1 INFO-VAX	Wed, 19 Oct 2005	Volume 2005 : Issue 584       Contents: Re: Booting from SAN?  Re: Hurd on IA64 Re: Hurd on IA643 Re: Mozilla: everything works except typing in URLs ) Re: OT: Is your HP printer spying on you?  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: URL grumble  URL grumble  Re: URL grumble  Re: URL grumble  Re: URL grumble   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:05:51 -0500 " From: "Schroeder, AJ" <aj1@qg.com> Subject: Re: Booting from SAN?* Message-ID: <dj5gbh$1sca$1@sxnews1.qg.com>  ? "Malcolm Dunnett" <nothome@spammers.are.scum> wrote in message  & news:OXhiD7QYeTxx@malvm9.mala.bc.ca...9 > In article <cxW4f.7290$1A1.5942@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com>, 8 >   AJ Schroeder <ajschroeder-no-spam@gmail.com> writes: >> >> P00>>>boot dgb11  >> Initializing... >>	 >> <snip> ( >> environment variable srm_boot createdC >> DIGITAL Server 5000 Model 5305 6533A Console V6.0-4, 10-MAY-2001  >> 10:11:42  >> >> CPU 0 booting >>9 >> usage is boot <device> [-file <file>] [-flags <flags>]  >  >   have you tried:  >  > >>>SET BOOTDEF_DEV DG*11*  > >>>B > 9 >  to let the console determine the device name it likes?  > I I have not - I have been playing around with the bootdef_dev environment    var. by adding multiple devices.  K I didn't know that you could use wildcards in the SRM - at least with boot   devices?   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 12:01:22 GMT ( From: Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net> Subject: Re: Hurd on IA64 < Message-ID: <mAq5f.54921$U9.54794@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk>   JF Mezei wrote:    > @ > In a context where Hurd said that servers would be a key area.T > Discussing IA64, you would have expected a greater commitment than just "support".  - Here's another telling quote I've just found.   J http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=172302032  I He noted that "we are kind of out on a peninsula with Intel" as the only  H supporter of Itanium-based servers among the top four server providers, A "but if you look at our financial position and Intel's financial  I position, I feel good about our shot" at making those systems successful   in the market.   --   Possible translations:  I 1) Itanium is not currently a success and is losing us money but we will  E continue to pour billions of our (and Intel's) money into it just to  " have some shot at establishing it.  E 2) I think we've failed with Itanium but I still feel good about our  H shot at it. We've got loads of money to invest in something else - I've < got this great plan to put HP-UX, VMS and NonStop on X86-64.  " 3) Up shit creek without a paddle.   Others welcome.  --  
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Oct 2005 07:40:48 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler)  Subject: Re: Hurd on IA64 3 Message-ID: <vdKN$eDKjSES@eisner.encompasserve.org>   \ In article <4355B069.131FA374@teksavvy.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:  H > As for Itanium-based servers, Hurd said that HP remains committed. "IfG > you buy Itanium, you have my commitment for support. We're committed.  > Intel is committed," he said.   -    Image of a tight white suit comes to mind.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 07:56:00 -0500 6 From: "Craig A. Berry" <craigberry@mac.com.spamfooler>< Subject: Re: Mozilla: everything works except typing in URLsD Message-ID: <craigberry-6C87BC.07560019102005@news.isp.giganews.com>  $ In article <dj57q0$4kh$5@online.de>,E  helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to    reply) wrote:  G > I've encountered a strange problem with Mozilla in VMS.  I can access I > pages through links, through bookmarks or through the pull-down list of I > recently visited sites.  However, when typing in a URL directly (in the B > same window where the pull-down list is), NOTHING happens.  ThisC > occurred for the first time after having used Mozilla for several K > months, and since it has occurred, the behaviour has remained the same.   C > Restarting Mozilla or even rebooting the machine does not change   > anything.  > D > However, this problem exists only for one particular user.  Thus, J > presumably I can delete everything in that user's Mozilla directory and G > things will work again after the user starts Mozilla for the "first"  K > time again.  However, I would prefer a different solution and would like  ! > to understand what is going on.   @ I've seen this too, where you have to click the Go button after C entering the URL because hitting return does nothing.  I've always  F figured it was some hidden setting that got whacked but never found a ' solution.  Please post if you find one.    ------------------------------   Date: 19 OCT 2005 10:42:01 GMT4 From: karcher@thuria.waisman.wisc.edu (Carl Karcher)2 Subject: Re: OT: Is your HP printer spying on you?6 Message-ID: <19OCT05.10420142@thuria.waisman.wisc.edu>  & In a previous article, Tom Wade wrote:  I ->I remember hearing years ago that some form of ID tracking was put into > ->all color printers to help identify the source of any forged ->banknotes [treasury bills].   M I think it started even before that with color copiers when the feds realized G the resulting copies (on the right paper) where "good enough to spend".    --G -- Carl Karcher, Waisman Computing Services, Waisman Center, UW-Madison : --                   karcher.nomorespam@waisman.wisc.edu     ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 02:30:51 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> & Subject: Re: Porting VMS back to VAX ?, Message-ID: <4355E81A.5CF613DB@teksavvy.com>   John Santos wrote: > G > Oh, so you mean you *ARE* going to port VMS to the PDP-11!  Hooray!!!   F Perhaps they should consider porting VMS to ARM platform. This way, itE could be used in smartphones. Consider the huge advantage VMS has for F telephony applications since it comes with its own "PHONE" application already written :-)   D And consider the clustering capabilities. You could have a 96 personH support centre, with each person on their VMS-powered smartphone part ofF a 96 node cluster over a GSM interface (or UMTS where 3G is available)F and incoming calls could automatically be load balanced to the handsetA that is the least busy, and calls would automatically failover to B another handset when one person goes through a tunnel, and the newC support person would have access to all the files the first support 6 person was accessing at the time of entering a tunnel.    E With VMS on smartphones, FredK could be developping VMS while playing  golf.   D And consider the computing potential with batch queues on each phoneG processing important stuff while the phone is in the person's pocket to ( make use of every possible CPU cycle :-)   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Oct 2005 07:39:09 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) & Subject: Re: Porting VMS back to VAX ?3 Message-ID: <zoAcNC7hL4d$@eisner.encompasserve.org>   q In article <MPG.1dbfa0e9764af3c79896f9@news.bellatlantic.net>, John Santos <john.santos@post.harvard.edu> writes:  > G > Oh, so you mean you *ARE* going to port VMS to the PDP-11!  Hooray!!!  >   +    Right after they finish the 36 bit port.   F    I was actually in the room at a DECUS Symposium when one of the topF    managers (vp?) at DEC said they'd go ahead and do that just as soon+    as 36 bit systems came in blue cabinets.   D    He obviously didn't know the DECSYSTEM-20 line very well, both of@    mine were blue and I was tempted to return his little joke by/    voluntering that he could rent time on them.    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Oct 2005 07:34:21 -0500; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) & Subject: Re: Porting VMS back to VAX ?3 Message-ID: <pru3A$lLR0LT@eisner.encompasserve.org>   f In article <vee5f.20174$GH1.277053@news20.bellglobal.com>, "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> writes: > J > BTW, I am yet to be convinced that EPIC is better than RISC. One way to O > convince me would be to write a SETI@Home (or BOINC) client and then publish  M > the results for the whole world to drool at. Compaq did this with Alpha so  & > why wouldn't HP do it with Itanium ?  C    I believe SETI did thier own ports, and if the vendor supplied a D    port SETI still had to verify it.  I also think SETI is no longer    looking for new ports.   C    BOINC might still be looking for new ports, but I think it would #    still depend on being certified.           ------------------------------   Date: 19 Oct 2005 13:09:33 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)& Subject: Re: Porting VMS back to VAX ?+ Message-ID: <3rmusdFjmgb4U1@individual.net>   , In article <43559F06.9C381681@teksavvy.com>,0 	JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes: > Neil Rieck wrote: K >> I was never convinced that RISC was better than CISC until I experienced M >> OpenVMS on Alpha. (CISC was much more important when RAM was expensive but  >> those days are long gone).  >  > 0 > What is the difference between CISC and RISC ?  4 RISC has a limited instruction set compared to CISC.. All RISC instructions must be the same length.H All RISC instructions must execute int he same number of machine cycles.E (Some definitions say "in one machine cycle" but that is not really a 6 requirement as long as they all take the same number.)  G Ther may be a few more things to the definition, but that's the meat of  the matter.    > H > I know that VAX was a 48 point bold reverse video and flashing "C" forC > complex. But the IBM 360 architecture (in whatever incarnation it E > currently has) was also considered CISC but its instruction set was J > nowhere near as Complex as VAX with fewer addressing modes and something> > that was closer to a RISC architecture than it was from VAX.  H The 360 would only meet the first requirement which seems to be the only5 one that the various web sites with definitions list.    >  > H > When you consider that the 8086 is considered CISC but sports the sameJ > types of features as Alpha's RISC, it truly blurrs the line between CISC > and RISC.   K Not when you look at the true definition of RISC.  The 8080 was the closest J of that Intel family to RISC, but it fails both point 2 and 3.  DecendantsH like the 8088, 8086 and Zilog Z80 moved rapidly away from the RISC modelG (which, of course, didn't even exist at that point in time) by creating J single instructions that actually were like Macros that executed more thanL one other instruction. (ie. the Z80 instruction -- LDIR which actually does:F   (DE) <- (HL);HL <- HL+1; DE <- DE+1; BC <- BC-1; repeat while BC<>-1   Hope this helps.   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: 19 Oct 2005 05:54:00 -0700) From: "Ken Robinson" <kenrbnsn@gmail.com>  Subject: Re: URL grumbleB Message-ID: <1129726440.569159.70680@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   issinoho wrote:  > A few observations,  > / > Why does http://www.openvms.com take me here, ! > http://www.acctgsoftware.com/ ?   1 Because Digital/Compaq/HP didn't grab it first...    > G > Also why do, http://www.hp.com/openvms  & http://openvms.hp.com/ give  > me big fat 404's ? > I > And why has the official site got a URL of http://h71000.www7.hp.com/ ? C > Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue does it? And not a mention of  > (open)vms in the URL!   C On HP's site, the convention they came up with and follow is to use ; http://www.hp.com/go/<product name here>, so for VMS either B http://www.hp.com/go/vms or http://www.hp.com/go/openvms will work  @ Complaining here probably won't help. Using the "Feedback to the: webmaster" link on the site will probably get you further.   Ken    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Oct 2005 05:45:49 -0700% From: "issinoho" <issinoho@gmail.com>  Subject: URL grumbleC Message-ID: <1129725949.213409.296940@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    A few observations,   - Why does http://www.openvms.com take me here,  http://www.acctgsoftware.com/ ?   E Also why do, http://www.hp.com/openvms  & http://openvms.hp.com/ give  me big fat 404's ?  G And why has the official site got a URL of http://h71000.www7.hp.com/ ? A Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue does it? And not a mention of  (open)vms in the URL!   9 Would it be too hard to make things a bit easier to find?   	 /grumble>    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:17:45 -0400 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>  Subject: Re: URL grumble+ Message-ID: <43564778.B9CD1A4@teksavvy.com>    issinoho wrote: G > Also why do, http://www.hp.com/openvms  & http://openvms.hp.com/ give  > me big fat 404's ?    ' The standard is www.hp.com/go/somewhere     
 you can have:    http://www.hp.com/go/vms or http://www.hp.com/go/openvms    G The more people use the "vms" one, the better the chances that the open ! will be dropped once and for all.    ------------------------------    Date: 19 Oct 2005 08:05:53 -0500- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)  Subject: Re: URL grumble3 Message-ID: <ibGDqeCMr3zJ@eisner.encompasserve.org>   k In article <1129725949.213409.296940@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "issinoho" <issinoho@gmail.com> writes:   / > Why does http://www.openvms.com take me here, ! > http://www.acctgsoftware.com/ ?   A Because the owner of that domain name has set things up that way.   G > Also why do, http://www.hp.com/openvms  & http://openvms.hp.com/ give  > me big fat 404's ?  & Because hp has set things up that way.  I > And why has the official site got a URL of http://h71000.www7.hp.com/ ?  HP would prefer you use:   	http://www.hp.com/go/openvms      or 	http://www.hp.com/go/vms   C matching their grand scheme of things.  That way you may be tempted 9 to use the same scheme substituting "printers" for "vms".   C > Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue does it? And not a mention of  > (open)vms in the URL!   E In fairness to HP, the designers of the World Wide Web did not intend # URL spellings to be human-friendly.   ; > Would it be too hard to make things a bit easier to find?   2 HP management would prefer you learn their scheme.   ------------------------------    Date: 19 Oct 2005 10:43:27 -0700 From: jordan@ccs4vms.com Subject: Re: URL grumbleC Message-ID: <1129743807.471203.106220@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>    issinoho wrote:  > A few observations,  > / > Why does http://www.openvms.com take me here, ! > http://www.acctgsoftware.com/ ?  > G > Also why do, http://www.hp.com/openvms  & http://openvms.hp.com/ give  > me big fat 404's ? > I > And why has the official site got a URL of http://h71000.www7.hp.com/ ? C > Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue does it? And not a mention of  > (open)vms in the URL!  > ; > Would it be too hard to make things a bit easier to find?  >  > /grumble>   2 I can't imagine what would be easier to find than:  #      http://www.openvms.digital.com   > which still works.  And as long as enough folks keep using it,  hopefully HP won't shut it down.   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2005.584 ************************                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               w                             pu                          `                                                                                                                        H                                                      9         T7,  L         !BL       1O     12 O                     2   B             @      @      @      @      @      @               @@@@@      @     