n > > 9 > > To satisfy VMS users it is normally not sufficient toY9 > > simply port apps while not really integrating it inton5 > > VMS. A decent port would make use of specific VMS 6 > > features where appropriate like CDL with carefully9 > > chosen parameter types (and qualifier names) that fit 6 > > in and like using RMS instead of flat/stream files8 > > and with standard installation procedures like PCSI. > >-9 > > To satisfy VMS users it is normally not sufficient toT7 > > simply port apps while not improving their quality.j7 > > Unfortunately a lot of SW is written in a quick andi6 > > dirty manner or in crap PLs like C or C++. If this9 > > SW is adapted that it can be compiled for VMS it willt8 > > run as unreliable as on other OSs which are expected4 > > to be rebooted daily (Windoze) or weekly (UNIX). > >y2 > > Having more than one OS isn't an issue in most7 > > environments as PC type HW is cheap. Most commodityo6 > > SW like browsers, office apps, small databases and5 > > most open source SW run on PC type HW. Do we need.3 > > unreliable and misbehaving SW that isn't reallye4 > > integrated into VMS? Are there people that would4 > > like to run that kind of SW on their VMS systems4 > > taking the risk that this SW is interfering with > > clean and stable VMS apps? > >m2 > > Is there a chance to avoid other OSs? How many3 > > apps have to be ported to VMS and maintained ino4 > > a current version that VMS can be the only OS in > > a certain environment? > >d1 > > As long as the vast majority of managers makeO3 > > decisions not based on technical facts VMS willt& > > not gain substantial market share.1 > > As long as the vast majority of managers makeb0 > > decisions not based on mid term perspectives1 > > like TCO VMS will not gain substantial marketr
 > > share.1 > > As long as the vast majority of managers make>. > > decisions not based on quality aspects but/ > > instead gaze at the time to market VMS willP& > > not gain substantail market share. > > 3 > > As long as the vast majority of programmers user2 > > crap languages like C or C++ the vast majority1 > > of SW will not reach a level of quality whichD  > > qualifies for use under VMS.3 > > As long as the vast majority of compiler and OSD. > > vendors offer only a compiler for the crap0 > > language C this trend towards crap languages% > > will not end or even turn around.. > > 0 > > We should accept that most people (managers,2 > > programmers, customers) think differently than/ > > necessary for a substantial success of VMS.a > >r- > > Of course there are still areas where VMS - > > could shine like production line or powera0 > > station control, stock exchange and internet1 > > shops that should be available 24x7 hours pera3 > > week. Trying to compete with other OSs in areaso1 > > where VMS' advantages aren't really necessary 0 > > is not a good idea. Instead forces should be, > > focused on the areas where VMS is a much( > > better and a really needed solution. > > 0 > > Sorry that I didn't find a chance to mention > > that UNIX is crap also.y   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 19:48:23 +0200-' From: Brass Christof <welcome@spam.not>TE Subject: Re: Why porting apps to VMS isn't very helpful in most cases ( Message-ID: <3D10C3E7.AA10B4A8@spam.not>  
 RLC wrote: > 9 > > To satisfy VMS users it is normally not sufficient tor7 > > simply port apps while not improving their quality.C7 > > Unfortunately a lot of SW is written in a quick and 6 > > dirty manner or in crap PLs like C or C++. If this9 > > SW is adapted that it can be compiled for VMS it wille8 > > run as unreliable as on other OSs which are expected4 > > to be rebooted daily (Windoze) or weekly (UNIX). > : > There is a LOT of quality VMS software written in C/C++.> > There is also a LOT of quality software on lots of platforms7 > written in C/C++.  Programming languanges are not the,5 > problem near as much as programmers and progrmaming 4 > methodologies.  Bad programmers can write bad code9 > in virtually every language even though some definatelyi > make it harder to do so. >  > just my opinion, >  > Rick Cadruvi...i  4 While I have to agree to all of your statements the 5 vast majority of open source SW I've seen written in y5 C or C++ and the sources of Navigator that have been -4 released to the public were incredibly bad designed  *and* implemented.  0 Open source SW is a major target of any porting % attempt as the sources are available.s  7 C and C++ are not for the vast majority of programmers c4 that use these languages because they offer way too ; much and too easy ways to screw design and implementation. t  ; The vast majority of C/C++/ObjC, PERL, UNIX and Windows/XY a9 programmers are either hackers or hobbyists. They should e8 learn a decent programming language and read some books ; about SW engineering and architecture before they continue u programming.   -- a? According to the Quality Assurance Institute C/C++/ObjC, PERL,  @ UNIX (incl. Linux) and Windows/XY are regarded as harmful. Java 0 is slow and the class library is badly designed.7 moc dot slupofni at ssarb - please reverse the sequenceB   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 12:13:34 +0100l( From: Nic Clews <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1>+ Subject: Re: [OT] Why Software is So Bad...c) Message-ID: <3D10675E.A52A0335@127.0.0.1>-   John Eisenschmidt wrote: >   A I've seen twice now, statement from HP (Compaq) that the softwareuG quality in OpenVMS is improving, better and more extensive testing, anda) a higher closure rate (IIRC) on problems.5  H Is that slide available anywhere, or perhaps Sue S, you can cut/paste it here?   C (Mark Gorham Reading 28th May, Rich Marcello, Manchester 18th June)  -- r? Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. CP Charges, CSC Computer Scienceso nclews at csc dot comd   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Jun 2002 07:02:31 -0700( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)+ Subject: Re: [OT] Why Software is So Bad...M= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0206190602.788a3426@posting.google.com>r  t "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote in message news:<WWOP8.301582$Gs.23922604@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>...> > "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote in message9 > news:wvMP8.71617$R61.20372@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net...  >  > ...  > J > > Software is bad because people will pay for the squatulent, bug-ridden
 > > dreck. > M > And in particular because people won't pay *more*, and wait a few months to M > a year longer, for a more reliable product.  They get exactly what they payt@ > for which is, after all, the ideal of a market-driven economy. > I > For some reason this reminds me of the recent mention of the absence ofa? > ethics in business, perhaps because they're two symptoms of a % > possibly-common underlying problem.r >  > - bill  B people will not pay more?  You mean, people will not pay anything!: Everyone wants free software, so you get what you pay for!   ------------------------------   Date: 19 Jun 2002 15:14:33 GMT1 From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)i+ Subject: Re: [OT] Why Software is So Bad... + Message-ID: <aeq74p$amn$1@info.cs.uofs.edu>   J In article <%zMP8.384807$t8_.154124@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>,&  "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> writes: |> hM |> ** Too bad there aren't enough 3rd-party OpenVMS applications available to N |> fulfill each requirement. But then again, that would go against HP's desire* |> to keep OpenVMS in a 'no growth' state.  . It's not too late to do something about that!!   bill   -- sJ 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: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 17:17:51 GMTh0 From: prune@ZAnkh-Morpork.mv.com (Paul Winalski)+ Subject: Re: [OT] Why Software is So Bad... 8 Message-ID: <3d10bb69.925162212@proxy.news.easynews.com>  4 On Tue, 18 Jun 2002 20:13:16 GMT, "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote:.  G >Software is bad because people will pay for the squatulent, bug-ridden  >dreck.    Ain't it the truth.p  D For what other consumer good would people accept a license agreementA that says "if it doesn't work as advertised and documented, we'reaF under no obligation to fix it, and if you or your business get damagedD by it, we won't pay for your losses."  Contrast consumer response toB Firestone's tire debacle with the response to Melissa, Nimbda, and other such software glitches.   C One of these days, the general public is going to be computer-savvy @ enough that we in the industry won't be able to get away with itD anymore.  Some day, some lawyer is going to file a class-action suitE that'll be heard by a comuter-savvy judge who will rule that whateverVD the license agreement might say, standard consumer product liability> law applies to computer software.  The result won't be pretty.    > The engineering technology exists to produce reliable softwareC systems.  But it's so expensive and tedious to apply that it's onlyd? used on critical projects such as the control computers for the  Space Shuttle.  D As long as the marketplace is willing to tolerate buggy systems thatA crash, malfunction, and have security holes you can drive a truck*. through, the situation isn't going to improve.  
 ---------- Remove 'Z' to reply by email.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 07:30:07 -0400 2 From: rdeininger@mindspring.com (Robert Deininger) Subject: Re: __asm__ in DEC CXXKK Message-ID: <rdeininger-1906020730070001@11cust11.tnt1.nashua.nh.da.uu.net>'  J In article <3D0F64E5.6BAF666B@lmco.com>, JMK <jeffrey.m.klopotic@lmco.com> wrote:   >Craig,  >Thanks for the help!n >oB >You know, I did my RTFM, and when a topic as blatant as assembler< >doesn't make the index or glossary of a major compiler, the* >documentation is in serious need of help.  I ... And you should help the documentation by emailing your suggestions to E the address given in the manual.  Indexes are tricky; a person has toiG decide which words are important enough to put in the index.  Obviously_ they missed one.   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2002.338 ************************