1 INFO-VAX	Thu, 24 Nov 2005	Volume 2005 : Issue 656       Contents: Re: A small matter of detail...  Re: A small matter of detail... ! RE: Debugger and FORTRAN INCLUDES 1 Re: DECpark (Reading, UK) to close after 25 years / Re: HP : Massive strike and protest march today  New PL/I kit for OpenVMS Alpha& Re: PHP_MYSQL/SWS2.1 and authorization  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 12:01:48 +0000 ! From: Baldrick <none@[127.0.0.1]> ( Subject: Re: A small matter of detail...' Message-ID: <dm4a3c$ono$1@lore.csc.com>    prep@prep.synonet.com wrote:  ; > I just got a CD kit for Alphas, the DEC04 one and went to < > have a look see. Well, knowing that CSWING and ISO CDs are@ > not on speaking terms, I copied the openvms directory from theB > system tools disk to a disk with about 1.7Gb free... And ran out
 > of space!!   > C > And when I look at the wreckage, I find 9 or 10 copies of all the H > files! It seems that the copy moved the entire subtree, then went backB > and did it all over again, and again... untill the disk filled.  > - > Is this a know problem that has been fixed?   H Alias directories are used. e.g. in the LP distribution, you see a KITS F directory, and a PRODUCT and DOC and KIT directory, the files are not ! repeated, they are alias entries.    --  E Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. Car Park Charges, CSC Computer Sciences  nclews at csc dot com    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 08:41:07 -0500 ' From: Ken Robinson <kenrbnsn@gmail.com> ( Subject: Re: A small matter of detail...H Message-ID: <7dd80f60511240541n5fa201b4u20ec36d9d5bb6864@mail.gmail.com>  A On 11/23/05, prep@prep.synonet.com <prep@prep.synonet.com> wrote: ; > I just got a CD kit for Alphas, the DEC04 one and went to < > have a look see. Well, knowing that CSWING and ISO CDs are@ > not on speaking terms, I copied the openvms directory from theB > system tools disk to a disk with about 1.7Gb free... And ran out > of space!! > C > And when I look at the wreckage, I find 9 or 10 copies of all the H > files! It seems that the copy moved the entire subtree, then went backA > and did it all over again, and again... untill the disk filled.   F What account were you logged in as when you did the copy, and/or whereB was your current directory? Also, if you were logged into a system> that was part of a cluster, how many nodes are in the cluster?  C If you were logged into the SYSTEM account and there are 9 nodes in A your cluster, that would probably explain the problem. Or if your D default directory was defined as a search list with 9 directories. IC know that when you copy tapes in those situations, copy gives you 9  copies of what was on the tape.   F I would have used BACKUP to copy the files. And just to be on the safeC side, set your default to a directory that is not in a search list.    Ken Robinson   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 18:19:21 +1100 6 From: "O'Brien Paddy" <Paddy.O'Brien@transgrid.com.au>* Subject: RE: Debugger and FORTRAN INCLUDESX Message-ID: <0A7046B0A95F2B41B3712F0C5FD1CDC307E66A@EX-TG2-PR.corporate.transgrid.local>   -----Original Message-----8 From: dooleys@snowy.net.au [mailto:dooleys@snowy.net.au]& Sent: Thursday, 24 November 2005 15:19 To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com * Subject: Re: Debugger and FORTRAN INCLUDES    A my experience is that "included" fortran is shown in the debugger 4 (but none of my programs could be described as huge) did you compile with /noopt?= in the debugger do a "show source" to check that the debugger % is not looking elsewhere for the code E also check the /assume and /include qualifiers used when you compiled - the logical name fort$include can affect this 6 also the logical name dbg$process can affect debugging Phil   *****    Phil,   L To my understanding (though as mentioned before, I have not "included" code=L , but whether /noopt, etc., the debugger will list all lines of include fil=L es.  It honours all the include qualifiers and logicals.  The debugger shou=L ld not look other than when you compiled regardless of qualifiers or logica=L ls.  The /list does not apply; when you look in the debugger, you will alwa=L ys get a listing of any include file.  Hence my earlier comments about not =L including the $xxxdef files, but rather copying the few parameters that I u= se from any of them.  L I remember in another thread how one particapant (I think it was Bill Gunsh=L annon) asked the rhetorical question of how many people still write Fortran=K   It is a lot!  C is too pitfalled for writing efficient numerical code.  = L The code in our applications (for electrical transmission problems -- proba=L bly much as Phil's codes) is about 95% Fortran, including graphics.  The od=L d 5% is from an application that we picked up from the internet to allow ou=L r users to interface their own code in a pseudo C language to interface wit=+ h Fortran common areas in our applications.    Regards, Paddy    G *********************************************************************** ; Please consider the environment before printing this email.   C "This electronic message and any attachments may contain privileged @ and confidential information intended only for the use of the=20D addressees named above.  If you are not the intended recipient of=20C this email, please delete the message and any attachment and advise D the sender.  You are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,=207 distribution, reproduction of this email is prohibited.   C If you have received the email in error, please notify TransGrid=20 C immediately.  Any views expressed in this email are those of the=20 ? individual sender except where the sender expressly and with=20 C authority states them to be the views of TransGrid.  TransGrid uses > virus-scanning software but excludes any liability for viruses contained in any attachment.  < Please note the email address for TransGrid personnel is now$ firstname.lastname@transgrid.com.au"  G ***********************************************************************    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 07:13:48 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> : Subject: Re: DECpark (Reading, UK) to close after 25 years( Message-ID: <ops0q29auozgicya@hyrrokkin>  > On 24 Nov 2005 03:36:51 -0800, Ian Miller <ijm@uk2.net> wrote:  < > The CORAL 66  compiler that runs on VMS is still available0 > http://www.swep-eds.com/CORAL/CORAL%20Page.htm > C > Training was done for a while in Shire Hall (was Berkshire County I > Council which is now a Foster Wheeler office) which is up the hill from 
 > DECpark. >   D I am aware of that.  What I was trying to determine was whether this4 (1) is the same as the original compiler for the VAXD (2) if yes then does it use VCG backend, if no, did the original use(      it and how is this one implemented?% (3) in which language was it written?  Tom    ------------------------------    Date: 24 Nov 2005 06:53:30 -0800$ From: "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com>8 Subject: Re: HP : Massive strike and protest march todayB Message-ID: <1132844010.172444.16400@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>   David J Dachtera wrote:  > Lurker wrote:  > > C > > "David J Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> wrote in message ) > > news:437F46AE.61AAE08F@comcast.net...  > > > Lurker wrote:  > > > > G > > > > "David J Dachtera" <djesys.nospam@comcast.net> wrote in message - > > > > news:437E942F.368C4834@comcast.net... G > > > > > ...and there in we find "the rub": some labor contracts - and H > > > > > state/Federal laws - prohibit the replacement of workers until
 > > specified L > > > > > conditions are met. Unilateral action cannot be taken arbitrarily. > > > >  > > > > Like a strike? > > > G > > > Strikes are not arbitrary. They are a last resort when management ) > > > refuses to negotiate in good faith.  > > A > > You could say the same about dismissals or, as you call them, @ > > replacements. They are not arbitrary, they are a last resort= > > when unions or workers refuse to negotiate in good faith.  >  > Nope.  > J > Replacements are a deliberate action taken to "bust" the union and avoidG > the commitments the company made when it signed the contract with the @ > union workers. It is not arbitrary either, it is a deliberate,/ > pre-meditated attempt to escape a commitment.  > ( > > > > > > you have absolutely no right; > > > > > > to stop anyone from taking that job on whatever 8 > > > > > > conditions they (and the employer) agree on.	 > > > > > K > > > > > ...which also can prevent "replacements" being put in place until ' > > > > > specified conditions are met.  > > > > 9 > > > > Yeah, but who has signed up for those conditions? ( > > > > Was it the union or individuals? > > >  > > > Everyone.  > > 9 > > I haven't. So this proves that you are wrong already.  >  > Nope.  > 2 > > By example, not "everyone" signed up for that. > I > "Everyone" was inclusive of the individuals inferred by your reference. C > As you are not party to that (you are neither "the union" nor the 6 > "individuals" involved), your comment is irrelevant. >  > > > > Can I take that job < > > > > without signing up for those conditions or will I be/ > > > > prevented from doing that by the union?  > > > J > > > You will be prevented from being hired by the company's HR policies. > > ( > > Ah, now you are switching the rules. >  > Nope.  > I > The company's HR policies are neither arbitrary nor can they be changed  > unilaterally.  >  > You're 0 for 3 so far... >  > > If it's a company @ > > policy it's totally up to them (again, as long as they don't > > break the law of course).  > G > Not totally. Under federal labor regulations, the company cannot take , > action either unilaterally or arbitrarily. > 
 > 0 for 4. >  > > And it's up to me to accept ? > > those policies, try to get a better deal or just turn on my < > > heel and go elsewhere. But I don't agree that some union8 > > functionaries can tell me (and the company/employer)# > > what conditions that should be.  > J > If you select a collective bargaining agent to negotiate on your behalf,E > you bloody well do "agree that some union functionaries can tell me I > what conditions that should be". As to the company, that is part of the % > negotiated contract. They chose it.  > ? > > Note please that I understand it when employees *willingly* B > > join a union - that's their right and choice. What I do objectC > > to is when they *can't* stay out of the union. Not if they want  > > to keep the job. >  > Write your congress-person.  > 9 > > > > > > Also, you don't (or shouldn't) have the right : > > > > > > to intimidate, coerce or otherwise make people" > > > > > > to play by your rules.	 > > > > > K > > > > > ...even though that's exactly what "slave labor" employers do the 	 > > world  > > > > > over.  > > > > 7 > > > > Can you give an authoritative reference to your 6 > > > > definition of the "slave labor"? At the moment9 > > > > I'm not too sure what you are talking about even.  > > > + > > > Refer to the general media, reference  > > ; > > You used a term "slave labor" which seems to be illegal ? > > in most, if not all the countries of the world. So, can you   > > please define what you mean? > J > Refer to your favorite historical encyclopedia and stop playing ignorant > to avoid the issue.  >  > > References to the general  > > media won't cut it.  >  > Tough. Deal with it. > * > > I could just as well claim that unions > > enforce "slave labor". > ' > Not supported by historical evidence.  > 
 > 0 for 6. > ( > > If you know of a case which actually> > > qualifies for the term "slave labor" - contact the police. > = > U.S. police have no authority/jurisdiction outside the U.S.  > 
 > 0 for 7. >  > > We; > > are not talking about extreme cases like that (I hope).  > G > Sorry - that's *EXACTLY* what we are talking about! Read up on it and  > learn something! > ( > > > > > > > > I voted them into officeP > > > > > > > > (well, not me all the time, but the majority), I never gave that# > > > > > > > > power to any union. 
 > > > > > > > ' > > > > > > > You didn't have a choice.  > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, what has happened to democracy? Are you really> > > > > > > saying that you are happy to accept whatever rulesA > > > > > > a body you haven't voted in, haven't even heard about - > > > > > > for that matter, sets up for you? 	 > > > > > P > > > > > Isn't that *EXACTLY* what happens when your choice loses the election? > > > > I > > > > No. If my choice loses the election that means that I (and people I > > > > like me) got out-voted. But at least we had a chance. As you said   > > > > above in your statement: > > > > ' > > > > > > > You didn't have a choice.  > > > >  > > > > That's a lot different.  > > > J > > > Not really. Your choice lost. So, you're stuck with what the winners6 > > > want to shove down your throat, like it or else. > > C > > It is different. One - we could win, if we got out-voted, well, ; > > a pity, but it means that the majority had other ideas.  > H > Oh - so when it occurs as part of the potlical process, with which youJ > seem to agree, it's o.k. to impose the unwanted upon the unwilling. WhenF > it occurs as part of the management/labor relationship, to which you) > appear to take exception, it's not o.k.  >  > Very interesting.  >  > > But let @ > > me give you a recent example (I wasn't affected at all, just; > > read about it in the papers). A few days back there was A > > a strike in major Australian cities which has gridlocked them @ > > for a long time. The strikers objected to some proposed laws? > > that elected goverment wants to introduce. According to the ? > > estimates less than half union members joined the protests. D > > Out of all the work force it was about 5%. Add to that children,B > > elderly etc and you are probably talking just a couple percentC > > of the population. Yet, those few percents were allowed to hold # > > several major cities to ransom?  > J > Get over it - that's the way it works. Inconvenience in the name of fair > treatment of labor.  > < > > > > Did you miss something? I was talking about the case= > > > > (and you did too) where a union worker goes on strike < > > > > for no fault of my own. Simply 'cause the members of? > > > > his/her union have a grievance against another employer  > > > > I don't even know. > > > K > > > ...and your point is ...? When you rely on others for transportation, E > > > services, etc., you tacitly accept such possible eventualities.  > > 9 > > No, when I buy a bus pass I expect the bus to take me D > > to my destination (short of major natural disasters). Basically,= > > as a consumer, I shouldn't have to know or care about any C > > union policies - if you don't like the conditions, don't accept ? > > them, I'll go elsewhere. But, when a union makes sure there C > > is nowhere else to go (cause of it's influence) then I'm robbed B > > of my rights. Same if I want to hire someone but ain't allowed > > to do that by a union. > ( > Then drive yourself, walk or don't go. > G > Life is not convenient, fair, or 100% anything else you might want or 	 > desire.  >  > Get over it. > J > You struck out a couple times over and then some with that response. Get > over it. Move on.  >  > -- > 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/  > $ > Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page:! > http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/  >  > Coming soon:( > Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page  E Well, I think we should get our issues straight as there are multiple  issues.    Claims in this thread:  $ 1. Unions are good/bad for buisness:D    a.) bad, as they get -- according to some -- outlandish wages and+ benefits, hurting businesses and taxpayers. F    b.) bad, as they often institute highly restricitve rules about whoE can do what work for a buisness or gov't., making it difficult to get  things done.F    c.) Some union workers are lazy and obnoxious, milking projects for6 too many hours, etc. Some are good and honest workers.)    d.) good because they provide training   E 2. Unions are good/bad for workers, getting them a better/worse deal. 9 This includes wages and benefits, and working conditions.   ? One thing I noticed from some is a pure "every man for himself" B attitude. They argue that unions should not be allowed to lock outD non-union workers willing to work for less. I think that's fine to aA point. I have read news about what I feel are unreasonably unsafe F working conditions for some workers in the U.S. And then there are theE sweatshops which at least one poster claims don't exist. I think news D like Kathy Lee Gifford and Nike being accused of taking advantage ofG sweatshops and some Op-ed pieces I've read, including some arguing that C boycotting sweatshops is actually bad for such workers as it forces A them into even WORSE living conditions (no job at all or becoming E prostitutes, including child prostitutes [has no one participating in A this thread ever read of such?]), and news articles detailing the G horrid working conditions for some means that maybe there is a problem! C I don't think it's a terrible thing to want to try to bring about a @ world in which workers don't have to endure truly horrid workingD conditions, like long hours without bathroom breaks, being fired for? getting sick, etc. OTOH, I have problems with unions (and union A members) that abuse their power, but this isn't a simple good/bad  problem.  G Principles have the problem of unintended consequences. I believe it is D important to address such consequences, even if it means backing off% from the originating principle a bit.    JMHO   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 07:53:13 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> ' Subject: New PL/I kit for OpenVMS Alpha ( Message-ID: <ops0q42zdbzgicya@hyrrokkin>  * Also added some new links to the web site. www.kednos.com Tom    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 13:56:49 +0100 ( From: JOUKJ <joukj@hrem.nano.tudelft.nl>/ Subject: Re: PHP_MYSQL/SWS2.1 and authorization < Message-ID: <43efc$4385b892$82a13cad$16065@news1.tudelft.nl>   Martin Borgman wrote:  > 3 > the problem you describe is a well known problem. H > The first solution is to revert back to the old authentication method. > , > You can do this by editing run_mysqld.com: > = >     Add the option "--old-passwords" to the mysqld command.  > H > The second option is to compile mysql 4.1.x client yourself using the  > SWS_PHP 1.3 sources. > F > The third option is to use the first option for now and to wait for A > Jean-Franois to build a new version of the mysql 4.1.x client. E I would like to go for option 2, but I have no idea where to get the  F sources. They are in the SWS_PHP 1.3 source-distribution, but that is  obvious the wrong one.I On Jean-Franois's site I can only find binaries for php_mysql. Is there   a way to get the sources?                        Jouk   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2005.656 ************************