1 INFO-VAX	Sun, 05 Sep 2004	Volume 2004 : Issue 492       Contents:! Re: A whopping 50 percent...  ??? 6 Changing "DECnet Phase IV Prefix" under DECnet Phase V: Re: Changing "DECnet Phase IV Prefix" under DECnet Phase V: Re: Changing "DECnet Phase IV Prefix" under DECnet Phase V/ Re: could SET DISPLAY be caching an IP address?  Re: Future of Decnet Re: Future of Decnet Re: Future of Decnet Re: I need SMC  CD for Win2000 Re: I need SMC  CD for Win2000 Re: I need SMC  CD for Win2000< Re: Itanic Adoption Survey from 23-August-2004 Computerworld< RE: Itanic Adoption Survey from 23-August-2004 Computerworld< Re: Itanic Adoption Survey from 23-August-2004 Computerworld< Re: Itanic Adoption Survey from 23-August-2004 Computerworld" Re: Itanium: EFI... no fs0: device Re: Link to Itanium doc set  NCL command for SHOW OBJECT ? ! Re: NCL command for SHOW OBJECT ?  Open Motif for VMS1 Re: Tomcat on OpenVMS - Is source code available? 1 Re: Tomcat on OpenVMS - Is source code available?   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2004 22:16:35 GMT 0 From: glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu>* Subject: Re: A whopping 50 percent...  ???- Message-ID: <79r_c.239667$8_6.1152@attbi_s04>    JF Mezei wrote:    (snip)  M > RISC allowed for simpler design of chip which allowed for much higher clock M > speeds. But the cost was many more instructions and bigger executables than F > for CISC, so the performance was not necessarily proportional to the > impressive Mhz rates.   @ Comparing raw clock speeds is never a good idea.  There are manyF tradeoffs between how much work can be done in one cycle, and how many cycles are needed.  P > I'd like to know more about why early versions of Alpha had such terrible byteK > manipulation. I still recall that during an early Alpha presentation at a P > DECUS LUG meeting, I asked about that. So it isn't as if the Digital engineersO > would have been ignorant about the need to compare bytes. (if *I* could see a M > problem, then Shirley, the DEC engineers would have seen this problem too).   F > However, byte manipulation limits didn't apply to all RISC machines.  ? Byte manipulation on any machine with a wide memory bus usually = requires fetching the whole word from memory.  If it uses ECC @ memory it requires the whole word to be fetched, the appropriate; byte modified, and the word with new ECC bits written back.   > Traditionally, this was hidden from the user, just part of the? complexities of a memory write cycle.  The tradition of RISC is > to make more complex operations visible at the instruction set< level.   Many early RISC processors didn't have multiply and< divide instructions, though they may have had something like; multiply step, which performs one cycle worth of a multiply 
 operation.  D Last I knew, byte operations were very slow on UltraSPARC, a machine> that as far as I know does have them as instructions, but they= execute relatively slowly.   Alpha just made that explicit to  the assembly programmer.   -- glen    ------------------------------   Date: 4 Sep 2004 20:07:04 -0500 - From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) ? Subject: Changing "DECnet Phase IV Prefix" under DECnet Phase V 3 Message-ID: <Y1omi3Gqtcqz@eisner.encompasserve.org>   < I have a VAX with Phase V which is not working* and an AlphaB with Phase V which is working.  Trying to sort out the differencesI I note that the Phase IV Prefix on the working machine is 43:16175583270: > whereas the Phase IV Prefix on the not working machine is 49:.  E (I know the working machine was configured that way for the DEC X.500 F Directory, which requires Phase V, making it strange that it is called a Phase _IV_ Prefix).   F But I cannot figure out how to change the Phase IV Prefix using eitherB the configuration utility or NCL.  Can anyone offer a suggestion ?  D * By "not working" I mean can SET HOST 0 but not SET HOST <nodename>B   itself.  There are other symptoms, but that is the most blatant.   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2004 01:30:47 GMT 5 From: brad@rabbit.dnsalias.org (Bradford J. Hamilton) C Subject: Re: Changing "DECnet Phase IV Prefix" under DECnet Phase V . Message-ID: <b%t_c.104805$9d6.24053@attbi_s54>  c In article <Y1omi3Gqtcqz@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: = !I have a VAX with Phase V which is not working* and an Alpha C !with Phase V which is working.  Trying to sort out the differences J !I note that the Phase IV Prefix on the working machine is 43:16175583270:? !whereas the Phase IV Prefix on the not working machine is 49:.  ! F !(I know the working machine was configured that way for the DEC X.500G !Directory, which requires Phase V, making it strange that it is called  !a Phase _IV_ Prefix). ! G !But I cannot figure out how to change the Phase IV Prefix using either C !the configuration utility or NCL.  Can anyone offer a suggestion ?  !   	 Hi Larry,    SET   	   routing        phaseiv_prefix              Support: All 5          Default: Hex 49        Value: Address prefix   F          Prefix for Phase IV addresses. If the characteristic phase ivF          address is not 0.0, a DECnet area address is formed by addingA          the area portion of the Phase IV address to this prefix. C          You can modify this characteristic only when the entity is           disabled.    A          set [node node-id] routing phaseiv prefix address-prefix             Example:   *          set routing phaseiv prefix = 49::  G but I have a VAX and an Alpha at home.  Both work, and both use 49 (the C default).  I'm not sure the prefix is the cause of your problem(s).   E !* By "not working" I mean can SET HOST 0 but not SET HOST <nodename> C !  itself.  There are other symptoms, but that is the most blatant.   J __________________________________________________________________________A Bradford J. Hamilton                    "All opinions are my own" K bMradAhamiPltSon-at-coMmcAast.nPeSt     "Lose the MAPS, and replace '-at-'  0                                          with @"   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Sep 2004 21:27:22 -0500 - From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) C Subject: Re: Changing "DECnet Phase IV Prefix" under DECnet Phase V 3 Message-ID: <VuhZQQjAuNeU@eisner.encompasserve.org>   f In article <b%t_c.104805$9d6.24053@attbi_s54>, brad@rabbit.dnsalias.org (Bradford J. Hamilton) writes:e > In article <Y1omi3Gqtcqz@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:   I > !But I cannot figure out how to change the Phase IV Prefix using either E > !the configuration utility or NCL.  Can anyone offer a suggestion ?  > !  >  > Hi Larry,  >  > SET  >  >   routing  >  >     phaseiv_prefix  8 Ok thanks.  I had no idea that would be under "routing".  I > but I have a VAX and an Alpha at home.  Both work, and both use 49 (the    So yours match each other :-)   E > default).  I'm not sure the prefix is the cause of your problem(s).   / Nor am I, but it is a discrepancy I should fix.   G > !* By "not working" I mean can SET HOST 0 but not SET HOST <nodename> E > !  itself.  There are other symptoms, but that is the most blatant.    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2004 21:28:35 GMT 0 From: glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu>8 Subject: Re: could SET DISPLAY be caching an IP address?/ Message-ID: <7sq_c.372377$%_6.361206@attbi_s01>   / Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:  (snip)  C > This situation in general is slow but usable.  What is the least  H > powerful machine anyone has run Mozilla on?  Am I correct in assuming ) > that the bottleneck is memory, not CPU?   C I used to run Netscape 4.x on Mac LC/II's with the maximum 10M ram. : Though we kept Netscape 2.x around for faster performance.# (That was in an elementary school.)    -- glen    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2004 15:52:39 -0500 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> Subject: Re: Future of Decnet + Message-ID: <413A2B17.DBC688C7@comcast.net>    Roy Omond wrote: >  > JF Mezei wrote:  >  > > Larry Kilgallen wrote: > >  > > F > >>Depending on how you measure efficiency LAT is much less efficient1 > >>than CTERM (the SET HOST protocol in DECnet).  > >  > > T > > Can someone explain this statement ? In what way would CTERM be more efficient ? > - > JF, Larry is (as usual) absolutely correct.  > B > Hint: think about how the echoing of characters you type on yourB > keyboard appears on the screen.  Then think how CTERM might haveA > implemented this in order to reduce network traffic (bearing in ; > mind that it is a very, very clever piece of software :-)  > + > The rest is left as an exercise etc. etc.   G I can sort of see that argument, but I'd have to call it a "Washington" E to "Delicious" comparison: apples-to-apples, but different varieties.   H I'd have to wonder if that is counter-balanced by the ability to packageH data for multiple sessions. Does CTERM also do that? Given that terminalG servers and LAT are not used as they once were due to TCP/IP and telnet 9 sessions to/from PCs and such, would it matter that much?    D.J.D.   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Sep 2004 20:09:05 -0500 - From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)  Subject: Re: Future of Decnet 3 Message-ID: <4NKFKlBDcvxh@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ` In article <413A2B17.DBC688C7@comcast.net>, David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> writes:  C >> Hint: think about how the echoing of characters you type on your C >> keyboard appears on the screen.  Then think how CTERM might have B >> implemented this in order to reduce network traffic (bearing in< >> mind that it is a very, very clever piece of software :-) >>  , >> The rest is left as an exercise etc. etc. > I > I can sort of see that argument, but I'd have to call it a "Washington" G > to "Delicious" comparison: apples-to-apples, but different varieties.  > J > I'd have to wonder if that is counter-balanced by the ability to packageJ > data for multiple sessions. Does CTERM also do that? Given that terminalI > servers and LAT are not used as they once were due to TCP/IP and telnet ; > sessions to/from PCs and such, would it matter that much?   B That LAT optimization _is_ aimed at multiple terminals on the same? server, all typing at the same time.  It is not much help going ) from a workstation to another VMS system.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2004 21:13:31 -0500 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> Subject: Re: Future of Decnet + Message-ID: <413A764A.7229B081@comcast.net>    Larry Kilgallen wrote: > b > In article <413A2B17.DBC688C7@comcast.net>, David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> writes: > E > >> Hint: think about how the echoing of characters you type on your E > >> keyboard appears on the screen.  Then think how CTERM might have D > >> implemented this in order to reduce network traffic (bearing in> > >> mind that it is a very, very clever piece of software :-) > >>. > >> The rest is left as an exercise etc. etc. > > K > > I can sort of see that argument, but I'd have to call it a "Washington" I > > to "Delicious" comparison: apples-to-apples, but different varieties.  > > L > > I'd have to wonder if that is counter-balanced by the ability to packageL > > data for multiple sessions. Does CTERM also do that? Given that terminalK > > servers and LAT are not used as they once were due to TCP/IP and telnet = > > sessions to/from PCs and such, would it matter that much?  > D > That LAT optimization _is_ aimed at multiple terminals on the sameA > server, all typing at the same time.  It is not much help going + > from a workstation to another VMS system.    Well, yes and no.   B When you consider that most terminal applications returned a largeC amount of display data for very few keystrokes, it takes on another  meaning.  D That said, it is, as you say, a bit diferent when you have number ofG users on a single server typing MASS-11, WORD-11 or WPS-Plus documents, B or when using EDT, TECO, etc., where keystroke echo is rather more
 important.   D.J.D.   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 13:40:18 -0700* From: "Jack Peacock" <peacock@simconv.com>' Subject: Re: I need SMC  CD for Win2000 2 Message-ID: <Ef2dnVrmwNOvtafcRVn-pA@mpowercom.net>  8 "Tom Hartsook" <hartsoot@ucs.orst.edu> wrote in message 6 news:622ca779.0409030925.a309cf3@posting.google.com...D >I want to upgrade my SMC (System Management Console) box from NT toF > Win2000.  The drones at HP tell me that the Win2000 version will notF > run on the Compaq DeskPro EN.  I don't believe them.  They refuse to > give me the CD.  > K There is no production version of Windows 2000 for the Alpha.  There was a  L beta version several years ago but it was never RTM and was only handed out J to developers.  If someone does send you a current version of Win2000 for G Alpha it would be rather surprising news to a lot of people.  The only  C 64-bit versions of Windows available now are for Itanium and AMD64.   M I think you should believe the HP drones.  Better think about switching to a   PC.    Jack Peacock     ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 22:55:15 +0100< From: "Alex Daniels" <AlexNOSPAMTHANKSDaniels@themail.co.uk>' Subject: Re: I need SMC  CD for Win2000 6 Message-ID: <413a39bd$0$22763$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>  6 "Jack Peacock" <peacock@simconv.com> wrote in message , news:Ef2dnVrmwNOvtafcRVn-pA@mpowercom.net...: > "Tom Hartsook" <hartsoot@ucs.orst.edu> wrote in message 8 > news:622ca779.0409030925.a309cf3@posting.google.com...E >>I want to upgrade my SMC (System Management Console) box from NT to G >> Win2000.  The drones at HP tell me that the Win2000 version will not G >> run on the Compaq DeskPro EN.  I don't believe them.  They refuse to  >> give me the CD. >>M > There is no production version of Windows 2000 for the Alpha.  There was a  J > beta version several years ago but it was never RTM and was only handed L > out to developers.  If someone does send you a current version of Win2000 M > for Alpha it would be rather surprising news to a lot of people.  The only  E > 64-bit versions of Windows available now are for Itanium and AMD64.  > M > I think you should believe the HP drones.  Better think about switching to   > a PC.  >  Jack Peacock   
 He said...  = >> The drones at HP tell me that the Win2000 version will not  >> run on the Compaq DeskPro EN   L Compaq Deskpro's do NOT have Alpha CPUs in them, so your response to Tom is & incorrect. He is right to question hp.  K Admitted however, I have seen many of the Deskpros (that are being used as  K SMCs),  like Tom is referring to, residing inside the GS160/320s cabs, but   still they are not Alphas.   Alex   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 18:17:20 -0700* From: "Jack Peacock" <peacock@simconv.com>' Subject: Re: I need SMC  CD for Win2000 2 Message-ID: <D4Sdnap-tfO89KfcRVn-iQ@mpowercom.net>  H "Alex Daniels" <AlexNOSPAMTHANKSDaniels@themail.co.uk> wrote in message 0 news:413a39bd$0$22763$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk...K > Compaq Deskpro's do NOT have Alpha CPUs in them, so your response to Tom  + > is incorrect. He is right to question hp.  > M > Admitted however, I have seen many of the Deskpros (that are being used as  M > SMCs),  like Tom is referring to, residing inside the GS160/320s cabs, but   > still they are not Alphas. > M Mea culpa, I don't use Compaq/HP PCs, all I noticed was the CD label with an   Alpha part number.  M May still be a related problem.  If the software on the Alpha side was never  K upgraded past NT level SMB support then it may well be an orphan system in  H that the PC side has to stay at NT to work with the Alpha.  Look at the J Pathworks situation, there was no upward compatibility.  Each new Windows M server version Pathworks had to be replaced with a new version too, and even  M then it was only a minimal patch to make the errors go away.  It sure sounds  I like a deadend SMC is collateral damage from the demise of Win2000 Alpha.   K What protocols does SMC use?  A better question, why does the PC side have  G to be moved to Win2000 if it breaks the sole purpose of its existence,  F managing the Alpha?  Is it joined to a Win2K domain?  Has anyone ever E upgraded to Win2000 in this environment?  HP may still be correct in   claiming no upgrade exists.    Jack Peacock     ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 14:06:55 -0400# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> E Subject: Re: Itanic Adoption Survey from 23-August-2004 Computerworld , Message-ID: <GImdnUT65syimafcRVn-sw@igs.net>   Barry Treahy, Jr. wrote: > Tom Linden wrote:  > B >> There must have been similar surveys done during the VAX to AXPC >> transition.  It would be interesting to see how the then surveys ( >> compared with the market that ensued. >>C >> If these numbers are a good sampling, I am sure they are getting C >> serious attention from HP management.  Maybe SRI is working on a  >> CHARON-AXP. >> >>D > Don't know about either question but regarding the first, I do notH > recall the 'crisis of concern' revolving around Alpha that has existedB > with Itanic; Quite possibly because Alpha wasn't a decade in theF > making just to debut as a flop - Digital did a good job of marketingF > and hosting local and regional technical seminars to sell the meritsD > of Alpha...  The fact that Alpha also received top processor speed@ > recognition rather quickly, where as Itanic seems to need pushG > starting like an old Buick, no doubt made Alpha an easier sell job to  > accept...     G I expect that Itanic will only hit top speed shortly before it hits the A concrete after being pushed out of an aircraft from 10,000 feet .   L Maybe we'll see EV8 as a trademark of Intel when the following generation of0 Itanics ship in 2008-9 (if they live that long).   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 21:15:11 -0400' From: "Main, Kerry" <kerry.main@hp.com> E Subject: RE: Itanic Adoption Survey from 23-August-2004 Computerworld R Message-ID: <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB3E02F3@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----4 > From: Jack Peacock [mailto:peacock@simconv.com]=20" > Sent: September 4, 2004 11:35 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com G > Subject: Re: Itanic Adoption Survey from 23-August-2004 Computerworld  >=203 > "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message=20 ( > news:K7OdnbONUqMkL6XcRVn-iw@igs.net... > > Barry Treahy, Jr. wrote:H > >> I know, I'm more than a week behind on reading, but did anyone elseG > >> see this little interesting survey (+/- 4% error) from Interex/HP?  > >>A > > 42+17+15 =3D 74% that could be considering Sun or IBM as a=20  > more reliable  > > partner  > >   
 [snip ...]  > > Every one of our VMS customers (and that's only a handful=20 > these days) has=20@ > already installed a Windows network, either on their own or=20 > they asked us to=20 @ > do it.  They know VMS has a limited life left.  Not one has=20 > considered=20  > Linux, Solaris, HP-UX or AIX.  >   Jack Peacock=20  >=20   Jack - really ??  G Seriously, I have had discussions with mission critical type Cust's who G are now coming to the conclusion that they can no longer afford Windows C when one considers the down time to install the recommended monthly  Microsoft security patches.   F The issue they are finding is not so much the reboot time (all systemsD reboot pretty quickly these days), but rather it is the time to testH these patches before moving them into production. These Customers do notH install any patches into production before testing. And they have a huge number of applications.   C It is why some Customers are developing J2EE / Java applications on G Windows and Linus, but deploying them on OpenVMS in production. Best of E both worlds i.e. good gui's and availability of dev tools, yet do not : have to worry about virus/trojan of the day in production.  - Must be a different set of Customers I guess?    Regards   
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax: 613-591-4477  kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20  $ "OpenVMS has always had integrity .. Now, Integrity has OpenVMS .."   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2004 21:15:38 -0500 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>E Subject: Re: Itanic Adoption Survey from 23-August-2004 Computerworld + Message-ID: <413A76CA.EC164CF2@comcast.net>    "Main, Kerry" wrote: >  > > -----Original Message-----3 > > From: Jack Peacock [mailto:peacock@simconv.com] $ > > Sent: September 4, 2004 11:35 AM > > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com I > > Subject: Re: Itanic Adoption Survey from 23-August-2004 Computerworld  > > 2 > > "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message* > > news:K7OdnbONUqMkL6XcRVn-iw@igs.net... > > > Barry Treahy, Jr. wrote:J > > >> I know, I'm more than a week behind on reading, but did anyone elseI > > >> see this little interesting survey (+/- 4% error) from Interex/HP?  > > >>> > > > 42+17+15 = 74% that could be considering Sun or IBM as a > > more reliable 
 > > > partner  > > >  >  > [snip ...] > = > > Every one of our VMS customers (and that's only a handful  > > these days) has ? > > already installed a Windows network, either on their own or  > > they asked us to? > > do it.  They know VMS has a limited life left.  Not one has  > > considered! > > Linux, Solaris, HP-UX or AIX.  > >   Jack Peacock > >  >  > Jack - really ?? > I > Seriously, I have had discussions with mission critical type Cust's who I > are now coming to the conclusion that they can no longer afford Windows E > when one considers the down time to install the recommended monthly  > Microsoft security patches.  > H > The issue they are finding is not so much the reboot time (all systemsF > reboot pretty quickly these days), but rather it is the time to testJ > these patches before moving them into production. These Customers do notJ > install any patches into production before testing. And they have a huge > number of applications.  > E > It is why some Customers are developing J2EE / Java applications on I > Windows and Linus, but deploying them on OpenVMS in production. Best of G > both worlds i.e. good gui's and availability of dev tools, yet do not < > have to worry about virus/trojan of the day in production. > / > Must be a different set of Customers I guess?   E I'm sure its just a matter of time before platform-neutral Java hacks  begin to proliferate.    D.J.D.   ------------------------------  $ Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 23:57:30 -0400# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> E Subject: Re: Itanic Adoption Survey from 23-August-2004 Computerworld , Message-ID: <9ZidnfiojPo2E6fcRVn-pA@igs.net>   David J Dachtera wrote:  > "Main, Kerry" wrote: >> >>> -----Original Message-----3 >>> From: Jack Peacock [mailto:peacock@simconv.com] $ >>> Sent: September 4, 2004 11:35 AM >>> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com ; >>> Subject: Re: Itanic Adoption Survey from 23-August-2004  >>> Computerworld  >>> 2 >>> "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message* >>> news:K7OdnbONUqMkL6XcRVn-iw@igs.net... >>>> Barry Treahy, Jr. wrote: D >>>>> I know, I'm more than a week behind on reading, but did anyoneA >>>>> else see this little interesting survey (+/- 4% error) from  >>>>> Interex/HP?  >>>>> = >>>> 42+17+15 = 74% that could be considering Sun or IBM as a  >>> more reliable  >>>> partner >>>> >>
 >> [snip ...]  >>= >>> Every one of our VMS customers (and that's only a handful  >>> these days) has ? >>> already installed a Windows network, either on their own or  >>> they asked us to? >>> do it.  They know VMS has a limited life left.  Not one has  >>> considered! >>> Linux, Solaris, HP-UX or AIX.  >>>   Jack Peacock >>>  >> >> Jack - really ??  >>F >> Seriously, I have had discussions with mission critical type Cust'sF >> who are now coming to the conclusion that they can no longer affordF >> Windows when one considers the down time to install the recommended& >> monthly Microsoft security patches. >>A >> The issue they are finding is not so much the reboot time (all G >> systems reboot pretty quickly these days), but rather it is the time B >> to test these patches before moving them into production. TheseG >> Customers do not install any patches into production before testing. / >> And they have a huge number of applications.  >>F >> It is why some Customers are developing J2EE / Java applications onG >> Windows and Linus, but deploying them on OpenVMS in production. Best G >> of both worlds i.e. good gui's and availability of dev tools, yet do A >> not have to worry about virus/trojan of the day in production.  >>0 >> Must be a different set of Customers I guess? > G > I'm sure its just a matter of time before platform-neutral Java hacks  > begin to proliferate.      Write once, crash anywhere.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2004 08:33:14 +0300 4 From: Mike Rechtman <michael.rechtman.nospam@hp.com>+ Subject: Re: Itanium: EFI... no fs0: device & Message-ID: <413ACF4A.7150802A@hp.com>  ! VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:  > ] > In article <AWJZc.9506$Pq5.1866@news.cpqcorp.net>, John Reagan <john.reagan@hp.com> writes: # > >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: 
 > >> OK... > >>K > >> After several days of dicking with this box, I now have a FS0: device.  > >>& > >> I start to install VMS and I get: > >> > >> Portion done: 0%...10% # > >> ...20%...30%...40%...50%...60%  > >>Y > >> %PCSI-E-WRITEERR, error writing DISK$OPENVMSIV8_1:[VMS$COMMON.][SYSLIB]STARLET.OLB;2 * > >> -LBR-E-DUPKEY, duplicate key in index' > >> %PCSI-E-OPFAILED, operation failed J > >> Terminating is strongly recommended.  Do you want to terminate? [YES] > >> > >> :(  > >> > > M > >You are doing a full install (INITIALIZE), not an upgrade (PRESERVE), yes?  > J > I installed V8.1 which I received weeks (months?) ago.  I received a DVD > with E8.2 so I used preserve.   A And did you have any LP's installed on V8.1 or previous versions? A (IIRC there were similar problems caused by some installations of 3 FORTRAN, COBOL and some Mathematical library(ies) )    Mike   >  > --> > http://www.ProvN.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system security? >                       solutions that others only claim to be.  > --. > Cyber-Terrorism (si'-ber tayr'-or-iz-em) n.:N >   The release of, the sale of, or the use of any Micro$oft software product! > --M > VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM    --  E --------------------------------------------------------------------- E Usual disclaimer: All opinions are mine alone, perhaps not even that. ? Mike Rechtman                            *rechtman@tzora.co.il* F Kibbutz Tzor'a.                          Voice (home): 972-2-9908337  B   "20% of a job takes 80% of the time, the rest takes another 80%"E ---------------------------------------------------------------------  -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----  Version: 3.1: GCM/CS d(-)pu s:+>:- a++ C++ U-- L-- W++ N++ K? w--- V+++$6 PS+ PE-- t 5? X- tv-- b+ DI+ D-- G e++ h--- r+++ y+++@ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2004 18:31:03 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG$ Subject: Re: Link to Itanium doc set0 Message-ID: <00A37614.49DA83E5@SendSpamHere.ORG>  \ In article <6kujj0d2sep2rt921pk19j4l0o5d8i6u54@4ax.com>, Nigel Barker <nigel@hp.com> writes:D >On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 16:53:19 GMT, VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > 2 >>There's not doc on the DVD or CD for the 8.2 FT. >>A >>Is there a set on the HP web site?  If so, anybody have a link?  > 0 >http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/os82ft_index.html  . What page (where) on HP's site held this link?   --  < http://www.ProvN.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system security=                       solutions that others only claim to be.  --  , Cyber-Terrorism (si'-ber tayr'-or-iz-em) n.:M   The release of, the sale of, or the use of any Micro$oft software product!   --  K VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM    ------------------------------   Date: 4 Sep 2004 22:41:01 -0500 - From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) & Subject: NCL command for SHOW OBJECT ?3 Message-ID: <tk1RzhLuP3vp@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ? After such good luck getting an answer to my previous question, 3 let me ask how with NCL one does the equivalent of:    	NML> SHOW OBJECT FAL    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2004 05:39:29 +0000 - From: David B Sneddon <dbsneddon@bigpond.com> * Subject: Re: NCL command for SHOW OBJECT ?* Message-ID: <413AA691.2030003@bigpond.com>  % Larry Kilgallen was overheard to say: A > After such good luck getting an answer to my previous question, 5 > let me ask how with NCL one does the equivalent of:  >  > 	NML> SHOW OBJECT FAL  >   2 $ MCR NCL SHOW SESSION CONTROL APPLICATION FAL ALL   Regards, Dave.  --  I David B Sneddon (dbs)    VMS Systems Programmer     dbsneddon@bigpond.com I Sneddo's quick guide ...          http://www.users.bigpond.com/dbsneddon/ I DBS freeware at ...   http://www.users.bigpond.com/dbsneddon/software.htm I "Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans" Lennon    ------------------------------   Date: 4 Sep 2004 20:00:51 -0700 ( From: shofu_au@yahoo.com.au (Mark Smith) Subject: Open Motif for VMS = Message-ID: <8bdc0085.0409041900.39a02739@posting.google.com>   	 Hi Group,   2 Has anyone compiled Open Motif (2.2) for Open VMS?  ? I wish to compile and use Open Motif on Open VMS 7.3.  I have a D program I wish to port from Mac OSX that uses Open Motif libraries. @ Some of the widgets that I am using are not available in the DEC Windows supplied by HP.   E If so are they are command procedures available to assist in building  Open Motif.    Thanks     Mark   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2004 14:00:40 -0400 * From: Chuck Chopp <ChuckChopp@rtfmcsi.com>: Subject: Re: Tomcat on OpenVMS - Is source code available?9 Message-ID: <won_c.93166$_h.57765@bignews3.bellsouth.net>    Neil Rieck wrote:   9 > "Chuck Chopp" <ChuckChopp@rtfmcsi.com> wrote in message 5 > news:Rcl_c.91426$_h.87567@bignews3.bellsouth.net...  >  >>Neil Rieck wrote:  >  >  > [...snip...] >  > F >>I'm not using Apache w/MOD_JK@ to front-end my webapp.  I'm directlyJ >>accessing Tomcat on port 8080.  I had tested with JDK v1.3.1, JDK v1.4.1I >>and JDK v1.4.2 and the problem I'm encountering with Tomcat occurs with  >>all 3 versions of the JDK. >>B >>This problem has to do with how Tomcat is compiling JSPs when itF >>determines that a JSP is newer than the compiled version in the workK >>directory, and the problem is only occurring in the Tomcat implementation ; >>on OpenVMS.  This problem does not happen in other Tomcat % >>implementations on other platforms.  >> >  > [...snip...] > L > Sorry for the confusion but I didn't see this information in your previous > post.  > L > So when you log in interactively, can you invoke the Java compiler via theM > command "javac"? I know this may seem a dumb question but this was "one" of N > the problems that was happening on my system. I had to modify one of the DCLL > scripts to properly locate the Java complier. The other problem was causedM > by using JRE instead of SDK. In both instances Jakarta/Tomcat couldn't find I > the compiler and whatever error message I received didn't tell me this.   K Yes, the Java compiler command "JAVAC" is working OK.  JSPs located in the  L root folder of the webapp are compiled w/o any problems.  JSPs located in a J subfolder under the root folder of the webapp are also compiled properly, F excluding the "WEB-INF" subfolder.  Any JSPs within "WEB-INF" or in a M subfolder under "WEB-INF" cannot be compiled.  The JSPs are still being used  I to automatically generate ".java" source code files for the classes that  H represent the JSPs, but they are not being compiled into ".class" files.  G Per the Java Servlet v2.3 specifications, section "SRV.6.5", all files  M located in/under "WEB-INF" should be accessible to the webapp itself but are  L protected from being directly requested via the web browser client.  So, if J you want to design your webapp so that individual JSPs cannot be accessed M directly by the web browser.  The result is that an action within the webapp  L must be referenced, and it is up to the logic [e.g. Java code] written into M that action to determine which JSP to display.  This method is documented as  J a preferred means of implementing a certain level of security in a webapp K and is explicitly mentioned as being a part of the functionality of Tomcat  G v4.1.  The fact that Tomcet v4.1.24 on OpenVMS is failing to behave as VD documented w/respect to this subject leads me to believe that it is J defective in some manner and the defect is located within some portion of H the code that was customized for the installation kit of CSWS_JAVA v2.1.  J Ultimately, I think that a classpath is not being set properly during JSP B compilation and this is leading to the problem that I've observed.     -- g Chuck Choppu  8 ChuckChopp (at) rtfmcsi (dot) com http://www.rtfmcsi.com  @ RTFM Consulting Services Inc.     864 801 2795 voice & voicemail2 103 Autumn Hill Road              864 801 2774 fax Greer, SC  29651  , Do not send me unsolicited commercial email.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2004 19:55:13 -0500l6 From: "Craig A. Berry" <craigberry@mac.com.spamfooler>: Subject: Re: Tomcat on OpenVMS - Is source code available?D Message-ID: <craigberry-E09342.19551304092004@news.isp.giganews.com>  9 In article <won_c.93166$_h.57765@bignews3.bellsouth.net>,1,  Chuck Chopp <ChuckChopp@rtfmcsi.com> wrote:  L > Ultimately, I think that a classpath is not being set properly during JSP D > compilation and this is leading to the problem that I've observed.  9 Have you by any chance read the release notes located at:y  I http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/products/ips/apache/csws_java_relnotes_i 21.html   E especially the section entitled, "JSP examples do not run under Java n
 1.4.0-1" ?  ? Just a guess on my part, but it sounds similar to what you are hE describing.  The workaround described there is to define the logical l apache$jakarta_user_classpath.   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2004.492 ************************