1 INFO-VAX	Sat, 04 May 2002	Volume 2002 : Issue 246       Contents: Re: A nighmare for Bill Gates ( Re: ASTs and privs. Was: $QIO and SYSPRV3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix 3 Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix H Re: dBASE IV package/license for VMS VAX, product status?  Transferable?H Re: dBASE IV package/license for VMS VAX, product status?  Transferable?P Re: Does anyone have example code for finding the BG device associated  with a T  Re: Fix for EDT emulation in EVE Re: New to VAX RE: Revisionist history  Re: Revisionist history  Re: Revisionist history + Re: Some more words of wisdom from Capellas + Re: Some more words of wisdom from Capellas  Re: Vax emulator for PC ) Re: VAXstation 3520 (Firefox) mem upgrade ' Re: VMS on http://www.windows-sucks.org ' Re: VMS on http://www.windows-sucks.org ' Re: VMS on http://www.windows-sucks.org 8 Re: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?) [OT] Re: UK folks this might interest you   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------   Date: 4 May 2002 09:32:17 -0700 . From: spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman)& Subject: Re: A nighmare for Bill Gates= Message-ID: <b096a4ee.0205040832.157804aa@posting.google.com>   a JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message news:<3CD34B6A.EDC30AD8@videotron.ca>...  > <dream mode on> O > Rooters - May 7th 2002. (Santa Clara).  Carly Fiorina, the victorious head of O > the new HP finally unveiled today the product roadmap she has been working on  > for the past year. > P > HP, having now gained number 1 status in the computer industry [1] has decidedI > to chart the course for the industry, a course full of high quality and M > innovation. The newly acquired assets will allow HP to return to its former ; > self, innovating with high quality products and services.  > O > As a result of this strong power, HP has decided to screw Intel and Microsoft P > whose products are nowhere near the desired HP quality levels and instead willK > redevelop the Alpha chip and redeploy its high quality operating systems, - > layered products and application software.   > M > The new HP product line will be consolidated around the Alpha chip from the O > desktop to the supercomputer, which will support VMS, Tandem's NSK, Tru64 and H > Linux. HP has decided that it was much more efficient to merge HP-UX'sI > features into the richer environment of Tru64 than doing the previously  > announced reverse. > D > Not wanting to become a proprietary company, HP will licence theseP > technologies with very easy terms to any other computer manufacter, as well as/ > allow other chip makers to FAB Alpha designs.  > O > With a strong leadership role, HP will be able to set industry standards that L > will greatly increase productivity, eliminate the time current lost to fixK > Microsoft software problems and viri, and also enhance competition by not 7 > having a single OS that has such a high market share.  >  > N > [1] (that is what the montreal Subway information panels said today, i guess > they forgot about IBM) > </dream mode off>     # Well put! Let's mail this to Carly.    Disclaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldman " afeldman atski gfigroup dotski com   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 05 May 2002 01:22:54 +0930 / From: Mark Daniel <mark.daniel@wasd.vsm.com.au> 1 Subject: Re: ASTs and privs. Was: $QIO and SYSPRV . Message-ID: <3CD403D6.ECDD9D1@wasd.vsm.com.au>   John Santos wrote: > * > On Fri, 3 May 2002, Paul Winalski wrote: > I > > On 03 May 2002 12:36:38 +0800, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> 
 > > wrote: > > 4 > > >JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> writes: > > > H > > >> would work fine. The only hitch is that your AST may execute withK > > >> SYSPRV or without SYSPRV depending on if it executes before or after # > > >> the disabling of the sysprv.  > > > H > > >Does this mean AST code could run at elevated privelege if it fires9 > > >at the 'right time'? No, I don't mean elevated mode.  > > A > > I believe the answer to that is yes, because privileges are a J > > process-wide attribute and the AST runs in the context of its process.G > > If this is a problem for your application, then the AST should turn B > > off the elevated privilege if it's on and restore it before it > > returns.   Without a doubt.   E > I wish we had a better problem description here.  I think what Mark * > is worried about is something like this:  B Just to state it again (and at the outset of this continued threadF discussion) I was *not* originally interested in privileges associatedH with AST routine execution (although there must have been some confusionD in my original post about this point) I was using AST delivery as anE obvious point at which asynchronous $QIO processing has completed.  I H wanted to understand whether (and better still why) a required privilegeE for a given operation might have to stay enabled until that point, or A whether (and why) it could be disabled when the asynchronous $QIO G initially returned (whether or not the processing had completed at that  point or not).  E RMS (based on the ACP-QIO interface) was the specific and immediately  relevant example.    A > Process creates a file with RMS ($CREATE) asynchronously.  This B > takes a lot of QIO's, all internal to RMS, as it drills down theA > directory tree to the intended directory, reads the file header > > of the directory to determine if the creator has appropriateA > access rights to create the file there, checks for any existing B > version of the file to determine if there is an existing file ofA > the same name which is protected against replacement, before it  > finally returns a result.   H This is a fair description of my specific concern.  I was also generallyG interested if there was any hard-and-fast rule for when $QIO (and other E asynchronous system services) take notice of process privileges, then E again when they use them, and by implication when they can be changed > without affecting the progress of the asynchronous processing.  F When I stopped to consider my original approach it struck me that someG of the functionality of the AST mechansim might be lost if an operation E requiring enhanced privileges would effectively block other user-mode E processing because of a requirement to retain the privilege until the  operation completed.  B > Does RMS implement this as a string of $QIO's (not $QIOW's) with9 > an AST completion routine for each triggering the next?   F Much of RMS' processing would be executing at EXEC mode anyway, so any@ AST's it delivers will be quite independent of any USER mode AST	 activity.    @ > If so, what happens when the main line of the code temporarily= > enables SYSPRV for some unrelated operation? (Remember, the : > $CREATE was called with FAB$L_FOP with the ASY bit set.)  D Without a doubt (there I go again) much of the functionality of ASTsH would be lost if once you lauched an asynchronous activity you had to beE very careful about what else you did (in the way of privileges) until ( the point at which the AST is delivered.   @ > Does RMS remember the privilege context from the time when the? > $CREATE was invoked, or does it check privs as it goes along.   < I think that has been addressed earlier in the thread.  $QIOC preprocessing checks required privileges before the driver is given G control.  Once the $QIO returns execution to image code it is basically ' independent until the AST is delivered.    ? > E.G. suppose the process does not have read access to the 3rd A > directory in the path with its normal privileges, but does when I > it has SYSPRV.  I.E. file to create is DKA200:[FOO.BAR.BASE.BALL]A.DAT, = > but the protection code of [FOO.BAR]BASE.DIR is (rwe,rwe,,) C > The $CREATE should fail when it checks BASE.DIR's protection, but D > if the AST for completion of the read of BASE.DIR's header happens= > to occur during a brief period when SYSPRV is enabled, then 1 > the $CREATE will continue and possibly succeed.   E If this was the case then the documentation should have the caveat IN $ LARGE FRIENDLY LETTERS on the cover.   @ > Disabling AST delivery won't do the trick if the function that# > requires SYSPRV depends on AST's.  > ; > Even converting all the AST routines in the program to do ; > nothing except queue a task to run in the main line won't ; > do the trick since the AST routines here are part of RMS,   > not user-written AST routines.  F Though as mentioned above they will be delivered independently of user code and at EXEC mode.   5 > The only method I see here that would work is to do : > everything synchronously, or to have a server process do; > all the privileged work, keep SYSPRV on all the time, and : > communicate with it via some mechanism or other.  (Maybe  ? Quoting Stephen Hoffman from an earlier post in this thread ...   G  > > Whether or not the AST routine requires any extended privileges is  not H  > > relevant to my query.  It is whether the privilege required for the $QIO  G  > > needs to remain enabled during the driver processing, which, if it 	 requires  F  > > some truly asynchronous activity such as device I/O, may be some &  > > (relatively) considerable period.  >  E  > The privilege checks precede the operation -- that said, there are ?  > buffer checks when a read operation completes; OpenVMS again B  > confirms that a read operation will only write to a buffer that  > the user has access to.  >  ?  > Drivers are fully privileged, and can do whatever they want. C  > Thus the relevent interface is the FDT routine within the driver A  > code, and the $qio code within OpenVMS.  These two are used to ?  > control access.  This is not to say that the driver will not ?  > probe memory access and even process ownership of the memory A  > when an asychronous read operation completes; the driver does  B  > need to verify that the memory is still accessable to the user.  
 and again ...   F  > The XQP is another whole discussion, as that is a large and complexG  > environment.  In general, you only need the privileges or the access F  > when you initiate the file operation, and you can safely ignore any6  > of the various ASTs that fly around within the XQP.  < > threads will serve instead of a fully independent process?3 > Does each thread have its own privilege context?)  > 8 > Or maybe the RMS $CREATE/$OPEN routines are not really6 > asynch, but the ASY bits are just there to get it to% > call the completion AST routines...   E The operations seem to be fully asynchronous and the AST routines, if 4 supplied (i.e. not zero), will be called regardless.    > --
 > John Santos  > Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. > 781-861-0670 ext 539  G It's an interesting and relevant topic.  Thanks to all who participate.    ------------------------------   Date: 04 May 2002 07:45:27 GMT& From: Volker Birk <bumens@dingens.org>< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix< Message-ID: <3cd39196$0$223$4d4ebb8e@businessnews.de.uu.net>  = In comp.sys.hp.hpux Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote: 1 > it doesn't have reasonable SMP capabilities for ) > anything over 4 to at most 8 processors    What exactly are you missing?    > it doesn't have any ( > prime-time-ready clustering mechanisms  G Have a look at Beowulf, http://www.beowulf.org/ and, if you want to try ? out, read http://www.ram.org/computing/linux/linux_cluster.html    > it's still experimenting! > (vigorously) with file systems,   > What is wrong with a choice between Ext3, Reiser, JFS and XFS?M Read http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Filesystems-HOWTO.html for filesystem support.   , > it has no formal support structure (though; > some of the package vendors are trying to create them)...   B That is wrong - it has _many_ formal support structures offered byD companies from HP to IBM, from Redhat to SuSE, even from us - ebios.  L > From what I know of Linux I like it a lot.  But it's not a mature platformK > yet for much beyond desktop (or at least development desktop) and low-end 
 > server use.   ; Enter "Linux Cluster" into a search enginge of your choice.   & > In many senses, of course Linux *is*F > Unix - which means that rather than having to convert to Linux, manyJ > customers will likely choose to remain with their current Unix vendor asK > long as that vendor makes sure that their Unix is Linux-compatible (which  > even VMS could be).   ( VMS is definitely not a Unix, nor Linux.  E I think, Linux will completely replace commercial Unix in most of the D markets. Some Unix fans will continue supporting that nicest hack of2 a platform, and of course - BSD will never die ;-)  B But why not using HP-UX today and having a slightly move to Linux?   VB.  --  C *** ebios Informationssysteme, Germany      ***  kangu:~ $ cd /pub/ G *** Gut-Betha-Platz 1, 88339 Bad Waldsee    ***  kangu:/pub $ more beer H *** Phone +49-7524-93421 Fax +49-7524-93423 ***  Aaahhhh! That was good!? *** mailto:vb@ebios.de                      ***  kangu:/pub $ _    ------------------------------   Date: 04 May 2002 07:47:58 GMT& From: Volker Birk <bumens@dingens.org>< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix< Message-ID: <3cd3922e$0$223$4d4ebb8e@businessnews.de.uu.net>  = In comp.sys.hp.hpux Bob Ceculski <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote:  > linux is a poor mans unix   * Good morning. World is changing every day.  D > begin with doesn't say much for linux ... yes good old propreitaryG > vms is still the best os in the world for the past 20 plus years, and F > the way it looks right now, the next 20 years ... linux or any otherD > os for that matter will never rival vms ... it will survive on its > own merits ...  B I agree - VMS will survive, it has a broad platform of supporters.  8 Why do I have the feeling of an growing OS war here? :-P   VB.  --  C *** ebios Informationssysteme, Germany      ***  kangu:~ $ cd /pub/ G *** Gut-Betha-Platz 1, 88339 Bad Waldsee    ***  kangu:/pub $ more beer H *** Phone +49-7524-93421 Fax +49-7524-93423 ***  Aaahhhh! That was good!? *** mailto:vb@ebios.de                      ***  kangu:/pub $ _    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 10:50:04 GMT L From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix8 Message-ID: <00A0D6A7.3D39CD9C@SSRL04.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  e In article <3cd39196$0$223$4d4ebb8e@businessnews.de.uu.net>, Volker Birk <bumens@dingens.org> writes: > >In comp.sys.hp.hpux Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote:2 >> it doesn't have reasonable SMP capabilities for* >> anything over 4 to at most 8 processors >  >What exactly are you missing? >  >> it doesn't have any) >> prime-time-ready clustering mechanisms  > H >Have a look at Beowulf, http://www.beowulf.org/ and, if you want to try@ >out, read http://www.ram.org/computing/linux/linux_cluster.html  M Beowulf clusters are designed for a considerably different problem space than N VMS clusters.  Beowulf clusters are designed, last I looked, to make a virtualG supercomputer out of a bunch of cheap PC boxes.  A Beowulf cluster will G typically be running one massive computation at a time; it's not really K designed to enable commercial application processing to continue relatively M unimpeded while one out of three of your data centers burns down, nor does it N do the job of allowing multiple processes safe access to resources mediated by a distributed lock manager.   N Beowulf is fine, but it's not even trying to address the space Bill is talking about.    ' >> In many senses, of course Linux *is* G >> Unix - which means that rather than having to convert to Linux, many K >> customers will likely choose to remain with their current Unix vendor as L >> long as that vendor makes sure that their Unix is Linux-compatible (which >> even VMS could be). > ) >VMS is definitely not a Unix, nor Linux.M  J He didn't say it was.  What he said was that it's possible that VMS could I be Linux-compatible in the sense of running Linux binaries, and possibly W" offereing Linux-compatible shells.   >uC >But why not using HP-UX today and having a slightly move to Linux?   K If you're using VMS already, why not keep using VMS until and unless forceda to move?   -- Alans  O =============================================================================== 0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056oM  Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA  94309-0210tO ===============================================================================T   ------------------------------   Date: 04 May 2002 11:57:24 GMT& From: Volker Birk <bumens@dingens.org>< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix< Message-ID: <3cd3cca4$0$228$4d4ebb8e@businessnews.de.uu.net>  a In comp.sys.hp.hpux "Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr" <winston@ssrl.slac.stanford.edu> wrote:fO > Beowulf clusters are designed for a considerably different problem space than- > VMS clusters.M  G That is partly right - and completely off-topic. VMS has nothing to do  
 with Unix.  L A commercial fail-over solution is offered by HP for example, or have a look( at http://www.missioncriticallinux.com/.  H You want to do that just using free software? We'll build a solution for6 you (we're using ICP Vortex RAID cluster & scripting).  K You want a real virtual machine redundant cluster build with free software?o> No problem, have a look at http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/.  M > If you're using VMS already, why not keep using VMS until and unless forcedo
 > to move?  E Yes, why not? I'm not defending Linux here. I only want to show, thate< the "Linux is Unix for children" theses is not true anymore.  ! Please don't write such nonsense.    VB.a -- nC *** ebios Informationssysteme, Germany      ***  kangu:~ $ cd /pub/ G *** Gut-Betha-Platz 1, 88339 Bad Waldsee    ***  kangu:/pub $ more beer H *** Phone +49-7524-93421 Fax +49-7524-93423 ***  Aaahhhh! That was good!? *** mailto:vb@ebios.de                      ***  kangu:/pub $ _    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 13:28:07 GMTn# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>w< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' UnixH Message-ID: <HlRA8.14173$wSM1.4960@news02.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message& news:3CD33C39.EC45D8F4@videotron.ca... > Ken Green wrote: > G > I am not forgetting MPE, although I am not very familiar with it. VMSK bringsG > in a SUBSTANTIAL portion of the profits for Compaq. Compaq considered- killingeI > VMS 2 years ago but realised that the impact on the financials would ben	 too much.e >.  J Ah yes, but the combined HP/Compaq is much bigger and VMS revenues/profitsJ represent a much smaller percentage of the whole (that's assuming that the7 PC side of the business ever becomes profitable again).   H Sometimes companies get so big that a few billion in sales here or thereI means nothing to them, irrespective of the profitability of that business   unit. So that unit gets ditched.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 14:24:15 GMTt* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' UnixA Message-ID: <Y9SA8.54301$Ii2.4711732@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>   3 "Volker Birk" <bumens@dingens.org> wrote in messageM6 news:3cd3cca4$0$228$4d4ebb8e@businessnews.de.uu.net...; > In comp.sys.hp.hpux "Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr"0' <winston@ssrl.slac.stanford.edu> wrote:aL > > Beowulf clusters are designed for a considerably different problem space than > > VMS clusters.D >a2 > That is partly right - and completely off-topic.  E Wrong.  The subject under discussion was the lack of prime-time-levelPJ maturity of Linux clustering.  VMS *defines* clustering maturity; Linux is+ still trying to understand that definition.     VMS has nothing to do > with Unix.  L Wrong.  VMS was, in fact, one of the first POSIX-compliant platforms.  WhileH POSIX != Unix, it's a bit of a stretch to claim 'POSIX has nothing to do with Unix'.h   >aI > A commercial fail-over solution is offered by HP for example, or have at look* > at http://www.missioncriticallinux.com/.  G Fail-over-style clustering is an improvement (though scripted fail-over-< chains remain a kludge), but still falls short in areas likeK concurrent-shared-disk access and distributed lock management (plus a whole G bunch of ancillary non-disk-related areas).  Not to mention that last IuK heard missioncriticallinux was not in the best of health (which is too bad,rC since it seemed to be the most credible of the Linux efforts in the ) prime-time space even if not yet mature).f  K There's a good reason so much cluster-related development activity is stilleI taking place (at a still-accelerating rate) in the Linux community:  it'so2 because mature facilities simply aren't there yet.   > J > You want to do that just using free software? We'll build a solution for8 > you (we're using ICP Vortex RAID cluster & scripting).  K Hey, *I* can build a solution for you too.  But I wouldn't call it 'mature'e3 until it had been out in the field for a few years.u   > C > You want a real virtual machine redundant cluster build with freen	 software?e@ > No problem, have a look at http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/.  L Fine for read-only access with a central dispatcher, but that's another veryD limiting niche.  I think you need to read (or possibly re-read) GregB Pfister's "In Search of Clusters" (2nd edition) to understand what 'maturity' means in this space.c   > H > > If you're using VMS already, why not keep using VMS until and unless forced > > to move? >gG > Yes, why not? I'm not defending Linux here. I only want to show, thatf> > the "Linux is Unix for children" theses is not true anymore.  J True:  Linux is now Unix for adolescents.  Some proprietary Unixes are forK adults, though youngish ones.  Systems like VMS and zOS qualify as 'mature'l5 (it's possible something like Netware might as well).w   - bill   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 14:38:02 GMTe* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix@ Message-ID: <enSA8.48568$n7.4417647@bin8.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  3 "Volker Birk" <bumens@dingens.org> wrote in messagef6 news:3cd39196$0$223$4d4ebb8e@businessnews.de.uu.net...? > In comp.sys.hp.hpux Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net> wrote:t3 > > it doesn't have reasonable SMP capabilities foro+ > > anything over 4 to at most 8 processorso >e > What exactly are you missing?   G The level of fine-grained kernel locking that doesn't choke with higheraC processor counts.  Not to mention that NUMA changes are still underg
 construction.n   ...o   > > it's still experimenting# > > (vigorously) with file systems,T >c@ > What is wrong with a choice between Ext3, Reiser, JFS and XFS?  K Ext3 is starting to look pretty good, but hardly sufficiently tested to bet H your enterprise on yet.  Reiser is still under construction (I like it aK lot, but wouldn't bet my business on it yet either).  JFS and XFS are still K being integrated:  IBM and SGI certainly did a lot more than just throw thelJ source code over the transom, but they're not the mature products on Linux) that they are in their original settings.v   ...o  . > > it has no formal support structure (though= > > some of the package vendors are trying to create them)...s >eD > That is wrong - it has _many_ formal support structures offered byF > companies from HP to IBM, from Redhat to SuSE, even from us - ebios.  J Sorry - my idea of a 'formal support structure' is more along the lines ofK what VMS, IBM proprietary systems, and some of the proprietary Unixes have, I rather than just the fact that someone, somewhere is willing to express asG sense of support responsibility.  Most of the companies associated with H Linux aren't experienced in this area at all by comparison, and even theH major proprietary vendors are still getting their Linux operations up toI speed (and, of course, even after they do there's still the issue that if L the problem you have happens to be on someone else's Linux platform they may' not be quite as ready to help with it).h   - bill   ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 2002 15:45:31 GMTe From: phn@icke-reklam.ipsec.nu< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix) Message-ID: <ab0vmr$dbo$2@nyheter.crt.se>   1 In comp.os.vms John Smith <a@nonymous.com> wrote:e  < > "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@videotron.ca> wrote in message( > news:3CD33C39.EC45D8F4@videotron.ca... >> Ken Green wrote:n >>H >> I am not forgetting MPE, although I am not very familiar with it. VMS > brings  = MPE has a very loyal user base, and the system is a very goodo? transaction-type system. Just like VMS it has it's strength ande niche.  G Both of these systems could survive on it's own, like any niche system.n  @ IBM itself shows us that survival and a huge market presence is B obtained my diversifying and presence in several different niches.  ? Why then can't hp do exactly that ? Who in it's right mind will>H bet it's whole company on a single product that everyone complains about# and most would like to get rid of ?r    H >> in a SUBSTANTIAL portion of the profits for Compaq. Compaq considered	 > killingtJ >> VMS 2 years ago but realised that the impact on the financials would be > too much.p >>  L > Ah yes, but the combined HP/Compaq is much bigger and VMS revenues/profitsL > represent a much smaller percentage of the whole (that's assuming that the9 > PC side of the business ever becomes profitable again).t  J > Sometimes companies get so big that a few billion in sales here or thereK > means nothing to them, irrespective of the profitability of that businessa" > unit. So that unit gets ditched.       --   Peter Hkanson         s7         IPSec  Sverige      ( At Gothenburg Riverside )eJ            Sorry about my e-mail address, but i'm trying to keep spam out,; 	   remove "icke-reklam" if you feel for mailing me. Thanx.v   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 15:57:03 GMT 1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>s< Subject: Re: Capellas: Linux, Windows Will 'Eviscerate' Unix; Message-ID: <jxTA8.66544$%s3.26397068@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>l  3 "Volker Birk" <bumens@dingens.org> wrote in messagea6 news:3cd3922e$0$223$4d4ebb8e@businessnews.de.uu.net...? > In comp.sys.hp.hpux Bob Ceculski <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote:h > > linux is a poor mans unixt >?, > Good morning. World is changing every day. > F > > begin with doesn't say much for linux ... yes good old propreitaryI > > vms is still the best os in the world for the past 20 plus years, andsH > > the way it looks right now, the next 20 years ... linux or any otherF > > os for that matter will never rival vms ... it will survive on its > > own merits ... >5D > I agree - VMS will survive, it has a broad platform of supporters. >a: > Why do I have the feeling of an growing OS war here? :-P  I If there's a war going on here, its a war against marketing ineptitude. ILK don't think many denizens of comp.os.vms have a visceral hatred of Unix, ofs OS/400, of NSK, or even MVS.  K Windoze is another story, but hey, there are plenty of technical reasons tos" dislike THAT operating system. ;-}   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 06:54:51 GMT L From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")Q Subject: Re: dBASE IV package/license for VMS VAX, product status?  Transferable?w8 Message-ID: <00A0D686.60D01345@SSRL04.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>  \ In article <87lmb1uunu.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes:) >jordan@ccs4vms.com (Rich Jordan) writes:p >gF >> about dBASE, and the company that now holds the license for the DOSE >> versions has no information at all on VMS or dBASE for same and sogF >> far hasn't answered queries about licensing, and since apparently aC >> federal court invalidated Borland's copyright on dBASE due to iteC >> being derived from JPL code..... for all I know it may be publicu! >> domain now.  Yeah, right... :)  > G >Glen Everhart may be able to fill in some details here. The 'JPL' codev >isn't RBase, is it?   No.t  L The JPL package was called "Vulcan".  If memory serves, it was developed on K minicomputers.  The author got permission from JPL to market a CP/M version E of the product, Ashton-Tate picked it up and named it dBASE II  ("II" I because that would make it sound like an established product), then hiredhK somebody else to do the DOS port, picked up various other products, created H an in-house development team that they didn't really know how to manage,H had their lunch eaten in the xBASE-language arena by FoxPro and Clipper,J was way behind the curve for Windows products, and eventually  collapsed. I Borland bought 'em and staff members who wanted to keep their jobs had toyK relocate some 350 miles away from Los Angeles, where Ashton-Tate had  been,dJ to the San Francisco Bay Area.  I knew two configuration management peopleH at Ashton-Tate; one's now a travel agent in the San Fernando Valley, theF other's a project leader at Apple.  My friend who was a tech writer at> Ashton-Tate has been a tech writer at Sun for ten years or so.  C I never heard anything about a federal court invalidating Borland'sgI copyright on dBASE; A-T  was never able to copyright the dBASE _language_uH (thus Clipper, FoxPro, Visual FoxPro), and by the time Borland got to beF the owner of anything - which was at the dBASE IV level - there reallyG couldn't have been any of the Vulcan code left, after implementation ins1 8080 assembler for dBASE II and C for III and IV.h   -- Alano    O ===============================================================================e0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056 M  Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA  94309-0210oO ===============================================================================    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 07:15:59 GMT9L From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")Q Subject: Re: dBASE IV package/license for VMS VAX, product status?  Transferable? 8 Message-ID: <00A0D689.54CA6881@SSRL04.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>   In article <00A0D686.60D01345@SSRL04.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>, winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr") writes:9] >In article <87lmb1uunu.fsf@prep.synonet.com>, Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> writes:V* >>jordan@ccs4vms.com (Rich Jordan) writes: >>G >>> about dBASE, and the company that now holds the license for the DOSaF >>> versions has no information at all on VMS or dBASE for same and soG >>> far hasn't answered queries about licensing, and since apparently a>D >>> federal court invalidated Borland's copyright on dBASE due to itD >>> being derived from JPL code..... for all I know it may be public" >>> domain now.  Yeah, right... :) >>H >>Glen Everhart may be able to fill in some details here. The 'JPL' code >>isn't RBase, is it?e >  >No.  N Oops.  Some googling shows there was some stuff I missed in 1991.  I was rightK - it wasn't Rbase.  Apparently the JPL code was JPLDIS, Vulcan was what them9 CP/M package was called when the author was marketing it.  >bM >The JPL package was called "Vulcan".  If memory serves, it was developed on nL >minicomputers.  The author got permission from JPL to market a CP/M versionF >of the product, Ashton-Tate picked it up and named it dBASE II  ("II"J >because that would make it sound like an established product), then hiredL >somebody else to do the DOS port, picked up various other products, createdI >an in-house development team that they didn't really know how to manage, I >had their lunch eaten in the xBASE-language arena by FoxPro and Clipper,aK >was way behind the curve for Windows products, and eventually  collapsed. iJ >Borland bought 'em and staff members who wanted to keep their jobs had toL >relocate some 350 miles away from Los Angeles, where Ashton-Tate had  been,K >to the San Francisco Bay Area.  I knew two configuration management peoplefI >at Ashton-Tate; one's now a travel agent in the San Fernando Valley, thehG >other's a project leader at Apple.  My friend who was a tech writer atk? >Ashton-Tate has been a tech writer at Sun for ten years or so.= >= This is all correct.    D >I never heard anything about a federal court invalidating Borland'sJ >copyright on dBASE; A-T  was never able to copyright the dBASE _language_I >(thus Clipper, FoxPro, Visual FoxPro), and by the time Borland got to beOG >the owner of anything - which was at the dBASE IV level - there really=H >couldn't have been any of the Vulcan code left, after implementation in2 >8080 assembler for dBASE II and C for III and IV.  M Ah.  A-T sued Fox and SCO claiming copyright violation, and it turns out thateN they _had_ copyrighted the dBASE language, but claimed in the application thatB it was an original work of Ashton-Tate when the language - not theM implementation - had been developed at JPL.  A California judge (according toeM www.lgu.com/publications/softcopy/14.shtml) invalidated their copyright undertM the "unclean hands" doctrine, saying that it had been obtained by "fraudulentlM representations"), and that's what precipitated their collapse, although theya were in trouble anyway.t  N Hmmm.  Interesting stuff on dBASE and FoxPro history at www.foxprohistory.org;J look at the stuff with Jeb Long and Wayne Ratliff.  JPLDIS was written in  FORTRAN (yay!) on Univac 1108s.t   -- Alanp      O ===============================================================================e0  Alan Winston --- WINSTON@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDUM  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:  650/926-3056oM  Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA  94309-0210eO ===============================================================================y   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 13:36:18 +0100 C From: Jamie Stallwood <this.no.worky-try.sommat.else@project76.net>3Y Subject: Re: Does anyone have example code for finding the BG device associated  with a Tu8 Message-ID: <1rj7duokiru6tct4crv9ero4vh5pvl7ii8@4ax.com>  2 On Thu, 02 May 2002 14:00:24 -0400, Micheal Austin# <maustin@firstdbasource.com> wrote:   D >> Or if that can't be done programatically, does anyone know how toD >> attach a BG device to  a terminal created from template (TNA0:) ? >> a% >> My hair is neraly torn out here :)8 >vI >Why don't you tell us what you are trying to accomplish - then we may be " >able to give you some assistance.  < Trying to make a telnet like TELNETD but with my own tweaks.  C I can do all the accept() and stuff but need to be able to like UCXm 4.2 TN device to a BG device.n   ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 2002 09:27:19 -0700 . From: spamsink2001@yahoo.com (Alan E. Feldman)) Subject: Re: Fix for EDT emulation in EVE < Message-ID: <b096a4ee.0205040827.47bb4ba@posting.google.com>  d Dave Greenwood <greenwoodde@ornl.gov> wrote in message news:<3MAY02.19374814@feda34.fed.ornl.gov>...H > In a previous article, SPAMSINK2001@YAHOO.COM (Alan E. Feldman) wrote: > [big snip]G > > 3.) Also, with EDT you can do multiple substitutions (and any other > > > EDT line mode commands) with only one file open operation: > >  x$ > > $    EDIT/EDT/NOCOMMAND yourfile > > s-abc-def-wh > > s-old2-new2-wh > > s-old3-new3-wh > > exit > >  iI > > With TPU it looks like you have to open the file once for each globalsJ > > replace operation and, at least for global replace operations, write aH > > whole page of code for each line of EDT code. (OK, you don't have toF > > actually write it in this case, but you do have to hunt for it and > > fetch it and set it up.) >  >     position( buffer_begin );  > I > returns your position to the beginning of the buffer so you can do youryJ > next global replace from there.  Or you can do your searches for the oldM > string in the reverse (backwards) direction.  No reason to reopen the file.     A You just made my case for why EDT is useful. Years ago when I wasWE working in physics, it happened from time to time that I needed to dogE global substitutes in many "input" files. With EDT, this is triviallyd< easy as seen in the quote above. With EVE it becomes a total? nightmare. I can't use the "Do command line mode commands" in atF script. I have to write (and waste time learning yet another language,A debugging, etc.) or dig up examples of how to do this, reject theoD worthless ones (GSR.TPU, for example, which still no one can tell me, how to make work), find one that works, etc.  9 All this because I can't simply put the Do commands I rundB interactively into a script. And I wouldn't call global search and; replace a rare, oddball, no-one-will-ever-need-it function.    Disclaimer: JMHO Alan E. Feldmane" afeldman atski gfigroup dotski com   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 13:21:51 +0100s, From: Paul Williams <flo@uk.thalesgroup.com> Subject: Re: New to VAXa2 Message-ID: <3CD3D25F.6DB793BF@uk.thalesgroup.com>   JF Mezei wrote:i > D > [Downloadable fonts] worked with the VT320, but only in 80 columnsB > mode. Something about not enough memory in the VT320 for storing- > two fontmaps. (80 and 132 column versions).a  G A particular font could work in either mode, but not both, so you could , have a downloadable font in 132-column mode.   ------------------------------  * Date: Sat, 4 May 2002 15:33:11 +0000 (UTC) From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk  Subject: RE: Revisionist history+ Message-ID: <ab0uvm$8jr$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk>   _ In article <CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIMEGHEOAA.tom@kednos.com>, "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> writes:s >  >  >>-----Original Message-----< >>From: Fred Kleinsorge [mailto:kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com]% >>Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 11:07 AMn >>To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comx" >>Subject: Re: Revisionist history >> >>J >>The fact is that we didn't just build chips, and the time from pass 0 toM >>production is non-zero.  EV8 wasn't in silicon, it was in design.  There isaK >>no way to measure how well it would have performed, or when it would have-M >>delivered.  You can take the best estimates from the chip designers, or youlA >>can look at past history of the delta between the original chipd >>and platformL >>schedule estimates and the actuals.  It probably would have been somewhere
 >>in between.  >>K >>I am a skeptic that you would have seen EV8 based platforms in 2004.  The.L >>EV7, which is the cornerstone of EV8 will only have been out in productionK >>systems late this year - perhaps if "2004" meant "December 50th 2004" ---oJ >>maybe.  The only good thing about EV8 is that it is more-or-less a fancyK >>EV8, and so we had a chance of not having to debug new platforms and coresL >>logic chips at the same time.  It's not likely that much if any of the SMTK >>features would have been exploited by the O/S's in that timeframe, excepth: >>for using the chip as virtual 4-CPU SMP's.  Perhaps some >>specialized UNIX MP   >>software might have been done. >>D >>But no matter.  EV8 in 2004, 2005 or 2006 would still have been anL >>interesting chip - especially to those who would want to see very high CPUJ >>counts (even if 3/4 of them are virtual - just the additional functional' >>units would have helped performance).r >>? >>But it is acedemic.  The decision, like it or not, was to not  >>build EV8, andM >>to concentrate on building platforms and not chips.  And to be able to haveo2 >>a single server platform strategy for all O/S's. >sH >Of course, it really doesn't matter which chips you use as long as they >provideF >competitive performance.  I mean, you could port VMS to Power PC.  Of >course,M >you wouldn't be in control of your destiny, but then I'm not sure that InteliK >is a better choice from this perspective.  I think too many people on thise >listhM >confuse VMS with Alpha,  VMS is the platform, Alpha is the delivery vehicle.. >o  L Sorry I think very few confuse VMS with Alpha. If Compaq had decided to portD VMS to a  high performance chip such as Power 4 and had done so in aL reasonable manner ie not simultaneously announcing the death of Alpha   thenN they would probably have garnered support rather than critism from most if not all in this group.  K The problem was that they simultaneously announced the death of Alpha and a-L port to a totally unproven chip which even then was looking decidedly dodgy.O Hell if they'd announced the port to Itanium but not axed Alpha then even thoseaN who thought Itanium didn't have much of a future would have probably supported' the experiment and muted their critism.t    
 David Webb VMS and Unix team leader CCSS Middlesex University   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 15:46:10 GMTy1 From: "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com>l  Subject: Re: Revisionist history; Message-ID: <6nTA8.66522$%s3.26390110@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net>t  + <david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk> wrote in messagem% news:ab0uvm$8jr$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk...i   >yI > Sorry I think very few confuse VMS with Alpha. If Compaq had decided to  portF > VMS to a  high performance chip such as Power 4 and had done so in aG > reasonable manner ie not simultaneously announcing the death of Alphac thenL > they would probably have garnered support rather than critism from most if noto > all in this group.  C Quite possibly so. POWER is proven, IBM has very deep pockets and at! not-insignificant fab capability.h  K > The problem was that they simultaneously announced the death of Alpha and  abG > port to a totally unproven chip which even then was looking decidedlyh dodgy.K > Hell if they'd announced the port to Itanium but not axed Alpha then even  thosecF > who thought Itanium didn't have much of a future would have probably	 supporteds) > the experiment and muted their critism.,  J Almost certainly the case. So, why did they do what they did when they didL it, rather than announce IPF as a "complementary" architecture? Not everyoneL at CPQ is stupid, particularly the technology types who made the decision toG "abandon chip." Seems to me CPQ thought it could get more leverage withiG Intel by effectively taking Alpha off the microprocessor playing field.2   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 17:10:15 GMTc* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>  Subject: Re: Revisionist history@ Message-ID: <XBUA8.57073$v7.4715748@bin6.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>  < "Terry C. Shannon" <terryshannon@attbi.com> wrote in message5 news:6nTA8.66522$%s3.26390110@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net...i >o- > <david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk> wrote in message ' > news:ab0uvm$8jr$1@aquila.mdx.ac.uk...c   ...   I > > The problem was that they simultaneously announced the death of Alphao anda > a I > > port to a totally unproven chip which even then was looking decidedly  > dodgy.H > > Hell if they'd announced the port to Itanium but not axed Alpha then even > those H > > who thought Itanium didn't have much of a future would have probably > supportedl+ > > the experiment and muted their critism.r > L > Almost certainly the case. So, why did they do what they did when they didE > it, rather than announce IPF as a "complementary" architecture? Noth everyoneK > at CPQ is stupid, particularly the technology types who made the decisionr toI > "abandon chip." Seems to me CPQ thought it could get more leverage withrI > Intel by effectively taking Alpha off the microprocessor playing field.-  H Unfortunately, it's also looking increasingly questionable just how much" leverage with Intel will be worth.   - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 13:13:20 +0200f9 From: Jan-Erik =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F6derholm?= <aaa@aaa.com>R4 Subject: Re: Some more words of wisdom from Capellas' Message-ID: <3CD3C250.D3520742@aaa.com>w  > Hm, the Oracle Rdb development team sure shows a hell of a lot9 of interest in VMS. But then, you probably thought of theS "classic" Oracle stuff.r   Jan-Erik Sderholm.    Bill Todd wrote: > * > ...and that Oracle really hasn't shown a- > tremendous amount of interest in VMS latelyv   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 14:06:05 GMTP* From: "Bill Todd" <billtodd@metrocast.net>4 Subject: Re: Some more words of wisdom from CapellasA Message-ID: <hVRA8.54089$Ii2.4690516@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>t  3 "Jan-Erik Sderholm" <aaa@aaa.com> wrote in messageu! news:3CD3C250.D3520742@aaa.com...v@ > Hm, the Oracle Rdb development team sure shows a hell of a lot; > of interest in VMS. But then, you probably thought of the  > "classic" Oracle stuff."  J Well, yuh, since that's what 99.9% of the rest of the world thinks of when they think of Oracle.   L When Oracle (classic) goes back to developing on VMS and releasing first (orI even simultaneously with Solaris) on it, as they once did, I'll change myn opinion.   - bill   >  > Jan-Erik Sderholm.  >  > Bill Todd wrote: > >W, > > ...and that Oracle really hasn't shown a/ > > tremendous amount of interest in VMS latelyo   ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 2002 07:11:50 -0500e- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)a  Subject: Re: Vax emulator for PC3 Message-ID: <pR8OfRNj$7zh@eisner.encompasserve.org>   l In article <45126e60.0205032038.73df023f@posting.google.com>, srp336@getcoactive.com (Steve Pfister) writes:Q >> There is a Hobbyist version. This product is definitely the N 1 VAX emulator,e9 >> and it is also a real product for VAX/VMS development.  > ) > Thanks for the responses I've gotten...r > F > Just out of curiosity...how much is the Charon-Vax plus version? I'm  D I have never been able to get a newsgroup response to that question.   ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 2002 04:40:17 -0700e- From: roli@barmettler.net (Roland Barmettler)r2 Subject: Re: VAXstation 3520 (Firefox) mem upgrade< Message-ID: <235cf5c3.0205040340.2a0fd50@posting.google.com>  6 "Fred Kleinsorge" <kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> wrote:  " > Is physical pages set in sysgen?  & Of course it wasn't ;-)  Thanks a lot!   Greetings, Rolanda   ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 2002 10:47:48 -0000== From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]>=0 Subject: Re: VMS on http://www.windows-sucks.org6 Message-ID: <20020504104748.28523.qmail@gacracker.org>  8 On 28 Apr 02, p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) wrote:? >In article <aabpqk$8ifs$1@lead.zk3.dec.com>, "Fred Kleinsorge"u& ><kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> writes:O >> Frankly, with a site name of "windows-sucks" it's not likely that Compaq (or.I >> many companies, except perhaps Sun) would directly contribute to it...m( >> interested users on the other hand... >> @9 >The proxy servers at work won't let me look at that url.r  J Probably because I wasn't prepared to pay for a Verisign cert. I rolled my own.  ? >But it is probably the sort of site which has the potential ofn@ >introducing VMS to new users, who could after all be tomorrow'sB >purchasers. Even bringing the existence of VMS to their attention >is something worthwhile IMHO.  H Agreed, and since I didn't get much input from anyone else I've finishedK off as best I can. Apologies for the long post, but I think posting it here 1 will give me a better chance of getting feedback.       VMS (a.k.a.OpenVMS) e  I  If you've been around computers for a while you might have heard of VMS.1K  (It stands for Virtual Memory System.) It was first conceived in 1976 as anH  new operating system to run on Digital's VAX hardware. (That stands forI  Virtual Address eXtension.) Version 1.0 first shipped in 1978 running onoD  the VAX 11/780 platform. Since then it has been ported to the AlphaH  platform, and now, under the ownership of Compaq, it is being ported toG  the Itanium Processor Family which Intel produces. VAX versions are 32dK  bit, and Alpha and IPF versions are 64 bit operating systems. This portingpE  process also involves work to make the OS less dependent on specific G  hardware platforms, thus making any future porting efforts easier. So,bJ  don't be surprised if the operating system turns up on Hammer or Power in  the next few years. iH  Despite what you may have heard, VMS is very much alive. At the time ofK  writing this article, April 2002, the current version is 7.3 and v7.3-1 ise  in Beta testing.   E  So why haven't I seen a VMS system?  Well, VMS generally runs on bigTA  machines that are hidden away in datacentres at hospitals, stockhC  exchanges, microchip fabs, lotteries, and large telecommunications H  companies. These aren't the only places you will find it, but these areK  some of its key markets. Other notable users of VMS systems are governmentiG  and the military (The US Air Force recently signed a deal to use it inBH  their JStars surveillance planes). VMS isn't really a desktop operatingJ  system, although there are some very nice workstations that run it. I forD  one would be delighted to see appropriate hardware designed and theB  operating system marketed for desktop use. This is because of itsH  first-rate security, and resistance to virii and other attacks. You canJ  read a little about one of the most famous attacks against VMS - the WANKD  worm - in Suelette Dreyfus' E-book, Underground. This attack was inH  October 1989 and that particular security hole in the DECnet networking,  suite for VMS has long-since been patched.   K  What makes it different from other operating systems?  If you connect to aiH  system and it gives you the prompt "Username:" you know you're on a VMSE  system. That's the first difference you'll notice. Then, when you'reuD  logged in, you will find that, unless the system manager has set upI  aliases (called symbols on VMS), none of the standard Unix commands will.G  work. This is because VMS uses its own command line interpreter called H  DCL. (Digital Command Language, although rumour has it that the acronymI  really stands for Dave Cutler's Language.) DCL is based on English whichII  means you can expect to see commands like SET FILE/OWNER=FREDKL FOO.TXT, K  SEARCH STARLET.* "Hoffman", or DIRECTORY/SIZE/DATE. This might seem like a=G  pain, but most commands and qualifiers can be abbreviated to the first G  three or four characters to save wear and tear on your fingertips. The E  online help is large and comprehensive and, once you have learned to I  navigate through it, you will quickly be able to find the commands to doaG  what you want. In fact, as you navigate through the help you will find I  that there simply isn't the need to write lots of small utilities as youcK  might on unix to enhance the shell, you just use DCL to build most of youro  helper tools. cH  In addition to having a completely unique command line interpreter, VMSI  has a rather special file system. Every time you write a file to disk itrI  creates a new version and the old one is retained. This allows you to go K  back to the previous version of a file, or compare the latest version withtC  the prior version and get a list of differences. This sort of file 7  versioning is usually only found on large mainframes. eH  As you browse through the volumous documentation set of VMS you'll soonB  realise that the design philosophy behind the operating system isI  completely different from that of Unix or Windows. One key difference islJ  in the privileges models. Unix systems pretty much have an all-or-nothingF  approach with regular users and those with root privileges. VMS has aI  considerable number of different privileges that can be granted to users D  to permit them to carry out specific tasks. This makes managing the-  security of the system considerably easier.    H  Where can I learn more?  The best way to learn more about any operatingH  system is to actually use it. Compaq offers a test-drive program which,H  although intended for potential corporate customers, can be used if youD  approach them in a fairly professional manner. There are also a fewK  systems on the internet run by dedicated VMS Hobbyists who are prepared todI  grant people free access to their systems. VMSbox and Hobbes the VAX are E  the two best-known of these and a little effort with a search enginey  should help you find them. J  Of course, there are other options. You could search Ebay for second handC  equipment such as an old MicroVAX, or you could use one of the VAX J  emulators that would allow you to run VMS on a PC-based system. WhicheverE  of these options you might choose, you would need to join your local J  chapter of the user group. For the US, and now many other countries, thisD  is Encompass. Once you've joined you'll be able to visit Montagar's@  Hobbyist site to get software licenses and order install kits.       Useful Links   9  comp.os.vms - The newsgroup for all things VMS related. t
  OpenVMS.org c  The OpenVMS FAQ n  VMS Product Documentation c   VMS at the University of Texas   "Unhackable" VMS at DefCon 9   PicoVAX Emulator        Doc. -- m6 The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.K ~ Phineas Taylor Barnum.                             https://vmsbox.cjb.neti   ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 02 13:35:27 +0200f) From: p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture)-0 Subject: Re: VMS on http://www.windows-sucks.org) Message-ID: <nhWFlJA5IAJA@elias.decus.ch>.  v In article <20020504104748.28523.qmail@gacracker.org>, Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:: > On 28 Apr 02, p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) wrote:@ >>In article <aabpqk$8ifs$1@lead.zk3.dec.com>, "Fred Kleinsorge"' >><kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> writes:uP >>> Frankly, with a site name of "windows-sucks" it's not likely that Compaq (orJ >>> many companies, except perhaps Sun) would directly contribute to it...) >>> interested users on the other hand...: >>> : >>The proxy servers at work won't let me look at that url. > L > Probably because I wasn't prepared to pay for a Verisign cert. I rolled my > own. >   F No, I believe it's the "sucks" in the site name which doesn't get past our url filters.  ; [rest snipped - I can't think of much to add at the moment]k   ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 2002 14:14:33 -0000b= From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]>a0 Subject: Re: VMS on http://www.windows-sucks.org5 Message-ID: <20020504141433.1320.qmail@gacracker.org>   7 On 4 May 02, p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) wrote:rB >In article <20020504104748.28523.qmail@gacracker.org>, Doc.Cypher5 ><Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> writes:i; >> On 28 Apr 02, p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) wrote:eA >>>In article <aabpqk$8ifs$1@lead.zk3.dec.com>, "Fred Kleinsorge"a) >>><kleinsorge@star.zko.dec.com> writes: eF >>>> Frankly, with a site name of "windows-sucks" it's not likely that >>>> Compaq (or2K >>>> many companies, except perhaps Sun) would directly contribute to it... * >>>> interested users on the other hand... >>>> 2; >>>The proxy servers at work won't let me look at that url.  >>  M >> Probably because I wasn't prepared to pay for a Verisign cert. I rolled myn >> own.  >> b >nG >No, I believe it's the "sucks" in the site name which doesn't get pastt >our url filters.t  K Ah, my mistake... I thought you were referring to my site. That'll teach mec4 to be careless about what came before in the thread.     Doc. -- p6 The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.K ~ Phineas Taylor Barnum.                             https://vmsbox.cjb.nete   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 12:33:37 GMT>" From: "Hans Vlems" <hvlems@iae.nl>A Subject: Re: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform?f1 Message-ID: <ByQA8.1099$W3.19157@typhoon.bart.nl>,  I The VMS binary kits are distributed seperately for AXP and VAX platforms.p( You are right for the CD that is called:  > openVMS Version 7.3 Alpha and VAX layered products, April 2001 order#: AG-RF8EB-BSo   Hans, Tom Linden <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message3 news:CIEJLCMNHNNDLLOOGNJIOEGHEOAA.tom@kednos.com...r@ > I haven't tried it, but was told by CSA that it is the same CD > as for alpha.t >  > >-----Original Message----- 9 > >From: Giorgio Ungarelli [mailto:giorgio@ungarelli.net]l& > >Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 10:57 AM > >To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com@ > >Subject: Was OpenVMS V7.3 ever released for the VAX platform? > >w > >l > >Hi, > >qL > >I thought that the last version of OpenVMS released by Compaq for the VAXD > >platform was V7.2 and all subsequent releases (V7.2-1, V7.3, etc)
 > >would only K > >be for the Alpha platform.  However, I have recently seen pictures of an 7 > >OpenVMS/VAX V7.3 CD (from Compaq), dated April 2001.i > >nJ > >Could someone please confirm that OpenVMS V7.3 is available for the VAX > >platform? > > 
 > >Thanks, > > 
 > >Giorgio > >h > >a > >---) > >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.n= > >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).wC > >Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 4/19/2002t > >  > ---e( > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.< > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).B > Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 4/19/2002 >i   ------------------------------   Date: 4 May 2002 09:43:39 -00003= From: Doc.Cypher <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]>w2 Subject: [OT] Re: UK folks this might interest you6 Message-ID: <20020504094339.27260.qmail@gacracker.org>  7 On 3 May 02, p_sture@elias.decus.ch (Paul Sture) wrote:o4 >In article <e21KLJt21lo4@eisner.encompasserve.org>,0 >koehler@encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:6 >> In article <3CD24C96.E44B887B@127.0.0.1>, Nic Clews# >> <sendspamhere@127.0.0.1> writes:m >>> B >>> Oh, there's nothing like the smell of a brewery. Mmmmmmmmmmmm. >>> ? >>> I used to work in a bakery, and that wasn't too bad either.  >>> F >>> On Orkney recently I visited the Highland Park distillery, another >>> nasal delight. >>>  >> vK >>    Used to live down the street from a chocolate candy plant.   And thenu@ >>    my sister lived in Hershey for a while.  Breath in deeply. >> >uJ >I once had a trip around a chocolate factory. The company policy was thatF >staff could eat as much as they liked at work, but not take any home. >wJ >Believe me, after 2 hours of being offered every type of chocolate by theI >tour guide, none of us could touch the stuff again for days. I could seey% >how that company's policy worked :-)s  G That must be pretty standard practice in chocolate factories. I spent 6wH weeks working in a Belgian one last year and the smell alone pretty much put me off chocolate for weeks.-     Doc. -- a6 The bigger the humbug, the better people will like it.K ~ Phineas Taylor Barnum.                             https://vmsbox.cjb.netv   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2002.246 ************************              