INFO-VAX Tue, 11 Nov 2008 Volume 2008 : Issue 610 Contents: Re: /SYSTEM and /FOREIGN on a disk on the same MOUNT command Re: /SYSTEM and /FOREIGN on a disk on the same MOUNT command Re: Fortran, debugger and Alpha/VMS 7.3-2 Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Peek&Spy anyone ? Re: Peek&Spy anyone ? Re: Peek&Spy anyone ? Re: Peek&Spy anyone ? RE: Peek&Spy anyone ? RE: Who is left at VMS engineering ? Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 21:39:20 -0500 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: /SYSTEM and /FOREIGN on a disk on the same MOUNT command Message-ID: <4918f052$0$90266$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Arne Vajhøj wrote: > R.A.Omond wrote: >> etmsreec@yahoo.co.uk wrote: >>> Just had an interesting one... >>> >>> I'd always taken that /SYSTEM and /FOREIGN were mutually exclusive - >>> you wouldn't be allowed to mount a volume system wide if you were >>> mounting it foreign as you'd only want one thread/process to be able >>> to squirt data at the disk. >>> >>> A colleague just tried doing the two qualifiers on the same command >>> and it worked. Odd in my view! >>> >>> Is this a bug or have I got it the wrong way round in my head? >> >> I see no reason whatsoever to even begin to consider this a bug. >> >> Why should you not be able to do that ? > > Because for a couple of decades you could not. I got a private email from someone more knowledgeable than me that pointed me to clear proof that I was wrong. It has been possible since before I started with VMS. I remembered wrong. Arne ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:43:40 -0800 From: "Tom Linden" Subject: Re: /SYSTEM and /FOREIGN on a disk on the same MOUNT command Message-ID: On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:39:20 -0800, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > Arne Vajhøj wrote: >> R.A.Omond wrote: >>> etmsreec@yahoo.co.uk wrote: >>>> Just had an interesting one... >>>> >>>> I'd always taken that /SYSTEM and /FOREIGN were mutually exclusive - >>>> you wouldn't be allowed to mount a volume system wide if you were >>>> mounting it foreign as you'd only want one thread/process to be able >>>> to squirt data at the disk. >>>> >>>> A colleague just tried doing the two qualifiers on the same command >>>> and it worked. Odd in my view! >>>> >>>> Is this a bug or have I got it the wrong way round in my head? >>> >>> I see no reason whatsoever to even begin to consider this a bug. >>> >>> Why should you not be able to do that ? >> Because for a couple of decades you could not. > > I got a private email from someone more knowledgeable than > me that pointed me to clear proof that I was wrong. -- I > > It has been possible since before I started with VMS. > > I remembered wrong. > > Arne > -- PL/I for OpenVMS www.kednos.com ------------------------------ Date: 11 Nov 2008 05:37:50 GMT From: "David Weatherall" Subject: Re: Fortran, debugger and Alpha/VMS 7.3-2 Message-ID: <6nsk1eFnchgU1@mid.individual.net> David Weatherall wrote: > We finally upgraded the Alphas in our cluster from V7.3-1 to -2 last > week. As expected, we never saw any problem until my colleague needed > to use the debugger with her Fortran (V7.5...) program. > > It contains a Structure/record like > > structure /asd$record/ > character*36 asd_name > character*36 efile_name > character*12 other_name > ... > end structure > > record /asd$record/ asd_record > > > In the debugger we can > > EXA ASD_RECORD > > without problem but > > EXA ASD_RECORD.ASD_NAME > > generates the following error :- > > %DEBUG-E-INTERR, debugger error in DBGADDEXP\DETERMINE_TYPE unknown > arg type or session corruption > > T'was fine on 7.3-1. Anybody know what's going on? John? > > Kristine, my colleague, is less than impressed. > > Cheers - Dave > > Now that I look at it, the $ in asd$record is a bit suspicious > perhaps. Just to let you all know where this went. Our system manager loaded a Patch over the w/e giving us the following version of DEBUG and DEBUGSHR :- Image Identification Information image name: "DEBUG" image file identification: "V8.3-015" image file build identification: "XBX2-SSB-0000" link date/time: 16-OCT-2008 08:16:56.94 linker identification: "A11-50" Patch Information There are no patches at this time. It fixes the debugger's EXAMINE problem. My colleague is now 'ganz gluecklich und zufrieden' so thanks to whoever at HP resolved it (Jeff?). My only problem, now is that my command file that builds _my_ application fails when Fortran-77 (V7.5) compiling my source with "/DEBUG". No /NOOPT. GEM whinges about GSD errors. I can't quote the precise error text 'cos I sent the mail with above information before finding the problem... I can't check what else the SM changed 'cos he's on a well-earned holiday and I've no desire to disturb him. I still debug on VAX so I can live with whatever side-effect of the DEBUG fix might be causing the compiler problem. I suspect compiling individual modules with get around it. ie.. FOR /deb /sep mod1 FOR /deb /sep mod2 . . . FOR /deb /sep modn instead of FOR /deb /sep - ! mod1,- mod2,- . . . modn as I've had similar problems in the past in another app, I Q/A my app next week so ... Cheers - Dave. -- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:57:16 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Message-ID: <00A826C4.B4672205@SendSpamHere.ORG> In article <6nr5lgFf2ikU3@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >In article <00A82514.67CBCF1B@sendspamhere.org>, > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: >> In article <6nlgdmFm4tcqU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >>>In article <00A8247E.E4E037C0@sendspamhere.org>, >>> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: >>>> In article <0003e74f$0$26284$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes: >>>>>John Reagan wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I've been staying out of the discussion since I don't even understand them. >>>>>> That part of the productizing of the compilers is above my pay grade as they >>>>>> say. >>>>> >>>>>But Shirley, you guys could add a couple of IF statements in your >>>>>compilers to check the status of the licence check call and exit >>>>>gracefully when it is not good ? >>>>> >>>>>And a better thing would be to put the licence check in a loop with a 10 >>>>>second timer. If the licence is already "in use", wait 10 seconds and >>>>>try again. This way, as soon as the other compile is done, this one can >>>>>begin. (this loop could be controlled though some logical name whose >>>>>value would be the maximum amount of time to wait for licence to become >>>>>available) >>>> >>>> Polling? How unixy. :) >>> >>>Since when? Version 6? >> >> Bill, you never cease to amaze me in the lack of humor department. ;) > >Oh, I have humor. But that was yet another of the typical Unix type >comments here and based on the demonstrated level of real Unix knowledge >in this group there is little if any reason to assume it isn's a serious >comment requiring an answer. I mean would be the response here if I >constantly complained about SOS being the only VMS editor. :-) How much blood do you lose through your nose from being at that altitude on your high horse? I tossed up a smiley when I said that; it was clear that it was humor. BTW, we all know that TECO is the only VMS editor. -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM ... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC) Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. Publication of _this_ usenet article outside of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright notice, disclaimer and quotations. ------------------------------ Date: 10 Nov 2008 19:07:33 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Message-ID: <6nrf3lFgp63U6@mid.individual.net> In article , "Tom Linden" writes: > On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 10:28:19 -0800, Bill Gunshannon > wrote: > >> In article , >> "Tom Linden" writes: >>> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:22:40 -0800, Bill Gunshannon >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> In article , >>>> "Tom Linden" writes: >>>>> On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:19:01 -0800, JF Mezei >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> John Reagan wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I've been staying out of the discussion since I don't even >>>>>>> understand >>>>>>> them. >>>>>>> That part of the productizing of the compilers is above my pay grade >>>>>>> as >>>>>>> they >>>>>>> say. >>>>>> >>>>>> But Shirley, you guys could add a couple of IF statements in your >>>>>> compilers to check the status of the licence check call and exit >>>>>> gracefully when it is not good ? >>>>>> >>>>>> And a better thing would be to put the licence check in a loop with a >>>>>> 10 >>>>>> second timer. If the licence is already "in use", wait 10 seconds and >>>>>> try again. This way, as soon as the other compile is done, this one >>>>>> can >>>>>> begin. (this loop could be controlled though some logical name whose >>>>>> value would be the maximum amount of time to wait for licence to >>>>>> become >>>>>> available) >>>>> >>>>> I used a C compiler on a Sun box about 20 years ago, and if someone >>>>> had >>>>> used the >>>>> compiler, you had to wait a half hour, because that useer had >>>>> preemptive >>>>> rights >>>>> for that period, we ended up expanding the license to 2 users. >>>> I have been using Suns since the M68K Sun3 days and have never seen a >>>> compiler that was not just wide open. Well, that may have happened >>>> when >>>> they moved to the first Solaris versions (much less than 20 years ago >>>> and >>>> when we stopped being a Sun shop) when I seem to remember Sun >>>> unbundling >>>> the compiler but even then GNU-C was already available and had no such >>>> limitation. >>>> bill >>>> >>> This was in 1994 Sun had asked me to write an IMS multiplexor with 3270 >>> screens for Hughes. It may be that you used educational license? The >> >> SunOS had no kind of license manager. You sure you weren't using a third >> party product? I do remember things like FrameMaker and Rational Rose >> all >> using license managers (and some even had dongles) but nothing I ever saw >> from Sun prior to the existence of Solaris. > > It wasn't SunOS, it was Solaris. OK, a bit clearer. Solaris 2.0 is the first version not identified as SunOS and it was released in June of 1992, not quite 20 years ago. And calling SunOS 4.1.x as Solaris 1 was an after the fact re-branding for marketing reasons so they really weren't known as Solaris. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 10 Nov 2008 20:03:06 GMT From: "Bob Eager" Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Message-ID: <176uZD2KcidF-pn2-b2kWYWmtqQJ7@rikki.tavi.co.uk> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:57:16 UTC, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > BTW, we all know that TECO is the only VMS editor. Hear, hear! (user of TECO since 1973...) -- Bob Eager Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:48:00 -0500 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Message-ID: Bill Gunshannon wrote: > In article , > "Tom Linden" writes: >> On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:19:01 -0800, JF Mezei >> wrote: >> >>> John Reagan wrote: >>> >>>> I've been staying out of the discussion since I don't even understand >>>> them. >>>> That part of the productizing of the compilers is above my pay grade as >>>> they >>>> say. >>> But Shirley, you guys could add a couple of IF statements in your >>> compilers to check the status of the licence check call and exit >>> gracefully when it is not good ? >>> >>> And a better thing would be to put the licence check in a loop with a 10 >>> second timer. If the licence is already "in use", wait 10 seconds and >>> try again. This way, as soon as the other compile is done, this one can >>> begin. (this loop could be controlled though some logical name whose >>> value would be the maximum amount of time to wait for licence to become >>> available) >> I used a C compiler on a Sun box about 20 years ago, and if someone had >> used the >> compiler, you had to wait a half hour, because that useer had preemptive >> rights >> for that period, we ended up expanding the license to 2 users. > > I have been using Suns since the M68K Sun3 days and have never seen a > compiler that was not just wide open. Well, that may have happened when > they moved to the first Solaris versions (much less than 20 years ago and > when we stopped being a Sun shop) when I seem to remember Sun unbundling > the compiler but even then GNU-C was already available and had no such > limitation. > > bill > > For the past three years or so, Sun has been allowing free use of Solaris 10 and the development tools. You can just buy a media kit and go. The price of the media kit can range from free to $???. I got my last media kit for free. You can also download the software from a Sun web site. Sun's current business model is to give away the software and charge for support. If you are a hobbyist, it doesn't cost you a dime. If you are using the software for business critical systems, you probably need some level of support! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:00:39 -0500 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Message-ID: <19ednWUdiq5QRYXUnZ2dnUVZ_tXinZ2d@giganews.com> Bill Gunshannon wrote: > In article <00A82514.67CBCF1B@sendspamhere.org>, > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: >> In article <6nlgdmFm4tcqU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >>> In article <00A8247E.E4E037C0@sendspamhere.org>, >>> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: >>>> In article <0003e74f$0$26284$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes: >>>>> John Reagan wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I've been staying out of the discussion since I don't even understand them. >>>>>> That part of the productizing of the compilers is above my pay grade as they >>>>>> say. >>>>> But Shirley, you guys could add a couple of IF statements in your >>>>> compilers to check the status of the licence check call and exit >>>>> gracefully when it is not good ? >>>>> >>>>> And a better thing would be to put the licence check in a loop with a 10 >>>>> second timer. If the licence is already "in use", wait 10 seconds and >>>>> try again. This way, as soon as the other compile is done, this one can >>>>> begin. (this loop could be controlled though some logical name whose >>>>> value would be the maximum amount of time to wait for licence to become >>>>> available) >>>> Polling? How unixy. :) >>> Since when? Version 6? >> Bill, you never cease to amaze me in the lack of humor department. ;) > > Oh, I have humor. But that was yet another of the typical Unix type > comments here and based on the demonstrated level of real Unix knowledge > in this group there is little if any reason to assume it isn's a serious > comment requiring an answer. I mean would be the response here if I > constantly complained about SOS being the only VMS editor. :-) > > bill > > Hey! I used SOS ca. 1984. It was OK as editors go and about the only usable choice if you didn't have a VT100 compliant terminal. I wouldn't put up with it NOW but expectations have changed over the last twenty-five years! It took a while but Princeton finally caved in and bought some VT terminals; AIRC they were VT-220s. Bit of ancient trivia: SOS stood for Son Of Stopgap. Stopgap was apparently an early editor but I arrived on the scene a little too late to have any experience with it. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:07:49 -0500 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Message-ID: <19ednWQdiq7mR4XUnZ2dnUVZ_tXinZ2d@giganews.com> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > In article <6nr5lgFf2ikU3@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >> In article <00A82514.67CBCF1B@sendspamhere.org>, >> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: >>> In article <6nlgdmFm4tcqU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >>>> In article <00A8247E.E4E037C0@sendspamhere.org>, >>>> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: >>>>> In article <0003e74f$0$26284$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes: >>>>>> John Reagan wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I've been staying out of the discussion since I don't even understand them. >>>>>>> That part of the productizing of the compilers is above my pay grade as they >>>>>>> say. >>>>>> But Shirley, you guys could add a couple of IF statements in your >>>>>> compilers to check the status of the licence check call and exit >>>>>> gracefully when it is not good ? >>>>>> >>>>>> And a better thing would be to put the licence check in a loop with a 10 >>>>>> second timer. If the licence is already "in use", wait 10 seconds and >>>>>> try again. This way, as soon as the other compile is done, this one can >>>>>> begin. (this loop could be controlled though some logical name whose >>>>>> value would be the maximum amount of time to wait for licence to become >>>>>> available) >>>>> Polling? How unixy. :) >>>> Since when? Version 6? >>> Bill, you never cease to amaze me in the lack of humor department. ;) >> Oh, I have humor. But that was yet another of the typical Unix type >> comments here and based on the demonstrated level of real Unix knowledge >> in this group there is little if any reason to assume it isn's a serious >> comment requiring an answer. I mean would be the response here if I >> constantly complained about SOS being the only VMS editor. :-) > > How much blood do you lose through your nose from being at that altitude > on your high horse? I tossed up a smiley when I said that; it was clear > that it was humor. > > BTW, we all know that TECO is the only VMS editor. > There is no editor but EDT and Mohammed is his prophet! ;-) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 21:35:51 -0500 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Message-ID: <4918ef81$0$90266$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> yyyc186 wrote: > On Nov 10, 8:03 am, "John Reagan" wrote: >> I am a US-born citizen (born in Indiana) and I have a birth certificate to >> prove it. There are other US-born/US-based folks working on compilers >> besides me. > > How many non-US developers are working on the compilers and the OS? > It only takes one to no longer meet ITAR standards. 1) I don't think OS and compilers fall under ITAR. 2) It is not only US citizens that are allowed. Green card holders are also allowed. Arne ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:01:52 -0500 From: "John Reagan" Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Message-ID: "yyyc186" wrote in message news:11ec677e-e607-4133-b206-17f008687d7c@35g2000pry.googlegroups.com... On Nov 10, 8:03 am, "John Reagan" wrote: >> >> I am a US-born citizen (born in Indiana) and I have a birth certificate >> to >> prove it. There are other US-born/US-based folks working on compilers >> besides me. >How many non-US developers are working on the compilers and the OS? >It only takes one to no longer meet ITAR standards. Well, that isn't my understanding of how it works. As for the legal status of my co-workers, that isn't something I can talk about is it? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:36:58 -0500 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: OVMS Integrity BASIC LTU Getting only 1 user at cost of $2400.00??? Message-ID: <0004b09d$0$2527$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com> John Reagan wrote: > Well, that isn't my understanding of how it works. As for the legal status > of my co-workers, that isn't something I can talk about is it? Is there any harm in revealing whether certain employees are married or not ? I can understand you not wanting to announce that FredK is an illegal alien from outer space as it may send immigration officials after him (as was shown in the documentary "Coneheads" done some years ago). Seriously though, does ITAR still make sense ? I recall that during the clinton era, clinton relaxed the encryption export restrictions since the USA realised that USA companies were being hurt, unable to export their products and foreign companies were getting worldwide market share with equal or better encryption. (he also got the military to stop the degradation of the general GPS signals since it was pointless to do that just to please the military). ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 23:35:16 GMT From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= Subject: Peek&Spy anyone ? Message-ID: Hi. Anyone used Peek&Spy from "Networking Dynamics Corporation" ? Any comments on the product ? http://networkingdynamics.com/Peek.htm Jan-Erik. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 00:33:55 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: Peek&Spy anyone ? Message-ID: <00A826F3.BBCDF249@SendSpamHere.ORG> In article , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= writes: >Hi. >Anyone used Peek&Spy from "Networking Dynamics Corporation" ? >Any comments on the product ? > >http://networkingdynamics.com/Peek.htm > >Jan-Erik. Yes, but RaxcoSuport/CONTRL is better! ;) -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM ... pejorative statements of opinion are entitled to constitutional protection no matter how extreme, vituperous, or vigorously expressed they may be. (NJSC) Copr. 2008 Brian Schenkenberger. Publication of _this_ usenet article outside of usenet _must_ include its contents in its entirety including this copyright notice, disclaimer and quotations. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 00:39:13 GMT From: winston@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing) Subject: Re: Peek&Spy anyone ? Message-ID: <00A826DB.54002CA9@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> In article , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= writes: >Hi. >Anyone used Peek&Spy from "Networking Dynamics Corporation" ? >Any comments on the product ? > >http://networkingdynamics.com/Peek.htm Worked fine for me on VAX in the early 1990s (and the part where I could take over their terminals and type commands for them saved me a lot of time in running around to pepole's offices). Since then has become irrelevant to me most of my users access VMS resources through things that aren't terminals. (Eg, web-based front ends, X windows applications, etc.) -- Alan ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:55:25 -0600 From: Shael Richmond Subject: Re: Peek&Spy anyone ? Message-ID: Jan-Erik Söderholm wrote: > Hi. > Anyone used Peek&Spy from "Networking Dynamics Corporation" ? > Any comments on the product ? > > http://networkingdynamics.com/Peek.htm > We have been using it for years on VAX, Alpha, and now Itanium. Works as advertised and they have good support. Shael ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:51:53 +1030 From: "Barratt, Chris (Health)" Subject: RE: Peek&Spy anyone ? Message-ID: I'll second that... > -----Original Message----- > From: Shael Richmond [mailto:ksrich@bellsouth.net] > Sent: Tuesday, 11 November 2008 11:25 > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: Peek&Spy anyone ? > > Jan-Erik S=F6derholm wrote: > > Hi. > > Anyone used Peek&Spy from "Networking Dynamics Corporation" ? > > Any comments on the product ? > > > > http://networkingdynamics.com/Peek.htm > > > We have been using it for years on VAX, Alpha, and now Itanium. > Works as advertised and they have good support. > > > Shael ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:35:16 +0000 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: Who is left at VMS engineering ? Message-ID: <9D02E14BC0A2AE43A5D16A4CD8EC5A593ED9530B9D@GVW1158EXB.americas.hpqcorp.net> > -----Original Message----- > From: Bill Gunshannon [mailto:billg999@cs.uofs.edu] > Sent: November 10, 2008 1:25 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? > > In article > <9D02E14BC0A2AE43A5D16A4CD8EC5A593ED9530A6E@gvw1158exb.americas.hpqcorp > .net>, > "Main, Kerry" writes: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Bill Gunshannon [mailto:billg999@cs.uofs.edu] > >> Sent: November 10, 2008 11:15 AM > >> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > >> Subject: Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? > >> > >> In article <3wmmutDb+s6e@eisner.encompasserve.org>, > >> koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) > writes: > >> > In article <0003b6c1$0$2534$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei > >> writes: > >> >> > >> >> Since HP has many products that fill the VMS niche, letting VMS > >> wither > >> >> away while steeriung customers over to HP-UX, Linux, Windows or > NSK > >> >> means that HP doesn't lose the customer. > >> > > >> > HP has lots of products that can fill many niches where VMS is > an > >> > option. But there are niches where VMS and not UNIX, Windows, > or > >> > even Tandem is an option. > >> > >> Not enough of them to even count. And certainly not enough to > justify > >> investing any money in the advancement of VMS. If it were > othewrwise, > >> we wouldn't always be coming back to this same discusion. > >> > >> bill > >> > >> > > > > Yeah, you are likely right - > > > > I mean how much money is there really in these small markets like > banks, > > telecom, manufacturing, stock exchanges, education, transportation, > retail, > > utility and military markets anyway? > > > > You forgot hospitals. Oh wait, they are as gone as some of the ones > above. > Or did you miss that after loosing the academic side of education VMS > is now > starting to loose the administrative side as companies like SCT tell > more > and more of their customers that they are migrating. And then we have > the > recent nugget I got (and announced here) that DISA is dropping VMS from > its > stable of OSes of interest. If you know anything about DITSCAP/DIACAP > you > should be able to interpret the writting on the wall as far as future > GOV > and not just military business. > > But, that's OK. Just ignore it. Hey Dave, what was it you recently > said about > "blowing sunshine up their people's skirts". :-) > > bill > Bill, Let's get real. Yes, the market for OpenVMS is not what it used to be, but neither is Solaris, AIX or any other major OS. The numbers of those OS's have all gone down drastically in recent years as well. Heck, fwiw, almost every Cust I talk to about server and DC consolidation mentions that they want to move the majority of their Solaris and AIX environments to Linux. For awhile, the market was all about distributed solutions, so even with the large number of monthly security patches and "one bus app, one OS" culture, Windows and Linux were taking market share from all the major OS's. Yes, there are many reasons and marketing is certainly one of them. [fill-in additional past gripes about DEC / Compaq here] Now, almost every med to large company is talking about radically changing their compute model to much more centralized solutions. Anyway, based on the win reports circulated internally, OpenVMS has been doing very well. In particular, the Integrity blades with OpenVMS seems to be gaining popularity. As an example: http://h71028.www7.hp.com/ERC/downloads/4AA1-7999ENW.pdf http://tinyurl.com/6ybkgg (video testimonial) Extract - "Acision uses HP OpenVMS running on HP Integrity servers & HP Blades to help deliver more than half of the world's text & multimedia messages & serve three quarters of all videomail users." Could it be better? Of course. However, it is not as bad as you like to make it out. Regards Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-254-8911 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT) OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ Date: 10 Nov 2008 20:06:37 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? Message-ID: <6nriidFifb7U1@mid.individual.net> In article <9D02E14BC0A2AE43A5D16A4CD8EC5A593ED9530B9D@gvw1158exb.americas.hpqcorp.net>, "Main, Kerry" writes: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Bill Gunshannon [mailto:billg999@cs.uofs.edu] >> Sent: November 10, 2008 1:25 PM >> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >> Subject: Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? >> >> In article >> <9D02E14BC0A2AE43A5D16A4CD8EC5A593ED9530A6E@gvw1158exb.americas.hpqcorp >> .net>, >> "Main, Kerry" writes: >> > >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Bill Gunshannon [mailto:billg999@cs.uofs.edu] >> >> Sent: November 10, 2008 11:15 AM >> >> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >> >> Subject: Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? >> >> >> >> In article <3wmmutDb+s6e@eisner.encompasserve.org>, >> >> koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) >> writes: >> >> > In article <0003b6c1$0$2534$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei >> >> writes: >> >> >> >> >> >> Since HP has many products that fill the VMS niche, letting VMS >> >> wither >> >> >> away while steeriung customers over to HP-UX, Linux, Windows or >> NSK >> >> >> means that HP doesn't lose the customer. >> >> > >> >> > HP has lots of products that can fill many niches where VMS is >> an >> >> > option. But there are niches where VMS and not UNIX, Windows, >> or >> >> > even Tandem is an option. >> >> >> >> Not enough of them to even count. And certainly not enough to >> justify >> >> investing any money in the advancement of VMS. If it were >> othewrwise, >> >> we wouldn't always be coming back to this same discusion. >> >> >> >> bill >> >> >> >> >> > >> > Yeah, you are likely right - >> > >> > I mean how much money is there really in these small markets like >> banks, >> > telecom, manufacturing, stock exchanges, education, transportation, >> retail, >> > utility and military markets anyway? >> > >> >> You forgot hospitals. Oh wait, they are as gone as some of the ones >> above. >> Or did you miss that after loosing the academic side of education VMS >> is now >> starting to loose the administrative side as companies like SCT tell >> more >> and more of their customers that they are migrating. And then we have >> the >> recent nugget I got (and announced here) that DISA is dropping VMS from >> its >> stable of OSes of interest. If you know anything about DITSCAP/DIACAP >> you >> should be able to interpret the writting on the wall as far as future >> GOV >> and not just military business. >> >> But, that's OK. Just ignore it. Hey Dave, what was it you recently >> said about >> "blowing sunshine up their people's skirts". :-) >> >> bill >> > > > Bill, > > Let's get real. I've been saying that here for quite some time. :-) > Yes, the market for OpenVMS is not what it used to be, > but neither is Solaris, AIX or any other major OS. The numbers of those > OS's have all gone down drastically in recent years as well. Which, of course, doesn't really bother all the people who want to see VMS flourish. > > Heck, fwiw, almost every Cust I talk to about server and DC consolidation > mentions that they want to move the majority of their Solaris and AIX > environments to Linux. Which, of course, doesn't really bother all the people who want to see VMS flourish. > > For awhile, the market was all about distributed solutions, so even > with the large number of monthly security patches and "one bus app, > one OS" culture, Windows and Linux were taking market share from > all the major OS's. > > Yes, there are many reasons and marketing is certainly one of them. > [fill-in additional past gripes about DEC / Compaq here] > > Now, almost every med to large company is talking about radically > changing their compute model to much more centralized solutions. On what platform? VMS? Or Windows? Or Linux? How do the latter two help the continued existence of VMS? > > Anyway, based on the win reports circulated internally, OpenVMS has > been doing very well. In particular, the Integrity blades with > OpenVMS seems to be gaining popularity. You keep saying this and yet the people here some of whom have been working with VMS for decades and have no desire to change are all, one by one, announcing the end of their VMS based careers. What's wrong with this picture? > > As an example: > http://h71028.www7.hp.com/ERC/downloads/4AA1-7999ENW.pdf > > http://tinyurl.com/6ybkgg (video testimonial) > > Extract - "Acision uses HP OpenVMS running on HP Integrity servers > & HP Blades to help deliver more than half of the world's text & > multimedia messages & serve three quarters of all videomail users." > > Could it be better? Of course. > > However, it is not as bad as you like to make it out. That is a matter of opinion. I would think the people here who have been forced to find other ways to earn a living having to literaly toss away decades of experience that they now find worthless might disagree. I merely pointed out two markets you continue to say are a lock for VMS that I know from direct personal experience (just like DJD knows about hospitals) are basicly either lost to VMS or will be shortly just like academia was. Remember me? I'm the guy who tried to explain to HP what they really needed to do to have an effective Edu Program that might have at least stemed the flow of blood fromt he wound a little bit. But I found them not just unwilling to try to work this out but pretty much unable to even understand a market they used to hold in the palm of their hand. And the result is, its gone. And with it all those future business- men who would have remembered VMS from their college days, hopefully with fond memories. Now I talk with our admin staff and hear that Banner is next. When the only thing left running on VMS is the Oracle Backend what reason will there be to keep it around at all paying for people with an un-needed skilset just to maintain that one piece? And then we have the military connection. Contrary to the evidence I keep pointing out you claim the military is happy with and continues to push VMS. Well, so far this calendar year I have spent twice as much time in my uniform than at my desk here at the university. And I'm not done yet. I will spend at least half of the remaining parti of the year in my role as an Army IT "subject matter expert", their definition, not mine. And in that time I will not come in contact with even one VMS system or anyone of my peers who has ever seen one. Trust me, I ask. Oh, I know they still exist. Moffett Field comes to mind. But these are "grandfathered" systems that will see no upgrade. No change at all to their configuration because it is unlikely they could get the IS re-certified. Not because there is anything wrong with the security of the system but strictly because there is no longer any method in place for them to be accredited. And we won't even address the well known problem that no one even know what VMS the operating system is. (Hint: There is at least one other VMS in DOD's IT infrastructure that is very well known.) So we come back to DJD's comment about blowing sunshine. And time that maybe you followed your own advice to "Get real". Things are getting bleak and sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming freight train. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 17:25:53 -0500 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? Message-ID: <0007eb8a$0$7905$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com> Main, Kerry wrote: > Anyway, based on the win reports circulated internally, OpenVMS has > been doing very well. In particular, the Integrity blades with > OpenVMS seems to be gaining popularity. "doing very well" is relative. A terminally ill patient in paliative care can be defined as "doing very well" when one day she is well enough to speek coherently, when normally she isn't. If you measure the success of VMS by the sales of a few blades here and there, then it means that expectations of VMS sales have gone WAY down. Perhaps it is now in the same league as Tandem where getting a handfull of new sales per year was considered a good year ? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 17:28:50 -0500 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? Message-ID: <0007ec3a$0$7905$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com> Bill Gunshannon wrote: > Which, of course, doesn't really bother all the people who want to see > VMS flourish. I think that "all the people who" should be replaced with "those who still" I would surmise that the majority of VMS supporters have now accepted that VMS will never again flourish and just expect HP to keep VMS on life support at a sufficiently high level that HP can claim that VMS is still being developped. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:09:36 -0500 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? Message-ID: <19ednWcdiq57R4XUnZ2dnUVZ_tXinZ2d@giganews.com> Bill Gunshannon wrote: > In article <9D02E14BC0A2AE43A5D16A4CD8EC5A593ED9530B9D@gvw1158exb.americas.hpqcorp.net>, > "Main, Kerry" writes: >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Bill Gunshannon [mailto:billg999@cs.uofs.edu] >>> Sent: November 10, 2008 1:25 PM >>> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >>> Subject: Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? >>> >>> In article >>> <9D02E14BC0A2AE43A5D16A4CD8EC5A593ED9530A6E@gvw1158exb.americas.hpqcorp >>> .net>, >>> "Main, Kerry" writes: >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Bill Gunshannon [mailto:billg999@cs.uofs.edu] >>>>> Sent: November 10, 2008 11:15 AM >>>>> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >>>>> Subject: Re: Who is left at VMS engineering ? >>>>> >>>>> In article <3wmmutDb+s6e@eisner.encompasserve.org>, >>>>> koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) >>> writes: >>>>>> In article <0003b6c1$0$2534$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei >>>>> writes: >>>>>>> Since HP has many products that fill the VMS niche, letting VMS >>>>> wither >>>>>>> away while steeriung customers over to HP-UX, Linux, Windows or >>> NSK >>>>>>> means that HP doesn't lose the customer. >>>>>> HP has lots of products that can fill many niches where VMS is >>> an >>>>>> option. But there are niches where VMS and not UNIX, Windows, >>> or >>>>>> even Tandem is an option. >>>>> Not enough of them to even count. And certainly not enough to >>> justify >>>>> investing any money in the advancement of VMS. If it were >>> othewrwise, >>>>> we wouldn't always be coming back to this same discusion. >>>>> >>>>> bill >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Yeah, you are likely right - >>>> >>>> I mean how much money is there really in these small markets like >>> banks, >>>> telecom, manufacturing, stock exchanges, education, transportation, >>> retail, >>>> utility and military markets anyway? >>>> >>> You forgot hospitals. Oh wait, they are as gone as some of the ones >>> above. >>> Or did you miss that after loosing the academic side of education VMS >>> is now >>> starting to loose the administrative side as companies like SCT tell >>> more >>> and more of their customers that they are migrating. And then we have >>> the >>> recent nugget I got (and announced here) that DISA is dropping VMS from >>> its >>> stable of OSes of interest. If you know anything about DITSCAP/DIACAP >>> you >>> should be able to interpret the writting on the wall as far as future >>> GOV >>> and not just military business. >>> >>> But, that's OK. Just ignore it. Hey Dave, what was it you recently >>> said about >>> "blowing sunshine up their people's skirts". :-) >>> >>> bill >>> >> >> Bill, >> >> Let's get real. > > I've been saying that here for quite some time. :-) > >> Yes, the market for OpenVMS is not what it used to be, >> but neither is Solaris, AIX or any other major OS. The numbers of those >> OS's have all gone down drastically in recent years as well. > > Which, of course, doesn't really bother all the people who want to see > VMS flourish. > >> Heck, fwiw, almost every Cust I talk to about server and DC consolidation >> mentions that they want to move the majority of their Solaris and AIX >> environments to Linux. > > Which, of course, doesn't really bother all the people who want to see > VMS flourish. > >> For awhile, the market was all about distributed solutions, so even >> with the large number of monthly security patches and "one bus app, >> one OS" culture, Windows and Linux were taking market share from >> all the major OS's. >> >> Yes, there are many reasons and marketing is certainly one of them. >> [fill-in additional past gripes about DEC / Compaq here] >> >> Now, almost every med to large company is talking about radically >> changing their compute model to much more centralized solutions. > > On what platform? VMS? Or Windows? Or Linux? How do the latter > two help the continued existence of VMS? > >> Anyway, based on the win reports circulated internally, OpenVMS has >> been doing very well. In particular, the Integrity blades with >> OpenVMS seems to be gaining popularity. > > You keep saying this and yet the people here some of whom have been > working with VMS for decades and have no desire to change are all, > one by one, announcing the end of their VMS based careers. What's > wrong with this picture? > >> As an example: >> http://h71028.www7.hp.com/ERC/downloads/4AA1-7999ENW.pdf >> >> http://tinyurl.com/6ybkgg (video testimonial) >> >> Extract - "Acision uses HP OpenVMS running on HP Integrity servers >> & HP Blades to help deliver more than half of the world's text & >> multimedia messages & serve three quarters of all videomail users." >> >> Could it be better? Of course. >> >> However, it is not as bad as you like to make it out. > > That is a matter of opinion. I would think the people here who have been > forced to find other ways to earn a living having to literaly toss away > decades of experience that they now find worthless might disagree. I > merely pointed out two markets you continue to say are a lock for VMS > that I know from direct personal experience (just like DJD knows about > hospitals) are basicly either lost to VMS or will be shortly just like > academia was. Remember me? I'm the guy who tried to explain to HP what > they really needed to do to have an effective Edu Program that might have > at least stemed the flow of blood fromt he wound a little bit. But I > found them not just unwilling to try to work this out but pretty much > unable to even understand a market they used to hold in the palm of their > hand. And the result is, its gone. And with it all those future business- > men who would have remembered VMS from their college days, hopefully with > fond memories. Now I talk with our admin staff and hear that Banner is > next. When the only thing left running on VMS is the Oracle Backend what > reason will there be to keep it around at all paying for people with an > un-needed skilset just to maintain that one piece? > > And then we have the military connection. Contrary to the evidence I keep > pointing out you claim the military is happy with and continues to push > VMS. Well, so far this calendar year I have spent twice as much time in > my uniform than at my desk here at the university. And I'm not done yet. > I will spend at least half of the remaining parti of the year in my role > as an Army IT "subject matter expert", their definition, not mine. And > in that time I will not come in contact with even one VMS system or anyone > of my peers who has ever seen one. Trust me, I ask. Oh, I know they still > exist. Moffett Field comes to mind. But these are "grandfathered" systems > that will see no upgrade. No change at all to their configuration because > it is unlikely they could get the IS re-certified. Not because there is > anything wrong with the security of the system but strictly because there > is no longer any method in place for them to be accredited. And we won't > even address the well known problem that no one even know what VMS the > operating system is. (Hint: There is at least one other VMS in DOD's IT > infrastructure that is very well known.) > > So we come back to DJD's comment about blowing sunshine. And time that > maybe you followed your own advice to "Get real". Things are getting > bleak and sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming > freight train. > > bill > NO! The light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming dragon! ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2008.610 ************************