INFO-VAX Mon, 17 Jan 2005 Volume 2005 : Issue 33 Contents: Re: HP talk about VMS Re: Installing OpenVMS 7.3 Alpha on a 600a Workstation problems Re: J F kooks out again Re: Microvax II questions Re: Microvax II questions Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium Re: OpenVMS 8.2 Itanium emulator? Re: OpenVMS 8.2 Itanium emulator? Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) Re: Subversion client build on OpenVMS Re: Subversion client build on OpenVMS Re: TCP/IP on OpenVMS 7.3 Re: TCP/IP on OpenVMS 7.3 Re: Using GLUT (OpenGL) on VMS 7.3.2 RE: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris Re: vms versus solaris ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:27:35 -0600 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: HP talk about VMS Message-ID: <41EB30A6.29F9B222@comcast.net> mas wrote: > > No, really ;-). > > http://www.interex.com/hpworldnews/hpw501/news3.jsp > p.s. sorry if already posted. Now, if that would only appear in the mainstream trade media... -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Coming soon: Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 12:17:16 -0800 From: Crabs Subject: Re: Installing OpenVMS 7.3 Alpha on a 600a Workstation problems Message-ID: > > You started with a 433au, and then got a 600a board. The au is > supported by VMS. The a varity is a bit different, but I'm not real > knowledgable about the differences. I think it's the SCSI support. > > Peter mentioned memory. I'd definitely try the 433 with one module > pulled out, and swapping them until you determine whether one is bad. > If more than one is bad, this won't work. > > Possibly you could get the seller to provide an 'au' board? > > Dave > Dave: There is *no* difference between 'A' variant and 'AU' as far as motherboard/memory/cache. The PWS 'A' version has usually supplied with an no 'B' cache module, Adaptec 2940UW SCSI card, IDE CD-Rom, and Matrox Millennium graphics. These are not supported by SRM, but are recognized by Alphabios. Thus VMS will not run. The 'AU' version had a 2mb or 4mb 'B' cache module, Qlogic IPS1020 SCSI card, SCSI CD-Rom, and Powerstorm or Elsa Gloria Synergy (Permedia 2 chipset) graphics, which are all compatible with SRM, so VMS will work. That being said, there are two versions of the PWS motherboard. The "Miata MX5" and the "Miata GL". One can easily distinguish between the two as the 'GL' has two USB ports on the back panel, where as the 'MX5' does not. The 'GL' has an onboard SCSI port and it's IDE utilizes the Cypress chipset which is recognized by SRM. In this version of the PWS, OpenVMS will boot from an IDE CDRom, where as the MX5 version will not. Regars, TomC ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 01:41:05 GMT From: "Gregory Morrow" Subject: Re: J F kooks out again Message-ID: Mama Mezei's Home Remedies wrote: > Gregory Morrow wrote: > > >And poor JF is also a French - Canuck, a group that is the trailor trash of > >North America... > > > >Maybe JF is foaming at the mouth because his phimosis is acting up > >again...he needs to have his maman take a cleaver to that pesky foreskin! > > Oh, I don't think he wants maman to chop off that pesky foreskin. I > think he rather enjoys it when she comes over every night and plays > with it. > > I can just see his big fat hairy Hungarian babushka mother applying > some gypsy home remedies to his swollen glans....... > > "Arrrr joo feelink betterrr now, bay-bee? Do joo vant Maman to kiss > it???" Wow, what a freeky scene...!!! -- Best Greg ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 01:21:39 +0800 From: prep@prep.synonet.com Subject: Re: Microvax II questions Message-ID: <87vf9xs318.fsf@prep.synonet.com> "E.S." writes: > prep@prep.synonet.com wrote: >>>I have both of the uV-I's ;-) >> BA-23 and... Or are they different board sets? > Different board sets, supporting different FP types Ah, this was to do with the `new' FP-11J chip. Seem to remember that questions about the new and old ended up with mumblage and little real info. Was the I ever avaiable in other than BA-23 boxes? -- Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd., +61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda. West Australia 6076 comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked. EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 14:48:19 -0700 From: "E.S." Subject: Re: Microvax II questions Message-ID: prep@prep.synonet.com wrote: > Was the I ever avaiable in other than BA-23 boxes? I only saw it in a BA23, but it probably doesn't mean anything. And the Owners Manual talks only about the BA23 too. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 14:40:22 -0500 From: "John Smith" Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium Message-ID: <0tadnfrkas-AXnfcRVn-rA@igs.net> Tom Linden wrote: > > True, but since Intel has cooled to the Itanium, and they only have a > 3 year > contractual obligation to HP, one might reasonably ask, what happens > then. Given the cost of the fab, if they have a captive customer it > might be tempting > to recoup some of the capital investment from them. Tom, Can you elaborate more on the "3 year contractual obligation to HP" and what *exactly* that means? Where did that 3 years term come from? What is Intel obligated to do during that timeframe? What can Intel do upon expiry of that timeframe? Other things? It would be very useful to know if your info is different that what appears to be the generally accepted wisdom of the Intel/HP 'pact' announced in December at the time of the "Great Engineer Shuffle", prior to the carly(tm) gabfest on Tuesday. Some pointed questions may have to be asked during the webcast. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:37:33 -0500 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium Message-ID: <1105907224.2472bc2be4827723e0ec915062a02003@teranews> Larry Kilgallen wrote: > _Without_ having read the hidden article, let me say that the cost of > a FAB is the cost of a FAB. The per-chip-type cost is minimal when > compared to the per-process cost of the FAB. Consider that DEC built > a FAB in Hudson Massachusetts to build Alphas and then used the excess > FAB capacity to build StrongARM, a totally different chip. Correct. FABs are to chips what CD manufacturing plants are to music. You supply the CD plan with a mask, and they spit out what you want them to spit out, whether Frank Sinatra or Eminem. Some plants can also use their hardware to spit out DVDs. FAbs are like that too. They are built to produce chips of a certain mask size. They then sell their manufacturing capacity to try to have their FAbs run at full capacity to make the FAB operation prfitable. (Intel's most recent financials had lower profits due in part to its FABs being underused). In the case of Digital's Hudson plant, Digital actually refused business, wanting to reserve production capacity should Alpha ever become popular. Alpha wasn't marketed, so the Hudson plant remained underused big time. Had Digital welcomed business to FAB other people's chips and used the plant at 100% capacity, it would have generated enough money to pay for upgrades (or a new plant) to make chips with smaller masks. Intel and IBM understood this and seeked business opportunities to increase production at their FABs. In the end, Alphas were FABbed by both Intel and IBM. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:47:22 -0500 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium Message-ID: <41EAE0E2.F65E1F87@nobody.org> Tom Linden wrote: > True, but since Intel has cooled to the Itanium, and they only have a 3 > yearn contractual obligation to HP, one might reasonably ask, what happens then. > Given the cost of the fab, if they have a captive customer it might be > tempting to recoup some of the capital investment from them. Intel doesn't have a FAB dedicated to IA64. It uses the same FAB as the 8086. Does anyone know how long it takes to switch product/chip at a FAB (say to produce 8086s one day and Alphas the next ?) Is this measured in minutes, hours, days, weeks ? I assume that they have designed the FAbs so that product switches don't entail long downtimes. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:13:52 -0800 From: "Tom Linden" Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium Message-ID: On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 14:40:22 -0500, John Smith wrote: > Tom Linden wrote: >> >> True, but since Intel has cooled to the Itanium, and they only have a >> 3 year >> contractual obligation to HP, one might reasonably ask, what happens >> then. Given the cost of the fab, if they have a captive customer it >> might be tempting >> to recoup some of the capital investment from them. > > > Tom, > > Can you elaborate more on the "3 year contractual obligation to HP" and > what > *exactly* that means? > > Where did that 3 years term come from? Well, I may have taken a bit of a leap here, see news story below pulled off of Schwab.com as news relating to the stock. This story appeared 18-DEC > What is Intel obligated to do during that timeframe? ditto. > What can Intel do upon expiry of that timeframe? ditto. > Other things? > > It would be very useful to know if your info is different that what > appears > to be the generally accepted wisdom of the Intel/HP 'pact' announced in > December at the time of the "Great Engineer Shuffle", prior to the > carly(tm) > gabfest on Tuesday. Some pointed questions may have to be asked during > the > webcast. > > > > Revelation: Why HP's commitment to Itanium is unwavering - really The IT press has been having a field day as rumors were circulating about that a staff of chip designers that Hewlett Packard Co has had stationed in Fort Collins, Colorado assisting with the design of the Itanium chips with partner Intel Corp had been moved to Intel. The interpretation of what this small move meant was nearly uniform - that HP was in back-handed way washing its hands of Itanium. There's a reason why those Colorado chip creators have been moved to Intel, and while neither HP nor Intel will come out and say why, this is very likely the reason: Intel has no choice but to take them as part of the complex and secret contract between HP and Intel that created the Itanium chip. Everyone has been thinking that HP was the dupe in the Itanium partnership, but as time passes, it is becoming clear who will be getting the short end of the stick in this relationship going forward. And it isn't HP. It is Intel, which would have probably killed off Itanium a year or two ago (we surmise) if it were not for one fact: Intel has a contractual arrangement that forces it to supply HP with Itanium chips, probably so long as HP desires them. And with HP-UX and now OpenVMS ported to and soon to be only available on Itanium, HP most definitely wants those Itanium chips for its Integrity-based servers. If Intel kills Itanium, then HP will sue it for breach of contract. This is the only explanation that makes sense. And when the idea was ran past Don Jenkins, vice president of marketing for HP's Business Critical Systems unit, he said that this was absolutely correct. "Yes, absolutely, Intel has a long-term commitment to supply the Itanium," he said. And when pressed further with the suggestion that a commitment can be broken a lot easier than a contract he said that there is absolutely a legal contract that assures that Intel has to supply HP with chips. As to the precise term of the contract, he was not sure. But presumably it is at least out to 2008, which is the term of the new $3 billion Itanium investment plan that HP recently announced. HP's commitment to Itanium, regardless of all the naysayers, is precisely as strong as the unavoidable fact that its HP-UX, OpenVMS, and NonStop operating systems are only going to be available on Itanium chips in Integrity systems in the not-too-distant future. In early 2005, HP will roll out production versions of OpenVMS for Itanium, and later in the year it will follow with variants of the NonStop servers running on Itanium. The fact that HP is no longer paying engineers to work on Itanium and is expecting Intel to pick up the tab for their salaries is a payback of sorts, at least to a cynical eye. As the first-generation "Merced" chips were delayed for two years, HP definitely took it on the chin, since its Integrity servers were supposed to be able to support both Itanium and PA-RISC chips. The second-generation "McKinley" Itanium 2 chips offered better performance, but there were still a lot of naysayers when it came to Itanium. When Intel rejiggered the Xeon and Itanium roadmaps several times in the past two years, culminating with the advent of the 64-bit variants of the Xeon chips, HP was left in a position of constantly justifying its investments in Itanium - and continually re-investing in Itanium. The deal, it seems, cuts both ways, as most partnerships do. That is why when Intel announced that the HP Itanium team was moving over to Intel (following a similar move by Compaq to sell off its Alpha chip intellectual property and chip designers just before HP bought Compaq in late 2001), HP the next day announced that it was going to spend that $3 billion over the next three years to pump up the Itanium ecosystem and build future Integrity machines. Those investments are going to be necessary for HP to accomplish its goal of making Integrity servers represent 50% of BCS sales in calendar 2005, growing to 70% by the end of 2006. > > Intel and HP didn't disclose the financial terms of the deal that will > move those HP engineers over to Intel, but HP did talk about where > that $3 billion will be spent. Jenkins said that this sum represented > the R&D of system components for the Integrity line, including > chipsets and system designs that will push Itanium machines better > into the $6,000 to $10,000 price range. HP is also establishing > dedicated development teams for the Windows and Linux platforms, > complementing its existing teams for HP-UX, OpenVMS, and > NonStop. The company will also be spending a lot of money fostering ISVs, and hopes to boost the number of Itanium applications (across all platforms) from 2,900 today to 4,500 by the end of the year. That money will go into analyzing the key financial services, telecom, public sector, HPC, and manufacturing markets where HP plans to push Integrity machines and ensure that the right collection of applications are available for the most likely Integrity customers. Some development funds will be used to create better virtual partitions for all of the platforms HP supports on Itanium. Jenkins says that when the Merced project was launched, Intel lacked the systems expertise that HP brought to the table, but now that the Itanium architecture is established and that Intel has the Alpha experts, it only makes sense to move the original HP team that was so critical to the Itanium design under the same roof at Intel. By letting go of Itanium development, HP loses one key advantage - getting its way with future Itanium designs - but it gains a little, too, since other server makers will be less inclined to think that HP is getting favorable treatment. -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:37:04 -0500 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Next Gen Fabs & Itanium Message-ID: <41EB24B3.E7C76506@teksavvy.com> Tom Linden wrote: > Everyone has been thinking that HP was the dupe in the Itanium > partnership, but as time passes, it is becoming clear who will be > getting the short end of the stick in this relationship going forward. I think both are getting the short end of the stick. HP was stupid enough to continue to put all its eggs into the sinking IA64 basket. Both Intel and HP could have stopped before Merced came out. They didn't. Now, even if HP were to announce it is porting VMS, HP-UX and NSK to another platform on Jan 18, it would still require HP continue to develop and sell those unwanted IA64 boxes for many years, just like Hp is forced to support Alpha for many years. So HP is forced to use whatever contract fine print it can find to force Intel to continue IA64 for a couple more years to give HP time to find a way out of this stupid monumental morass. Also, by pulling out of IA64 now, HP is probably isolating itself from any responsability towards other users of IA64, notably SGI who also relies a log on that IA64 thing. > And it isn't HP. It is Intel, which would have probably killed off Itanium > a year or two ago (we surmise) I am of the opinion that the decision was taken in late 2003 or early 2004 by both HP and Intel. What the "contract" does is let HP be in the driver's seat in terms of how/when the pullout is implemented. 2004 saw a number of steps and announcements taken to set the stage for IA64's retirement. My bet is 2007, with the announcement perhaps later in 2005 when porting work officially begins (although I woudln't be surprised if it had already begun in hidden corners of HP premises). > if it were not for one fact: Intel has a > contractual arrangement that forces it to supply HP with Itanium > chips, probably so long as HP desires them. Supplying the chips is not the problem. Continued engineering to rework the cores is the problem. The announcement on the 18th is just a bigger cache to the same core. But HP and intel will tout it as an incredible feat of engineering on the scale of discovering the warp drive. > And with HP-UX and > now OpenVMS ported to and soon to be only available on Itanium, My guess is that Alpha VMS sales will outlive IA64 VMS sales. > HP most definitely wants those Itanium chips for its Integrity-based > servers. If Intel kills Itanium, then HP will sue it for breach of > contract. Nop. The decision to kill IA64 was taken cooperatively. Both HP and Intel realised that IA64 wouldn't ever be able to compete against the 8086 or Power AND be profitable. It is one thing to donate IA64 servers as publicity stunts, but another to convince customers to actually pay full price for those things, especially when conversion efforts out fo Alpha could be done only once when the real successor to Alpha is ready. Also, bear in mind that the "contract" may also be forcing HP to buy certain quantities of IA64 chips. > HP will roll out production versions of OpenVMS for Itanium, VMS may have be availbale commercially in 2 days, but it doesn't mean that a large proportion of VMS customers will be able to migrate to it. Availabiliyty of software will be the driving force here. And for software that is no longer being upgraded or available for VMS, customers will migrate to another platform. Where will Alpha workstation customers migrate to ? (as I recall, NASA was a big Alpha workstation customer). With Tru64 dead, with VMS no longer getting any X/Motif work done (or even mentioned in the roadmap), one would really have to consider whether the trouble of porting to IA64 is wasted time when the real port should be ato a viable platform. Now, add to this the constant flux of news from both HP, Intel and the press about the lack of success of IA64, retranchement into smaller and smaller markets, and now the stories about the only reason IA64 still alive is some contract. Who would commit an enterprise to costly system/software changes to a platform that only has a couple years left in it before customer needs to consider another port ? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:30:31 GMT From: "Marco" Subject: Re: OpenVMS 8.2 Itanium emulator? Message-ID: > Oh, I also notice you are specifying Itanium. > > Why is that a requirement ? > > If the hardware is emulated, why do you care what emulation is involved ? > > The major difference between Alpha and Itanium, for instance, is speed > and cost of the hardware. Neither of those would show up through an > emulator. > > Why is VAX emulation inadequate for you? (Yes, somebody else in the > newsgroup might have a reason, but I am asking about Marco's reason.) I am new to this, and maybe don't know how to clearly ask... I'm basically looking for some software that will enable me to run OpenVMS on my Intel-based laptop. If I can get a VAX emulator that runs on my Intel laptop, I'm all for it... I'd want an Itanium one also. Why? Just because... ;-) Marco ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:21:34 -0600 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: OpenVMS 8.2 Itanium emulator? Message-ID: <41EB2F3E.F4DFF0A4@comcast.net> Marco wrote: > > > Oh, I also notice you are specifying Itanium. > > > > Why is that a requirement ? > > > > If the hardware is emulated, why do you care what emulation is involved ? > > > > The major difference between Alpha and Itanium, for instance, is speed > > and cost of the hardware. Neither of those would show up through an > > emulator. > > > > Why is VAX emulation inadequate for you? (Yes, somebody else in the > > newsgroup might have a reason, but I am asking about Marco's reason.) > > I am new to this, and maybe don't know how to clearly ask... > > I'm basically looking for some software that will enable me to run OpenVMS > on my Intel-based laptop. > > If I can get a VAX emulator that runs on my Intel laptop, I'm all for it... Well, there's a commercial product called Charon-VAX and freeware called SIMH. > I'd want an Itanium one also. Why? Just because... ;-) So, you're asking an Itanic emulator that runs on x86-32 (presumably under WhineBloze)? -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Coming soon: Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 14:30:29 -0500 From: Wayne Sewell Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) Message-ID: <00A3DF60.645439B6.1@tachysoft.com> >X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms >Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) >From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG >>The Source Listings Kit is of such low volume that at the last DECUS (sic) >>symposium where its continued existance was in peril there were fewer than >>six customers who showed up at the meeting to discuss it. > >If this is cancelled, they might as well cancel VMS along with it! By your >"DECUS (sic)" comment, I believe you are talking about the HP World? If so, >I found no value whatsoever in it isn't it really billyworld/eunuchsworld? >and therefore was not present to attend a >SIG or BOF on the future of the source listings. I will put in my vote here >and now that this service had better not go the way of the Dodo. Absolutely. There have been many problems I have had over the years that could not possibly have been solved without the source. Not necessarily in tapesys, which is mostly user mode, but in our virtual tape and disk devices, which require heavy internals. I had no idea that the source listings were in jeopardy, that hp was even considering doing away with them. It would be a way to destroy what few vms vendors are left. It's bad enough that patches do not include source, causing the listings to be out of synch with the actual code being executed. Doing without the listings entirely is too horrible for contemplation. For those of us who do not go to hp world, who should we contact to stave off this disaster? Wayne =============================================================================== Wayne Sewell, Tachyon Software Consulting (281)812-0738 wayne@tachysoft.com http://www.tachysoft.com/www/tachyon.html and wayne.html =============================================================================== Larry(sniffing):"I smell something awful." Moe:"Yeah, well don't brag about it." ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:02:30 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) Message-ID: <00A3DF75.A0ECDD5E@SendSpamHere.ORG> In article <00A3DF60.645439B6.1@tachysoft.com>, Wayne Sewell writes: >>X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms >>Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) >>From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG > > >>>The Source Listings Kit is of such low volume that at the last DECUS (sic) >>>symposium where its continued existance was in peril there were fewer than >>>six customers who showed up at the meeting to discuss it. >> >>If this is cancelled, they might as well cancel VMS along with it! By your >>"DECUS (sic)" comment, I believe you are talking about the HP World? If so, >>I found no value whatsoever in it > >isn't it really billyworld/eunuchsworld? It's been billyworld/eunuchsworld since long before HP. DECUS became the Domestic Emasculated Computer Useless Society long before HP or Compaq. I could get by in the VAX days without it. Somewhat more difficult in the Alpha days but even that code was readable. Source listings make the most sense now with this fugly instruction set. If these go away, it's off to open that Brew Pub/Apple Store I've been thinking about. -- http://www.ProvN.com for the *best* OpenVMS system security solutions that others only claim to be. -- Cyber-Terrorism (si'-ber tayr'-or-iz-em) n.: The release of, the sale of, or the use of any Micro$oft software product! -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:35:13 -0800 From: Alan Frisbie Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) Message-ID: <41EAFA31.5020109@Flying-Disk.com> VAXman- wrote: > In article <3K2KX83ug0Cd@eisner.encompasserve.org>, > Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: >> The Source Listings Kit is of such low volume that at the last DECUS (sic) >> symposium where its continued existance was in peril there were fewer than >> six customers who showed up at the meeting to discuss it. > If this is cancelled, they might as well cancel VMS along with it! By your > "DECUS (sic)" comment, I believe you are talking about the HP World? If so, > I found no value whatsoever in it and therefore was not present to attend a > SIG or BOF on the future of the source listings. I will put in my vote here > and now that this service had better not go the way of the Dodo. Likewise. I may not need the listings often, but when I need them, I *NEED* them. That is why I continue to subscribe to them. Alan ------------------------------ Date: 16 Jan 2005 18:49:00 -0600 From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) Message-ID: In article <00A3DF49.86A9D6BE@SendSpamHere.ORG>, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: > In article <3K2KX83ug0Cd@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: >>The Source Listings Kit is of such low volume that at the last DECUS (sic) >>symposium where its continued existance was in peril there were fewer than >>six customers who showed up at the meeting to discuss it. > > If this is cancelled, they might as well cancel VMS along with it! By your > "DECUS (sic)" comment, I believe you are talking about the HP World? If so, No, by that comment I mean really DECUS, back when it was called DECUS. They did not want to continue making Microfiche, and we convinced them to do it on CDROM. (Another interpretation is that they wanted to do it on CDROM, but were floating a trial balloon to get our reaction). > I found no value whatsoever in it and therefore was not present to attend a > SIG or BOF on the future of the source listings. I will put in my vote here > and now that this service had better not go the way of the Dodo. I don't think creation of what goes into the service is broken. I found a good reception at the last boot camp for my comments on one manner in which the content should change. The process for creating the kits is well-embedded in the VMS release cycle. What is broken (for me, anyway) is the process by which one orders it. Below I quote a bit from just one HP employee (the full scenario has been mailed to someone at HP whose name we all know): > > I gave the person who answered our customer number. > > > > He asked what I wanted to order, and I said QT-MT1AB-Q8 and > > spelled it phonetically. > > > > He asked if I knew what that was. I said it was a VMS Source Listings > > subscription renewal. > > > > He said this was Hewlett Packard and I seemed to have the wrong company. > > I agreed and hung up. ------------------------------ Date: 16 Jan 2005 18:50:57 -0600 From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) Message-ID: In article <41EAFA31.5020109@Flying-Disk.com>, Alan Frisbie writes: > VAXman- wrote: > > >> In article <3K2KX83ug0Cd@eisner.encompasserve.org>, > > Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: > >>> The Source Listings Kit is of such low volume that at the last DECUS (sic) >>> symposium where its continued existance was in peril there were fewer than >>> six customers who showed up at the meeting to discuss it. > >> If this is cancelled, they might as well cancel VMS along with it! By your >> "DECUS (sic)" comment, I believe you are talking about the HP World? If so, >> I found no value whatsoever in it and therefore was not present to attend a >> SIG or BOF on the future of the source listings. I will put in my vote here >> and now that this service had better not go the way of the Dodo. > > Likewise. I may not need the listings often, but when I need them, > I *NEED* them. That is why I continue to subscribe to them. Again, this was a DECUS symposium, and Alan, I thought you were at the meeting ! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:31:58 -0600 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) Message-ID: <41EB31AE.28AD1B28@comcast.net> Wayne Sewell wrote: > > >X-Newsgroups: comp.os.vms > >Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) > >From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG > > >>The Source Listings Kit is of such low volume that at the last DECUS (sic) > >>symposium where its continued existance was in peril there were fewer than > >>six customers who showed up at the meeting to discuss it. > > > >If this is cancelled, they might as well cancel VMS along with it! By your > >"DECUS (sic)" comment, I believe you are talking about the HP World? If so, > >I found no value whatsoever in it > > isn't it really billyworld/eunuchsworld? Well, yes and no. No, the bulk of the presentations were not VMS-centric. Yes, there were VMS-related sessions, albeit in "the catacombs" of the facility formerly (still?) known as McCormick South. VMS may be the bastard son of the bastard son, but its still draws enough of an audience to make it worth their while, apparently. We'll see how the OpenVMS section of the HP Tech. Forum goes... -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Coming soon: Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 00:43:26 -0500 From: Carl Friedberg Subject: Re: Source Listings Kit (was: vms versus solaris) Message-ID: <890539d905011621436b5594a0@mail.gmail.com> Larry, I remember that meeting well. As I recall, Digital floated the idea that they would replace the (then current) microfiche source distribution with CDrom. On closer questioning, the marketing folks understood that the CDroms would contain the same images as the microfiche. I think you and I were both equally aghast at the notion that somehow Digital was going to take the listing files, print them on an LP03, send them out to a service bureau, and get back a microfiche kit and a cdrom kit. We prevailed upon them to transfer the listing files to the cdrom, so that one could use SEARCH and COPY... And, I agree, there were about six of us interested in that topic. It was around 1985 or 1986. Carl Friedberg (212) 233-5470 Carl at comets dot com On 16 Jan 2005 18:49:00 -0600, Larry Kilgallen wrote: > In article <00A3DF49.86A9D6BE@SendSpamHere.ORG>, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: > > In article <3K2KX83ug0Cd@eisner.encompasserve.org>, Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: > > >>The Source Listings Kit is of such low volume that at the last DECUS (sic) > >>symposium where its continued existance was in peril there were fewer than > >>six customers who showed up at the meeting to discuss it. > > > > If this is cancelled, they might as well cancel VMS along with it! By your > > "DECUS (sic)" comment, I believe you are talking about the HP World? If so, > > No, by that comment I mean really DECUS, back when it was called DECUS. > They did not want to continue making Microfiche, and we convinced them > to do it on CDROM. (Another interpretation is that they wanted to do > it on CDROM, but were floating a trial balloon to get our reaction). > > > I found no value whatsoever in it and therefore was not present to attend a > > SIG or BOF on the future of the source listings. I will put in my vote here > > and now that this service had better not go the way of the Dodo. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 19:46:24 +0100 From: Wilm Boerhout Subject: Re: Subversion client build on OpenVMS Message-ID: <41eab685$0$1231$ba620dc5@nova.planet.nl> M.Eismann wrote: ... > it requires licenses, Yes, but compare that to the (100s? 1000?) of person-hours needed to fully port Subversion. Unless you work for peanuts, porting may be more expensive than acquiring a license. > and it stores every "atomic" > release of a textfile (sourcefile) in full format - not incrementally > like CVS or Subversion would do... Not true, see other posts above -- Wilm Boerhout Zwolle, The Netherlands wilmOLD@PAINTboerhout.nl (remove OLD PAINT from this address before use) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:30:15 -0500 From: "John E. Malmberg" Subject: Re: Subversion client build on OpenVMS Message-ID: M.Eismann wrote: > Hello to all! > > OpenVMS Alpha 7.3-2 > > I'm looking for a subversion-client built on OpenVMS. Subversion is a > version-cotrol-software similar to CVS (http:://www.cvshome.org) and > it's to be known to "replace" the well known CVS. > We don't want to use the CMS (Code-Management-System) from > DEC/Compaq/HP; it requires licenses, isn't able to work over networks > (like CVS does in client/server-mode) and it stores every "atomic" > release of a textfile (sourcefile) in full format - not incrementally > like CVS or Subversion would do... As has been pointed out, CMS stores in a delta generation format. There is a Microsoft Windows Client for it, but I have never used it. > The current sources are available at http://subversion.tigris.org in > version 1.1.2. Maybe anyone has built this tool on VMS?! Not that I have been able to find. I did find that there is a NetBeans plugin to provide Subversion access. Netbeans is available for OpenVMS Alpha if you have Java installed. I have not tried either NetBeans or the plug in. > Or anyone has > experiences in building this open-source-tool with GNV > (http://h71000.www7.hp.com/opensource/opensource.html#gnv)? > We have Compaq C V6.5-001 on OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-2, the latest > Unix-porting library installed. The UNIX porting library has limited usefulness in what products it can be applied to, one of it's current limitations is that it does one-way name conversions from UNIX to VMS ODS-2, and this will not work for many applications. An application like subversion is likely hit this limitation. I would generally only use it if there was no other easy way to get the job done. Generally with current versions of OpenVMS much of what the porting library was needed for is now available directly from the built in C RTL. I am not sure if the Apache module needed for Subversion is available in the VMS Apache based web server in a format suitable for building other programs against. In any case the source is available from the Apache.org web site. > I read somewhere, that we also need the > automake- and autoconf-tools for building/porting from Unix/Linux to > VMS, but where can I get binaries of these tools? Automake and autoconf tools are macro libraries that are hand tuned by each platform that they produce with the results merged into one set of scripts. They are generally used at the time that the source package is being first developed by the suppliers of the package. The output of automake and autoconfig is then run to produce the first datafiles and scripts that are then intended to be run by the person doing the final compile and install. After that point, the output scripts are then hand tweaked for the project until they produce the correct output for each platform. While the intent is that the resulting hand tweaked configuration script should produce the correct output on any platform that it is run on. The actual result is that it can only produce the correct answers on platforms where someone has manually checked all the results it came up with after the last modification to the scripts. For other platforms it may be producing less than optimal answers. It is usually less work on OpenVMS to just simply hand create the data files and build scripts by hand and maintain them that way then to try to get the automatic configuration stuff working. After all the only way to verify the output of the configuration script is if you already have the correct answers. And if you have the correct answers, you do not need to run the configuration script. Some people are looking at seeing what can be done to get GNV bash to properly process such configuration scripts, but since the scripts have been previously tweaked for each of their active target platforms, it is likely that any solution will also result in fixes being applied to the configure scripts supplied with the product. > Can anyone help me? Professional support can be obtained from HP and other consulting sources. Volunteer support is available from this and other forums. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:25:17 -0600 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: TCP/IP on OpenVMS 7.3 Message-ID: <41EB301C.DBE21672@comcast.net> John Hixson wrote: > > Hi again guys, > I got my openvms system up and running and I also have an openvms > hobbyist license. I did not get the license by purchasing a CD, I got it > by email after sighning up with decus. I would like to get TCP/IP > services on my machine. Currently I connect through minicom over a > serial line. I seem to not be able to run decnet or tcpip without a > license. I haven't been able to find any information on this either. Is > there a hobbyist like license for openvms that would allow me to run > these services? Am I barking up the wrong tree? I attempted to get a > multinet license but it says my checksum is invalid, which I dont > understand unless im entering in the wrong information. EVen if I were > to get multinet, Im not sure how I would get it on the box. Well, you'll find the TCP/IP Services for OpenVMS (aka "UCX") PAK in the "layered products" license set from OpenVMSHobbyist.org. Look for "UCX", not TCP/IP. There seems to be a known problem this year with PSC's hobbyist PAK generator rejecting valid checksums. I did receive a valid Multinet PAK separately, however (many thanx to the one who intervened (Hunter?)). -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Coming soon: Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:32:04 -0800 From: John Hixson Subject: Re: TCP/IP on OpenVMS 7.3 Message-ID: OK, So I got the license for multinet =). Im still unclear as to why it was rejecting me, but at least I have it now. I also managed to get the hobbyist licenses for everything else. However, I see no license for any tcp/ip stuff. I downloaded the multinet zip file and now I gotta figure out a way of getting it on my box =). I only have a serial line connection to it, so this should be interesting. - John John Hixson wrote: > Hi again guys, > I got my openvms system up and running and I also have an openvms > hobbyist license. I did not get the license by purchasing a CD, I got it > by email after sighning up with decus. I would like to get TCP/IP > services on my machine. Currently I connect through minicom over a > serial line. I seem to not be able to run decnet or tcpip without a > license. I haven't been able to find any information on this either. Is > there a hobbyist like license for openvms that would allow me to run > these services? Am I barking up the wrong tree? I attempted to get a > multinet license but it says my checksum is invalid, which I dont > understand unless im entering in the wrong information. EVen if I were > to get multinet, Im not sure how I would get it on the box. > > Thanks again, > John Hixson ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 23:14:40 GMT From: "FredK" Subject: Re: Using GLUT (OpenGL) on VMS 7.3.2 Message-ID: 1) DECW$OPENGLSHR should be defined as a logical for the card you are using. If you want upward compatability, you should use the earliest ones (say, the P350 images) unless you need V1.2 features. 2) We are not publishing GLUT documentation, we are shipping GLUT as a courtesy. You can find various things on the internet, including the GLUT source. "Hiroyuki Tanaka" wrote in message news:68cfa44d.0501150104.79b2bec0@posting.google.com... > Hi All, > > I see that as part of Open VMS 7.3.2 the Open GL Utility Toolkit > (GLUT) is now part of the VMS install. > > Where is the documentation located to use the GLUT toolkit. > > Until now I have always defined GL to SYS$LIBRARY. > > But it appears I will need to define it to the version of OpenGL I am > using. > > Thanks for the pointer. > > Tanaka ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:33:12 -0500 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: vms versus solaris Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Neil Rieck [mailto:n.rieck@sympatico.ca]=20 > Sent: January 16, 2005 10:26 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: vms versus solaris >=20 > "Tom Linden" wrote in message=20 > news:opsko7zcolzgicya@hyrrokkin... > > On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 08:38:16 -0500, Neil Rieck=20 > =20 > > wrote: > > > [...snip...] > >> > >> Although I have nothing but respect for the official=20 > OpenVMS FAQ, it is a > >> bit too technical for some situations. Some time ago I=20 > needed to produce=20 > >> a > >> semi-technical comparison of UNIX and OpenVMS for my=20 > employer (target > >> audience: semi-technical people who have volunteered for a partial=20 > >> lobotomy > >> and are now in middle management) in order to defend our=20 > team's choice of > >> sticking with OpenVMS rather than jumping to LINUX. Once=20 > presented, I > >> removed information specific to my employer and posted the=20 > information=20 > >> on my > >> personal web site. > >> > >> http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/docs/vms_vs_unix.html > > > > To your list of sectors you could add > > Steel > > Automotive > > Semiconductors > >> >=20 > I've already added semiconductors but didn't know about Steel and=20 > Automotive. Which companies were you thinking of? >=20 Neil, Steel and automotive are quite big with OpenVMS including some really big steel and auto companies in Southern Ontario :-) Reference: (examples of critical markets for OpenVMS) http://h71000.www7.hp.com/success-stories.html Regards Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20 "OpenVMS has always had integrity .. Now, Integrity has OpenVMS .." ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:27:18 -0500 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: vms versus solaris Message-ID: <1105906609.93ae3d119ffb0c3887dcc4ca49dda829@teranews> Neil Rieck wrote: > sticking with OpenVMS rather than jumping to LINUX. Once presented, I > removed information specific to my employer and posted the information on my > personal web site. > > http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/docs/vms_vs_unix.htm Interesting... but I have a few comments/nitpicks to improve this document... #2.rewritten in 1992 for the 64-bit Alpha (Digital # Equipment Corporation) and renamed OpenVMS I wouldn't use the word "rewritten". It re-enforces the false image that OpenVMS is completely different from VMS. I'd just say that it was ported to the 64 bit Alpha and renamed O___VMS. #5.On 2002.06.30 Compaq announced they will port # OpenVMS to Intel's Itanium (IA-64) processor. The date was 2001.06.25 In 2002.06.30, Compaq was no longer in existance (Compaq ceased to exist May 7th 2002). In item 6, the merger was announced Sept 7th 2001. Consumed May 7th 2002. In the on-line help, you may wish to add that VMS was available in multiple languages, including hebrew (which is interesting in computerterms since it is written backwards, ALL-IN-1 had some specific string handling routines included solely for support of hebrew for instance). You can also update the portion about Advanced ile system from Tru64 NOT making it to HP-UX but 2004. (This was recently annoucnnd by HP who are going with Veritas instead). #1.global variables allow a process to share # information with their respective sub-processes Not sure what you mean by this. If you are talking about symbols, a better way to say it would be: a copy of a parent's global variables is passed on by default to subrpocesses. (they are not shared per say). ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 21:55:21 +0100 From: Paul Sture Subject: Re: vms versus solaris Message-ID: <3502kfF4gmnosU1@individual.net> Tom Linden wrote: > On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 08:38:16 -0500, Neil Rieck > wrote: > >> >> "Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER" wrote in message >> news:newscache$enkdai$ow22$1@news.sil.at... >> >>> In article <41e94fd5$1@news.012.net.il>, "Eitan" >>> writes: >> >> [...snip...] >> >>> >>> For other answers read the OpenVMS FAQ http://www.hp.com/go/openvms/faq >>> >>> -- >>> Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER >>> Network and OpenVMS system specialist >>> E-mail peter@langstoeger.at >>> A-1030 VIENNA AUSTRIA I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist >> >> >> Although I have nothing but respect for the official OpenVMS FAQ, it is a >> bit too technical for some situations. Some time ago I needed to >> produce a >> semi-technical comparison of UNIX and OpenVMS for my employer (target >> audience: semi-technical people who have volunteered for a partial >> lobotomy >> and are now in middle management) in order to defend our team's choice of >> sticking with OpenVMS rather than jumping to LINUX. Once presented, I >> removed information specific to my employer and posted the >> information on my >> personal web site. >> >> http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/docs/vms_vs_unix.html > > > To your list of sectors you could add > Steel > Automotive > Semiconductors > I'll add Mail Order ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 17:12:58 -0500 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: vms versus solaris Message-ID: <41EAE6E0.5B37E562@teksavvy.com> Paul Sture wrote: > > To your list of sectors you could add > > Steel > > Automotive > > Semiconductors > > > > I'll add Mail Order Mail Order ? Which large MAil Order shop uses VMS ? Amazon is a Sun shop, so is EBAY. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:23:33 -0800 From: "Tom Linden" Subject: Re: vms versus solaris Message-ID: On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 13:25:54 -0500, Neil Rieck wrote: > I've already added semiconductors but didn't know about Steel and > Automotive. Which companies were you thinking of? Forgot Fiat and SEAT -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:21:36 -0800 From: "Tom Linden" Subject: Re: vms versus solaris Message-ID: On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 13:25:54 -0500, Neil Rieck wrote: > I've already added semiconductors but didn't know about Steel and > Automotive. Which companies were you thinking of? VW and GM both big VMS PL/I shops Steel We have customers in Australia and Germany -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 19:22:17 -0500 From: "Neil Rieck" Subject: Re: vms versus solaris Message-ID: <1zDGd.8833$W33.218182@news20.bellglobal.com> "JF Mezei" wrote in message news:1105906609.93ae3d119ffb0c3887dcc4ca49dda829@teranews... > Neil Rieck wrote: >> sticking with OpenVMS rather than jumping to LINUX. Once presented, I >> removed information specific to my employer and posted the information on >> my >> personal web site. >> >> http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/docs/vms_vs_unix.htm > > Interesting... but I have a few comments/nitpicks to improve this > document... > > #2.rewritten in 1992 for the 64-bit Alpha (Digital > # Equipment Corporation) and renamed OpenVMS > > I wouldn't use the word "rewritten". It re-enforces the false image that > OpenVMS is completely different from VMS. I'd just say that it was > ported to the 64 bit Alpha and renamed O___VMS. > I have to disagree with you on this JF. I've talked face-to-face with people in OpenVMS engineering at a seminar some time back and what follows is (IIRC) a close quote: "We looked at everything and partially rewrote many modules to get things back to the way they should have been done in the first place. We also discovered and fixed a lot of potential bugs." As others have pointed out in this newsgroup, there are two OpenVMS code bases: one for VAX and one for "Alpha and Itanium". I'm only assuming that the problems discovered during the port/rewrite made it back into the VAX base but who knows for sure? Maybe some of the OpenVMS folk can respond to this. Anyway, OpenVMS is now better as a result of the project to go to Alpha. p.s. At a different seminar an HP employee made the following statement which I transcribed into my notes for the day: "We touched ~1200 modules going from VAX to Alpha and we only touched ~200 modules going from Alpha to Itanium". Pretty cool fact, eh? Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge, Ontario, Canada. http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 23:03:58 -0500 From: "Neil Rieck" Subject: Re: vms versus solaris Message-ID: "JF Mezei" wrote in message news:1105906609.93ae3d119ffb0c3887dcc4ca49dda829@teranews... > Neil Rieck wrote: > > In the on-line help, you may wish to add that VMS was available in > multiple languages, including hebrew (which is interesting in > computerterms since it is written backwards, ALL-IN-1 had some specific > string handling routines included solely for support of hebrew for > instance). > I knew about Thai, Hanzi, Hanyu and Hangul from the documentation cd-roms but I didn't know about Hebrew. Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge, Ontario, Canada. http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 23:06:41 -0500 From: "Neil Rieck" Subject: Re: vms versus solaris Message-ID: "JF Mezei" wrote in message news:41EB2533.9DE5A07@teksavvy.com... > Neil Rieck wrote: >> which I transcribed into my notes for the day: "We touched ~1200 modules >> going from VAX to Alpha and we only touched ~200 modules going from Alpha >> to >> Itanium". Pretty cool fact, eh? > > Touch != rewrite. I agree. It was a different quote from a different seminar. The person that made this comment was not a programmer. Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge, Ontario, Canada. http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2005.033 ************************