1 INFO-VAX	Fri, 15 Apr 2005	Volume 2005 : Issue 209       Contents: Re: (history of) BACKUP/ALIAS  Re: (history of) BACKUP/ALIAS  Re: (history of) BACKUP/ALIAS  RE: Changing node IP address8 Re: Converting SQL services config files from 7.0 to 7.1 Re: FA: VMS SW kits. Re: FA: VMS SW kits. Re: FA: VMS SW kits. Re: FA: VMS SW kits., Re: Flash Card reader with VMS Now available, Re: Flash Card reader with VMS Now available, Re: Flash Card reader with VMS Now available, Re: Flash Card reader with VMS Now available$ How to disable outgoing FTP service?( Re: How to disable outgoing FTP service?( Re: How to disable outgoing FTP service?( Re: How to disable outgoing FTP service?( Re: HP sells dual-core dual cpu Opterons( Re: HP sells dual-core dual cpu Opterons5 Re: newbie needs help with copying file with only FID $ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ RE: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey$ Re: Operating System Security Survey  Re: OT: Race for dual core 8086s  Re: OT: Race for dual core 8086s6 Re: ridiculous GBLPAGES Autogen values under VMS 7.2-2) SPX/GPR (WS01X/VS40X) graphics devices... - Re: SPX/GPR (WS01X/VS40X) graphics devices... P Re: Third party IDE PCI-controller & OVMS V7.3-2 & DVD recording =>         succP Re: VMS FAQ: changing volume label of system disk: DECnet MOP or LANCP boot data  Re: VMS to Max OS X file sharing  Re: VMS to Max OS X file sharing  Re: VMS to Max OS X file sharing Want to be Heard by Hurd? ; Re: [OpenVMS] What do you expect from DIR/SIZ=(ALLO,USED) ? ; Re: [OpenVMS] What do you expect from DIR/SIZ=(ALLO,USED) ? B Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMB Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMB Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMB Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMB Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMB Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMB Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMB Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMB Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMB Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMB Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMB Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COM  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:52:55 GMT   From: John Santos <john@egh.com>& Subject: Re: (history of) BACKUP/ALIAS, Message-ID: <XCB7e.22299$qO6.17706@trnddc05>   JF Mezei wrote:  > AEF wrote: > ; >>/ALIAS is not relevant to non-save_set  image operations.  >  >  >  > if I do :  > " > BACKUP/ALIAS/IMAGE Disk1: Disk2: > and $ > BACKUP/NOALIAS/IMAGE Disk1: Disk2: > H > wouldn't there be a difference ? won't the /ALIAS make multiple copiesH > of the same file ?  Will it overwrite the already created original, orI > will it be smart enough to just skip it because the target file already 
 > exists ?  G I think it is possible /ALIAS will copy all the aliased files twice (or B more; once per alias directory entry), but each copy would use theB existing file header and thus replace the previous copy.  In otherF words, BACKUP would do more work, but the result would be the same.  I= don't know if it would reuse the existing space or delete and G re-allocate the file for each copy, possibly changing the output disk's  fragmentation level.  C However, it is also possible that backup is smart enough to know it E has already copied the file, and not do it twice.  I don't think I've G ever caught it doing the same file twice (with ctrl/T) while forgetting ( to include /NOALIAS on the command line.  G I'm sure I've done it with both "/NOALIAS" and with no qualifier at all A and never lost anything.  I'm not sure I've ever used /ALIAS on a D disk-to-disk image backup, which HELP says is the default.  However,F HELP also says not to use /ALIAS unless you have to (i.e. restoring anD old saveset), because the default behavior does the right thing.  IfE the default behavior is correct and  /ALIAS is the default, then this H statement makes no sense.  So I think the online HELP needs to be looked at.   8 But I think you guys are worrying way too much about it.   --   John Santos  Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Apr 2005 16:17:40 -0700$ From: "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com>& Subject: Re: (history of) BACKUP/ALIASC Message-ID: <1113520659.971343.111530@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>    John Santos wrote: > JF Mezei wrote:  > > AEF wrote: > > = > >>/ALIAS is not relevant to non-save_set  image operations.  > >  > > 
 > > if I do :  > > $ > > BACKUP/ALIAS/IMAGE Disk1: Disk2: > > and & > > BACKUP/NOALIAS/IMAGE Disk1: Disk2: > > C > > wouldn't there be a difference ? won't the /ALIAS make multiple  copiesG > > of the same file ?  Will it overwrite the already created original,  orC > > will it be smart enough to just skip it because the target file  already  > > exists ? > E > I think it is possible /ALIAS will copy all the aliased files twice  (or D > more; once per alias directory entry), but each copy would use theD > existing file header and thus replace the previous copy.  In otherE > words, BACKUP would do more work, but the result would be the same.  I ? > don't know if it would reuse the existing space or delete and B > re-allocate the file for each copy, possibly changing the output disk's > fragmentation level. > E > However, it is also possible that backup is smart enough to know it G > has already copied the file, and not do it twice.  I don't think I've > > ever caught it doing the same file twice (with ctrl/T) while
 forgetting* > to include /NOALIAS on the command line. > E > I'm sure I've done it with both "/NOALIAS" and with no qualifier at  all C > and never lost anything.  I'm not sure I've ever used /ALIAS on a F > disk-to-disk image backup, which HELP says is the default.  However,E > HELP also says not to use /ALIAS unless you have to (i.e. restoring  anF > old saveset), because the default behavior does the right thing.  IfG > the default behavior is correct and  /ALIAS is the default, then this C > statement makes no sense.  So I think the online HELP needs to be  looked > at.    HELP for which version?   D On VMS 6.2 you cannot specify both /image and /alias. I checked withF VERB and they are disallowed. I checked on eisner and there is no suchF disallowance; however, I cannot try image backups there due to lack ofE proper privs. And I cannot try it on any of my systems as I have only D 6.1 (no alias qualifier to try!) and 6.2 (with which /IMAGE/ALIAS is
 not allowed!)   F I don't think you'll get BACKUP/IMAGE disk1: disk2: copying files moreF than once despite anything you do with aliases or the alias qualifier.G I believe it works as follows: BACKUP makes its own copy of INDEXF.SYS. G Then it walks the directory structure, copying files, and for each file F it marks that file's "header" in its own copy of INDEXF.SYS as copied.G Thus, when alias entries bring BACKUP around to the same file id, it is C already marked as copied and BACKUP moves on to the next file. So I , don't think there'd be any extra processing.  . Of course, WHY would you want to add /ALIAS to        $ BACKUP/IMAGE disk1: disk2:  	 anyway???   : > But I think you guys are worrying way too much about it.     Of this I am certain!    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 00:27:52 GMT   From: John Santos <john@egh.com>& Subject: Re: (history of) BACKUP/ALIAS+ Message-ID: <cUD7e.13716$jd6.9502@trnddc07>   
 AEF wrote: > John Santos wrote: >  >>JF Mezei wrote:  >>
 >>>AEF wrote:  >>>  >>> = >>>>/ALIAS is not relevant to non-save_set  image operations.  >>>  >>>  >>>if I do : >>> # >>>BACKUP/ALIAS/IMAGE Disk1: Disk2:  >>>and% >>>BACKUP/NOALIAS/IMAGE Disk1: Disk2:  >>> B >>>wouldn't there be a difference ? won't the /ALIAS make multiple >  > copies > F >>>of the same file ?  Will it overwrite the already created original, >  > or > B >>>will it be smart enough to just skip it because the target file > 	 > already  >  >>>exists ?  >>E >>I think it is possible /ALIAS will copy all the aliased files twice  >  > (or  > D >>more; once per alias directory entry), but each copy would use theD >>existing file header and thus replace the previous copy.  In otherE >>words, BACKUP would do more work, but the result would be the same.  >  > I  > ? >>don't know if it would reuse the existing space or delete and B >>re-allocate the file for each copy, possibly changing the output >  > disk's >  >>fragmentation level. >>E >>However, it is also possible that backup is smart enough to know it G >>has already copied the file, and not do it twice.  I don't think I've > >>ever caught it doing the same file twice (with ctrl/T) while >  > forgetting > * >>to include /NOALIAS on the command line. >>E >>I'm sure I've done it with both "/NOALIAS" and with no qualifier at  >  > all  > C >>and never lost anything.  I'm not sure I've ever used /ALIAS on a F >>disk-to-disk image backup, which HELP says is the default.  However,E >>HELP also says not to use /ALIAS unless you have to (i.e. restoring  >  > an > F >>old saveset), because the default behavior does the right thing.  IfG >>the default behavior is correct and  /ALIAS is the default, then this C >>statement makes no sense.  So I think the online HELP needs to be  >  > looked >  >>at.  >  >  > HELP for which version?  >    Alpha V7.3-2  D VAX V7.3 has the same help text, but without the note saying to only8 use /ALIAS when restoring old (V6.2 and older) savesets.    F > On VMS 6.2 you cannot specify both /image and /alias. I checked withH > VERB and they are disallowed. I checked on eisner and there is no suchH > disallowance; however, I cannot try image backups there due to lack ofG > proper privs. And I cannot try it on any of my systems as I have only F > 6.1 (no alias qualifier to try!) and 6.2 (with which /IMAGE/ALIAS is > not allowed!)  > H > I don't think you'll get BACKUP/IMAGE disk1: disk2: copying files moreH > than once despite anything you do with aliases or the alias qualifier.I > I believe it works as follows: BACKUP makes its own copy of INDEXF.SYS. I > Then it walks the directory structure, copying files, and for each file H > it marks that file's "header" in its own copy of INDEXF.SYS as copied.I > Thus, when alias entries bring BACKUP around to the same file id, it is E > already marked as copied and BACKUP moves on to the next file. So I . > don't think there'd be any extra processing.  / So no difference with /NOALIAS on disk-to-disk.   F Help does have a peculiarity perhaps meant to indicate it only applies, when doing a backup to a saveset...  It says   BACKUP  	    /ALIAS   '          /ALIAS save-set-spec (default)           /NOALIAS     ' The syntax of an image backup is either      $ backup/image dev1: dev2:  # for a disk-to-disk image backup, or   #   $ backup/image dev1: dev2:saveset   ! for an image backup to a saveset.   H I don't think CLI can make this distinction, so it would be up to backupG itself to disallow /ALIAS on the 1st form.  There's no magic "DISALLOW" F clause they could put in BACKUP.CLD that says there's an output deviceE spec but no file spec.  (Also, it would have to translate any logical  name to be sure.)    > 0 > Of course, WHY would you want to add /ALIAS to > " >     $ BACKUP/IMAGE disk1: disk2: >  > anyway???   I No idea!  Just wanted to point out that I'm sure I've never tried it. :-)      >  > : >>But I think you guys are worrying way too much about it. >  >  >  > Of this I am certain!  >      --   John Santos  Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 13:18:36 -0500 8 From: "Grealy, Patrick J" <Patrick.J.Grealy@uth.tmc.edu>% Subject: RE: Changing node IP address Q Message-ID: <F567BEA12C734C4FA3DC39691BB73869011FB9B3@UTHEVS3.mail.uthouston.edu>   D Thanks for the comments Paul. We are a member server and used almostF exclusively within our department. Also, our primary domain controllerG and other hosts are all keeping their IP addresses so Adv Server should ? behave. I'm noting your suggestions for testing after-the-fact.   F Thanks also to Bart Z. yesterday - the NET$CONFIGURE ADVANCED was very8 useful, permanently removing the two csmacd-1 lines from  NET$CSMACD_STARTUP.NCL. - Pat G.   > -----Original Message-----+ > From: PEN [mailto:paul.nuneznosp@mhp.com] ( > Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 8:07 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com ' > Subject: Re: Changing node IP address  >=20
 > Hi Patrick,  >=20E > "Grealy, Patrick J" <Patrick.J.Grealy@uth.tmc.edu> wrote in message  > H news:F567BEA12C734C4FA3DC39691BB73869011FB4D6@UTHEVS3.mail.uthouston.edu .  > .  > >Hi, > [snip]3 > >I am especially concerned about Advanced Server.  > [snip] >=20H > Check for the existence of the logical name pwrk$knbdaemon_ipaddr (may not + > exist if you have a single IP interface).  >=20H > Also, if you use an entry for the server in the lmhosts. file on other& > systems, you'll have to update them. >=20H > A sanity check after you've changed the address (and restarted TCPIP), but " > before starting Advanced Server: >=20 >  $ show logical tcpip$inet*  >=206 > build a FQDN using the values of tcpip$inet_host and tcpip$inet_domain, > then > do:  >=20 >  $ tcpip show host <FQDN>  >=204 > and ensure the output reflects the new IP address. >=20F > If the server is configured as a WINS client, you may want to verify the  > new 7 > address gets registered after Advanced Server starts.  >=20H > Other than that, if Advanced Server fails to start (or more precisely, ifC > the pwrk$knbdaemon process shuts down immediately after startup),  check G > pwrk$logs:pwrk$knbdaemon_<nodename>.log for errors.   If you see some  > t_bind2 > error, try restarting the tcpip$pwipacp process: >=20+ > $ @sys$startup:tcpip$pwip_driver_shutdown * > $ @sys$startup:tcpip$pwip_driver_startup >=20 > Good luck, >=20 > Paul   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Apr 2005 22:17:20 -0700* From: karl.rohwedder@gmx.de (Cluster-Karl)A Subject: Re: Converting SQL services config files from 7.0 to 7.1 < Message-ID: <6436beb5.0504142117.61baa4e@posting.google.com>  v "aniranshu" <anirban.maiti@gmail.com> wrote in message news:<1113459778.984226.242160@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>...- > I get the following error while conversion:  >   > Converting configuration file:+ > $1$DGA20:[USER]SQLSRV_CONFIG_FILE70.DAT;1   >                to script file:+ > $1$DGA20:[USER]MY_CONFIG_SCRIPT_FILE.SQS;  > ; > %SQLSRV-E-INVCONFIGREC, Invalid record at line #1 in file  > $1$DGA20:[USER]S > QLSRV_CONFIG_FILE70.DAT;1  > %SQLSRV-E-CONFIGTEXT, Text:  > ; > %SQLSRV-E-INVCONFIGREC, Invalid record at line #2 in file  > $1$DGA20:[USER]S > QLSRV_CONFIG_FILE70.DAT;1  > %SQLSRV-E-CONFIGTEXT, Text:  > ; > %SQLSRV-E-INVCONFIGREC, Invalid record at line #3 in file  > $1$DGA20:[USER]S > QLSRV_CONFIG_FILE70.DAT;1  > %SQLSRV-E-CONFIGTEXT, Text:  > ; > %SQLSRV-E-INVCONFIGREC, Invalid record at line #4 in file  > $1$DGA20:[USER]S > QLSRV_CONFIG_FILE70.DAT;1  > %SQLSRV-E-CONFIGTEXT, Text: 6 > SQLSRV_70000SYS$MANAGER:SYS$MANAGER:SYS$SYSTEM:ddddd > ddp = > %SYSTEM-F-ACCVIO, access violation, reason mask=00, virtual  > address=00000001000D( > 0047, PC=0000000000060720, PS=0000001B > 4 >   Improperly handled condition, image exit forced.3 >     Signal arguments:   Number = 0000000000000005 3 >                         Name   = 000000000000000C 3 >                                  0000000000000000 3 >                                  00000001000D0047 3 >                                  0000000000060720 3 >                                  000000000000001B  >  >     Register dump:; >     R0  = 00000001000D000F  R1  = 0000000000000001  R2  =  > 0000000000010310; >     R3  = 000000007C05CD1C  R4  = 00000000000D0748  R5  =  > 00000000000D0010; >     R6  = 00000000000401F8  R7  = 0000000003A78001  R8  =  > 0000000000044F80; >     R9  = 0000000003A78001  R10 = 0000000003A7D792  R11 =  > 000000007FFCDBE0; >     R12 = 0000000000000000  R13 = 000000007AF167D0  R14 =  > 0000000000000000; >     R15 = 000000007AF15E10  R16 = 00000000000D0048  R17 =  > 0000000000000000; >     R18 = 0000000000000092  R19 = 00000000000000D2  R20 =  > 0000000000000003; >     R21 = 00000000000D0247  R22 = 0000000000000000  R23 =  > 00000000007AE0B4; >     R24 = 000000000027A0C8  R25 = 0000000000000001  R26 =  > FFFFFFFF809A88E8; >     R27 = 000000007C03A700  R28 = 000000000000000F  R29 =  > 000000007AE078A0; >     SP  = 000000007AE078A0  PC  = 0000000000060720  PS  =  > 200000000000001B > @ > My Sql services 7 runs perfectly with this configuration file.  @ We never had any problems vonverting to V7.1. Do you have 'many'@ service entries in the config file? Maybe you could just add the configuration manually.   
 regards Kalle    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:14:59 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>  Subject: Re: FA: VMS SW kits. B Message-ID: <1113509699.c9fe0472aac47bae03e7c877af9653a5@teranews>   Bill Gunshannon wrote:% > > See seller "st-a-d-03" in eBay...  > >  > B > Gee, I never thought of this.  I have a couple xerox paper boxesD > full of distributions.  Maybe retirement is closer than I thought.    1 I ask this naively: is it legal to sell the CDs ?   B I think that lending/giving away the CDs wouldn't be an issue. But making money from it ?  C (I doubt that HP/Compaq/Digital/whoeveer would sue someone, but you A don't want to force the owner of VMS to take RIAA-like actions to  prevent the sharing of media.   F If there is any organisation in the USA that needs to be shut down (or shot down ?) it is the RIAA.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 22:31:20 GMT % From: "John Vottero" <John@mvpsi.com>  Subject: Re: FA: VMS SW kits. < Message-ID: <YaC7e.5906$bc2.3052@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com>  ; "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message  < news:1113509699.c9fe0472aac47bae03e7c877af9653a5@teranews... > Bill Gunshannon wrote:& >> > See seller "st-a-d-03" in eBay... >> > >>C >> Gee, I never thought of this.  I have a couple xerox paper boxes E >> full of distributions.  Maybe retirement is closer than I thought.  >  > 3 > I ask this naively: is it legal to sell the CDs ?   / Is it legal to sell a book you've already read?    > D > I think that lending/giving away the CDs wouldn't be an issue. But > making money from it ? > E > (I doubt that HP/Compaq/Digital/whoeveer would sue someone, but you C > don't want to force the owner of VMS to take RIAA-like actions to  > prevent the sharing of media.   L I don't think HP/Compaq/Digital would sue because they are pretty sure they F would lose in court.  A copyright prevents people from making copies. E Selling a copy when you're done with it should fall under "fair use".   H > If there is any organisation in the USA that needs to be shut down (or > shot down ?) it is the RIAA.  M The RIAA is suing people for making copies, not for selling CDs that they no   longer want.   ------------------------------   Date: 15 Apr 2005 00:04:00 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: FA: VMS SW kits. , Message-ID: <3c8engF6fvij7U2@individual.net>  B In article <1113509699.c9fe0472aac47bae03e7c877af9653a5@teranews>,0 	JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes: > Bill Gunshannon wrote:& >> > See seller "st-a-d-03" in eBay... >> > >>  C >> Gee, I never thought of this.  I have a couple xerox paper boxes E >> full of distributions.  Maybe retirement is closer than I thought.  >  > 3 > I ask this naively: is it legal to sell the CDs ?   G I don't know, which is why what I said above was kinda tongue-in-cheek. ! Maybe I was just too subtle.  :-)    > D > I think that lending/giving away the CDs wouldn't be an issue. But > making money from it ? > E > (I doubt that HP/Compaq/Digital/whoeveer would sue someone, but you C > don't want to force the owner of VMS to take RIAA-like actions to  > prevent the sharing of media.  > H > If there is any organisation in the USA that needs to be shut down (or > shot down ?) it is the RIAA.  @ I would never even consider selling them.  I keep all of them in@ case someone ever approaches me saying they are looking for some old Vax distro.    bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------   Date: 15 Apr 2005 00:09:40 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: FA: VMS SW kits. , Message-ID: <3c8f23F6fvij7U3@individual.net>  < In article <YaC7e.5906$bc2.3052@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com>,( 	"John Vottero" <John@mvpsi.com> writes:= > "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message  > > news:1113509699.c9fe0472aac47bae03e7c877af9653a5@teranews... >> Bill Gunshannon wrote: ' >>> > See seller "st-a-d-03" in eBay...  >>> >  >>> D >>> Gee, I never thought of this.  I have a couple xerox paper boxesF >>> full of distributions.  Maybe retirement is closer than I thought. >> >>4 >> I ask this naively: is it legal to sell the CDs ? > 1 > Is it legal to sell a book you've already read?   C Depends on wether or not the book came with a license limiting what , you can do with it.  I believe the disks do.   >  >>E >> I think that lending/giving away the CDs wouldn't be an issue. But  >> making money from it ?  >>F >> (I doubt that HP/Compaq/Digital/whoeveer would sue someone, but youD >> don't want to force the owner of VMS to take RIAA-like actions to  >> prevent the sharing of media. > N > I don't think HP/Compaq/Digital would sue because they are pretty sure they H > would lose in court.  A copyright prevents people from making copies. G > Selling a copy when you're done with it should fall under "fair use".   E Only if you own the copy rather than just having a license to use.  I F would guess (anyone from HOP want to jump inhere with facts?) that you; are actually required to destroy old ones by your contract.    bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------    Date: 14 Apr 2005 12:10:22 -0700 From: jordan@ccs4vms.com5 Subject: Re: Flash Card reader with VMS Now available C Message-ID: <1113505822.029685.262460@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>    What bus does it connect to?   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 15:57:12 -0400 ? From: "David Turner, Island Computers US Corp" <david@hpaq.net> 5 Subject: Re: Flash Card reader with VMS Now available : Message-ID: <iUz7e.78613$wo1.49229@bignews6.bellsouth.net>   ide    dt   --     David B Turner Island Computers US Corp 2700 Gregory St, Suite 180 Savannah GA 31404  Tel: 912 447 6622 X201 Skype ID: islandco Fax: 912 201 0402  Email: dbturner@icusc.com  Web: http://www.islandco.com% ===================================== < All orders are subject to the following terms and conditions. of sale. These should be read before ordering.% http://www.islandco.com/warranty.html   % <jordan@ccs4vms.com> wrote in message = news:1113505822.029685.262460@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...  > What bus does it connect to? >    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:23:01 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 5 Subject: Re: Flash Card reader with VMS Now available B Message-ID: <1113510180.0e54182607496ee9cfbab9a9a5473507@teranews>  / "David Turner, Island Computers US Corp" wrote: - > Combo card reader (fits in the floppy slot)  >  > With SD Card 1GB $299  > With Compact Flash 1GB $349  > With Compact Flash 4GB $689  > With Compact Flash 8GB $1895  * What interface is it ? SCSI ? PCI ? QBUS ?   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:49:36 -0400 ? From: "David Turner, Island Computers US Corp" <david@hpaq.net> 5 Subject: Re: Flash Card reader with VMS Now available 8 Message-ID: <qBA7e.57851$f%4.726@bignews1.bellsouth.net>   IDE   I Plugs right in to DS10/DS10L Main Logic Board + DS20e, ES40, PWS Miata GL  not Miata etc.B Pretty much anything that uses the current IDE interface for alpha  7 Still testing - we'll be releasing them next month end. J We're waiting for the large CompactFlash cards to come in to be able to do full system backups etc.  0 Will notify people on this NG when ready to ship   David    --     David B Turner Island Computers US Corp 2700 Gregory St, Suite 180 Savannah GA 31404  Tel: 912 447 6622 X201 Skype ID: islandco Fax: 912 201 0402  Email: dbturner@icusc.com  Web: http://www.islandco.com% ===================================== < All orders are subject to the following terms and conditions. of sale. These should be read before ordering.% http://www.islandco.com/warranty.html   : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message< news:1113510180.0e54182607496ee9cfbab9a9a5473507@teranews...1 > "David Turner, Island Computers US Corp" wrote: / > > Combo card reader (fits in the floppy slot)  > >  > > With SD Card 1GB $299  > > With Compact Flash 1GB $349  > > With Compact Flash 4GB $689   > > With Compact Flash 8GB $1895 > , > What interface is it ? SCSI ? PCI ? QBUS ?   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Apr 2005 18:27:07 -0700, From: "Ultra Kiasu" <ultrakiasu@hotmail.com>- Subject: How to disable outgoing FTP service? B Message-ID: <1113528427.546955.74680@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>  : My old OpenVMS server had been replaced with a new server.A I need to run parallel the same application for some time on both G machine. With exception that the old server will not send out files via C FTP to the external machines. But the external parties will need to / send in updated sales file to both VMS servers.   D Both machine had been sync with identical OS for apps compatibility.   OS: OpenVMS 7.1  Network: UCX 4.1 - ECO 9  F What is the best solution to disable outgoing FTP services while allow incoming FTP services?  G Will adding logical symbol "FTP" to redirect FTP command to a false com  script work?  : ie FTP == WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "Outgoing FTP service disabled"  3 How to set another logical to link to the true FTP?   B Alternatively, could I simply rename UCX$FTP.EXE or are there some other executables i had missed?   A Sorry I am not good in OpenVMS or DCL, do appreciate if you could   assist me in solving this issue.  
 Thank you.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:57:17 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 1 Subject: Re: How to disable outgoing FTP service? B Message-ID: <1113530236.b3ad0cfe11a513c6fe6d7f8904516078@teranews>   Ultra Kiasu wrote:H > What is the best solution to disable outgoing FTP services while allow > incoming FTP services?  B Assuming that ultimate security is not needed and you just want toD prevent casual use, replacing the executable is perhaps the easiest.  F To find out exectly which .exe you need to replace, havine one user doC and ftp transfer, and do a SHOW PROC/CONT/ID=xxxxxx for that user's ) process, you'll file the exact file name.   F You can then write a simple program that writes "Sorry, FTP service is= disabled" and place the new .exe in the place of the old one.   E You may also want to test COPY/FTP to ensure that it also fails. (not 7 sure if that command is available at your VMS version).   F You also need to be careful if you upgrade any software on the machine@ since it may re-instate service, or add something like copy/ftp.    H Another option you have is to remove the FTP command from the DCLTABLEs.E You could then give normal users a DCLTABLE.EXE that doesn't have FTP F command, and still have a DCLTABLE_FULL.EXE that you could give to theC system manager who woudl still be able to use the FTP command. (you , assign a dcl table in the authorize utility.   HELP SET COMMAND/DELETE   F You can also lookup the VERB utuility on the freware of DECUS archivesE which allows you to extract a definition of a command. If your system F has COPY/FTP, you can extrtact the COPY command, edit it to remove the6 /FTP parameter and then put it back into the DCLTABLE.  G Note that existing processes use the older version of DCLTABLE, so when H you replace a DCLTABE.EXE and re-=install it, only new users get the new3 version, existing processes still have the old one.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 22:13:53 -0400 $ From: "Sympatico" <noone@ishere.now>1 Subject: Re: How to disable outgoing FTP service? : Message-ID: <CrF7e.21146$8i6.738582@news20.bellglobal.com>  J UCX allows you to configure the FTP server (inbound) and client (outbound) separately.   ; You need to invoke the sys$manager:UCX$CONFIG.com procedure C (TCPIP$CONFIG.com in 5.0 and later versions) and disable FTP Client / service, while enabling the FTP Server service.    Option 2 is Client Services  Option 3 is Server Services  (iirc): and FTP is shown as an item in each of the resulting menus    7 "Ultra Kiasu" <ultrakiasu@hotmail.com> wrote in message < news:1113528427.546955.74680@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...< > My old OpenVMS server had been replaced with a new server.C > I need to run parallel the same application for some time on both I > machine. With exception that the old server will not send out files via E > FTP to the external machines. But the external parties will need to 1 > send in updated sales file to both VMS servers.  > F > Both machine had been sync with identical OS for apps compatibility. >  > OS: OpenVMS 7.1  > Network: UCX 4.1 - ECO 9 > H > What is the best solution to disable outgoing FTP services while allow > incoming FTP services? > I > Will adding logical symbol "FTP" to redirect FTP command to a false com  > script work? > < > ie FTP == WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "Outgoing FTP service disabled" > 5 > How to set another logical to link to the true FTP?  > D > Alternatively, could I simply rename UCX$FTP.EXE or are there some! > other executables i had missed?  > C > Sorry I am not good in OpenVMS or DCL, do appreciate if you could " > assist me in solving this issue. >  > Thank you. >    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 02:38:34 GMT   From: John Santos <john@egh.com>1 Subject: Re: How to disable outgoing FTP service? + Message-ID: <KOF7e.11208$Zn3.6499@trnddc02>    Sympatico wrote:L > UCX allows you to configure the FTP server (inbound) and client (outbound)
 > separately.  > = > You need to invoke the sys$manager:UCX$CONFIG.com procedure E > (TCPIP$CONFIG.com in 5.0 and later versions) and disable FTP Client 1 > service, while enabling the FTP Server service.  >  > Option 2 is Client Services  > Option 3 is Server Services  > (iirc)< > and FTP is shown as an item in each of the resulting menus >  > 9 > "Ultra Kiasu" <ultrakiasu@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:1113528427.546955.74680@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > < >>My old OpenVMS server had been replaced with a new server.C >>I need to run parallel the same application for some time on both I >>machine. With exception that the old server will not send out files via E >>FTP to the external machines. But the external parties will need to 1 >>send in updated sales file to both VMS servers.  >>F >>Both machine had been sync with identical OS for apps compatibility. >> >>OS: OpenVMS 7.1  >>Network: UCX 4.1 - ECO 9 >>H >>What is the best solution to disable outgoing FTP services while allow >>incoming FTP services? >>I >>Will adding logical symbol "FTP" to redirect FTP command to a false com  >>script work? >>< >>ie FTP == WRITE SYS$OUTPUT "Outgoing FTP service disabled" >>5 >>How to set another logical to link to the true FTP?  >>D >>Alternatively, could I simply rename UCX$FTP.EXE or are there some! >>other executables i had missed?t >>  F If you need tighter security, you'll need a firewall to block outboundH connections to port 21, because someone could write their own FTP clientD and bypass whatever you do to the standard FTP client to disable it.A (Or they could install a program with a built-in FTP client, likeo	 Mozilla.)   C >>Sorry I am not good in OpenVMS or DCL, do appreciate if you couldo" >>assist me in solving this issue. >> >>Thank you. >>     --   John Santos- Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:36:43 -0400t- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>m1 Subject: Re: HP sells dual-core dual cpu OpteronsvB Message-ID: <1113511005.b7910072e9f3623e21997d1674f5d605@teranews>   John Smith wrote:t > N > http://h71016.www7.hp.com/dstore/MiddleFrame.asp?page=config&ProductLineId=4B > 31&FamilyId=1256&BaseID=14621&jumpid=ex_r2910_frooglesmb/servers >  > Base price is $3000  > ' > Can OVMS Engineering spell Port-eron?r  2 Actually, the question to VMS engineers should be:  G from an operating system point of view, are there differences between acH dual core machine and one with 2 separate CPUs ?  (in tersm of low level? stuff like memory acces,s synchronisations, optimisation etc) ?A  F In such an environment, would VMS itself be able to use both cores, orD would it use just one core and let applications use the other core ?   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 22:06:31 GMT * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>1 Subject: Re: HP sells dual-core dual cpu Opteronsi1 Message-ID: <HPB7e.3911$Xc4.515@news.cpqcorp.net>M  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message< news:1113511005.b7910072e9f3623e21997d1674f5d605@teranews... >V4 > Actually, the question to VMS engineers should be: >PI > from an operating system point of view, are there differences between aCJ > dual core machine and one with 2 separate CPUs ?  (in tersm of low levelA > stuff like memory acces,s synchronisations, optimisation etc) ?  >Y  K Dual core chips are in effect multiple CPUs on a single chip carrier.  TheyoF may share some on-chip hardware - like cache - but for all intents and> purposes they are no different to software than seperate CPUs.  H > In such an environment, would VMS itself be able to use both cores, orF > would it use just one core and let applications use the other core ?  J This is a question more interesting to "multiple threads" - which could beE any number of things such as SMT or Hyperthreading.  In this case theCB chip can have multiple threads of operation, but threads share CPUG logic.  Generally threads *can* be treated like a real CPU, my guess is-G that it is workload dependent on how much this benefits a system.   TheoF threads *could* be viewed as something other than general purpose CPUsI by a threading package - but it isn't clear that VMS would consider doingeE this - I guess it would depend on some important threaded application < needing it, and the ability to reuse/find/define a threading package/interface  that makes sense.e   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 02:53:06 +0800e From: prep@prep.synonet.come> Subject: Re: newbie needs help with copying file with only FID- Message-ID: <87zmw16vhp.fsf@prep.synonet.com>?  * "Hein" <hein.nomail@hp.nomail.com> writes:    > Or... zero out the last bytes?  > Hein, was your mouth out with bloat :) Zero filling will leave; a bunch of empty lines if EOF gets bumped. Use -1 for `nexth block please'.   --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda.a@                                              West Australia 6076* comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Apr 2005 12:51:36 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)n- Subject: Re: Operating System Security Survey"3 Message-ID: <0itAkVIQgcAI@eisner.encompasserve.org>n  T In article <fatp7fhyfv7l$.dlg@wagmail.com>, Mitch Wagner <mitch@wagmail.com> writes:  M > The poll has been up two weeks. Last week, VMS was getting 3 percent of theiJ > vote. This week, allofasudden it's getting more than half (IIRC). And weG > got more responses in the second week of the poll than in the first. h > L > That told me the poll was being fixed by VMS advocates. This is hardly theG > first time this has happened. Or the second. Or the 50th. It's always 7 > pretty obvious from voting patterns what's going on. 0 > L > So I searched on Google, then Google Groups, for "VMS security" (and maybeI > Security Pipeline -- I forgot which exact search strings I used) -- and  > oho, here y'all were.7  F So you achieved your goal, getting some set of people to pay attention to your publication.  F And voters achieved their goal, getting some set of people to consider VMS.  F The further benefit to communication will be if some of those VMS fansG keep an eagle eye on your publication to see if there are innaccuracies D like (made up example) "users can defeat password history mechanismsA by changing their passwords multiple times unless you establish aiA minimum password lifetime".  One of the initial drafts of the newe? Federal 800-53 security publication actually had such a notion.    ------------------------------   Date: 14 Apr 2005 18:34:41 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)- Subject: Re: Operating System Security Surveys, Message-ID: <3c7rduF6mk040U1@individual.net>  3 In article <uxLaerCna6i6@eisner.encompasserve.org>, 0 	Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:Y > In article <3c7c9kF6losspU1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:eU >> In article <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB595AE9@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>,i- >> 	"Main, Kerry" <kerry.main@hp.com> writes:t > B >>> Question for you - do you think the absolute majority of thoseK >>> responding to the poll were doing as you seem to think (ballot stuffing I >>> without thinking about the question) or were they actually expressing D >>> what they truly believed i.e. that VMS was a more secure OS than >>> Windows, Linux, UNIX?b >> ,D >> Who cares.  If I truly believe Bush would make a better president6 >> than Kerry does it justify stuffing the ballot box? > B > But does the fact that you voted twice prove that the end result8 > is invalid ?   Only if the difference is two or fewer.  B If I voted more than once, I have no reason to believe that othersB haven't also voted more than once, so I would be a fool to put any@ faith inthe resulting ballot, so yes, it pretty much proves that the result is invalid.   > E >>> Imho, most respondents answered truthfully - the poll asked theirm& >>> opinion and that is what they got. >>>  >>  G >> I see no evidence to support that belief.  And considerable evidencefG >> just int his group alone to contradict it.  Consider that one person'I >> posted how easy it was to beat the system, I have no reason to believe A >> that all the VMS votes weren't the results of 5 people voting.i > : > Thank you for the faith you have expressed in all of us.  E I'm not the one who admitted voting more than once.  I am not the onelD who suggested voting more than once.  I'm definitely not the one whoB suggested "stuffing the ballot box".  I didn't vote at all for theB reasons I have already given.  I do tend to judge people by their B actions and the actions they advocate.  I would like to assume theC majority here, like me, knew the total lack of value in such a poll A and chose not to vote at all.  Maybe we should have a poll to ask , how many times each person actually voted.    " Oh yeah, it's not just my opinion.  @ >  That told me the poll was being fixed by VMS advocates. Thisi@ >  is hardly the first time this has happened. Or the second. OrC >  the 50th. It's always pretty obvious from voting patterns what'si >   going on.    bill   -- >J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   h   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 18:50:51 +0000 (UTC)e7 From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)b- Subject: Re: Operating System Security Surveye( Message-ID: <d3me2b$2ps$2@pcls4.std.com>  ( Mitch Wagner <mitch@wagmail.com> writes:  ! >>>>Vote early.   Vote often. :-)  >>> ) >>> Ooooo, you guys are SOOOOOOOO busted.,  L >The poll has been up two weeks. Last week, VMS was getting 3 percent of theI >vote. This week, allofasudden it's getting more than half (IIRC). And wedF >got more responses in the second week of the poll than in the first.   8 >That told me the poll was being fixed by VMS advocates.  I I wouldn't say it was 'fixed' by anyone.  What happened was that word got K out 'cool! An operating system security survey poll by someone who actually H knows what VMS is!'  Even if you discount all the 'vote early and often'I voters, you still would have seen a substantial spike in VMS votes in the F second week.  I don't know what your target audience is but I doubt itF includes the type of people who may have a use for something like VMS,H especially since you exclude a category for commercial Unixes.  In fact,H if you weren't married to someone who remembers and likes VMS, would youJ have even included it as a separate category?  Perhaps you'd either decideK to include it in the "mainframe" category or not given it a second thought.   F What happened is a flaw in that kind of poll (self-selected respondersE as well as interest in the poll spread out beyond your user base) noto (just) ballot box stuffing.E   -Mike (who voted just once)l -- 7 -Mike    ------------------------------   Date: 14 Apr 2005 18:54:20 GMT$ From: "Doc." <doc@openvms-rocks.com>- Subject: Re: Operating System Security Surveyo7 Message-ID: <Xns9638D4BCEC8FDdcovmsrox@212.100.160.126>a  H %NEWS-I-NEWMSG, Mitch Wagner wrote in news:13b5qc7dgkrme.dlg@wagmail.com  - > What angle do you suggest for the article? u  C That's a good question, and not one I think anyone here can answer aD without knowing a bit more about your publication's target audience.  I You could go for an approach of, "You've heard of it, and probably think G? it's dead...", or something else might be appropriate for your yG publication.  I really don't know.  What would interest your readers?  wJ There's participants in this newsgroup who've authored articles for other F publications so there is no lack of good writing skills, and I'm sure D those who could contribute to something like that would be happy to G target your audience if you define it appropriately.  I don't consider  J myself an appropriate source as my employer is de-emphasising VMS, but if E you wanted to offer the option of pointing people at the free-access k9 Deathrow Cluster I'm sure I can offer some encouragement.e  I We're keen to see VMS get whatever publicity it can, if your website can  C utilise that enthusiasm and define how it can produce something of AI interest to your readership, I think you've a winning combination for an d article.  H As it is, the most un-subtle option would be to trumpet the security of J VMS, but having helped admin the Deathrow Cluster for a while now, I know F that it is possible for an admin to make a VMS machine insecure.  Not J easy, but possible.  What would perhaps be more interesting is to look at I some of the disaster tolerance features the OS provides.  That might not  F offer a great deal of interest to a large segment of your audience as H they perhaps can't afford the infrastructure, but talking about setting D up a system that could withstand a datacenter being nuked should be H interesting.  There are 9/11 stories in there about VMS, the system has J from a very early stage been designed to deal with disaster situations of  that magnitude.v  I As I say, it is very much down to what you think would be of interest to -F your readers.  If it was something I could get up on slashdot as well F then we'd both be winning, you'd get more viewers and VMS would get a  higher profile.6  A Anyway, if you want an example of what sort of thing might be of  B interest, look at Colin Butcher's contribution on computerworld...I http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/software/story/0,10801,97032,n 00.html (sorry about the wrap).i     Doc. -- sG OpenVMS:     Eight out of ten hackers prefer *other* operating systems.eG http://www.openvms-rocks.com    Deathrow Public-Access OpenVMS Cluster.N   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:22:16 -0700$& From: Mitch Wagner <mitch@wagmail.com>- Subject: Re: Operating System Security Surveyn+ Message-ID: <1lp8s7qx7ri0f.dlg@wagmail.com>4  ( On 14 Apr 2005 18:54:20 GMT, Doc. wrote:  J > %NEWS-I-NEWMSG, Mitch Wagner wrote in news:13b5qc7dgkrme.dlg@wagmail.com > . >> What angle do you suggest for the article?  > E > That's a good question, and not one I think anyone here can answer lF > without knowing a bit more about your publication's target audience. > K > You could go for an approach of, "You've heard of it, and probably think lA > it's dead...", or something else might be appropriate for your eI > publication.  I really don't know.  What would interest your readers?  mL > There's participants in this newsgroup who've authored articles for other H > publications so there is no lack of good writing skills, and I'm sure F > those who could contribute to something like that would be happy to I > target your audience if you define it appropriately.  I don't consider iL > myself an appropriate source as my employer is de-emphasising VMS, but if G > you wanted to offer the option of pointing people at the free-access  ; > Deathrow Cluster I'm sure I can offer some encouragement.r > K > We're keen to see VMS get whatever publicity it can, if your website can dE > utilise that enthusiasm and define how it can produce something of mK > interest to your readership, I think you've a winning combination for an k
 > article. > J > As it is, the most un-subtle option would be to trumpet the security of L > VMS, but having helped admin the Deathrow Cluster for a while now, I know H > that it is possible for an admin to make a VMS machine insecure.  Not L > easy, but possible.  What would perhaps be more interesting is to look at K > some of the disaster tolerance features the OS provides.  That might not cH > offer a great deal of interest to a large segment of your audience as J > they perhaps can't afford the infrastructure, but talking about setting F > up a system that could withstand a datacenter being nuked should be J > interesting.  There are 9/11 stories in there about VMS, the system has L > from a very early stage been designed to deal with disaster situations of  > that magnitude.R > K > As I say, it is very much down to what you think would be of interest to eH > your readers.  If it was something I could get up on slashdot as well H > then we'd both be winning, you'd get more viewers and VMS would get a  > higher profile.D > C > Anyway, if you want an example of what sort of thing might be of  D > interest, look at Colin Butcher's contribution on computerworld...K > http://www.computerworld.com/softwaretopics/software/story/0,10801,97032, ! > 00.html (sorry about the wrap).a    - I can two three possible article angles here:   = 1) Why VMS is the most secure operating system in the world. Q  5 2) VMS disaster tolerance features (as you suggest).    K Doc, are you interested in writing either one of those stories? If not you,0 then who else?     -- 0   Mitch Wagner< Editor, Security Pipeline, http:///www.securitypipeline.com C Senior Editor, TechWeb Pipelines, http://www.techweb.com/pipelines  1 Wagner's Weblog: http://wagblog.InternetWeek.com   +1 (619) 461-4316    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:07:59 -07004& From: Mitch Wagner <mitch@wagmail.com>- Subject: Re: Operating System Security Survey + Message-ID: <1uakwrgmptfcw.dlg@wagmail.com>m  @ On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 18:50:51 +0000 (UTC), Michael Moroney wrote:  * > Mitch Wagner <mitch@wagmail.com> writes: > " >>>>>Vote early.   Vote often. :-) >>>> D* >>>> Ooooo, you guys are SOOOOOOOO busted. > M >>The poll has been up two weeks. Last week, VMS was getting 3 percent of the0J >>vote. This week, allofasudden it's getting more than half (IIRC). And weG >>got more responses in the second week of the poll than in the first. E > 9 >>That told me the poll was being fixed by VMS advocates.1 > K > I wouldn't say it was 'fixed' by anyone.  What happened was that word got2M > out 'cool! An operating system security survey poll by someone who actually J > knows what VMS is!'  Even if you discount all the 'vote early and often'K > voters, you still would have seen a substantial spike in VMS votes in the8H > second week.  I don't know what your target audience is but I doubt itH > includes the type of people who may have a use for something like VMS,J > especially since you exclude a category for commercial Unixes.  In fact,J > if you weren't married to someone who remembers and likes VMS, would you1 > have even included it as a separate category?  -  J Actually, I might have. My wife and I almost never discuss VMS. It doesn'tK come up as a subject of conversation anywhere near as often, as, say, whose5% turn it is to clean the litterbox. :)t  E When I included VMS, I was primarily remembering that I get letters a + couple of times a year from VMS advocates. I  I Failure to include Unix was not intentional. It was just a stupid mistakeiJ on my part. Although it IS true that Unix wasn't on my mind just because IE don't hear much about it lately. Our readers are interested mainly inB( Windows and Linux, with some Mac users.    Mitch Wagner   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:17:47 -0400V- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>h- Subject: Re: Operating System Security SurveynB Message-ID: <1113509867.88e472751ca96b2bdc56dbbb734128a5@teranews>  D > > rabid fanatics have to resort to ballot box stuffing in order toF > > skew the results of a stupid web poll in order to try and convince > > people it isn't?  1 We don't know that there was ballot box stuffing.   F If there were a total of 100 votes, and 43 people on comp.os.vms votes3 for VMS, would that be called ballot box stuffing ?G  E Now, if one or more VMS-fanatics truly did write scripts to vote manyeD times, then yeah, that is bad and it does invalidate the survey. But> frankly, I wouldn't expect this from people in this newsgroup.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:29:11 -0400a- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> - Subject: Re: Operating System Security Survey'B Message-ID: <1113510552.a8512c7b9477e3e467fcc2ec19f6a69d@teranews>   Mitch Wagner wrote:rM > The poll has been up two weeks. Last week, VMS was getting 3 percent of theAJ > vote. This week, allofasudden it's getting more than half (IIRC). And weF > got more responses in the second week of the poll than in the first.  > Cool. So VMS was still getting some votes prior to it becomingC "extremely" popular. Personally, I voted once, but would have neverfA known about your web site/magazine had it not been for someone onrD comp.os.vms posting a link to it and saying there was a survery that
 included VMS.o  E You should note however that people who support VMS are generally far-D more security aware and knowledgeable and the the VMS engineers haveB placed security and data integrity ahead of fancy features or highG performance. And that is something that those who choose VMS find quite5F valuable and important and which is significantly different from other= operating systems where many compromises were made to achieve>9 performance (unix)  or add marketable features (windows).e    9 > That told me the poll was being fixed by VMS advocates.s  B If a few VMS-fanatics really did cheat substantially, then that isF terrible. But if you opened up a new "market" of readers who suddentlyH got an interest in your publication because it mentioned VMS, that might' also explain the suddent rise in votes.   R (again, I have no idea of the number of votes, so I can't pass definite judgement)   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:33:43 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>n- Subject: Re: Operating System Security SurveynB Message-ID: <1113510820.4371e5ca84a0d0760f08fb16af50e0b1@teranews>   Mitch Wagner wrote: K > As of now, we have 2,303 responses. I have no idea how many actual peoplehM > this corresponds to; looks like several people in this newsgroup voted moreG" > than once. A lot more than once.  0 Ok, 921 responses for VMS is perhaps a bit high.  G If you could somehow clean up the votes to remove duplicate votes (same C IP), you could get a much better idea and that number would be most E interesting to see. My guess is that you shoudln't have more than 200rB valid votes for VMS in the days since the alledged stuffing began.  G And to whoemever stuffed the ballots: shame on you; you deprived VMS ofbE a legitimate place, albeit less extraordinary. Had VMS gotten 1% morewF than the others, it would have been a greater achievement because that vote would have been credible.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:44:05 -0400r' From: "Main, Kerry" <kerry.main@hp.com>>- Subject: RE: Operating System Security SurveyeR Message-ID: <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB595B37@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----2 > From: Mitch Wagner [mailto:mitch@wagmail.com]=20 > Sent: April 14, 2005 11:52 AM  > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comr/ > Subject: Re: Operating System Security Survey  >=20* > On 14 Apr 2005 08:02:58 GMT, Doc. wrote: >=20, > > %NEWS-I-NEWMSG, Mitch Wagner wrote in=20$ > news:1w4iygvahwx9f.dlg@wagmail.com > >=20- > >> On 13 Apr 2005 09:43:36 GMT, Doc. wrote:w > >>=20o- > >>> %NEWS-I-NEWMSG, Didier MORANDI wrote ine* > >>> news:425c355a$1_3@news.bluewin.ch=20 > >>>=208 > >>>> (I added 4 votes with ie/NS/Opera and Firefox :-) > >>>=20# > >>> Vote early.   Vote often. :-)t > >=20* > >> Ooooo, you guys are SOOOOOOOO busted. > >=20  
 [snip ...] =20 / > What angle do you suggest for the article?=20f >=20 > Mitch Wagner >=20   Mitch,  F One of the biggest issues imho, with many magazines today is that theyF tend to hit the latest OS religion of the day without recognizing thatF companies who have significant investments in other OS's do not changeG overnight. They might experiment on the fringes, but major changes takec 5-10 years.u   And for good reason.=20o  G And its not just because of the significant $'s it would take to switch|A e.g. the testing time and risk alone swamps any OS / HW costs.=20-  D Those with a good deal of real world IT experience also realize thatA about every 8-10 years there is a OS platform focus switch in the1B industry and if they followed this trend, they would constantly beF playing follow-the-latest-craze without doing what was right for their business.=20  C Case in point - a number of years ago, Oracle was telling all theirtF Customers to switch to Solaris. Before that (late 80's/early 90's), itG was OpenVMS (Oracle was originally developed on OpenVMS). Today, OracleaH is telling all their Customers that Linux is the way to go. What will it be in 2-3 years?=202  E What I would like to see are magazine articles that are not afraid ofcF the OS religious zealots and state things for what they really are.=20  G As an example - your article referenced "legacy" platforms which to thel@ uniformed reader likely thought you meant anything but Linux and Windows.  E However, every OS platform has "legacy" versions. Microsoft now calls2H Windows NT4 and Windows 2000 "legacy" platforms (look in doc's promotingH W2K3). Sun calls Solaris 2.6/7/8 "legacy". Same goes for IBM referencingG older mainframes. Yes, OpenVMS also has what it calls "legacy" versions  as well (e.g. V5.5-2 etc).  D However, every platform has "current" versions which are competitive@ with other platforms current versions. Mainframes still lead theC industry when it comes to partitioning and workload mgmt. SomethinghD which is only now starting to appear in its infancy on Windows/LinuxF systems. Windows 2003 has some new features which are big improvements% over previous versions of Windows.=20,  E OpenVMS recent versions have the capability to dynamically share (viarG load or time-of-day rules, manual drag-n-drop) CPU's between completelyl= different OS virtual partitions on Alpha servers that support G partitioning. OpenVMS officially supports up to 3,078 CPU's (96 serversMD x 32 cpu's) in a single active-active cluster that can be located inB datacenters up to 800km apart. OpenVMS now also runs on Intel IA64F hardware. Because of the shared file and batch system, every device inA an OpenVMS cluster has a unique name and hence a batch job can beoH submitted to run with direct IO's (not served over network) on the least busy of the 96 servers.e  H So, long answer to the question you raised, and I know you need to caterF to a certain extent to your readers, but in short, I would like to seeG more articles that focus on real world IT issues and challenges and noteF just on the hype of the day. Your readers need to understand why is it? that monthly security patches are simply not an option for manye enterprise requirements.  A As an example - what is the real cost of adopting a platform that5C requires monthly security patches. Think about QA cycles, review of G overall impact, application pre-testing, application verification afterdF reboot, application interface testing, tracking etc. And of course, QAA time is valuable, so patch testing is taking away time for actualtE application new functionality testing. Now think about doing this forr= hundred's and in large environments, thousands of systems.=20o   Regards:  
 Kerry Main Senior Consultanti HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-46600 Fax: 613-591-4477g kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20  $ "OpenVMS has always had integrity .. Now, Integrity has OpenVMS .."   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:51:52 -0400u- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> - Subject: Re: Operating System Security SurveyaB Message-ID: <1113511910.b18c1da8cd2d613b33880387f7d503f5@teranews>   Bill Gunshannon wrote:D > If I voted more than once, I have no reason to believe that othersD > haven't also voted more than once, so I would be a fool to put anyB > faith inthe resulting ballot, so yes, it pretty much proves that > the result is invalid.  H After I voted, I was presented with the voting results, and returning to+ the site automatically pesents the results.   " here are the cookies they sent me:  D www.securitypipeline.com	FALSE		FALSE	1144947324	160500005	160500005D www.securitypipeline.com	FALSE		FALSE	1144971750	162401003	162401003  D I assume that each cookie is for one survey I filled (I answered the second one too).  E Today, I returned to the site and saw that it remembers I had alreadye4 voted for the stuff on the spam legislation/spyware.  C So those who hacked votes for VMS would have had to disable cookiesrE and/or delete their cookies to vote again. I expect windows aor linuxt5 weenies to do such things. But not VMS professionals.?   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:56:58 -0400v- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>h- Subject: Re: Operating System Security SurveyeB Message-ID: <1113512225.24bb7a10d31ef170ed14f3a850ed700b@teranews>  
 "Doc." wrote:/J > You could go for an approach of, "You've heard of it, and probably think@ > it's dead...", or something else might be appropriate for your% > publication.  I really don't know.    H "You've probably heard competitors claim VMS was dead, but some 15 yearsH after the claims were started, VMS is still alive and new versions beingE produced, graphical user interface, TCPIP stack and still has all thetF data integrity and security and built-in clustering abilities began inG the early 1980s and still unmateched by any competitor, not even close.C> Now you know why competitors want you to believe VMS is dead."   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 02:48:37 +0800d From: prep@prep.synonet.comw- Subject: Re: Operating System Security Survey(- Message-ID: <874qe98a9m.fsf@prep.synonet.com>t  ( Mitch Wagner <mitch@wagmail.com> writes:  G > I'm not sufficiently familiar with VMS to be entitled to an opinion. y  F > I'm inclined to vote with the majority -- or the majority before YOUF > GUYS CAME IN AND MESSED THINGS UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -- that the skills# > of the sysadmin are matters most..  J RIGHTTTT... So anyone for `Secure DOS'. It is only the SMs skill remember.   -- l< Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. @                                              West Australia 6076* comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot. Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 17:35:36 -0400e# From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com>s- Subject: Re: Operating System Security SurveyN, Message-ID: <cO6dneZ1BfGpf8PfRVn-uA@igs.net>   Main, Kerry wrote: >iG > OpenVMS recent versions have the capability to dynamically share (viai> > load or time-of-day rules, manual drag-n-drop) CPU's betweenB > completely different OS virtual partitions on Alpha servers thatE > support partitioning. OpenVMS officially supports up to 3,078 CPU'sgG > (96 servers x 32 cpu's) in a single active-active cluster that can be.D > located in datacenters up to 800km apart. OpenVMS now also runs onC > Intel IA64 hardware. Because of the shared file and batch system,eB > every device in an OpenVMS cluster has a unique name and hence aE > batch job can be submitted to run with direct IO's (not served overo/ > network) on the least busy of the 96 servers.p    F Articles by Ken Moreau and Keith Parris seem to suggest that the 800kmH distance limit is really only governed by the latency limitations on theC network - lower the latency and up the distance. A VMS cluster withiI carefully chosen comms gear and lines ought to be able to better than the$H out-of-the-box 800km limit. On Internet2, clusters spanning thousands of miles would seem very possible.l   ------------------------------   Date: 14 Apr 2005 23:59:27 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)- Subject: Re: Operating System Security Surveya, Message-ID: <3c8eevF6fvij7U1@individual.net>  B In article <1113511910.b18c1da8cd2d613b33880387f7d503f5@teranews>,0 	JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes: > Bill Gunshannon wrote:E >> If I voted more than once, I have no reason to believe that others3E >> haven't also voted more than once, so I would be a fool to put any C >> faith inthe resulting ballot, so yes, it pretty much proves that  >> the result is invalid.g > J > After I voted, I was presented with the voting results, and returning to- > the site automatically pesents the results.  > $ > here are the cookies they sent me: > F > www.securitypipeline.com	FALSE		FALSE	1144947324	160500005	160500005F > www.securitypipeline.com	FALSE		FALSE	1144971750	162401003	162401003 > F > I assume that each cookie is for one survey I filled (I answered the > second one too). > G > Today, I returned to the site and saw that it remembers I had already 6 > voted for the stuff on the spam legislation/spyware. > E > So those who hacked votes for VMS would have had to disable cookiesuG > and/or delete their cookies to vote again. I expect windows aor linuxl7 > weenies to do such things. But not VMS professionals.e   JF,>F   Go back and read the whole thread.  Not only did at least one personC start off by voting from three different browsers.  Other suggestedhD voting multiple times and someone specifically pointed out that they? were using a cookie to track voting and that it could be easilye	 defeated.a  A   I don't make this stuff up.  I said from the beginning that the"? poll was usless and meaningless  That has since been borne out.t   bill   -- rJ Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>   l   ------------------------------   Date: 15 Apr 2005 00:54:13 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)- Subject: Re: Operating System Security Surveyn, Message-ID: <3c8hlkF6kc6a3U1@individual.net>  B In article <1113526042.dfdcb78db472e85853af498224547d6e@teranews>,0 	JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes: > Bill Gunshannon wrote:I >>   Go back and read the whole thread.  Not only did at least one personeF >> start off by voting from three different browsers.  Other suggestedG >> voting multiple times and someone specifically pointed out that theyDB >> were using a cookie to track voting and that it could be easily >> defeated. > I > Just because you *can* cheat a poll doesn't mean that you should cheat.4  5 I agree completely.  Others don't share that opinion.s   bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 20:47:33 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> - Subject: Re: Operating System Security Survey B Message-ID: <1113526042.dfdcb78db472e85853af498224547d6e@teranews>   Bill Gunshannon wrote:H >   Go back and read the whole thread.  Not only did at least one personE > start off by voting from three different browsers.  Other suggested F > voting multiple times and someone specifically pointed out that theyA > were using a cookie to track voting and that it could be easily9 > defeated.6  G Just because you *can* cheat a poll doesn't mean that you should cheat.b   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 18:41:01 GMTe! From: Nigel Barker <nigel@hp.com>n) Subject: Re: OT: Race for dual core 8086sl8 Message-ID: <55et5117ietqof8oi2g2to2obfbpmdh48c@4ax.com>  K On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 20:28:43 -0400, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>h wrote:  F >AMD announced it would release dual core 64 bit 8086s. Now, Intel hasH >leaked news that it may release its dual core 8086 before that, leaving >IA64 behind in the dust.  >lI >Another example of how competition in the 8086 space will force Intel todF >bring its 64 bit 8086 up and that it won't be able to keep the marketI >spaces for IA64 and 8086 separate for very long. Already IA64 was pushedSE >aside for workstation and low/mid range systems, leaving it only fors >"big iron" systems.   An rx16xx is hardly 'big iron'!h   -- Nigel Barker Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:52:56 -0400h- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> ) Subject: Re: OT: Race for dual core 8086seB Message-ID: <1113511975.5c8526b465bb3fe28ee8222efbc2dea1@teranews>   Nigel Barker wrote:e! > An rx16xx is hardly 'big iron'!e  M Made before Intel admitted it had given on on IA64 for anything but big-iron.h   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 19:00:00 GMT06 From: "Andy Bustamante" <a_c_bustamante@earthlink.net>? Subject: Re: ridiculous GBLPAGES Autogen values under VMS 7.2-2-; Message-ID: <Q4z7e.1677$J12.891@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>@  6 I won't try to improve on the words of The Wizard, see. http://h71000.www7.hp.com/wizard/wiz_7752.html  F The new behavior uses a "trivial" amount of memory to solve a capacityJ issue.  GLBPAGES is one of my application key parameters.  Your ridiculous6 is some one else's not going to be problem ever again.   -- K     Andy Bustamante  Remove the ASCII 95s for e-mail     . <chessmaster1010@hotmail.com> wrote in message= news:1113338640.689275.276760@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...PC > When I have upgraded an Alpha from VMS 7.2-1 to VMS 7.2-2 AUTOGEN F > insists on setting GBLPAGES to ridiculously high values, higher than > the amount of system memory. >lC > The following is from AGEN$PARAMS.REPORT on an AS4100 with system # > memory of 2GB (4194304 pagelets).g > ! > GBLPAGES parameter information:m6 > - AUTOGEN parameter calculation has been overridden.G > The calculated value was 50397698. The value 50452146 will be used inh- > accordance with the following requirements:g' > GBLPAGES has been increased by 54448.e# > GBLPAGES minimum value is 150000.p > I > If I run AUTOGEN later with feedback it doesn't reduce it; it increasesv
 > it more: > ! > GBLPAGES parameter information:aE > Feedback information. Old value was 50452146, New value is 50577907  > Maximum used GBLPAGES: 2052160% > Global buffer requirements: 3145728o3 > Pagelets reserved for memory resident sections: 0y >pD > Does it hurt anything (i.e. waste memory) to leave GBLPAGES set soC > high? Should I manually set it to a reasonable number after everyo
 > AUTOGEN? >n   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Apr 2005 12:57:23 -0700' From: "ClaudeVMS" <claudevms@attbi.com>h2 Subject: SPX/GPR (WS01X/VS40X) graphics devices...C Message-ID: <1113508643.013689.156130@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>r  ? This is a follow up on the answer I got about UISX. My customerw? may have a copy of UISX but I am also interested in the detailss about these cards.  A I have searched for specs for these graphics cards and found onlye the following:   SPX is 1024x1280 GPX is 1024x864s   Both have 8-planes?-  ? Any additional information about these devices would be greatlyi
 apprieciated.(   Thanks in advance,  
 -ClaudeVMS   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 17:08:44 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>.6 Subject: Re: SPX/GPR (WS01X/VS40X) graphics devices...B Message-ID: <1113512921.5445fb887f96cd00b2efa7c7abf7ffba@teranews>   ClaudeVMS wrote: > A > This is a follow up on the answer I got about UISX. My customereA > may have a copy of UISX but I am also interested in the detailst > about these cards. > C > I have searched for specs for these graphics cards and found only  > the following: >  > SPX is 1024x1280 > GPX is 1024x864i >  > Both have 8-planes?e  / http://home.iae.nl/users/pb0aia/vax/vs3khw.htmlt  & The SPX can be set for various sizes.   E SPX is 8 plane 66hz at the above screen size but can also emulate GPXr through dip switches.m. GPX is 8 plane, 60hz at the above screen size.   ------------------------------  % Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 01:03:17 -0500e( From: Rich Jordan <duodec@speakeasy.net>Y Subject: Re: Third party IDE PCI-controller & OVMS V7.3-2 & DVD recording =>         succo2 Message-ID: <EKmdnUjwP9-w1sLfRVn-3Q@speakeasy.net>   Eberhard Heuser-Hofmann wrote: > Hi,t > U > For those people who are allowed/willing to run unsupported hardware configurations  > here's some info:d > A > There are many Alphas without having an onboard IDE-controller.i > M > I've tested successfully a "Advance Peripherals 29134 PCI" under OVMS 7.3-2s > with a Alphastion 500. >  > .. > + > If you have further question let me know.p > 
 > Eberhard  F How is the performance?  Can you tell what mode the card runs the IDE 7 bus and peripherals in (PIO, DMA, what speed)?  Thanks!g   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:41:00 -0400o- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>IY Subject: Re: VMS FAQ: changing volume label of system disk: DECnet MOP or LANCP boot datagB Message-ID: <1113511257.48b1dd24cf7f7c95af9639966ff81abd@teranews>   Michael Moroney wrote:J > MOP is an old protocol; it is what Digital used for network booting everG > since there even was network booting.  It is a separate protocol than F > DECnet's protocol.  You shouldn't think of "DECnet MOP" and "LANCP".K > It's all MOP, it's just a question of whether MOP is controlled by DECnet, > or LANCP.t    E But when you define MOP services in the DECNET database, isn't it theT, DECNET softwware that handles MOP requests ?  D i.e. isn't it the DECNET software that registers the MOP protocol idG with the ethernet card so that when a MOP request is broadcasted, it is D the running DECNET software that is handled the packet so the DECNETI software can then fulful the MOP request if the host is in its database ?a  H (the packets may not be DECNET protocol, but still handled by the DECNET software ?)-    E If DECNET isn't running and the MOP nodes are defined with NCP, is it = correct to state that MOP requests will not be responded to ?:   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Apr 2005 13:48:05 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)e) Subject: Re: VMS to Max OS X file sharing,3 Message-ID: <4avnLURy8wbs@eisner.encompasserve.org>n  W In article <3c79u8F6mpet0U3@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:i > H > My boss had the same problem trying to access a BSD filesystem mountedF > on a MAC with NFS.  I suspect there are either problems with the MACF > implementation or some wierd, non-standard option you have to use in' > order to get things mounted properly.!  C    I recall now that I had to specifically tell Mac OS X not to usewD    NFS3.  It wouldn't automatically try NFS2 when NFS3 failed, as it    should have.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:11:30 -0400o- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>b) Subject: Re: VMS to Max OS X file sharingaB Message-ID: <1113509493.87a649256c056d8ea5636af82482b59e@teranews>  G Out of curiosity, how does the file sharing on VMS handle all the weirdhD and wonderful names you can have on a MAC ? Does it handler accented( characters in a file name for instance ?  H (question applies to both ODS2 and ODS5 disks on VMS acting as stores).   H Or does it build container files that are independant of VMS file naming
 conventions ?t   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 22:23:57 +0100 & From: Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk>) Subject: Re: VMS to Max OS X file sharing-1 Message-ID: <140420052223578487%nospam@yrl.co.uk>c  E In article <1113509493.87a649256c056d8ea5636af82482b59e@teranews>, JFo+ Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote:1  I > Out of curiosity, how does the file sharing on VMS handle all the weirdwF > and wonderful names you can have on a MAC ? Does it handler accented* > characters in a file name for instance ? > J > (question applies to both ODS2 and ODS5 disks on VMS acting as stores).  > J > Or does it build container files that are independant of VMS file naming > conventions ?.  D I tried and failed to find an acceptable method of interworking OS XB file names and ODS5 conventions using FTP tools. VMS-style escapes& would get irrepairably double escaped.  E For backup from OS X to VMS, I simply place the backup into a pgpdisksB or dmg container while still on the Mac, give it a name that won'tF upset an ODS2 disk and ftp it over. ZIp is a useful alternative if you! want Windows users to see inside.   E Container files? Ahh... Pathworks for Macintosh! Those were the days.t   -- f1 To de-mung my e-mail address:- fsnospam$elliott$$sC PGP Fingerprint: 1A96 3CF7 637F 896B C810  E199 7E5C A9E4 8E59 E248r   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 00:02:19 GMTt6 From: "Kenneth Farmer" <kfarmer@NOSPAM.spyderbyte.com>" Subject: Want to be Heard by Hurd?> Message-ID: <fwD7e.57515$9v2.1514966@twister.southeast.rr.com>  M Mark Hurd took the reins at HP on April 1st, after a twenty-five year career tM at NCR. The appointment of Hurd indicates a sea-change in the way HP intends pG to do business in the future, and it represents an opportunity for the sF OpenVMS community to voice its issues and concerns to someone without L preconceived notions or the baggage that may have been there before. Hurd's D history indicates someone who is deliberate, stable, and loyal. His L background is in sales & marketing, but he was also a man with a vision and K the dedication to make it happen. He joined NCR immediately after college, rG and stayed with them until he was finally named CEO in 2001 - and then gL managed to turn the company around and grow it dramatically during a period + in time when tech companies were faltering.w  9 http://www.openvms.org/stories.php?story=05/04/14/0488856I     -- t   Kens   OpenVMS.org % _____________________________________m Kenneth R. Farmer <><l& SpyderByte: http://www.SpyderByte.com    ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 17:49:02 +0000 (UTC) P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)D Subject: Re: [OpenVMS] What do you expect from DIR/SIZ=(ALLO,USED) ?$ Message-ID: <d3maee$1jd$1@online.de>  F In article <425ec0ec@NEWS.LANGSTOEGER.AT>, peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes: e  = > What should one expect to see when entering the DCL commandh > # > $ DIRECTORY/SIZE=(ALLOCATED,USED)c  A %DCL-W-IVKEYW, unrecognized keyword - check validity and spellingS  \ALLOCATED\   :-)1   > 1) The same as with /SIZE=ALLnC > Note: On V7.3 there were only ALL, ALLOCATED and USED, but now onn   Should be ALLOCATION.g  3 Give us the output of HELP DIR/SIZE on your system.f   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Apr 2005 20:24:20 +01006 From: eplan@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)D Subject: Re: [OpenVMS] What do you expect from DIR/SIZ=(ALLO,USED) ?, Message-ID: <425ed174$1@NEWS.LANGSTOEGER.AT>  w In article <d3maee$1jd$1@online.de>, helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:iG >In article <425ec0ec@NEWS.LANGSTOEGER.AT>, peter@langstoeger.at (Peter  >'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes:  >l> >> What should one expect to see when entering the DCL command >>  $ >> $ DIRECTORY/SIZE=(ALLOCATED,USED) >iB >%DCL-W-IVKEYW, unrecognized keyword - check validity and spelling
 > \ALLOCATED\  >o >:-)   OK. S/ALLOCATED/ALLOCATION/WK That's the problem with always shortening commands (and not rereading HELP) , I should have writtne ALLO, just as I typed. Sorry.   So, Option 5 was correct ;-)   -- o Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGERe% Network and OpenVMS system specialisti E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Apr 2005 12:56:37 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)tK Subject: Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMp3 Message-ID: <AknK0QIV1LhU@eisner.encompasserve.org>   e In article <425eb68a$1@NEWS.LANGSTOEGER.AT>, peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes:o  E >>The tool to create self-extracting DCX archives has not been portedl >>to OpenVMS I64.  > ? > Yes, FTSV hasn't been ported to I64 (and unlikely ever will). @ > Isn't this another reason to switch to a tool available on all' > platforms (namely ZIP[SFX]) instead ?n  > The primary reason to avoid self-extracting archives should be security concerns.  G >>                  Since .PCSI$COMPRESSED kits offer the same level ofvD >>compression and are handled transparently by PRODUCT commands, theD >>decision was made to start shipping .PCSI$COMPRESSED kits from the+ >>HP download site for both I64 and Alpha.    E > But only for some kits. A bunch of other kits (say CSWB, CSWS, ...)h> > are already in ZIPSFX. So why use different methods at all ?  8 Why use any of this when VMSINSTAL already exists ?  :-)  E > I see ZIP as _the_ improvement and it would also has less confusioni > during transition...  B I see no ZIP utility shipping with VMS, and some security policies do not allow running Freeward.   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 14:01:49 -0500 (CDT)h* From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)K Subject: Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMi2 Message-ID: <05041414014907_2860027B@antinode.org>  - From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)n  @ > The primary reason to avoid self-extracting archives should be > security concerns.  E    An Info-ZIP self-extracting Zip archive may be non-self extracted,bB too.  It's a feature.  It also allows the contents of wrong-system7 self-extracting archives to be extracted.  For example:    alp $ run MIATASG.EXEi3 %DCL-W-ACTIMAGE, error activating image MIATASG.EXE A -CLI-E-IMGNAME, image file ALP$DKA0:[SMS.ALPSTA.PWS]MIATASG.EXE;108 -IMGACT-F-NOTNATIVE, image is not an OpenVMS Alpha image  G    DUMP suggests, "This is a Windows self-extracting ZIP file.  You can G run it from Windows or unzip it with a utility like WinZip or PKUNZIP."e   alp $ unzip6c -t MIATASG.EXE0 Archive:  ALP$DKA0:[SMS.ALPSTA.PWS]MIATASG.EXE;1(     testing: dpws_aau/IMAGES/         OK*     testing: dpws_aau/IMAGES/logo.gif   OK.     testing: dpws_aau/IMAGES/perswork.jpg   OK [...]t  D > I see no ZIP utility shipping with VMS, and some security policies  > do not allow running Freeward.  C    If HP can supply CDRECORD, I suspect that they could also supplyu/ [Un]Zip.  The cost should be pretty reasonable.V  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547n   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Apr 2005 21:44:27 +01006 From: eplan@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)K Subject: Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMe, Message-ID: <425ee43b$1@NEWS.LANGSTOEGER.AT>  c In article <AknK0QIV1LhU@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:of >In article <425eb68a$1@NEWS.LANGSTOEGER.AT>, peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes:@ >> Yes, FTSV hasn't been ported to I64 (and unlikely ever will).A >> Isn't this another reason to switch to a tool available on all ( >> platforms (namely ZIP[SFX]) instead ? >I? >The primary reason to avoid self-extracting archives should bet >security concerns.n   Why ? I just don't bite.  H If it is the .EXE you won't trust, then UNZIP it with your own certifiedL UNZIP.EXE. (You know, this is the major reason for the invention of ZIPSFX).A If it is the content you won't trust, then why bother downloadingp+ or installing the kit (eg. patches) at all.S  D btw. How to verify/certify the content of a .PCSI[$COMPRESSED] kit ?I Why is a DCX compressed kit (instead of a ZIPped one) easier to certify ?i. In the end, it is a self-extracting archive...  H >>>                  Since .PCSI$COMPRESSED kits offer the same level ofE >>>compression and are handled transparently by PRODUCT commands, thevE >>>decision was made to start shipping .PCSI$COMPRESSED kits from the , >>>HP download site for both I64 and Alpha.  >-F >> But only for some kits. A bunch of other kits (say CSWB, CSWS, ...)? >> are already in ZIPSFX. So why use different methods at all ?  >e9 >Why use any of this when VMSINSTAL already exists ?  :-)-  I PRODUCT REMOVE (or in case of ECOs PRODUCT UNDO) is the major reason :-))e  F >> I see ZIP as _the_ improvement and it would also has less confusion >> during transition...8 >cC >I see no ZIP utility shipping with VMS, and some security policieso >do not allow running Freeward.e  ' Shipping ZIP with VMS is a possibility.eK Shipping a ZIP/UNZIP .PCSI Kit from VMS engineering is another possibility.oH Too bad that some security policies don't allow patches alltogether ;-)    -- s Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGERr% Network and OpenVMS system specialist. E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Apr 2005 15:07:38 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)tK Subject: Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COM 3 Message-ID: <cNHztyogrwwn@eisner.encompasserve.org>c  _ In article <05041414014907_2860027B@antinode.org>, sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda) writes:t/ > From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)d  E >> I see no ZIP utility shipping with VMS, and some security policiest! >> do not allow running Freeward.e > E >    If HP can supply CDRECORD, I suspect that they could also supply 1 > [Un]Zip.  The cost should be pretty reasonable.v  < But there is no way for them to retroactively ship it on all5 versions of VMS back to V3.n (Backup) or V6.1 (PCSI).a   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Apr 2005 15:11:21 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)nK Subject: Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COM,3 Message-ID: <icKkdlr6qIMP@eisner.encompasserve.org>-  e In article <425ee43b$1@NEWS.LANGSTOEGER.AT>, eplan@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes:ne > In article <AknK0QIV1LhU@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:0g >>In article <425eb68a$1@NEWS.LANGSTOEGER.AT>, peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes:lA >>> Yes, FTSV hasn't been ported to I64 (and unlikely ever will).nB >>> Isn't this another reason to switch to a tool available on all) >>> platforms (namely ZIP[SFX]) instead ?  >>@ >>The primary reason to avoid self-extracting archives should be >>security concerns. >  > Why ? I just don't bite. > J > If it is the .EXE you won't trust, then UNZIP it with your own certified > UNZIP.EXE.  ) Then it is not a self-extracting archive.g  C > (You know, this is the major reason for the invention of ZIPSFX).u  D Of course I don't know that, since I never heard that term until you just wrote it.  C > If it is the content you won't trust, then why bother downloadings- > or installing the kit (eg. patches) at all.-  E If one gets data from a questionable source (the Internet), it may be E possible to unpack it with a tool of known integrity and then examinei
 the contents.s  F > btw. How to verify/certify the content of a .PCSI[$COMPRESSED] kit ?  > VMS Development is aware of that problem and have responded toD customer questions at the VMS Symposium in a non-disclosure setting.  ) > Shipping ZIP with VMS is a possibility.s  4 Not with all the versions that have already shipped.   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 23:05:26 GMTs  From: John Santos <john@egh.com>K Subject: Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COM-, Message-ID: <WGC7e.11180$Zn3.10330@trnddc02>   Larry Kilgallen wrote:g > In article <425ee43b$1@NEWS.LANGSTOEGER.AT>, eplan@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes:o > e >>In article <AknK0QIV1LhU@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:e >>h >>>In article <425eb68a$1@NEWS.LANGSTOEGER.AT>, peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes: >>>mA >>>>Yes, FTSV hasn't been ported to I64 (and unlikely ever will).nB >>>>Isn't this another reason to switch to a tool available on all) >>>>platforms (namely ZIP[SFX]) instead ?v >>>hA >>>The primary reason to avoid self-extracting archives should be- >>>security concerns.o >> >>Why ? I just don't bite. >>J >>If it is the .EXE you won't trust, then UNZIP it with your own certified >>UNZIP.EXE. >  > + > Then it is not a self-extracting archive.   C I think the point is that UNZIP knows how to handle self-extractingaA archives, i.e. ignore the code and unpack the archive part of they@ file.  So if FOO.EXE is reputed to be a self-extracting archive,B then "$ run foo" will extract it (if really is what it purports to> be), "$ run foo" will trash your system if it is a trojan, andE "$ unzip foo.exe" will extract it if really is a zip archive, even if'G the executable code has been munged by a cracker, and "$ unzip foo.exe"O; will complain if it doesn't actually contain a zip archive.t  @ This is my understanding; can someone who knows for sure confirm this?g  B Also, this implies that you can unzip a self-extracting archive onA another architecture, e.g. unzip an Alpha executable on a VAX, ort> even on a Unix or M$ system.  (Though you'll lose the VMS file% attributes if you do this.)  Experts?t   >  > C >>(You know, this is the major reason for the invention of ZIPSFX).s >  > F > Of course I don't know that, since I never heard that term until you > just wrote it. >  > C >>If it is the content you won't trust, then why bother downloadingr- >>or installing the kit (eg. patches) at all.c >  > G > If one gets data from a questionable source (the Internet), it may be G > possible to unpack it with a tool of known integrity and then examinei > the contents.d >  > F >>btw. How to verify/certify the content of a .PCSI[$COMPRESSED] kit ? >  > @ > VMS Development is aware of that problem and have responded toF > customer questions at the VMS Symposium in a non-disclosure setting. >  > ) >>Shipping ZIP with VMS is a possibility.r >n6 > Not with all the versions that have already shipped.  C Isn't it on the freeware CD?  Also, GNV is on the Open Source Toolsf@ CD-ROM (at least in V8.2).  GNV includes unzip 5.42.  (At least,7 the version I have installed on my V7.3-2 system does.)   @ There is a big disclaimer in the V8.2 cover letter about lack ofD any warranty for GNV, which might be an issue.  Sources are includedF (or at least they were in the version I downloaded for V7.3-2; haven't installed V8.2 yet.)   -- h John Santosa Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 19:35:35 -0500 (CDT) * From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)K Subject: Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMh2 Message-ID: <05041419353544_2860027B@antinode.org>    From: John Santos <john@egh.com>  E > I think the point is that UNZIP knows how to handle self-extractingwC > archives, i.e. ignore the code and unpack the archive part of themB > file.  So if FOO.EXE is reputed to be a self-extracting archive,D > then "$ run foo" will extract it (if really is what it purports to@ > be), "$ run foo" will trash your system if it is a trojan, andG > "$ unzip foo.exe" will extract it if really is a zip archive, even ifeI > the executable code has been munged by a cracker, and "$ unzip foo.exe"i= > will complain if it doesn't actually contain a zip archive.e > B > This is my understanding; can someone who knows for sure confirm > this?s  (    Yes, as I thought I had demonstrated.  D > Also, this implies that you can unzip a self-extracting archive onC > another architecture, e.g. unzip an Alpha executable on a VAX, or @ > even on a Unix or M$ system.  (Though you'll lose the VMS file' > attributes if you do this.)  Experts?a  D    If the VMS/RMS attributes were saved when the archive was createdH (Zip -V), then they should be there after extraction by UnZip on any VMS system.1  H    UnZip on a non-VMS system will ignore these VMS/RMS attributes, as itB would have nowhere to put them.  And until recently, the file dataD would be corrupted (NUL-padded to a 16KB multiple) as well, but thatB problem should be fixed in the latest Info-ZIP [Un]Zip release(s).  E    DVD-size files (>2GB) would need to use Zip 3.x and UnZip 6.x, notr
 yet released.u  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-orge    Saint Paul  MN  55105-25472   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 01:53:21 GMT(  From: John Santos <john@egh.com>K Subject: Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMe) Message-ID: <l8F7e.1081$c93.526@trnddc08>w   Steven M. Schweda wrote:" > From: John Santos <john@egh.com> > E >>I think the point is that UNZIP knows how to handle self-extractingoC >>archives, i.e. ignore the code and unpack the archive part of the-B >>file.  So if FOO.EXE is reputed to be a self-extracting archive,D >>then "$ run foo" will extract it (if really is what it purports to@ >>be), "$ run foo" will trash your system if it is a trojan, andG >>"$ unzip foo.exe" will extract it if really is a zip archive, even ifpI >>the executable code has been munged by a cracker, and "$ unzip foo.exe"e= >>will complain if it doesn't actually contain a zip archive.l >>B >>This is my understanding; can someone who knows for sure confirm >>this?m >  > * >    Yes, as I thought I had demonstrated.  C Yup, for some reason my browser didn't thread your response in withC? the rest of the posts, so I didn't see it until after I posted.    > D >>Also, this implies that you can unzip a self-extracting archive onC >>another architecture, e.g. unzip an Alpha executable on a VAX, orn@ >>even on a Unix or M$ system.  (Though you'll lose the VMS file' >>attributes if you do this.)  Experts?  >  > F >    If the VMS/RMS attributes were saved when the archive was createdJ > (Zip -V), then they should be there after extraction by UnZip on any VMS	 > system.: > J >    UnZip on a non-VMS system will ignore these VMS/RMS attributes, as itD > would have nowhere to put them.  And until recently, the file dataF > would be corrupted (NUL-padded to a 16KB multiple) as well, but thatD > problem should be fixed in the latest Info-ZIP [Un]Zip release(s). >   G Your earlier post also answered this question (or most of it).  Thanks.   D Good to know about the potential padding problem and how to fix.  IsB that a problem with the VMS-Zip-made archive or the non-VMS unzip?C (Is Info-ZIP a purely VMS [un]zip, which would imply the problem is,D on the VMS zipping side, or is it a generic ZIP/UNZIP package, which leaves my question open?),    G >    DVD-size files (>2GB) would need to use Zip 3.x and UnZip 6.x, not1 > yet released.r > J > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > 6 >    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98185 >    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-orgb >    Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547      --   John Santosu Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:18:16 -0500i2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>K Subject: Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMo+ Message-ID: <425F2468.A5C3EB84@comcast.net>M   John Santos wrote: >  > Larry Kilgallen wrote:i > > In article <425ee43b$1@NEWS.LANGSTOEGER.AT>, eplan@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes:  > > g > >>In article <AknK0QIV1LhU@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:r > >>j > >>>In article <425eb68a$1@NEWS.LANGSTOEGER.AT>, peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes: > >>>dC > >>>>Yes, FTSV hasn't been ported to I64 (and unlikely ever will).pD > >>>>Isn't this another reason to switch to a tool available on all+ > >>>>platforms (namely ZIP[SFX]) instead ?- > >>>bC > >>>The primary reason to avoid self-extracting archives should beo > >>>security concerns.  > >> > >>Why ? I just don't bite. > >>L > >>If it is the .EXE you won't trust, then UNZIP it with your own certified > >>UNZIP.EXE. > >e > >y- > > Then it is not a self-extracting archive.a > E > I think the point is that UNZIP knows how to handle self-extracting,C > archives, i.e. ignore the code and unpack the archive part of the B > file.  So if FOO.EXE is reputed to be a self-extracting archive,D > then "$ run foo" will extract it (if really is what it purports to@ > be), "$ run foo" will trash your system if it is a trojan, andG > "$ unzip foo.exe" will extract it if really is a zip archive, even ifpI > the executable code has been munged by a cracker, and "$ unzip foo.exe"y= > will complain if it doesn't actually contain a zip archive.: > B > This is my understanding; can someone who knows for sure confirm > this?w > D > Also, this implies that you can unzip a self-extracting archive onC > another architecture, e.g. unzip an Alpha executable on a VAX, or @ > even on a Unix or M$ system.  (Though you'll lose the VMS file' > attributes if you do this.)  Experts?o  ? Well, I believe Steve Schweda is the current resident expert...c  D Anyway, the point is this: even if the Self-extracting .EXE is a VAXG executable, and you are trying to unpack it on I64, naturally, the .EXEuD can't be run; but UNZIP for I64 can still extract the content of the archive.  D As to whether it's a self-extract, well, it is, and it isn't. On theF platform appropriate to the executable stub, yes, it's a self-extract.B On any other platform, it's a compressed archive with garbage data pre-pended.i   --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page:l" http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/i  " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/    Coming soon:& Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:12:16 -0500-2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>K Subject: Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COMs+ Message-ID: <425F2300.269E2629@comcast.net>6   Hoff Hoffman wrote:  > j > In article <i5e7e.3755$HO2.2128@news.cpqcorp.net>, hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com (Charlie Hammond) writes: > F > :The tool to create self-extracting DCX archives has not been ported > :to OpenVMS I64... > K >   The tool used is FTSV, and it is available on the Freeware V7.0 distro.  > H >   The FTSV tool uses knowledge of the VAX and Alpha image headers, andE >   this use precludes the direct translation of the image for use onaH >   OpenVMS I64 -- and the changes made to the image headers for OpenVMSI >   I64 also means that a straight source code port isn't a trivial task.l  F As other posters have noted, Phil Katz's compression algorithms, whileH "not invented here" (at DEC) are more efficient. The typical DCX archiveH (.%LB, .PCSI$COMPRESSED, etc.) squeezes down about 20% to 40% when I use+ ZIP/VMS/LEVEL=8 (equivalent to "DeflateX").-  F ZIP SFX's are just .ZIP archives with an executable pre-pended. If theH .EXE is wrong for your platform, UNZIP can still do the extract for you.  < ...and I believe that ZIP and UNZIP have been ported to I64.   My $0.02...i   -- h David J Dachtera dba DJE Systemst http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page:t" http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/t  " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/e   Coming soon:& Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:29:32 -0500 (CDT)e* From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)K Subject: Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COM-2 Message-ID: <05041421293191_2860027B@antinode.org>    From: John Santos <john@egh.com>  , > >    Yes, as I thought I had demonstrated. > E > Yup, for some reason my browser didn't thread your response in with A > the rest of the posts, so I didn't see it until after I posted.a  <    I use the Info-VAX e-mail gateway, which loses some info.  F > Good to know about the potential padding problem and how to fix.  IsD > that a problem with the VMS-Zip-made archive or the non-VMS unzip?E > (Is Info-ZIP a purely VMS [un]zip, which would imply the problem isaF > on the VMS zipping side, or is it a generic ZIP/UNZIP package, which > leaves my question open?)g  F    It was a bug in the old Zip -V on VMS.  The VMS/RMS attributes wereB all ok, but the plain-old size datum (used on non-VMS systems) wasF wrong in the archive, which confounded the foreign UnZip programs.  OnB VMS, UnZip used the size from the VMS/RMS attributes (ignoring the0 generic size datum), so the results were better.  A    There was a long, rambling, often pointless ("A point in every H direction is the same as no point at all.") discussion here a while ago,F when I first noticed the problem and started down the road to Info-ZIPB expertise (cough).  Search for 'ZIP "-V" v. UNIX, et al.: Problem," possible solutions.', if you dare.  D    The Info-ZIP [Un]Zip programs are very widely ported, but they doE have a good deal of VMS-specific code (and even some VMS-accomodation76 code for non-VMS systems).  For an excess of info, tryF "http://www.info-zip.org", although it seems to be dead for the nonce.  H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-25474   ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 02:42:59 GMTa  From: John Santos <john@egh.com>K Subject: Re: [PCSI] PACKAGE vs COPY, was How to compress .PCSI to .PCSI$COM + Message-ID: <TSF7e.11209$Zn3.7692@trnddc02>h   David J Dachtera wrote:R > John Santos wrote: >  >>Larry Kilgallen wrote: >>h >>>In article <425ee43b$1@NEWS.LANGSTOEGER.AT>, eplan@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes: >>>e >>> g >>>>In article <AknK0QIV1LhU@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:e >>>> >>>>j >>>>>In article <425eb68a$1@NEWS.LANGSTOEGER.AT>, peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes: >>>>>  >>>>>kC >>>>>>Yes, FTSV hasn't been ported to I64 (and unlikely ever will).mD >>>>>>Isn't this another reason to switch to a tool available on all+ >>>>>>platforms (namely ZIP[SFX]) instead ?: >>>>>0C >>>>>The primary reason to avoid self-extracting archives should beo >>>>>security concerns.  >>>> >>>>Why ? I just don't bite. >>>>L >>>>If it is the .EXE you won't trust, then UNZIP it with your own certified >>>>UNZIP.EXE. >>>o >>>U, >>>Then it is not a self-extracting archive. >>E >>I think the point is that UNZIP knows how to handle self-extractinghC >>archives, i.e. ignore the code and unpack the archive part of the1B >>file.  So if FOO.EXE is reputed to be a self-extracting archive,D >>then "$ run foo" will extract it (if really is what it purports to@ >>be), "$ run foo" will trash your system if it is a trojan, andG >>"$ unzip foo.exe" will extract it if really is a zip archive, even if I >>the executable code has been munged by a cracker, and "$ unzip foo.exe"-= >>will complain if it doesn't actually contain a zip archive.a >>B >>This is my understanding; can someone who knows for sure confirm >>this?- >>D >>Also, this implies that you can unzip a self-extracting archive onC >>another architecture, e.g. unzip an Alpha executable on a VAX, or @ >>even on a Unix or M$ system.  (Though you'll lose the VMS file' >>attributes if you do this.)  Experts?h >  > A > Well, I believe Steve Schweda is the current resident expert...a >   = Yup, and he answered all my questions before I asked them :-) @ (Unfortunate threading problem that has now caused about 6 extra1 posts.  But that's the great usenet tradition ;-)x  F > Anyway, the point is this: even if the Self-extracting .EXE is a VAXI > executable, and you are trying to unpack it on I64, naturally, the .EXE F > can't be run; but UNZIP for I64 can still extract the content of the
 > archive. > F > As to whether it's a self-extract, well, it is, and it isn't. On theH > platform appropriate to the executable stub, yes, it's a self-extract.D > On any other platform, it's a compressed archive with garbage data
 > pre-pended.  >      -- n John Santoss Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2005.209 ************************