1 INFO-VAX	Wed, 29 Sep 2004	Volume 2004 : Issue 541       Contents: Re: *.CDD file for CONNX Re: As seen in WSJ Re: As seen in WSJ Re: As seen in WSJ Re: As seen in WSJ Re: As seen in WSJ Re: As seen in WSJ Re: As seen in WSJ Re: As seen in WSJ7 Re: BACKUP/INCREMENTAL not deleting old files properly? ! C Decompiler for HP Alpha OpenVMS % Re: C Decompiler for HP Alpha OpenVMS   Re: CSWS_PHP & Squirrel Webmail!  Re: CSWS_PHP & Squirrel Webmail!  Re: CSWS_PHP & Squirrel Webmail! Re: DHCP client question Re: Future of Decnet% Re: Hobbyist site licenses DOWN AGAIN % Re: Hobbyist site licenses DOWN AGAIN , Re: HP admits discontinued IA64 workstations, Re: HP admits discontinued IA64 workstations, Re: HP admits discontinued IA64 workstations  Re: Most Wanted - VMS 6.1 VAX CD Re: Odd behavior in XFC cache 4 OT: Good places in EU to study Networking/Clustering Re: OT: Sun's fighting chance  Re: OT: Sun's fighting chance P Re: Rdb on NT and Unix (was Re: Interbase on VMS (was Re: "Oracle RDB" licensingP Re: Rdb on NT and Unix (was Re: Interbase on VMS (was Re: "Oracle RDB" licensingP Re: Rdb on NT and Unix (was Re: Interbase on VMS (was Re: "Oracle RDB" licensingP Rdb on NT and Unix (was Re: Interbase on VMS (was Re: "Oracle RDB" licensing queP Re: Rdb on NT and Unix (was Re: Interbase on VMS (was Re: "Oracle RDB" licensing3 Re: TCPIP$SMTP_SEND_FROM_FILE, what's its future??? 3 Re: TCPIP$SMTP_SEND_FROM_FILE, what's its future??? 3 Re: TCPIP$SMTP_SEND_FROM_FILE, what's its future??? 3 Re: TCPIP$SMTP_SEND_FROM_FILE, what's its future??? 3 Re: TCPIP$SMTP_SEND_FROM_FILE, what's its future??? # Re: Tiny pickings for Itanium OEM's # Re: Tiny pickings for Itanium OEM's # RE: Tiny pickings for Itanium OEM's # Re: Tiny pickings for Itanium OEM's = Re: [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-2] DCL Command Line Length in EVE/TPU   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 29 Sep 2004 00:26:18 -0700# From: dooleys@snowy.net.au (dooley) ! Subject: Re: *.CDD file for CONNX = Message-ID: <1ca82fc6.0409282326.181c6aa2@posting.google.com>   e David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<415A1DBA.A487E357@comcast.net>... 
 > Phil wrote:  > > 0 > > "cljlk" <cljlk@hotmail.com> wrote in message: > > news:de74637.0409280140.5075dcf1@posting.google.com...4 > > > dooleys@snowy.net.au (dooley) wrote in message< >  news:<1ca82fc6.0409271642.1e3094af@posting.google.com>...; > > > > nojunk <nojunk@nojunk.hotmail.com> wrote in message 2 >  news:<4157e50b$0$4033$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>...P > > > > > I have installed CONNX8.X which is a middle between VMX and WindowsXP.N > > > > > Would anyone please tell me how to generat configuration file *.CDD? > > > > > Thans.C > > > > cdd files are not really config files but database metadata 4 > > > > You need to install the connx admin software+ > > > > and use the data dictionary manager E > > > > you can import cdd definitions from varions sources .cdd .pdl  > > > > Phil > > > K > > > I have installed CONNX8.x client and admin software. I do not see any I > > > application that I can generate data dictionary file (*.CDD). Would  > > > you please3 > > > point it out. I am new in this filed. Thanks. = > > I am running a much older version, but the help file says N > > http://www.connx.com/products/connx/Connx%208.9%20UserGuide/connxcdd32.htm > > To create a CDD 7 > > Click the Start button, and then point to Programs. ; > > Point to CONNX 8, and then click CONNX Data Dictionary. 9 > > The Open dialog box appears. Click the Cancel button. 5 > > The CONNX Data Dictionary Manager window appears. 9 > > You can add or import CDD objects (databases, tables, 9 > > fields, views, and stored procedures) by clicking the 6 > > Add or Import buttons in the CONNX Data Dictionary9 > > Manager window and then choosing an available object.  > > Phil > = > Cool, but he wants to GENERATE .CDD files, not import them.  > ) I seem to be missing the problem here.... > I assume there is some sort of data structure in place on vms,, or there wouldn't be any need to use connx. B Connx can understand almost any structure, from a database schema,B vms .ddl files, powerhouse dictionaries and .pdl files, vms common> data dictionary, and even basic, cobol, and dibol definitions.A If you don't have any of these, you can still create it manually, . by adding each table and defining its columns.@ After you have created or imported your definition, you generate- the connx .cdd by clicking the "save" button. = Then you create a connx data-source on your pc that is linked E to this cdd, and then you can use it like any other odbc data source.  Phil   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 11:26:18 +0100 O From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>  Subject: Re: As seen in WSJ 0 Message-ID: <cje2kc$njg$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Keith Parris wrote:  > John Smith wrote:  > 1 >> Hewlett-Packard Co. said it will stop offering @ >> desktop workstations based on Intel's Itanium microprocessor. >  > 8 > Business as usual, and zero impact on OpenVMS users... > K > We haven't had OpenVMS workstations for many years on Alpha, either, but  J > that hasn't stopped people from putting graphics cards into servers (or D > simply leaving in the graphics card which comes with every server D > anyway) and making their own workstations. Folks can and will use I > rx1600, rx2600, even rx4640 systems as workstations under OpenVMS, and  F > they'll continue to be supported by OpenVMS Engineering in doing so. Not really.   E Anything that reduces the likelyhood that Itanium survives materially H impacts OpenVMS customers. An event such as the only Itanium WorkstationH vendor taking an axe to their product range and at the same time cuttingH 15% of the itanium market off is one that does materially impact OpenVMS
 customers.  E How much less viable is that rx1600/rx2600 range now that 900 units a 1 quarter that shared the same platform have gone ?   E How much less viable is LV Itanium now that a big chunk of its market  has just evaporated ?   E You would have to be very seriously challenged to assume that this is 1 a zero impact event to the OpenVMS customer base.    Regards  Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------    Date: 29 Sep 2004 04:42:01 -0700. From: fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br (Fabio Cardoso) Subject: Re: As seen in WSJ = Message-ID: <f30679fb.0409290342.2dd606f5@posting.google.com>   l Keith Parris <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<Oql6d.11915$m86.8560@news.cpqcorp.net>... > John Smith wrote: 2 > > Hewlett-Packard Co. said it will stop offeringA > > desktop workstations based on Intel's Itanium microprocessor.  > 8 > Business as usual, and zero impact on OpenVMS users... > K > We haven't had OpenVMS workstations for many years on Alpha, either, but  J > that hasn't stopped people from putting graphics cards into servers (or D > simply leaving in the graphics card which comes with every server D > anyway) and making their own workstations. Folks can and will use I > rx1600, rx2600, even rx4640 systems as workstations under OpenVMS, and  F > they'll continue to be supported by OpenVMS Engineering in doing so.  G Workstations would be an interesting choice for Industrial Automation,  > LIMS, etc ...but for me its important to have Itanium blades C to run OpenVMS clusters. These blades could be used as workstations 1 in a BladePC-like aproach. Any date of release ?     Regards    FC   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 11:16:12 -0400 # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>  Subject: Re: As seen in WSJ , Message-ID: <QqOdnTkLU4wgTMfcRVn-ow@igs.net>   Fabio Cardoso wrote:> > Keith Parris <keithparris_NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message1 > news:<Oql6d.11915$m86.8560@news.cpqcorp.net>...  >> John Smith wrote:2 >>> Hewlett-Packard Co. said it will stop offeringA >>> desktop workstations based on Intel's Itanium microprocessor.  >>9 >> Business as usual, and zero impact on OpenVMS users...  >>G >> We haven't had OpenVMS workstations for many years on Alpha, either, B >> but that hasn't stopped people from putting graphics cards intoC >> servers (or simply leaving in the graphics card which comes with D >> every server anyway) and making their own workstations. Folks canC >> and will use rx1600, rx2600, even rx4640 systems as workstations A >> under OpenVMS, and they'll continue to be supported by OpenVMS  >> Engineering in doing so.  > H > Workstations would be an interesting choice for Industrial Automation,? > LIMS, etc ...but for me its important to have Itanium blades E > to run OpenVMS clusters. These blades could be used as workstations 2 > in a BladePC-like aproach. Any date of release ?     Wrong phrasing Fabio.   H What is important to you is supported OpenVMS clusters on low-cost bladeD servers...... which probably means AMD64-based systems as opposed to& low-volume nearly proprietary Itanics.   ------------------------------    Date: 29 Sep 2004 08:58:56 -0700( From: bob@instantwhip.com (Bob Ceculski) Subject: Re: As seen in WSJ = Message-ID: <d7791aa1.0409290758.55d99ddc@posting.google.com>    Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<cje2kc$njg$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...  > Keith Parris wrote:  > > John Smith wrote:  > > M > > We haven't had OpenVMS workstations for many years on Alpha, either, but  L > > that hasn't stopped people from putting graphics cards into servers (or F > > simply leaving in the graphics card which comes with every server F > > anyway) and making their own workstations. Folks can and will use K > > rx1600, rx2600, even rx4640 systems as workstations under OpenVMS, and  H > > they'll continue to be supported by OpenVMS Engineering in doing so.
 > Not really.  > G > Anything that reduces the likelyhood that Itanium survives materially J > impacts OpenVMS customers. An event such as the only Itanium WorkstationJ > vendor taking an axe to their product range and at the same time cuttingJ > 15% of the itanium market off is one that does materially impact OpenVMS > customers. > G > How much less viable is that rx1600/rx2600 range now that 900 units a 3 > quarter that shared the same platform have gone ?  > G > How much less viable is LV Itanium now that a big chunk of its market  > has just evaporated ?  > G > You would have to be very seriously challenged to assume that this is 3 > a zero impact event to the OpenVMS customer base.  > 	 > Regards  > Andrew Harrison   ; you are in left field as usual Andrew ... what will make or 1 break itanium as a viable chip are two things ...   
 1. OpenVMS. 2. the ev8 alpha team to make itanium ev8 like  ? OpenVMS will make or break itanium ... that is the bottom lime!    ------------------------------   Date: 29 Sep 2004 16:21:56 GMT+ From: "Doc." <doc.cypher@openvms-rocks.com>  Subject: Re: As seen in WSJ 7 Message-ID: <Xns9573BAE93E5A5dcovmsrox@212.100.160.123>   % %NEWS-I-NEWMSG, Bob Ceculski wrote in 5 news:d7791aa1.0409290758.55d99ddc@posting.google.com     > ... that is the bottom lime!  # What sort of lime?  Green or Quick?    SCNR :-)     Doc. --  G OpenVMS:     Eight out of ten hackers prefer *other* operating systems. G http://www.openvms-rocks.com    Deathrow Public-Access OpenVMS Cluster.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 12:27:57 -0400 # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>  Subject: Re: As seen in WSJ , Message-ID: <U6Kdncl54cITf8fcRVn-jQ@igs.net>   Bob Ceculski wrote: # > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy : > <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message. > news:<cje2kc$njg$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>... >> Keith Parris wrote: >>> John Smith wrote:  >>> @ >>> We haven't had OpenVMS workstations for many years on Alpha,F >>> either, but that hasn't stopped people from putting graphics cardsD >>> into servers (or simply leaving in the graphics card which comesF >>> with every server anyway) and making their own workstations. Folks; >>> can and will use rx1600, rx2600, even rx4640 systems as G >>> workstations under OpenVMS, and they'll continue to be supported by $ >>> OpenVMS Engineering in doing so. >> Not really. >>H >> Anything that reduces the likelyhood that Itanium survives materially? >> impacts OpenVMS customers. An event such as the only Itanium E >> Workstation vendor taking an axe to their product range and at the C >> same time cutting 15% of the itanium market off is one that does ' >> materially impact OpenVMS customers.  >>H >> How much less viable is that rx1600/rx2600 range now that 900 units a4 >> quarter that shared the same platform have gone ? >>H >> How much less viable is LV Itanium now that a big chunk of its market >> has just evaporated ? >>H >> You would have to be very seriously challenged to assume that this is4 >> a zero impact event to the OpenVMS customer base. >>
 >> Regards >> Andrew Harrison > = > you are in left field as usual Andrew ... what will make or 3 > break itanium as a viable chip are two things ...  >  > 1. OpenVMS0 > 2. the ev8 alpha team to make itanium ev8 like > A > OpenVMS will make or break itanium ... that is the bottom lime!      Bob,  I  I'm sure you've noticed the vast unstoppable VMS marketing campaign that I has been unleashed by HP, designed to place a VMS server in every college G kid's dorm room, in every primary school classroom, and in every garage D across America by noon this coming Friday.  Oh....my bad....that's a@ Microsoft campaign for Windows XP on Dell/AMD I'm thinking about    K If VMS is the make-or-break criteria, I'd be busy shorting Intel stock like F crazy right now if I was betting on HP doing anything to market VMS onF Itanic. I think Ford sold more Edsels in one year than HP has sold VMSL servers in 3 years and will sell in their next 5 years of forecasts at their current rate of marketing.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 13:07:09 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>  Subject: Re: As seen in WSJ , Message-ID: <415AEBBA.AC6AF68D@teksavvy.com>   Bob Ceculski wrote: = > you are in left field as usual Andrew ... what will make or 3 > break itanium as a viable chip are two things ...  >  > 1. OpenVMS0 > 2. the ev8 alpha team to make itanium ev8 like  N Bob, I think you are wrong.  Remember that the whole purpose of dropping AlphaL and PaRisc was to adopt a high volume, low cost, industry standard commodity chip for servers.   J IA64 has not achieved high volume and odds of it achieving it are lower asI time progresses and the 64 bit 8086 takes on more and more serious tasks, ' further eroding IA64's remaining niche.   L IA64 is not low cost. Due to iot not being high volume, and the fact that itL is proprietary and available from a single source. Alpha was actually better than IA64 in that respect.  N IA64 is not industry standard. The 8086 is industry standard. And because 80863 has moved to 64 bits, it will not be eclipsed soon.   M IA64 os not commodity chips. Because it is single sourced, expensive, and not ) available for low end platforms/desktops.   K Even if IA64 attained the same performance expectations as Alpha could have E with EV8, the market would still not make IA64 succeed in what it had H originally set out to do. In fact, when you look at Alpha, its technical  supriority did not save it life.  M The same reasons that caused HP/Compaq to kill Alpha would logically cause HP  to also abandon IA64.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 13:46:56 -0400 # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>  Subject: Re: As seen in WSJ , Message-ID: <95qdnW_6Nt-JaMfcRVn-qw@igs.net>   JF Mezei wrote:  > Bob Ceculski wrote: > >> you are in left field as usual Andrew ... what will make or4 >> break itanium as a viable chip are two things ... >>
 >> 1. OpenVMS 1 >> 2. the ev8 alpha team to make itanium ev8 like  > A > Bob, I think you are wrong.  Remember that the whole purpose of A > dropping Alpha and PaRisc was to adopt a high volume, low cost, / > industry standard commodity chip for servers.  > C > IA64 has not achieved high volume and odds of it achieving it are E > lower as time progresses and the 64 bit 8086 takes on more and more 8 > serious tasks, further eroding IA64's remaining niche. > F > IA64 is not low cost. Due to iot not being high volume, and the factF > that it is proprietary and available from a single source. Alpha was, > actually better than IA64 in that respect. > C > IA64 is not industry standard. The 8086 is industry standard. And B > because 8086 has moved to 64 bits, it will not be eclipsed soon. > G > IA64 os not commodity chips. Because it is single sourced, expensive, 3 > and not available for low end platforms/desktops.  > B > Even if IA64 attained the same performance expectations as AlphaF > could have with EV8, the market would still not make IA64 succeed inA > what it had originally set out to do. In fact, when you look at 7 > Alpha, its technical supriority did not save it life.  > F > The same reasons that caused HP/Compaq to kill Alpha would logically  > cause HP to also abandon IA64.    $ Stay tuned to this same Bat channel.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 10:17:05 -0400 & From: Jilly <jilly@clarityconnect.com>@ Subject: Re: BACKUP/INCREMENTAL not deleting old files properly?8 Message-ID: <1096467377.CixG0TmuKsiGf5xkrvZ/Vw@teranews>  ; WAG, try adding a /RECORD on the restore of the image save.    Malcolm Dunnett wrote:   > K >  I'm having a problem with restoring an incremental backup. Either BACKUP % > is broken or I'm missing something.  >  >  I have two savesets:  > K >   an image backup (BACKUP/IMAGE/RECORD/NOALIAS disk: saveset1 ) of a disk  > K >   and a differential backup (BACKUP/SINC=BACKUP disk:[*...]*.*;* saveset2  >   )  > , >  I restore the image backup to a new disk: > ( >    BACKUP/IMAGE/NOALIAS saveset1 disk: > , >  and then restore the differential backup: > 7 >    BACKUP/INCREMENTAL/OVERLAY/TRUNCATE saveset2 disk:  >  >   8 >  The problem I'm seeing is in the following situation: > K >   Given a file ( x.dat;10 ) exists on the volume when the image backup is L > created but has been deleted before the latest differential backup is run.H > Given also that a new file of the same name but a lower version numberK > (x.dat;1) has been created by the time of the differential backup. When I I > restore the image backup I get the x.dat;10 file restored ( as would be J > expected ). When I restore the incremental backup I get the x.dat;1 fileJ > restored ( again, as would be expected ), BUT THE X.DAT;10 FILE DOES NOTJ > GET DELETED. This leads to an older version of the file remaining in theL > directory with a higher version number, which is not a pleasant situation. > 7 >   An I doing something wrong or is this a BACKUP bug.  > I >   The system is running OpenVMS 7.3-1. The VMS731_BACKUP V1.0 patch has  >   been
 > applied.   --  B Jilly - Working from Home in the Chemung River Valley, Waverly, NYB       - jilly@clarityconnect.com         http://www.jilly.baka.comE       - mark.jilson@hp.com               http://www.hp.com/go/openvms ;       - http://www.jilsonracing.com      Go Fast, Turn Left C       - http://www.chemungspeedrome.com  Door Handle to Door Handle    ------------------------------    Date: 29 Sep 2004 09:33:03 -0700. From: dhipenbecker@mbco.com (Doug Hipenbecker)* Subject: C Decompiler for HP Alpha OpenVMS= Message-ID: <d8809b28.0409290833.419cd358@posting.google.com>    Greetings...  C Does anyone know if a decompiler for C executable exists for the HP  Alpha OpenVMS OS?    Thanks in advance. Doug Hipenbecker Miller Brewing Co.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 17:11:16 GMT 4 From: "Fred Kleinsorge" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>. Subject: Re: C Decompiler for HP Alpha OpenVMS3 Message-ID: <U0C6d.11980$lV6.5349@news.cpqcorp.net>   I Something to turn it back into C or some other HLL?  No.  But you can get 8 the Alpha "assembler" listing of the executable code by:  % $ mc srm_check -verbose -dump FOO.EXE       ; "Doug Hipenbecker" <dhipenbecker@mbco.com> wrote in message 7 news:d8809b28.0409290833.419cd358@posting.google.com...  > Greetings... > E > Does anyone know if a decompiler for C executable exists for the HP  > Alpha OpenVMS OS?  >  > Thanks in advance. > Doug Hipenbecker > Miller Brewing Co.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 10:28:53 +0100 = From: "Andoni" <no_spam_please@andoni-at-ireland-dot-com.com> ) Subject: Re: CSWS_PHP & Squirrel Webmail! 2 Message-ID: <Tfv6d.32380$Z14.11176@news.indigo.ie>   Hi,   L I'll try to answer that one, correct me if I'm wrong please. Basically it isJ having a problem because CSWS_PHP is putting an exclusive lock on the fileL which contains the session information. This means that, as one frame of theG website is loading and therefore accessing the session information, the K other frames get this error because they cannot access it at the same time.   K This is a 'feature' of CSWS. It seems to like the idea of putting exclusive H locks on things. We have to have a batch program restart our CSWS serverJ every night to copy off that day's log files because otherwise there is no= access to them until it comes down! Madness if you ask me ;-)    Hope that explains it? Andoni.   : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message& news:4159EAE7.F63D91DB@teksavvy.com... > Jerry Alan Braga wrote: L > > to get HP to modify the scripts to make it work with VMS.  The nature of the K > > frames and the access to the same session file makes this application a  > > no-go form VMS.  > K > Could you explin this further ? What exactly about this app makes it a no  go& > on VMS bot a go on other platforms ?   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 07:55:00 -0500 6 From: "Craig A. Berry" <craigberry@mac.com.spamfooler>) Subject: Re: CSWS_PHP & Squirrel Webmail! D Message-ID: <craigberry-A1742A.07545929092004@news.isp.giganews.com>  2 In article <Tfv6d.32380$Z14.11176@news.indigo.ie>,?  "Andoni" <no_spam_please@andoni-at-ireland-dot-com.com> wrote:   N > I'll try to answer that one, correct me if I'm wrong please. Basically it isL > having a problem because CSWS_PHP is putting an exclusive lock on the fileN > which contains the session information. This means that, as one frame of theI > website is loading and therefore accessing the session information, the M > other frames get this error because they cannot access it at the same time.  > M > This is a 'feature' of CSWS. It seems to like the idea of putting exclusive J > locks on things. We have to have a batch program restart our CSWS serverL > every night to copy off that day's log files because otherwise there is no? > access to them until it comes down! Madness if you ask me ;-)   G Opening files with exclusive access by default has always been the VMS  G way.  The C run-time makes a nod toward other conventions by providing  H the DECC$FILE_SHARING feature logical name.  That may be worth a try in > this case.  The documentation on the feature logicals is here:  I http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/732FINAL/5763/5763pro_004.html#feature_logi  cals_sec  ! (that may need manual unwrapping.    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 13:25:01 GMT . From: "Jerry Alan Braga" <jabraga@flanagan.ca>) Subject: Re: CSWS_PHP & Squirrel Webmail! ) Message-ID: <NIy6d.2652$Du2.913@edtnps89>   M While the file sharing does work, it does not for this app.  What happens is  M that the file gets zero'd but one for the frames with the other needs it and  J then reports back to the browser with another error about invalid request  length.   < That is why this app is not very good on VMS without changes  B "Craig A. Berry" <craigberry@mac.com.spamfooler> wrote in message > news:craigberry-A1742A.07545929092004@news.isp.giganews.com...4 > In article <Tfv6d.32380$Z14.11176@news.indigo.ie>,@ > "Andoni" <no_spam_please@andoni-at-ireland-dot-com.com> wrote: > M >> I'll try to answer that one, correct me if I'm wrong please. Basically it   >> is I >> having a problem because CSWS_PHP is putting an exclusive lock on the   >> file L >> which contains the session information. This means that, as one frame of  >> theJ >> website is loading and therefore accessing the session information, theI >> other frames get this error because they cannot access it at the same   >> time. >>E >> This is a 'feature' of CSWS. It seems to like the idea of putting   >> exclusiveK >> locks on things. We have to have a batch program restart our CSWS server K >> every night to copy off that day's log files because otherwise there is   >> no @ >> access to them until it comes down! Madness if you ask me ;-) > H > Opening files with exclusive access by default has always been the VMSH > way.  The C run-time makes a nod toward other conventions by providingI > the DECC$FILE_SHARING feature logical name.  That may be worth a try in @ > this case.  The documentation on the feature logicals is here: > K > http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/732FINAL/5763/5763pro_004.html#feature_logi 
 > cals_sec > $ > (that may need manual unwrapping.    ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 07:50:50 +0000 (UTC) 6 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)! Subject: Re: DHCP client question 0 Message-ID: <newscache$odls4i$l28$1@news.sil.at>  X In article <cj6q4m$h8l$1@misc-cct.server.rpi.edu>, "Bob Healey" <healer@rpi.edu> writes:K >I'm running a vaxstation 4000, temporarily setup to use the DHCP client to L >obtain an IP address.  It's been unable to get an address from the school'sM >server, so I examined the traffic on a network sniffer.  The packets leaving J >the machine have the correct source MAC address on the packet, but insideL >the DHCP Discovery packet, it has a field labeled "Client Hardware Address"L >which is a different value than the actual hardware address of the machine.K >As far as I can tell by examining the packets, the DHCP server is replying G >to the "Client Hardware Address" and not the source MAC address.  Does H >anyone know a trick I can use to tell VMS to either 1.) Not include theL >"client hardware address field" or 2.) force it to include the right value?M >This is only temporary as I'm waiting for some static IP assignments to come 	 >through.    Select one of the following   L 1) Upgrade to a more recent version of TCPIP as the older ones are broken inL this regard (but alas the required TCPIP version is still not there for VAX)  B 2) start DECNET (Phase-V; as Phase-4 can't be started) after TCPIPF (eg. by entering the TCPIP$STARTUP.COM in the CONFIG phase in SYSMAN).  3 3) use another TCPIP stack (like TCPware, Multinet)    4) don't start DECnet at all  
 I use 2 and 3    HIH    --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------   Date: 29 Sep 2004 05:54:13 GMT2 From: "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow> Subject: Re: Future of Decnet ? Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-93mDEPLeIdnK@dave2_os2.home.ours>   E On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:58:38 UTC, greigaln@netscape.net (Alan Greig)   wrote:  a > Roy Omond <Roy.Omond@BlueBubble.UK.Com> wrote in message news:<2q2n3hFq0mskU1@uni-berlin.de>...  > > Alan Greig wrote:  > >  > > >> [... snip ...]  > > >   > > > But first there was ANF-10 > > & > > Now there's a blast-from-the-past. > >  > > What are you up to Alan ?  >  > Nothing really...   # Hope that's an enjoyable nothing...    --   Cheers - Dave.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 10:53:09 GMT 5 From: brad@rabbit.dnsalias.org (Bradford J. Hamilton) . Subject: Re: Hobbyist site licenses DOWN AGAIN. Message-ID: <puw6d.137314$D%.115608@attbi_s51>  c In article <Tyq6d.113$Za.6@fe40.usenetserver.com>, Alphaman <alphaman-nix-spam@alphant.com> writes:  !Alan Frisbie wrote:> !> I had the same problem about a month ago when I was getting? !> a friend's system set up.   After waiting a week, I e-mailed A !> David Cathay and he replied that the procedure had been broken < !> but was now fixed.   I'm guessing that it's broken again. !>   !> Alan  ! J !I left a message for David Cathey this afternoon regarding this issue; I H !hope we can get to the bottom of it soon!  I'd hate to lose my 50 days ) !of uptime due to expired licenses... 8^)   / David's usually been responsive - not to worry.   B My license expired recently, but my system stayed up until I got a' "replacement" from openvmshobbyist.org.   ? http://uptimes.hostingwired.com/account.php?op=details&hid=8347    ! C !  http://uptimes.hostingwired.com/account.php?op=details&hid=10205    UPS - no fair!!!	:-)   ! I !It would also probably really screw up my home automation system...  :^P  !  !Aaron !   J __________________________________________________________________________A Bradford J. Hamilton                    "All opinions are my own" K bMradAhamiPltSon-at-coMmcAast.nPeSt     "Lose the MAPS, and replace '-at-'  0                                          with @"   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 17:35:14 GMT 3 From: Eric Dittman <dittman@jeeves.int.dittman.net> . Subject: Re: Hobbyist site licenses DOWN AGAIN) Message-ID: <mnC6d.7274$Wu1.538@trnddc02>   / Alphaman <alphaman-nix-spam@alphant.com> wrote:  > Alan Frisbie wrote: ? > > I had the same problem about a month ago when I was getting @ > > a friend's system set up.   After waiting a week, I e-mailedB > > David Cathay and he replied that the procedure had been broken= > > but was now fixed.   I'm guessing that it's broken again.  > >  > > Alan  K > I left a message for David Cathey this afternoon regarding this issue; I  I > hope we can get to the bottom of it soon!  I'd hate to lose my 50 days  * > of uptime due to expired licenses... 8^)  D >   http://uptimes.hostingwired.com/account.php?op=details&hid=10205  J > It would also probably really screw up my home automation system...  :^P  J I tried yesterday (9/28) around 5:00PM Central and got the licenses within
 five minutes.  --   Eric Dittman dittman@dittman.net    ------------------------------   Date: 29 Sep 2004 05:54:12 GMT2 From: "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow>5 Subject: Re: HP admits discontinued IA64 workstations ? Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-kdv7swgrw30Q@dave2_os2.home.ours>   C On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 21:38:46 UTC, John Reagan <john.reagan@hp.com>   wrote:  H > Now, in theory, everybody should have done complete testing when they H > updated OpenVMS Alpha or even just installed a new C compiler, right?  > Or did you trust us then?   $ Well I trust you but I stll check...   --   Cheers - Dave.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 02:34:58 -0400 ( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>5 Subject: Re: HP admits discontinued IA64 workstations , Message-ID: <415A5792.8010105@tsoft-inc.com>   JF Mezei wrote:    > Bill Gunshannon wrote: > J >>So what?  Sun has already demonstrated that they are willing to considerD >>supporting a platform based strictly on the needs/desires of theirJ >>customers.  As long as there are Sparc customers I suspect there will be >>Sparc support. >> > P > Yes. However, assuming  (for sake of discussion) that today, the 8086 from AMDP > had equal features to Sparc and that SUN annouced it was pulling out of Sparc.O >  There would be an outcry, but for a different reason. It woudln't be because > > of the loss of a cheap platform, but over migration hassles.    L Well, isn't that one of the principal problems with killing Alpha?  Causing 6 customers to incur costs, sometimes significant costs.    O > No matter what marketers tell you, any migration to a different architecture, P > even if on same OS requires recertification, testing, migration plan, parallelN > testing etc and that costs a lot of money to the customer, even if the OS is > the same. D > That is something which the VMS engineers seem to refuse to admit.  P I don't think you can pin this one on the VMS engineers.  They had their course Q dictated to them, and they/re trying to make the best they can of the situation.  G   It's curly who didn't give a damn about the harm he was doing to the  0 customers.  Carly continues along the same path.   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  15486t   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 12:18:47 -0400s- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>n5 Subject: Re: HP admits discontinued IA64 workstationse, Message-ID: <415AE066.E470F78E@teksavvy.com>   David Froble wrote: Q > I don't think you can pin this one on the VMS engineers.  They had their coursePR > dictated to them, and they/re trying to make the best they can of the situation.  M And from the point of view of their responsabilities, they seemd to have donesE an excellent job at porting VMS to that IA64 thing and minimizing thec< technical impacts of migration. And they get an A+ for that.  N However, when they say that because you just need to recompile with barely anyF changes and this migration is as easy as pie, they seem to forget thatN customers have due processes to follow in order to migrate production from oneE machine to another and such processes are far more involved than justlI recompiling. In many cases, they don,t even recompile because software is  furnished by a 3rd party.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 08:14:45 +0100g- From: Roy Omond <Roy.Omond@BlueBubble.UK.Com>() Subject: Re: Most Wanted - VMS 6.1 VAX CD + Message-ID: <2rv5sbF1e67ucU1@uni-berlin.de>    Jefferson Humber wrote:   J > Does anybody know of any FTP sites hosting the OpenVMS 6.1 VAX binaries % > CD for download ? (Is this legal ?)$ > A > If not can anyone lend me one in the UK ? (Is this legal too ?)L > I > Badly need one for 5.5-2H4 --> 7.3 migration (6.1 is purely a stepping  	 > stone).c   Jeff, you're in luck :-)  ? I've got one.  I'm in the UK, 10 miles south of Cambridge, nearE Saffron Walden.c   I'll lend you mine ...  4 P.s. would you like a VAX 7660 with that, sir ?  :-)  	 Roy Omond- Blue Bubble Ltd.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 10:21:16 -0400:& From: Jilly <jilly@clarityconnect.com>& Subject: Re: Odd behavior in XFC cache8 Message-ID: <1096467628.Lf3QEUya8vm7gyBk3dN6CA@teranews>  J The only way to actually force XFC to use a certain amount of memory is toK commit that memory to the XFC reserved memory section VCC$MIN_CACHE_SIZE askE per system management documentation.  Otherwise XFC will allocate ands; release memory within it's parameter bounds as it sees fit.    Andrew Robert wrote:   > Hi Everyone, > L > I recently upgraded my Alpha GS-140 to 8 EV6 processors and 12G of memory. > 3 > As a part of this, I set the VCC_MAX_SIZE to 10G.m > B > What is odd is that the cache allocates and uses only around 8G. > J > Is there a limit to XFC somewhere or is there something else I should be3 > tuning to take advantage of the increased memory?r > F > Any assistance you can provide on this would be greatly appreciated. > 	 > Thanks,i > Andy   --  B Jilly - Working from Home in the Chemung River Valley, Waverly, NYB       - jilly@clarityconnect.com         http://www.jilly.baka.comE       - mark.jilson@hp.com               http://www.hp.com/go/openvms ;       - http://www.jilsonracing.com      Go Fast, Turn LeftiC       - http://www.chemungspeedrome.com  Door Handle to Door Handle    ------------------------------    Date: 29 Sep 2004 09:45:29 -0700. From: fabiopenvms@yahoo.com.br (Fabio Cardoso)= Subject: OT: Good places in EU to study Networking/Clustering = Message-ID: <f30679fb.0409290845.3a1fadd6@posting.google.com>   8 Do you know good institutions in EU where is possible to3 have a specialization in Network/Clustering (Open)?u   UK and DE are welcome !    Regardsa   FC   ------------------------------    Date: 29 Sep 2004 03:36:38 -0700' From: icerq4a@spray.se (David Svensson)c& Subject: Re: OT: Sun's fighting chance= Message-ID: <734da31c.0409290236.6088ca77@posting.google.com>d   Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<cjbfe6$qu9$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...g > David Svensson wrote: e > > JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message news:<415324FC.9DE61861@teksavvy.com>...x > > 7 > >>You know, this talk about "open" got me thinking...s > >>N > >>Imagine IF, unhindered by the unwanted port to IA64, the VMS engineers hadL > >>managed to give VMS a linux compatibility layer, complete with FX32! andI > >>delivered this FASTER than Sun's equivalent which is expected "soon".n > >  > > G > > Sun's solution isn't emulating a CPU. Their Solaris x86 OS will run C > > Linux x86 binaries, which isn't exactly rocket science. SimilaraH > > projects exists in several other operating systems. The question, as4 > > usual, is how good the support for this will be. > > A > The initial release is targeted at running all the applicationsr5 > currently qualified for RedHat Advanced Server 2.1.s  5 I have already heard comments from some ISV who says: & that is not something we will support.   > > A > >>The marketing opportunities would have been very interesting.  > >  > > F > > Not very, it would just validate the reason that you could run the- > > software on a real Linux machine instead.a > B > Not really, dtrace for example provides a level of observability@ > for developers and deployers that is unlikely to be replicated6 > by the OpenSource community in the forseable future. >gC > And dtrace is only one example of areas where Solaris leads linuxa1 > by a very wide margin as a deployment platform.  > < > Security, resource management, virtualisation, scalability4 > and cost for example are also in Solaris's favour. > = > So take the app that you cannot be bothered to port and run  > it on a better platform.  B While Sun is bashing Linux it is endorsing it. This shows how muchC power there is in Linux. The traditional UNIX'es start to replicate C features in Linux instead of the other way around as it was before.a  F More and more ISV's are saying that in the future there is only neededD to do Linux releases and while this Linux-in-Solaris may be good for; Sun it will add the reasons to go with Linux only releases.i  ? Perhaps Solaris will turn out to be a good Linux distribution ?o   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 13:56:56 +0100oO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>-& Subject: Re: OT: Sun's fighting chance0 Message-ID: <cjebep$qma$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   David Svensson wrote:j > Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote in message news:<cjbfe6$qu9$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>...t >  >>David Svensson wrote:5 >>d >>>JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message news:<415324FC.9DE61861@teksavvy.com>... >>>e >>> 7 >>>>You know, this talk about "open" got me thinking...  >>>>N >>>>Imagine IF, unhindered by the unwanted port to IA64, the VMS engineers hadL >>>>managed to give VMS a linux compatibility layer, complete with FX32! andI >>>>delivered this FASTER than Sun's equivalent which is expected "soon".h >>>p >>>cF >>>Sun's solution isn't emulating a CPU. Their Solaris x86 OS will runB >>>Linux x86 binaries, which isn't exactly rocket science. SimilarG >>>projects exists in several other operating systems. The question, ast3 >>>usual, is how good the support for this will be.s >>>d >>A >>The initial release is targeted at running all the applicationst5 >>currently qualified for RedHat Advanced Server 2.1.O >  > 7 > I have already heard comments from some ISV who says:a( > that is not something we will support. >   8 I am sure that many ISV's will not support this but then3 the likelyhood is that the ISV will support Solaris"	 directly,s  5 For example more ISV's currently support Solaris thank0 support Linux mainly because of the difficulties5 pinning down an entity in the Linux world to back offm the ISV's support issues to.   > A >>>>The marketing opportunities would have been very interesting.o >>>d >>>iE >>>Not very, it would just validate the reason that you could run ther, >>>software on a real Linux machine instead. >>B >>Not really, dtrace for example provides a level of observability@ >>for developers and deployers that is unlikely to be replicated6 >>by the OpenSource community in the forseable future. >>C >>And dtrace is only one example of areas where Solaris leads linuxw1 >>by a very wide margin as a deployment platform.> >>< >>Security, resource management, virtualisation, scalability4 >>and cost for example are also in Solaris's favour. >>= >>So take the app that you cannot be bothered to port and runu >>it on a better platform. >  > D > While Sun is bashing Linux it is endorsing it. This shows how muchE > power there is in Linux. The traditional UNIX'es start to replicatesE > features in Linux instead of the other way around as it was before.  >   > You seem to be labouring under a fundamental missunderstanding about what Linux actually is.e  F Kernel + device drivers + management utilites + GNU/OpenSource = Linux? where 95% of the development is in the GNU/OpenSource chunk not-3 the Kernel + device drivers + management utilities.n  A Emulating "Linux" has nothing to do with replicating the featuresdD of Linux which are mostly just a rather simple by Solaris's standard< kernel but instead is all about providing the GNU/OpenSource9 interfaces in the right way to allow "Linux" apps to run.   @ The characteristics of a platform emulating another is generally> one of haveing greater rather than less functionality than the platform it is emulating.p  0 That is the case with Solaris emulating "linux".  @ The Linux kernel provides a limitted subset of the functionalityB in the Solaris kernel and most Linux interfaces are in fact copies1 of Solaris/UNIX rather than the otherway arround.r  C Perhaps a good example of this is Solaris dtrace where there is now 8 activity in the Linux community around trying to provide> functionality that matches it in the linux kernel, an activity9 made rather difficult by Linus's complete indifference toy1 the needs for observability as a kernel function.i  H > More and more ISV's are saying that in the future there is only neededF > to do Linux releases and while this Linux-in-Solaris may be good for= > Sun it will add the reasons to go with Linux only releases.  > A > Perhaps Solaris will turn out to be a good Linux distribution ?l     Perhaps    Regardsn Andrew Harrisonn   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:47:37 -0400 ' From: "Laconic2" <laconic2@comcast.net>iY Subject: Re: Rdb on NT and Unix (was Re: Interbase on VMS (was Re: "Oracle RDB" licensing 0 Message-ID: <1rmdnf3AYYaPIMfcRVn-sQ@comcast.com>  = "Keith Cayemberg" <keith.cayemberg@arcor.de> wrote in message ; news:415ab518$0$8106$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net...e > John Smith wrote:  > > Keith Cayemberg wrote: > >b > >>John Smith wrote:- > >> > >>>Neil Rieck wrote: > >>>p > >>>64 > >>>>"John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message, > >>>>news:gKudnckJ1OqpsMXcRVn-tQ@igs.net... > >>>> > >>>>[snip] > >>>> > >>>>H > >>>>>Interbase, which I happen to think was a pretty good DBMS on VMS,G > >>>>>is now open source though there has been no official VMS supports > >>>>>for it for a longJ > >>>>>time. But at $80k for 2-cpu RDB license maybe somebody could make aH > >>>>>living selling 20 support contracts annually of Interbase on VMS. > >>>>>e > >>>>E > >>>>Visiting www.interbase.com takes you to www.Borland.com where I4J > >>>>didn't see any Open Source info. Is Borland talking about putting it  > >>>>into an Open Source model? > >>>n > >>>. > >>> - > >>>www.sourceforge.net/search   "interbase"o > >>>c > >>>A > >> > >>F > >>Although OpenVMS was once a major InterBase platform. I have neverI > >>been able to find any binaries for VMS within the last several years.>E > >>And I believe OpenVMS hasn't been actively supported by InterBasehG > >>developers for many years, and I'm nearly certain that this supportsA > >>stopped long before InterBase was released to the open sourceh > >>community in August 2000.g > >>H > >>This may mean that all available open source versions will need some7 > >>porting work before it runs comfortably on OpenVMS.  > >>A > >>Please also consider the support user's have been getting fort< > >>currently supported platforms at the open source site... > >>I > >>http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=201962&group_id=1962&func=browse  > >>D > >>The "open" support requests go back almost to when InterBase was* > >>released to the open source community. > >>G > >>I do not wish to FUD InterBase, but I do want to point out that one>I > >>should carefully consider the needs of their task and environment andqF > >>as carefully research how well the potential solutions cover thoseG > >>needs. Certainly there are customers that would find InterBase fitsr	 > >>their  > >>unique set of needs. > >>F > >>Also, Database  Technology is a highly complex world in itself, inE > >>which the details can matter very much! Correct DB comparisons ofr > >>fitness forsE > >>a job can require a great deal of tenacity. My experience Rdb hasaH > >>shown me that a database can have a great deal more mission-criticalE > >>cleverness and sophistication than you will find described in anybJ > >>marketing brochure or university textbook. (IMO only to be experienced- > >>in an Rdb Internals class on this planet)  > >>E > >>It may very well be that I have missed some significant InterBaserI > >>support sources (my last detailed search was a couple years ago), andi@ > >>I would be very interested to know what I've missed as well. > >>F > >>To facilitate anyone else's research over InterBase, I'm providing, > >>below my sources of info on InterBase... > >> > >>, > >>_Potential Sources of InterBase Support_ > >>< > >>InterBase 6.0 Open Source SQL Database - SourceForge.net. > >>http://sourceforge.net/projects/interbase/ > >>? > >>Borland InterBase Software Cross Platform Embedded Databaset/ > >>http://www.borland.com/interbase/index.htmle > >>7 > >>IBDI - Die InterBase Entwickler Initiative - German@  > >>http://www.interbase2000.de/ > >> > >>IBPhoenix -  > >>http://www.ibphoenix.com/> > >> > >>H > >>_InterBase History - interesting relationship to Datatrieve and Rdb_ > >>/ > >>How did Interbase appear? - Wayback Machine  > >> > >O > >SL http://web.archive.org/web/20030810013409/http://www.cvalde.com/misc/how_app
 > > eared.htmh > >e > >>Interbase: A Bedtime Story7 > >>http://www.frayernet.com/PC_Life/pc_life_2_2_92.htmr > >>4 > >>Die Interbase Entwicklungsgeschichte - in German5 > >>http://www.interbase2000.de/IBAbout/IbRoadmap.htm  > >>& > >>Wie Interbase entstand - in German, > >>http://www.interbase2000.de/hist/ah1.htm > >>D > >>Client Server NEWS 364 Sept. 1, 2000 - InterBase Rises - Wayback > >>Machinen > >> > >t > >tK http://web.archive.org/web/20040227204130/http://www.ibphoenix.com/a641.htmr > >n > > J > > I don't know whether any of the 'open source' contains any VMS-isms in it ornK > > whether that was stripped out prior to release into the wild. It may beoA > > worth someone's effort to e-mail or call Borland to find out.  > > I > > I used Interbase (v3.3 I think, on VMS 5.5) for a short while and wase very9 > > impressed with it for the application it was used on.k > >u > >iL > > DEC's sale of RDB to Oracle has to rank up there amongst the more stupid ofH > > their decisions, especially if the NT/unix port was to be imminentlyK > > released as was thought at the time. As I have previously written here,o DEC J > > could have spun-off the Rdb unit and sold 49% or more of the stock for moreJ > > money than they received from Oracle. The stock market would have been very8 > > receptive at that time if the unix/NT port was real. > >  > 
 > Hi John, > G > both the Rdb ports to Unix and to NT were real. The Unix ports of RdbkI > v6.1 and v7.0 were available and supported for production systems for a H > couple of years (desupport was June, 30th 2001). The NT port was fieldJ > tested but then released as the Oracle Rdb Workbench for Windows NT, butH > not supported (or licensable) for production systems. This decision toI > not release the NT port as production software had to do with a lack of B > production-level support (from Compaq at the time) for the BLISSH > compilers for NT on which the Rdb NT is based. This situation made anyH > contractual support by Oracle for the Rdb on NT product impossible. SoF > it was therefore released as a non-supported development and testingD > workbench tool. The Rdb for NT was originally going to receive theJ > Version number 8.0 indicating a step up in features from the current RdbF > v7.0-n for OpenVMS. Now practically all these new features have been6 > incorporated in the Rdb v7.1-x releases for OpenVMS. >a > I > You can learn more and download the Oracle Rdb Workbench for Windows NTo# > for free at the following URLs...  >e+ > Oracle Rdb Workbench for Windows NT/Intel6= > http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/rdbnt8/index.htmlw > & > Oracle Rdb On Windows Nt - Faq SheetF > http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/rdbnt8/htdocs/rdbntfaq.htm >q* > OTN - Oracle Rdb Software Download Index9 > http://otn.oracle.com/software/products/rdb7/index.htmle > H > ***ImportantThe Rdb Workbench for Windows NT/Intel is provided as-is,0 > without support or commitment to new releases. >: >C	 > Cheers!N >  > Keith Cayembergl  J Isn't it also true that the port of Rdb to NT was limited to NT running onK an Alpha?  It's my understanding that If you were running NT on a plain oldr4 Pentium,  Rdb NT was not supported on that platform.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 06:53:28 -0700 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> Y Subject: Re: Rdb on NT and Unix (was Re: Interbase on VMS (was Re: "Oracle RDB" licensingf( Message-ID: <opse3cvedbzgicya@hyrrokkin>  I On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:47:37 -0400, Laconic2 <laconic2@comcast.net> wrot=: e:   > ? > "Keith Cayemberg" <keith.cayemberg@arcor.de> wrote in message = > news:415ab518$0$8106$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net...A >> John Smith wrote: >> > Keith Cayemberg wrote:e >> > >> >>John Smith wrote: >> >>  >> >>>Neil Rieck wrote:t >> >>> >> >>>5 >> >>>>"John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message - >> >>>>news:gKudnckJ1OqpsMXcRVn-tQ@igs.net...k >> >>>>.
 >> >>>>[snip]t >> >>>>  >> >>>>hI >> >>>>>Interbase, which I happen to think was a pretty good DBMS on VMS=  ,eI >> >>>>>is now open source though there has been no official VMS support=x   >> >>>>>for it for a longuI >> >>>>>time. But at $80k for 2-cpu RDB license maybe somebody could mak=; e aeI >> >>>>>living selling 20 support contracts annually of Interbase on VMS=T .  >> >>>>> >> >>>>eF >> >>>>Visiting www.interbase.com takes you to www.Borland.com where II >> >>>>didn't see any Open Source info. Is Borland talking about putting=i  itm! >> >>>>into an Open Source model?g >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>. >> >>>www.sourceforge.net/search   "interbase" >> >>> >> >>> >> >>  >> >>.G >> >>Although OpenVMS was once a major InterBase platform. I have never I >> >>been able to find any binaries for VMS within the last several year=  s.F >> >>And I believe OpenVMS hasn't been actively supported by InterBaseI >> >>developers for many years, and I'm nearly certain that this support=e  B >> >>stopped long before InterBase was released to the open source >> >>community in August 2000. >> >>3I >> >>This may mean that all available open source versions will need som=e eo8 >> >>porting work before it runs comfortably on OpenVMS. >> >>tB >> >>Please also consider the support user's have been getting for= >> >>currently supported platforms at the open source site...n >> >>dK >> >>http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=3D201962&group_id=3D1962&func=3D=- browse >> >>2E >> >>The "open" support requests go back almost to when InterBase wase+ >> >>released to the open source community.a >> >>SI >> >>I do not wish to FUD InterBase, but I do want to point out that one=   I >> >>should carefully consider the needs of their task and environment a=r ndG >> >>as carefully research how well the potential solutions cover those I >> >>needs. Certainly there are customers that would find InterBase fits=d  
 >> >>their >> >>unique set of needs.e >> >> G >> >>Also, Database  Technology is a highly complex world in itself, in F >> >>which the details can matter very much! Correct DB comparisons of >> >>fitness forF >> >>a job can require a great deal of tenacity. My experience Rdb hasI >> >>shown me that a database can have a great deal more mission-critica=t lmF >> >>cleverness and sophistication than you will find described in anyI >> >>marketing brochure or university textbook. (IMO only to be experien=e ced . >> >>in an Rdb Internals class on this planet) >> >>bF >> >>It may very well be that I have missed some significant InterBaseI >> >>support sources (my last detailed search was a couple years ago), a=l ndA >> >>I would be very interested to know what I've missed as well.m >> >>tG >> >>To facilitate anyone else's research over InterBase, I'm providingf- >> >>below my sources of info on InterBase...u >> >>x >> >> - >> >>_Potential Sources of InterBase Support_r >> >>a= >> >>InterBase 6.0 Open Source SQL Database - SourceForge.nets/ >> >>http://sourceforge.net/projects/interbase/t >> >>o@ >> >>Borland InterBase Software Cross Platform Embedded Database0 >> >>http://www.borland.com/interbase/index.html >> >> 8 >> >>IBDI - Die InterBase Entwickler Initiative - German! >> >>http://www.interbase2000.de/  >> >>f >> >>IBPhoenix - >> >>http://www.ibphoenix.com/ >> >>h >> >> I >> >>_InterBase History - interesting relationship to Datatrieve and Rdb=  _o >> >>m0 >> >>How did Interbase appear? - Wayback Machine >> >>y >> > >> >I > http://web.archive.org/web/20030810013409/http://www.cvalde.com/misc/h=- ow_app >> > eared.htm >> > >> >>Interbase: A Bedtime Story 8 >> >>http://www.frayernet.com/PC_Life/pc_life_2_2_92.htm >> >>R5 >> >>Die Interbase Entwicklungsgeschichte - in Germanr6 >> >>http://www.interbase2000.de/IBAbout/IbRoadmap.htm >> >>f' >> >>Wie Interbase entstand - in Germann- >> >>http://www.interbase2000.de/hist/ah1.htm. >> >>oE >> >>Client Server NEWS 364 Sept. 1, 2000 - InterBase Rises - WaybackB >> >>Machine >> >>i >> > >> >I > http://web.archive.org/web/20040227204130/http://www.ibphoenix.com/a64=s 1.htms >> > >> >I >> > I don't know whether any of the 'open source' contains any VMS-isms=o  inc > it oreI >> > whether that was stripped out prior to release into the wild. It ma=o y beB >> > worth someone's effort to e-mail or call Borland to find out. >> >I >> > I used Interbase (v3.3 I think, on VMS 5.5) for a short while and w=t as > very: >> > impressed with it for the application it was used on. >> > >> >I >> > DEC's sale of RDB to Oracle has to rank up there amongst the more s=  tupida > ofI >> > their decisions, especially if the NT/unix port was to be imminentl=V y I >> > released as was thought at the time. As I have previously written h=  ere, > DEC_I >> > could have spun-off the Rdb unit and sold 49% or more of the stock =  fore > moreI >> > money than they received from Oracle. The stock market would have b=5 een7 > very9 >> > receptive at that time if the unix/NT port was real.r >> > >> >> Hi John,- >>I >> both the Rdb ports to Unix and to NT were real. The Unix ports of Rdb=r  I >> v6.1 and v7.0 were available and supported for production systems for=g  aI >> couple of years (desupport was June, 30th 2001). The NT port was fiel=e doI >> tested but then released as the Oracle Rdb Workbench for Windows NT, =h butmI >> not supported (or licensable) for production systems. This decision t=t o I >> not release the NT port as production software had to do with a lack =g ofC >> production-level support (from Compaq at the time) for the BLISSoI >> compilers for NT on which the Rdb NT is based. This situation made an=n y.I >> contractual support by Oracle for the Rdb on NT product impossible. S=o oaG >> it was therefore released as a non-supported development and testing E >> workbench tool. The Rdb for NT was originally going to receive thevI >> Version number 8.0 indicating a step up in features from the current =l Rdb>G >> v7.0-n for OpenVMS. Now practically all these new features have been 7 >> incorporated in the Rdb v7.1-x releases for OpenVMS.h >> >>I >> You can learn more and download the Oracle Rdb Workbench for Windows =s NT$ >> for free at the following URLs... >>, >> Oracle Rdb Workbench for Windows NT/Intel> >> http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/rdbnt8/index.html >>' >> Oracle Rdb On Windows Nt - Faq SheeteG >> http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/rdbnt8/htdocs/rdbntfaq.htm  >>+ >> OTN - Oracle Rdb Software Download Indexd: >> http://otn.oracle.com/software/products/rdb7/index.html >>I >> ***Important=E2=80=94The Rdb Workbench for Windows NT/Intel is provid=w	 ed as-is,o1 >> without support or commitment to new releases.t >> >>
 >> Cheers! >> >> Keith Cayemberg > I > Isn't it also true that the port of Rdb to NT was limited to NT runnin=p g onI > an Alpha?  It's my understanding that If you were running NT on a plai=c n old 6 > Pentium,  Rdb NT was not supported on that platform. >-I I believe Keith mentioned lack of support for Bliss as one of the reason=t s,6 and the Bliss port to x86 hasn't been released, yet:-)   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 11:13:27 -0400e# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>uY Subject: Re: Rdb on NT and Unix (was Re: Interbase on VMS (was Re: "Oracle RDB" licensing , Message-ID: <4OWdnUkiCu2FTMfcRVn-oA@igs.net>   Keith Cayemberg wrote: > Laconic2 wrote:  > @ >> "Keith Cayemberg" <keith.cayemberg@arcor.de> wrote in message > <SNIP> >>> Cheers!  >>>m >>> Keith Cayembergc >> >>B >> Isn't it also true that the port of Rdb to NT was limited to NTG >> running on an Alpha?  It's my understanding that If you were runninga? >> NT on a plain old Pentium,  Rdb NT was not supported on thatI >> platform. >> >gG > Actually, as the name of the product indicates, "Oracle Rdb WorkbencheE > for Windows NT/IntelTM", is a port to the standard NT on Intel IA32uE > processors. I'm quite certain Rdb on NT was not available for NT on C > Alpha. Especially, since Microsoft/Compaq had already desupportedpB > Windows NT on Alpha before the first version of Rdb NT was field	 > tested.e >oC > In fact, I have Rdb for NT running on my Pentium 3 Thinkpad undera > Windows 2000 right now...n >h >> show versions3 > Current version of SQL is: Oracle Rdb SQL X8.0-05A    " Oh well, another opportunity lost.  J Just what was it about the decade from 1994-2004 that invested the honchos% at Digital, Compaq, and HP so stupid?o     >PG > Perhaps sequestered somewhere in the bowels of the cathedral halls ofsH > Oracle or Microsoft there is a lone mutant system with an experimentalG > Rdb 8.0 for Windows 2008 on Alpha EV8? :-) But it has certainly neverA9 > seen the light of day. Notice that everything is EIGHT!- >- > Sanctuary! SANCTUARY!e    K I'll send you a roll of aluminum foil so you can make some hats to keep theu& RAYS from getting into your head.  :-)   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 15:13:59 +020000 From: Keith Cayemberg <keith.cayemberg@arcor.de>Y Subject: Rdb on NT and Unix (was Re: Interbase on VMS (was Re: "Oracle RDB" licensing queUA Message-ID: <415ab518$0$8106$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>p   John Smith wrote:  > Keith Cayemberg wrote: >  >>John Smith wrote:  >> >>>Neil Rieck wrote: >>>  >>>a2 >>>>"John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> wrote in message* >>>>news:gKudnckJ1OqpsMXcRVn-tQ@igs.net... >>>>
 >>>>[snip] >>>> >>>>F >>>>>Interbase, which I happen to think was a pretty good DBMS on VMS,E >>>>>is now open source though there has been no official VMS supportl >>>>>for it for a longH >>>>>time. But at $80k for 2-cpu RDB license maybe somebody could make aF >>>>>living selling 20 support contracts annually of Interbase on VMS. >>>>>  >>>>C >>>>Visiting www.interbase.com takes you to www.Borland.com where IiH >>>>didn't see any Open Source info. Is Borland talking about putting it >>>>into an Open Source model? >>>r >>>r >>> + >>>www.sourceforge.net/search   "interbase"s >>>t >>>t >> >>D >>Although OpenVMS was once a major InterBase platform. I have neverG >>been able to find any binaries for VMS within the last several years.sC >>And I believe OpenVMS hasn't been actively supported by InterBasesE >>developers for many years, and I'm nearly certain that this supportn? >>stopped long before InterBase was released to the open sourcea >>community in August 2000.o >>F >>This may mean that all available open source versions will need some5 >>porting work before it runs comfortably on OpenVMS.e >>? >>Please also consider the support user's have been getting forl: >>currently supported platforms at the open source site... >>G >>http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=201962&group_id=1962&func=browse_ >>B >>The "open" support requests go back almost to when InterBase was( >>released to the open source community. >>E >>I do not wish to FUD InterBase, but I do want to point out that one G >>should carefully consider the needs of their task and environment and4D >>as carefully research how well the potential solutions cover thoseE >>needs. Certainly there are customers that would find InterBase fits$ >>theirr >>unique set of needs. >>D >>Also, Database  Technology is a highly complex world in itself, inC >>which the details can matter very much! Correct DB comparisons ofs
 >>fitness for C >>a job can require a great deal of tenacity. My experience Rdb hastF >>shown me that a database can have a great deal more mission-criticalC >>cleverness and sophistication than you will find described in anydH >>marketing brochure or university textbook. (IMO only to be experienced+ >>in an Rdb Internals class on this planet)a >>C >>It may very well be that I have missed some significant InterBasesG >>support sources (my last detailed search was a couple years ago), andy> >>I would be very interested to know what I've missed as well. >>D >>To facilitate anyone else's research over InterBase, I'm providing* >>below my sources of info on InterBase... >> >>* >>_Potential Sources of InterBase Support_ >>: >>InterBase 6.0 Open Source SQL Database - SourceForge.net, >>http://sourceforge.net/projects/interbase/ >>= >>Borland InterBase Software Cross Platform Embedded Database2- >>http://www.borland.com/interbase/index.html6 >>5 >>IBDI - Die InterBase Entwickler Initiative - Germani >>http://www.interbase2000.de/ >>
 >>IBPhoenix -n >>http://www.ibphoenix.com/M >> >>F >>_InterBase History - interesting relationship to Datatrieve and Rdb_ >>- >>How did Interbase appear? - Wayback Machine- >> > N > http://web.archive.org/web/20030810013409/http://www.cvalde.com/misc/how_app > eared.htm  >  >>Interbase: A Bedtime Story5 >>http://www.frayernet.com/PC_Life/pc_life_2_2_92.htm  >>2 >>Die Interbase Entwicklungsgeschichte - in German3 >>http://www.interbase2000.de/IBAbout/IbRoadmap.htm? >>$ >>Wie Interbase entstand - in German* >>http://www.interbase2000.de/hist/ah1.htm >>B >>Client Server NEWS 364 Sept. 1, 2000 - InterBase Rises - Wayback	 >>Machinee >> > M > http://web.archive.org/web/20040227204130/http://www.ibphoenix.com/a641.htmu >  > N > I don't know whether any of the 'open source' contains any VMS-isms in it orI > whether that was stripped out prior to release into the wild. It may ben? > worth someone's effort to e-mail or call Borland to find out.f > L > I used Interbase (v3.3 I think, on VMS 5.5) for a short while and was very7 > impressed with it for the application it was used on.  >  > M > DEC's sale of RDB to Oracle has to rank up there amongst the more stupid ofsF > their decisions, especially if the NT/unix port was to be imminentlyM > released as was thought at the time. As I have previously written here, DEC M > could have spun-off the Rdb unit and sold 49% or more of the stock for more M > money than they received from Oracle. The stock market would have been very 6 > receptive at that time if the unix/NT port was real. >    Hi John,  F both the Rdb ports to Unix and to NT were real. The Unix ports of Rdb H v6.1 and v7.0 were available and supported for production systems for a G couple of years (desupport was June, 30th 2001). The NT port was field -I tested but then released as the Oracle Rdb Workbench for Windows NT, but pG not supported (or licensable) for production systems. This decision to MH not release the NT port as production software had to do with a lack of A production-level support (from Compaq at the time) for the BLISS 0G compilers for NT on which the Rdb NT is based. This situation made any sG contractual support by Oracle for the Rdb on NT product impossible. So .E it was therefore released as a non-supported development and testing hC workbench tool. The Rdb for NT was originally going to receive the yI Version number 8.0 indicating a step up in features from the current Rdb tE v7.0-n for OpenVMS. Now practically all these new features have been e4 incorporated in the Rdb v7.1-x releases for OpenVMS.    H You can learn more and download the Oracle Rdb Workbench for Windows NT ! for free at the following URLs...u  ) Oracle Rdb Workbench for Windows NT/Intel ; http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/rdbnt8/index.htmlt  $ Oracle Rdb On Windows Nt - Faq SheetD http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/rdbnt8/htdocs/rdbntfaq.htm  ( OTN - Oracle Rdb Software Download Index7 http://otn.oracle.com/software/products/rdb7/index.htmla  G ***ImportantThe Rdb Workbench for Windows NT/Intel is provided as-is, -. without support or commitment to new releases.     Cheers!    Keith Cayembergl   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 16:41:03 +0200F0 From: Keith Cayemberg <keith.cayemberg@arcor.de>Y Subject: Re: Rdb on NT and Unix (was Re: Interbase on VMS (was Re: "Oracle RDB" licensingdA Message-ID: <415ac97f$0$8097$9b4e6d93@newsread4.arcor-online.net>n   Laconic2 wrote:l  ? > "Keith Cayemberg" <keith.cayemberg@arcor.de> wrote in message. <SNIP>	 >>Cheers!i >> >>Keith Cayembergf >  > L > Isn't it also true that the port of Rdb to NT was limited to NT running onM > an Alpha?  It's my understanding that If you were running NT on a plain old06 > Pentium,  Rdb NT was not supported on that platform. >   F Actually, as the name of the product indicates, "Oracle Rdb Workbench D for Windows NT/IntelTM", is a port to the standard NT on Intel IA32 D processors. I'm quite certain Rdb on NT was not available for NT on B Alpha. Especially, since Microsoft/Compaq had already desupported H Windows NT on Alpha before the first version of Rdb NT was field tested.  B In fact, I have Rdb for NT running on my Pentium 3 Thinkpad under  Windows 2000 right now...w   SQL> show versions1 Current version of SQL is: Oracle Rdb SQL X8.0-05   F Perhaps sequestered somewhere in the bowels of the cathedral halls of G Oracle or Microsoft there is a lone mutant system with an experimental 1F Rdb 8.0 for Windows 2008 on Alpha EV8? :-) But it has certainly never 7 seen the light of day. Notice that everything is EIGHT!    Sanctuary! SANCTUARY!e   Cheers!t   Keith Cayemberg E "For any possible constellation of events, there exists at least one u- conspiracy theory to re-explain it"  KEC 2004n   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 11:20:26 GMTy" From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG< Subject: Re: TCPIP$SMTP_SEND_FROM_FILE, what's its future???0 Message-ID: <00A3897D.488959F9@SendSpamHere.ORG>  Y In article <xll6d.11913$F16.1600@news.cpqcorp.net>, hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) writes:mT >In article <00A38902.74327E66@SendSpamHere.ORG>, VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG writes:^ >:In article <4159C7C9.6CE8985D@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:$ >:>VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:M >:>> I needed to make a modification to a customer program that is using thisdM >:>> API however I cannot find a reference in the TCP/IP programming doc set.t >:>  >:>)H >:>I did find a reference to the SFF once in the manuals but it had someM >:>inconsistencies. HOWEVER, the documentation in the Ask the wizzard is morenP >:>complete. I pointed it to the documentation folks who had been unaware of the4 >:>far more complete SFF doc in the ask the wizzard. >:>lN >:>Can't remember exactly which TCPIP manual has the SFF documentation though.P >:>Could be the main one (TCPIP management manual I think it is called). I think0 >:>it started to be documented only at TCPIP 5.3 >:G >:I've found nothing in the wizzard with a link to documentation.  All  ) >:references say it's NOT yet documented.r >b >hG >  What I see in ATW indicates V5.1 and later -- it may well have first G >  been in the release notes in that version, FWIW, but it is listed inSE >  the current TCP/IP Services manuals, in the section on using SMTP.u > ? >  ATW topic (4492), and here's the main documentation for SFF:  >iG >  http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/732FINAL/6525/6525pro_016.html#sff_secc  E Nit.  Why is a programming detail (and I use the terminology 'detail',* with tongue in cheek) in the User's Guide?    E This is rediculously sparce documentation.  I am trying to understand E why this TCPIP$SMTP_SFF works to sent mail _a_ recipient on a CC listh, but not to multiple recipients on a CC list.   -- o< http://www.ProvN.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system security=                       solutions that others only claim to be.y -- w, Cyber-Terrorism (si'-ber tayr'-or-iz-em) n.:M   The release of, the sale of, or the use of any Micro$oft software product! e -- eK VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 12:37:02 -0400e- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>o< Subject: Re: TCPIP$SMTP_SEND_FROM_FILE, what's its future???, Message-ID: <415AE4AC.8C31DC79@teksavvy.com>  ! VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:aG > This is rediculously sparce documentation.  I am trying to understandkG > why this TCPIP$SMTP_SFF works to sent mail _a_ recipient on a CC listp. > but not to multiple recipients on a CC list.  M The Ask the Wizard is BY FAR, more complete and especially more accurate thans any of the TCPIP documentation.i  H the file you generate MUST include the SMTP commands prior to the actual header file.   ---- MAIL FROM: <chef@chocolate.com>o& RCPT TO: <bill.clinton@weschester.com>2 RCPT TO: <monica.lewinsky@somewhere.out.there.com> DATA& From: Chef Pierre <chef@chocolate.com>. To: Bill Clinton <bill.clinton@weschester.com>= CC: Monica Lewinsky <monica.lewisnky@somewhere.out.there.com>e' Subject: Secret chocolate mousse recipei Date: April 1 2005 21:13 EDT  	 Dear Billo> Melt 600gr of pure dark 70% cocoa chocolate in a double boiler, Add 3/4 pound of butter and melt/"mix it in.? Add 8 egg yokes to the mix after having taken it off the stove.d Whip 10 egg whites into snow.cW Incorporate the melted chocolate into the solid egg whites, add a bit of Grand Marnier.w Refrigrate. Enjoye .j ----------------  M In other words, the real list of recipients is in a list of RCPT TO: commands I at the top. The actual RFC822 header isn't actually processed (other than L adding the Received: lines and date validation). I *think* that the From may  also be validated in the header.  H The MAIL FROM: infomration is used to proceded the Return_Path: which si5 normally the first line in a received message header.s   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 17:12:29 GMT6" From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG< Subject: Re: TCPIP$SMTP_SEND_FROM_FILE, what's its future???0 Message-ID: <00A389AE.77A35BD5@SendSpamHere.ORG>  \ In article <415AE4AC.8C31DC79@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:" >VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:H >> This is rediculously sparce documentation.  I am trying to understandH >> why this TCPIP$SMTP_SFF works to sent mail _a_ recipient on a CC list/ >> but not to multiple recipients on a CC list.i >uN >The Ask the Wizard is BY FAR, more complete and especially more accurate than  >any of the TCPIP documentation. >SI >the file you generate MUST include the SMTP commands prior to the actualn
 >header file.h >i >----l  >MAIL FROM: <chef@chocolate.com>' >RCPT TO: <bill.clinton@weschester.com>t3 >RCPT TO: <monica.lewinsky@somewhere.out.there.com>i >DATAt' >From: Chef Pierre <chef@chocolate.com>t/ >To: Bill Clinton <bill.clinton@weschester.com>u> >CC: Monica Lewinsky <monica.lewisnky@somewhere.out.there.com>( >Subject: Secret chocolate mousse recipe >Date: April 1 2005 21:13 EDTl >o
 >Dear Bill? >Melt 600gr of pure dark 70% cocoa chocolate in a double boiler>- >Add 3/4 pound of butter and melt/"mix it in.o@ >Add 8 egg yokes to the mix after having taken it off the stove. >Whip 10 egg whites into snow.X >Incorporate the melted chocolate into the solid egg whites, add a bit of Grand Marnier.
 >Refrigrate.k >Enjoy >..t >----------------e > N >In other words, the real list of recipients is in a list of RCPT TO: commandsJ >at the top. The actual RFC822 header isn't actually processed (other thanM >adding the Received: lines and date validation). I *think* that the From mayr! >also be validated in the header.  >oI >The MAIL FROM: infomration is used to proceded the Return_Path: which sin6 >normally the first line in a received message header.  L It doesn't answer my question/issue but does demonstrate that you are ratherL fond of chocolate, a cad idiot and a sloppy fellatio performing homely girl.   -- n< http://www.ProvN.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system security=                       solutions that others only claim to be.a -- e, Cyber-Terrorism (si'-ber tayr'-or-iz-em) n.:M   The release of, the sale of, or the use of any Micro$oft software product!   -- cK VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMr   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 17:21:42 GMTh" From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG< Subject: Re: TCPIP$SMTP_SEND_FROM_FILE, what's its future???0 Message-ID: <00A389AF.C1040573@SendSpamHere.ORG>  \ In article <415AE4AC.8C31DC79@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes: {...snip...} >----h  >MAIL FROM: <chef@chocolate.com>' >RCPT TO: <bill.clinton@weschester.com>r3 >RCPT TO: <monica.lewinsky@somewhere.out.there.com>  >DATAl' >From: Chef Pierre <chef@chocolate.com>f/ >To: Bill Clinton <bill.clinton@weschester.com>e> >CC: Monica Lewinsky <monica.lewisnky@somewhere.out.there.com>( >Subject: Secret chocolate mousse recipe >Date: April 1 2005 21:13 EDTe {...snip...}N >In other words, the real list of recipients is in a list of RCPT TO: commandsJ >at the top. The actual RFC822 header isn't actually processed (other thanM >adding the Received: lines and date validation). I *think* that the From may-! >also be validated in the header.  > I >The MAIL FROM: infomration is used to proceded the Return_Path: which si:6 >normally the first line in a received message header.  L Enabling the "debug/logging" feature of TCPIP$SMTP_SENT_FROM_FILE shows that not to be the case.c  J ALso, without adding RCPT TO:, TCPIP$SMTP_SENT_FROM_FILE processes the CC:I and adds its own RCPT TO:.  I am only concerned in how to add a list to ab CC:.    I If I add RCPT TO: and CC: with the same addresses, I am getting duplicatem! copy to the recipient in the CC:.a   -- >< http://www.ProvN.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system security=                       solutions that others only claim to be.  -- t, Cyber-Terrorism (si'-ber tayr'-or-iz-em) n.:M   The release of, the sale of, or the use of any Micro$oft software product! > -- mK VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COMn   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 13:42:31 -0400>- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>t< Subject: Re: TCPIP$SMTP_SEND_FROM_FILE, what's its future???, Message-ID: <415AF401.CDBA2B3C@teksavvy.com>  ! VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: N > It doesn't answer my question/issue but does demonstrate that you are ratherN > fond of chocolate, a cad idiot and a sloppy fellatio performing homely girl.  N Insults apart, I was trying to explain to you that there is no such thing as aM "CC" list in SMTP. The actual recipients are all treated the same in RCPT TO:oN commands at the top of the file. The TO: and CC: lines in the header below the DATA command are not treated.t  / But i guess it is pointless to try to help you.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 03:00:02 -0400o( From: David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>, Subject: Re: Tiny pickings for Itanium OEM's, Message-ID: <415A5D72.8010005@tsoft-inc.com>   Main, Kerry wrote:   >>-----Original Message-----2 >>From: David Froble [mailto:davef@tsoft-inc.com] " >>Sent: September 28, 2004 5:29 PM >>To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Como. >>Subject: Re: Tiny pickings for Itanium OEM's >> >> >  > [Snip ..]n >  > 9 >>Knock it off Andrew.  It's one thing to debate.  Kerry   >>painted a great big = >>bullseye on himself with that question, which actually was n >>favorable to Sun. E >>Answering this is worse (and easier) than taking candy from a baby.  >> >>-- r6 >>David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04506 >>Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596@ >>DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com >>170 Grimplin Roada >>Vanderbilt, PA  15486c >> >> > B > So, Dave, whats your prediction - will Sun adopt Itanium or not?  K I've never cared about what Sun would do.  They have in the past done some e1 things that I wish DEC/Compaq/HP would have done.t  J When they wanted to drop Solaris on x86 the customers were vocal, and Sun " listened, and changed their plans.  L While it's pretty clear that Sparc as a CPU has not been at the head of the K class, they continue to make it available as long as customers will buy it.   P They have looked at implementing their OS on multiple platforms, from Sparc, to O x86, to Power, and probably even to IA-64.  Spreading it as widely as possible oJ is good for the customers.  It gives them choice.  It gives them security.  O I'm aware that VMS people weren't happy with the demise of Alpha.  They didn't pO have any choices.  Most have said that it's too bad about Alpha, but life (and eN their job) goes on, and they make the best of it.  Unfortunately a few try to Q justify things that were just plain wrong, and take great liberties with reality.t  P As for the itanic, I've always maintained that a port was a good thing, just as N Sun's spreading Solaris to multiple hardware is a good thing.  The port never  was a problem.  O The problem was the insane rationalization, which time has shown was very bad,  Q that was used to kill Alpha.  The problem was and is putting your very existance cO in someone else's hands.  Nobody wanted to hear it when I said that if AMD was aP successful in attacking Intel's bread and butter, IA-32, that Intel's attention N would concentrate on their major business.  Quite right for Intel, but not so / good for those they assign a lesser importance./  L Now all VMS people can hope is that the itanic won't totally sink.  It's no P longer the only 64 bit CPU from Intel, and not by Intel's planning, but because O AMD's success forced Intel to make a U-turn.  What was going to be an industry '- standard now isn't even fit for workstations.s   Dave   -- n4 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 Roadt Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 11:19:24 +0100sO From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com>g, Subject: Re: Tiny pickings for Itanium OEM's0 Message-ID: <cje27e$nfi$1@new-usenet.uk.sun.com>   Main, Kerry wrote: >>-----Original Message-----* >>From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy 1 >>[mailto:Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com] t# >>Sent: September 28, 2004 10:37 AMe >>To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comt. >>Subject: Re: Tiny pickings for Itanium OEM's >> >  > 
 > [snip..] >  > 8 >>You made this point earlier and if you remember got it >>batted straight back at you. >>% >>But since then things have changed.a >>; >>http://www.theregister.com/2004/09/11/intel_sun_solarium/  >>) >>Making your point even less compelling.o >>	 >>Regards  >>Andrew Harrisone >>
 >>>Regards >>>b >  >  > Thx for the pointer. > F > As the article states, once the ego's on both sides (Intel-Sun) stop4 > with the rhetoric, then who knows what may happen: > E > "While Sun still seems a bit wishy-washy on the Itanium front, it'srJ > clear that this is a real proposition for the company. If Intel wants to> > boost Itanium sales, it would be wise to curry Sun's favor." >   + You seem to have missed the point entirely.a  G "We certainly see there are customers out there expressing interest in sF Solaris," said Richard Dracott, general manager of Intel's enterprise I platforms group, in an interview. "AIX used to be something people asked   about but no so much anymore."  G This Intel quote probably sums the position up in the most satisfactory  way.  A Its pretty clear that Intel are trying to sell Sun on the idea ofeI porting to Itanium and not the other way around. And you would be totally64 blind to have missed the reasons why Intel are keen.  F Intel desperately need a platform that can shift volume, Windows isn'tH doing it for them probably because MS are rather indifferent to Itanium,E Linux isn't doing it for them because Linux's value is its ability todB run reasonably on commodity platforms and Itanium isn't remotely a commodity which leaves Sun.i     Regards  Andrew Harrisonn	 > Regards. >  > Kerry Main > Senior Consultantb > HP Services Canada > Voice: 613-592-4660d > Fax: 613-591-4477o > kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom > (remove the DOT's and AT)  > & > "OpenVMS has always had integrity ..  > Now, Integrity has OpenVMS .."   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 07:46:12 -0400:' From: "Main, Kerry" <kerry.main@hp.com>n, Subject: RE: Tiny pickings for Itanium OEM'sR Message-ID: <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB45D3E7@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----, > From: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy=203 > [mailto:Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com]=20y" > Sent: September 29, 2004 6:19 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com9. > Subject: Re: Tiny pickings for Itanium OEM's >=20 [Snip..]     >=20C > Its pretty clear that Intel are trying to sell Sun on the idea ofo= > porting to Itanium and not the other way around. And you=20e > would be totally6 > blind to have missed the reasons why Intel are keen. >=20H > Intel desperately need a platform that can shift volume, Windows isn'tA > doing it for them probably because MS are rather indifferent=20h
 > to Itanium, G > Linux isn't doing it for them because Linux's value is its ability totD > run reasonably on commodity platforms and Itanium isn't remotely a > commodity which leaves Sun.a >=20 >=20	 > Regardss > Andrew Harrison> > > Regardse > >=20  A Come on Andrew, according to Sun's own statements, the Solaris on>9 Itanium port is essentially done and running in the labs.t  F The current situation between Sun and Intel appears to be posturing ofH who is going to anti up for the $'s required to take it to the next step  i.e. which one will blink first.   :-)a   Regardsr  
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant> HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660i Fax: 613-591-4477a kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20  $ "OpenVMS has always had integrity .. Now, Integrity has OpenVMS .."   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 12:40:17 -0400s- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> , Subject: Re: Tiny pickings for Itanium OEM's, Message-ID: <415AE56F.CB5AA310@teksavvy.com>   "Main, Kerry" wrote:C > Come on Andrew, according to Sun's own statements, the Solaris onc; > Itanium port is essentially done and running in the labs.t  N And Microsoft had Windows 2000 (or whatever) all done on Alpha but decided not- to productize it even though it was all done.n  H If the marlket is too small, if the business environment and contractualK conditiosn for use of an architecture are not good, then there is no reason>J for Sun or anyone else to start productizing a product on IA64 and then beT stuck havng to support this for a small number of users for a large number of years.  M Remember that because SOlaris is already on multiple platforms, they probablytI have a much easier time of pprting it to other platforms, just as the VMS>J folks, now that they have done a proper port with shared code, will now beJ able to do. (for instance, when they are called upon to port to the 8086).   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 08:13:19 +0000 (UTC) 6 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)F Subject: Re: [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-2] DCL Command Line Length in EVE/TPU0 Message-ID: <newscache$6fms4i$l28$1@news.sil.at>  j In article <2rraugF1cni8tU1@uni-berlin.de>, "Peter Weaver" <WeaverConsultingServices@sympatico.ca> writes:! >Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER wrote:bF >> I just entered a long DCL command line within EVE (with the DCL and@ >> with the SPAWN prefix) at the "Command:" prompt and was quiteC >> surprised to get a "Line truncated to 256 characters" because mysC >> command length was only about 160 (but containing quotes if thisI >> makes a difference).  >>$ >> What could have been wrong here ? >uD >It appears that the COMPILE command in EVE$PARSER is triggering theG >TRUNCATE error, the TPU manual does not list TRUNCATE in the "SignaledhF >Errors" for COMPILE but it does explain it in the text. I would think5 >that the documentation should be changed to list it.:  H Doc ? Huh ? Do I need to know the internals just to use the editor ? ;-)! Why does DCL or SPAWN a COMPILE ?h  % >> Can you reproduce this behaviour ?> >P8 >Yup, no problem. If the DCL command plus the stuff thatC >EVE$PARSE_COMMAND adds in exceeds 256 characters then you get thisR >error.    Thanks  @ >> Is there a good way to enter longer DCL commands within EVE ? >tI >The latest manual that I have (7.3, but not changed since 7.1) says thataH >the SEND procedure supports lines up to 1024 characters even though theG >current DCL limit is 256 characters. So at least you should be able tot< >go that far, but you will need to do some programming. i.e. >e< >Command: TPU my_dcl := 'Write sys$output "this is my long';9 >Command: TPU my_dcl := my_dcl + ' command. that should'; ? >Command: TPU my_dcl := my_dcl + ' work but I have not tested';e0 >Command: TPU my_dcl := my_dcl + ' it so YMMV"'; >Command: TPU eve_dcl (my_dcl);2 >4# >(OK, I did test it, and it worked).  H Ok. But then I think I stay with SPAWN and enter the long command in theI new process. I just wanted to enter a long DCL command found in a logfiletG (with copy&paste) and I really get nervous when the DECterm changes themG width every time I spawn and logout afterwards (the fix is of course ton/ SET TERM/WIDTH=200 before entering the EDITor).e  : >> Do you know of any plans to support current DCL command< >> line lengths (2048) also within EVE/TPU (say with V8.2) ? >r& >I'm just an end-user so I don't know.   Any HPQ here ?   -- i Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGERs% Network and OpenVMS system specialists E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2004.541 ************************