1 INFO-VAX	Sat, 02 Mar 2002	Volume 2002 : Issue 119       Contents:& checking decc compiler version in mms?* Re: checking decc compiler version in mms?+ Re: Compaq adopts microsoft approach to VMS + Re: Compaq adopts microsoft approach to VMS  Re: copying system disks Re: decnet phase IV -> phase V Re: DTE Unsynchronised Re: expensive procedure calls ; Re: HP & Compaq high-end systems to "stay around for years" I RE: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of		 Linux H RE: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of	 LinuxH Re: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of	 LinuxP RE: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of	 Linux Linux LP Re: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of	 Linux Linux LP Re: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of	 Linux Linux LC HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux G Re: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux G Re: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux P Re: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux LinuxLin Re: I: PAKGEN Software for ISVs  Re: I: PAKGEN Software for ISVs  Re: I: PAKGEN Software for ISVs  Re: I: PAKGEN Software for ISVs + Re: Microsoft Curries Favor With Undergrads  OPENVMS-HOBBYIST License PAK? ! Re: OPENVMS-HOBBYIST License PAK? F Re: Q: Why is XP-1000 RAM so expensive from Compaq vis-a-vis Kingston? Re: restricting access to ports P Running SMG  program from DCL...better way than spawn when sending info BACK to P Re: Running SMG  program from DCL...better way than spawn when sending info BACK Re: Sound on alpha/VMS?  Re: Sound on alpha/VMS? * Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux Crow* Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux Crow* Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux Crow* Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux CrowE To VMS support: What is VMS/ucx raw socket exposure to DrDos attacks? I Re: To VMS support: What is VMS/ucx raw socket exposure to DrDos attacks? % Re: vax/vms documentation - psi / x29 % Re: vax/vms documentation - psi / x29 % Re: vax/vms documentation - psi / x29  VMS for a DEC 5000/240???? Re: VMS for a DEC 5000/240????: Warning!  Windoze XP involved in DRDos attacks!  Avoid XP!> Re: Warning!  Windoze XP involved in DRDos attacks!  Avoid XP!> RE: Warning!  Windoze XP involved in DRDos attacks!  Avoid XP!> RE: Warning!  Windoze XP involved in DRDos attacks!  Avoid XP!# Re: What return codes mean success?  Re: [Q] internet and VMS  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 13:43:30 -0800 5 From: forrest.cahoon@merrillcorp.com (Forrest Cahoon) / Subject: checking decc compiler version in mms? = Message-ID: <8369d643.0203011343.1395a528@posting.google.com>   L I want to implement a check in mms such that if the decc compiler version is1 >= 6.5, /optimize is used, otherwise /nooptimize.   , Does anyone have a good idea how to do this?   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 22:12:17 GMT - From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network> 3 Subject: Re: checking decc compiler version in mms? * Message-ID: <3C7FFF26.7060102@qsl.network>   Forrest Cahoon wrote: D  > I want to implement a check in mms such that if the decc compiler@  > version is > = 6.5, /optimize is used, otherwise /nooptimize.  >/  > Does anyone have a good idea how to do this?   >  A It is easer to implement the check in DCL before you call the MMS 
 procedure.  = MMS will use DCL symbols for any undefined macro definitions.     ? You can also specify a specific target on the MMS command line. 1 Use a special target for the older command files.   = Now in your header files, you can test for the version of the E complier with the __DECC_VER Macro as described in the documentation.   @ You can also use the #pragma optimize directives to control the $ optimization on a per routine basis.   -John  wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only    ------------------------------    Date: 01 Mar 2002 21:44:51 +02009 From: costello@iki.fi (Antti =?iso-8859-1?q?J=E4rvinen?=) 4 Subject: Re: Compaq adopts microsoft approach to VMS3 Message-ID: <m3664ghy30.fsf@muikku.baana.suomi.net>   / JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: M > But someone still on 5.5-2, what are the odds of them finding a *new* bug ?  > P > If someone is still on 5.5-2, it is likely that they have a stabel system withN > no new applications and running old versions of an application. Correct ? In- > that case, would they really find new bugs?   @ Doesn't this sound like situation where 5.5-2 might be ready for production use?   A Same applies to Oracle v6. And whatever folks asking for serious  > buglessness might want to use. If source code fo Oracle v6 and@ VMS 5.5-2 would be given to Public (old versions of VMS did cameC with source code, I've seen the tapes and parts of the code), would B there be demand for folks who would support and security-enchance # stable old versions of good stuff?     --   Antti Jrvinen, costello@iki.fi 5             "concerto for two faggots and orchestra"     ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 05:38:42 +0100 ( From: Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.ch>4 Subject: Re: Compaq adopts microsoft approach to VMS) Message-ID: <3C805752.9000304@bluewin.ch>    Nic Clews wrote:   > Paul Sture wrote:  >  >>John Santos wrote: >> >>* >>>What is 7.1-1H2????  Never heard of it. >>>  >>> h >>I believe it contained extra hardware support for certain models, and was only delivered > with those. >> >  > Extract fromG > http://www.openvms.compaq.com/openvms/os/openvms-release-history.html  >  > G >          |V7.1-1H1 |Superseded by         |  -NOV-1997 FRS | | |  for < > the following:                                           |I >                            |           |         |V7.1-1H2               > |                |F| |    > > UltraSCSI:                                                 |I >                            |           |         |                      0 > |                | | |      - KZPBA-CA adapter  on AlphaServers 4100, > 4000, 2100,     | I >                            |           |         |                      B > |                |Y| |        2100A, 2000, 1200, 1000, 1000A and > 800                 | I >                            |           |         |                      H > |                | | |      - UltraSCSI disks such as RZ1BB, RZ1CB and > RZ1DB         | I >                            |           |         |                      I > |                | | |    HSZ70 UltraSCSI controller for the Enterprise  > Storage Array|I >                            |           |         |                      H > |                | | |      10,000 (initially in Fast SCSI mode on the > KZPSA adapter | I >                            |           |         |                      + > |                | | |    AlphaServer 800 . > 5/500                                      |I >                            |           |         |                      ' > |                | | |    AlphaServer 2 > 1200                                           |I >                            |           |         |                      5 > |                | | |    DIGITAL Modular Computing $ > Components:                      |I >                            |           |         |                      1 > |                | | |      - Alpha 5/366 PICMG ( > SBC                                  |I >                            |           |         |                      1 > |                | | |      - Alpha 5/433 PICMG ( > SBC                                  |I >                            |           |         |                      , > |                | | |    DE500-BA Network- > Adapter                                   | I >                            |           |         |                      > > |                | | |    DE500-FA Network Adapter (run-time > only)                   | I >                            |           |         |                      C > |                | | |                                             > D > I installed it on a Digital Modular system with two graphic heads. >  >   G 1998 was the time slot I was thinking of.Thanks for confirming that my  D memory still works :-) Yep, HSZ70, KZPBA-CA adapter and those disks I spring to min We put it on all systems, in a similar fashion to what has  3 been discussed in the thread Philip Helbig started.   
 Paul Sture Switzerland G WHAT? yet another on topic response - surely this can't be comp.os.vms?    ------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 13:28:47 -0800 1 From: keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com (Keith Parris) ! Subject: Re: copying system disks = Message-ID: <cf15391e.0203011328.41b6041d@posting.google.com>   | Phillip Helbig <HELBPHI@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com> wrote in message news:<01KEUTRY8V1U8ZL57Q@sysdev.deutsche-boerse.com>...I > > > This seems the way to go.  The only "duplicated" stuff would be in  L > > > SYS$SPECIFIC, not SYS$COMMON, so wasted disk space won't be a problem. > > > > > Except that even SYS$SPECIFIC: can contain some very largeH > > node-specific files like SYSDUMP.DMP, OPERATOR.LOG and ACCOUNTNG.DAT% > > after months of inattention, etc.  > I > Large, yes, but node-specific and thus worth keeping---or am I missing   > something?  B Worth keeping, but only required to be kept on the system disk theD nodes actually boot from (and preserved across updates of that copy, of course).   C Let's say you have a "master" system disk with all the roots, and a B few systems boot from that, and you have a couple of "copy" systemB disks which also serve a few nodes each.  On the "copy" disks, oneD could safely delete SYSDUMP.DMP, OPERATOR.LOG, ACCOUNTING.DAT and soF forth in roots for systems which didn't ever boot from that particular copy of the system disk.? --------------------------------------------------------------- ? Keith Parris | parris at encompasserve dot org | Consulting on: > Clusters, Disaster Tolerance, Performance, I/O, Storage & SANs   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 13:11:16 -0800 0 From: Mark Berryman <Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com>' Subject: Re: decnet phase IV -> phase V , Message-ID: <3C7F7DF3.438CCE70@Mvb.Saic.Com>   JF Mezei wrote:  >  > Alan Greig wrote: H > > By all accounts DECNET Phase V is much more user friendly these daysH > > but some of us (and this is the case for me) first got involved withE > > DECNET Phase V way back in the days when it was called DECNET VAX  > > Extensions.  > N > If had had seen a clear explanation of what files are executed in what orderK > and where I was expected to add my commands to defeat some of the phase 5 L > defaults (for instance the commands to kill the messages about the missing> > time servers), perhaps my experience might have been better.  F You do not kill the messages about missing time servers (although thatH is certainly possible), you correctly configure your time clerk.  If youD don't have a DTSS server on your network, don't run DTSS.  If you doA have DTSS servers, configure your clerk to expect the appropriate H number.  I thought this was pretty well spelled out in the documentation" and the comments in the NCL files.   > K > I dislike systems where you have to run a utility to figure out the exact P > syntax, and once you've done the command, you then go edit a file to enter the > same command.   F Hmm, I chose to read the manual and learn the syntax.  But that's just me.   
 Mark Berryman    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 01:07:10 +0000 + From: "antonio.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org>  Subject: Re: DTE Unsynchronised & Message-ID: <3C8025BE.1000204@iee.org>   pat saunders wrote:    > Hi, ( >   I am using DECNET/OSI on a MicroVax,& >   I am using a LAPB circuit on DTE-0F >   When I look at state of DTE , I find it is "Unsynchronised" , What3 > is the cause of this message and how do I fix it,     0 Your end and the other end (if there is one ...)0 disagree about *something*. Or the hardware link has failed somehow.    > < >    I find that the LAPB link goes up and down like a yo-yo >    :    D > Event: Link Setup Failed from: Node LOCAL:.KEWG99 LAPB Link DTE-0,   [snip]  D > Event: Link Initialising from: Node LOCAL:.KEWG99 LAPB Link DTE-0,      ( Rather than going up and doing, it looks/ to me like it's staying pretty consistely down! 5 LAPB is starting to initialise but it never succeeds.    Has it *ever* worked?   # If not, you have to verify that you $ have set it up properly and that the& hardware is working all the way to the# other end (i.e. as far as the telco % or your next modem and its associated 
 network box).   - If the hardware is working, try tracing LAPB. 1 If you see *any* received data, then it is likely / that you have working hardware but the two ends , disagree about something (e.g. you are using the wrong profile or whatever).     + You can look at the modem connect layer too * just to be sure that it is up and running.  / What hardware do you have? Some of the adapters  need to have firmware loaded.   ) If it used to work and now does not, look * for a config change or a hardware failure.   Antonio    --     --------------- - Antonio Carlini             arcarlini@iee.org    ------------------------------    Date: 01 Mar 2002 16:39:39 -0500P From: "Stefan Monnier <foo@acm.com>" <monnier+comp.arch/news/@flint.cs.yale.edu>& Subject: Re: expensive procedure calls, Message-ID: <5l7kowklwk.fsf@rum.cs.yale.edu>  9 >>>>> "Alex" == Alex Colvin <alexc@world.std.com> writes: G >> The difference between SSA-form and continuation-passing-style (i.e. F >> using tail-calls only) is mostly limited to notational differences,8 > I thought SSA was all about intra-procedure data flow, > not inter-procedural.   A Yes, so CPS is more general than SSA, but within a procedure, SSA A and CPS look very much the same.  As for why there's CPS within a > procedure, it's because in CPS every flow-control operation is; a tail-call (i.e. tail-call is goto and goto is tail-call).      	Stefan    ------------------------------    Date: 02 Mar 2002 04:19:55 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>D Subject: Re: HP & Compaq high-end systems to "stay around for years"0 Message-ID: <87wuww2g7o.fsf@k9.prep.synonet.com>  ' Alan Greig <a.greig@virgin.net> writes:   D > On 28 Feb 2002 19:22:27 -0800, VMSfan@hotmail.com (VMS Fan) wrote:   A > > the company will continue to make both Compaq and HP high-end D > >enterprise systems that are already in customer use available for2                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^@ > >some time. "The big equipment will stay around for years," he	 > >said.'    @ > I think I'm more worried after reading that than I was before.  & Did I read you concern correctly Alan?   --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:53:06 -0600+ From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com> R Subject: RE: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of		 LinuxH Message-ID: <7E008308CD77154485FEF878168D078E260A52@CMIMAIL1.amdocs.com>   > -----Original Message-----6 > From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca]   > Christopher Smith wrote:3 > > Linux runs on 360?  I thought it was only 390s.   ? > 390s are to the 360 what Alpha EV7 is to Alpha 21064 or what   > the Pentium is to 
 > the 80286.    5 > Same instruction set. Few more instructions, nicer   > implementation, and in the@ > case of 390/360, 32 bit adressing instead of 24 bit adressing.  9 Right, but for some reason I thought that these few more  ( instructions, etc, were a requirement...   Chris     ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developer  Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");  '       ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:23:03 -0600+ From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com> Q Subject: RE: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of	 LinuxrH Message-ID: <7E008308CD77154485FEF878168D078E260A51@CMIMAIL1.amdocs.com>   > -----Original Message-----6 > From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca]  = > While Comapq was quick to kill Tru64, has IBM killed AIX ?   > What puzzles me is9 > why IBM would have ported Linux to its 360 mainframes, i > running many instances9 > of an OS, while AIX isn't ported to the same mainframe.   @ Linux runs on 360?  I thought it was only 390s.  Anyway, I have ? been under the impression that the bulk of the work wasn't doneo= by IBM, but rather -- in true linux fashion -- by some peoplee> who just happened to have access to a mainframe.  (Whether IBM? provided this access, I don't know, but it certainly would havem
 been cheaper)	  A I was also under the impression that AIX would run as a guest O/SlC under either CMS or MVS, in which case, that would seem to indicater that it runs on a 390, right?e   Chris     ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developerg Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");t 'e  r   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 16:54:14 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> Q Subject: Re: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of	 LinuxT, Message-ID: <3C7FF885.18F0A9F2@videotron.ca>   Christopher Smith wrote:1 > Linux runs on 360?  I thought it was only 390s.n  N 390s are to the 360 what Alpha EV7 is to Alpha 21064 or what the Pentium is to the 80286. p  M Same instruction set. Few more instructions, nicer implementation, and in thea> case of 390/360, 32 bit adressing instead of 24 bit adressing.   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 16:20:44 -0600+ From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com>jY Subject: RE: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of	 Linux Linux LcH Message-ID: <7E008308CD77154485FEF878168D078E260A53@CMIMAIL1.amdocs.com>   > -----Original Message-----6 > From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca]   > Christopher Smith wrote:< > > Right, but for some reason I thought that these few more, > > instructions, etc, were a requirement...  = > VM, which is the basis for the multiple instances of an OS a > has existed at@ > least since the days of the 370, although it was still 24 bit  > adressing.  : Right -- the point is that I wasn't aware it would run on 7 360/370 machines, due to, I thought, some of the small - differences in hardware.    I'll have to take a closer look.   Chrisa    ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developero Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");8 'd  .   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 23:48:56 GMTn* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>Y Subject: Re: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of	 Linux Linux Lt? Message-ID: <IrUf8.5558$yL2.345243@bin6.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>   8 "Christopher Smith" <csmith@amdocs.com> wrote in messageB news:7E008308CD77154485FEF878168D078E260A53@CMIMAIL1.amdocs.com... > > -----Original Message-----8 > > From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca] >k > > Christopher Smith wrote:> > > > Right, but for some reason I thought that these few more. > > > instructions, etc, were a requirement... > > > > VM, which is the basis for the multiple instances of an OS > > has existed atA > > least since the days of the 370, although it was still 24 bitd > > adressing. >o; > Right -- the point is that I wasn't aware it would run on 8 > 360/370 machines, due to, I thought, some of the small > differences in hardware. > " > I'll have to take a closer look.  L Don't bother.  JF is simply rather loose in his terminology - e.g., he stillJ consistently refers to IA32 platforms as '8086's, even though virtually noK current IA32 software would run on an 8086.  As he doesn't seem inclined to-K change his usage (though why is unclear), there's little reason to continueiI to correct him save when he manages to confuse someone he's talking with.o   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 18:15:15 -0500i- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> Y Subject: Re: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of	 Linux Linux Li, Message-ID: <3C800B83.70A0CCF2@videotron.ca>   Christopher Smith wrote:; > Right -- the point is that I wasn't aware it would run ono8 > 360/370 machines, due to, I thought, some of the small > differences in hardware.  K That is very likely, if the compiler used to generate the Linux Kernel maker> use of featires available on the 390 and not available on 370.  F This is no different from an aplication that would mame use of PentiumI features not availbale on the 386 for instance (instructions for graphicsa handling for instance).)   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 14:07:08 -0600cB From: clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP (Simon Clubley)L Subject: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux3 Message-ID: <m4j$MeL4HFJh@eisner.encompasserve.org>0  a In article <J9Uv6b4tuD8K@eisner.encompasserve.org>, young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) writes:p > ) > In fact, IBM last week said that it haseN > already recouped most of its $1 billion investment in Linux through sales of" > hardware, software and services. >   ( That statement prompts two observations:  I 1) Linux is (or can be) a _profitable_, and hence viable, operation for a H company. That must be making Bill Gates more worried than he already is.  H 2) Much more of a COV issue: It gives support to those within HP/CPQ whoM may be arguing that focusing on Linux is the way forward and can be harnessed H as a viable revenue stream. The issue with that is that Linux is a knownH entity to everyone and therefore something that HP can be comfortable in
 promoting.  K I try to imagine how someone within HP who has never heard of VMS except as L "some product" that exists within a company that they are about to take overK and I wonder if they may view VMS as that strange thing sitting in a corner M of CPQ whose revenue stream may not be required if alternative streams exist.,  	 > 				Rob1 >    Simon.   --  B Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP       + Microsoft: The Lada of the computing world.    ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 15:47:08 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> P Subject: Re: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux, Message-ID: <3C7FE8C0.4347CE3D@videotron.ca>   Simon Clubley wrote:K > 1) Linux is (or can be) a _profitable_, and hence viable, operation for a0J > company. That must be making Bill Gates more worried than he already is.  M To HP, Linux would be no more profitable than Windows, unless Linux customers|) are more likely to buy support contracts.   G Linux is to wintel box makers today what Unix was to the Data Generals, G Burroughs etc of the 80s. They could no longer afford to have their own M proprietary systems so they all jumped on the Unix bandwagon because Unix was|: cheap for them and looked "compatible" with everyone else.  H Linux is an easy way for wintel box makers to escape from the slavery toL Microsoft, especially in case Microcost tanks. It is also very easy for themJ to claim to be Linux vendors and attempt to portray themselves as a viableG Linux vendor to counter IBM's push to capture some of the Linux market.   M Does HP/Compaq really have the in-house expertise to be able to truly support  Linux worldwide ?    H No offense meant to Linux itself, but Linux is a fad right now. So it isJ normal that anyone and everyone wants to claim to sell Linux, just in case Linux does catch on.  M While Comapq was quick to kill Tru64, has IBM killed AIX ? What puzzles me is M why IBM would have ported Linux to its 360 mainframes, running many instances 7 of an OS, while AIX isn't ported to the same mainframe.|  N The "logical" thing to have done is ensure that the proprietary Unixes (Tru64,E AIX, Solaris) could cleanly compile Linux code. That would have takenwJ advantage of the pool of Linux "free" software, while giving customers theH advantage of a proprietary and solidly supported/debugged UNXI operating0 system with features such as clustering etc etc.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 15:43:53 -0500 1 From: Michael Austin <maustin@firstdbasource.com>eP Subject: Re: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux2 Message-ID: <3C7FE809.8E71E908@firstdbasource.com>   Simon Clubley wrote: > c > In article <J9Uv6b4tuD8K@eisner.encompasserve.org>, young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) writes:2 > >3+ > > In fact, IBM last week said that it haseP > > already recouped most of its $1 billion investment in Linux through sales of$ > > hardware, software and services. > >s > * > That statement prompts two observations: > K > 1) Linux is (or can be) a _profitable_, and hence viable, operation for abJ > company. That must be making Bill Gates more worried than he already is.    4 Somehow, I do not think $52B BG is all that worried.   -- d Regards,  7 Michael Austin            Registered Linux User #261163y7 First DBA Source, Inc.    http://www.firstdbasource.coms Sr. Consultant   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 17:16:08 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca>uY Subject: Re: HP's viewpoint on Linux, was: Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux LinuxLine, Message-ID: <3C7FFDA6.F5C3E094@videotron.ca>   Christopher Smith wrote:: > Right, but for some reason I thought that these few more* > instructions, etc, were a requirement...  I VM, which is the basis for the multiple instances of an OS has existed atdH least since the days of the 370, although it was still 24 bit adressing.   ------------------------------   Date: 28 Feb 2002 20:34:23 CDT= From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.120519.killspam.00c7 (Wayne Sewell) ( Subject: Re: I: PAKGEN Software for ISVs. Message-ID: <Y6nB+QMW$1z7@tachxxsoftxxconsult>  [ In article <3C7EE086.5D339CF8@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:c > Wayne Sewell wrote:- >> s^ >> In article <3C7DA1D7.B9A63756@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes: >> >M >> > I've worked in shops where non-LMF software (other license methods) wereo >> > verboten. >> > >> a+ >> Really?  What's the reasoning on that?  T >  > Say, "Disaster Recovery".n >   L I'm not sure I follow.  Since this isn't the billyworld, you typically don'tK have to reinstall everything from scratch during disaster recovery.  If youdN restore all the disks from backups, you get back to pretty much where you wereM before the crisis began, including all the license keys.  In the case of sp32nM products, all the keys reside in product directories, so when you restore theeK disk containing the product, the key comes along for the ride.  The productm; is ready to start immediately once the restore is complete.o  O Again, the licensing schemes which depend on hardware might have a problem, duerN to board swaps and such, but the ones that don't will work just fine after theM restore.  If you don't have to *do* anything, I don't see how recovery is anye different from LMF.f     --  O ===============================================================================oM Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxxy: http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-)oO ===============================================================================8= Society Lady:  Are you familiar with the Great Wall of China? 5        Curly:  No, but I know a big fence in Chicago!P   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 16:24:10 CDT"= From: wayne@tachysoft.xxx.525246.killspam.00ce (Wayne Sewell)d( Subject: Re: I: PAKGEN Software for ISVs. Message-ID: <J8YOvjnGLBBU@tachxxsoftxxconsult>  T In article <3C7F4E4F.1040900@bluewin.ch>, Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.ch> writes:1 > In article <cVzC8K+49bsV@tachxxsoftxxconsult>, LA > wayne@tachysoft.xxx.120519.killspam.00c7 (Wayne Sewell) writes:] > A >  > In article <3C7DA1D7.B9A63756@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" ,! > <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:i >  > N >  >> I've worked in shops where non-LMF software (other license methods) were >  >> verboten.e >  >>e >  >  >K >  > Really?  What's the reasoning on that?  Too much trouble dealing with p > alternateh >  > key formats?  > G > It makes sense given the weird variety of protection mechanisms I've tH > seen over the years. One company I used to deal with deliberately set J > out to crack competititors' licensing mechanisms to learn how NOT to do I > it, and usually a simple PATCH was all that was required.The mechanism .F > they devised for their own products was sophisticated, but could be 4 > circumvented if you knew how the designer thought.  O Any licensing scheme can be cracked eventually.  The idea is to make it so muchfJ work and take so many employee hours that the customer would save money by% actually paying for the product.  :-)i   > D > One of the more devious licensing mechanisms I have seen involved B > something hidden in a file header, which caused immense pain on I > occasions by announcing the license dead when it should not have been, sI > forcing me to reach for my backup tapes. Certain changes in the TCP/IP .F > configuration required the issue of a new license, somewhat (cough) E > inconvenient when you are doing reconfiguration in holiday periods.-  K It is certainly a balancing act to protect yourself from piracy and yet notnO inconvience or otherwise annoy the legitimate customer in any way.  Ironically,dK we just started using a new key system for new releases of products.  There L were a couple of minor key-related problems during field test, but none have; been reported since actual release of TAPESYS 6.1/JB 4.0.  c    E > I am putting forward a request to use PAKGEN to the software house -, > responsible for this product forthwith :-)  N I cannot commit Software Partners to anything, being a developer rather than aH manager, but I will certainly suggest this and have started looking intoO implementation details.  In fact, given the work I put into the new key system,eN my tentative plan is to support both key formats, allowing the customer to askM for either a LMF PAK or one of our key files.  Many of our existing customersaM are very familiar with our key system, and the new version has the capability^F of enabling any combination of our products in a single key file.  NewC customers, or those with non-LMF bans, could ask for a regular PAK.    -- wO =============================================================================== M Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738  wayne@tachysoft.xxx : http://www.tachysoft.xxx/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html  K change .xxx to .com in addresses above, assuming you are not a spambot  :-)CO ===============================================================================-= Society Lady:  Are you familiar with the Great Wall of China?m5        Curly:  No, but I know a big fence in Chicago!H   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 03:09:24 GMTs1 From: "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net>M( Subject: Re: I: PAKGEN Software for ISVs' Message-ID: <3C804422.189A6B51@fsi.net>s   Wayne Sewell wrote:  > ] > In article <3C7EE086.5D339CF8@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:h > > Wayne Sewell wrote:o > >>` > >> In article <3C7DA1D7.B9A63756@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes: > >> >O > >> > I've worked in shops where non-LMF software (other license methods) were  > >> > verboten. > >> > > >>+ > >> Really?  What's the reasoning on that?o > >  > > Say, "Disaster Recovery".r > >. > N > I'm not sure I follow.  Since this isn't the billyworld, you typically don'tM > have to reinstall everything from scratch during disaster recovery.  If you P > restore all the disks from backups, you get back to pretty much where you wereO > before the crisis began, including all the license keys.  In the case of sp32nO > products, all the keys reside in product directories, so when you restore theFM > disk containing the product, the key comes along for the ride.  The productm= > is ready to start immediately once the restore is complete.a > Q > Again, the licensing schemes which depend on hardware might have a problem, duelP > to board swaps and such, but the ones that don't will work just fine after theO > restore.  If you don't have to *do* anything, I don't see how recovery is any  > different from LMF.a  C Well, that's just it - anything that is in any way connected to thedG physical hardware (MAC address, CPU serial number, etc.) will typically  break in a DR scenario.   ? Even some based on license units can be a problem if you "home"w; system(s) is(are) "smaller" than the one(s) at the DR site.u  F Sometimes, it's just a management issue. Some sites want all licensing3 managed through central facility, for many reasons.h   -- u David J. Dachterae dba DJE Systemsh http://www.djesys.com/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/"   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 22:49:17 -0600-- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)1( Subject: Re: I: PAKGEN Software for ISVs3 Message-ID: <S0KCLv5ZbgOf@eisner.encompasserve.org>   [ In article <3C804422.189A6B51@fsi.net>, "David J. Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@fsi.net> writes:h  E > Well, that's just it - anything that is in any way connected to thenI > physical hardware (MAC address, CPU serial number, etc.) will typicallym > break in a DR scenario.   @ LMF provides enough capabilities to allow licenses to be tied to? hardware MAC addresses, so an ISV that is determined to do suchs2 things might not be dissuaded merely by using LMF.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 15:13:12 -0500u* From: John Reagan <john.reagan@compaq.com>4 Subject: Re: Microsoft Curries Favor With Undergrads) Message-ID: <3C7FE0D8.5080908@compaq.com>@   Brian Tillman wrote:F >>  Microsoft on Thursday released software development tools aimed atE >>  college-level computer science students, hoping it will produce asD >>  fresh crop of software programmers loyal to its Windows and .Net >>  technology.  >> > ; > At one time, Digital knew this.  Compaq just says, "Huh?"e >   - I'll follow up with a "Huh?" to your comment?w  H Can you give me an example of what Digital did "at one time" that would I be similar?  I can't think of any (other than some campus-wide licensing  : schemes for universities that still exist today [I think])   -- i John Reagant' Compaq Pascal/{A|I}MACRO Project Leadera   ------------------------------   Date: 2 Mar 2002 01:59:12 GMTh2 From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@shell1.aracnet.com>& Subject: OPENVMS-HOBBYIST License PAK?, Message-ID: <a5pblg02a4q@enews4.newsguy.com>  E I just realized I needed to hurry up and get new Hobbyist PAKs for myt; system, and discovered that there is at least two new PAKs.$  H I gather that DFG is "Disk File Optimizer"?  However, what on earth does OPENVMS-HOBBYIST do?!?!?   		Zane   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 22:54:55 -0600i- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)j* Subject: Re: OPENVMS-HOBBYIST License PAK?3 Message-ID: <7V0U+$eH+f2V@eisner.encompasserve.org>I  a In article <a5pblg02a4q@enews4.newsguy.com>, "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh@shell1.aracnet.com> writes:eG > I just realized I needed to hurry up and get new Hobbyist PAKs for my = > system, and discovered that there is at least two new PAKs.d > J > I gather that DFG is "Disk File Optimizer"?  However, what on earth does > OPENVMS-HOBBYIST do?!?!?  E PAKs for OPENVMS-HOBBYIST are only provided to hobbyists.  Thus thirdtD parties can honor that PAK rather than having to issue their own forD hobbyists.  Some third parties would prefer to issue their own PAKs.   ------------------------------    Date: 02 Mar 2002 04:00:45 +0800, From: Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com>O Subject: Re: Q: Why is XP-1000 RAM so expensive from Compaq vis-a-vis Kingston?r0 Message-ID: <871yf43vo2.fsf@k9.prep.synonet.com>  / wspencer@ap.nospam.org (Warren Spencer) writes:-  ? > Clearly Compaq cannot support 3rd-party RAM, so a CPQ supportiA > technician might ask you to remove it temporarily if you have anD > hard-to-find hardware failure.  However iff the system in questionD > has extreme reliability requirements, you may wish to use the moreA > expensive RAM to avoid potential conflicts with you CPQ supporth > agreement.  ? So show then where the door is and cancel the support contract. A I think you will find that the 'misunderstanding' if papered overr$ and... You know the script I'm sure.  @ Hum wonder what the $/TPC would be on the recent record ES45 run with non-Q memory...   -- i< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.-@                                              West Australia 6076. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 11:01:08 -0800a0 From: Mark Berryman <Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com>( Subject: Re: restricting access to ports, Message-ID: <3C7F5F74.4B1807ED@Mvb.Saic.Com>   Phillip Helbig wrote:m > J > > This shouldn't be necessary.  When the ISP blocks incoming connectionsH > > on all ports except some very limited subset that you have chosen toJ > > allow, they are not filtering out *ALL* packets to those ports on yourI > > system, only those that have (or don't have) a certain bit set in the F > > packet header that says "this is a new connect request".  When youI > > initiate a connection to a specific port on a remote host, the TCP/IPsH > > stack assigns you a random available port number for your end of theI > > connection.  (The port number is how it keeps track of connections somG > > it knows which application, i.e. which BG: or TCP: device gets thisMD > > particular packet.)  The ISP should *NOT* be filtering out theseK > > packets on the established connections, only the packets for externally  > > initiated new connections. > I > Unfortunately, I think the ISP IS filtering out everything.  Never mindoI > FTP and SMTP, which are a bit trickier; I couldn't even TELNET out when-H > this filter was in place, but could as soon as he took the filter down > again. > G > If it's any help, here's the filter the ISP had (which is now removede6 > until I can tell him EXACTLY what he should filter): >  > echo "     helbig_filter" , > iptables -N helbig_filter > /dev/null 2>&1 > iptables -F helbig_filterb; > iptables -A helbig_filter -p tcp --dport 8000   -j ACCEPTc; > iptables -A helbig_filter -p tcp --dport 20:21  -j ACCEPTl; > iptables -A helbig_filter -p tcp --dport 23     -j ACCEPTd; > iptables -A helbig_filter -p tcp --dport 443    -j ACCEPT ; > iptables -A helbig_filter -p tcp --dport 25     -j ACCEPTt; > iptables -A helbig_filter -p tcp --dport 110    -j ACCEPTr9 > iptables -A helbig_filter -p ICMP               -j DROPh# > iptables -A helbig_filter -j DROP   G The problem with this filter is that it is blocking all reply packets. eH Regardless of whether you are initiating an outbound connection, or someH external host is initiating a request on one of these allowed ports, the reply packet is lost.e  G Have your ISP make the following changes (I am using 192.168.0.1 in thee; example since I don't know what your actual IP address is):r   Insert as the first rule:   ! iptables -s 192.168.0.1 -j ACCEPTo  F this will cause any packet you initiate to pass the filter so you haveH unlimited outbound connectivity and all of your reply packets to inbound connections will also work.t   The next rule should be:  / iptables -p tcp -d 192.168.0.1 !--syn -j ACCEPTs  C this will cause any TCP packet, destined for your host, that is not 0 trying to start a new connection to be accepted.  E Presumably, you also need your DNS queries to also pass this filter. aG The following two entries will allow this to work although there may ben a shorter way:  $ iptables -p udp --dport 53 -j ACCEPT$ iptables -p udp --sport 53 -j ACCEPT  H I tend to setup filters on routers rather than unix hosts and I admit toA surprise that your ISP is doing it this way.  My knowledge of theyG iptables program is weak since I never use it but the above should give-- enough clues to your ISP to get things going.   
 Mark Berrymanu Mark.Berryman@Mvb.Saic.Com   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 13:53:09 -0800o/ From: rcyoung@aliconsultants.com (Robert Young)8Y Subject: Running SMG  program from DCL...better way than spawn when sending info BACK to s= Message-ID: <91437ce6.0203011353.60469142@posting.google.com>3  E We are currently looking at using lib$spawn to run a SMG program from D DCL. Is there a better way of doing this so that the SMG program canD send information ( by setting a logical  or ???) back to the parent,5 so it is checkable after the subprocess has finished?n   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 21:36:40 -0800 ) From: P.Young@unsw.EDU.AU (Patrick Young) Y Subject: Re: Running SMG  program from DCL...better way than spawn when sending info BACK = Message-ID: <55f85d77.0203012136.1b428267@posting.google.com>   t rcyoung@aliconsultants.com (Robert Young) wrote in message news:<91437ce6.0203011353.60469142@posting.google.com>...G > We are currently looking at using lib$spawn to run a SMG program fromiF > DCL. Is there a better way of doing this so that the SMG program canF > send information ( by setting a logical  or ???) back to the parent,7 > so it is checkable after the subprocess has finished?o  G I'm not sure what the question is. SMG in the context of SMG$ routines?r  * Or you are looking at this type of thing??   $ spawn/nowait run smg $ wait 00:00:00.50 $ open/read MBOX MY_MBXs $ read MBOX my_data- $ write sys$output my_data $ close MBOX   H t smg.bas  1nB     %include "$iodef" %from %library "sys$share:basic$starlet.tlb"C     %include "$stsdef" %from %library "sys$share:basic$starlet.tlb"sC     %include "starlet" %from %library "sys$share:basic$starlet.tlb"d       declare word chant2     declare string constant msg = "Hello world!!!"  G     call sys$qiow(, chan, IO$_WRITEVBLK,,,, msg by ref, len(msg),,,,) &e?         if sys$crembx(0%, chan,,,,, "MY_MBX") and STS$M_SUCCESS   @ PS: you are the 3rd Robert Young I've met today - myself (Robert P Young) and my father :-)   ------------------------------  * Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 19:50:26 +0000 (UTC)4 From: lewis@luminaforspam.mitre.org (Keith A. Lewis)  Subject: Re: Sound on alpha/VMS?. Message-ID: <a5om21$8np$1@newslocal.mitre.org>  } "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network> writes in article <3C7FBC77.2010205@qsl.network> dated Fri, 01 Mar 2002 17:27:43 GMT:sF >Did you add @SYS$STARTUP:MMOV$STARTUP to your SYSTARTUP_VMS.COM file?  1 Yes.  And when I try to re-run it manually I get:k  & %RUN-F-CREPRC, process creation failed! -SYSTEM-F-DUPLNAM, duplicate namee  * The MMOV$SERVER process does indeed exist.  I The AUA0 device probably exists independant of MMOV.  I did pull it out aaH few years back and tried to use it in a 4100, maybe I fried it or put it back in the wrong slot...o  = Anybody know what these cards look like at the boot prompt?  f  + --Keith Lewis              klewis$mitre.org=> The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 17:38:30 -0800w) From: P.Young@unsw.EDU.AU (Patrick Young).  Subject: Re: Sound on alpha/VMS?= Message-ID: <55f85d77.0203011738.1fbbdcc9@posting.google.com>=  j lewis@luminaforspam.mitre.org (Keith A. Lewis) wrote in message news:<a5om21$8np$1@newslocal.mitre.org>... > ? > Anybody know what these cards look like at the boot prompt?  C >   F Can't take a machine down at the moment to check. You most likely have& an ESS1887 AudioDrive (Personal WS)...  
 F sh mag aua0e  6 Disk AUA0:, device type ESS1887 AudioDrive, is online,7     record-oriented device, carriage control, served toE     cluster via MSCP Server.  ) The 1887 is an ISA device, and will need:t  " device       = "ES1888 Sound Card"   name       = AUs   driver     = MMOV$ESSDRIVERa   adapter    = XBUS    id         = ES18887
 end_device  > Added to the SYS$SYSTEM:SYS$USER_CONFIG.DAT. I'm not sure MMOV= will do this during instalation by default - from the comment  in my file, maybe not...  4 ! Added on 22-JAN-2001 13:22:43.98 via Patrick Young  @ Which with my non-existant memory, I cannot even remember addingA any more, or even if I had to ISACFG this option from SRM and tagr
 it ES1888.  6 On the PC164 at home I've got the old M$ sound system:  
 $ sh mag aua0   D Device AUA0:, device type unknown, is online, record-oriented device     carriage control.d  % device       = "Microsoft Sound Card"a   name       = AUd   driver     = MMOV$MSBDRIVERd   adapter    = ISA   id         = "PCXBJ"
 end_device  E and had to do an isacfg from the SRM console to add the device beforec it could be picked up as AUA0:   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 13:39:45 -0600s+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)l3 Subject: Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux Crowm3 Message-ID: <VBpKilD$N0Gt@eisner.encompasserve.org>   j In article <cdQf8.159$pN4.15502@bin8.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes: > : > "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message/ > news:J9Uv6b4tuD8K@eisner.encompasserve.org...  >>@ >> Gotta love revisionist historians!  Remember kids, it is your? >> "perception" of history.  We all have our own "perceptions!"o > N > This is not to say that Sun's interest in Linux has not increased, just thatM > your purported inconsistency doesn't seem to be supported by the referencesy > you cite.t >    	I knew this would be fun!   	Taking this again:.  K  "Linux on non-PC platforms is a nonstarter," said Greg Papadopoulos, chiefnJ  technology officer for Sun Microsystems. "The ecosystem of open source is5  not going to be working for IBM on other platforms."t  A 	In other words:  "Linux on non-PCs isn't a threat, won't get offt> 	the ground... is going nowhere."  AND "IBM isn't going to get@ 	Linux going on much other than PC (Intel) based hardware [other! 	platforms... other than "PC"]  "i  C 	The the conclusion drawn from the second statement follows clearlyiD 	from the first.  Or course IBM Linux success and other Linux succes> 	clearly refutes Greg Papadopoulos's second statement but thatH 	is really an aside.  The contradiction is found in his first statement.@ 	If as he says, Linux on non-PC platforms is a "nonstarter", whyB 	is Sun doing what they are doing and announcing a brand new Linux 	initiative for core Solaris:   , 	Sun's NEW direction (among pieces) is this:  K compatibility tools so that >>> Linux applications can run on Sun's SolarisnD operating system <<< and a range of professional services for Linux.  2 	Remember... Solaris is out of the Intel game now.  A 	Clearly for platforms other than Intel/PC, clearly contradicting=, 	the the CTO's statement from two years ago.   	Ed Zander says:  I Sun's president and chief operating officer, Ed Zander, tried to convince G listeners on a conference call that his company has long been a staunch- supporter of Linux.     A 	Clearly not the case... further borne out in that New York Times G 	article where Sun is mentioned 11 times... Sun targetted as one of thefA 	two main reasons for IBM's strategy, borne out in this statementF 	from that article:   J "Today, Microsoft and Sun dominate the application development seats," theO [Bowen] report stated. "We recommend that IBM aggressively pursue a Linux-based.J application development platform. Doing so would disrupt the Sun-Microsoft stranglehold."  B 	Sun couldn't embrace Linux THEN as that wouuld undercut their own6 	development efforts, and when several articles in the@ 	past two weeks point out a major shift in their strategy ZanderD 	does revisionist historians proud!  Probably some tough convincing # 	there on that conference call, eh?   E 	Sun adopts a major Linux thrust for Solaris on February 7th because  + 	they probably don't have much of a choice!l   				Robe   > - bill >  >>I >> http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/03/biztech/articles/20soft.htmlo >> >> >> March 20, 2000a >>M >> "Linux on non-PC platforms is a nonstarter," said Greg Papadopoulos, chieftL >> technology officer for Sun Microsystems. "The ecosystem of open source is7 >> not going to be working for IBM on other platforms."  >> >>0 >> http://biz.yahoo.com/fo/020207/0207sun_1.html >> >> Thursday February 7, 2002 >>L >> Sun's president and chief operating officer, Ed Zander, tried to convinceJ >> listeners on a conference call that his company has long been a staunch* >> supporter of Linux. [Cough cough cough] >> >> ... >>C >> Curiously, he said the media, analysts and even customers didn'tn > understand howJ >> committed his company is to Linux. Perhaps that's because Sun has until > now K >> only dipped its big toe in Linux waters. Previous reluctance about Linuxi > can beM >> seen as an effort to protect its flagship Solaris franchise, but Sun's new # >> strategy resembles a cannonball.  >>I >> Sun's Linux initiatives include general-purpose servers running Linux, M >> development of an entire suite of infrastructure software called SunOne onlI >> Linux, compatibility tools so that Linux applications can run on Sun'ss	 > SolarisDC >> operating system and a range of professional services for Linux.9 >> >>? >> Perhaps it has a lot to do with IBM's noted Linux success as / >> later in that biz.yahoo.com article we read:y >>K >> It may also be about competing on more fronts against IBM , which was anl > earlylL >> and prominent supporter of Linux. In fact, IBM last week said that it hasL >> already recouped most of its $1 billion investment in Linux through sales > of# >> hardware, software and services.e >> >> Rob >> >> >  >    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 20:45:53 GMTo* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>3 Subject: Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux Crow-C Message-ID: <4MRf8.225194$Aw2.17620189@bin7.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>s  8 "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message- news:VBpKilD$N0Gt@eisner.encompasserve.org...hK > In article <cdQf8.159$pN4.15502@bin8.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>, "Bill Todd"   <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes: > > < > > "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message1 > > news:J9Uv6b4tuD8K@eisner.encompasserve.org...e > >>B > >> Gotta love revisionist historians!  Remember kids, it is yourA > >> "perception" of history.  We all have our own "perceptions!"i > >cK > > This is not to say that Sun's interest in Linux has not increased, just  thatD > > your purported inconsistency doesn't seem to be supported by the
 references
 > > you cite.  > >0 >9 > I knew this would be fun!y  A Not really.  You just need to take a course in logic and parsing.?   >s > Taking this again: >sG >  "Linux on non-PC platforms is a nonstarter," said Greg Papadopoulos,s chieffL >  technology officer for Sun Microsystems. "The ecosystem of open source is7 >  not going to be working for IBM on other platforms."a > B > In other words:  "Linux on non-PCs isn't a threat, won't get off? > the ground... is going nowhere."  AND "IBM isn't going to getoA > Linux going on much other than PC (Intel) based hardware [other?" > platforms... other than "PC"]  "  J While that may be a legitimate interpretation of his comment (another one,L of course, is that it was just a non-starter for *Sun*, given its own choiceH of directions and lack of interest in shouldering the entire burden of aK Linux-on-SPARC effort as IBM has indeed shouldered the entire burden of its"J Linux-on-everything efforts), the problem with your original post was thatF it cited no evidence (and in particular no admission from Sun, which IL believe would be most people's understanding of what 'eating crow' means) to
 the contrary.p   > D > The the conclusion drawn from the second statement follows clearlyE > from the first.  Or course IBM Linux success and other Linux succes 6 > clearly refutes Greg Papadopoulos's second statement  J *If* you interpret it as you chose to, rather than, e.g., as I pointed out it can be interpreted.  	  but thatr > is really an aside.   K Yes, it is, since (as I said above) your original presentation did not citey it.   4   The contradiction is found in his first statement.A > If as he says, Linux on non-PC platforms is a "nonstarter", whyeC > is Sun doing what they are doing and announcing a brand new Linux  > initiative for core Solaris:  L Because it's *not* an initiative to support Linux itself on non-PC platformsL (which is the thrust of Greg's original statement), but rather an initiativeI to support Linux *applications* on *Solaris* platforms (rather similar toPI the COE work on VMS, and very distinct from IBM's support of the Linux OSl itself on all its platforms).   F The main reason you're such a light-weight is that you don't bother toE understand what you read before spouting nonsense about it.  That's a0/ correctable deficiency, should you want to try..   - bill   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 15:22:10 -0600-+ From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young)a3 Subject: Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux Crowr3 Message-ID: <DqfP9WEyM+UZ@eisner.encompasserve.org>o  p In article <4MRf8.225194$Aw2.17620189@bin7.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>, "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes:   >  >> >> Taking this again:n >>H >>  "Linux on non-PC platforms is a nonstarter," said Greg Papadopoulos, > chief M >>  technology officer for Sun Microsystems. "The ecosystem of open source ist8 >>  not going to be working for IBM on other platforms." >>C >> In other words:  "Linux on non-PCs isn't a threat, won't get offh@ >> the ground... is going nowhere."  AND "IBM isn't going to getB >> Linux going on much other than PC (Intel) based hardware [other# >> platforms... other than "PC"]  "n > > > While that may be a legitimate interpretation of his comment  ! 	"May be" OR "is"  - Which is it?B  ( 	This consistent vacilation is annoying.  D 	Was Reagan wrong in saying that Russia was an "Evil Empire?"  As weA 	are slouching towards Gomorrah and can no longer use words like nB 	"Evil", are we still allowed to posit that something "is"?  Is itB 	true or isn't it?  Depending on my meaning of "is" and "true" and/ 	my "perception" of history or course we can't!h  H > The main reason you're such a light-weight is that you don't bother to= > understand what you read before spouting nonsense about it.h  A 	Ok, I'm a lightweight....  Parse it however you wish and declarer8 	others lacking understanding and nonsensical.  Typical.   				Robd   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 23:43:18 GMTp* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>3 Subject: Re: Sun eating major helping of Linux Crowp? Message-ID: <qmUf8.1108$pN4.219015@bin8.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>l  8 "Rob Young" <young_r@encompasserve.org> wrote in message- news:DqfP9WEyM+UZ@eisner.encompasserve.org...AK > In article <4MRf8.225194$Aw2.17620189@bin7.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>, "Billl& Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net> writes: >j > >h > >> > >> Taking this again:j > >>J > >>  "Linux on non-PC platforms is a nonstarter," said Greg Papadopoulos,	 > > chiefsL > >>  technology officer for Sun Microsystems. "The ecosystem of open source is: > >>  not going to be working for IBM on other platforms." > >>E > >> In other words:  "Linux on non-PCs isn't a threat, won't get off2B > >> the ground... is going nowhere."  AND "IBM isn't going to getD > >> Linux going on much other than PC (Intel) based hardware [other% > >> platforms... other than "PC"]  "y > >i@ > > While that may be a legitimate interpretation of his comment > " > "May be" OR "is"  - Which is it?  J "May be" - I'm usually pretty careful to say what I mean.  In this case, IK was giving your rather liberal expansion the benefit of considerable doubt;nH had your expansion stuck more closely to the original statement, I would have said "is".b   >o) > This consistent vacilation is annoying.h  H I suppose it would be if I were vacillating.  However, once again that's5 simply your mistaken interpretation of the situation.3   >C> > Was Reagan wrong in saying that Russia was an "Evil Empire?"  I Yes, he was.  But that would be a rather stupid diversion to pursue here.P     As wetA > are slouching towards Gomorrah and can no longer use words likenC > "Evil", are we still allowed to posit that something "is"?  Is iteC > true or isn't it?  Depending on my meaning of "is" and "true" and-0 > my "perception" of history or course we can't!  I We can, and should, use words reasonably precisely - a concept apparentlyiI foreign to you (or perhaps you just aren't acquainted with the details ofsJ their definitions).  While I don't try to take advantage of other people'sI fuzziness in such areas as Clinton did (though given that the environmentrJ was a legal proceeding, I'm not sure that being sticky about precision wasI all that inappropriate), I do try to use, rather than abuse, the languagerJ and don't apologize if others are too lazy to follow such use (though I am& happy to clarify when asked politely).   >EJ > > The main reason you're such a light-weight is that you don't bother to? > > understand what you read before spouting nonsense about it.3 >1B > Ok, I'm a lightweight....  Parse it however you wish and declare9 > others lacking understanding and nonsensical.  Typical.4  J My calling a spade a spade is fairly typical, indeed.  If this had been anL exceptional aberration on your part rather than your own typical behavior, I0 would probably have been less directly critical.   - bill   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 11:26:55 -0800 ( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)N Subject: To VMS support: What is VMS/ucx raw socket exposure to DrDos attacks?= Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0203011126.397a1efa@posting.google.com>   B Could someone enlighten us on potential problems here w/raw socketE api's in ucx/tcpware/multinet ... please read about new DrDos attacksa at ...   http://grc.com/dos/drdos.htm   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 20:40:20 -0800i) From: P.Young@unsw.EDU.AU (Patrick Young)bR Subject: Re: To VMS support: What is VMS/ucx raw socket exposure to DrDos attacks?= Message-ID: <55f85d77.0203012040.37926c9e@posting.google.com>   m bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) wrote in message news:<d7791aa1.0203011126.397a1efa@posting.google.com>... D > Could someone enlighten us on potential problems here w/raw socketG > api's in ucx/tcpware/multinet ... please read about new DrDos attacks0 > at ... >  > http://grc.com/dos/drdos.htm  G I can speak only for TCPIP services where as a normal user you won't be$% able to create yourself a raw socket.b  # H help tcpip prog sock socket() argi ...3N                  o  SOCK_RAW - Provides access to internal network interfaces.N                 Available only to users with either a system UIC or the SYSPRV                 privilege.  K Yup, as is usual with OpenVMS someone thought this out. Tru64 also has thism thought out:  M             SOCK_RAW  [Tru64 UNIX]   Provides access to internal network pro- M                       tocols and interfaces. This type of socket is availableaA                       only to a process with superuser privilege.w  H Not really knowing too much about Window(tm), and I have never even seenG Window(tm) XP(tm), what security model exists that would be suitable to  apply?   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 01:26:05 +0000 + From: "antonio.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org>u. Subject: Re: vax/vms documentation - psi / x29& Message-ID: <3C802A2D.4080608@iee.org>   Bob Knowles wrote:  L > Antonio's last sentence may well be right: the Bookreader program, and OLDM > (Online Documentation) - precursor of the revolutionarily-named ODL (OnlinetB > Documentation Library) - started in the late '80s or early '90s.    3 I meant online as in "on the web now". The PSI docs 6 were almost certainly on CONOLD at some stage in their5 lives. I assumed that if he had the manuals somewherec he'd have read them ...l  N > Management Guide there's just one small sub-section - and I shan't repeat itJ > here because the Alpha implementation is entirely different (I think theM > Australian group that 'ported' it started by throwing out nearly all of theSL > original code, produced by the European Network Engineering group based in > Reading).f    ) The group in Oz that produced the OpenVMS   - Alpha X.25 implementation chose to port theirg- existing Unix X.25 implementation but to give 1 it a $QIO interface that was as close as possible - to that provided by Phase V PSI. I guess they.* were used to working in C and the existing PSI code was in BLISS.     Antonioe   -- A   ---------------n- Antonio Carlini             arcarlini@iee.orgr   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 01:28:49 +0000d+ From: "antonio.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org> . Subject: Re: vax/vms documentation - psi / x29$ Message-ID: <3C802AD1.70401@iee.org>   Alan Greig wrote:e  H > Is that strictly true? I well recall spending days on the phone to theD > UK CSC trying to get X25 working under VAX/VMS 5.5 with DECNET VAXA > Extensions (Phase V) talking to a Phase V DEMSA. Got it workingeD > eventually after multiple patch kits and CSC supplied workarounds.    . There was an overlap period when both PSI V4.3+ and PSI V5 (Phase V) fixes were being done.   . Please try not to mention EXTENSIONS again :-)  * I was not there and luckily I never had to% support it. I think the problems weres+ mostly down to the fact that it was Phase V"' PSI with (essentially) Phase IV DECnet.o     Antonion   --     ---------------s- Antonio Carlini             arcarlini@iee.orge   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 01:39:47 +0000y+ From: "antonio.carlini" <arcarlini@iee.org> . Subject: Re: vax/vms documentation - psi / x29& Message-ID: <3C802D63.8090005@iee.org>   pat saunders wrote:l   >  > Hi,tG >   I include more info regarding the problem that "might" be a soluion H > to why it is unsynchronised. I get the same NCL/CML errors as the chapH > below but the solution proposed only works on an alpha station. I need  > to find the equiv for the vax. > @ > It turned out that @sys$startup:x25$configure.com setting was:- >   1.  Autoconfigure device drivers   :   NOt >  > While it should be:e. >   1.  Autoconfigure device drivers   :   YES    - As I mentioned in another thread, some of theu- synch cards need to have firmware loaded. Youn. should ensure that you have configured decnet:'   $ @SYS$MANAGER:NET$CONFIGURE ADVANCEDm  4 If you miss off ADVANCED it tends to assume that you2 want DECnet running over everything, including the/ synch lines ... that means you'll end up havingo1 DDCMP instead of LAPB running. I think you end up / with a different error message than the one you 4 report, but I no longer have any real synch hardware to test this out on.    ' My (vague) recollection is that this is.% also the point at which you are asked.! whether you want to configure thea& WAN drivers (and when you say yes, you' get asked a few more questions, most of , which require a YES as an answer). Note that( it does not hurt to say that some of you% boards require microcode to be loadedl) even if none do. The reverse is not true! + Similarly, if you happen to be the customers' running a DSF32 (I know we had at leasti' *one* customer ...) then you'll want tot+ say YES to that. Again it won't hurt to sayi yes if you don't have a DSF32.    ( You probably have PSI configured already) (otherwise you would have no LAPB at all)e but just in case:p 	$ @SYS$MANAGER:PSI$CONFIGUREt (this one is screen-based).B    ) Again, it would help to know exactly whato, hardware you have. Most of the synch devices. have drivers of the form SxDRIVER or ZxDRIVER. The output from: 	$ SHOW DEV S* andn           $ SHOW DEV Z*p   might be useful.  * An offline device is generally a bad sign.   Antonioa     --     ---------------a- Antonio Carlini             arcarlini@iee.orga   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 16:53:04 -0800S From: kd5izi@my-deja.com (RDD)# Subject: VMS for a DEC 5000/240???? = Message-ID: <b696daa8.0203011653.26e6a7a9@posting.google.com>   
 Greetings,  D I've been interested in learning about VMS.  I recently was given anF old DEC 5000/240 that had an outdated verison of Ultrix on it.  I haveC several Sun machines so I have no need for another UNIX machine but B would love to learn VMS.  Having never even touched a VMS console,@ where would I begin.... assuming it will even run on this beast.  ' Many thanks in advance for all replies.u   Kind Regards   Randy  (AD5GB)   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 01:27:28 GMT>+ From: Ryan Moore <rmoore@rmoore.dyndns.org>a' Subject: Re: VMS for a DEC 5000/240????o= Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.31.0203011725370.31896-100000@jaipur>s  H I beleive a DEC 5000/240 is probably one of those MIPS boxes, right?  IfJ so, VMS will not run on it.  VMS requires either a VAX or Alpha processor.   On 1 Mar 2002, RDD wrote:iF > I've been interested in learning about VMS.  I recently was given anH > old DEC 5000/240 that had an outdated verison of Ultrix on it.  I haveE > several Sun machines so I have no need for another UNIX machine butgD > would love to learn VMS.  Having never even touched a VMS console,B > where would I begin.... assuming it will even run on this beast. >t) > Many thanks in advance for all replies.o   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Mar 2002 11:22:53 -0800 ( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski)C Subject: Warning!  Windoze XP involved in DRDos attacks!  Avoid XP!t< Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0203011122.c6317f3@posting.google.com>  = for all you windoze XP fans, I suggest not upgrading or using>> XP until raw socket API's are removed from it or else you risk: loosing internet access ... you as a valid client could be; blacklisted by ISP servers and routers as w/raw sockets you = could become part of a targeted Distributed Reflection Denial-8 of Service attack ... these are just appearing now and I; suggest all admins read the following ... below the link isa; an excerpt about Microsofts insanity to include these api's2 into XP ...p   http://grc.com/dos/drdos.htm  ' The attacking platform's responsibilitys  C I imagine that anyone reading this page is already well aware of myfF feelings regarding the deliberate and unnecessary inclusion of the rawC socket API in a mass market consumer desktop PC. I am referring, ofgE course, to the absolute insanity of Microsoft's inclusion &#8212; and ? subsequent defense of &#8212; the raw socket API in Windows XP.i  C While pedantic network experts, and Microsoft themselves, correctly!F argue that there are other ways to produce malicious Internet traffic,D there is no easier way than through the use of raw sockets. The best; way to earn users' trust is to deserve it. But deliberately E incorporating this unnecessary facility into every Windows XP machinesE &#8212; and essentially enabling it, by design, to become a maliciousnB reflection attack generator &#8212; makes a mockery of Microsoft'sA recent "Trustworthy Computing" rhetoric. We can always hope, as IsD fervently do, that Microsoft will recognize that it is not too late,? and will remove raw sockets from XP during one of the product'so/ continuous flow of patches and Windows Updates.i   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 15:09:30 -0500a- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> G Subject: Re: Warning!  Windoze XP involved in DRDos attacks!  Avoid XP!n, Message-ID: <3C7FDFF1.30C89C9D@videotron.ca>   Bob Ceculski wrote: < > loosing internet access ... you as a valid client could be= > blacklisted by ISP servers and routers as w/raw sockets you ? > could become part of a targeted Distributed Reflection Denial) > of Service attack ...r  9 Pardon my ignorance, but what is a "raw socket API" ?????   L In what way is that different from the $QIO interface on VMS for TCPIP/UDP ?   ------------------------------  $ Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 14:07:56 -0600+ From: Christopher Smith <csmith@amdocs.com>yG Subject: RE: Warning!  Windoze XP involved in DRDos attacks!  Avoid XP! H Message-ID: <7E008308CD77154485FEF878168D078E260A4F@CMIMAIL1.amdocs.com>   > -----Original Message-----6 > From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca]  ; > Pardon my ignorance, but what is a "raw socket API" ?????d  ? > In what way is that different from the $QIO interface on VMS t > for TCPIP/UDP ?i  @ It is no different from any interface on several other platforms> which allows one to construct tcp/ udp packets willy nilly. :)  9 This is a pet peeve of mine, because people are slamming  < microshaft for implementing this (perfectly acceptable, and 8 sometimes useful) service, rather than (as they should) 7 slamming microshaft for having _ABSOLUTELY_NO_SECURITY_p  > So what Bob should have said was "don't upgrade to windows... ! until it's secure" (can't happen)B   Sorry for the rant.x   Chrise    ! Christopher Smith, Perl Developerr Amdocs - Champaign, IL   /usr/bin/perl -e '? print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n");  'u  t   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 22:40:30 -0000 - From: wspencer@ap.nospam.org (Warren Spencer)0G Subject: RE: Warning!  Windoze XP involved in DRDos attacks!  Avoid XP!:7 Message-ID: <91C4BFED6warrenspencer1977@209.249.90.100>   / csmith@amdocs.com (Christopher Smith) wrote in c= <7E008308CD77154485FEF878168D078E260A4F@CMIMAIL1.amdocs.com>:l   >> -----Original Message-----w7 >> From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca]o >o< >> Pardon my ignorance, but what is a "raw socket API" ????? > @ >> In what way is that different from the $QIO interface on VMS  >> for TCPIP/UDP ? > A >It is no different from any interface on several other platformso? >which allows one to construct tcp/ udp packets willy nilly. :)o >.: >This is a pet peeve of mine, because people are slamming = >microshaft for implementing this (perfectly acceptable, and p9 >sometimes useful) service, rather than (as they should)  8 >slamming microshaft for having _ABSOLUTELY_NO_SECURITY_ >   
 -- snip --  F I believe the real issue here is that the Windows OS is polluted with G insecure designs and code, allowing scrip-kiddies (or worse) to easily rK write nasty viruses.  The accessibility of the raw sockets interface in XP t7 will allow virus writers to write much nastier viruses.n  H The raw sockets interface is indeed present on many operating systems.  D Adding it to the (arguably) most insecure one makes a bad situation  significantly worse.  F Given the licensing model for XP and the raw sockets issue, there may H indeed be good reasons for avoiding XP - I know I'm going to as long as 	 possible.n   ws -- n   Warren Spencer' Senior Software Engineer (not a writer)- The Associated Press  < ** Time flies like an arrow.  Fruit flies like a bananna. **   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 22:19:19 GMT80 From: prune@ZAnkh-Morpork.mv.com (Paul Winalski), Subject: Re: What return codes mean success?8 Message-ID: <3c7ffe2b.442981764@proxy.news.easynews.com>  , On Fri, 01 Mar 2002 08:48:39 +0100, Jan-Erik1 =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F6derholm?= <aaa@aaa.com> wrote:r  @ >That's not 100% as described in "Writing real programs in DCL". >> >0-2    cond code. >3-14   msg number >15     fac spec ? >16-26  facility number  >27     customer specific ?n >28     inhibit displays >29-31  reserved/unused.  9 That's what I get for typing it in from memory instead of> looking it up.  F Bit 15, the facility-specific flag, is technically part of the messageF number.  If set, it means that the message is specific to a particularC facility.  If clear, it means that the message number is one of thet& system-defined shared message numbers.  D Bit 27 (which I had incorrectly said was bit 31), if set, means that< this is a customer-defined facility as opposed to one of the! officially-registered facilities.   F I'd forgotten about bit 28.  If set, this bit means that if the status? is used as the return value of a main program, the DCL CLI willn3 not display the message associated with the status.   
 ---------- Remove 'Z' to reply by email.d   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 06:53:39 +0100n2 From: martin@radiogaga.harz.de (Martin Vorlaender)! Subject: Re: [Q] internet and VMSa; Message-ID: <3c8068e3.524144494f47414741@radiogaga.harz.de>s  ) Bob Ceculski (bob@instantwhip.com) wrote: 7 > martin@radiogaga.harz.de (Martin Vorlaender) wrote...r- > > Bob Ceculski (bob@instantwhip.com) wrote:i8 > > >  ... and editing tcpware_configure is a lot easier5 > > > than editing 8 million conf files in apache ...p > > J > > Oh come on. You don't have to use Apache's INCLUDE statement - you canK > > have it all in one file (in fact, using HTTDP.CONF/SRM.CONF/ACCESS.CONFaH > > is deprecated). As the task at hand is a little more complicated, of8 > > course you do have to remember some more statements. >CG > with purveyor, I just use the rsm html interface for everything, or I'= > can edit a single configuration file ... it's a lot easier!p  < Pray tell me how you *easily edit* Purveyor's config file...  I It's a registry-style file (a remnant of Purveyor once being available onpF WinNT 3.5), though IIRC in plain ASCII (with "Key" and "Value" lines).  I I once wrote a (decidedly non-trivial) perl program to read it and outputfC a roughly equivalent Apache config file. That's the downside of GUIr2 configuration - it's no good for batch processing.   cu,t   Martin -- eD                     | Martin Vorlaender    |    VMS & WNT programmer-   Smiert Spamionem  | work: mv@pdv-systeme.deiD                     |       http://www.pdv-systeme.de/users/martinv/4                     | home: martin@radiogaga.harz.de   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2002.119 ************************