1 INFO-VAX	Tue, 15 Nov 2005	Volume 2005 : Issue 637       Contents:! Re: A question about autocomplete  Re: copy [000000...]*.* & Re: DCPS and form feeds with /copies=n+ Re: OT: Sun's Andy Bechtolsheim  on Itanium + Re: OT: Sun's Andy Bechtolsheim  on Itanium + Re: OT: Sun's Andy Bechtolsheim  on Itanium + Re: OT: Sun's Andy Bechtolsheim  on Itanium + Re: OT: Sun's Andy Bechtolsheim  on Itanium  Unable to Boot Firmware CD-ROM" Re: Unable to Boot Firmware CD-ROM" Re: Unable to Boot Firmware CD-ROM" Re: Unable to Boot Firmware CD-ROM= Re: Video card Digital PCI ZLXp-L1 compatibility with OpenVMS " We have lots of DEC Books for SaleG Re: Will Rich Marcello either come clean or do some proper marketingand G Re: Will Rich Marcello either come clean or do some proper marketingand   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 20:39:21 +0000 # From: issinoho <issinoho@gmail.com> * Subject: Re: A question about autocomplete4 Message-ID: <dlaslq$q8i$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>   Peter Weaver wrote: 2 > "issinoho" <issinoho@gmail.com> wrote in message0 > news:dl77lh$30c$1$830fa7a5@news.demon.co.uk... >> Peter Weaver wrote:4 >>> "issinoho" <issinoho@gmail.com> wrote in message2 >>> news:dl4n4r$cgj$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...L >>>> I've always felt that one of the biggest failings with DCL was the lackL >>>> of a Unix-style autocompletion of filepaths when TAB is hit. This wouldD >>>> be a fantastic addition, however if I remember rightly an olderK >>>> discussion around this offered some fundamental reasons why this would  >>>> never work under DCL. >>>> ...K >>> Does nobody here keep an eye things coming out of the OpenOffice group?  >>> ' >>> http://www.oooovms.dyndns.org/auto/  >>>  >>> & >> Not *really* the same though is it? > M > I hate to come across sounding like Larry on this, but why? Keeping in mind A > that I'm not a Unix person so I have no idea what "a Unix-style D > autocompletion of filepaths" looks like. But based on that limitedM > description and the description at http://www.oooovms.dyndns.org/auto/ they L > sound like the same thing (except the VMS one does commands too). The onlyK > problem is that it is still a work in progress and still has many bugs to , > work out, but it looks interesting so far. >  >   F All I can say in reply is that without a frame of reference it may be G difficult to make a judgement. I feel sure though that for those of us  E who use multiple OS's it is only natural that some have strengths in  F particular areas over others. The bash shell has some lovely features 5 which could only enhance DCL if they were introduced.   E Actually, my main point was that since bash-on-VMS already has this,  : surely moving it into DCL would be relatively trivial. No?   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 17:51:38 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>   Subject: Re: copy [000000...]*.*, Message-ID: <437914F3.212291A7@teksavvy.com>   Jeff Cameron wrote: B > $BACKUP/IGNORE=INTER source-disk:[*...]*.*;*  target-disk:[*...]: > (Note do not use [000000...]*.*;* as the specification).    / What is the issue with using [000000...]*.*.* ?    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 18:07:21 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> / Subject: Re: DCPS and form feeds with /copies=n , Message-ID: <437918A1.F6B0FA32@teksavvy.com>  M Re: multiple copies of a print job nbot starting on their own sheet of paper.   D Consider how postscript works.  A page doesn't get printed until theH "showpage" operator executes. This results in not only the virtual imageE to be transfered to the paper, but also the paper to be ejected and a  new page begun.   E So by default, every postcript job ends by ejecting the page and DCPS E doesn't need to bother with adding postscript code to eject a page at F the end of a file.  So when you print multiple copies, DCPS just sends; the raw postscript X times without anything between copies.     H If you print PCL to a PCL printer, I suspect DCPS does the same. It justH assumes that your job has a "page eject" just like postcript jobs have a "showpage" in them.     F Does your printer support postscript ? If so, one solution would be toH replace the PCL escape sequences with ANSI escape sequences and then useH DCPS to print a "text" file to a postscript output.  You would then have) an implicit page eject between each copy.    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 19:15:42 GMT ( From: Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net>4 Subject: Re: OT: Sun's Andy Bechtolsheim  on Itanium< Message-ID: <yn5ef.15958$Es4.3758@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>   GreyCloud wrote:   >>A >> "Where do you see Intel's Itanium processor in the context of   >> high-performance computing? >  >  >    At SGI.   E They've certainly got some big Itanium iron don't they. Checking the  C just released 6 monthly update to the top 500 supercomputers I see  D though that even at the extreme supercomputer high end, Itanium has B halved its share, Opteron has doubled and Xeon is up as well. IBM . continues to lead the field by a clear margin.7 http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/13162775.htm  	Posted on Mon, Nov. 14, 2005   7 Leaders of supercomputing industry gathering in Seattle   G "According to the researchers who compile the list, Intel chips are at  H the heart of two-thirds of the top 500 systems. AMD's Opteron was in 55 # systems, vs. 25 systems a year ago.   : IBM took the top three spots on the list, with its mostly B custom-designed systems using IBM's PowerPC and Power5 processors.  H The number of systems based on Itanium chips fell by almost 50 percent, > while the number of systems using Intel Xeon chips increased."   --  
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 15:39:53 -0700 " From: GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com>4 Subject: Re: OT: Sun's Andy Bechtolsheim  on Itanium: Message-ID: <xaGdnSAok9bMj-TenZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@bresnan.com>   Alan Greig wrote:    >  >  > GreyCloud wrote: >  >>> B >>> "Where do you see Intel's Itanium processor in the context of  >>> high-performance computing?  >> >> >> >> > 	 > At SGI.  > G > They've certainly got some big Itanium iron don't they. Checking the  E > just released 6 monthly update to the top 500 supercomputers I see  F > though that even at the extreme supercomputer high end, Itanium has D > halved its share, Opteron has doubled and Xeon is up as well. IBM 0 > continues to lead the field by a clear margin.9 > http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/13162775.htm " >     Posted on Mon, Nov. 14, 2005 > 9 > Leaders of supercomputing industry gathering in Seattle  > I > "According to the researchers who compile the list, Intel chips are at  J > the heart of two-thirds of the top 500 systems. AMD's Opteron was in 55 % > systems, vs. 25 systems a year ago.  > < > IBM took the top three spots on the list, with its mostly D > custom-designed systems using IBM's PowerPC and Power5 processors. > J > The number of systems based on Itanium chips fell by almost 50 percent, @ > while the number of systems using Intel Xeon chips increased." >   E Currently.  It appears that the Military is taking a big interest in  C their systems and what these systems have to offer.  Which used to  G belong to the old DEC VMS systems.  I always wondered who the military  G was buying from.  Check out their military videos.  Small market niche  7 really.  Only takes a few sales to make a hefty profit.    ------------------------------   Date: 14 Nov 2005 23:09:21 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)4 Subject: Re: OT: Sun's Andy Bechtolsheim  on Itanium+ Message-ID: <3tsjp1Ftvsi7U1@individual.net>   : In article <xaGdnSAok9bMj-TenZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@bresnan.com>,% 	GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> writes:  > G > Currently.  It appears that the Military is taking a big interest in  6 > their systems and what these systems have to offer.   A Care to provide some pointers?  I found one article about DOD and  SGI and that was from April.   D >                                                     Which used to I > belong to the old DEC VMS systems.  I always wondered who the military  I > was buying from.  Check out their military videos.  Small market niche  9 > really.  Only takes a few sales to make a hefty profit.   7 Unless your giving them away like most Itanium systems.    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: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 18:16:15 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> 4 Subject: Re: OT: Sun's Andy Bechtolsheim  on Itanium, Message-ID: <43791AB7.58EA1877@teksavvy.com>   Alan Greig wrote: 9 > Leaders of supercomputing industry gathering in Seattle     F Supercomputing is a bit like Formula  1 racing.  It is a way for a carE and tyre manufacturer to build an image. They don't make any money on F those formula cars and instead spend megabucks to have those cars raceD in various venues to get exposure and make themselves look like real7 experts so that consumers buy their mass produced gear.   G So that IA64 thing could have been just that. A non-profitable exercise G to make Intel look quite capable of producing high performance chips so F that it would have a better image and be able to sell even more 8086s.  F Problem is that IA64 isn't really worth bragging about and the 8086 isE not far behind (if not ahead in certain areas), so it quite different 3 from comparing a formula 1 car with a chevy impala.     F Remember that while HP was bragging about IA64 *shipments* in 2003 andF 2004, IA64 revenue were totally unimpressive. So they were pushing lowG cost/subsidized machines to reserach labs so they could brag about some  large user of IA64.   G The real test is whether they can really sell IA64 boxes to make money.    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 22:36:25 -0700 " From: GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com>4 Subject: Re: OT: Sun's Andy Bechtolsheim  on Itanium: Message-ID: <sPydnXCiboZt7uTenZ2dnUVZ_tydnZ2d@bresnan.com>   Bill Gunshannon wrote:  < > In article <xaGdnSAok9bMj-TenZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@bresnan.com>,' > 	GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> writes:  > G >>Currently.  It appears that the Military is taking a big interest in  6 >>their systems and what these systems have to offer.  >  > C > Care to provide some pointers?  I found one article about DOD and  > SGI and that was from April. >    > D >>                                                    Which used to I >>belong to the old DEC VMS systems.  I always wondered who the military  I >>was buying from.  Check out their military videos.  Small market niche  9 >>really.  Only takes a few sales to make a hefty profit.  >  > 9 > Unless your giving them away like most Itanium systems.   ) http://www.sgi.com/industries/government/    And some videos.  5 http://www.sgi.com/industries/government/weather.html    Whatever happened to JSTARS??    ------------------------------    Date: 14 Nov 2005 20:32:59 -0800' From: "Schnootling" <chuckm@dis.wa.gov> ' Subject: Unable to Boot Firmware CD-ROM C Message-ID: <1132029178.982188.210220@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   	 Hi Folks,   G I've Googled this group for RUN/STOP discussions and looked at the FAQ, > but I can't see anything that encourages me to try a (possibly3 destructive) command without asking y'all directly: ) I try to BOOT DKa500 and get the good 'ol D "dka500.5.0.1.1 has no media present or is disabled via the RUN/STOP switch" E message. If I try to load/ready the CD-ROM by pushing the load/unload 2 button, the tray goes in then pops right back out.G Here is the result (abridged, with "polling" lines removed) of the SHOW  DEVICE command:  >>>show device  dka500.5.0.1.1 DKa500 RRD46 1337 isp0 slot 0, ... dva0.0.0.1000.0 DVA0 RX23 * dra0.0.0.5.0 DRA0 6 member RAID 5 degraded% ewa0.0.0.4.1 00-00-..... twisted pair   @ So, it seems like the CD-ROM (dka500) is seen by the system, but	 unusable.   E The/My system was purchased from a reseller who had (of course) wiped E all software off the box. I'm pretty sure everything worked before it E was shipped. And, the CD-ROM is an internal unit, so I didn't goof up = any CD-ROM connections by reconnecting things after I got it.    Anyone got any ideas ?   Confused Chuck   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Nov 2005 21:14:30 -0800/ From: "David B Sneddon" <dbsneddon@bigpond.com> + Subject: Re: Unable to Boot Firmware CD-ROM C Message-ID: <1132031670.694989.303200@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>   3 Have you tried opening the box up and reseating all  the cables and connectors?1 It may just be that the SCSI cable has come a bit  loose.   Dave   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Nov 2005 21:18:51 -0800' From: "Schnootling" <chuckm@dis.wa.gov> + Subject: Re: Unable to Boot Firmware CD-ROM C Message-ID: <1132031931.455891.165470@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>   	 Hi David,   4 No, I haven't. I'll (gulp) try doing that tomorrow.    Chuck the Cautious   ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 01:01:41 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> + Subject: Re: Unable to Boot Firmware CD-ROM 0 Message-ID: <11niud1motueu17@corp.supernews.com>   Schnootling wrote: > Hi Folks,  > I > I've Googled this group for RUN/STOP discussions and looked at the FAQ, @ > but I can't see anything that encourages me to try a (possibly5 > destructive) command without asking y'all directly: + > I try to BOOT DKa500 and get the good 'ol F > "dka500.5.0.1.1 has no media present or is disabled via the RUN/STOP	 > switch" G > message. If I try to load/ready the CD-ROM by pushing the load/unload 4 > button, the tray goes in then pops right back out.I > Here is the result (abridged, with "polling" lines removed) of the SHOW  > DEVICE command:  >  >>>>show device  > " > dka500.5.0.1.1 DKa500 RRD46 1337 > isp0 slot 0, ... > dva0.0.0.1000.0 DVA0 RX23 , > dra0.0.0.5.0 DRA0 6 member RAID 5 degraded' > ewa0.0.0.4.1 00-00-..... twisted pair  > B > So, it seems like the CD-ROM (dka500) is seen by the system, but > unusable.  > G > The/My system was purchased from a reseller who had (of course) wiped G > all software off the box. I'm pretty sure everything worked before it G > was shipped. And, the CD-ROM is an internal unit, so I didn't goof up ? > any CD-ROM connections by reconnecting things after I got it.  >  > Anyone got any ideas ? >  > Confused Chuck >   G What is the source of your CD media?  The RRD46 is a later model, but,  I if you created the CD yourself, it may not be compatable with the drive.  3   Older drives are not as flexible as later drives.   L The other post about re-seating cables, cards, and such is also a good idea.  ) Make sure there is not a SCSI ID problem.    --  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: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 15:14:32 -0500 * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>F Subject: Re: Video card Digital PCI ZLXp-L1 compatibility with OpenVMS, Message-ID: <4378f029$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>  5 "Michael Kraemer" <M.Kraemer@gsi.de> wrote in message * news:4376489F.MD-1.4.4.M.Kraemer@gsi.de... > > >  > > >what about the ZLXp-L2 ?  > > @ > > The same. See http://www.compaq.com/info/SP4508/SP4508PF.PDF > > I > > As FredK more than once stated, drivers previously in OPEN3D for this I > > 3D cards are now at best in 2D mode in VMS. No more OPEN3D. Deinstall  it. H > > It won't work with VMS V7.3-2/MOTIF V1.3-1 and up (it will sometimes hangG > > the X11 server in a loop - at prio 6 - cause of MOTIF API changes). E > > Open3D V4.9B was the last (from 2001 for VMS V7.2-x up to V7.3-1)  > > ; > > If you need 3D, then you need at least EV6 systems now.  > >  >  > now that's a bit confusing. ; > I don't need 3D, I just want a decent GUI (2D/Motif) on a ? > machine that once was sold as a workstation (with a ZLXp-L2). F > VMS release notes tell me that I need Open3D to get *any* gfx out of > it. B > And indeed it seems: no Open3D, no gfx, same symptoms as the OP.D > Now you tell me *not* to use Open3D. Fine. How can I get gfx now ? >   B This card was expensive when new, and targeted at 3D users.  ThereC was not any thought about someone wanting to use it for generic 2D. F If you install the Open3D kit, I "suspect" that the 2D capability will0 work without the license (but am not 100% sure).   ------------------------------    Date: 14 Nov 2005 19:03:36 -0800 From: "TONY" <swmoretp@aol.com> + Subject: We have lots of DEC Books for Sale B Message-ID: <1132023816.766692.96500@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>  D We have lots of DEC, Digital Equipment Corporation books for sale in our eBay store at:{ http://stores.ebay.com/00000-Vintage-Software-and-More_Digital-Equipment-CorpDEC_W0QQcolZ4QQdirZ1QQftidZ2QQtZkm?refid=store    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 19:00:46 -0500 ( From: Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>P Subject: Re: Will Rich Marcello either come clean or do some proper marketingand= Message-ID: <wICdnXRIe_esuOTeRVn-rw@metrocastcablevision.com>    Karsten Nyblad wrote:  > Bill Todd wrote: >  >> Karsten Nyblad wrote: >>/ >>> Even software comparison may not be enough.  >> >> >>G >> Yes, they are:  they are just much slower than hardware comparisons.  >>F >> The situation you describe is solved by conventional transactional ; >> mechanisms - it has nothing to do with hardware failure.  >>	 >> - bill  >  > H > You need software comparisons when ever a process locks a resource or - > chances the state of some system wide data.   D No shit:  that's part of the 'externally visible' state I mentioned.  D I think you're confused:  you seem to be assuming that the multiple H systems proceed relatively independently, whereas my assumption is that G Tandem has merely substituted frequent software checks for the earlier  > hardware comparisons at every point where divergence would be E significant.  It would be *possible* for the systems to operate more  F independently (even in their locking activity, as long as they always A rendezvoused before committing any changes:  that would start to  6 resemble a hybrid between lock-based and 'optimistic' G concurrency-control mechanisms, with commit-time back-outs of the kind  H you described), but that would entail pretty pervasive changes from how # the system presumably used to work.    - bill   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 19:41:36 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> P Subject: Re: Will Rich Marcello either come clean or do some proper marketingand, Message-ID: <43792EB2.769BAFBF@teksavvy.com>   Bill Todd wrote:E > I think you're confused:  you seem to be assuming that the multiple I > systems proceed relatively independently, whereas my assumption is that H > Tandem has merely substituted frequent software checks for the earlier? > hardware comparisons at every point where divergence would be  > significant.    C Tandem is mostly about hardware fault tolererance. It also provides H tools for applications to exit as multiple instances with communicationsH between instances of an app to ensure that if one node fails, the app on2 the backup node can take over the workload safely.  H It is up to the apps to ensure their backup is up todate. Tandem doesn't magically do that.   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2005.637 ************************