1 INFO-VAX	Tue, 18 Oct 2005	Volume 2005 : Issue 581       Contents:6 Re: Announcing the proVMS Computer Experts Association6 Re: Announcing the proVMS Computer Experts Association Booting from SAN?  Re: Booting from SAN?  Re: Booting from SAN? ) Can we please have ECP in .PCSI* format ? > Cd-r Verbatim 0,17  Dvd Verbatim 0,36  * www.dvd100.net 5194 Re: ES40 MODEL NUMBER F$GETSYII Re: fork() (Was: Re: Will "COM for OpenVMS" be ported to Itanium ?) ?) ?) I Re: fork() (Was: Re: Will "COM for OpenVMS" be ported to Itanium ?) ?) ?) I Re: fork() (Was: Re: Will "COM for OpenVMS" be ported to Itanium ?) ?) ?) O Re: fork() (Was: Re: Will "COM for OpenVMS" be ported to Itanium ?) ?) ?) ?) ?) 7 Re: Historical point on VMS and security certifications B Re: Memory Barriers and Synchronization (was: Re: fork() (Was: ... Re: OpenVMS 8.2-1  Re: Porting VMS back to VAX ?  Re: Porting VMS back to VAX ?  Re: Porting VMS back to VAX ?  Re: Porting VMS back to VAX ?  Re: set time on Itanium OpenVMS  Re: set time on Itanium OpenVMS  Re: set time on Itanium OpenVMS  Re: set time on Itanium OpenVMS  Re: TCP/IP NFS-mount Re: VMS support strategy?  Re: VMS support strategy?  Re: [CSWS V2.1] When expected ?  Re: [CSWS V2.1] When expected ?  Re: [CSWS V2.1] When expected ?  Re: [CSWS V2.1] When expected ?   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:33:17 +0100 % From: "issinoho" <issinoho@gmail.com> ? Subject: Re: Announcing the proVMS Computer Experts Association 4 Message-ID: <dj0qp9$j2o$1$830fa79d@news.demon.co.uk>   Guys,   @ I see you are using TextPattern on your website. Does this work K out-of-the-box on VMS. If you have time I would appreciate you documenting  ( the construction of the website on VAMP H (http://www.issinoho.com:8080/phpbb2/) for the benefit of the community.  @ Best Regards and well done. Look forward to the English version.  * <thierry.uso@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message = news:1129553090.125309.320350@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... & > Translation of the official announce >  > /---- . > French professionnal join to promote OpenVMS > D > The launch of the proVMS association is the culmination of severalB > months of reflection by a group of OpenVMS contractors including3 > independant consultants and IT service providers.  > H > The members of proVMS believe in a future for OpenVMS; this belief hasD > been further strengthened in recent months by a number of positiveH > events : the improvement in HPs sales figures for OpenVMS after a longG > period of stagnation, advertising campaigns launched by distributors, & > the good health of Interex Europe... > G > The proVMS association proposes to (i) promote the networks of skills C > surrounding OpenVMS, (ii) offer forum space for discussion on the I > OpenVMS renaissance and its commercial interest to enterprise and (iii) 4 > to facilitate contractor to client communications. > I > The future only will tell the extent and nature of this revival  but by E > supporting proVMS it is at least possible to actively contribute to  > this future. > B > The launch of www.provms.org web site (currently only in french)+ > constitutes the first offering of proVMS.  >  > Pay us a visit ! > -----/ > B > proVMS targets the french OpenVMS market in a fisrt step. We can% > contact us at : contact@provms.org.  >    ------------------------------    Date: 17 Oct 2005 15:18:59 -0700 From: thierry.uso@wanadoo.fr? Subject: Re: Announcing the proVMS Computer Experts Association C Message-ID: <1129587539.811245.288240@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   A We have tested some CMS on OpenVMS (spip, mambo and guppy) before F choosing TextPattern. spip and co needed modification of the PHP code, rename of files...  C TextPattern 1.0rc3 works out-of-the-box on OpenVMS. We have not yet  tested the last stable version.   % We choosed TextPattern also because : ?   - it has a strict separation between presentation and content    - it generates a clean XHTML&   - it has powerfull publish functions  
 Weakness :3   - it needs a good understanding in CSS stylesheet    - not enough documentation  D When we built the website, PHP was not supported by WASD on Itanium. So, we choosed Apache.  6 I will document soon all the stuff on your VAMP board.   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 23:33:28 GMT 2 From: AJ Schroeder <ajschroeder-no-spam@gmail.com> Subject: Booting from SAN?7 Message-ID: <cxW4f.7290$1A1.5942@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com>    Hello,  B I have a DS5305 "white box" that I have been trying to boot off an< HSG80 controller. Yes, the white boxes are technically not aB supported hardware platform for OpenVMS, but I have yet to see VMS not work on this machine.   ; Anyway, as I stated, I am attempting to boot off of a HSG80 B controller, I ran through wwidmgr from SRM, and I see my mirrorset that I created:   
 P00>>>sho dev    <snip>2 polling kgpsa1 (KGPSA-C) slot 4, bus 0 PCI, hose 16 kgpsab0.0.0.4.1    PGB0        WWN 2000-0000-c922-366b7 dgb11.1001.0.4.1   $1$DGA11                 HSG80  V86F  </snip>   * Here is the SRM output when I try to boot:   P00>>>boot dgb11 Initializing...    <snip>% environment variable srm_boot created @ DIGITAL Server 5000 Model 5305 6533A Console V6.0-4, 10-MAY-2001 10:11:42  
 CPU 0 booting   6 usage is boot <device> [-file <file>] [-flags <flags>] >>>    </snip>  P00>>>sho boot_osflags boot_osflags            0,0  P00>>>  F I have also tried to boot using $1$DGA11 and DGA11, but no luck on anyB of the device names, I get the same thing, the machine inits, then' gives me the usage of the boot command.   6 If anyone has any ideas, it would be much appreciated.   Thanks,    --   AJ Schroeder   To reply: Remove "-no-spam"    ------------------------------    Date: 17 Oct 2005 21:00:33 -0700; From: "johnhreinhardt@yahoo.com" <johnhreinhardt@yahoo.com>  Subject: Re: Booting from SAN?C Message-ID: <1129608032.964056.235490@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>    AJ Schroeder wrote:  > Hello, > D > I have a DS5305 "white box" that I have been trying to boot off an> > HSG80 controller. Yes, the white boxes are technically not aD > supported hardware platform for OpenVMS, but I have yet to see VMS > not work on this machine.  > = > Anyway, as I stated, I am attempting to boot off of a HSG80 D > controller, I ran through wwidmgr from SRM, and I see my mirrorset > that I created:  >  > P00>>>sho dev  >  > <snip>4 > polling kgpsa1 (KGPSA-C) slot 4, bus 0 PCI, hose 18 > kgpsab0.0.0.4.1    PGB0        WWN 2000-0000-c922-366b9 > dgb11.1001.0.4.1   $1$DGA11                 HSG80  V86F 	 > </snip>  > , > Here is the SRM output when I try to boot: >  > P00>>>boot dgb11 > Initializing...  >  > <snip>' > environment variable srm_boot created B > DIGITAL Server 5000 Model 5305 6533A Console V6.0-4, 10-MAY-2001
 > 10:11:42 >  > CPU 0 booting  > 8 > usage is boot <device> [-file <file>] [-flags <flags>] > >>>  > 	 > </snip>  > P00>>>sho boot_osflags > boot_osflags            0,0  > P00>>> > H > I have also tried to boot using $1$DGA11 and DGA11, but no luck on anyD > of the device names, I get the same thing, the machine inits, then) > gives me the usage of the boot command.  > 8 > If anyone has any ideas, it would be much appreciated. > 	 > Thanks,  >  > -- > AJ Schroeder >  > To reply: Remove "-no-spam"    AJ, D   Your boot device should be the fully qualified name, i.e. you needD "dgb11.1001.0.4.1" as the boot device. This is what works for me.  I= also have the "white-box" 5305 version and a pair of HSG80's.    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 05:06:35 GMT 2 From: AJ Schroeder <ajschroeder-no-spam@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Booting from SAN?6 Message-ID: <vp%4f.3608$8K4.603@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com>   johnhreinhardt@yahoo.com wrote:    >  > AJ Schroeder wrote: 	 >> Hello,  >>E >> I have a DS5305 "white box" that I have been trying to boot off an ? >> HSG80 controller. Yes, the white boxes are technically not a E >> supported hardware platform for OpenVMS, but I have yet to see VMS  >> not work on this machine. >>> >> Anyway, as I stated, I am attempting to boot off of a HSG80E >> controller, I ran through wwidmgr from SRM, and I see my mirrorset  >> that I created: >> >> P00>>>sho dev >>	 >> <snip> 5 >> polling kgpsa1 (KGPSA-C) slot 4, bus 0 PCI, hose 1 9 >> kgpsab0.0.0.4.1    PGB0        WWN 2000-0000-c922-366b : >> dgb11.1001.0.4.1   $1$DGA11                 HSG80  V86F
 >> </snip> >>- >> Here is the SRM output when I try to boot:  >> >> P00>>>boot dgb11  >> Initializing... >>	 >> <snip> ( >> environment variable srm_boot createdC >> DIGITAL Server 5000 Model 5305 6533A Console V6.0-4, 10-MAY-2001  >> 10:11:42  >> >> CPU 0 booting >>9 >> usage is boot <device> [-file <file>] [-flags <flags>]  >> >>> >>
 >> </snip> >> P00>>>sho boot_osflags  >> boot_osflags            0,0	 >> P00>>>  >>E >> I have also tried to boot using $1$DGA11 and DGA11, but no luck on D >> any of the device names, I get the same thing, the machine inits,/ >> then gives me the usage of the boot command.  >>9 >> If anyone has any ideas, it would be much appreciated.  >>
 >> Thanks, >> >> --  >> AJ Schroeder  >> >> To reply: Remove "-no-spam" >  > AJ, F >   Your boot device should be the fully qualified name, i.e. you needF > "dgb11.1001.0.4.1" as the boot device. This is what works for me.  I? > also have the "white-box" 5305 version and a pair of HSG80's.   ? That did the trick! Figures... the *one* thing I didn't try. ;)    Thank you very much,   AJ Schroeder   ------------------------------    Date: 17 Oct 2005 23:17:41 -02006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)2 Subject: Can we please have ECP in .PCSI* format ?, Message-ID: <43543115$1@news.langstoeger.at>  O As I understand, one needs TDC on OpenVMS Alpha V8.2 for collecting performance F data and ECP (V5.5A and up) for displaying them (graphically). Right ?  N (V7.3-2: either TDC or ECP can be used for collecting, and ECP for displaying)   eg. )     $!SET COMMAND SYS$COMMON:[TDC]TDC$DCL 9     $ TDC COLLECT/COUNT=30/COLLECTION=TDC-ONE-HOUR ECPALL ?     $ ! Using the character-cell interface to the ECP Analyzer:      $ PLAN ANALYZE -*     _$    /CPC_FILE=TDC-ONE-HOUR.TDC$DAT -,     _$    /ANALYZE_REPORT=TDC-ONE-HOUR.RPT -      _$    /DUMP=TDC-ONE-HOUR.CSV9     $ ! OR using the Motif interface to the ECP Analyzer:      $ PLAN ANALYZE/MOTIF  K What I currently don't understand is the difference between TDC and TDC_RT. C TDC_RT is installed with VMS V8.2, but what for ? Collecting data ? L Why is then this other TDC product ? Displaying data ? I, thought, ECP is...> (On V7.3-2, there is no TDC_RT, only TDC, which collects data)  K Or is TDC the TDC_RT plus the SDK ? Do I need the SDK for collecting data ? I Probably not. So, TDC_RT is sufficient. But TDC gets updates. Will TDC_RT J get updates, too ? Probably not. So, is the use of TDC better than the useK of TDC_RT ? Likely. So, it is better to install TDC. And deinstall TDC_RT ?   . Ok, I will RTFM tomorrow, but in the meantime:  K May we please have ECP in .PCSI* format now (to be able to remove it later, J if PerfDat or other products become more interesting than ECP = free ;-) ?I (As I understand, PerfDat has its own collector and is not free, right ?)    Many TIA   --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 18:41:22 GMT  From: fmjbrsdr@yahoo.es G Subject: Cd-r Verbatim 0,17  Dvd Verbatim 0,36  * www.dvd100.net 5194 2 Message-ID: <mfS4f.22299$o8.5527@twister.auna.com>  : The best prices in dvds and cds, Verbatim Traxdata Princo    http://www.dvd100.net   ? Los mejores precios en Dvds y cds , Verbatim, traxdata, Princo.    http://www.dvd100.net    No lo dudes visitanos    Best Regards, Saluditos 
 Maria Sanz     ---   | Cib ravisetecik navan mulegamot dogeberel bas ta mecane lihar tit fehono tohitere lehawec sudas feta gabamoyami misapicebo .   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 21:21:18 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) ' Subject: Re: ES40 MODEL NUMBER F$GETSYI 2 Message-ID: <iBU4f.14757$EE3.984@news.cpqcorp.net>  m In article <17OCT05.10523046@thuria.waisman.wisc.edu>, karcher@thuria.waisman.wisc.edu (Carl Karcher) writes: 5 :And for a ES40-2 with a single 833 cpu you get 1984.   A   I updated and commented-up ALPHADEF for OpenVMS V8.2; there are ?   a whole lot more details and a whole lot more codes in there.   1   $ search sys$share:*.req ALPHA$K,ES40/match=and       N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------K     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 20:12:52 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) R Subject: Re: fork() (Was: Re: Will "COM for OpenVMS" be ported to Itanium ?) ?) ?)3 Message-ID: <8BT4f.14748$EE3.8116@news.cpqcorp.net>   g In article <dio3q0$b4l$1@news-02.connect.com.au>, "Richard Maher" <maher_rj@hotspamnotmail.com> writes:   C :Can anyone show me which part of the "Programming Concepts Manual" J :(presumably the bit on shared memory) that tells you that your $enq/$deqsK :are a plebian waste of time and that unless you're coding in C and use the H :MB() instruction and have Hoff on the project then you're up shit creek :without a paddle?  D   $enq and $deq work just fine for locking, and these and most otherB   (all other?) system service calls include a memory barrier call.E   The calls to $enq and $deq are heavier than some applications using D   shared memory might need or want, so these applications can and do$   directly use memory barrier calls.      N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------K     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 07:42:33 +0100 3 From: "Richard Maher" <maher_rj@hotspamnotmail.com> R Subject: Re: fork() (Was: Re: Will "COM for OpenVMS" be ported to Itanium ?) ?) ?)1 Message-ID: <dj1d09$nas$1@news-02.connect.com.au>    Hi Hoff,  F >   $enq and $deq work just fine for locking, and these and most otherD >   (all other?) system service calls include a memory barrier call.  J That's a relief. I was aware of the non-atomic and unaligned memory accessI dangers and ASTs, even on a single-processor machine but this other stuff E was beginning to scare me. Now, I will go and read the Ask the wizard E references you posted to find out a bit about these light-wait memory L synchronization techniques (lost interest when PPL$ died and everything wentJ threads) that others are using. But your post left me wondering why (all?)? System Service calls *need* to "include a memory barrier call"?   9 Should all developers of UWSSs be deploying this explicit $ synchronization/flush and if so why?   Cheers Richard Maher  I PS. A couple of ask the wizard question came up on a DECdtm search of the K VMS site the other day and left me with the impression that the "Wizard" is K complete pants when it comes to DECdtm questions :-) Don't worry Kerry says ! you won't be getting any more :-(   0 "Hoff Hoffman" <hoff@hp.nospam> wrote in message- news:8BT4f.14748$EE3.8116@news.cpqcorp.net... C > In article <dio3q0$b4l$1@news-02.connect.com.au>, "Richard Maher" % <maher_rj@hotspamnotmail.com> writes:  > E > :Can anyone show me which part of the "Programming Concepts Manual" L > :(presumably the bit on shared memory) that tells you that your $enq/$deqsI > :are a plebian waste of time and that unless you're coding in C and use  the J > :MB() instruction and have Hoff on the project then you're up shit creek > :without a paddle? > F >   $enq and $deq work just fine for locking, and these and most otherD >   (all other?) system service calls include a memory barrier call.G >   The calls to $enq and $deq are heavier than some applications using F >   shared memory might need or want, so these applications can and do& >   directly use memory barrier calls. >  >  > ( >  ---------------------------- #include' <rtfaq.h> ----------------------------- 4 >     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ --  www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq , >  --------------------------- pure personal# opinion --------------------------- G >         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com  >    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 00:57:10 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) R Subject: Re: fork() (Was: Re: Will "COM for OpenVMS" be ported to Itanium ?) ?) ?)3 Message-ID: <GLX4f.14793$_Q3.7869@news.cpqcorp.net>   g In article <dj1d09$nas$1@news-02.connect.com.au>, "Richard Maher" <maher_rj@hotspamnotmail.com> writes:   G :>   $enq and $deq work just fine for locking, and these and most other E :>   (all other?) system service calls include a memory barrier call.  : K :That's a relief. I was aware of the non-atomic and unaligned memory access J :dangers and ASTs, even on a single-processor machine but this other stuffF :was beginning to scare me. Now, I will go and read the Ask the wizardF :references you posted to find out a bit about these light-wait memoryM :synchronization techniques (lost interest when PPL$ died and everything went K :threads) that others are using. But your post left me wondering why (all?) @ :System Service calls *need* to "include a memory barrier call"? : : :Should all developers of UWSSs be deploying this explicit% :synchronization/flush and if so why?     D   If your code will be contending with data or arguments or storage D   that is involving shared memory and multiprocessing, I/O space, or@   with driver-level DMA, you may (or will) need memory barriers.  C   Regardless, you will certainly want to know the memory access and    memory-ordering rules.  C   Granularity of reference -- I think this topic was added into the B   FAQ -- hit one of the OpenVMS kernel bits big-time a while back,=   causing all manner of "fun" until the cause was found.  An  >   "adjacent" longword was getting corrupted by code running inC   parallel, even though there were no collisions and no overlapping E   references between the activities.  This took a while to find, too.   D   Even on shared memory code targeted for uniprocessors, I tend to  B   prefer to follow and to use the multiprocessor rules -- somebodyB   eventually uses the code on a multiprocessor, and then my 'phoneB   inevitably rings.  (And of course, these corruptions are usually,   supremely difficult to to reproduce, too.)  C   Some code I'm working on now takes out application-specific locks D   intended to explicitly prevent multiple users from going after theB   same structure -- in parallel.  This because I know somebody is F   going to attempt it, whether deliberately through complete accident.    N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------K     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 20:07:50 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) X Subject: Re: fork() (Was: Re: Will "COM for OpenVMS" be ported to Itanium ?) ?) ?) ?) ?)3 Message-ID: <qwT4f.14747$EE3.9546@news.cpqcorp.net>   c In article <434EA011.11054.E8D57EE@localhost>, "Stanley F. Quayle" <squayle@insight.rr.com> writes: ) :On 13 Oct 2005 at 16:44, JF Mezei wrote: H :> Pardon my ignorance here, but what does "memory barrier instructions"	 :> mean ?  ..> :  A Memory Barrier instruction forces the memory subsystem to; :  flush all pending writes out to memory.  Other processes < :  accessing the same data cell will then be able to see the: :  changes.  If no Memory Barrier instruction is executed,5 :  when the changes are visible is non-deterministic.  : G :In C, there's a built-in _MB() function on Alpha to make this happen.  E :The same built-in on Itanium does a Memory Fence instruction, which   :is similar.    H   One place where you can get into serious trouble in most languages andH   shared memory is with the implicit register-based caching of data thatH   is frequently performed.  There are storage keywords -- volatile comesF   to mind -- that can help with this.  Barring DMA-related "fun", mostG   of the problems I've seen involve translation buffers and MP systems, D   or non-atomic read-modify operations that got interrupted part way   through the sequence.     N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------K     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 15:31:15 -0400 - From: William Webb <william.w.webb@gmail.com> @ Subject: Re: Historical point on VMS and security certificationsI Message-ID: <8660a3a10510171231s11a4bb15s50d0ad1b249ae136@mail.gmail.com>   6 On 10/17/05, FredK <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> wrote:L > If it is Leo, that is the right person.  What you need to really provide = isI > not just the question, but a projection.  That is, "we have $30 million E > dollars in projected OpenVMS sales in CY200X that require XXX for a < > successdul bid.  How do we work with HP and OpenVMS to get > this support." > C > Now you have someones attention.  The governments handling of COE B > left a bad taste in everyones mouth and people are gun-shy about? > committing engineering resources, time and money on this type A > of requirement unless we see an actual bottom line return or up 
 > front cash.  >  > < > "William Webb" <william.w.webb@gmail.com> wrote in messageE > news:8660a3a10510170810m229c0560v8b0a89a0faffcc74@mail.gmail.com... 8 > On 10/17/05, FredK <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> wrote: >  > Hi, Fred-  > H > I've sent emails sporadically for a good while now, to someone I won'tH > name asking about Common Criteria certification and whether there wereE > plans to pursue it for VMS-- last I heard (which has been some time , > ago) the decision was still up in the air. >  >  >  >  >     C It *was*, (he's a really nice guy, by the way- but you already know C that) and, if I could make projections (or predictions!) like those A you mention with any measure of accuracy, I'd be telling you what 7 stocks to buy so we both could retire next week.  : ^ )    WWWebb   --C NOTE: This email address is only used for noncommerical VMS-related  correspondence. C All unsolicited commercial email will be deemed to be a request for 8 services pursuant to the terms and conditions located at# http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/e/webbww/    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 20:03:01 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) K Subject: Re: Memory Barriers and Synchronization (was: Re: fork() (Was: ... 3 Message-ID: <VrT4f.14746$EE3.6312@news.cpqcorp.net>   c In article <434E5CE6.32015.D870169@localhost>, "Stanley F. Quayle" <squayle@insight.rr.com> writes: + :On 13 Oct 2005 at 9:44, Bob Koehler wrote: @ :>    But mostly people used single processor systems, where all# :>    processes see the same thing.  : D :Not true.  I had a set of processes communicating through a global C :section.  Worked perfectly on VAX, but totally messed up on Alpha  E :until I put explicit memory barrier instructions.  Single processor.  : 6 :Hoff told me I'd have to do that, and he was right...  /   I learned that one the hard way, I might add.   C   There is a VAX box or two that has comparatively more aggressive  @   processor caching than most other VAX boxes, and the behaviourA   caught a few VAX applications short; applications that were not C   managing the shared memory caches and writes into the instruction B   stream per the rules saw various failures.  Failure to issue the?   requisite REI before attempting to execute the generated code >   could cause consistency problems, as I recall.  (There is an6   equivalent IMB PALcode call for Alpha applications.)  ?   There are a series of so-called litmus tests for read and for @   write ordering on Alpha; these are in the architecture manual.?   There is a topic or two in the Ask The Wizard area.  Two that >   I'd look at are topics (2681) and (6984).  (1661) is/was the/   "master" "coding bugs" topic over there, too.    A   Uniprocessors tend to be fairly safe, but you can get into some C   serious trouble with DMA and read-write ordering even on an Alpha D   uniprocessor, if you don't follow the barrier rules.  You can alsoB   get into some trouble with instruction granularity; with (a lackD   of) atomic operations.  And then there are the usual bits of "fun"B   with the granularity of reference; virtual memory references too?   close together can effectively get tangled.  I much prefer to :   follow the memory barrier rules, even on a uniprocessor.    N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------K     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 15:29:42 -0400 " From: "Hal Kuff" <kuff@tessco.com> Subject: Re: OpenVMS 8.2-10 Message-ID: <11l7ut7ov8kljfb@corp.supernews.com>  L Thanxs Kerry, we have full doc set and distribution and wanetd to make sure L we did not miss anything... in theory when we get an un-obtanium we can get L the DVD kit as well... We are looking to get a dual processor box very soon  actually...     3 "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com> wrote in message  L news:FD827B33AB0D9C4E92EACEEFEE2BA2FB70C475@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net...   > -----Original Message-----) > From: Hal Kuff [mailto:kuff@tessco.com]   > Sent: October 17, 2005 8:43 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com  > Subject: OpenVMS 8.2-1 > ; > Has anyone received a kit, and if so how recently... does  > everyone on Alpha 6 > continue to get the kits or was it un-obtanium only? >    Hal -   E OpenVMS V8.2-1 is Integrity only - adds support for features to bring G Integrity in line with Alpha (e.g. 96 node clusters etc), has bug fixes ) and a number of performance enhancements.    The V8.2-1 doc's are online at: - http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/os82_index.html    Regards   
 Kerry Main Senior Consultant  HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660  Fax: 613-591-4477  kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)   4 OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 16:58:48 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> & Subject: Re: Porting VMS back to VAX ?, Message-ID: <43541086.D494F890@teksavvy.com>   John Reagan wrote:E > Also, much of the Macro-32 code over the years has evolved to using I > various EVAX_ builtins and referencing the additional R16-R24 registers H > for increased performance.  Plus most of the Macro-32 code was touchedH > when moving from VAX to Alpha to add things like .CALL_ENTRY, etc. andH > recoding to not use features that the Macro compiler couldn't support.    F So basically, VAX Macro has evolved on Alpha and IA64 but not on VAX !  C If VAX Macro on VAX were to be updated, couldn't it support the new E constructs that exist on Alpha and IA64 making much easier to use the " alpha/ia64 code base back on VAX ?  F In tersm of calling standards, isn't IA64 quite different from Alpha ?E If so, there would already be conditional code for each architecture, < right ? Same for image activator and plenty of other things.    G > Bottom line is that the amount of effort would be substantial for low G > payback in most cases.  If you believe there is a business reason for H > moving a specific feature back to VAX, then please share that with us.  > But was just curious about the status of the code and just howF incomatible it had become to prevent the real VMS code base from beingD used to generate VAX versions of VMS. Prior to the port to IA64, theG code bases were not designed to be shared, but with the work to support E IA64, this has changed. So I was just wondering if , now that the VMS G code base can suport multiple architectures, if supporting VAX from the . current alpha/ia64 code base would be so hard.  H (I realise that there is no business case for it at this point in time).   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 22:23:33 GMT & From: John Reagan <john.reagan@hp.com>& Subject: Re: Porting VMS back to VAX ?4 Message-ID: <FvV4f.14767$oJ3.12888@news.cpqcorp.net>   JF Mezei wrote:    > H > So basically, VAX Macro has evolved on Alpha and IA64 but not on VAX !  A The VAX Macro was extended on Alpha and IA64 for several reasons:   I - To take advantage of additional hardware features (ie, more registers,   wider registers)  H - To tell the compiler additional information that it needs to generate H code since Alpha and IA64 don't have single instructions like CALLS and I RET that magically know how to save and restore registers from the stack.      > E > If VAX Macro on VAX were to be updated, couldn't it support the new G > constructs that exist on Alpha and IA64 making much easier to use the $ > alpha/ia64 code base back on VAX ?   So, if we see a    EVAX_LDQ R24,8(R21)   I on VAX, exactly what would you expect the compiler to do?  How would you  I pass them around efficiently?  How would the operating system save their  E state around ASTs?  Interrupts?  It would be way more work than just   "updating the compiler".  < Some of the Alpha/I64 Macro features like ".call_entry" and F ".call_linkage" are already accepted by the VAX compiler (it silently  ignores them).   > H > In tersm of calling standards, isn't IA64 quite different from Alpha ?G > If so, there would already be conditional code for each architecture, > > right ? Same for image activator and plenty of other things.  I For parameter passing, etc. IA64 and Alpha are more alike than VAX.  For  E unwind information, VAX and Alpha are more alike than I64.  Same for  D object/image formats, debug information, etc.  It is hard to make a @ general statement on which more is more like VAX than the other.   > @ > But was just curious about the status of the code and just howH > incomatible it had become to prevent the real VMS code base from beingF > used to generate VAX versions of VMS. Prior to the port to IA64, theI > code bases were not designed to be shared, but with the work to support G > IA64, this has changed. So I was just wondering if , now that the VMS I > code base can suport multiple architectures, if supporting VAX from the 0 > current alpha/ia64 code base would be so hard. >   E As we ported OpenVMS to I64, we *tried* to isolate/hide architecture  G dependent features when we had to visit them to make changes (bury the  H differences in macros, utility routines, etc.).  However, the compilers G handled much of the source code without human intervention.  We didn't  D turn Macro-32 into a high-level language, we just tried to hide the H differences that couldn't be handled by the compilers.  Also, we didn't : hide ALL of them.  There are still lots of code that reads   .ifdef ALPHA	 something  .endc    .ifdef IA64 	 something  .endc   B that would need additional work if we ported to another platform. 5 Hopefully they can all be found with SEARCH at least.    --   John Reagan / HP Pascal/{A|I}MACRO for OpenVMS Project Leader  Hewlett-Packard Company    ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 23:10:10 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) & Subject: Re: Porting VMS back to VAX ?3 Message-ID: <mbW4f.14773$FD3.8304@news.cpqcorp.net>   H : So basically, VAX Macro has evolved on Alpha and IA64 but not on VAX !  E   A down-port of the OpenVMS 64-bit code pool (Alpha and I64) and its E   kernel and application code from a 64-bit platform back to a 32-bit B   platform is just as likely as a port of most any existing 32-bitA   platform back to its 16-bit predecessor platform(s), of course.   D   As we stated some eons ago, the VAX kernel and its environment is,D   are, and will remain stable -- we'd have to overhaul it as part ofA   any down-port, causing most any drivers or other kernel-code to !   require relinks or more rework.   C   Getting the compilers and the code generation and other such back F   to OpenVMS VAX is just the first part of the effort here -- stuffingE   applications back into 32-bits virtual and (up to) 34-bits physical E   will be entertaining.    (Piles of my own OpenVMS source code won't H   particularly down-port willingly, either due to prerequisite products,C   or due to use of compiler features or system services or such for E   64-bit operations.)  The additional expectation here -- that any of G   this work would keep most existing 32-bit code on OpenVMS VAX working D   -- is non-trivial, particularly where we would have to tear up theH   existing kernel to make it 64-bit.  Or pull enough out of the existing0   applications to remove the 64-bit assumptions.  E   Except for PDAs and existing and embedded applications, most 32-bit E   processing is basically dead, too -- the software on many platforms D   is often stuck on 16-bit or 32-bit assumptions, but -- even in theB   PC space -- the new hardware is 64-bit.  And both PC and OpenVMSD   VAX 32-bit software is moving forward.  So why again would we wantC   to spend the effort down-porting 64-bit code to 32-bit iron here, A   when we could be adding features into OpenVMS on current 64-bit    hardware?   C   Could we get more pieces back to OpenVMS VAX and 32-bit?  Sure.   F   Could we down-port all of the 64-bit OpenVMS implementation?  Maybe.E   But in the time that it would take to down-port OpenVMS -- ignoring E   what I perceive as a (lack of) interest that folks have around this F   particular address space reduction right now -- would anybody want aD   down-port enough to pay for it?  Or would you rather have new work   and new features?     N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------K     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:56:04 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> & Subject: Re: Porting VMS back to VAX ?, Message-ID: <43543A04.4D3EE1C1@teksavvy.com>   Hoff Hoffman wrote: F >   As we stated some eons ago, the VAX kernel and its environment is,F >   are, and will remain stable -- we'd have to overhaul it as part ofC >   any down-port, causing most any drivers or other kernel-code to # >   require relinks or more rework.   ? In terms of drivers, wouldn't the Alpha and IA64 drivers differ G substantially ? Or do they share some core structure which is radically ' different from those designed for VAX ?   C At a higher level, such as file system and DCL/utilities, would the 0 Alpha source code pool be easily usable on VAX ?  E >   Getting the compilers and the code generation and other such back = >   to OpenVMS VAX is just the first part of the effort here    G John Reagan mentioned differences in MACRO. But would C , Bliss and PL1 A really have significant differences that would prevent Alpha code  compilation on VAX ?    G >   Except for PDAs and existing and embedded applications, most 32-bit % >   processing is basically dead, too   	 I agree.    F >   VAX 32-bit software is moving forward.  So why again would we wantE >   to spend the effort down-porting 64-bit code to 32-bit iron here, C >   when we could be adding features into OpenVMS on current 64-bit 
 >   hardware?   D Because of the secret upcoming 3ghz VAX with 64 bit extensions to be' produced by AMD :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)     H I just wanted to know just how different the code had become between VAXF and Alpha and whether it would have been easy to re-integrate VAX intoJ the real code base now that it was able to support multiple architectures.   ------------------------------  # Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 21:17:17 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) ( Subject: Re: set time on Itanium OpenVMS4 Message-ID: <xxU4f.14755$EE3.11847@news.cpqcorp.net>  ^ In article <1129568762.479534.190700@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, Don.Zong@gmail.com writes:A :I was trying to set time on Itanium OpenVMS 8.2-1, but no go, no F :error/warning message, time doesn't get changed at all. DTSS disabledC :and deleted. NTP was shutdown. Can someone give it try on your own H :itanium OpenVMS box and please let me know the result. I might overlook' :something. But this is really strange.   H   Works OK here, on an rx2600 running a version of OpenVMS (likely) past   OpenVMS I64 V8.2-1.   J   What was the exact SET TIME command used, which particular Integrity boxH   is involved, and are messages (eg: f$environment("MESSAGE")) disabled?  H   What sort of time change are you after?  (If this is the usual part ofG   going onto or off of daylight saving time (DST -- and do remember to  E   recycle your unused daylight), or if you are reading the time value ?   back via C or other RTL, you might want to take a look at the G   information on TDF and timezone management available within the FAQ.)   N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------K     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------    Date: 17 Oct 2005 16:07:12 -0700 From: Don.Zong@gmail.com( Subject: Re: set time on Itanium OpenVMSC Message-ID: <1129590432.652649.226130@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   C Did a few more tests, look like I was able to change time for small A delta time say a few minutes, but if I chang from current time to G 30-Oct-2005:01:56:00 ( I was trying to test time change - fall back) or C some time way ahead, it just won't get changed. My box is rx2600 as # well. I am sure message is enabled.    Hoff Hoffman wrote: ` > In article <1129568762.479534.190700@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, Don.Zong@gmail.com writes:C > :I was trying to set time on Itanium OpenVMS 8.2-1, but no go, no H > :error/warning message, time doesn't get changed at all. DTSS disabledE > :and deleted. NTP was shutdown. Can someone give it try on your own J > :itanium OpenVMS box and please let me know the result. I might overlook) > :something. But this is really strange.  > J >   Works OK here, on an rx2600 running a version of OpenVMS (likely) past >   OpenVMS I64 V8.2-1.  > L >   What was the exact SET TIME command used, which particular Integrity boxJ >   is involved, and are messages (eg: f$environment("MESSAGE")) disabled? > J >   What sort of time change are you after?  (If this is the usual part ofH >   going onto or off of daylight saving time (DST -- and do remember toG >   recycle your unused daylight), or if you are reading the time value A >   back via C or other RTL, you might want to take a look at the I >   information on TDF and timezone management available within the FAQ.)  > P >  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------M >     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq P >  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------G >         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------  # Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 00:11:05 GMT # From: hoff@hp.nospam (Hoff Hoffman) ( Subject: Re: set time on Itanium OpenVMS3 Message-ID: <t4X4f.14786$5S3.4470@news.cpqcorp.net>   ^ In article <1129590432.652649.226130@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, Don.Zong@gmail.com writes:D :Did a few more tests, look like I was able to change time for smallB :delta time say a few minutes, but if I chang from current time toH :30-Oct-2005:01:56:00 ( I was trying to test time change - fall back) orD :some time way ahead, it just won't get changed. My box is rx2600 as$ :well. I am sure message is enabled.  @   The test I ran was on an rx2600, and one not running any time >   services such as those within DECnet-Plus, nor the NTP tool.   	--   B   Please see the description of managing the daylight saving time >   (DST) switch-over in the OpenVMS FAQ -- there are tools and =   mechanisms provided for this, either via a provided command =   procedure such as SYS$EXAMPLES:DAYLIGHT_SAVINGS.COM, or via B   the automatic DST switch-over mechanism available within OpenVMS9   V7.3 and later (eg: via the AUTO_DLIGHT_SAV parameter).   B   Going after the SET TIME command directly probably won't do what   you really want.   	--   B   If you really want to change the time directly, you will want toA   reboot to change the time forward or backwards by large values, D   using the SETTIME system parameter or similar mechanism during theB   reboot -- various software has been seen to become confused whenD   the running time changes (and either forward or backward) by largeF   values.  Some loops.  Some fails.  Some reports errors.  Some throws
   a snit.    	--   C   If you want to test, set AUTO_DLIGHT_SAV or such, and then reboot B   with SETTIME set to prompt for the time, and (obviously) set the8   system time to just before your local DST change-over.   	--   C   There is a mistake in the FAQ, as it refers to one of the two DST A   switch-overs as occuring in October next year in the US, and it    should indicate November.       N  ---------------------------- #include <rtfaq.h> -----------------------------K     For additional, please see the OpenVMS FAQ -- www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq N  --------------------------- pure personal opinion ---------------------------E         Hoff (Stephen) Hoffman   OpenVMS Engineering   hoff[at]hp.com    ------------------------------    Date: 17 Oct 2005 19:08:15 -0700$ From: "AEF" <spamsink2001@yahoo.com>( Subject: Re: set time on Itanium OpenVMSB Message-ID: <1129601295.545690.21280@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   Hoff Hoffman wrote:  [...] E >   There is a mistake in the FAQ, as it refers to one of the two DST C >   switch-overs as occuring in October next year in the US, and it  >   should indicate November.     F You're right that there is a mistake in the FAQ, but that is for 2007, not next year.  G Currently: Switch to DST on the first Sunday in April; fall back on the  last Sunday in October.   G New law for 2007 and beyond: Spring forward to DST on the 2nd Sunday in 4 March and fall back on the first Sunday in November.  D Also, the FAQ gives the range of dates for DST as inclusive which isF NOT the case. The vast majority of the falling-back Sunday is standard time.   G Re the list of Web sites given in the VMS FAQ: Another Web site I found = useful for time information for various parts of the world is       http://www.timeanddate.com   C Note that Indiana is going on DST starting 2006. Right now, most of > Indiana is on standard time year round and small portions nearD (relatively) densely populated areas just outside the Indiana border8 keep the same time as their respective nearby areas. See    /    http://webexhibits.org/daylightsaving/f.html    (info about the current system)    and   0    http://www.infoplease.com/spot/daylight1.html   (info about the new system)   = for more info on the peculiarities of timekeeping in Indiana.   E Disclaimer: I have no connection to any Web sites given in this post.    ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:52:15 +0000 (UTC) . From: klewis@LUMINA.MITRE.ORG (Keith A. Lewis) Subject: Re: TCP/IP NFS-mount . Message-ID: <dj0vde$sil$1@newslocal.mitre.org>   "Bendix" <br@b-riis.dk> writes in article <1129143133.326479.189620@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> dated 12 Oct 2005 11:52:13 -0700:  >TCPIP> sh proxy > < >VMS User_name     Type      User_ID    Group_ID   Host_name > 4 >NOBODY            ON             -2          -2   *1 >TCPIP> mount dnfs: /host=vax1 /path="/test/data" = >%TCPIP$DNFSMOUNT-E-MOUNTFAIL, error mounting _DNFS5:[000000] = >-SYSTEM-F-INVLOGIN, login information invalid at remote node   G My functioning NFS proxies show type "OND".  I think a reboot or tcp/ip H restart will change ON to OND.  There may even be a less disruptive way.  0 --Keith Lewis              klewis {at} mitre.org> The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:49:01 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> " Subject: Re: VMS support strategy?0 Message-ID: <11l7okq5b0n2n54@corp.supernews.com>   Larry Kilgallen wrote:] > In article <4352CA08.BAC1798@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:  >  > F >>When you have a dwindling interest in a platform, you do not wish toJ >>split newsgroups because you then lose critical mass to make a newsgroup: >>worthwhile since none of the groups have enough posters. >  > M > Is that worse than losing critical mass by driving away technical posters ?  >  > G >>The naysayers proved to be the most loyal are are still around in one Q >>remaining active newsgroup where what is left of the psion community "gathers".  >  > B > And what value is provided by forming a community of naysayers ?  F I try to not jump into such discussions.  Cannot hold back any longer.  ) Can we have a definition of a 'naysayer'?   E Is it anybody that doesn't agree with you, and/or anybody that posts  $ anything that you don't want to see?  D I for one am not happy going along with a fable.  If the king isn't B wearing any cloths, don't get angry because I say "The king isn't D wearing any cloths".  (Apologies to any who haven't read the story.)  G Currently, I have one (1) remaining VMS customer.  Periodically, I get  G asked the question, "Shouldn't we be looking at converting to windows?"   H Whose fault is this?  Well, the list is long.  On that list, promently, E is the various owners of VMS.  The perception to many is that VMS is  > dead, or dying.  Who is most responsible for challenging that D perception?  If I have to give you a hint, then the rest of this is + wasted time, since you'll never understand.   I When I see such posts, and name calling such as 'naysayer' and 'whiner',  I the only understanding I get is that some feel that when an entity loses  I it's VMS customers, they should just go away and leave the remaining few  G to continue with their fantasy that 'everything is Ok'.  Well, I'm not   going away.   F There is a wide range of dissent.  Some are reasonable.  Some ask for A rediculous things.  Some have agendas.  Trying to lump all these  F individuals together under one name isn't very reasonable.  Trying to G act like VMS isn't in decline, with few actions by HP to counter this,  + is a good way to see that decline continue.   H You suggest addressing things from a business perspective.  Last time I I tried that, the question "What's this mean in sales dollars?" was asked.  G   Well, at some time in the past I could have answered such a question  I with some dollar figure.  Due to the decline of VMS, and the loss of VMS  H customers, I can no longer answer such a question.  So to some, I guess  my input no longer matters.   G A question for Larry.  How many customers buy a VMS system to run your  H security software?  I'm guessing the answer would be zero, since such a H product would be bought to add security to a system purchased to run an E application, and security with nothing else doesn't make much sense.  G Would you want to be ignored by HP since you are not directly involved   in sales of hardware?   % Ok, I'm done with this stupid thread.    --  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, 17 Oct 2005 17:02:09 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> " Subject: Re: VMS support strategy?, Message-ID: <4354114F.92EBA215@teksavvy.com>   Larry Kilgallen wrote:M > Is that worse than losing critical mass by driving away technical posters ?     D Funny, of the "technical posters" who announced they were leaving, I# seem to recall a very good reason :   F "I've had to move to xxxxx because VMS was no longer used and must now/ support YYYYY and sadly don't use VMS anymore".   D The slow erosion of posters, one by one, should be a good indicationB that all is not well with VMS and that the installed base is stillE shrinking.  It isn't a case of people being driven because they don't  like what they read.   ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 19:22:19 +0100 % From: "issinoho" <issinoho@gmail.com> ( Subject: Re: [CSWS V2.1] When expected ?4 Message-ID: <dj0q4o$5hn$1$830fa7b3@news.demon.co.uk>  % Splendid news! Looking forward to it.     5 "Rick Barry" <richard.barry@hp.com> wrote in message  & news:4353dbef$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...E > We now expect a mid-November availability for SWS 2.1 on Alpha and  
 > Itanium. > , > SWS 2.1 removes the stream-lf restriction. >  > Rick Barry > Hewlett-Packard Company  > Secure Web Server Engineering  > OpenVMS System Software Group  > Nashua, NH > E > "Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER" <peter@langstoeger.at> wrote in message ( > news:4353f696$1@news.langstoeger.at...6 >> I wanted to upgrade a CSWS V2.0 system to VMS V8.2,8 >> but CSWS V2.1 with support for V8.2 is not yet there. >> On > >> http://www.openvms.digital.com/openvms/products/ips/apache/ >>< >> one can read of "is expected to be available in Q3 2005".4 >> So, on average, it is three months late so far... >>< >> What now, wait for V2.1 or better change to CSWS V1.3-1 ?? >> And will CSWS V2.1 lift the restriction to Stream-LF Files ?  >> >> TIA >> >> --  >> Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER( >> Network and OpenVMS system specialist >> E-mail  peter@langstoeger.at I >> A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist  >  >    ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 17:03:10 -0500 " From: "Schroeder, AJ" <aj1@qg.com>( Subject: Re: [CSWS V2.1] When expected ?* Message-ID: <dj1730$1lm5$1@sxnews1.qg.com>  1 "issinoho" <issinoho@gmail.com> wrote in message  . news:dj0q4o$5hn$1$830fa7b3@news.demon.co.uk...' > Splendid news! Looking forward to it.  >  > 7 > "Rick Barry" <richard.barry@hp.com> wrote in message  ( > news:4353dbef$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...F >> We now expect a mid-November availability for SWS 2.1 on Alpha and  >> Itanium.  >>- >> SWS 2.1 removes the stream-lf restriction.  >>
 >> Rick Barry  >> Hewlett-Packard Company  >> Secure Web Server Engineering  >> OpenVMS System Software Group
 >> Nashua, NH  >>F >> "Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER" <peter@langstoeger.at> wrote in message) >> news:4353f696$1@news.langstoeger.at... 7 >>> I wanted to upgrade a CSWS V2.0 system to VMS V8.2, 9 >>> but CSWS V2.1 with support for V8.2 is not yet there.  >>> On? >>> http://www.openvms.digital.com/openvms/products/ips/apache/  >>> = >>> one can read of "is expected to be available in Q3 2005". 5 >>> So, on average, it is three months late so far...  >>> = >>> What now, wait for V2.1 or better change to CSWS V1.3-1 ? @ >>> And will CSWS V2.1 lift the restriction to Stream-LF Files ? >>>  >>> TIA  >>>  >>> --   >>> Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER ) >>> Network and OpenVMS system specialist   >>> E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atJ >>> A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist >> >> >  > D Great news! Especially since I was recently bitten by the stream-lf B requirement. It was totally my fault since I didn't read the docs  completely.   
 AJ Schroeder     ------------------------------  % Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 18:58:57 -0400 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> ( Subject: Re: [CSWS V2.1] When expected ?0 Message-ID: <11l8apro3ukik8d@corp.supernews.com>   Rick Barry wrote: M > We now expect a mid-November availability for SWS 2.1 on Alpha and Itanium.  > , > SWS 2.1 removes the stream-lf restriction.  * Me thinks you will be a hero to many.  :-)   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  + Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 18:21:54 -0500 (CDT) * From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)( Subject: Re: [CSWS V2.1] When expected ?2 Message-ID: <05101718215425_20200274@antinode.org>   Rick Barry wrote: M > We now expect a mid-November availability for SWS 2.1 on Alpha and Itanium.  > , > SWS 2.1 removes the stream-lf restriction.      Sounds good.   (    Did anyone ever fix the problem whereF "@ SYS$MANAGER:APACHE$CONFIG.COM FLUSH" caused holes in the access log file?   H    Can SWS 2.1 be installed on an ODS2 disk?  (Or should I just read the documentation?)   H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2005.581 ************************