1 INFO-VAX	Sat, 30 Apr 2005	Volume 2005 : Issue 240       Contents: Re: DEC/MMJ connectors Re: DEC/MMJ connectors% Re: FTP oddity for case sensitiveness 9 Re: HP Athlon 64 laptop for $1000 - oh if only it ran VMS 9 Re: HP Athlon 64 laptop for $1000 - oh if only it ran VMS C Re: Lexical function to set environmental variables of AlphaStation C Re: Lexical function to set environmental variables of AlphaStation 8 Re: Maybe HP should get out of the hardware business....8 Re: Maybe HP should get out of the hardware business....8 Re: Maybe HP should get out of the hardware business....8 Re: Maybe HP should get out of the hardware business....8 Re: Maybe HP should get out of the hardware business...., more questions on Cyrillic fonts and Mozilla RE: Processor scheduling$ Re: Sandia says alpha the best chip!$ Re: Sandia says alpha the best chip!$ Re: Sandia says alpha the best chip!$ Re: Sandia says alpha the best chip! Re: Setting up an NTP server Re: Slow Filesystem I/O  Re: Slow Filesystem I/O  Re: Slow Filesystem I/O % SYS$SYSROOT and similar logical names ) Re: SYS$SYSROOT and similar logical names ) Re: SYS$SYSROOT and similar logical names + Re: What is Different or Special About VMS? + Re: What is Different or Special About VMS? + Re: What is Different or Special About VMS? + Re: What is Different or Special About VMS? + RE: What is Different or Special About VMS?   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 11:01:13 -0500 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> Subject: Re: DEC/MMJ connectors + Message-ID: <4273ABC9.CBC3DC82@comcast.net>    Dave Froble wrote: >  > GreyCloud wrote:> > > Does anyone know where I can get a 6-pin DEC/MMJ to female > > db25 cable??2 > > I managed to acquire an unused VT420 terminal. > I > I'm thinking that you may be mistaken on what you need.  The VLC, if my $ > memory is any good, takes an MMJ.   ( ...and has a DB25M serial port, as well.  # > VT-420s also accept up to 2 MMJs.   ? Some variants also have a DB25M. Likewise, some VT320 and VT510 
 terminals.  I > This allows for two sessions on the terminal.  This capability can also ? > be provided by some (most) of the DECserver terminal servers.  > G > Unless I'm mistaken, you need a flat 6-conductor cable with an MMJ on H > each end.  The MMJs are reversed, ie; one end with the tab up, and theI > tab down at the other end.  This flips xmit/recv, gnd/gnd, and DTR/DSR.  > I > I think there may have been an international model of the VT-420 with a  > DB25 connection.  E Quite. Indeed, there was, to the best of my recollection (doesn't say  much, I know...).    --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: " http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/    Coming soon:& Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 12:56:06 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com>  Subject: Re: DEC/MMJ connectors 0 Message-ID: <1177e52csnkvr8c@corp.supernews.com>   JF Mezei wrote:  > Dave Froble wrote: > M >>I've got all kinds of cables laying around.  The connectors and tools also.  >  > E > Aren't you affaid someone might sue you if they trip over all those $ > cables you've left lying around ?  >  > :-)   8 Nope.  I shoot trespassers and bury them in the back 40.  H My biggest problem is keeping track of unused space in the back 40.  :-)   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 15:19:47 GMT * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>. Subject: Re: FTP oddity for case sensitiveness2 Message-ID: <nmNce.4770$Ls3.1504@news.cpqcorp.net>  : "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message< news:1114818831.5ad36c95c5ec4447569e1ce7c261204b@teranews... > FredK wrote:H > > I can think of a couple reasons not to.  But to me the best one is -I > > because it solves a non-problem which has no impact to the useability K > > or functionality of the product.  FTP provides two completely different  > > syntaxes  Posix and VMS. >  > J > Point is that it doesn't seem efficient to have two separate portions of > code to parse a command. > J > You'd think they would have integrated this in the same portion of code.  E Actually it would probably make it more complicated than it is worth, @ and it isn't a place to worry about "efficiency" in performance.   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Apr 2005 03:01:25 -0700 From: icerq4a@spray.seB Subject: Re: HP Athlon 64 laptop for $1000 - oh if only it ran VMSC Message-ID: <1114853085.782836.218110@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>    Dave Froble wrote: > Dr. Dweeb wrote:) > > <jordan@ccs4vms.com> wrote in message A > > news:1114443928.521093.220290@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...  > >  > >>Alan Greig wrote:  > >>B > >>>Thanks to the Inquirer I've just noticed HP is selling the HP R4000 F > >>>laptop with Athlon 64 3200+ for approx $1000. This should also be > >> > >>able > >>A > >>>to handle the two core mobile Athlon 64 when launched with a  simple > >>>BIOS upgrade. > >>> F > >>>Another HP offering that would make a damn fine VMS system if not for 4 > >>>the slight inconvenience of the lack of a port. > >>A > >>Of course back when the Alpha was killed we were regaled with 	 fantasies F > >>of inexpensive (because they were the "Industry Standard") itaniumF > >>systems that would finally push VMS into more affordable ranges onE > >>non-proprietary hardware. Even laptops were discussed as probable B > >>options down the road when they got the heat and power demands down.  > >>G > >>No port would have been required because it would have already been 	 > >>done.  > >> > >  > > C > > Not wishing to rain on the parade, but is there someone who has  actually> > > gone through the exercise of comparing the current Itanium
 offerings and E > > price points with the current Alph offerings and price points for  machinesC > > of similar performance characteristics to determine whether the 
 Itanium isA > > currently a better price performance choice than the Alpha ??  > > F > > I do not think that this is likely true for 8-way or over systems, but itE > > may already be for smaller boxes - but I admit to having no clue.  > >  > > Dr. Dweeb. > >  > >  > G > Just recently I read about some prices for itanics.  The figure $3900   E > was used for one of the CPUs, not sure which one, possibly a future  dualC > core model.  Then again, maybe that was a Xeon, since I think the ( > article was comparing Xeon and itanic.  9 A suggestion is that you take a look at Intels pricelist. - http://www.intel.com/intel/finance/pricelist/   ( Itanium 2 prices are from $530 to $4227.# Xeon/Xeon MP prices go up to $3692.    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 11:31:23 GMT ! From: Nigel Barker <nigel@hp.com> B Subject: Re: HP Athlon 64 laptop for $1000 - oh if only it ran VMS8 Message-ID: <knp6715h606e4v2iiiijircqup177oge9d@4ax.com>  6 On 30 Apr 2005 03:01:25 -0700, icerq4a@spray.se wrote:   >  >Dave Froble wrote:  >> Dr. Dweeb wrote: * >> > <jordan@ccs4vms.com> wrote in messageB >> > news:1114443928.521093.220290@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... >> > >> >>Alan Greig wrote: >> >> C >> >>>Thanks to the Inquirer I've just noticed HP is selling the HP  >R4000G >> >>>laptop with Athlon 64 3200+ for approx $1000. This should also be  >> >> 	 >> >>able  >> >> B >> >>>to handle the two core mobile Athlon 64 when launched with a >simple  >> >>>BIOS upgrade.  >> >>>G >> >>>Another HP offering that would make a damn fine VMS system if not  >for5 >> >>>the slight inconvenience of the lack of a port.  >> >> B >> >>Of course back when the Alpha was killed we were regaled with
 >fantasiesG >> >>of inexpensive (because they were the "Industry Standard") itanium G >> >>systems that would finally push VMS into more affordable ranges on F >> >>non-proprietary hardware. Even laptops were discussed as probableC >> >>options down the road when they got the heat and power demands  >down. >> >> H >> >>No port would have been required because it would have already been
 >> >>done. >> >>  >> > >> >D >> > Not wishing to rain on the parade, but is there someone who has	 >actually ? >> > gone through the exercise of comparing the current Itanium  >offerings andF >> > price points with the current Alph offerings and price points for	 >machines D >> > of similar performance characteristics to determine whether the >Itanium is B >> > currently a better price performance choice than the Alpha ?? >> >G >> > I do not think that this is likely true for 8-way or over systems,  >but it F >> > may already be for smaller boxes - but I admit to having no clue. >> > >> > Dr. Dweeb.  >> > >> > >>H >> Just recently I read about some prices for itanics.  The figure $3900 > F >> was used for one of the CPUs, not sure which one, possibly a future >dual D >> core model.  Then again, maybe that was a Xeon, since I think the) >> article was comparing Xeon and itanic.  > : >A suggestion is that you take a look at Intels pricelist.. >http://www.intel.com/intel/finance/pricelist/ > ) >Itanium 2 prices are from $530 to $4227. $ >Xeon/Xeon MP prices go up to $3692.  H Very interesting. In fact apart from a few parts that are about $4K & 2KP respectively all Itanium chips are about $1K or less while only the 2GHz Xeon MPF is under $1K. In fact the 1.3/3M CPUs in my rx2620 are only $530 each.   -- Nigel Barker Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 08:26:58 -0700 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> L Subject: Re: Lexical function to set environmental variables of AlphaStation( Message-ID: <opsp1w68zvzgicya@hyrrokkin>  6 On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:33:13 -0500, David J Dachtera  " <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> wrote:   > Meat Loaf wrote: >> >> Rudolf Wingert wrote: >> >> > Hello,  >> >I >> > AFAIK there is an undocumented lexical function to set environmental 5 >> > variables. Does anybody know how it can be done?  >> > >> > TIA and regards R. Wingert  >>D >>   F$CONTEXT  F$CSID     F$CVSI     F$CVTIME   F$CVUI     F$DEVICE> >>   F$DIRECTORY           F$EDIT     F$ELEMENT  F$ENVIRONMENTD >>   F$EXTRACT  F$FAO      F$FILE_ATTRIBUTES     F$GETDVI   F$GETJPID >>   F$GETQUI   F$GETSYI   F$IDENTIFIER          F$INTEGER  F$LENGTHA >>   F$LOCATE   F$MESSAGE  F$MODE                F$PARSE    F$PID D >>   F$PRIVILEGE           F$PROCESS  F$SEARCH   F$SETPRV   F$STRING9 >>   F$TIME     F$TRNLNM   F$TYPE     F$USER     F$VERIFY  >>D >> These are the only lexicals on my 6.2 and 7.3 Alpha's.  Was there5 >> something that you were trying to do specifically?  > E > F$GETENV() is present all the way back to at least V7.2, but is not ! > documented in the on-line HELP.  > E > I'll have to find the address to TELNET to the V8.2 nodes on the HP I > TestDrive cluster and check it out there. Dunno if F$SETENV() ever made  > it into a production release.  > , http://www-vms.gsi.de/HELP/LEXICALS/F_GETENV   On 7.3# FREJA> echo f$getenv("auto_action")  BOOT   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 10:58:32 -0500 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>L Subject: Re: Lexical function to set environmental variables of AlphaStation* Message-ID: <4273AB28.7ACA18A@comcast.net>   Tom Linden wrote:  > 6 > On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:33:13 -0500, David J Dachtera$ > <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> wrote: >  > > Meat Loaf wrote: > >> > >> Rudolf Wingert wrote: > >>
 > >> > Hello,  > >> >K > >> > AFAIK there is an undocumented lexical function to set environmental 7 > >> > variables. Does anybody know how it can be done?  > >> >! > >> > TIA and regards R. Wingert  > >>F > >>   F$CONTEXT  F$CSID     F$CVSI     F$CVTIME   F$CVUI     F$DEVICE@ > >>   F$DIRECTORY           F$EDIT     F$ELEMENT  F$ENVIRONMENTF > >>   F$EXTRACT  F$FAO      F$FILE_ATTRIBUTES     F$GETDVI   F$GETJPIF > >>   F$GETQUI   F$GETSYI   F$IDENTIFIER          F$INTEGER  F$LENGTHC > >>   F$LOCATE   F$MESSAGE  F$MODE                F$PARSE    F$PID F > >>   F$PRIVILEGE           F$PROCESS  F$SEARCH   F$SETPRV   F$STRING; > >>   F$TIME     F$TRNLNM   F$TYPE     F$USER     F$VERIFY  > >>F > >> These are the only lexicals on my 6.2 and 7.3 Alpha's.  Was there7 > >> something that you were trying to do specifically?  > > G > > F$GETENV() is present all the way back to at least V7.2, but is not # > > documented in the on-line HELP.  > > G > > I'll have to find the address to TELNET to the V8.2 nodes on the HP K > > TestDrive cluster and check it out there. Dunno if F$SETENV() ever made ! > > it into a production release.  > > . > http://www-vms.gsi.de/HELP/LEXICALS/F_GETENV >  > On 7.3% > FREJA> echo f$getenv("auto_action")  > BOOT  > Hhhmmm... How 'bout F$SETENV, which is what the OP is seeking?   --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: " http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/    Coming soon:& Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Apr 2005 00:08:43 -0700 From: icerq4a@spray.seA Subject: Re: Maybe HP should get out of the hardware business.... C Message-ID: <1114844923.861673.120010@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>    Bill Todd wrote: > icerq4a@spray.se wrote:  > > " (also important E > > there, at least compared with the MP bus-strangulation which Xeon F > > experienced:  ever wonder why we never saw anything smaller than a. > > 4-processor Itanic submission in TPC-C?)," > > @ > > Well, atleast I have and it is still on the TPC-C list, with
 Madison 3M > > 1.3Ghz CPUs. > E > Why, so it is.  The list being so large, I usually don't notice new G > submissions unless they fall *somewhere* near the top of their class.  > ? > And this submission does not - by a lot.  I guess HP was more 
 interestedE > in providing a low-cost system than a high-performance one - though  evenE > there, HP's own dual-Xeon system submitted only a month later beats  it< > on both $/tpmC *and* tpmC, so it's not exactly persuasive.  C Yes, the tpmcC is certainly not outstanding, but if one look at the 9 response times it is much lower than the x86 submissions.    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Apr 2005 00:43:21 -0700 From: icerq4a@spray.seA Subject: Re: Maybe HP should get out of the hardware business.... C Message-ID: <1114847001.528803.290420@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   E x86 is already on the way scale to the level of IA64, IBM has a large D system, Unisys have, Sun is doing a midrange (16-way) system. FutureE high-end systems for commercial use may not have more than 16-sockets B since there are lots of cores on future chips. The latest rumour IE heard was that no system builder have a plan to buy the Opteron Horus B chipset, which is sad, but that does not mean that we will not see larger x86 systems.   G Chipsets are very expensive to make and take a lot of time to validate. D As for enterprise features, Intel may still be able to differentiateD it's chips. AMD cannot really afford to make as large dies as Intel.F Intel may choose to have more stuff on it's IA64 chips, such as cores, cache, better RAS features.   D I would like to buy Proliant systems with IA64 chips in a few years.F The common platform is a good way to get the costs down, since IA64 is not a high-volume ISA.   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Apr 2005 07:49:16 -0700* From: "Alan Greig" <greigaln@netscape.net>A Subject: Re: Maybe HP should get out of the hardware business.... C Message-ID: <1114872556.819634.170670@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>    icer...@spray.se wrote: G > x86 is already on the way scale to the level of IA64, IBM has a large F > system, Unisys have, Sun is doing a midrange (16-way) system. FutureG > high-end systems for commercial use may not have more than 16-sockets D > since there are lots of cores on future chips. The latest rumour IG > heard was that no system builder have a plan to buy the Opteron Horus D > chipset, which is sad, but that does not mean that we will not see > larger x86 systems.   E If nobody builds Horus based systems it may well be because there are C even better Opteron (>8 core) scaling chipsets in the wings. Or the  rumour might be wrong.  ? > Chipsets are very expensive to make and take a lot of time to 	 validate. F > As for enterprise features, Intel may still be able to differentiateF > it's chips. AMD cannot really afford to make as large dies as Intel.A > Intel may choose to have more stuff on it's IA64 chips, such as  cores, > cache, better RAS features.  > F > I would like to buy Proliant systems with IA64 chips in a few years.E > The common platform is a good way to get the costs down, since IA64  is > not a high-volume ISA.  D But using exactly which business logic will Intel even try to regainB the lead over Opteron with Itanium without trying even harder withD Xeon? Intel lost. Face it. Intel is now AMD compatible and it cannot@ afford to compete against itself letting AMD take all the glory.D Already HP are *upgrading* customers with Itanium servers to Opteron> based systems. See the following in the link I posted earlier.   --- : http://www.internetnews.com/commentary/article.php/3501511D "Alan Walker, vice president of technology integration for passenger: reservation system giant Sabre (Quote, Chart), would know.  D He's running the company's low-fare search applications on dual-coreC Opteron chips using about 145 of HP's ProLiant DL585 four-processor  boxes.  > "The things work," he tells internetnews.com. Put it this way:F throughput on production is north of 1.8 times what he was pulling outF of the Itanium-based servers. The dual-core performance "significantlyF drives down the cost of hardware," not to mention future opportunities' to upgrade or buy more dual-core boxes.   G When tens of thousands of travel agencies hit Sabre's platform, each in D search of, say, some 200 different ways to get to Miami on differentG days, from different airports and the like, that's about half a million G lines of C++ code doing a lot of searching. Opteron's dual-core ability < to process and scale horizontally and cheaply fits the bill.  B Walker says it's inevitable that the industry is going to shift to> dual-core architecture. Where Sabre's servers were handling 50D transactions per second with Itanium, he's just upped that to 90 per8 second since switching to Opteron on ProLiant servers. " ---     D The only possible chance of a future for the Itanic is if Intel sellF it. And right now it would probably be a better bet for HP to buy AMD. --  
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 13:07:34 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> A Subject: Re: Maybe HP should get out of the hardware business.... 0 Message-ID: <1177eqk18sd7d67@corp.supernews.com>   Alan Greig wrote:   D > And right now it would probably be a better bet for HP to buy AMD.  & Don't like Opteron chips much, do you?  @ HP controlling AMD would be the kiss of death.  Several reasons.  H AMD is just becoming acceptable to many, and having a rival control AMD  would quickly end that.   C Would you really want the company that originally came up with the  ) concept of itanic to be your chip vendor?    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Apr 2005 10:23:54 -0700* From: "Alan Greig" <greigaln@netscape.net>A Subject: Re: Maybe HP should get out of the hardware business.... C Message-ID: <1114881834.571377.108660@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    Dave Froble wrote: > Alan Greig wrote:  > B > HP controlling AMD would be the kiss of death.  Several reasons.  D Didn't say they should do it just that it would be a better bet thanB buying all the Itanium rights and engineers back from Intel. WhichC would be a terrible idea and likely result in even more pain for HP  product lines.  E > AMD is just becoming acceptable to many, and having a rival control  AMD  > would quickly end that.   0 Not if HP got out of the desktop PC business :-) --  
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  + Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 14:29:30 +0000 (UTC) P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)5 Subject: more questions on Cyrillic fonts and Mozilla $ Message-ID: <d504o9$8e1$1@online.de>  G After having had another look at my font setup, I no longer think that  H the main problem is lack of fonts, but rather that Mozilla doesn't know  what fonts to use.  Here is my  = [VMS$COMMON.SYSFONT.DECW.USER_COMMON]DECW$FONT_DIRECTORY.DAT:    25I 6x12.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-r-semicondensed--12-110-75-75-c-60-iso10646-1 I 6x13.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-r-semicondensed--13-120-75-75-c-60-iso10646-1 B 6x10.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--10-100-75-75-c-60-iso10646-1B 7x13.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--13-120-75-75-c-70-iso10646-1B 7x14.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--14-130-75-75-c-70-iso10646-1? 6x9.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--9-90-75-75-c-60-iso10646-1 ? 5x7.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--7-70-75-75-c-50-iso10646-1 ? 4x6.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--6-60-75-75-c-40-iso10646-1 ? 5x8.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--8-80-75-75-c-50-iso10646-1 H 6x13b.pcf -misc-fixed-bold-r-semicondensed--13-120-75-75-c-60-iso10646-1J 6x13o.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-o-semicondensed--13-120-75-75-c-60-iso10646-1A 7x13b.pcf -misc-fixed-bold-r-normal--13-120-75-75-c-70-iso10646-1 B 8x13.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--13-120-75-75-c-80-iso10646-1D 9x18.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--18-120-100-100-c-90-iso10646-1C 7x13o.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-o-normal--13-120-75-75-c-70-iso10646-1 A 7x14b.pcf -misc-fixed-bold-r-normal--14-130-75-75-c-70-iso10646-1 B 9x15.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--15-140-75-75-c-90-iso10646-1A 8x13b.pcf -misc-fixed-bold-r-normal--13-120-75-75-c-80-iso10646-1 C 9x18b.pcf -misc-fixed-bold-r-normal--18-120-100-100-c-90-iso10646-1 C 8x13o.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-o-normal--13-120-75-75-c-80-iso10646-1 A 9x15b.pcf -misc-fixed-bold-r-normal--15-140-75-75-c-90-iso10646-1 J helvr12.pcf -adobe-helvetica-medium-r-normal--12-120-75-75-p-67-iso10646-1K clr6x12.pcf -schumacher-clean-medium-r-normal--12-120-75-75-c-60-iso10646-1 F iso8859-2.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--16-160-75-75-c-80-iso8859-2D 10x20.pcf -misc-fixed-medium-r-normal--20-200-75-75-c-100-iso10646-1  E It thus looks like there are several different sizes and a couple of  F different styles and shapes.  The iso10646-1 font set contains all of F the fonts I will ever need.  The .BDF files are ASCII and it is clear . from reading them that all I need is in there.  (    $ sea 9X18B.BDF;1 startchar/log/noout      761 matches  E Before I installed these fonts, I couldn't see Cyrillic fonts at all. > Now I can, but only in one size/strength/shape.  So Mozilla is6 definitely finding the fonts, but it is using only one size/strength/shape.     What am I missing?   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 11:49:35 -0400 ' From: "Main, Kerry" <kerry.main@hp.com> ! Subject: RE: Processor scheduling R Message-ID: <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB5ECEEC@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----> > From: David J Dachtera [mailto:djesys.nospam@comcast.net]=20 > Sent: April 29, 2005 10:42 PM  > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com # > Subject: Re: Processor scheduling  >=20 > that_guy wrote:  > >=20H > > mabey im looking in the wrong place but i cant find much information@ > > could someone please give me a rundown (or a link) on VMS=20 > processor scheduling >=20: > Search Amazon.com for book titles similar to "OpenVMS=20 > Internals and Data5 > Structures". I believe the author is Ruth Goldberg.  >=20 > --=20     / A bit dated, but links on page are still valid: 6 http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/books_internals.html  9 By the way, the author's correct name is Ruth Goldenberg.      Regards   
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax: 613-591-4477  kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20  $ "OpenVMS has always had integrity .. Now, Integrity has OpenVMS .."   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Apr 2005 00:51:36 -0700 From: icerq4a@spray.se- Subject: Re: Sandia says alpha the best chip! B Message-ID: <1114847496.658029.57510@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>  4 Most Alpha people are working Itanium, some on Xeon,A and they are especially on the future common system architecture.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 09:26:20 -0400 $ From: "Chris" <an.other@not_here.ca>- Subject: Re: Sandia says alpha the best chip! : Message-ID: <QHLce.15395$gA5.900552@news20.bellglobal.com>  J The comment was made "this isn't an official position, but this is what isB going on";  wasn't a non-disclosure agreement for crying out loud.  K Enough time has passed and so many circumstances changed, that I don't feel  I have "dishonoured" anything H (and I certainly don't need ethics training from you or anyone else, but thanks all the same)    < "Rob Brooks" <brooks@cuebid.zko.dec.nospam> wrote in message' news:fEXULRG7bzMw@cuebid.zko.dec.com...  > > Chris wrote: > > L > > From an OpenVMS perspective, I was told in confidence some time ago thatA > > quite a bit of effort went in to making the VAX-to-Alpha port J > > hardware-independent, and the Alpha-to-Itanium port would take it evenD > > further, making an 8086-64 port "relatively easy" (not my words) > L > If it was told "in confidence", why are you now dishonouring that request? >  > --   > 1 > Rob Brooks    VMS Engineering -- I/O Exec Group  brooks!cuebid.zko.dec.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 13:10:57 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> - Subject: Re: Sandia says alpha the best chip! 0 Message-ID: <1177f0t5js8jjae@corp.supernews.com>   icerq4a@spray.se wrote: 6 > Most Alpha people are working Itanium, some on Xeon,C > and they are especially on the future common system architecture.  >   F Recent news is that the ex-Alpha people were thrown off their project.  : Because the ex-HP people didn't like what they were doing.   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------    Date: 30 Apr 2005 10:36:56 -0700* From: "Alan Greig" <greigaln@netscape.net>- Subject: Re: Sandia says alpha the best chip! C Message-ID: <1114882616.741148.222960@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>    Dave Froble wrote: > icerq4a@spray.se wrote: 8 > > Most Alpha people are working Itanium, some on Xeon,E > > and they are especially on the future common system architecture.  > >  > ? > Recent news is that the ex-Alpha people were thrown off their  project. > < > Because the ex-HP people didn't like what they were doing.  E Likely Intel just needed an excuse to move its best people (the Alpha E folks) into its top priority X86-64 projects. Let the ex-HP engineers ( fiddle with the death rattle of Itanium.   --  
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 11:10:19 -0500 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>% Subject: Re: Setting up an NTP server + Message-ID: <4273ADEB.25A9D1EC@comcast.net>    Dave Froble wrote: >  > Rob Brown wrote:+ > > On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Dave Froble wrote:  > > J > >> Now if I could only figure out how to get the Windows 2000 systems to# > >> read the time from the server.  > >  > >  > > Off-topic now, but:  > >  > > Open a DOS window: > >  > > C\> NET TIME /HELP  > > C\> NET TIME /SETSNTP mumble > > 0 > > Seems to work on the W2K system I have here. > >  > >  > I > Yeah, I've been told this before.  I've never been able to verify if it F > works.  Don't know if it's a one-time setting.  I'd want the windowsH > boxes to continuously follow the time broadcasting system.  It doesn't > seem to work for me. > 1 > Anybody know where to get decent documentation?   " Try (text retrieved from W/98-SE):  
 C:\> NET/?  4 For more information about a specific Microsoft NET . command, type the command name followed by /?  (for example, NET VIEW /?).   6 NET CONFIG   Displays your current workgroup settings.> NET DIAG     Runs the Microsoft Network Diagnostics program to?              display diagnostic information about your network. 4 NET HELP     Provides information about commands and              error messages.? NET INIT     Loads protocol and network-adapter drivers without 0              binding them to Protocol Manager.  < NET LOGOFF   Breaks the connection between your computer and;              the shared resources to which it is connected. 7 NET LOGON    Identifies you as a member of a workgroup. ) NET PASSWORD Changes your logon password. 4 NET PRINT    Displays information about print queues%              and controls print jobs.  NET START    Starts services.  NET STOP     Stops services.B NET TIME     Displays the time on or synchronizes your computer's =              clock with the clock on a Microsoft Windows for  H              Workgroups, Windows NT, Windows 95, or NetWare time server.5 NET USE      Connects to or disconnects from a shared 3              resource or displays information about               connections. 9 NET VER      Displays the type and version number of the  1              workgroup redirector you are using.  4 NET VIEW     Displays a list of computers that share4              resources or a list of shared resources$              on a specific computer.   C:\> NET TIME /?  5 Displays the time on or synchronizes your computer's  7 clock with the shared clock on a Microsoft Windows for  . Workgroups, Windows NT, Windows 95, or NetWare time server.  7 NET TIME [\\computer | /WORKGROUP:wgname] [/SET] [/YES]   6   computer    Specifies the name of the computer (time5               server) whose time you want to check or 5               synchronize your computer's clock with. <   /WORKGROUP  Specifies that you want to use the clock on a :               computer (time server) in another workgroup.<   wgname      Specifies the name of the workgroup containing9               a computer whose clock you want to check or 8               synchronize your computer's clock with. If5               there are multiple time servers in that 8               workgroup, NET TIME uses the first one it                finds.9   /SET        Synchronizes your computer's clock with the 4               clock on the computer or workgroup you               specify.6   /YES        Carries out the NET TIME command without;               first prompting you to provide information or                confirm actions.  ? The text from NET on W2K is rather more terse and less helpful.   H As to what constitutes "decent documentation" these days, that's another topic entirely.    --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: " http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/    Coming soon:& Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 06:34:22 GMT % From: Thomas OToole <tom@realbig.com>   Subject: Re: Slow Filesystem I/O+ Message-ID: <4273273F.F932B769@realbig.com>    Bill Todd wrote: >  > Rob Young wrote: >  > ...  > ; >    Newer hardware has masked the problem you describe for / > >       the most part (smallness of buffers).  > I > If so, it would seem strange that people are still complaining about it I > then.  Rather, it seems more likely that you're just typically clueless = > - a question which, fortunately, we can examine right here.   @ Yet it's UNfortunate that you don't spend even a fraction of theD considerable bandwidth you bring to bear bashing Rob doing somethingE much more useful, like pissing on bathgatesOS. Considering the thread A started with a complaint about a backported gartner(TM) compliantAG billyapp, the least you should do is provide comment about the numeroust other causes ofaE inefficiency within such an app. YOU are most unfair, considering the H opportunies for tuning that VMS provides at both the application and theF system level, which, no doubt, have not even been considered, and thatH goes double considering the billions of dollars of thrust that have beenD applied getting the pig (apologies to pigs everywhere) known as billM gates airborne. So what's the deal? Are you pwned by the bathgates syndicate?r   -Tom O'Toole   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 06:44:18 GMTc% From: Thomas OToole <tom@realbig.com>i  Subject: Re: Slow Filesystem I/O+ Message-ID: <42732994.AE10402D@realbig.com>w   Larry Kilgallen wrote: > s > In article <24xGylcV4xfC@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:ab > > In article <slrnd6nk9v.78k.usenet@gaia.roc2.gblx.net>, Dan Foster <usenet@evilphb.org> writes: > >>H > >> That's a shame (Spiralog). Wonder why then-DEC dropped it if it was > >> pretty good?  > >rH > >    They dropped it because it didn't work.  You could get impressiveH > >    speed in laboratory conditions.  In the real world you didn't.  AF > >    nasty problem showed up and there was no real justification for3 > >    fixing it with no real benefit to customers.  > 7 > Spiralog was an ideal concept for write-mostly files.  > E > When they started talking about it at DECUS some of us wondered whon8 > had write-mostly applications.  Apparently nobody did.    1 Like disk to disk backup or database journaling??      -Tom O'Toole   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 10:50:54 -0500 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>  Subject: Re: Slow Filesystem I/O+ Message-ID: <4273A95E.4B2ECDD5@comcast.net>m   Thomas OToole wrote: >  > Larry Kilgallen wrote: > >su > > In article <24xGylcV4xfC@eisner.encompasserve.org>, koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: d > > > In article <slrnd6nk9v.78k.usenet@gaia.roc2.gblx.net>, Dan Foster <usenet@evilphb.org> writes: > > >>J > > >> That's a shame (Spiralog). Wonder why then-DEC dropped it if it was > > >> pretty good?, > > >RJ > > >    They dropped it because it didn't work.  You could get impressiveJ > > >    speed in laboratory conditions.  In the real world you didn't.  AH > > >    nasty problem showed up and there was no real justification for5 > > >    fixing it with no real benefit to customers.l > >V9 > > Spiralog was an ideal concept for write-mostly files.r > > G > > When they started talking about it at DECUS some of us wondered who : > > had write-mostly applications.  Apparently nobody did. > 3 > Like disk to disk backup or database journaling??g  G What would the advantage of Spiralog (versus the existing) have been in6 those cases?   -- e David J Dachtera dba DJE Systemsj http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page:n" 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/    Coming soon:& Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page   ------------------------------  + Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 09:24:22 +0000 (UTC).P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply). Subject: SYS$SYSROOT and similar logical names$ Message-ID: <d4vis6$dqc$1@online.de>   This is the default setup:  # $ dir sys$manager:systartup_vms.comd   Directory SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR]   SYSTARTUP_VMS.COM;25   Total of 1 file.   Directory SYS$COMMON:[SYSMGR]3   SYSTARTUP_VMS.COM;202    Total of 1 file.  & Grand total of 2 directories, 2 files. $ sh log sys$sysrootK    "SYS$SYSROOT" = "DSA133:[SYS0.]" [concealed,terminal] (LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE)e         = "SYS$COMMON:" T 1  "SYS$COMMON" = "DSA133:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.]" [concealed,terminal] (LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE)  $ This raises a number of questions.    C First, why is SYS$SYSROOT used in two contexts: as the logical name-9 itself, and as the alias for the concealed directory nametF DSA133:[SYS0.]?  In other words, as a logical name, SYS$SYSROOT pointsH to two directories, namely DSA133:[SYS0.] and DSA133:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.]. H However, with the DIRECTORY command, SYS$SYSROOT shows up as the name ofH only the first directory, the second showing up as SYS$COMMON (which, of9 course, is in turn defined as DSA133:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.]). w  ? It seems it would make much more sense to define SYS$SYSROOT asa  "    "SYS$SYSROOT" = "SYS$SPECIFIC:"J 1  SYS$SPECIFIC = "DSA133:[SYS0.]" [concealed,terminal] (LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE)         = "SYS$COMMON:"0O 1  "SYS$COMMON" = "DSA133:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.]" [concealed,terminal] (LNM$SYSTEM_Tg  F This would have several advantages.  First, it would put SYS$SPECIFIC I and SYS$COMMON on the same footing.  (Note that the SYS$SPECIFIC logical o? is defined by default, but it is not used in the definition Of kF SYS$SYSROOT.)  Second, it would make clear that SYS$SYSROOT refers to B both SYS$SPECIFIC and SYS$COMMON, as now in the definition of the I logical SYS$SYSROOT (except that the translation of SYS$SPECIFIC, rather hB than SYS$SPECIFIC, is used in that definition) and not create any E confusion with the DIRECTORY command by suggesting that it refers to h only the former.  G Second question: Since SYS$SYSROOT is defined as a search list, why not = use VMS$COMMON:[000000.] rather than [SYS0.SYSCOMMON.] in theyI definition?  This would make it unnecessary to have [SYS0.SYSCOMMON.] be  @ an alias for VMS$COMMON:[000000.] in the first place.  The only G advantage I can see in the current scheme is that one can do something t6 like $ DIR [SYS0...] and have it pick up the stuff in % VMS$COMMON:[000000...] via the alias.i  F (At first I thought that the search-list functionality might be neededF during system startup before the software (which might be somewhere in7 the search list) is running, thus one would have to usefI [SYS0.SYSCOMMON.] explicitly rather than using SYS$SYSROOT.  However, in i> that case one could just use VMS$COMMON:[000000.] explicitly.)  E Third, it is probably not supported, but it would make sense to me tomG add a third translation for SYS$SYSROOT, namely pointing to a directoryeD on a non-system disk shared by all members of a cluster, for exampleD containing common SYSUAF.DAT etc.  This would allow one redefinitionH (which could be done, for example, only if this directory is available) B rather than defining SYSUAF and all the other logicals explicitly.  E Actually, one might want to have two such additional definitions, onen@ preceeding the standard two and one following them.  Things likeG SYSUAF.DAT could be in the first directory of the search list, so that tH all machines (satellites or boot nodes) would use them no matter what.  H In the fourth directory in the search list, one could have things which I are used only if there is no entry in a previous directory in the search  G list, which would allow one to put stuff in SYS$COMMON on a particular sE system disk so that it is used by all nodes booting from that system 0I disk, but not by those booting from other system disks (which would pick D4 it up from the fourth directory in the search list).   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 06:44:15 -0400>- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>t2 Subject: Re: SYS$SYSROOT and similar logical namesB Message-ID: <1114857852.bea7390d8554cb506e863970481f250f@teranews>  / Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:>% > $ dir sys$manager:systartup_vms.com   > Directory SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR] > Directory SYS$COMMON:[SYSMGR]>  ( > Grand total of 2 directories, 2 files. > $ sh log sys$sysrootM >    "SYS$SYSROOT" = "DSA133:[SYS0.]" [concealed,terminal] (LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE)o >         = "SYS$COMMON:"sV > 1  "SYS$COMMON" = "DSA133:[SYS0.SYSCOMMON.]" [concealed,terminal] (LNM$SYSTEM_TABLE)  E > First, why is SYS$SYSROOT used in two contexts: as the logical name ; > itself, and as the alias for the concealed directory namee    " sys$manager = sys$sysroot:[SYSMGR]  @ SYS$SYSROOT has 2 items: the disk:[SYS0.] one, and "SYS$COMMON".  F Since the first translation is conceiled, the first portion of the DIR@ command shows SYS$SYSROOT: as device name since it is conceiled.  C Since the second transation is not conceiled, it shows its value asn device name SYS$COMMON:   H I tend to agree with you that it is sometimes puzzling/annoying when you are dealing with this.  ? If they had DEFINE/SYSTEM SYS$SYSROOT   SYS$SPECIFIC,SYS$COMMONe  E This may have had a better effect. Your directory commands would haverH SYS$SPECIFIC:[SYSMGR] and SYS$COMMON:[SYSMGR] and that would make things< far easier to understand when you start as a system maneger.  A If they had both values their specific ones (eg: disk:[SYS0.] and>> disk:[sys0.syscommon.] , then both directories would appear as: SYS$SYSROOT:[SYSMGR] and that would be far more confusing.  E The disadvantage of the good one (SYS$SPECIFIC,SYS$COMMON) is that it>C would require more logical name translations and slow my all mighty>% microvax II even more :-) :-) :-) :-)     F re: you suggestion for a 3rd item to point to some shared location forC SYSUAF etc. That would be neat, but it probably couldn't be done by$D default, but perhaps the VMS engineers could make this in a standardK documented way for system managers to customize (or is that done already ?)I   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 11:17:32 GMT$) From: Antonio Carlini <arcarlini@iee.org>e2 Subject: Re: SYS$SYSROOT and similar logical names& Message-ID: <42736972.9020604@iee.org>  / Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:0  G > Third, it is probably not supported, but it would make sense to me tosI > add a third translation for SYS$SYSROOT, namely pointing to a directoryyF > on a non-system disk shared by all members of a cluster, for exampleF > containing common SYSUAF.DAT etc.  This would allow one redefinitionJ > (which could be done, for example, only if this directory is available) D > rather than defining SYSUAF and all the other logicals explicitly.  I I've added two private defs to SYS$SYSROOT for years (a SYS_SPECIFIC one EF and a SYS_COMMON one). Never caused me a problem. I'm careful to make F sure that during a MINIMUM startup they do _not_ get defined (I'd hateD to have to pick up the pieces after an Open VMS update tripped over C them) but otherwise they cause me no trouble and are pretty useful.S  I I believe OpenVMS Engineering do something similar - and even added some O> support for their scheme to various system command procesures.   Antonio    ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 08:14:13 GMT3A From: "Colin Butcher" <colin_DOT.butcher_AT@xdelta_DOT.co_DOT.uk>f4 Subject: Re: What is Different or Special About VMS?< Message-ID: <p7Hce.22174$G8.7456@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>  L I was asked to write an article about OpenVMS for COmputer Weekly last year.6 You might find it useful. Feel free to borrow from it.  L http://www.computerweekly.com/articles/article.asp?liArticleID=131808 is the on-line version they published.3   -- >   Hope this helps, Colin.") colin DOT butcher AT xdelta DOT co DOT uk E It's not mine, but I like this definition: Legacy = stuff that works.s   ------------------------------  # Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 08:16:10 GMTv! From: Nigel Barker <nigel@hp.com>D4 Subject: Re: What is Different or Special About VMS?8 Message-ID: <2lf6719ohk0pcjanlf96ch1d7krtkqcjmk@4ax.com>  8 On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 10:10:10 -0700, Z <Z@no.spam> wrote:   >Nigel Barker wrote:@ >> Quite the contrary here's a report from one of the DFWUG team' >> http://vmsone.com/~opcom/index.html e >n! >What specific link on that page?s  O The one that says "Defcon9 - a report of sorts" perhaps I should have been more>; explicit so here it is http://vmsone.com/~opcom/defcon9.htm    -- Nigel Barker Live from the sunny Cote d'Azur$   ------------------------------    Date: 30 Apr 2005 08:57:01 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)E4 Subject: Re: What is Different or Special About VMS?3 Message-ID: <W7XGj34KL$Yw@eisner.encompasserve.org>E  W In article <3dg968F6rrre3U1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:F  C > point.  Surely if VMS is still in the favor of the government andaF > DOD as many here keep insisting you can come up with a more credible > source to show it.  B Many government agencies have rules against publicity.  I did someB consulting work for a distinctly non-DoD government agency and the> purchase order had specific boilerplate terms forbidding me to@ publicize that relationship.  I can safely say the motive was toA prohibit any sort of implicit US government endorsement -- not as  a security measure.s   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 10:56:33 -0500a2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>4 Subject: Re: What is Different or Special About VMS?+ Message-ID: <4273AAB1.1406F825@comcast.net>    Larry Kilgallen wrote: > Y > In article <3dg968F6rrre3U1@individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:g > E > > point.  Surely if VMS is still in the favor of the government and H > > DOD as many here keep insisting you can come up with a more credible > > source to show it. > D > Many government agencies have rules against publicity.  I did someD > consulting work for a distinctly non-DoD government agency and the@ > purchase order had specific boilerplate terms forbidding me to > publicize that relationship.    @ So, don't. Publicize the product/service, *NOT* who buys it - no prohibition against that, eh?r  $ > I can safely say the motive was toC > prohibit any sort of implicit US government endorsement -- not aso > a security measure.T  E These days, gov't endorsement might be considered a negative by some.t   --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: " http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/  ( Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/   " Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/t   Coming soon:& Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page   ------------------------------  % Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 13:18:38 -0400t' From: "Main, Kerry" <kerry.main@hp.com>p4 Subject: RE: What is Different or Special About VMS?R Message-ID: <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB5ECEEE@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----$ > From: bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu=20A > [mailto:bill@triangle.cs.uofs.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Gunshannono > Sent: April 29, 2005 10:35 PMs > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com06 > Subject: Re: What is Different or Special About VMS? >=20  	 [snip ..]e   >=20G > I have never said that VMS was not secure.  But the fact remains that6F > without the attention that Windows and Unix get we'll probably neverF > know if there isn't some hole waiting to be exploited.  How many manH > hours have been spent trying to hack Windows?  How many man hours haveA > been spent trying to hack Unix?  Howmany man hours have been=20w > spent tryingG > to hack VMS?  What was they said about an infinite number of monkeys?t >=20  : Given the bigger targets i.e. stock exchanges, banks, chipG manufacturing, health, lotteries, would not the rewards be much bigger?   F Another way to look at this - "how many man hours have spent trying toB hack OpenVMS and the hackers simply got frustrated and moved on toB easier pickings where the rewards i.e. success in actually hacking@ something to brag about, stand a much better chance of success?"    A > My biggest problem is with the insistence on using something as7B > irrelevant as DEFCON (or number of CERT advisories) to prove theC > point.  Surely if VMS is still in the favor of the government and F > DOD as many here keep insisting you can come up with a more credible > source to show it. >=20  E OpenVMS is still very much a huge part of secure Govt work. As otherssF have stated, these are Cust's who obviously do not want others to know what they are running.=20    > >=20A > > My opinion (and others have expressed similar thoughts) is=20p > that even if? > > OpenVMS were more popular from a mainstream perspective,=20  > there would noth? > > be anywhere near the number of security issues (notice I=20  > did not say no > > issues)=20 >=20E > And I agree. But surely you realize that VMS has profited from muchpC > of this because I wold like to think that when a hole is found inbE > one of the others someone in VMS Engineering takes the time to lookeA > at the equivalent code in VMS to see that there is, in fact, noaD > vulnerability there.  Of course, if one is found and fixed, no one5 > would ever know because VMS was never attacked. =20   @ When holes are id'ed in any of the OpenSource programs in use byD OpenVMS, they are reviewed to see if it is applicable to OpenVMS. InF most cases, even if the vulnerability might affect the process runningG that OpenSource program, but it does not usually result in the attackeriE getting any elevated priv's as what often happens on other platforms.a   > But prudent practice > would be to check anyway. =20e   As stated they do get reviewed.d  * > Because of differences in the underlyingE > OS model I am sure many of these exploits do not exist, such as thetD > dreaded "buffer overflow".  But, guess what, that problem also didG > not affect RSX, RSTS or Primos (my other favorite examples.)  Many oftH > the more well known exploits have been closed in most versions of Unix
 > as well.=20e >=20H > >         seen today on other platforms e.g. the 100+ security patchesB > > released publically by Red Hat for its Linux platforms (you=20 > said NSA was0 > > using Linux? Now that makes me feel safe...) >=20F > First of all, I hardly expect any of NSA'a machines are available toD > the hackers.  Second, NSA hardened Linux several years ago.  ThoseE > modifications are only now being put into core distributions.  Why? H > Because (again, as I have frequently said here) Linux is not a serious8 > operating system it is a toy written by a child and=20 > maintained by self-l > proclained computer experts.  G Well, keep in mind that something like 60+% of computer security issuestG are directed from internal employees. That is typically what is of mostoD concern to those who are into the high end security requirements.=20   > =20z? > >                                             since Jan of=20  > this year or3 > > what ever number has been released for Windows.  >=20G > Windows has no excuse other than incompetence and greed. (Unlike manysG > in the industry today I do not now nor have I ever thought Bill Gatesv# > was any kind of computer genius.)h >=20 > >=20B > > Every OS has had some security issues in the past, but as I=20 > stated in an< > > earlier thread, there are at least 2 major parts to a=20 > secure solution - = > > the capabilities of the Admin's and the base OS design=20t > itself. The bestA > > Admin's will not be able to stop holes in the OS that they=20- > are not awared? > > of, hence the base OS design is absolutely critical. The=20t > less OS issues) > > the more secure the overall solution.i > >=20A > > The point is that, regardless if you want to believe it or=20e
 > not, one ofeG > > OpenVMS's claims i.e. very high security, was tested at this DEFCONtI > > event and beat up in an environment full of knowledgeable hackers.=20t >=20H > See, there you go again.  Knowing how few real VMS professionals thereA > are left in the world and knowing that schools stopped using=20l
 > VMS severalI= > years ago and knowing that running VMS yourself requires=20E > special hardwareG > as well as mandatory licenses, just where did all those pre-pubescent-A > computer geeks get all that knowledge?  They have Windows at=20<
 > home.  Theyp? > have Linux.  Some probably have some flavor of BSD.  It is=20n > highly unlikelyDA > they are all running VMS in their basements in order to look=20F > for holes. >=20   [snip..]   >=20B > >                                                            =20
 >        ManyeA > > of these were hackers were looking for the bragging rights=20t
 > to say theyt? > > hacked into the "VAX" system. [actually Alpha OpenVMS as=20a > noted in the > > article] >=20G > There you prove my point again.  They don't even know what the systemhH > is.  They don;t even know the name of the OS and yet you expect people@ > to believe they are knowledable enough about it to launch a=20
 > real attack-G > and thus be properly repelled by the security of the OS.  The fact ismH > they didn't know what it was and in most cases had probably never seen: > a VMS system before in their life.  I wonder how many=20 > attempts to login : > as "root" were logged?  More importantly, it would be=20 > interesting to seeH > how many attemts were made to login to accounts such as MAINT (which I= > believe was one of the default maintenance accounts back=20N > inthe DEC days.)@ > That at least would have shown some little understanding of=20
 > VMS even if0 > somewhat dated.i >=20  G Since you were not there, have no idea of who was there, and no idea ofxD what level of skills these attendee's had, how can you make any suchE "out of the air" assumptions that these were rookie hackers with onlyd Windows and *nux experience?=20s  F Even when the article stated that one of the more well know hackers atG that event stated he only trusted OpenVMS to store his files (which youcE would think implies a very good understanding of OpenVMS), you simplysC poo-poo this as not being important as *you* had not heard of him??-   > >=20@ > > In the end, they were not successful. The one incident of=20 > social eng wasA > > not a reflection on the OS itself, but rather the Admin's.=20r
 > i.e. social-= > > eng is not "hacking" a system, but rather using social=203 > trickery to get1A > > valid passwords etc which ths system views as a valid access.s > >=20G > > So, instead of a hacker having the bragging rights, OpenVMS now hasx( > > kudo's from the event instead. =3D20 >=20E > Faint praise.  It's just too bad that so many serious professionals9+ > fail to see it as nothing more than that.r >=20D > There are published criteria for secure systems.  VMS can probablyG > pass them at a much higher level than Windows or any version of Unix.2H > That would be something to brag about.  And it would make great press.H > Unfortunately, HP doesn't seem to care and so we are left with relyingG > on DEFCON for bragging rights.  That's like going to a Star Trek Con-2? > vention to get up to date on the latest finding in physics=20a > and science. >=20  D You know that Windows and Linux have passed many of these "publishedB secure systems criteria" requirements - despite all of the monthlyE security patches released each month for these two platforms. [Over atH 100 publically available security patches for RH Linux since Jan of this year alone].  H So, perhaps I am missing something, but saying OpenVMS also passed theseF same "published secure systems crtiteria" gives what type of marketing material?=20     Regardsa  
 Kerry Main Senior Consultants HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660i Fax: 613-591-4477n kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20  $ "OpenVMS has always had integrity .. Now, Integrity has OpenVMS .."   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2005.240 ************************