1 INFO-VAX	Mon, 13 Sep 2004	Volume 2004 : Issue 508       Contents:= how to communicate with remote command transparently via ssh? 2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.2 Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. Re: Impersonate  Re: Impersonate  Re: Impersonate  Re: Impersonate  Re: Impersonate  Sorry Wrong News GroupG Re: TSM hates my DECnet version (Was: TSM won't accept my circuit name) G Re: TSM hates my DECnet version (Was: TSM won't accept my circuit name) P Re: TSM hates my DECnet version (Was: TSM won't accept my circuit name) name)nam Re: VMSKITBLD.COM failure  Re: VMSKITBLD.COM failure  Re: VMSKITBLD.COM failure   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 23:33:13 GMT * From: "Stephen J. Smith" <sjs@khadrin.com>F Subject: how to communicate with remote command transparently via ssh?8 Message-ID: <pan.2004.09.12.23.32.52.730749@khadrin.com>  ; Hi.  I am writing a server that will rely on ssh to provide @ authentication and to run as the authenticated user.  I have theF server part working, but I can't figure out what I am doing wrong withF regard to ssh.  I have google'd many times and read the "Guide to SSH") in the TCP/IP Services documentation set.    Example:   ~/devel/pcms$ cat hello1.c   #include <stdio.h>   int main(void) { !     printf("hello\012hello\012"); 
     return 0;  }   D When running the program on OpenVMS from Cygwin I get the following:  < ~/devel/pcms$ ssh viper mcr [.devel.pcms]hello1 > hello1.log ~/devel/pcms$ xxd hello1.logB 0000000: 0a68 656c 6c6f 0d0a 6865 6c6c 6f0d 0a0d  .hello..hello...   I expected to get:  " ~/devel/pcms$ ./hello1 >hello1.log ~/devel/pcms$ xxd hello1.log  > 0000000: 6865 6c6c 6f0a 6865 6c6c 6f0a            hello.hello.  ; I have tried a few other versions of hello as well--with no  success--including:    ~/devel/pcms$ cat hello2.c   #include <stdio.h>   int main(void) { ,     if (freopen("SYS$OUTPUT", "wb", stdout))%         printf("hello\012hello\012"); 
     return 0;  }    Which gave the following:    ~/devel/pcms$ xxd hello2.log  = 0000000: 6c6c 6f0a 6c6c 6f0a 0d0a 0d              llo.llo....   C The version of VMS is "OpenVMS V7.3-2", which comes with ssh client  and server programs:   TCPIP> show version   ;   HP TCP/IP Services for OpenVMS Alpha Version V5.4 - ECO 2 >   on a COMPAQ AlphaServer DS20E 833 MHz running OpenVMS V7.3-2  < The client OS in the examples above is Cygwin on Windows XP:   ~/devel/pcms$ uname -aR CYGWIN_NT-5.1 mamba 1.5.11(0.116/4/2) 2004-09-04 23:17 i686 unknown unknown Cygwin ~/devel/pcms$ ssh -V) OpenSSH_3.9p1, OpenSSL 0.9.7d 17 Mar 2004    Thanks.  -Stephen    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 11:55:21 -0700  From: Z <z@no.spam> ; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. 0 Message-ID: <10k96sddvgnde31@corp.supernews.com>    VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:E > I would *never* use a PeeCee for terminal emulation.  Hell, I would F > never use a PeeCee for anything other than to emulate this customer F > environment.  I have ample real VT terminals, DECWindows on monitorsF > and a Poerbook which, out of the box, does a fine VT emulation usingF > a keyboard with has an alternate keypad which does not have the [,]  > and [-] keys fused into one.  D A PC used as a terminal emulator is much better than the real thing F when you need to capture output, like from a SHOW CONFIG, for example.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 14:51:02 -0400 ( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. , Message-ID: <41449A96.9030202@tsoft-inc.com>   JF Mezei wrote:    > David Froble wrote:  > M >>HA HA!  Reminds me a bit of my son when he had trouble getting an inkjet to M >>work.  I think it may have already been broken, but he grabbed the printer, Q >>raised it over his head, and propelled it rapidly toward the floor.  Oh, and he R >>works out at a gym almost every day, so when I say rapidly, I mean VERY rapidly. >> > G > Any damage to the floor ?  That's what I would be concerned about ;-)  >  >  >   . Didn't bother looking.  It was his floor.  :-)   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:22:48 +0100 < From: "Alex Daniels" <AlexNOSPAMTHANKSDaniels@themail.co.uk>; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. 6 Message-ID: <4144a1e9$0$22761$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>  K "Z" <z@no.spam> wrote in message news:10k96sddvgnde31@corp.supernews.com... " > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:F >> I would *never* use a PeeCee for terminal emulation.  Hell, I wouldG >> never use a PeeCee for anything other than to emulate this customer  G >> environment.  I have ample real VT terminals, DECWindows on monitors G >> and a Poerbook which, out of the box, does a fine VT emulation using K >> a keyboard with has an alternate keypad which does not have the [,] and   >> [-] keys fused into one.  > K > A PC used as a terminal emulator is much better than the real thing when  C > you need to capture output, like from a SHOW CONFIG, for example.   G VXT's, VT1200, VT1300, VT525 are all real terminal emulators, that can  F capture output just as easily. There are also a number of third-party ' products offering similar capabilities.    Alex     ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 15:19:32 -0500 ( From: Wayne Sewell <wayne@tachysoft.com>; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. / Message-ID: <00A37C64.5E6AE13F.1@tachysoft.com>    >From: Z <z@no.spam> >X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms< >Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future.& >Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 11:55:21 -0700= >Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com 1 >Message-ID: <10k96sddvgnde31@corp.supernews.com>  > ! >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: F >> I would *never* use a PeeCee for terminal emulation.  Hell, I wouldG >> never use a PeeCee for anything other than to emulate this customer  G >> environment.  I have ample real VT terminals, DECWindows on monitors G >> and a Poerbook which, out of the box, does a fine VT emulation using G >> a keyboard with has an alternate keypad which does not have the [,]   >> and [-] keys fused into one.  > E >A PC used as a terminal emulator is much better than the real thing  G >when you need to capture output, like from a SHOW CONFIG, for example.   / As can a mac emulator, with far fewer screwups.    Wayne O =============================================================================== N Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738   wayne@tachysoft.com; http://www.tachysoft.com/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html    O =============================================================================== P Larry(sniffing):"I smell something awful." Moe:"Yeah, well don't brag about it."   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:08:14 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. 0 Message-ID: <00A37C6B.32EEF1AC@SendSpamHere.ORG>  F In article <10k96sddvgnde31@corp.supernews.com>, Z <z@no.spam> writes:! >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: F >> I would *never* use a PeeCee for terminal emulation.  Hell, I wouldG >> never use a PeeCee for anything other than to emulate this customer  G >> environment.  I have ample real VT terminals, DECWindows on monitors G >> and a Poerbook which, out of the box, does a fine VT emulation using G >> a keyboard with has an alternate keypad which does not have the [,]   >> and [-] keys fused into one.  > E >A PC used as a terminal emulator is much better than the real thing  G >when you need to capture output, like from a SHOW CONFIG, for example.   E Bullshit!  Use ALPHA_LOGGER (free utility you can find in SYS$EXAMPLE E on an Alpha) or Raxco's CarbonCopy on a real terminal.  If DECWindows D is available, DECterm pisses all over the PeeCee terminal emulator's cornflakes.     --  < http://www.ProvN.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system security=                       solutions that others only claim to be.  --  , Cyber-Terrorism (si'-ber tayr'-or-iz-em) n.:M   The release of, the sale of, or the use of any Micro$oft software product!   --  K VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 16:56:14 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> ; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. , Message-ID: <4144B7EE.17549A50@teksavvy.com>   Z wrote:E > A PC used as a terminal emulator is much better than the real thing H > when you need to capture output, like from a SHOW CONFIG, for example.  N IF and only IF that PC is not connected to any email, other PCs or internet soK that it does not risk being infected with any Viri. If not, then you have a J whole set of management tasks to be performed to cleanup, test, verify andN constantly update anti virus software. That is a lot for just a dumb terminal.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 17:07:28 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> ; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. , Message-ID: <4144BA8F.D8E87E05@teksavvy.com>  ! VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: F > is available, DECterm pisses all over the PeeCee terminal emulator's
 > cornflakes.   K DECterm misses the ability to display control codes, save images as .jpg or K other more current formats etc. It is a real shame that VMS management have 6 decided to stop developping  GUI applications for VMS.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 16:30:49 -0700 * From: "Jack Peacock" <peacock@simconv.com>; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. 2 Message-ID: <S-2dnVn7tpG3QdncRVn-hQ@mpowercom.net>  K "Z" <z@no.spam> wrote in message news:10k8vhlskc60m0f@corp.supernews.com... H >> Yes, the 3100 machines have a 1.2gig limit for the boot device.  OnceG >> VMS is up, the limit is gone for data disks, but you can't boot from   >> anything bigger than 1.2gigs. > L > Yet you fault PCs from the same time period for the same basic limitation? > M It wasn't just the 3100-10/20, which was a problem with SCSI definitions.  I  M believe Oracle had a similar problem in a release that came out around 1987.  H It has to do with wrapping on a power of two boundary to calculate disk 
 block number.   H Disk capacity outstripping controller addressing has been a problem for G several decades.  Even in the 70's, before the PC, CP/M hit a capacity  D boundary on double density floppies.  The disk filesystem had to be K redesigned in version 2 to handle drives over 256KB (yes, kilobytes, an 8"  L SSSD floppy held 243KB).  The WD1000 MFM interface had problems when drives I exceeded 1024 cylinders (around 128MB).  The replacement IDE workstation  H interface has hit boundary problems at 512MB, 2GB, 8GB and 128GB due to 3 limited bits for block numbering in the controller.   L DEC and VMS had a certain advantage in that their homegrown disk interfaces J became obsolete before disk technology outgrew it.  The upgrade customers L knew a controller card would be needed when a larger disk was ordered.  The G 3100-10/20 was one of the few cases where the machines lasted too long   before the next upgrade.   Jack Peacock     ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 16:33:26 -0700  From: Z <z@no.spam> ; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. 0 Message-ID: <10k9n5p9hmr48e3@corp.supernews.com>    VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:F >>A PC used as a terminal emulator is much better than the real thing H >>when you need to capture output, like from a SHOW CONFIG, for example.  G > Bullshit!  Use ALPHA_LOGGER (free utility you can find in SYS$EXAMPLE G > on an Alpha) or Raxco's CarbonCopy on a real terminal.  If DECWindows F > is available, DECterm pisses all over the PeeCee terminal emulator's
 > cornflakes.   1 DECWindows isn't available at the SRM >>> prompt.    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:36:07 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. 0 Message-ID: <00A37C90.9F01A631@SendSpamHere.ORG>  \ In article <4144BA8F.D8E87E05@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:" >VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:G >> is available, DECterm pisses all over the PeeCee terminal emulator's  >> cornflakes. > L >DECterm misses the ability to display control codes, save images as .jpg orL >other more current formats etc. It is a real shame that VMS management have7 >decided to stop developping  GUI applications for VMS.     " What VT terminal displayed images?   --  < http://www.ProvN.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system security=                       solutions that others only claim to be.  --  , Cyber-Terrorism (si'-ber tayr'-or-iz-em) n.:M   The release of, the sale of, or the use of any Micro$oft software product!   --  K VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:38:23 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. 0 Message-ID: <00A37C90.EF946CE1@SendSpamHere.ORG>  F In article <10k9n5p9hmr48e3@corp.supernews.com>, Z <z@no.spam> writes:! >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: G >>>A PC used as a terminal emulator is much better than the real thing  I >>>when you need to capture output, like from a SHOW CONFIG, for example.  > H >> Bullshit!  Use ALPHA_LOGGER (free utility you can find in SYS$EXAMPLEH >> on an Alpha) or Raxco's CarbonCopy on a real terminal.  If DECWindowsG >> is available, DECterm pisses all over the PeeCee terminal emulator's  >> cornflakes. > 2 >DECWindows isn't available at the SRM >>> prompt.  + Huh?  What's the point your trying to make?         --  < http://www.ProvN.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system security=                       solutions that others only claim to be.  --  , Cyber-Terrorism (si'-ber tayr'-or-iz-em) n.:M   The release of, the sale of, or the use of any Micro$oft software product!   --  K VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 02:31:12 +0100 < From: "Alex Daniels" <AlexNOSPAMTHANKSDaniels@themail.co.uk>; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. 6 Message-ID: <4144f83d$0$22747$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>  - <VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG> wrote in message  * news:00A37C90.9F01A631@SendSpamHere.ORG...8 > In article <4144BA8F.D8E87E05@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei ( > <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:# >>VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: H >>> is available, DECterm pisses all over the PeeCee terminal emulator's >>> cornflakes.  >>K >>DECterm misses the ability to display control codes, save images as .jpg   >>orI >>other more current formats etc. It is a real shame that VMS management   >>have8 >>decided to stop developping  GUI applications for VMS. >  > $ > What VT terminal displayed images? >  <SNIP>  L That would be the VT1200 (b/w) or the VT1300 (colour). Also the VXT (albeit % not quite the VT prefix you specify).    VT1300M Cpu: KA42-A, CVAX chip @ 90ns, 64KB external cache Memory: 4MB on cpu board.  + 4, (12, or 16MB?) boards to max 8MB (32MB?)    Alex     ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 21:26:30 -0400 ' From: Stuart Fuller <stufuller@usa.net> ; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. 0 Message-ID: <60t2ic.lh1.ln@dadsys2.fuller.local>  #   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:   H > In article <10k9n5p9hmr48e3@corp.supernews.com>, Z <z@no.spam> writes:" >>VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:G >>>>A PC used as a terminal emulator is much better than the real thing J >>>>when you need to capture output, like from a SHOW CONFIG, for example. >>I >>> Bullshit!  Use ALPHA_LOGGER (free utility you can find in SYS$EXAMPLE I >>> on an Alpha) or Raxco's CarbonCopy on a real terminal.  If DECWindows H >>> is available, DECterm pisses all over the PeeCee terminal emulator's >>> cornflakes.  >>3 >>DECWindows isn't available at the SRM >>> prompt.  > - > Huh?  What's the point your trying to make?  >     F As a Field Service person, I frequently need to do a SHOW CONFIG at a I console prompt, record the information, replace the <whatever stores the  K config>, restore the information.  Using my laptop, with whatever terminal  J emulator, as a console device to save the configuration information saves B me a lot of time and effort, vs. writing all the information down.   --             Stu    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:13:17 -0700  From: Z <z@no.spam> ; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. 0 Message-ID: <10ka0hg8s0c5cd5@corp.supernews.com>   Stuart Fuller wrote:H >>>>>A PC used as a terminal emulator is much better than the real thingK >>>>>when you need to capture output, like from a SHOW CONFIG, for example.  >>> I >>>>Bullshit!  Use ALPHA_LOGGER (free utility you can find in SYS$EXAMPLE I >>>>on an Alpha) or Raxco's CarbonCopy on a real terminal.  If DECWindows H >>>>is available, DECterm pisses all over the PeeCee terminal emulator's >>>>cornflakes.  >>> 4 >>>DECWindows isn't available at the SRM >>> prompt. >>- >>Huh?  What's the point your trying to make?  >>   >  > H > As a Field Service person, I frequently need to do a SHOW CONFIG at a K > console prompt, record the information, replace the <whatever stores the  M > config>, restore the information.  Using my laptop, with whatever terminal  L > emulator, as a console device to save the configuration information saves D > me a lot of time and effort, vs. writing all the information down.   Exactly.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 23:06:57 -0400 . From: Mike Bartman <omni@foolie.omniphile.com>; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. 8 Message-ID: <td3ak0lggnlepbe37e7u93o55dh5h57qfr@4ax.com>  8 On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 09:50:11 -0700, Z <z@no.spam> wrote:   >Mike Bartman wrote:I >>>Didn't VAXstations suffer this same problem? I seem to remember a 2GB  J >>>or 1GB disk size limit when I rebuilt a 3100 (?) from spare parts last  >>>year. > H >> Yes, the 3100 machines have a 1.2gig limit for the boot device.  OnceG >> VMS is up, the limit is gone for data disks, but you can't boot from   >> anything bigger than 1.2gigs. > K >Yet you fault PCs from the same time period for the same basic limitation?   C Yep.  A fault is a fault.  DEC usually did better.  I don't believe B other VAXstations from that period had similar problems...the 4000A series for instance...but I may be mistaken about that.  If I am, * someone here will surely point it out. ;-)  A I also fault the PCs for doing it more than once.  Wasn't there a A limit at around 32 meg drives (or was that partition size at that A limit)?  And then again with 512 meg drives?  And then again with F something like 10 gig drives?  How many times do they have to make the= same mistake before they figure out a way to fix it properly?   
 -- Mike B.
 -- Mike B.  
 '04 FLSTCI  @ ----------------------------------------------------------------=   To reply via e-mail, remove the 'foolie.' from the address. %   I'm getting sick of all the SPAM... @ ----------------------------------------------------------------   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 23:14:07 -0400 . From: Mike Bartman <omni@foolie.omniphile.com>; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. 8 Message-ID: <m04ak01294d0nlkelpt616jigaiqj575gh@4ax.com>  ! >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: G >>>A PC used as a terminal emulator is much better than the real thing  I >>>when you need to capture output, like from a SHOW CONFIG, for example.  > H >> Bullshit!  Use ALPHA_LOGGER (free utility you can find in SYS$EXAMPLEH >> on an Alpha) or Raxco's CarbonCopy on a real terminal.  If DECWindowsG >> is available, DECterm pisses all over the PeeCee terminal emulator's  >> cornflakes.  = That's why when I use a PC to get to my VAX/Alpha I use X and F DECWindows.  The PC does a decent job of it that way...until I have toF reboot it to unlock it, or install a minor bit of software, anyway...     
 -- Mike B.  @ ----------------------------------------------------------------=   To reply via e-mail, remove the 'foolie.' from the address. %   I'm getting sick of all the SPAM... @ ----------------------------------------------------------------   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 23:35:06 -0400 # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> ; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. , Message-ID: <OqOdnQqdKZDxiNjcRVn-vQ@igs.net>   Mike Bartman wrote: : > On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 09:50:11 -0700, Z <z@no.spam> wrote: >  >> Mike Bartman wrote:F >>>> Didn't VAXstations suffer this same problem? I seem to remember aD >>>> 2GB or 1GB disk size limit when I rebuilt a 3100 (?) from spare >>>> parts last year.  >>C >>> Yes, the 3100 machines have a 1.2gig limit for the boot device. C >>> Once VMS is up, the limit is gone for data disks, but you can't + >>> boot from anything bigger than 1.2gigs.  >>A >> Yet you fault PCs from the same time period for the same basic  >> limitation? > E > Yep.  A fault is a fault.  DEC usually did better.  I don't believe D > other VAXstations from that period had similar problems...the 4000C > series for instance...but I may be mistaken about that.  If I am, , > someone here will surely point it out. ;-) > C > I also fault the PCs for doing it more than once.  Wasn't there a C > limit at around 32 meg drives (or was that partition size at that C > limit)?  And then again with 512 meg drives?  And then again with H > something like 10 gig drives?  How many times do they have to make the? > same mistake before they figure out a way to fix it properly?     K It's the 'value add' part of the process - design something crappy to begin I with so there is a short time to market and sweat the details later. When B you figure out something that's a bit better later, your marketingI department can call it "New & Improved" and "Better Than The Competition"  even when it isn't.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 01:27:53 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> ; Subject: Re: I'm giving up computers if this is the future. , Message-ID: <41452FD7.48A01B67@teksavvy.com>  & > > What VT terminal displayed images?    VT240, 330, 340 and some others.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 14:59:43 -0400 ( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> Subject: Re: Impersonate, Message-ID: <41449C9F.7020108@tsoft-inc.com>   Larry Kilgallen wrote:  Y > In article <4143EA34.8020006@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:  >  >>Larry Kilgallen wrote: >> > C >>>You can defend against it by demanding that VMS Development make  >>>privilege names more clear. >>> C >>>Others have done that in the past, and the response was that the B >>>VMS Developers renamed the old DETACH privilege to IMPERSONATE.E >>>It did not gain any capabilities in the renaming, but it certainly  >>>made things more clear. >>> K >>I cannot see that.  To me, and possibly only me, the DETACH priv was for  Q >>allowing a detached process to be created.  What clarity does it gain by being  D >>re-named to IMPERSONATE?  Stupidest thing they've done in a while. >> > I > The fact that you just skimmedthe documentation is a sample of why they I > changed the name.  The security consideration of DETACH was always that C > the user could create a detached process _running_under_any_UIC_.  >   O Yes, and I've used it both ways.  The problem is that without the DETACH priv,  N Ok, it's been a while, a long while since I wrote those utilities, you cannot  use CREPRC.   Q Ok, after looking at it from your prespective, there is a valid argument for the  O new name.  I'll still claim that a valid argument for the old name also exists.   O Maybe spliting the priviledge would have been better, (maybe not!) with DETACH  S allowing the usage of CREPRC for the same UIC and IMPERSONATE for using other UICs.    Dave   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------    Date: 12 Sep 2004 19:52:03 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)  Subject: Re: Impersonate3 Message-ID: <Om+FX3fLUSr5@eisner.encompasserve.org>   W In article <41449C9F.7020108@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:   Q > Maybe spliting the priviledge would have been better, (maybe not!) with DETACH  U > allowing the usage of CREPRC for the same UIC and IMPERSONATE for using other UICs.   F Breaking existing programs is not historically popular in VMS circles.   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 02:11:05 GMT   From: John Santos <john@egh.com> Subject: Re: Impersonate) Message-ID: <Zk71d.2296$5t4.880@trnddc01>    David Froble wrote:  > Larry Kilgallen wrote: > = >> In article <4143EA34.8020006@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froble    >> <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes: >> >>> Larry Kilgallen wrote: >>>  >>E >>>> You can defend against it by demanding that VMS Development make   >>>> privilege names more clear. >>>>E >>>> Others have done that in the past, and the response was that the D >>>> VMS Developers renamed the old DETACH privilege to IMPERSONATE.G >>>> It did not gain any capabilities in the renaming, but it certainly  >>>> made things more clear. >>>>I >>> I cannot see that.  To me, and possibly only me, the DETACH priv was  I >>> for allowing a detached process to be created.  What clarity does it  I >>> gain by being re-named to IMPERSONATE?  Stupidest thing they've done   >>> in a while.  >>>  >>J >> The fact that you just skimmedthe documentation is a sample of why theyJ >> changed the name.  The security consideration of DETACH was always thatD >> the user could create a detached process _running_under_any_UIC_. >> > K > Yes, and I've used it both ways.  The problem is that without the DETACH  K > priv, Ok, it's been a while, a long while since I wrote those utilities,   > you cannot use CREPRC. > K > Ok, after looking at it from your prespective, there is a valid argument  H > for the new name.  I'll still claim that a valid argument for the old  > name also exists.  > J > Maybe spliting the priviledge would have been better, (maybe not!) with K > DETACH allowing the usage of CREPRC for the same UIC and IMPERSONATE for   > using other UICs.  >  > Dave >    Dave,   G You are arguing from a situation that hasn't been true for a very long   time (20 years?)  F In VMS V1.0, DETACH allowed you to create a detached process under anyF UIC.  Without DETACH privilege, you couldn't create a detached process! at all (even under your own UIC).   = You could always create subprocesses, if your quotas allowed.   D Lots of people complained; they had applications which really neededD detached processes but no need to create them under anything but the? creator's UIC and they didn't want to grant DETACH willy-nilly.   A About VMS V3.0, $CREPRC (underlying RUN) was changed.  If you had E DETACH privilege, you could still create detached processes under any C UIC. If not, you could now create detached processes under your own  UIC (subject to quotas).  D So the DETACH priv no longer governed detached processes per se, butC the name stayed the same for about 15 years, until around V7.0 when F it was changed to IMPERSONATE as being more descriptive.  The functionA of the priv didn't change at all; it is still the same bit in the  priv mask and in the UAF.    --   John Santos  Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:15:31 -0700  From: Z <z@no.spam>  Subject: Re: Impersonate0 Message-ID: <10ka0lmolj8ae7a@corp.supernews.com>   John Santos wrote:F > So the DETACH priv no longer governed detached processes per se, butE > the name stayed the same for about 15 years, until around V7.0 when H > it was changed to IMPERSONATE as being more descriptive.  The functionC > of the priv didn't change at all; it is still the same bit in the  > priv mask and in the UAF.    Dumb question:  < So why does SUBMIT/USER= require CMKRNL and not IMPRESONATE?   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:24:11 -0400 - From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network>  Subject: Re: Impersonate1 Message-ID: <CridnQBsdONzvdjcRVn-jQ@adelphia.com>    Z wrote: > > > So why does SUBMIT/USER= require CMKRNL and not IMPRESONATE?  G SUBMIT/USER requires read access to the SYSUAF file to verify that the  F user exists and to get the information about them, and then CMKRNL to 1 actually do the $SNDJBC under the requested user.   G Since the IMPERSONATE privilege only applies to detached processes, it   does not come into play.   -John  wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only    ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:11:30 GMT ) From: xenman <xenman@sprynet.nospaam.com>  Subject: Sorry Wrong News Group 8 Message-ID: <3q79k09v8on5eio5kj8hm55nk6n6bdkkpp@4ax.com>   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 14:40:30 -0400 ( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>P Subject: Re: TSM hates my DECnet version (Was: TSM won't accept my circuit name), Message-ID: <4144981E.3050804@tsoft-inc.com>    Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER wrote:  Y > In article <4142823B.5050105@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:  > N >>Now don't you all remember my advice on using DECnet IV?  Damn kids, always 6 >>gotta play with fire.  Then cry when they get burnt. >> > H > The wrong DECNET_VERSION number is a well known problem of DECnet PlusI > V7.3-1 ECO 2. (I'm surprised that it isn't already fixed with a ECO 3).  > L > But your recommendation for DECnet-IV is like suggesting "ride with a bike" > then you have no fuel problems". >  >      Depends upon the distance.    P WEll, I won't say that DECnet V doesn't have capabilities that IV doesn't.  But 1 for my usage, DECnet IV provides all that I need.   O I wouldn't use a bus to transport one person a short distance.  That has other   types of fuel problems.  :-)   Dave   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  + Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 22:31:37 -0500 (CDT)  From: sms@antinode.orgP Subject: Re: TSM hates my DECnet version (Was: TSM won't accept my circuit name)) Message-ID: <04091222313704@antinode.org>   6 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)  M > Well known problem of DECNET_VERSION of V7.3-1 ECO 2. The displayed version M > number is way too low. I don't know why there is still no DECNET_OSI V7.3-1 L > ECO 3 to fix it (I wonder also why there is no DECNET_OSI V7.3-2 ECO 1) !!  F    Thanks for the info.  Where were you a couple of days ago, before I figured this out?   ) > Why not upgrade to V7.3-2 alltogether ?       No kits.   # > Kits should not be the problem...   C    I agree, but that doesn't get me the required kits.  I'm open to B CD-ROM image offers, and to anonymous packages sent to the addressB below.  Otherwise, I'll just wait for the next Hobbyist kit (or an4 incredible bargain on Ebay, which appears unlikely).  0 > (But VMS V7.3-2 has currently over 20 ECOs ;-)  (    Any with such a "Well known problem"?  9 > Yes, PATHWORKS. If you don't use it, then deinstall it.p@ > More free space, less fragmentation, less backup/restore time,! > less upgrade headaches/time....o  /    According to PRODUCT SHOW PRODUCT /FULL (andoE SYS$UPDATE:VMSINSTAL.HISTORY), it's not installed.  I assume that thetG file in question is an orphan from some long-lost experiment.  It'll bei
 gone soon.  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547t   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 02:26:24 GMTe  From: John Santos <john@egh.com>Y Subject: Re: TSM hates my DECnet version (Was: TSM won't accept my circuit name) name)namt* Message-ID: <kz71d.2298$5t4.1111@trnddc01>    Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER wrote:Y > In article <4142823B.5050105@tsoft-inc.com>, David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:o > N >>Now don't you all remember my advice on using DECnet IV?  Damn kids, always 6 >>gotta play with fire.  Then cry when they get burnt. >  > H > The wrong DECNET_VERSION number is a well known problem of DECnet PlusI > V7.3-1 ECO 2. (I'm surprised that it isn't already fixed with a ECO 3).- > L > But your recommendation for DECnet-IV is like suggesting "ride with a bike" > then you have no fuel problems". >    JF????  :-).   -- u John Santos  Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 14:09:48 -0400r- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> " Subject: Re: VMSKITBLD.COM failure, Message-ID: <414490EB.D6A207FE@teksavvy.com>  	 Al wrote:cF > After specifying the BUILD option, the source and target drives, andG > leaving SYS0 as the root dir, VMSKITBLD.COM goes through initializingn/ > the tape, and then I get the following error:l > A > %CREATE-E-EDIRNOTCRE, _MUA0:<SYSEXE> directory file not createdh. > -LIB-F-INVFILSPE, invalid file specification  M I believe that the VMSKITBLD procedure is meant to create a system DRIVE, noteL backup of your system stuff onto tape. It even tries to set special "nomove"N attributes to files after they have been copied, and that would obviously failK on a tape since the head would be well beyond those files that have already0N been written (and set file/nomove on a tape is rather "redundant" :-) :-) ::-)  L On a VAX, you'd be doing a @STABACKIT.COM to create a bootable TK50 that has only BACKUP on it.P Then, you'd be doing BACKUP/IMAGE to save your system disk onto a separate tape.  N You would then use standalone backup to boot into backup and then restore your. saves system drive to whatever drive you want.   ------------------------------    Date: 12 Sep 2004 17:54:56 -0700 From: alegend@mail.com (Al)"" Subject: Re: VMSKITBLD.COM failure< Message-ID: <f486c91c.0409121654.b200c1d@posting.google.com>  a JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message news:<414490EB.D6A207FE@teksavvy.com>...7 > Al wrote:lH > > After specifying the BUILD option, the source and target drives, andI > > leaving SYS0 as the root dir, VMSKITBLD.COM goes through initializing 1 > > the tape, and then I get the following error:, > > C > > %CREATE-E-EDIRNOTCRE, _MUA0:<SYSEXE> directory file not created-0 > > -LIB-F-INVFILSPE, invalid file specification > O > I believe that the VMSKITBLD procedure is meant to create a system DRIVE, not N > backup of your system stuff onto tape. It even tries to set special "nomove"P > attributes to files after they have been copied, and that would obviously failM > on a tape since the head would be well beyond those files that have alreadynP > been written (and set file/nomove on a tape is rather "redundant" :-) :-) ::-) > N > On a VAX, you'd be doing a @STABACKIT.COM to create a bootable TK50 that has > only BACKUP on it.R > Then, you'd be doing BACKUP/IMAGE to save your system disk onto a separate tape. > P > You would then use standalone backup to boot into backup and then restore your0 > saves system drive to whatever drive you want.  > I was under the impression VMSKITBLD would actually build me aD distribution kit, that would be the same as the original VMS5.5 TK50F tape from DEC. But regardless, if VMSKITBLD is not suitable for what ID need I will re-phrase the problem: how do I make a working duplicate" of a VMS5.5 distribution kit tape?  
 Thank you, -Al.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 01:25:19 -0400>- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>l" Subject: Re: VMSKITBLD.COM failure, Message-ID: <41452F3E.72E5D9F5@teksavvy.com>  	 Al wrote: F > need I will re-phrase the problem: how do I make a working duplicate$ > of a VMS5.5 distribution kit tape?  Q There is a utility called VM'S TPCE which allows to make an image copy of a tape.   D Or you could use BACKUP to copy the actual savesets to VMS, then useK stabackit.com to create a "bootable" standalone backup tape, and then mount J the tape /noerase and use backup to ocpy the savesets in the same order as they were on the original tape.4  G Another way to do this is to use the kitbuild procedure to create a newjJ directory structure on disk, and use backup to get that structure to tape.   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2004.508 ************************