0 INFO-VAX	Wed, 01 Feb 2006	Volume 2006 : Issue 64      Contents:# Differences between KA690 and KA691 ' Re: Differences between KA690 and KA691 ' Re: Differences between KA690 and KA691 A Re: FOR070.DAT files appearing - (Crow doesn't taste so bad after P Re: FOR070.DAT files appearing - (Crow doesn't taste so bad after   all)   all)aF Re: FOR070.DAT files appearing - (Crow doesn't taste so bad after all)& Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems& Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems& Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems& Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems& Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems& Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems& Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems& Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems Re: IA64: Montecito info Re: IA64: Montecito info Re: Open VMS programing in C Re: Open VMS programing in C: Re: p2c (dave gillespie's pas to c converter) & VMS pascal: Re: p2c (dave gillespie's pas to c converter) & VMS pascal: Re: p2c (dave gillespie's pas to c converter) & VMS pascal: Re: p2c (dave gillespie's pas to c converter) & VMS pascal: Re: p2c (dave gillespie's pas to c converter) & VMS pascal Re: SimH V3.5-2 released Re: SimH V3.5-2 released Re: Splitting serial cables ?  Re: Splitting serial cables ?  Re: Splitting serial cables ?  Re: Splitting serial cables ?  Re: Splitting serial cables ?  Re: Splitting serial cables ?  Re: Splitting serial cables ? ' Re: The Pentium Chronicles (2006.01.31) ' Re: The Pentium Chronicles (2006.01.31) ' Re: The Pentium Chronicles (2006.01.31)   F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 04:09:15 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> , Subject: Differences between KA690 and KA691, Message-ID: <43E07A95.E5114E11@teksavvy.com>  : There have been VAX4000 -500 and -600 and -500A and -600A.  F The "A" models use KA691, whereas the A-less models are based on KA690  A I found some of the manuals on the net, and both operates at a 12 D nanosecond cycle time, have 512kb of cache. (or is it 512 bytes ?).   G Does anyone know what the differences were between the 500 and 500A and  600 and 600A ?    H One of my system is labeled 500A on the cabinet but identifies itsels as3 a 600A in VMS. (It had supposedly been "upgraded").   * Its clock is at 333mhz on the motherboard.  D (wouldn't a VAX running at 333mhz be roughly the same as an Alpha at	 600mhz ?    H The difference in performance compared with my all mighty Microvax II is not so subtle :-)    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 07:12:14 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> 0 Subject: Re: Differences between KA690 and KA691( Message-ID: <ops4au6od6zgicya@hyrrokkin>  . On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 04:09:15 -0500, JF Mezei  % <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote:   , > Its clock is at 333mhz on the motherboard.F > (wouldn't a VAX running at 333mhz be roughly the same as an Alpha at
 > 600mhz ?  F Depends on what you are doing, it could be faster.  Remember, object   modules F on AXP could be 2 to 3 times larger.  Probably not for the 21064 cpus.   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Feb 2006 07:31:18 -0800 ( From: "Rich Jordan" <jordan@ccs4vms.com>0 Subject: Re: Differences between KA690 and KA691B Message-ID: <1138807878.435401.89970@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>  " Per the April and October 1993 SOC  * Model   TPS   CPU Clock   Cache chip/board* 400      51       63MHz         10KB/128KB* 500      68       72MHz         10KB/128KB+ 500a     116      72MHz          10KB/128KB + 600       103     83MHz          10KB/512KB + 600a     183      83MHz          10KB/512KB ( 700a     253     100MHz         10KB/2MB  E Max I/O Throughput listed 16.3MB/s on the ### models, and 20.6MB/s on B the -a models.  I could not find descriptive info on the technical# differences between the model sets.    ------------------------------   Date: 1 Feb 2006 09:49:10 -0600  From: briggs@encompasserve.orgJ Subject: Re: FOR070.DAT files appearing - (Crow doesn't taste so bad after3 Message-ID: <YjkfB9ffXAfF@eisner.encompasserve.org>   V In article <44bvpnF1ef83U1@individual.net>, Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.ch> writes: > Jeff Cameron wrote:  >>   >  > <snip> > M >> I distinctly remember that this was the behavior back in version 5.x, that O >> if you had rights (that is granted by file protections or ACLs) to writ in a O >> directory the owner of the file would be that of the creator, however if you O >> used a privilege where a right (protection/ACL) was refused, the owner would ; >> be the owner of the parent directory. I stand corrected.  >>  O >> Do you remember this behavior in the past? Or are my grey matter cells truly 
 >> misfiring?  >>  2 >> Boy! I'm beginning to acquire a taste for crow. >>   > J > I don't remember all the gory details, but at one customer they noticed G > a change in behaviour in this area with V6.1 (they had skipped V6.0).  > % > IIRC the following change bit them:  > D > The V5.n behaviour allowed users to create a file under their own F > ownership in a world writable directory, even if a previous version J > existed and was owned by another user. You can see the obvious security 
 > risk there.   A My recollection on this is not solid, but is it possible that you D are referring to the change where the rights to create a new version@ of an existing file were changed to require delete access to the: previous version as well as write access to the directory?  A Ownership is not the key to the security risk in the scenario you A have presented.  Access rights are.  You have effectively deleted A the previous version without having delete access to the previous  version.  B The fix for this is not an ownership test but rather a file access, rights test.  And that is what was deployed.   >  > Now consider this: >  > John Briggs wrote: > G >  >>File ownership defaults first to the owner of the previous version  >  >>(rights permitting) > J > Whoops, the users suddenly couldn't create a file if a previous version   > owned by someone else existed.  B Don't think ownership rights impacted this behavior.  If you can'tF create it under the previous version's ownership, you can still createC it under your own ownership.  As far as I know, a lack of ownership E rights to the default owner never end up preventing a file from being  created.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 15:44:07 +0100 ( From: Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.ch>Y Subject: Re: FOR070.DAT files appearing - (Crow doesn't taste so bad after   all)   all)a + Message-ID: <44bvpnF1ef83U1@individual.net>    Jeff Cameron wrote:  >    <snip>  L > I distinctly remember that this was the behavior back in version 5.x, thatN > if you had rights (that is granted by file protections or ACLs) to writ in aN > directory the owner of the file would be that of the creator, however if youN > used a privilege where a right (protection/ACL) was refused, the owner would: > be the owner of the parent directory. I stand corrected. > N > Do you remember this behavior in the past? Or are my grey matter cells truly > misfiring? > 1 > Boy! I'm beginning to acquire a taste for crow.  >   H I don't remember all the gory details, but at one customer they noticed E a change in behaviour in this area with V6.1 (they had skipped V6.0).   # IIRC the following change bit them:   B The V5.n behaviour allowed users to create a file under their own D ownership in a world writable directory, even if a previous version H existed and was owned by another user. You can see the obvious security  risk there.    Now consider this:   John Briggs wrote:  E  >>File ownership defaults first to the owner of the previous version   >>(rights permitting)  H Whoops, the users suddenly couldn't create a file if a previous version  owned by someone else existed.   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Feb 2006 01:08:45 -0600 2 From: "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow>O Subject: Re: FOR070.DAT files appearing - (Crow doesn't taste so bad after all) ? Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-ZcKzd0muGqb6@dave2_os2.home.ours>   D On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 04:30:18 UTC, Jeff Cameron <roktsci@comcast.net>  wrote:    
 <Big Snip>  L > I distinctly remember that this was the behavior back in version 5.x, thatN > if you had rights (that is granted by file protections or ACLs) to writ in aN > directory the owner of the file would be that of the creator, however if youN > used a privilege where a right (protection/ACL) was refused, the owner would: > be the owner of the parent directory. I stand corrected. > N > Do you remember this behavior in the past? Or are my grey matter cells truly > misfiring? > 1 > Boy! I'm beginning to acquire a taste for crow.  > Jeff  A There was big change in the operation of protections around that  ? time/version frame. At one time if you had write access to the  D directory you could (IIRC) create a new version of an existing file D (i,.e edit it) even if the previous file was owned by someone else. ? After the change, you needed write access to the file you were  F superseding. I remember having to set ACL's on many files (all, in one> tree) to enable user's to share development. I remember being F unimpressed at the time. Even tho' I'm not always keen on the idea of D users sharing directories :-)  (as many of mine will gladly testify  :-))) )    --   Cheers - Dave W.   ------------------------------    Date: 31 Jan 2006 23:08:14 -08007 From: "greg.chabala@gmail.com" <greg.chabala@gmail.com> / Subject: Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems C Message-ID: <1138777694.780332.174870@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   @ Okay. I figured out how to mount and dismount my cd-rom drive. IF created the stand alone backup 'partition' on USER02$DIA2 and I booted from it.  - It listed my devices and they were all there.   G But then there is the BACKUP command. Several things are suggested here F and in the hobbyist documentation. None seem to be working. Mostly theD error is that the /IMAGE switch only wants the device name, or so it  says. Here is what I have tried:  8 BACKUP/VERIFY/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VAXVMS073.B/SAVE DIA09 BACKUP/VERIFY/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VAXVMS073.B/SAVE DIA0:   . BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0/ BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0:   1 BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VAXVMS073.B/SAVE DIA0 2 BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VAXVMS073.B/SAVE DIA0:   BACKUP DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE     BACKUP DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0! BACKUP DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0:   & BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0' BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0:   ' What is the right way to be doing this?    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 07:41:22 +0000 7 From: David B Sneddon - bigpond <dbsneddon@bigpond.com> / Subject: Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems * Message-ID: <43E06622.7020908@bigpond.com>  , greg.chabala@gmail.com mentioned in passing:B > Okay. I figured out how to mount and dismount my cd-rom drive. IH > created the stand alone backup 'partition' on USER02$DIA2 and I booted
 > from it. > / > It listed my devices and they were all there.  > I > But then there is the BACKUP command. Several things are suggested here H > and in the hobbyist documentation. None seem to be working. Mostly theF > error is that the /IMAGE switch only wants the device name, or so it" > says. Here is what I have tried: > : > BACKUP/VERIFY/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VAXVMS073.B/SAVE DIA0; > BACKUP/VERIFY/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VAXVMS073.B/SAVE DIA0:  > 0 > BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VMS073.B/SAVE DIA01 > BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0:  > 3 > BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VAXVMS073.B/SAVE DIA0 4 > BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VAXVMS073.B/SAVE DIA0: >  > BACKUP DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE  > " > BACKUP DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0# > BACKUP DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0:  > ( > BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0) > BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0:  > ) > What is the right way to be doing this?   < Once you mount DKA500, what does DIR DKA500:[000000] reveal?   Regards, Dave --  B David B Sneddon (dbs) VMS Systems Programmer dbsneddon@bigpond.comB Sneddo's quick guide ...   http://www.users.bigpond.com/dbsneddon/B DBS freeware   http://www.users.bigpond.com/dbsneddon/software.htm   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 02:56:38 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> / Subject: Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems , Message-ID: <43E06994.A4712536@teksavvy.com>   "greg.chabala@gmail.com" wrote: ; > BACKUP/VERIFY/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VAXVMS073.B/SAVE DIA0:   G When you issue this command, do you see/hear activity on the CD drive ?   * Do you see/hear any activity on the disk ?  / Or does it issue the error message right away ?     G When standalone backup boots it should list the available device names. G Are you using DKA500: and DIA0: exactly as they are shown ? They may be G prefixed by some other text (for instance $1$DIA0: ) and you would have 5 to enter them exactly as standalone backup sees them.     H This format of the backup command has been in use since at least versionG 4.6 of VMS. So even in your old version of standalone backup, it SHOULD  work in that format.  ) Some variations to try: /INIT after DIA0:     B If you use a similar backup command from a booted VMS, you need to manually mount the drives.    B $ MOUNT/NOWRITE DKA500: volume CD$LOGICAL  (the "volume" shoudl be written on the CD). " $ MOUNT/FOREIGN DIA0: DISK$LOGICAL  ) You can then do the BACKUP/IMAGE command.   F The MOUNT command is unavailable from standalone backup and standalone* backup is expected to do its own mounting.   ------------------------------   Date: 1 Feb 2006 00:15:11 -0800 7 From: "greg.chabala@gmail.com" <greg.chabala@gmail.com> / Subject: Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems B Message-ID: <1138781711.663470.97740@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>   I believe Mr. Santos wins!   His command:B BACKUP/VERIFY/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VMS073.B/SAVE SYSTEM$DIA0:/INIT  F seems to be a hit. The backup is now in progress, and the cd-rom showsF activity, which it did not before. So far there have been three errorsA of the type 'unknown file in saveset' but I can't think they were 
 avoidable.  A I will update the status of the system when the backup completes.    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 07:45:59 GMT   From: John Santos <john@egh.com>/ Subject: Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems + Message-ID: <XGZDf.78728$M94.4494@trnddc01>    greg.chabala@gmail.com wrote: B > Okay. I figured out how to mount and dismount my cd-rom drive. IH > created the stand alone backup 'partition' on USER02$DIA2 and I booted
 > from it. > / > It listed my devices and they were all there.  > I > But then there is the BACKUP command. Several things are suggested here H > and in the hobbyist documentation. None seem to be working. Mostly theF > error is that the /IMAGE switch only wants the device name, or so it" > says. Here is what I have tried: > : > BACKUP/VERIFY/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VAXVMS073.B/SAVE DIA0; > BACKUP/VERIFY/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VAXVMS073.B/SAVE DIA0:  > 0 > BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VMS073.B/SAVE DIA01 > BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0:  >     I think it should be this one...  ; I think I've only done a VMS install from CD-ROM once, many : years ago, but I'm pretty sure you don't need to mount the8 source or destination disk.  Someone else said the right? save-set name is VMS073.B.  I think the "/IMAGE" is the default < (and only possible mode) for SA backup, but I don't think it@ hurts to specify it.  You may need a "/INIT" on the output side,9 i.e. ... DIA0:/INIT.  /VERIFY should be acceptable, and I  would recommend it.   = What error messages are you getting?  They are usually pretty  informative.  8 When you list out the disk devices, how do they display?9 Is it "DIA0:" or "SYSTEM$DIA0:" (or something else?)  You : may need to include the node id, i.e. the thing before the% dollar sign, in the device name.  Try   B BACKUP/VERIFY/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VMS073.B/SAVE SYSTEM$DIA0:/INIT  3 (Substitute the node id for "SYSTEM" as necessary.)       3 > BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VAXVMS073.B/SAVE DIA0 4 > BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:[000000]VAXVMS073.B/SAVE DIA0: >  > BACKUP DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE  > " > BACKUP DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0# > BACKUP DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0:  > ( > BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0) > BACKUP/IMAGE DKA500:VMS073.B/SAVE DIA0:  > ) > What is the right way to be doing this?  >      --   John Santos  Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 03:37:59 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> / Subject: Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems , Message-ID: <43E07343.15140912@teksavvy.com>   "greg.chabala@gmail.com" wrote: I >> activity, which it did not before. So far there have been three errors C > of the type 'unknown file in saveset' but I can't think they were  > avoidable.  G You'll know when the backup gets to the verification pass what happens.   F Do you know which files it complained about ? You should jot the names% down (and perhaps provide them here).   M Saveset B contains the real core of VMS. Missing files here is not good news.    ------------------------------   Date: 1 Feb 2006 01:12:42 -0800 7 From: "greg.chabala@gmail.com" <greg.chabala@gmail.com> / Subject: Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems B Message-ID: <1138785162.253567.30860@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    So far so good. No other errors.  B It succeeded in booting into the setup routine on DIA0:, and I hadF plenty of space to install the whole business. I picked DECnet Plus. I hope that it won't matter.  B I'm going to sleep and hope my install is finished in the morning.   Thanks everyone, Greg Chabala   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 04:58:23 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> / Subject: Re: Hobbyist kit installation problems , Message-ID: <43E08615.38EB8BE6@teksavvy.com>   "greg.chabala@gmail.com" wrote:     " > So far so good. No other errors.  1 Did the verify phase generate any errors at all ?   1 >I picked DECnet Plus. hope that it won't matter.   D You can use the PRODUCT REMOVE command to delete DECNET 5 , and thenH install DECNET 4 which si far simpler to configure and much lighter load on the system (and disk).   G Learning DECNET-5 is not for the faint of heart and you really need the H documentation. DECNET 4 is just a matter of answering a few questions inI a script and adding one command in the startup procedure to start decnet.    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 12:11:50 GMT 5 From: rdeininger@mindspringdot.com (Robert Deininger) ! Subject: Re: IA64: Montecito info L Message-ID: <rdeininger-0102060711470001@user-uinj4ck.dialup.mindspring.com>  C In article <1138628500.243226.325020@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,  bob@instantwhip.com wrote:  ; >what about companies that need 1P?  We do not want to have < >to pay for two cpu licenses when we only need one for small= >workgroups ... were is the 1P line of cheap 2K boxes we were 
 >promised?  J So buy 1 CPU if that's all you need.  I expect Intel will charge about theH same for a 2-core Montecito as a 1-core Madison.  Obviously their prices' will depend on the yield and on demand.   2 Only license 1 core if that's all you want to use.  C If Intel offers a single-core Montecito, HP will probably use it in F entry-level servers.  If HP uses it in a system VMS supports, VMS willD support the single-core CPUs along with dual-core ones.  Neither VMS. Engineering nor HP controls what Intel offers.  > Nobody in HP or Compaq ever promised to deliver a "2K" system.  J If it's a cheap box you want, I suggest going to your local U-Haul store. # They sell a great variety of boxes.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 09:26:45 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> ! Subject: Re: IA64: Montecito info / Message-ID: <poOdnT8h29dkWX3eRVn-oA@libcom.com>    Robert Deininger wrote: E > In article <1138628500.243226.325020@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,  > bob@instantwhip.com wrote: >  > < >>what about companies that need 1P?  We do not want to have= >>to pay for two cpu licenses when we only need one for small > >>workgroups ... were is the 1P line of cheap 2K boxes we were >>promised?  >  > L > So buy 1 CPU if that's all you need.  I expect Intel will charge about theJ > same for a 2-core Montecito as a 1-core Madison.  Obviously their prices) > will depend on the yield and on demand.  > 4 > Only license 1 core if that's all you want to use.   Reasonable.   E > If Intel offers a single-core Montecito, HP will probably use it in H > entry-level servers.  If HP uses it in a system VMS supports, VMS willF > support the single-core CPUs along with dual-core ones.  Neither VMS0 > Engineering nor HP controls what Intel offers.  / #1 reason why killing Alpha was a bad decision.   @ > Nobody in HP or Compaq ever promised to deliver a "2K" system.  H Well, my memory isn't what it used to be, but I seem to recall that you F are 100% correct.  boob wasn't promised a "2K" system.  It was a "1K" G system, and it came from none other than curly.  Along with many other  E promises which have not occured.  But then, if you're going to break  8 promises, what's wrong with denying they were ever made?  L > If it's a cheap box you want, I suggest going to your local U-Haul store. % > They sell a great variety of boxes.   G Your customer relations attitude leaves room for improvement, and that  ? room is great.  IBM and Sun owe you thanks for that little gem.    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------   Date: 1 Feb 2006 01:08:47 -0600 2 From: "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow>% Subject: Re: Open VMS programing in C ? Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-bhSvdUMd1J4X@dave2_os2.home.ours>   F On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:24:45 UTC, "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>  wrote:   > D > "Mike Rechtman" <michael.rechtman.nospam@hp.com> wrote in message " > news:43DF7067.4FC2B09D@hp.com... > > Neil Rieck wrote:  > >> > [...snip...] > > H > > I apologize to EDT. I started on RSTS myself, and the first editor IL > > used was a line editor on an LA120...  When we got VT100s and KED (later' > > went to EDT) it was a real jump up. I > > My fingers still only know EDT, which is why I always 'set ke edt' in $ > > tpu, and use my own TPU$SECTION. > >  > > Mike > > O > I'm in the same boat. Like after learning to play a piano, my fingers "know"  O > their way around the EDT keypad. My first DEC editor was TECO and we used it  4 > to modify DEC-EX diagnostic scripts on the PDP-11. > = > (but you'll never catch me typing $EDIT/TECO on OpenVMS :-)  >  > Neil Rieck > Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  > Ontario, Canada.; > http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html    F Nobody ever seems to get nostalgic about EDI as featured on RSX11-M.  D Line oriented editor with 66 (IIRC) lines per page - great fun (!). F OTOH it had a very small memory footprint and even with a priority of C 65 didn't bring a 128kw pdp-11/60 to its knees when running others  F things. 2 EDT sessions at priority 50 did. Some users were dis-chuffedD when I dropped EDT's to 49 so that the real-time test system didn't  suffer.    --   Cheers - Dave W.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 15:08:08 +0100 ( From: Paul Sture <paul.sture@bluewin.ch>% Subject: Re: Open VMS programing in C + Message-ID: <44btmcF1e5p6U1@individual.net>    Dave Weatherall wrote:H > On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 12:24:45 UTC, "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>  > wrote: >  > D >>"Mike Rechtman" <michael.rechtman.nospam@hp.com> wrote in message " >>news:43DF7067.4FC2B09D@hp.com... >> >>>Neil Rieck wrote: >>>  >>[...snip...] >>G >>>I apologize to EDT. I started on RSTS myself, and the first editor I K >>>used was a line editor on an LA120...  When we got VT100s and KED (later & >>>went to EDT) it was a real jump up.H >>>My fingers still only know EDT, which is why I always 'set ke edt' in# >>>tpu, and use my own TPU$SECTION.  >>>  >>>Mike  >>>  >>O >>I'm in the same boat. Like after learning to play a piano, my fingers "know"  O >>their way around the EDT keypad. My first DEC editor was TECO and we used it  4 >>to modify DEC-EX diagnostic scripts on the PDP-11. >>= >>(but you'll never catch me typing $EDIT/TECO on OpenVMS :-)  >> >>Neil Rieck >>Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  >>Ontario, Canada.; >>http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html   >  > H > Nobody ever seems to get nostalgic about EDI as featured on RSX11-M.  F > Line oriented editor with 66 (IIRC) lines per page - great fun (!). H > OTOH it had a very small memory footprint and even with a priority of E > 65 didn't bring a 128kw pdp-11/60 to its knees when running others  H > things. 2 EDT sessions at priority 50 did. Some users were dis-chuffedF > when I dropped EDT's to 49 so that the real-time test system didn't 
 > suffer.  >   F My first editor war! My introduction to VMS was with EDT, but the RSX E die-hards still favoured EDI, and the documentation guy favoured SOS.   ! Many heated discussions there :-)    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 11:28:39 +0000 ! From: Baldrick <none@[127.0.0.1]> C Subject: Re: p2c (dave gillespie's pas to c converter) & VMS pascal ' Message-ID: <drq61d$k6c$1@lore.csc.com>    Stanley F. Quayle wrote:* > On 31 Jan 2006 at 17:48, Baldrick wrote: > E >>I suspect it is not _real_ time but just happens to be fast enough, G >>and that if push came to shove it would fail. Like, when 5ms must and F >>has to be, without exception, 5ms. If windows does what Windows does+ >>best at that critical time, you're toast.  >  > H > I'm not sure where the "shove" would come from.  All Windows services @ > are disabled except for those required by the product.  Also, F > supported configurations require at least 1 processor more than the C > number of VAX processors being emulated.  This allows "overhead"  C > functions and network interface emulation to stay out of the VAX   > processors' way.  G It's merely an expression (UK only), Bob Koehler makes a good point of  3 what real time should be, and is in the real world.   9 How many real time operating systems are there out there?   H And this is absolutely nothing to do with how many windows services are H enabled, disabled, hacked, massaged, or whatever. Windows is not a real  time O/S, period.   I I'm trying hard to explain this in other terms. OK bit off the wall, but  H lets say you have this wheel thing, a round thing that rolls really. So  that's your VAX.  G Now, if you then emulate your VAX, but on a device which is not round,  H but square, so not smooth, it bump bump bumps. Therefore, no matter how E smooth and round your wheel, if you are being carried by that square  # one, you cannot escape its effects.   G I know that you are talking a 2 CPU system, but they are intrinsically  F linked, an axle, one round, one square, if you shut down windows, you E emulator would vanish too, it really has no bearing, windows is that  E square wheel you cannot get far enough away from, when it absolutely  . must be round (real time). 2 CPUs don't count.   I hope that analogy works.  F  > There is a version of CHARON-VAX that uses a real-time OS under it./  > Perhaps that would be more to your liking...   G You mention a "real time" option that the VAX can run on. What is this  H operating system, is it really capable of real time itself (i.e. has it C had the roundness test)? e.g. device interrupt going directly to a  F process, not being intercepted, handled (is it for me or the hardware I I'm running in a process?), but that hardware emulation could be located  E anywhere in the memory space, and potentially with different latency  G conditions, albeit in milli or even micro seconds, but that is all the    difference when it is real time.  E If the emulator ran directly on the hardware, with no possible other  F software (operating system, call it what you may) as a managing layer G then you'll have something that would pass as real time. (However I've    just described a VAX haven't I?)  F Real time means what it says, no artificial additives. If you have an F engineer, working on something or other, and expecting that black and G white is just that, no possibility of fuzzy grey edges, you could just  @ be introducing an unknown and indeterminate into their theories.  B I don't believe it matters whether some alternative is more to my H liking, it's not a question of that. It is that 1 out of 1000, or more, A or less, when real time is not real time, but real time +/- with  > potential catastrophic results. Where do you want to be today?  $ I worry about Boardroom Engineering.   --  E Regards, Nic Clews a.k.a. Mr. Car Park Charges, CSC Computer Sciences  nclews at csc dot com    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 11:45:35 +0000 0 From: Chris Sharman <chris.sharman@sorry.nospam>C Subject: Re: p2c (dave gillespie's pas to c converter) & VMS pascal 4 Message-ID: <drq70v$smu$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>   Bob Koehler wrote:[ > In article <W4KdnciUOcqRH0LeRVn-jQ@libcom.com>, Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:  > K >>Fixing something that ain't broke, such as a re-write in (hawk, spit) C,  D >>seems to me to be a totally worthless redundant effort.  But if a B >>"time-critical real-time application" on a "linux webserver" is ' >>involved, I'm guessing anything goes.  >  > D >    Time-critical may not mean the same thing to all of us, just as >    real-time doesn't.  > G >    When I say real-time, I mean "hard real-time" as in high interrupt 0 >    rates and I/O devices that will not buffer.  I Well, ok, I mean real-time as in "user not tempted to give up or retry",  E rather than the "got to be there in x ms", that I used to work to in  
 aerospace.  I Currently we use vms/osu - works well, but we'd like to be able to run a  H standard shopping cart & content management, rather than having to roll D our own - maintenance is too labour intensive - new designs require ) programming effort (in C and javascript).   I I've looked at vms/apache/mysql/php, but standard packages don't seem to   work out of the box.$ Hence the decision to move to linux.   Chris    ------------------------------   Date: 1 Feb 2006 05:44:55 -0800 ) From: "fred27" <fredericfournis@yahoo.fr> C Subject: Re: p2c (dave gillespie's pas to c converter) & VMS pascal C Message-ID: <1138801495.118773.141900@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    Hello,  5 A few years ago I managed a large translation project 1 from Vax pascal to Aix C. We experienced no major G problem translating the Vax pascal to C. We were in fact very impressed  by p2c. D But we rewrite everything which was low level i.e asynchronous calls, became multithread, file system access (rms)3 become berkeley Db, and fms became html/php/apache. 1 You can email me I you want tips about using p2c.   	 Sincerely      fred.    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 16:22:32 GMT & From: John Reagan <john.reagan@hp.com>C Subject: Re: p2c (dave gillespie's pas to c converter) & VMS pascal 2 Message-ID: <cf5Ef.2445$%43.2138@news.cpqcorp.net>   Chris Sharman wrote:   > K > I've looked at vms/apache/mysql/php, but standard packages don't seem to   > work out of the box.& > Hence the decision to move to linux.  G What didn't work "out of the box" with these?  I certainly know people  G who use Apache/php on VMS all the time.  Mysql runs on OpenVMS as well   if I remember correctly.  I If there is something we could do better, then let us know and we'll see   what we can do.      --   John Reagan / HP Pascal/{A|I}MACRO for OpenVMS Project Leader  Hewlett-Packard Company    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 11:58:10 -0500 2 From: "Stanley F. Quayle" <squayle@insight.rr.com>C Subject: Re: p2c (dave gillespie's pas to c converter) & VMS pascal / Message-ID: <43E0A252.21718.622C7B8B@localhost>   ' On 1 Feb 2006 at 11:28, Baldrick wrote: ; > How many real time operating systems are there out there?   E Lots.  There are real-time DOS versions.  I've used the OS-9x family  B and MTOS ...  even VMS has real-time capability (priority > 15).  : There is a real-time Linux  The current hot OS is VxWorks.  * > Windows is not a real time O/S, period.   C I agree.  The Task Manager does have a "Realtime" priority option,  F but that doesn't mean much.  Maybe the Embedded version of Windows is < designed with deterministic behavior -- that's one possible ! requirement for a "real-time" OS.   H > windows is that square wheel you cannot get far enough away from, when+ > it absolutely must be round (real time).    ? I *agree* with you.  However, there are relatively few systems  $ currently on VAX that are real-time.  H > You mention a "real time" option that the VAX can run on. What is thisB > operating system, is it really capable of real time itself [...]   QNX.  See www.qnx.com   F > If the emulator ran directly on the hardware, with no possible otherG > software (operating system, call it what you may) as a managing layer : > then you'll have something that would pass as real time.  D Operating systems provide facilities.  Why create them from scratch > when there are so many good OS's available that meet all your 	 criteria?   
 --Stan Quayle  Quayle Consulting Inc.  
 ----------8 Stanley F. Quayle, P.E. N8SQ  Toll free: 1-888-I-LUV-VAX3 8572 North Spring Ct., Pickerington, OH  43147  USA 0 stan-at-stanq-dot-com       http://www.stanq.com) "OpenVMS, when downtime is not an option"    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:49:05 -0500 1 From: Bob Supnik <bob.supnik@sicortex.nospam.com> ! Subject: Re: SimH V3.5-2 released 8 Message-ID: <6re1u1lkcr06270l3hlvan16cmr8cnqtpq@4ax.com>  D VMS 1.5??  This is great news!  Could you send me further details onF how you got the operating system installed (did you find a copy of theF unique tape restore program that ran eventually replaced by standalone backup)?  ? If possible, I'd like to get an image of V1.5 and add it to the E regression suite for the simulator.  There's been very little testing A of both compatibility mode and the commercial instructions; early 9 versions of VMS use these features much more extensively.    Thanks,    /Bob Supnik   * On 30 Jan 2006 01:14:14 -0800, "vaxorcist"' <hoelscher-kirchbrak@freenet.de> wrote:    >Hi friends, >  >I'm very sorry for the delay! > A >I'm a teacher and we have the end of the school year now here in 	 >Germany.  > F >I'm responsible for the design and printing of several hundred schoolF >reports so that my private hobbies have to stand back for a while ... >  >Everyone will get his copy! >  >By the way:2 >I have tested the SIMH VAX-11/780 emulator under: >- VMS V1.5 (new)  >- VMS V3.0  >- VMS V3.2  >- VMS V3.5 " >without any bigger problems :-))  >  >  >Regards >  >Ulli    ------------------------------  $ Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 17:34:34 +0100A From: Christian Corti <Christian.Corti@studserv.uni-stuttgart.de> ! Subject: Re: SimH V3.5-2 released + Message-ID: <oh47b3-vnf.ln1@news.online.de>   B In alt.sys.pdp11 vaxorcist <hoelscher-kirchbrak@freenet.de> wrote:3 > I have tested the SIMH VAX-11/780 emulator under:  > - VMS V1.5 (new) > - VMS V3.0 > - VMS V3.2 > - VMS V3.5# > without any bigger problems :-))    H How? I do have V3.0 and up till V5.0, but these tapes aren't bootable. IE do have some RX01 floppies for the console front end, but I can't use # them with the VAX-11/780 simulator:    VAX780 simulator V3.5-2  sim> att rx0 disk.dsk  RX: buffering file in memory
 sim> boot rx0  Invalid argument sim>  H But the standalone backup is on one of those disks, and I also have some! disks with diags etc. What to do?   	 Christian    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 01:49:28 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> & Subject: Re: Splitting serial cables ?, Message-ID: <43E059DA.FA7036EA@teksavvy.com>   Dave Froble wrote:* > You don't have to use the thinwire port. > = > A 90M includes the software.  At least most do, if not all.   D I checked the online PDFs, and they mention only a thinwire ethernetF port available.  (when you mount the 90 series server onto the special@ backpane, they mention a proprietary connector that provides all connections and power.)   3 Is that connector really a standard AUI connector ?    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 07:02:51 GMT   From: John Santos <john@egh.com>& Subject: Re: Splitting serial cables ?( Message-ID: <v2ZDf.1621$6d.714@trnddc06>   JF Mezei wrote:  > Dave Froble wrote: > * >>You don't have to use the thinwire port. >>= >>A 90M includes the software.  At least most do, if not all.  >  > F > I checked the online PDFs, and they mention only a thinwire ethernetH > port available.  (when you mount the 90 series server onto the specialB > backpane, they mention a proprietary connector that provides all > connections and power.)  > 5 > Is that connector really a standard AUI connector ?   C The only 90M I have ever dealt with (at a customer site) is 10BaseT D twisted pair.  There is definitely no AUI connector on it.  It might/ have a BNC connector, but they're not using it.   A It has flash, so it doesn't need a load host except for upgrades.    --   John Santos  Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 02:07:49 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> & Subject: Re: Splitting serial cables ?, Message-ID: <43E05E25.93107805@teksavvy.com>   John Santos wrote:E > The only 90M I have ever dealt with (at a customer site) is 10BaseT F > twisted pair.  There is definitely no AUI connector on it.  It might1 > have a BNC connector, but they're not using it.   D OK, I was looking at cheap 90 models, and that means 90T and TLs (noE TCPIP support). the 90Ms are still  pricy because they support TCPIP.    ------------------------------   Date: 1 Feb 2006 01:08:49 -0600 2 From: "Dave Weatherall" <djw-nothere@nospam.nohow>& Subject: Re: Splitting serial cables ?? Message-ID: <DTiotGxQ0bj6-pn2-dBiJmgdG3Bdd@dave2_os2.home.ours>   E On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 00:26:13 UTC, "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca>   wrote:  M > Oh by the way, rather than frying my ass my boss damned near kissed it (it  O > is at times like these that you want your boss to be of opposite gender). So  J > **** off and learn some basic electronic theory. Next you should try to K > acquire the technical specifications of chips MC1488 (driver) and MC1489  
 > (receiver).   E Crikey there's a couple of chip numbers I hadn't thought about for a  8 decade or two :-) I concur with the other sentiment BTW.   --   Cheers - Dave W.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 11:48:50 +0100 3 From: Michael Unger <spam.to.unger@spamgourmet.com> & Subject: Re: Splitting serial cables ?+ Message-ID: <44bi8rF1csdbU1@individual.net>   & On 2006-02-01 07:49, "JF Mezei" wrote:  F > I checked the online PDFs, and they mention only a thinwire ethernetH > port available.  (when you mount the 90 series server onto the specialB > backpane, they mention a proprietary connector that provides all > connections and power.)  > 5 > Is that connector really a standard AUI connector ?   8 No; it is a "DIN 41612" type connector, "C" series IIRC.  F But there is (has been?) a special power supply available to support a: stand-alone server which has an AUI connector for the LAN.   Michael    --  ; Real names enhance the probability of getting real answers. 5 My e-mail account at DECUS Munich is no longer valid.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 12:07:57 +0100 3 From: Michael Unger <spam.to.unger@spamgourmet.com> & Subject: Re: Splitting serial cables ?+ Message-ID: <44bj76F1cdrtU1@individual.net>   + On 2006-02-01 11:48, "Michael Unger" wrote:   : > No; it is a "DIN 41612" type connector, "C" series IIRC.  F A reasonable summary of the DIN 41612 connector series is available atF <http://www.harting.com/en/en/en/sol/verbtech/prod/din/index.en.html>.   > [...]    Michael    --  ; Real names enhance the probability of getting real answers. 5 My e-mail account at DECUS Munich is no longer valid.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 09:44:23 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> & Subject: Re: Splitting serial cables ?/ Message-ID: <rvidndPugZKBVH3eRVn-pA@libcom.com>    JF Mezei wrote:  > Dave Froble wrote: > * >>You don't have to use the thinwire port. >>= >>A 90M includes the software.  At least most do, if not all.  >  > F > I checked the online PDFs, and they mention only a thinwire ethernetH > port available.  (when you mount the 90 series server onto the specialB > backpane, they mention a proprietary connector that provides all > connections and power.)  > 5 > Is that connector really a standard AUI connector ?   / No, it's something else, as Michael has posted.   I However, if you have the backplane, plug in a repeater/hub, and you have  * your 10baseT networking, at least 8 ports.  H That's how I have my single 90M connected to the network.  Not the best F of connections, but for terminals and a printer, 10baseT is adequate, D and I have the parts so why not use them.  If you have the repeater D connected to an auto-sensing switch you don't have to worry about a  cross-over twisted pair cable.   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-04504 Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      Fax: 724-529-0596> DFE Ultralights, Inc.              E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com 170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 19:31:20 -0500 ) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> 0 Subject: Re: The Pentium Chronicles (2006.01.31)9 Message-ID: <uk1Ef.7765$Iw6.474161@news20.bellglobal.com>   : "Ken Fairfield" <my.full.name@intel.com> wrote in message % news:dronet$l89$1@news01.intel.com...  > E >     I'm not sure, but ISTRC that the issue was patent infringement, G > which does not necessarily imply "stolen".  Two people can (and often F > do) invent the same, or very similar, things.  The one to the PatentE > Office first gets to "own" the idea.  (I'm no patent expert so I'll D > not delve into stories of the incompetence of the Patent Office inE > the high-tech arena, nor the issues of "common practice" and "known . > art"...or whatever the correct terms are...) >   / Thanks for this different view of the incident. H I, too, remember a settlement at that time and assumed that an idea was 	 "stolen".   
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  Ontario, Canada.9 http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html     ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 07:07:01 -0800 # From: "Tom Linden" <tom@kednos.com> 0 Subject: Re: The Pentium Chronicles (2006.01.31)( Message-ID: <ops4auxzvjzgicya@hyrrokkin>  H On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 21:26:10 -0500, Bill Todd <billtodd@metrocast.net>   wrote:  H > Of course, active investigation into porting VMS to 32-bit x86 *did*  K > occur, as part of the Emerald(?) project at DEC (IIRC something like 15   F > years ago).  How far it actually got I don't know, but likely some   > c.o.v. participant does.  H In GEM base level 26 which would have been ca. 1994 there is evidence of support for Intel architecture.    ------------------------------   Date: 1 Feb 2006 09:46:13 -0800 C From: "AlexNOSPAMDaniels@themail.co.uk" <alexdaniels@themail.co.uk> 0 Subject: Re: The Pentium Chronicles (2006.01.31)B Message-ID: <1138815973.002356.96510@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   John Reagan wrote:  J > GEM's support for X86 was for Visual Fortran on Windows.  That is why it* > was invented and that is all it supports  ) I thought RDB for NT would have used GEM?    Alex   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2006.064 ************************