0 INFO-VAX	Mon, 17 Jan 2005	Volume 2005 : Issue 33      Contents: Re: HP talk about VMS ? Re: Installing OpenVMS 7.3 Alpha on a 600a Workstation problems  Re: J F kooks out again  Re: Microvax II questions  Re: Microvax II questions  Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium  Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium  Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium  Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium  Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium ! Re: OpenVMS 8.2 Itanium emulator? ! Re: OpenVMS 8.2 Itanium emulator? 1 Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) 1 Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) 1 Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) 1 Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) 1 Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) 1 Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) 1 Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) & Re: Subversion client build on OpenVMS& Re: Subversion client build on OpenVMS Re: TCP/IP on OpenVMS 7.3  Re: TCP/IP on OpenVMS 7.3 $ Re: Using GLUT (OpenGL) on VMS 7.3.2 RE: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:27:35 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> Subject: Re: HP talk about VMS+ Message-ID: <41EB30A6.29F9B222@comcast.net>   
 mas wrote: >  > No, really ;-).  > 5 > http://www.interex.com/hpworldnews/hpw501/news3.jsp  > p.s. sorry if already posted.   ? Now, if that would only appear in the mainstream trade media...    --   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: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:17:16 -0800 " From: Crabs <spamsucks@nospam.com>H Subject: Re: Installing OpenVMS 7.3 Alpha on a 600a Workstation problems/ Message-ID: <OL2dnazc0NhNV3fcRVn-sg@sunset.net>    > B > You started with a 433au, and then got a 600a board.  The au is G > supported by VMS.  The a varity is a bit different, but I'm not real  E > knowledgable about the differences.  I think it's the SCSI support.  > F > Peter mentioned memory.  I'd definitely try the 433 with one module I > pulled out, and swapping them until you determine whether one is bad.   + > If more than one is bad, this won't work.  > = > Possibly you could get the seller to provide an 'au' board?  >  > Dave >    Dave:   @ There is *no* difference between 'A' variant and 'AU' as far as I motherboard/memory/cache.  The PWS 'A' version has usually supplied with  I an no 'B' cache module, Adaptec 2940UW SCSI card, IDE CD-Rom, and Matrox  H Millennium graphics. These are not supported by SRM, but are recognized $ by Alphabios. Thus VMS will not run.H The 'AU' version had a 2mb or 4mb 'B' cache module, Qlogic IPS1020 SCSI E card, SCSI CD-Rom, and Powerstorm or Elsa Gloria Synergy (Permedia 2  G chipset) graphics, which are all compatible with SRM, so VMS will work.   E That being said, there are two versions of the PWS motherboard.  The  H "Miata MX5" and the "Miata GL".  One can easily distinguish between the H two as the 'GL' has two USB ports on the back panel, where as the 'MX5' G does not.  The 'GL' has an onboard SCSI port and it's IDE utilizes the  H Cypress chipset which is recognized by SRM. In this version of the PWS, G OpenVMS will boot from an IDE CDRom, where as the MX5 version will not.    Regars,    TomC   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 01:41:05 GMT E From: "Gregory Morrow" <gregorymorrowREMEMBERARTIESHAW@earthlink.net>   Subject: Re: J F kooks out againB Message-ID: <RIEGd.8636$C52.2142@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>  ! Mama Mezei's Home Remedies wrote:   F > Gregory Morrow <gregorymorrowREMEMBERARTIESHAW@earthlink.net> wrote: > K > >And poor JF is also a French - Canuck, a group that is the trailor trash  of > >North America...  > > E > >Maybe JF is foaming at the mouth because his phimosis is acting up L > >again...he needs to have his maman take a cleaver to that pesky foreskin! > F > Oh, I don't think he wants maman to chop off that pesky foreskin.  IE > think he rather enjoys it when she comes over every night and plays 
 > with it. > E > I can just see his big fat hairy Hungarian babushka mother applying 6 > some gypsy home remedies to his swollen glans....... > F > "Arrrr joo feelink betterrr now, bay-bee?  Do joo vant Maman to kiss > it???"     Wow, what a freeky scene...!!!   --   Best Greg   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 01:21:39 +0800  From: prep@prep.synonet.com " Subject: Re: Microvax II questions- Message-ID: <87vf9xs318.fsf@prep.synonet.com>     "E.S." <emu@ecubics.com> writes:   > prep@prep.synonet.com wrote:    >>>I have both of the uV-I's ;-)  1 >> BA-23 and... Or are they different board sets?   5 > Different board sets, supporting different FP types   D Ah, this was to do with the `new' FP-11J chip. Seem to remember thatF questions about the new and old ended up with mumblage and little real info.   2 Was the I ever avaiable in other than BA-23 boxes?   --  < 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: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 14:48:19 -0700  From: "E.S." <emu@ecubics.com>" Subject: Re: Microvax II questions5 Message-ID: <CiBGd.207$b45.135@fe39.usenetserver.com>    prep@prep.synonet.com wrote:  4 > Was the I ever avaiable in other than BA-23 boxes?  ? I only saw it in a BA23, but it probably doesn't mean anything. 4 And the Owners Manual talks only about the BA23 too.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 14:40:22 -0500 # From: "John Smith" <a@nonymous.com> $ Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium, Message-ID: <0tadnfrkas-AXnfcRVn-rA@igs.net>   Tom Linden wrote:  > G > True, but since Intel has cooled to the Itanium, and they only have a  > 3 yearF > contractual obligation to HP, one might reasonably ask, what happensE > then. Given the cost of the fab, if they have a captive customer it  > might be tempting 5 > to recoup some of the capital investment from them.      Tom,  L Can you elaborate more on the "3 year contractual obligation to HP" and what *exactly* that means?   & Where did that 3 years term come from?4 What is Intel obligated to do during that timeframe?0 What can Intel do upon expiry of that timeframe?
 Other things?   K It would be very useful to know if your info is different that what appears G to be the generally accepted wisdom of the Intel/HP 'pact' announced in L December at the time of the "Great Engineer Shuffle", prior to the carly(tm)J gabfest on Tuesday. Some pointed questions may have to be asked during the webcast.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:37:33 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> $ Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & ItaniumB Message-ID: <1105907224.2472bc2be4827723e0ec915062a02003@teranews>   Larry Kilgallen wrote:G > _Without_ having read the hidden article, let me say that the cost of E > a FAB is the cost of a FAB.  The per-chip-type cost is minimal when G > compared to the per-process cost of the FAB.  Consider that DEC built H > a FAB in Hudson Massachusetts to build Alphas and then used the excess< > FAB capacity to build StrongARM, a totally different chip.  E Correct. FABs are to chips what CD manufacturing plants are to music.   H You supply the CD plan with a mask, and they spit out what you want themF to spit out, whether Frank Sinatra or Eminem. Some plants can also use  their hardware to spit out DVDs.  E FAbs are like that too.  They are built to produce chips of a certain E mask size. They then sell their manufacturing capacity to try to have D their FAbs run at full capacity to make the FAB operation prfitable.  D (Intel's most recent financials had lower profits due in part to its FABs being underused).  ? In the case of Digital's Hudson plant, Digital actually refused B business, wanting to reserve production capacity should Alpha everC become popular. Alpha wasn't marketed, so the Hudson plant remained H underused big time.  Had Digital welcomed business to FAB other people'sB chips and used the plant at 100% capacity, it would have generatedD enough money to pay for upgrades (or a new plant) to make chips with smaller masks.  B Intel and IBM understood this and seeked business opportunities toD increase production at their FABs. In the end, Alphas were FABbed by both Intel and IBM.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:47:22 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> $ Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium* Message-ID: <41EAE0E2.F65E1F87@nobody.org>   Tom Linden wrote: I > True, but since Intel has cooled to the Itanium, and they only have a 3 S > yearn  contractual obligation to HP, one might reasonably ask, what happens then. H > Given the cost of the fab, if they have a captive customer it might be> > tempting to recoup some of the capital investment from them.  G Intel doesn't have a FAB dedicated to IA64. It uses the same FAB as the  8086.   G Does anyone know how long it takes to switch product/chip at a FAB (say C to produce 8086s one day and Alphas the next ?) Is this measured in  minutes, hours, days, weeks ?   H I assume that they have designed the FAbs so that product switches don't entail long downtimes.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:13:52 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> $ Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium( Message-ID: <opskpz9ed6zgicya@hyrrokkin>  F On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 14:40:22 -0500, John Smith <a@nonymous.com> wrote:   > Tom Linden wrote:  >>H >> True, but since Intel has cooled to the Itanium, and they only have a	 >> 3 year G >> contractual obligation to HP, one might reasonably ask, what happens F >> then. Given the cost of the fab, if they have a captive customer it >> might be tempting6 >> to recoup some of the capital investment from them. >  >  > Tom, > K > Can you elaborate more on the "3 year contractual obligation to HP" and    > what > *exactly* that means?  > ( > Where did that 3 years term come from?  J Well, I may have taken a bit of a leap here, see news story below pulled   off ofE Schwab.com as news relating to the stock.  This story appeared 18-DEC   6 > What is Intel obligated to do during that timeframe? ditto.2 > What can Intel do upon expiry of that timeframe? ditto. > Other things?  > G > It would be very useful to know if your info is different that what   	 > appears I > to be the generally accepted wisdom of the Intel/HP 'pact' announced in F > December at the time of the "Great Engineer Shuffle", prior to the   > carly(tm) J > gabfest on Tuesday. Some pointed questions may have to be asked during   > the 
 > webcast. >  >  >  > - Revelation: Why HP's commitment to Itanium is  unwavering - really     C The IT press has been having a field day as rumors were circulating D about that a staff of chip designers that Hewlett Packard Co has hadD stationed in Fort Collins, Colorado assisting with the design of theB Itanium chips with partner Intel Corp had been moved to Intel. TheF interpretation of what this small move meant was nearly uniform - that7 HP was in back-handed way washing its hands of Itanium. A There's a reason why those Colorado chip creators have been moved H to Intel, and while neither HP nor Intel will come out and say why, thisG is very likely the reason: Intel has no choice but to take them as part D of the complex and secret contract between HP and Intel that created the Itanium chip.   > Everyone has been thinking that HP was the dupe in the ItaniumA partnership, but as time passes, it is becoming clear who will be F getting the short end of the stick in this relationship going forward.J And it isn't HP. It is Intel, which would have probably killed off ItaniumG a year or two ago (we surmise) if it were not for one fact: Intel has a @ contractual arrangement that forces it to supply HP with Itanium> chips, probably so long as HP desires them. And with HP-UX and? now OpenVMS ported to and soon to be only available on Itanium, D HP most definitely wants those Itanium chips for its Integrity-basedB servers. If Intel kills Itanium, then HP will sue it for breach of	 contract. @ This is the only explanation that makes sense. And when the idea> was ran past Don Jenkins, vice president of marketing for HP's@ Business Critical Systems unit, he said that this was absolutelyE correct. "Yes, absolutely, Intel has a long-term commitment to supply C the Itanium," he said. And when pressed further with the suggestion D that a commitment can be broken a lot easier than a contract he saidH that there is absolutely a legal contract that assures that Intel has to supply HP with chips.   < As to the precise term of the contract, he was not sure. ButF presumably it is at least out to 2008, which is the term of the new $3@ billion Itanium investment plan that HP recently announced. HP'sD commitment to Itanium, regardless of all the naysayers, is precisely> as strong as the unavoidable fact that its HP-UX, OpenVMS, andC NonStop operating systems are only going to be available on Itanium H chips in Integrity systems in the not-too-distant future. In early 2005,F HP will roll out production versions of OpenVMS for Itanium, and laterG in the year it will follow with variants of the NonStop servers running  on Itanium.   A The fact that HP is no longer paying engineers to work on Itanium I and is expecting Intel to pick up the tab for their salaries is a payback E of sorts, at least to a cynical eye. As the first-generation "Merced" D chips were delayed for two years, HP definitely took it on the chin,D since its Integrity servers were supposed to be able to support both; Itanium and PA-RISC chips. The second-generation "McKinley" I Itanium 2 chips offered better performance, but there were still a lot of " naysayers when it came to Itanium.  A When Intel rejiggered the Xeon and Itanium roadmaps several times @ in the past two years, culminating with the advent of the 64-bitC variants of the Xeon chips, HP was left in a position of constantly G justifying its investments in Itanium - and continually re-investing in E Itanium. The deal, it seems, cuts both ways, as most partnerships do. = That is why when Intel announced that the HP Itanium team was H moving over to Intel (following a similar move by Compaq to sell off itsB Alpha chip intellectual property and chip designers just before HPB bought Compaq in late 2001), HP the next day announced that it wasC going to spend that $3 billion over the next three years to pump up @ the Itanium ecosystem and build future Integrity machines. ThoseC investments are going to be necessary for HP to accomplish its goal B of making Integrity servers represent 50% of BCS sales in calendar( 2005, growing to 70% by the end of 2006. > H > Intel and HP didn't disclose the financial terms of the deal that willD > move those HP engineers over to Intel, but HP did talk about whereG > that $3 billion will be spent. Jenkins said that this sum represented @ > the R&D of system components for the Integrity line, includingD > chipsets and system designs that will push Itanium machines betterA > into the $6,000 to $10,000 price range. HP is also establishing B > dedicated development teams for the Windows and Linux platforms,: > complementing its existing teams for HP-UX, OpenVMS, and
 > NonStop.  D The company will also be spending a lot of money fostering ISVs, and= hopes to boost the number of Itanium applications (across all A platforms) from 2,900 today to 4,500 by the end of the year. That A money will go into analyzing the key financial services, telecom, ? public sector, HPC, and manufacturing markets where HP plans to ? push Integrity machines and ensure that the right collection of C applications are available for the most likely Integrity customers. < Some development funds will be used to create better virtual; partitions for all of the platforms HP supports on Itanium.   D Jenkins says that when the Merced project was launched, Intel lackedD the systems expertise that HP brought to the table, but now that the@ Itanium architecture is established and that Intel has the AlphaB experts, it only makes sense to move the original HP team that wasJ so critical to the Itanium design under the same roof at Intel. By lettingC go of Itanium development, HP loses one key advantage - getting its I way with future Itanium designs - but it gains a little, too, since other I server makers will be less inclined to think that HP is getting favorable 
 treatment.         --  C Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:37:04 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> $ Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium, Message-ID: <41EB24B3.E7C76506@teksavvy.com>   Tom Linden wrote: @ > Everyone has been thinking that HP was the dupe in the ItaniumC > partnership, but as time passes, it is becoming clear who will be H > getting the short end of the stick in this relationship going forward.  4 I think both are getting the short end of the stick.  E HP was stupid enough to continue to put all its eggs into the sinking D IA64 basket. Both Intel and HP could have stopped before Merced cameF out. They didn't.  Now, even if HP were to announce it is porting VMS,F HP-UX and NSK to another platform on Jan 18, it would still require HPF continue to develop and sell those unwanted IA64 boxes for many years,7 just like Hp is forced to support Alpha for many years.   H So HP is forced to use whatever contract fine print it can find to forceH Intel to continue IA64 for a couple more years to give HP time to find a) way out of this stupid monumental morass.   F Also, by pulling out of IA64 now, HP is probably isolating itself fromE any  responsability towards other users of IA64, notably SGI who also   relies a log on that IA64 thing.  L > And it isn't HP. It is Intel, which would have probably killed off Itanium! > a year or two ago (we surmise)    E I am of the opinion that the decision was taken in late 2003 or early G 2004 by both HP and Intel. What the "contract" does is let HP be in the G driver's seat in terms of how/when the pullout is implemented. 2004 saw E a number of steps and announcements taken to set the stage for IA64's G retirement. My bet is 2007, with the announcement perhaps later in 2005 H when porting work officially begins (although I woudln't be surprised if7 it had already begun in hidden corners of HP premises).   * > if it were not for one fact: Intel has aB > contractual arrangement that forces it to supply HP with Itanium- > chips, probably so long as HP desires them.   G Supplying the chips is not the problem. Continued engineering to rework G the cores is the problem. The announcement on the 18th is just a bigger F cache to the same core. But HP and intel will tout it as an incredible? feat of engineering on the scale of discovering the warp drive.      > And with HP-UX andA > now OpenVMS ported to and soon to be only available on Itanium,   = My guess is that Alpha VMS sales will outlive IA64 VMS sales.     F > HP most definitely wants those Itanium chips for its Integrity-basedD > servers. If Intel kills Itanium, then HP will sue it for breach of > contract.   C Nop. The decision to kill IA64 was taken cooperatively. Both HP and E Intel realised that IA64 wouldn't ever be able to compete against the G 8086 or Power AND be profitable. It is one thing to donate IA64 servers F as publicity stunts, but another to convince customers to actually payF full price for those things, especially when conversion efforts out foH Alpha could be done only once when the real successor to Alpha is ready.  D Also, bear in mind that the "contract" may also be forcing HP to buy! certain quantities of IA64 chips.     ? > HP will roll out production versions of OpenVMS for Itanium,    E VMS may have be availbale commercially in 2 days, but it doesn't mean G that a large proportion of VMS customers will be able to migrate to it. A Availabiliyty of software will be the driving force here. And for ? software that is no longer being upgraded or available for VMS, + customers will migrate to another platform.   G Where will Alpha  workstation customers migrate to ? (as I recall, NASA C was a big Alpha workstation customer). With Tru64 dead, with VMS no H longer getting any X/Motif work done (or even mentioned in the roadmap),H one would really have to consider whether the trouble of porting to IA64B is wasted time when the real port should be ato a viable platform.  F Now, add to this the constant flux of news from both HP, Intel and theG press about the lack of success of IA64, retranchement into smaller and E smaller markets, and now the stories about the only reason IA64 still @ alive is some contract. Who would commit an enterprise to costlyG system/software changes to a platform that only has a couple years left 6 in it before customer needs to consider another port ?   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:30:31 GMT # From: "Marco" <marco@Z.nbnet.nb.ca> * Subject: Re: OpenVMS 8.2 Itanium emulator?> Message-ID: <bWBGd.212502$Np3.8928958@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>  / > Oh, I also notice you are specifying Itanium.  >  > Why is that a requirement ?  > K > If the hardware is emulated, why do you care what emulation is involved ?  > H > The major difference between Alpha and Itanium, for instance, is speedF > and cost of the hardware.  Neither of those would show up through an > emulator.  > F > Why is VAX emulation inadequate for you?  (Yes, somebody else in theG > newsgroup might have a reason, but I am asking about Marco's reason.)   < I am new to this, and maybe don't know how to clearly ask...  J I'm basically looking for some software that will enable me to run OpenVMS on my Intel-based laptop.   K If I can get a VAX emulator that runs on my Intel laptop, I'm all for it... 8 I'd want an Itanium one also.  Why?  Just because... ;-)   Marco    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:21:34 -0600 2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>* Subject: Re: OpenVMS 8.2 Itanium emulator?+ Message-ID: <41EB2F3E.F4DFF0A4@comcast.net>    Marco wrote: > 1 > > Oh, I also notice you are specifying Itanium.  > >  > > Why is that a requirement ?  > > M > > If the hardware is emulated, why do you care what emulation is involved ?  > > J > > The major difference between Alpha and Itanium, for instance, is speedH > > and cost of the hardware.  Neither of those would show up through an
 > > emulator.  > > H > > Why is VAX emulation inadequate for you?  (Yes, somebody else in theI > > newsgroup might have a reason, but I am asking about Marco's reason.)  > > > I am new to this, and maybe don't know how to clearly ask... > L > I'm basically looking for some software that will enable me to run OpenVMS > on my Intel-based laptop.  > M > If I can get a VAX emulator that runs on my Intel laptop, I'm all for it...   H Well, there's a commercial product called Charon-VAX and freeware called SIMH.   : > I'd want an Itanium one also.  Why?  Just because... ;-)  D So, you're asking an Itanic emulator that runs on x86-32 (presumably under WhineBloze)?   --   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: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 14:30:29 -0500 ( From: Wayne Sewell <wayne@tachysoft.com>: Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris)/ Message-ID: <00A3DF60.645439B6.1@tachysoft.com>    >X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms; >Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) ! >From: VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG     L >>The Source Listings Kit is of such low volume that at the last DECUS (sic)L >>symposium where its continued existance was in peril there were fewer than; >>six customers who showed up at the meeting to discuss it.  > L >If this is cancelled, they might as well cancel VMS along with it!  By yourM >"DECUS (sic)" comment, I believe you are talking about the HP World?  If so, # >I found no value whatsoever in it    ( isn't it really billyworld/eunuchsworld?  * >and therefore was not present to attend aM >SIG or BOF on the future of the source listings.  I will put in my vote here C >and now that this service had better not go the way of the Dodo.       O Absolutely.  There have been many problems I have had over the years that could N not possibly have been solved without the source.  Not necessarily in tapesys,J which is mostly user mode, but in our virtual tape and disk devices, which require heavy internals.  I I had no idea that the source listings were in jeopardy, that hp was even L considering doing away with them.  It would be a way to destroy what few vms vendors are left.   N It's bad enough that patches do not include source, causing the listings to beM out of synch with the actual code being executed.  Doing without the listings + entirely is too horrible for contemplation.   M For those of us who do not go to hp world, who should we contact to stave off  this disaster?   Wayne O =============================================================================== N Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting  (281)812-0738   wayne@tachysoft.com; http://www.tachysoft.com/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html    O =============================================================================== P Larry(sniffing):"I smell something awful." Moe:"Yeah, well don't brag about it."   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:02:30 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG: Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris)0 Message-ID: <00A3DF75.A0ECDD5E@SendSpamHere.ORG>  Z In article <00A3DF60.645439B6.1@tachysoft.com>, Wayne Sewell <wayne@tachysoft.com> writes: >>X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms < >>Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris)" >>From: VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG >  > M >>>The Source Listings Kit is of such low volume that at the last DECUS (sic) M >>>symposium where its continued existance was in peril there were fewer than < >>>six customers who showed up at the meeting to discuss it. >>M >>If this is cancelled, they might as well cancel VMS along with it!  By your N >>"DECUS (sic)" comment, I believe you are talking about the HP World?  If so,$ >>I found no value whatsoever in it  > ) >isn't it really billyworld/eunuchsworld?   J It's been billyworld/eunuchsworld since long before HP.  DECUS became the G Domestic Emasculated Computer Useless Society long before HP or Compaq.     J I could get by in the VAX days without it.  Somewhat more difficult in theJ Alpha days but even that code was readable.  Source listings make the mostI sense now with this fugly instruction set.  If these go away, it's off to 8 open that Brew Pub/Apple Store I've been thinking about.   --  < http://www.ProvN.com  for the *best* OpenVMS system security=                       solutions that others only claim to be.  --  , Cyber-Terrorism (si'-ber tayr'-or-iz-em) n.:M   The release of, the sale of, or the use of any Micro$oft software product!   --  K VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:35:13 -0800 4 From: Alan Frisbie <Usenet02_REMOVE@Flying-Disk.com>: Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris). Message-ID: <41EAFA31.5020109@Flying-Disk.com>   VAXman- wrote:    5 > In article <3K2KX83ug0Cd@eisner.encompasserve.org>, 2  > Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:  M >> The Source Listings Kit is of such low volume that at the last DECUS (sic) M >> symposium where its continued existance was in peril there were fewer than < >> six customers who showed up at the meeting to discuss it.  M > If this is cancelled, they might as well cancel VMS along with it!  By your N > "DECUS (sic)" comment, I believe you are talking about the HP World?  If so,M > I found no value whatsoever in it and therefore was not present to attend a N > SIG or BOF on the future of the source listings.  I will put in my vote hereD > and now that this service had better not go the way of the Dodo.    D Likewise.   I may not need the listings often, but when I need them,= I *NEED* them.   That is why I continue to subscribe to them.    Alan   ------------------------------    Date: 16 Jan 2005 18:49:00 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) : Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris)3 Message-ID: <c3$0ZxVpkP5j@eisner.encompasserve.org>   U In article <00A3DF49.86A9D6BE@SendSpamHere.ORG>,   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: e > In article <3K2KX83ug0Cd@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:   L >>The Source Listings Kit is of such low volume that at the last DECUS (sic)L >>symposium where its continued existance was in peril there were fewer than; >>six customers who showed up at the meeting to discuss it.  > M > If this is cancelled, they might as well cancel VMS along with it!  By your N > "DECUS (sic)" comment, I believe you are talking about the HP World?  If so,  G No, by that comment I mean really DECUS, back when it was called DECUS. F They did not want to continue making Microfiche, and we convinced themE to do it on CDROM.  (Another interpretation is that they wanted to do D it on CDROM, but were floating a trial balloon to get our reaction).  M > I found no value whatsoever in it and therefore was not present to attend a N > SIG or BOF on the future of the source listings.  I will put in my vote hereD > and now that this service had better not go the way of the Dodo.    H I don't think creation of what goes into the service is broken.  I foundG a good reception at the last boot camp for my comments on one manner in G which the content should change.   The process for creating the kits is ' well-embedded in the VMS release cycle.   F What is broken (for me, anyway) is the process by which one orders it.D Below I quote a bit from just one HP employee (the full scenario has5 been mailed to someone at HP whose name we all know):   7 > > I gave the person who answered our customer number.  > > ? > > He asked what I wanted to order, and I said QT-MT1AB-Q8 and  > > spelled it phonetically. > > J > > He asked if I knew what that was.  I said it was a VMS Source Listings > > subscription renewal.  > > L > > He said this was Hewlett Packard and I seemed to have the wrong company. > > I agreed and hung up.    ------------------------------    Date: 16 Jan 2005 18:50:57 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) : Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris)3 Message-ID: <O1L+M2TIWPU0@eisner.encompasserve.org>   e In article <41EAFA31.5020109@Flying-Disk.com>, Alan Frisbie <Usenet02_REMOVE@Flying-Disk.com> writes:  > VAXman- wrote: >  > 6 >> In article <3K2KX83ug0Cd@eisner.encompasserve.org>,4 >  > Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: > N >>> The Source Listings Kit is of such low volume that at the last DECUS (sic)N >>> symposium where its continued existance was in peril there were fewer than= >>> six customers who showed up at the meeting to discuss it.  > N >> If this is cancelled, they might as well cancel VMS along with it!  By yourO >> "DECUS (sic)" comment, I believe you are talking about the HP World?  If so, N >> I found no value whatsoever in it and therefore was not present to attend aO >> SIG or BOF on the future of the source listings.  I will put in my vote here E >> and now that this service had better not go the way of the Dodo.    > F > Likewise.   I may not need the listings often, but when I need them,? > I *NEED* them.   That is why I continue to subscribe to them.M  B Again, this was a DECUS symposium, and Alan, I thought you were at
 the meeting !u   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:31:58 -0600G2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>: Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris)+ Message-ID: <41EB31AE.28AD1B28@comcast.net>t   Wayne Sewell wrote:p >  > >X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms= > >Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris)i# > >From: VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORGe > N > >>The Source Listings Kit is of such low volume that at the last DECUS (sic)N > >>symposium where its continued existance was in peril there were fewer than= > >>six customers who showed up at the meeting to discuss it.i > >sN > >If this is cancelled, they might as well cancel VMS along with it!  By yourO > >"DECUS (sic)" comment, I believe you are talking about the HP World?  If so,e$ > >I found no value whatsoever in it > * > isn't it really billyworld/eunuchsworld?   Well, yes and no.   7 No, the bulk of the presentations were not VMS-centric.s  F Yes, there were VMS-related sessions, albeit in "the catacombs" of theC facility formerly (still?) known as McCormick South. VMS may be the-@ bastard son of the bastard son, but its still draws enough of anD audience to make it worth their while, apparently. We'll see how the- OpenVMS section of the HP Tech. Forum goes...    --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page:i" 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: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 00:43:26 -0500 , From: Carl Friedberg <frida.fried@gmail.com>: Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris)7 Message-ID: <890539d905011621436b5594a0@mail.gmail.com>a  J Larry, I remember that meeting well. As I recall, Digital floated the ideaN that they would replace the (then current) microfiche source distribution withL CDrom. On closer questioning, the marketing folks understood that the CDromsL would contain the same images as the microfiche. I think you and I were bothO equally aghast at the notion that somehow Digital was going to take the listing'M files, print them on an LP03, send them out to a service bureau, and get back P a microfiche kit and a cdrom kit. We prevailed upon them to transfer the listing< files to the cdrom, so that one could use SEARCH and COPY...  E And, I agree, there were about six of us interested in that topic. Ite
 was around
 1985 or 1986.*   Carl Friedberg (212) 233-5470 Carl at comets dot com  M On 16 Jan 2005 18:49:00 -0600, Larry Kilgallen <Kilgallen@spamcop.net> wrote:BW > In article <00A3DF49.86A9D6BE@SendSpamHere.ORG>,   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG writes:Tg > > In article <3K2KX83ug0Cd@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes:n > N > >>The Source Listings Kit is of such low volume that at the last DECUS (sic)N > >>symposium where its continued existance was in peril there were fewer than= > >>six customers who showed up at the meeting to discuss it.e > >tO > > If this is cancelled, they might as well cancel VMS along with it!  By yourcP > > "DECUS (sic)" comment, I believe you are talking about the HP World?  If so, > I > No, by that comment I mean really DECUS, back when it was called DECUS.'H > They did not want to continue making Microfiche, and we convinced themG > to do it on CDROM.  (Another interpretation is that they wanted to doXF > it on CDROM, but were floating a trial balloon to get our reaction). > O > > I found no value whatsoever in it and therefore was not present to attend aMP > > SIG or BOF on the future of the source listings.  I will put in my vote hereD > > and now that this service had better not go the way of the Dodo.   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 19:46:24 +0100i+ From: Wilm Boerhout <w3.boerhout@planet.nl>F/ Subject: Re: Subversion client build on OpenVMS 5 Message-ID: <41eab685$0$1231$ba620dc5@nova.planet.nl>g   M.Eismann wrote: ...    > it requires licenses, E Yes, but compare that to the (100s? 1000?) of person-hours needed to !H fully port Subversion. Unless you work for peanuts, porting may be more # expensive than acquiring a license.s    > and it stores every "atomic" G > release of a textfile (sourcefile) in full format - not incrementallyo$ > like CVS or Subversion would do... Not true, see other posts above    -- A
 Wilm Boerhoutk Zwolle, The NetherlandsD   wilmOLD@PAINTboerhout.nl2    (remove OLD PAINT from this address before use)   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:30:15 -05001- From: "John E. Malmberg" <wb8tyw@qsl.network>c/ Subject: Re: Subversion client build on OpenVMSs1 Message-ID: <Y6KdndeuvtNHU3fcRVn-jw@adelphia.com>o   M.Eismann wrote: > Hello to all!  >  > OpenVMS Alpha 7.3-2  > G > I'm looking for a subversion-client built on OpenVMS. Subversion is afF > version-cotrol-software similar to CVS (http:://www.cvshome.org) and3 > it's to be known to "replace" the well known CVS.s< > We don't want to use the CMS (Code-Management-System) fromG > DEC/Compaq/HP; it requires licenses, isn't able to work over networks D > (like CVS does in client/server-mode) and it stores every "atomic"G > release of a textfile (sourcefile) in full format - not incrementally $ > like CVS or Subversion would do...  I As has been pointed out, CMS stores in a delta generation format.  There t? is a Microsoft Windows Client for it, but I have never used it.h  F > The current sources are available at http://subversion.tigris.org in: > version 1.1.2. Maybe anyone has built this tool on VMS?!  H Not that I have been able to find.  I did find that there is a NetBeans $ plugin to provide Subversion access.  G Netbeans is available for OpenVMS Alpha if you have Java installed.  I s. have not tried either NetBeans or the plug in.   > Or anyone hasw8 > experiences in building this open-source-tool with GNV= > (http://h71000.www7.hp.com/opensource/opensource.html#gnv)?r? > We have Compaq C V6.5-001 on OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-2, the latestI! > Unix-porting library installed.f  H The UNIX porting library has limited usefulness in what products it can G be applied to, one of it's current limitations is that it does one-way iI name conversions from UNIX to VMS ODS-2, and this will not work for many  A applications.  An application like subversion is likely hit this  F limitation.  I would generally only use it if there was no other easy E way to get the job done.  Generally with current versions of OpenVMS tA much of what the porting library was needed for is now available  ! directly from the built in C RTL.g  I I am not sure if the Apache module needed for Subversion is available in nH the VMS Apache based web server in a format suitable for building other @ programs against.  In any case the source is available from the  Apache.org web site.  ) > I read somewhere, that we also need thefF > automake- and autoconf-tools for building/porting from Unix/Linux to3 > VMS, but where can I get binaries of these tools?-  G Automake and autoconf tools are macro libraries that are hand tuned by MH each platform that they produce with the results merged into one set of I scripts.  They are generally used at the time that the source package is r8   being first developed by the suppliers of the package.  G The output of automake and autoconfig is then run to produce the first cE datafiles and scripts that are then intended to be run by the person h$ doing the final compile and install.  C After that point, the output scripts are then hand tweaked for the  @ project until they produce the correct output for each platform.  I While the intent is that the resulting hand tweaked configuration script pG   should produce the correct output on any platform that it is run on.  E The actual result is that it can only produce the correct answers on aH platforms where someone has manually checked all the results it came up I with after the last modification to the scripts.  For other platforms it a+ may be producing less than optimal answers.c  G It is usually less work on OpenVMS to just simply hand create the data iG files and build scripts by hand and maintain them that way then to try e1 to get the automatic configuration stuff working.e  H After all the only way to verify the output of the configuration script I is if you already have the correct answers.  And if you have the correct u9 answers, you do not need to run the configuration script.e  F Some people are looking at seeing what can be done to get GNV bash to H properly process such configuration scripts, but since the scripts have I been previously tweaked for each of their active target platforms, it is tH likely that any solution will also result in fixes being applied to the , configure scripts supplied with the product.   > Can anyone help me?,  J Professional support can be obtained from HP and other consulting sources.  : Volunteer support is available from this and other forums.   -Johnb wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:25:17 -0600n2 From: David J Dachtera <djesys.nospam@comcast.net>" Subject: Re: TCP/IP on OpenVMS 7.3+ Message-ID: <41EB301C.DBE21672@comcast.net>r   John Hixson wrote: >  > Hi again guys,F >    I got my openvms system up and running and I also have an openvmsJ > hobbyist license. I did not get the license by purchasing a CD, I got itE >   by email after sighning up with decus. I would like to get TCP/IPaD > services on my machine. Currently I connect through minicom over aE > serial line. I seem to not be able to run decnet or tcpip without ahI > license. I haven't been able to find any information on this either. Is F > there a hobbyist like license for openvms that would allow me to runF > these services? Am I barking up the wrong tree? I attempted to get aC > multinet license but it says my checksum is invalid, which I dontcH > understand unless im entering in the wrong information. EVen if I were= > to get multinet, Im not sure how I would get it on the box.u  H Well, you'll find the TCP/IP Services for OpenVMS (aka "UCX") PAK in theH "layered products" license set from OpenVMSHobbyist.org. Look for "UCX", not TCP/IP.e  C There seems to be a known problem this year with PSC's hobbyist PAKaG generator rejecting valid checksums. I did receive a valid Multinet PAK E separately, however (many thanx to the one who intervened (Hunter?)).e   --   David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems  http://www.djesys.com/  ) Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page:r" 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: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:32:04 -0800w$ From: John Hixson <john@divinix.org>" Subject: Re: TCP/IP on OpenVMS 7.30 Message-ID: <oaWdnfd6oNB5xnbcRVn-oA@inreach.com>   OK, I      So I got the license for multinet =). Im still unclear as to why it  H was rejecting me, but at least I have it now. I also managed to get the I hobbyist licenses for everything else. However, I see no license for any aC   tcp/ip stuff. I downloaded the multinet zip file and now I gotta  G figure out a way of getting it on my box =). I only have a serial line  0 connection to it, so this should be interesting.   - John     John Hixson wrote: > Hi again guys,F >   I got my openvms system up and running and I also have an openvms K > hobbyist license. I did not get the license by purchasing a CD, I got it lE >  by email after sighning up with decus. I would like to get TCP/IP rE > services on my machine. Currently I connect through minicom over a lF > serial line. I seem to not be able to run decnet or tcpip without a J > license. I haven't been able to find any information on this either. Is G > there a hobbyist like license for openvms that would allow me to run eG > these services? Am I barking up the wrong tree? I attempted to get a sD > multinet license but it says my checksum is invalid, which I dont I > understand unless im entering in the wrong information. EVen if I were s= > to get multinet, Im not sure how I would get it on the box.g >  > Thanks again,t
 > John Hixsonh   ------------------------------  # Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 23:14:40 GMT * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>- Subject: Re: Using GLUT (OpenGL) on VMS 7.3.2t2 Message-ID: <AzCGd.5949$HT1.1471@news.cpqcorp.net>  5 1)  DECW$OPENGLSHR should be defined as a logical forf: the card you are using.  If you want upward compatability,7 you should use the earliest ones (say, the P350 images)e unless you need V1.2 features.  3 2) We are not publishing GLUT documentation, we aree9 shipping GLUT as a courtesy.  You can find various thingsm+ on the internet, including the GLUT source.e    B "Hiroyuki Tanaka" <Hiroyuki_Tanaka4@excite.co.jp> wrote in message7 news:68cfa44d.0501150104.79b2bec0@posting.google.com...u	 > Hi All,l >nB > I see that as part of Open VMS 7.3.2 the Open GL Utility Toolkit( > (GLUT) is now part of the VMS install. >t= > Where is the documentation located to use the GLUT toolkit.  >m4 > Until now I have always defined GL to SYS$LIBRARY. >eG > But it appears I will need to define it to the version of OpenGL I ama > using. >i > Thanks for the pointer.o >b > Tanaka   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:33:12 -0500a' From: "Main, Kerry" <kerry.main@hp.com>s Subject: RE: vms versus solarisuR Message-ID: <FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB4EA44C@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>   > -----Original Message-----3 > From: Neil Rieck [mailto:n.rieck@sympatico.ca]=20I! > Sent: January 16, 2005 10:26 AMl > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Comk! > Subject: Re: vms versus solarisl >=203 > "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> wrote in message=20r$ > news:opsko7zcolzgicya@hyrrokkin...5 > > On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 08:38:16 -0500, Neil Rieck=20y > <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>=20n
 > > wrote: > >  > [...snip...] > >>< > >> Although I have nothing but respect for the official=20 > OpenVMS FAQ, it is a> > >> bit too technical for some situations. Some time ago I=20 > needed to produce=20 > >> a< > >> semi-technical comparison of UNIX and OpenVMS for my=20 > employer (targetJ > >> audience: semi-technical people who have volunteered for a partial=20
 > >> lobotomyi@ > >> and are now in middle management) in order to defend our=20 > team's choice of@ > >> sticking with OpenVMS rather than jumping to LINUX. Once=20 > presented, IB > >> removed information specific to my employer and posted the=20 > information=20
 > >> on my > >> personal web site.I > >>; > >> http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/docs/vms_vs_unix.htmlp > >l) > > To your list of sectors you could addf	 > > Steelg > > Automotive > > Semiconductors > >> >=20F > I've already added semiconductors but didn't know about Steel and=203 > Automotive. Which companies were you thinking of?I >=20   Neil,e  E Steel and automotive are quite big with OpenVMS including some reallyg4 big steel and auto companies in Southern Ontario :-)  5 Reference: (examples of critical markets for OpenVMS)0. http://h71000.www7.hp.com/success-stories.html   Regardso  
 Kerry Main Senior Consultante HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660a Fax: 613-591-4477h kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20  $ "OpenVMS has always had integrity .. Now, Integrity has OpenVMS .."   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:27:18 -0500t- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>P Subject: Re: vms versus solariseB Message-ID: <1105906609.93ae3d119ffb0c3887dcc4ca49dda829@teranews>   Neil Rieck wrote:aG > sticking with OpenVMS rather than jumping to LINUX. Once presented, InN > removed information specific to my employer and posted the information on my > personal web site. > 7 > http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/docs/vms_vs_unix.htmT  M Interesting... but I have a few comments/nitpicks to improve this document...s  2 #2.rewritten in 1992 for the 64-bit Alpha (Digital= #                  Equipment Corporation) and renamed OpenVMSn  H I wouldn't use the word "rewritten". It re-enforces the false image thatB OpenVMS is completely different from VMS. I'd just say that it was/ ported to the 64 bit Alpha and renamed O___VMS.i      0 #5.On 2002.06.30 Compaq announced they will port@ #                  OpenVMS to Intel's Itanium (IA-64) processor.   The date was 2001.06.25t  H In 2002.06.30, Compaq was no longer in existance (Compaq ceased to exist May 7th 2002).  I In item 6, the merger was announced Sept 7th 2001. Consumed May 7th 2002.e  B In the on-line help, you may wish to add that VMS was available in= multiple languages, including hebrew (which is interesting ineG computerterms since it is written backwards, ALL-IN-1 had some specificeM string handling routines included solely for support of hebrew for instance).s    E You can also update the portion about Advanced ile system from Tru64 -G NOT making it to HP-UX but 2004. (This was recently annoucnnd by HP who   are going with Veritas instead).    , #1.global variables allow a process to shareB #                  information with their respective sub-processes  D Not sure what you mean by this.  If you are talking about symbols, aG better way to say it would be: a copy of a parent's global variables is D passed on by default to subrpocesses. (they are not shared per say).   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:55:21 +0100t* From: Paul Sture <nospam@sture.homeip.net> Subject: Re: vms versus solarisu, Message-ID: <3502kfF4gmnosU1@individual.net>   Tom Linden wrote: I > On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 08:38:16 -0500, Neil Rieck <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>  n > wrote: >  >>F >> "Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER" <peter@langstoeger.at> wrote in message. >> news:newscache$enkdai$ow22$1@news.sil.at... >>4 >>> In article <41e94fd5$1@news.012.net.il>, "Eitan"' >>> <no_spam_please@nospam.com> writes:r >> >> [...snip...]  >> >>>aK >>> For other answers read the OpenVMS FAQ http://www.hp.com/go/openvms/faqa >>>a >>> -- l >>> Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER ) >>> Network and OpenVMS system specialistr  >>> E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atJ >>> A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist >> >>L >> Although I have nothing but respect for the official OpenVMS FAQ, it is aD >> bit too technical for some situations. Some time ago I needed to 
 >> produce  a H >> semi-technical comparison of UNIX and OpenVMS for my employer (targetG >> audience: semi-technical people who have volunteered for a partial  0 >> lobotomybL >> and are now in middle management) in order to defend our team's choice ofH >> sticking with OpenVMS rather than jumping to LINUX. Once presented, I> >> removed information specific to my employer and posted the  >> information  on myi >> personal web site.i >>9 >> http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/docs/vms_vs_unix.htmlt >  > ' > To your list of sectors you could addI > Steel  > Automotive > Semiconductors >    I'll add Mail Orderh   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:12:58 -0500t- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>t Subject: Re: vms versus solarise, Message-ID: <41EAE6E0.5B37E562@teksavvy.com>   Paul Sture wrote:n  ) > > To your list of sectors you could add 	 > > Steel  > > Automotive > > Semiconductors > >n >  > I'll add Mail Order   3 Mail Order ? Which large MAil Order shop uses VMS ?u  ! Amazon is a Sun shop, so is EBAY.    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:23:33 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>  Subject: Re: vms versus solaris ( Message-ID: <opskp0pjaazgicya@hyrrokkin>  G On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 13:25:54 -0500, Neil Rieck <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>  t wrote:  C > I've already added semiconductors but didn't know about Steel anda3 > Automotive. Which companies were you thinking of?    Forgot Fiat and SEAT   -- pC Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/u   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:21:36 -0800d# From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com>n Subject: Re: vms versus solarisb( Message-ID: <opskp0maa5zgicya@hyrrokkin>  G On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 13:25:54 -0500, Neil Rieck <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>  a wrote:  C > I've already added semiconductors but didn't know about Steel andp3 > Automotive. Which companies were you thinking of?   ! VW and GM both big VMS PL/I shopsb0 Steel We have customers in Australia and Germany   -- oC Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/    ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 19:22:17 -0500() From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>t Subject: Re: vms versus solarisi9 Message-ID: <1zDGd.8833$W33.218182@news20.bellglobal.com>e  ; "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message t< news:1105906609.93ae3d119ffb0c3887dcc4ca49dda829@teranews... > Neil Rieck wrote: H >> sticking with OpenVMS rather than jumping to LINUX. Once presented, IM >> removed information specific to my employer and posted the information on   >> my  >> personal web site.a >>8 >> http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/docs/vms_vs_unix.htm >mD > Interesting... but I have a few comments/nitpicks to improve this 
 > document...a >r4 > #2.rewritten in 1992 for the 64-bit Alpha (Digital? > #                  Equipment Corporation) and renamed OpenVMS- >-J > I wouldn't use the word "rewritten". It re-enforces the false image thatD > OpenVMS is completely different from VMS. I'd just say that it was1 > ported to the 64 bit Alpha and renamed O___VMS.  >l  M I have to disagree with you on this JF. I've talked face-to-face with people  G in OpenVMS engineering at a seminar some time back and what follows is  J (IIRC) a close quote: "We looked at everything and partially rewrote many H modules to get things back to the way they should have been done in the C first place. We also discovered and fixed a lot of potential bugs."   I As others have pointed out in this newsgroup, there are two OpenVMS code MK bases: one for VAX and one for "Alpha and Itanium". I'm only assuming that .J the problems discovered during the port/rewrite made it back into the VAX K base but who knows for sure? Maybe some of the OpenVMS folk can respond to mH this. Anyway, OpenVMS is now better as a result of the project to go to  Alpha.  H p.s. At a different seminar an HP employee made the following statement I which I transcribed into my notes for the day: "We touched ~1200 modules uM going from VAX to Alpha and we only touched ~200 modules going from Alpha to t Itanium". Pretty cool fact, eh?h  
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  Ontario, Canada.9 http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html ,   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 23:03:58 -0500n) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>  Subject: Re: vms versus solarisd9 Message-ID: <SOGGd.8963$W33.297686@news20.bellglobal.com>t  ; "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message  < news:1105906609.93ae3d119ffb0c3887dcc4ca49dda829@teranews... > Neil Rieck wrote:o >rD > In the on-line help, you may wish to add that VMS was available in? > multiple languages, including hebrew (which is interesting innI > computerterms since it is written backwards, ALL-IN-1 had some specificVE > string handling routines included solely for support of hebrew for h > instance). >l  K I knew about Thai, Hanzi, Hanyu and  Hangul from the documentation cd-roms   but I didn't know about Hebrew.;  
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,a Ontario, Canada.9 http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html b   ------------------------------  % Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 23:06:41 -0500r) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>/ Subject: Re: vms versus solaris 9 Message-ID: <pRGGd.8965$W33.298657@news20.bellglobal.com>O  ; "JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message i% news:41EB2533.9DE5A07@teksavvy.com...H > Neil Rieck wrote:-K >> which I transcribed into my notes for the day: "We touched ~1200 moduleseM >> going from VAX to Alpha and we only touched ~200 modules going from Alpha o >> to " >> Itanium". Pretty cool fact, eh? >o > Touch != rewrite.o  L I agree. It was a different quote from a different seminar. The person that ' made this comment was not a programmer.>  
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  Ontario, Canada.9 http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html n   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2005.033 ************************