1 INFO-VAX	Fri, 05 Aug 2005	Volume 2005 : Issue 433       Contents: Re: 'Nuff said1 Re: Digital logo and other character cell draws.. ( Re: homemade hardware i/o and the xp1000/ Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin / Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin / Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin / Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin / Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin / Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin / Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin / Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin / Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin G Re: Open VMS BOINC (Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing)   Re: Rdb 72 FT2 for Alpha and I64  Re: Rdb 72 FT2 for Alpha and I64  Re: Rdb 72 FT2 for Alpha and I64  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 21:25:12 -0500 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> Subject: Re: 'Nuff said + Message-ID: <42F2CE08.C3C5B2B0@comcast.net>    Richard Maher wrote: > L > Does no one mind that even HP couldn't be arsed to run DECnet on thier own > test-drive cluster?   G Technically, we don't NEED DECnet at work, AFATG. It just makes certain C aspects of life (like COPYing files between clusters) a bit easier.   % I don't currently run DECnet at home.    --   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: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 14:39:47 -0400- From: William Webb <william.w.webb@gmail.com> : Subject: Re: Digital logo and other character cell draws..7 Message-ID: <8660a3a10508041139287a991d@mail.gmail.com>   9 On 8/4/05, Alex van Denzel <vandenzel@hotmail.com> wrote:  > contracer11@gmail.com wrote:D > > Is there any way to create Sun Microsystems logo with DCL escape > > characters ?C > > I always use my VAX to access Solaris system with RSH commands, = > > and I'd like create a Sun logo to put in my procedures...  > > Thanks.  > > @ > Some VTxxx terminals (320 and higher I believe) are capable ofG > displaying uploaded fonts, so you could sacrifice some characters and  > create the sun-logo. >=20I > Another way is, create a big logo (like, screen size) with an ascii-art ' > rendering of the Sun logo. Like this.  >=20 >             /\ >             \ \  >            \ \ \ >           \ \ \  >         /  \ \  /  >        / /  \/ / / >       / / /\  / / /\ >       \/ / /  \/ / / >         / / /\  / /  >          /  \ \  / >            \ \ \ >           \ \ \  >            \ \ >             \/ >=20   Hah!  ) Makes me think of the old "See Figure 1."    WWWebb   --=20 C NOTE: This email address is only used for noncommerical VMS-related  correspondence. C All unsolicited commercial email will be deemed to be a request for 8 services pursuant to the terms and conditions located at# http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/e/webbww/    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 20:30:27 -0700 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> 1 Subject: Re: homemade hardware i/o and the xp1000 ( Message-ID: <opsu0mo1kpzgicya@hyrrokkin>  1 On Thu, 04 Aug 2005 13:39:19 GMT, John Malmberg   * <malmberg@dskwld.zko.dec.compaq.hp> wrote:  E > Only a number of video cards are supported with OpenVMS, and some   H > systems have dependencies on which slots can handle a video card, or  0 > which options can be combined on a single bus. > + Elsa Gloria graphics card is what you want.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 12:38:13 -0600 " From: GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com>8 Subject: Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin( Message-ID: <42F26095.76351119@mist.com>   John Smith wrote:  >  > Rob Young wrote: > >  > <snip> > > . > >> The market segment "Enterprise and volumeE > >> (4/8+ sockets)" is now targetted by the 64 bit Intel Xeon MP and H > >> successors. The roadmap shows that Intel have no remaining residual; > >> plans to force Itanic into the wider Enterprise space.  > > @ > > Ummm... it is a $60 billion dollar market.  Itanium only has& > > to garner so much to be a success. > L > Ummm...Rob? Alpha had to only garner 'so much' to be a success, and it had; > 'so much' prior to the Alphacide - ergo it was a success.  > M > Had it been advertised, and Tru64 not slaughtered and hung from a meat hook L > to let the blood drain from the corpse, and had NSK/Alpha been done, AlphaM > would have been even more successful and at a far lower cost than the Edsel 	 > Itanic.  >   ; All of the past actions done to VMS makes me wonder if Bill 8 Gates didn't have something to do with it thru malicious weasel contracts.    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 19:12:10 GMT ( From: Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net>8 Subject: Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin: Message-ID: <eMtIe.1601$ia4.256@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>   GreyCloud wrote:  = > All of the past actions done to VMS makes me wonder if Bill : > Gates didn't have something to do with it thru malicious > weasel contracts.   G Not quite Gates but I tend to believe the following 'conspiracy' worth   repeating here occasionally.  G It has been suggested that VMS co-developer Dave Cutler (still head of  F Windows-64 at Microsoft) was so furious with Compaq killing the Alpha E (which to some extent he still considered one of his babies from his  F Mica/Prism project at DEC), in favour of Itanic, that he really drove D hard the collaboration between Microsoft and ex DEC folks at AMD on C X86-64. If the Itanic killed Alpha he would sink Itanic - which he  * hated. Looks to me as if he did just that.  C Whatever you think of Windows, without Cutler's teams NT descended  G variants, it would still be a home O/S and wouldn't even remotely have  H the stability to run an enterprise. Cutler is said to be one of the few B people that can turn the air blue in discussions with Gates and I G strongly suspect Gates thinks the same of the Itanic as Cutler even if   he didn't at one time.  $ I doubt Cutler wants to see VMS die.  5 Search for Dave Cutler at www.theinquirer.net or try  4 http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=8722 as a start.   --  
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 16:59:15 -0600 " From: GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com>8 Subject: Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin( Message-ID: <42F29DC3.6D9D94F8@mist.com>   Alan Greig wrote:  >  > GreyCloud wrote: > ? > > All of the past actions done to VMS makes me wonder if Bill < > > Gates didn't have something to do with it thru malicious > > weasel contracts.  > H > Not quite Gates but I tend to believe the following 'conspiracy' worth > repeating here occasionally. > H > It has been suggested that VMS co-developer Dave Cutler (still head ofG > Windows-64 at Microsoft) was so furious with Compaq killing the Alpha F > (which to some extent he still considered one of his babies from hisG > Mica/Prism project at DEC), in favour of Itanic, that he really drove E > hard the collaboration between Microsoft and ex DEC folks at AMD on D > X86-64. If the Itanic killed Alpha he would sink Itanic - which he, > hated. Looks to me as if he did just that. > D > Whatever you think of Windows, without Cutler's teams NT descendedH > variants, it would still be a home O/S and wouldn't even remotely haveI > the stability to run an enterprise. Cutler is said to be one of the few C > people that can turn the air blue in discussions with Gates and I H > strongly suspect Gates thinks the same of the Itanic as Cutler even if > he didn't at one time. > & > I doubt Cutler wants to see VMS die. > 6 > Search for Dave Cutler at www.theinquirer.net or try6 > http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=8722 as a start. >   9 Thnx for the links.  I found that these sort of confirmed < some suspicions about what has happened.  Remember back when: DEC found out about some of their code getting into NT and sued M$ over this?6 I can only conclude that VMS can be ported to the x86.  < The amd64 does have the extra registers necessary along with. the new vector instructions to easily run VMS.; I don't know what would be standing in the way of M$ buying 8 the complete OpenVMS line from HP, but if they did, then6 they'd have the natural talent already on hand... Dave Cutler.    ------------------------------   Date: 4 Aug 2005 18:52:02 -0500 + From: young_r@encompasserve.org (Rob Young) 8 Subject: Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin3 Message-ID: <SkD7C3z0R0h8@eisner.encompasserve.org>   e In article <eMtIe.1601$ia4.256@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net> writes:  > H > Mica/Prism project at DEC), in favour of Itanic, that he really drove F > hard the collaboration between Microsoft and ex DEC folks at AMD on E > X86-64. If the Itanic killed Alpha he would sink Itanic - which he  , > hated. Looks to me as if he did just that. >    	I don't think so.  2 http://www.itjungle.com/two/two040605-story02.html  I The new Itanium machines are called PrimeQuest, and Fujitsu thinks it can K generate $2 billion in sales over the next few years from these Windows and L Linux boxes, mainly because some companies don't want big Unix iron and they have outgrown 32-bit X86 iron.   	Shipped in June.   < 	Tell you what... let's declare Itanium dead .. let's say .. 	when Itanium is dead?  E > Whatever you think of Windows, without Cutler's teams NT descended  I > variants, it would still be a home O/S and wouldn't even remotely have  & > the stability to run an enterprise.   ? 	I don't know about that.  I know of Windows based applications ? 	critical to the Enterprise that run on dozens of servers.  Who < 	cares if you lose one or two, etc.?  The important thing is 	to:  # 		1)  Have application availability  		2)  Not lose transactions 0 		3)  Not have corrupted databases / filesystems  > 	Again... regarding NASDAQ, if you read this and other threads) 	that is how SuperMontage is architected:   * http://www.onwindows.com/article.asp?id=25   [snip]  > The second tier, running on Windows 2000 Server and SQL Server@ implemented on two Dell 8450 four-processor servers, manages allC business logic using stored procedures. Each quotation, or message, E causes a SQL Server stored procedure to execute four or five database ? calls to process the message and load it into the database. SQL F Server business logic reviews all the reference information associated? with the message, such as the state of quoting participants. It > prepares relevant information to be included with the eventualG transmission of the quotation data to subscribers. It analyses whether, @ and where, the new quotation fits among the top five bid and ask prices.   E The third tier pulls data from the SQL Server database and multicasts F it to all SuperMontage subscribers. This layer is implemented on threeB dual-processor Dell 2250 servers running Windows 2000 Server. EachD processor supports a single channel of output, and each server has a backup machine for failover.   [snip]    . 	"Can't run an Enterprise" - I don't think so. 	It runs NASDAQ, etc. etc.  & > Cutler is said to be one of the few D > people that can turn the air blue in discussions with Gates and I I > strongly suspect Gates thinks the same of the Itanic as Cutler even if   > he didn't at one time.    ; 	I'd almost gander that Mr. Gates would prefer not to be at = 	Intel's mercy.  So in a sense you are probably right ... Mr. , 	Gates isn't fond of Itanium - but maybe forA 	a reason other than yours.  If Itanium comes to dominate, Intel  H 	dominates and in that lovely Wintel relationship might come to be known@ 	as IntWin or IntDow.  Ha.  Or Intel says:  "here is what we are 	designing - get used to it."    				Rob    ------------------------------  # Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 00:36:02 GMT ( From: Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net>8 Subject: Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin: Message-ID: <SvyIe.5147$ia4.866@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>   Rob Young wrote:    K > The new Itanium machines are called PrimeQuest, and Fujitsu thinks it can M > generate $2 billion in sales over the next few years from these Windows and N > Linux boxes, mainly because some companies don't want big Unix iron and they  > have outgrown 32-bit X86 iron.  B Tell that to the HP sales teams currently upgrading major Windows E customer sites from Itanium servers to HP Proliant 8-way SMP Windows  G dual core Opteron servers. I posted an example a couple of months back.    > 	Shipped in June.  > > > 	Tell you what... let's declare Itanium dead .. let's say .. > 	when Itanium is dead? >  > E >>Whatever you think of Windows, without Cutler's teams NT descended  I >>variants, it would still be a home O/S and wouldn't even remotely have  & >>the stability to run an enterprise.  >  > A > 	I don't know about that.  I know of Windows based applications A > 	critical to the Enterprise that run on dozens of servers.  Who > > 	cares if you lose one or two, etc.?  The important thing is > 	to: >   * You didn't read what I said above did you?   > = > 	I'd almost gander that Mr. Gates would prefer not to be at ? > 	Intel's mercy.  So in a sense you are probably right ... Mr. . > 	Gates isn't fond of Itanium - but maybe forC > 	a reason other than yours.  If Itanium comes to dominate, Intel  J > 	dominates and in that lovely Wintel relationship might come to be knownB > 	as IntWin or IntDow.  Ha.  Or Intel says:  "here is what we are > 	designing - get used to it."  > 	 > 				Rob  >    --  
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------   Date: 5 Aug 2005 02:05:50 GMT ( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)8 Subject: Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin, Message-ID: <3lfvruF12lqfaU1@individual.net>  ( In article <42F29DC3.6D9D94F8@mist.com>,% 	GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> writes:  > = > I don't know what would be standing in the way of M$ buying % > the complete OpenVMS line from HP,    D How about the idea that they have no interest in it at all as it hasG much less marketability than their current OS.  The only other possible F reason for MS buying VMS would be to kill it. But then they would haveA to see it as offering some kind of competition, which it doesn't.    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: 4 Aug 2005 20:40:45 -0700  From: bob@instantwhip.com 8 Subject: Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffinB Message-ID: <1123213244.981980.24290@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>  . Mr Gates blew it when he had the chance to buy/ alpha and vms and run windows on top of vms ... 4 that configuration would have ruled the it world ...1 now he is stcuk with trying to reinvent the wheel . and at the same time provide security and make1 a single user os try to do what vms can ... serve 2 multiple processes ... we put a windows server and0 sql w/visual basic apps (vendor package) between/ our alpha vms box and handhelds ... between the 2 sql errors and the windows bugs I had to write the2 app to connect the handhelds directly to the alpha/ or we would have had every manager throwing the 4 whole mess into the garbage ... we literally had one4 senior manager yelling at us to get that junk out of5 their office or they would quit ... if you think that / running your business on this garbage on 80,000 3 windows boxes is the way to run an enterprise, then 4 I really begin to question your knowledge of vms ...   ------------------------------   Date: 4 Aug 2005 20:55:46 -0700 ; From: "johnhreinhardt@yahoo.com" <johnhreinhardt@yahoo.com> 8 Subject: Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffinB Message-ID: <1123214146.793854.58550@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   Rob Young wrote:g > In article <eMtIe.1601$ia4.256@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net> writes:  > > F > > Whatever you think of Windows, without Cutler's teams NT descendedJ > > variants, it would still be a home O/S and wouldn't even remotely have' > > the stability to run an enterprise.  > A > 	I don't know about that.  I know of Windows based applications A > 	critical to the Enterprise that run on dozens of servers.  Who > > 	cares if you lose one or two, etc.?  The important thing is > 	to: > G  I took Alan as meaning that if you had Windows without the benifits of B the NT line, i.e. Windows 3.1, 95, 98, ME then what you would haveG would hardly be worthy of running enterprise applications.  Which seems  pretty much true to me.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 22:12:42 -0600 " From: GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com>8 Subject: Re: Intel hammer another nail in Itanium coffin( Message-ID: <42F2E73A.EA38108A@mist.com>   JF Mezei wrote:  >  > GreyCloud wrote:? > > All of the past actions done to VMS makes me wonder if Bill < > > Gates didn't have something to do with it thru malicious > > weasel contracts.  > H > Consider how much of Digital Palmer cannabalised in order to become anF > official reseller of Microsoft products. All of the office and email[ > infrastructure which had made Digital #1 for email for a very long time was cannabalised.  > R > Digital also donated clustering code to Microsoft. And god only knows what else.  ; I didn't know that this had happened.  Which again seems to ; confirm my suspicions.  Gates does spend time at his summer < Seabeck home on Hood Canal for the purposes of brainstorming; by himself for a week or two.  And no one knows what he was  thinking about.   < Also, consider that many of the PC OEMS or vendors that sign: contracts with M$ usually don't advertise or sell anything< else but windows.  Looking at HPs site at the front door, it: appears to be a Wintel environment, tho by clicking on big9 business computers and going down a level or two is where < you eventually meet up with VMS, but not at the front page. 8 Could this also be one of those contracts that HP signed: with M$??  Then looking at Dell, it too looks only Wintel,< until you get in a ways and you might see a linux configured PC.    ------------------------------   Date: 4 Aug 2005 16:40:48 -0700  From: sean@obanion.us P Subject: Re: Open VMS BOINC (Berkeley Open Infrastructure for Network Computing)C Message-ID: <1123198848.769307.141180@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   C OK, I have m4 and autoconf (with perl) through configure, make, and G make install.  Considering I have never used any of these, and the last C "UNIX" I was responsable for was Xenix (don't ask...), I was pretty  happy up to this point.   C automake is having a problem that I suspect is GNV related.  At the D point that configure has figured out that the shell is bash, it does  + exec "$CONFIG_SHELL" "$as_myself" ${1+"$@"}   
 which becomes    exec bash ./configure    and I get the error message   ( ./configure: /gnu/bin/bash: illegal seek    , Some details about what it took to get here:C I had to export PERL and M4 to point to the executables because for D some reason they where not found in the PATH, even thogh I had added1 thier location (/usr/local/bin for both) to PATH.     >From DCL I have set the logical DECC$PIPE_BUFFER_SIZE to 650007 in the JOB table for any of the configures to complete.   D As of two weeks ago, I had all patches for VMS 7.3-2 installed on my
 PWS 600au.  E I know I've seen something about "illegal seek" somewhere, but Google  isn't helping me find it.    Any suggestions?     Sean     johnhreinhardt@yahoo.com wrote:  > MDPlatts wrote:  > > Jeff Cameron wrote: D > > > Has anyone done the Open Source port of BOINC for OpenVMS AXP? > > > 
 > > > Jeff > > I > > I tried - had to port several utilities to GNV environment - but then H > > got stuck in a chicken/egg situation in that 2 utilities which didntK > > exist needed each other - automake and autoconf or something like that. 4 > > I've not tried since - but may revisit sometime. > > 
 > > Martin > > 0 > > (Team Jolt Cola - Overall World #12 @ BOINC) > 0 > >From another thread Keith Cayemberg provides: > 4 > autoconf for VMS - Thien-Thi Nguyen (ttn) Freeware; > http://www.glug.org/people/ttn/software/autoconf-for-vms/  >  > , > The link for the particular message is -->M > http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.os.vms/msg/34f75e160f238b4d?hl=en&  > E > It contains some other links to various VMS OpenSource projects and $ > information. Maybe this will help?   ------------------------------  $ Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 20:21:38 +02003 From: "Dr. Dweeb" <NOSPAM_5msg0h202@sneakemail.com> ) Subject: Re: Rdb 72 FT2 for Alpha and I64 = Message-ID: <42f25cb4$0$67255$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk>   C "Robert Deininger" <rdeininger@mindspringdot.com> wrote in message  F news:rdeininger-0408050646210001@user-105n84g.dialup.mindspring.com...K > In article <42f16031$0$67257$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk>, "Dr. Dweeb" * > <NOSPAM_5msg0h202@sneakemail.com> wrote: > G >>> "OpenVMS Industry Standard 64" is the formal name of the operating   >>> system. H >>> Yes, it's kinda annoying, but don't blame Oracle for it; if they're 
 >>> making >>> a K >>> formal press release, they have to call it by the name its owner calls   >>> it.  >>>  >>G >>OK. That is information I did not possess.  Thanks. Ginger & Norm are 
 >>excused.I >>Now, please knife the idiot who coined that phrase and the intellectual & >>lightweights who authorised its use. >>! >>I will now go outside and puke.  > L > "OpenVMS Industry Standard 64" is indeed the name of the operating system. > L > Nobody particularly likes it.  The "idiot" (your term) who came up with it > doesn't like it either.    You ?   / > All the reasonable names run up against Intel L > trademark problems, and getting permission to use them would have requiredJ > some poor soul to spend months dealing with lawyers in at least two big,H > dumb corporations, with no guarantee of success.  Meanwhile V8.2 would' > have been held up waiting for a name.  >    I see.  0 VMS for Itanium cannot exist without a new name?I One of the few OS's supporting Itanium cannot use the Itanium name - the  - architecture which HP co-invented/developed ?   H It would appear that it was not to be a problem for Microsoft and their , "Windows Server 2003 64-bit Itanium Edition"  H We should simply accept that HP, which is about to become a company 99% F dependent upon the will of Intel for the survival of all their PC and K enterprise systems is not on sufficiently good terms with Intel to be able  L to use the Itanium name on their products.  You guys must be in worse shape  than I thought.   ? With partners like Intel, HP apparently does not need enemies !   J > But this was more information you did not possess, so naturally you just  6 I do not possess all information any more than you do.  5 > assume other folks are idiots and should be knifed.  >  > Go knife yourself.    "Saucer of milk, table 3 please"   Dr. Dweeb.     ------------------------------   Date: 4 Aug 2005 12:56:17 -0700 # From: "WhoDat?" <whohe@whoever.com> ) Subject: Re: Rdb 72 FT2 for Alpha and I64 B Message-ID: <1123185377.003282.82720@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: O > Unfortunately as Sue Skonetski posted in February 2003 HP's official name for  > OpenVMS on Itanium is  > # > "hp OpenVMS Industry Standard 64"  >   D Okay, as long as they don't start abbreviating it OVIS, because thenG we'd need a different mascot. Would it be "a sheep in shark's clothing" C or "a shark in sheep's clothing" I wonder. Maybe someone could work / something up like a sheep with a shark head.;-)   D I wonder what other buzz-words we could surround VMS with that would improve its image even further?    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2005 21:29:22 -0500 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>) Subject: Re: Rdb 72 FT2 for Alpha and I64 + Message-ID: <42F2CF01.830D73D6@comcast.net>    Robert Deininger wrote:  > K > In article <42f16031$0$67257$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk>, "Dr. Dweeb" * > <NOSPAM_5msg0h202@sneakemail.com> wrote: > O > >> "OpenVMS Industry Standard 64" is the formal name of the operating system. O > >> Yes, it's kinda annoying, but don't blame Oracle for it; if they're making  > >> aO > >> formal press release, they have to call it by the name its owner calls it.  > >> > > H > >OK. That is information I did not possess.  Thanks. Ginger & Norm are > >excused. J > >Now, please knife the idiot who coined that phrase and the intellectual' > >lightweights who authorised its use.  > > " > >I will now go outside and puke. > L > "OpenVMS Industry Standard 64" is indeed the name of the operating system. > L > Nobody particularly likes it.  The "idiot" (your term) who came up with itI > doesn't like it either.   All the reasonable names run up against Intel  > trademark problems, ...   G What's wrong with "OpenVMS - 64-bit Architecture"? (Same text on ALpha,  I64, x86-64, Power, ...)  1 Does someone own rights to "64-bit Architecture"?    --   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   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2005.433 ************************