1 INFO-VAX	Thu, 23 Feb 2006	Volume 2006 : Issue 108       Contents:6 2006 OpenVMS Advanced Technical Boot Camp Announcement AMD blew it big time!  Re: AMD blew it big time!  Re: AMD blew it big time!  Re: AMD blew it big time!  Re: AMD blew it big time! 5 Re: Availability Manager/DECamds product announcement  Re: Blade vs Superdome Re: Blade vs Superdome Re: Blade vs Superdome Re: Boy, do I like VMS humor!  Re: Boy, do I like VMS humor!  Re: Boy, do I like VMS humor!  Cluster_config Re: Cluster_config= Re: Gartner wakes up company executives to X86-64 scalability , Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator, Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulatorG Re: HP Campus program for Integrity Servers in Europe/ Integrity Server ! Itanium still not on alpha level! % Re: Itanium still not on alpha level! % Re: Itanium still not on alpha level! % Re: Itanium still not on alpha level! % Re: Itanium still not on alpha level! % Re: Itanium still not on alpha level! / Re: JNI vs. XML on OpenVMS C Legacy Application  Re: JUMP Freeware  Re: JUMP Freeware , Re: object names from executable image files, Re: OpenVMS proves superior to all other OSs, Re: OpenVMS proves superior to all other OSs, Re: OpenVMS proves superior to all other OSs, Re: OpenVMS proves superior to all other OSs1 Re: Plain truth is that unix/linux is NOT secure!  Regarding SDA Extension.* Re: Size limit on filename created by zip?* Re: Size limit on filename created by zip?* Re: Size limit on filename created by zip?* Re: Size limit on filename created by zip?* Re: Size limit on filename created by zip? [OpenVMS V8] JUMP Freeware  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 07:35:59 -0800) From: "Sue" <susan_skonetski@hotmail.com> ? Subject: 2006 OpenVMS Advanced Technical Boot Camp Announcement C Message-ID: <1140708959.509369.163530@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>    Dear Newsgroup  E On behalf of the entire boot camp team, it is my pleasure to announce D the next OpenVMS Advanced technical boot camp May 21-26, 2006 at theB Sheraton Hotel in Nashua, NH. This five day event is geared to theG intermediate to advanced OpenVMS technologist and your instructors will @ be expert members of the OpenVMS Community. Additionally, we areE providing some basic and master level classes. And, new this year, we B will be highlighting sessions for the OpenVMS developer/architect.  D For the agenda, registration, hotel, questions and other information please visit the web page at:   . http://h71000.www7.hp.com/symposium/index.html  F There are several things that I would like to bring to your attention:  F 1. Registration is limited and we have sold out the last two years, so. please register early to avoid disappointment.C 2. Please keep in mind that the OpenVMS engineers who work with VMS C everyday determined the level of the session so what maybe basic to ' them may not be basic to everyone else. C 3. This is a very dynamic event and we will add sessions if needed. G 4. Closer to the boot camp you will be given the opportunity to sign up  for the sessions you want.+ 5. Certification will be available on site.   - Please let me know if you have any questions.   
 Warm Regards, 
 Sue Skonetski  Program manager    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 05:56:32 -0800 From: bob@instantwhip.com  Subject: AMD blew it big time!C Message-ID: <1140702992.624947.143510@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>   B they thought that buying a few bits and pieces of alpha technologyG for their oopsterons would suffice, but eventually it will run into the @ x86 boat anchor performance wall ... they should have bought all> of alpha and had the x86 64 on the one side, and alpha EV8 andF 9 on the high end ... would have been a lot better long term strategy.  ? But I guess they drank the itanium kool aid too, and slipped up  big time ...   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 07:26:34 -0700 6 From: "Michael D. Ober" <obermd.@.alum.mit.edu.nospam>" Subject: Re: AMD blew it big time!. Message-ID: <gDjLf.7$Gz2.2008@news.uswest.net>     K The only two OS's that run on the Alpha are VMS and Tru64 Unix.  Tru64 Unix I is being phased out in favor of HPUX and VMS has been marginalized in the H market by over three decades of marketing neglect by DEC/Compaq/HP.  AMDJ actually implemented the X86-64 instruction set on top of a crossbar basedK RISC architecture.  If they had gone too far in the direction of the Alpha, F getting the X86 instruction set to run would have resulted in the sameL performance problems found in the Itanium.  Doing that would have killed AMDD in very short order.  AMD understands that in order to thrive, theirI processors must run the market share OSs, which are currently Windows and  Linux, not VMS and Tru64 Unix.  
 Mike Ober.    & <bob@instantwhip.com> wrote in message= news:1140702992.624947.143510@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... D > they thought that buying a few bits and pieces of alpha technologyI > for their oopsterons would suffice, but eventually it will run into the B > x86 boat anchor performance wall ... they should have bought all@ > of alpha and had the x86 64 on the one side, and alpha EV8 andH > 9 on the high end ... would have been a lot better long term strategy. > A > But I guess they drank the itanium kool aid too, and slipped up  > big time ... >  >    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 06:52:36 -0800- From: "Andrew" <andrew_harrison@symantec.com> " Subject: Re: AMD blew it big time!A Message-ID: <1140706356.867507.4440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    bob@instantwhip.com wrote:D > they thought that buying a few bits and pieces of alpha technologyI > for their oopsterons would suffice, but eventually it will run into the B > x86 boat anchor performance wall ... they should have bought all > of alpha and had the x86 64 on the one side, and alpha EV8 and 9 on the high end ... would have been a lot better long term strategy.  >   F Exactly how much quicker do you think the EV8 would have been than the* current Alpha processor ? 1.5x 2x perhaps.  D Well Opteron is allready 2x faster than the fastest Alpha on int and 1.4x faster than Alpha on fp.   F EV8 might have bested AMD on FP but thats about it and in any case EV8D would never have managed to compete with AMD on thermal footprint or size.   @ EV8 was projected to require 250 million transistors a dual coreC Opteron comes in at 233 million confortably under the footprint EV8 & would have required for a single core.  F So why would AMD give up all that for the dubious pleasure of havening? to create their own ecosystem at a higher price, higher thermal A footprint and lower performance (for the workloads that sell most 
 servers) ?   Regards  Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 12:46:32 -0500 / From: "William Webb" <william.w.webb@gmail.com> " Subject: Re: AMD blew it big time!I Message-ID: <8660a3a10602230946v566dcd00s4bed092cc9f0f1c8@mail.gmail.com>   A On 2/23/06, Michael D. Ober <obermd.@.alum.mit.edu.nospam> wrote:  >    {SNIP}  " > VMS has been marginalized in theE > market by over three decades of marketing neglect by DEC/Compaq/HP.   ! VMS 1.0 release date was in 1978.   E So I guess that VMS marginalization began even before it was released  on the market.   WWWebb   --C NOTE: This email address is only used for noncommerical VMS-related  correspondence. C All unsolicited commercial email will be deemed to be a request for 8 services pursuant to the terms and conditions located at# http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/e/webbww/    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 10:06:30 -0800 From: bob@instantwhip.com " Subject: Re: AMD blew it big time!B Message-ID: <1140717990.943345.24660@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>  E no x86 emulated processor will ever run the high end as well as alpha  does.   B I said AMD could still have their x86 64 bit emulator chip for the masses@ who feel trapped on x86 but could have still beat IBM, Intel and everyone( else also in the high end with alpha ...  G and by the way, alpha runs windoze 2000 ... I know where to get you the  beta 3 CD if you want one ...    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 16:52:20 GMT 0 From: "Barry Kierstein" <Barry.Kierstein@HP.Com>> Subject: Re: Availability Manager/DECamds product announcement2 Message-ID: <8LlLf.3564$R55.3039@news.cpqcorp.net>  F Thanks for the input on network bandwidth, this is useful information.   Barry    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 03:46:58 -0800- From: "Andrew" <andrew_harrison@symantec.com>  Subject: Re: Blade vs Superdome B Message-ID: <1140695218.529831.76130@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   JF Mezei wrote: ) > IBM just announced a new Blade cabinet.  >  > ##F > IBM's new 15.75-inch-tall BladeCenter H chassis is 3.5 inches tallerC > than its predecessor. However, the design increases internal data B > transfer capacity tenfold to 40 gigabits per second; adds faster? > InfiniBand and Ethernet networking options; and includes more J > sophisticated self-management features. The system still accommodates as* > many as 14 blade servers, Big Blue said. > ## > : > I assume that HP's offering will pretty much match this. >  > G > Do such blades start to approach the performance of the interconnects A > between CPUs in Superdome systems ? Or are they still orders of E > magnitudes slower (in terms of interconnects between CPUs only, not  > actual CPUs).  >   E They are still orders of magnitude slower than the interconnects used D on large SMP systems. All of the large SMP servers (HP, IBM and Sun)( have bisectional bandwidths of 50+ GB/s.    ; > Or let me rephrase the question: Will Blade architectures D > eventually/soon scale to compete/replace Superdome class systems ?  A Blades are getting bigger, by that I mean that the blade building C blocks are getting larger. Sun for example is going to release an 8  Module 16 core AMD based blade.   D Many of the big SMP systems are deployed using some form of hardwareD partitioning and so you will find that the blades eat into this overG time. Blades give you access to some of the shared resources you get on E a large SMP system and if your maximum domain/LPAR etc partition does C not exceed the largest available blade in your chassis then you may 5 well see the blades replacing the larger SMP systems.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 08:27:30 -0500 * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> Subject: Re: Blade vs Superdome , Message-ID: <43fdb843$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>  K Let me agree with Andrew.  Blades will displace large scale SMP systems for K many customers.  Efficiently scaling a single system image and applications K to take advantage of very large CPU counts is hard to do - and we have more E than a few who have the need and the abilty to do so.  But many large K systems are effectively (if not really) partitioned into smaller subsets of  CPUs.   I From a VMS perspective, I would consider a blade system as a cluster in a J box with better interconnect technology and packaging.  It's a pretty goodJ technology fit.  It plays well into how VMS clusters are managed, and as a high-reliabilty solution.       8 "Andrew" <andrew_harrison@symantec.com> wrote in message< news:1140695218.529831.76130@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >  > JF Mezei wrote: + > > IBM just announced a new Blade cabinet.  > >  > > ##H > > IBM's new 15.75-inch-tall BladeCenter H chassis is 3.5 inches tallerE > > than its predecessor. However, the design increases internal data D > > transfer capacity tenfold to 40 gigabits per second; adds fasterA > > InfiniBand and Ethernet networking options; and includes more L > > sophisticated self-management features. The system still accommodates as, > > many as 14 blade servers, Big Blue said. > > ## > > < > > I assume that HP's offering will pretty much match this. > >  > > I > > Do such blades start to approach the performance of the interconnects C > > between CPUs in Superdome systems ? Or are they still orders of G > > magnitudes slower (in terms of interconnects between CPUs only, not  > > actual CPUs).  > >  > G > They are still orders of magnitude slower than the interconnects used F > on large SMP systems. All of the large SMP servers (HP, IBM and Sun)* > have bisectional bandwidths of 50+ GB/s. >  > = > > Or let me rephrase the question: Will Blade architectures F > > eventually/soon scale to compete/replace Superdome class systems ? > C > Blades are getting bigger, by that I mean that the blade building E > blocks are getting larger. Sun for example is going to release an 8 ! > Module 16 core AMD based blade.  > F > Many of the big SMP systems are deployed using some form of hardwareF > partitioning and so you will find that the blades eat into this overI > time. Blades give you access to some of the shared resources you get on G > a large SMP system and if your maximum domain/LPAR etc partition does E > not exceed the largest available blade in your chassis then you may 7 > well see the blades replacing the larger SMP systems.  >    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 06:03:42 -0800 From: bob@instantwhip.com  Subject: Re: Blade vs Superdome B Message-ID: <1140703422.505388.70500@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>  A that is because the chips that run them are garbage, and all they : can do to make them compete is run 80000 boxes of them ...  > too bad no alpha EV8 or 9 around, or that one system would runA circles around your blades, server farms and any other convuluted  hardware scheme out their ...    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:32:20 +0100 3 From: Michael Unger <spam.to.unger@spamgourmet.com> & Subject: Re: Boy, do I like VMS humor!+ Message-ID: <465bb4F9h9r9U1@individual.net>   / On 2006-02-22 22:28, "bdhobbs18@acm.org" wrote:   E > Wasn't there an engineering document for determining one's left and F > right hand?  I'm not even sure it was a DEC document.  Anyone have a > link?   F It had been posted to this NG by Charlie Hammond on 2-Apr-2004, threadA subject "DCL minute of the Day: integer to string, padded & right  justified".    Michael    --  ; Real names enhance the probability of getting real answers. 5 My e-mail account at DECUS Munich is no longer valid.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 05:00:28 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> & Subject: Re: Boy, do I like VMS humor!, Message-ID: <43FD878D.CD5DDFB6@teksavvy.com>   Michael Unger wrote:H > It had been posted to this NG by Charlie Hammond on 2-Apr-2004, threadC > subject "DCL minute of the Day: integer to string, padded & right 
 > justified".     H The procedure to identify the right and left hands is flawed. It assumesE the clock you are using is an antique analog display and not a modern J 21st century digital clock. Mr Hammond needs to update this documentation.  ' BTW, the URL for this preocedure is at:   Z > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.vms/msg/16a991c65c28f5db?dmode=source&hl=xx-elmer   ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 08:29:47 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) & Subject: Re: Boy, do I like VMS humor!3 Message-ID: <QW8DcO$bXiK8@eisner.encompasserve.org>   ] In article <1140643724.887478.173030@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, bdhobbs18@acm.org writes: E > Wasn't there an engineering document for determining one's left and F > right hand?  I'm not even sure it was a DEC document.  Anyone have a > link?   F Square dance teachers say to put your hands in front of you with palmsD down and thumbs extended.  The one that looks like the letter "L" is	 the Left.   / As with computing, that does not help everyone.    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 03:02:58 -0800 From: janicmx@yahoo.com  Subject: Cluster_config C Message-ID: <1140692577.935916.175320@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   D I have a VMS (7.32) cluster consisting of two Alpha 4100 using FC to HSG80 Controller/storage. C I tried to add a third Alpha 4100 into the cluster. (It was running  standalone VMS previously). 9 I connected the third node all right into HSG80. Then ran @ cluster_config (as per the manual) on one of the existing nodes.= I specified the new root (SYS2) and answered all the relevant 
 questions.  D The third node boots all right, joins the cluster and then goes itno NETCONFIG and AUTOGEN.! This is where the problems start: E These two procedures are trying to execute images not from the shared D systems disk and the new root (i.e. $1$DGA10:[sys2....) but from theE VERY TOP of the shared system disk ($1$DGA10:[sysexe]) which ofcourse ' does not exist and the node just hangs.   E It looks that AUTOGEN and NETCONFIG did not get the information about  the new root (i.e. SYS2) !?   B I tried running cluster_config MANY times but always with the same result.    Any help/idea ?    TIA !    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 06:14:14 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com>  Subject: Re: Cluster_config , Message-ID: <43FD98D2.4C7CD700@teksavvy.com>   janicmx@yahoo.com wrote:; > I connected the third node all right into HSG80. Then ran   F > The third node boots all right, joins the cluster and then goes itno > NETCONFIG and AUTOGEN.# > This is where the problems start:   G In a ethernet cluster, the satellite node is "fed" its root location by + the boot node during the MOP early process.   A But if your node boots directly from disks to which it has direct D access, you need to make sure that its SRM parameters are programmedE with the right root number as default for every boot. Otherwise, when I the node reboots, it will try to access another root and not find itself.    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 03:49:37 -0800- From: "Andrew" <andrew_harrison@symantec.com> F Subject: Re: Gartner wakes up company executives to X86-64 scalabilityB Message-ID: <1140695377.010563.21730@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   JF Mezei wrote:  > Andrew wrote: J > > If your normal transaction load equated to 25% of a 12 way system thenK > > turning 8 CPU's off increases your utilisation to 75%. None of this has # > > anything to do with technology.  > A > Isn't there minor technology that allows IBM to ensure that the H > customers do not turn on the extra CPUs without IBM knowing about it ?  F Yes, I was glossing over the technology component just a bit. You needE to be able to turn CPU's on and off and audit that process. But thats D something which almost every enterprise platform has been able to do for some time.   Regards  Andrew   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 08:00:36 -0500 2 From: "Stanley F. Quayle" <squayle@insight.rr.com>5 Subject: Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator - Message-ID: <43FD6BA4.7400.7E0F720@localhost>   . On 22 Feb 2006 at 18:59, Richard Brodie wrote:G > One might think pitching their entry level product a bit lower (given : > that they have gone to all the trouble of crippling it)   E It's hard to describe PersonalAlpha as a "product" -- something that  D I would trust my customers with in a mission-critical application.  E There are some people who need an Alpha on a laptop, and this is far   cheaper than buying a Tadpole.  F As for crippling it -- emulating a 64-bit processor on 32-bit Windows F is a slow process, at best.  The reason only 96 MB of RAM is emulated E is because 32-bit Windows doesn't let you lock gigs and gigs of host   RAM.  B The goal was to get something out there that lots of people could 7 run.  That was why 32-bit Windows was chosen as a host.   
 --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: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 18:26:48 +0100 3 From: Wilm Boerhout <w4OLD.boerhout@PAINTplanet.nl> 5 Subject: Re: Here it is: OpenVMS/Alpha on a simulator 6 Message-ID: <43fdf055$0$21845$ba620dc5@nova.planet.nl>  - Stanley F. Quayle wrote on 23-2-2006 14:00...   G > It's hard to describe PersonalAlpha as a "product" -- something that  F > I would trust my customers with in a mission-critical application.  G > There are some people who need an Alpha on a laptop, and this is far    > cheaper than buying a Tadpole.  A Mission critical, no. But... one of my customers is going to use  F PersonalAlpha as part of their archiving method. A single application G Alpha system (order picking, logistics, billing) has been taken out of  G production. Local (tax) law demands that application data must be kept  F for a number of years and be retrievable by the original application. B So, we pack the system and data disk containers together with the H PersonalAlpha kit, zip it on a CD/DVD, and whenever the tax people like E to take a swing at it, it will be restored. Performance will be less  > than optimal, but there will likely be only a single user and . performance is not specified as a requirement.  
 Wilm Boerhout  VX Company,  Baarn, The Netherlands   ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 09:53:12 +01006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)P Subject: Re: HP Campus program for Integrity Servers in Europe/ Integrity Server, Message-ID: <43fd8608$1@news.langstoeger.at>  ` In article <rySQCWXkf4jd@malvm9.mala.bc.ca>, nothome@spammers.are.scum (Malcolm Dunnett) writes:O >In article <43fc50c6$1@news.ll.iac.es>, Frank Gribbin <fjg@ing.iac.es> writes:  > N >> Does anyone know if there are plans for HP Campus program to be extended toM >> EMEA (Europe Middle East and Africa). For many years we've benefitted from E >> the (then) DEC Campus (educational) discount for VAXes and Alphas.  >>  C >   I don't know, but about 3 months ago I asked HP about plans to  D >extend them to Canada and got nowhere, so I wouldn't hold my breathH >if I were you. It appears that in Canada the only option an educationalM >institution has for IA64 is to pay the full commercial price for everything. G >I'm not sure why HP is less interested in IA64 adoption outside the US , >than inside, but that seems to be the case.  D Not really. I heard of a german developer who got a 40% discount forK one and a 99% (!) discount for another system (which was an rx2600 1.6GHz).   G As I won't disclose more infos, you could see it as an urban legend ;-) J but so do I see your statement, that they are not interested (outside US).  2 To others: ask HPQ yourself. Maybe you're lucky...   --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 06:10:51 -0800 From: bob@instantwhip.com * Subject: Itanium still not on alpha level!B Message-ID: <1140703850.963645.58200@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>  : we were promised alpha would continue until itanium was on; an even level ... when will that happen?  An EV79 now would  blow away even montecito ...  ? makes that 200 million a year for alpha development that compaq : complained about look cheap compared to the billions being wasted on itanium ...    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 06:43:38 -0800, From: "rcyoung" <rcyoung@aliconsultants.com>. Subject: Re: Itanium still not on alpha level!C Message-ID: <1140705818.165819.325250@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   F I don't have a good set for cross comarisions, but we do have (2) 2100A Alpha dual processor systems,  a rx2600 I64, and (2) 4000/500 Vax D systems, all being used as software development machines. The rx2600& blows all the others out of the water.   ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 06:58:13 -0800- From: "Andrew" <andrew_harrison@symantec.com> . Subject: Re: Itanium still not on alpha level!C Message-ID: <1140706693.523157.326180@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>    bob@instantwhip.com wrote:< > we were promised alpha would continue until itanium was on= > an even level ... when will that happen?  An EV79 now would  > blow away even montecito ... >   F This is plainly untrue. The 1.6GHz 9MB cache Itanium does 1580 SPECintB and 2700 SPECfp as oposed to the EV7z 1.3Ghz which does under 1000 SPECint and under 1700 SPECfp.  E Itanium struggles to compete with AMD-64, Power, SPARC and x86 but it  does compete with Alpha.   Regards  Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 10:15:22 -0500 * From: "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com>. Subject: Re: Itanium still not on alpha level!* Message-ID: <43fdd18b@usenet01.boi.hp.com>  I For the 2-4 CPU boxes, in general the equivalent Itanium boxes are faster L for most things today (provided the code has been properly cleaned of thingsK like alignment problems).  You can always compare a non-existant faster CPU  to real CPUs favorably.     7 "rcyoung" <rcyoung@aliconsultants.com> wrote in message = news:1140705818.165819.325250@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... H > I don't have a good set for cross comarisions, but we do have (2) 2100C > Alpha dual processor systems,  a rx2600 I64, and (2) 4000/500 Vax F > systems, all being used as software development machines. The rx2600( > blows all the others out of the water. >    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 10:08:47 -0800 From: bob@instantwhip.com . Subject: Re: Itanium still not on alpha level!C Message-ID: <1140718127.086102.226340@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>   F that is from 5 year old alpha technology ... just think where EV79 andD EV8 would have put alpha ... the results would have been drastically3 different ... not bad for 5 year old technology ...    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 10:10:30 -0800 From: bob@instantwhip.com . Subject: Re: Itanium still not on alpha level!C Message-ID: <1140718230.280546.134340@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>   < what about a single cpu box?  will there still be single cpu9 itaniums available in a few years?  doesn't sound like it 	 to me ...    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 08:31:32 -0600- From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) 8 Subject: Re: JNI vs. XML on OpenVMS C Legacy Application3 Message-ID: <GIhmzPtY$V1i@eisner.encompasserve.org>   m In article <1140647949.971781.115450@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "Scott" <jsd_hoosier@hotmail.com> writes: B > Thanks. I'm kind of surprised that no one came to the defense ofF > OpenVMS JNI, or telling me how they did the same sort of thing using > JNI.  E There may be people who can say that but do not follow the newsgroup. 7 A lot of people have been turned off by vendor-bashing.    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 01:57:05 -0800, From: "Cluster-Karl" <karl.rohwedder@gmx.de> Subject: Re: JUMP FreewareC Message-ID: <1140688625.446389.204140@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>    Peter,    check Hunter Goatleys fileserver* http://www.process.com/openvms/index.html.D It has V5.0 of JUMP available which works under V8.2 (can I confirm) and also supports IA64.  
 regards Kalle    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 14:56:23 +01006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) Subject: Re: JUMP Freeware, Message-ID: <43fdcd17$1@news.langstoeger.at>  r In article <1140688625.446389.204140@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>, "Cluster-Karl" <karl.rohwedder@gmx.de> writes:! >check Hunter Goatleys fileserver + >http://www.process.com/openvms/index.html. E >It has V5.0 of JUMP available which works under V8.2 (can I confirm) 	 >and also  >supports IA64.   L Thanks Kalle. (Please, Hunter, include version numbers in your archive. TIA) And also, Thanks Jonathan !   : Yup, it runs on V8.2. But only if build/linked on V8.2 ;-)I I always forget (though I suspected) this (and it is also one of the rare L kits which unfortunately can't be built with SET DEFAULT remnod::SW$SOURCE:)  K Now I've yet to see if V5.0 fixes the problem I once saw (the hard way ;-). @ (it was something like a SPAWNed subprocess was OTHER instead ofG INTERACTIVE mode - if I only could remember, I'm getting old too early)    --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 11:45:41 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG5 Subject: Re: object names from executable image files 0 Message-ID: <00A51BCD.3A4B5B62@SendSpamHere.ORG>  ] In article <1140648329.441495.186940@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, bdhobbs18@acm.org writes:  {...snip...}B >So, given an executable image file, how would one figure out what& >objects went into creating that file?   $ LINK/MAP{/FULL}    --  K VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM              5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"     ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 01:08:31 -0800+ From: "Dr. Dweeb" <comp.os.vms@hotmail.com> 5 Subject: Re: OpenVMS proves superior to all other OSs A Message-ID: <1140685711.225584.5530@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>   E Well, just how do people print multi copy (5 in our case) NCR tractor  feed forms ?????  
  Dr. Dweeb   ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 03:28:21 -0800- From: "Andrew" <andrew_harrison@symantec.com> 5 Subject: Re: OpenVMS proves superior to all other OSs C Message-ID: <1140694101.184298.255190@t39g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>    FredK wrote:: > "Andrew" <andrew_harrison@symantec.com> wrote in message? > news:1140629513.867335.225060@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...  > > F > > And you don't need massive servers to drive them, the load is veryD > > similar to supporting X-Terms or Windows Terminal Server clients > >  > K > Sorry.  BS.  In addition to non-distributed computing (which _is_ akin to M > x-terms or thin clients or terminals) *each* SunRay is driven by a software 3 > CFB server, compression, and communication logic.  >   F There is a wealth of Sun and external data relating to CPU loading for SunRay servers.   - http://suif.stanford.edu/papers/schmidt99.pdf   C Has a 8 way E4500 (336 Mhz) CPU's supporting 100 SunRay clients, in E terms of CPU resources this system would be easily matched by a 2 way  x86/AMD-64 server.  8 > Bandwidth is only part of the problem.  So is latency. >       G Sure but not at distances of up to 400 miles, how far do you need to go  ?   ; http://www2003.org/cdrom/papers/refereed/p741/p741-yang.htm   E Show how latency resiliant the SunRay is. This test was actually done E with the initial SunRay protocol, the current protocol should acheive = the better latency tollerance while consuming less bandwidth.   @ http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/ThinGuy?entry=sun_ray_bandwidth  = Gives you some idea of the network bandwidth requirments btw.   K > SunRay is nice IF you handwave "just a little".  If they are few, if they K > are simple (low-bandwidth applications), or if you can afford to dedicate  > the infrastructure needed.  F We seem to be struggling to reconcile theory (you) with practice (me).G You seem to forget that Sun uses SunRays exclusively as their connected G desktop environment. Before I left Sun they had centralised the servers F supporting all their desktops to a single major datacenter in each GEOB (excluding US) and GEO's without good telco infrastructure, so forD example in the UK all of the SunRays from Scotland (405 miles as the@ crow flies from the server) to the south coast were supported by< servers 30 miles south west of London. Ditto France etc etc.  G The NHS buy a lot of Sun's in the UK and their organisation is based in A Leeds, to support them Sun rented an office in Leeds, rented some G temporary bandwidth from BT and installed 30 SunRays and some printers. C No data, nothing worth stealing and the response times were fine, I G would know I spent some time there and thats 210 miles from the servers  as the crow flies   G >From a desktop use case perspective clearly many of Suns users are not D power desktop users but equally many are, but they all have SunRays.   regards  Andrew Harrison    ------------------------------  # Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 11:43:09 GMT " From:   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG5 Subject: Re: OpenVMS proves superior to all other OSs 0 Message-ID: <00A51BCC.DF8D0852@SendSpamHere.ORG>  Y In article <43fccf45$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>, "FredK" <fred.nospam@nospam.dec.com> writes:  >  > G >The problem is that the functionality of a terminal emulator is easily L >encompassed by software on a PC - there is a nearly non-existant (too smallM >for companies to make a business out of it) for dedicated terminal hardware.  > " >Are all PC emulators good?  Nope.   Agreed.     ( >  But they are generally speaking "good	 >enough".   K In my case, no; they've been a thorn in the arse for some time.  I'm amazed K that they get away with calling these emulations VT400 or VT500 when escape K sequences tests I have cause them to fall backward upon those thorn adorned  arses.   --  K VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker   VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM              5   "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"     ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 05:39:26 -0800 From: bob@instantwhip.com 5 Subject: Re: OpenVMS proves superior to all other OSs B Message-ID: <1140701966.716430.48490@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>  < LA36 printers print our 3 part invoices ... there is nothing9 antique about that ... paper has not become obsolete yet!    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 08:51:14 +0100 + From: Karsten Nyblad <nospam@nospam.nospam> : Subject: Re: Plain truth is that unix/linux is NOT secure!= Message-ID: <43fd6970$0$67257$157c6196@dreader2.cybercity.dk>    bob@instantwhip.com wrote:< > they still do not have the rings of security that vms has.E > vms was built with the flaws of unix in mind ... why are unix users F > trying to reinvent the wheel?  All they need is vms ... if they likeG > working in a convuluted environment, that can be arranged on vms also  > (gnu/gnv) ...  > G The kernel of VMS has two modes, but most is put into the kernel mode,  H and from the executive mode you can change into the kernel mode without 4 any privileges.  Thus not much added security there.  @ *NIX does not need supervisor mode because the command language G interpreter does not run in the same process as the user applications.  H *NIX protect the command language interpreter in a simpler way than VMS A but the *NIX way is at least as efficient.  Thus VMS uses a more  G complicated code to do something that could be done in a simpler.  Any  H security expert will tell you to keep you security related code simple, D so the *NIX design of running the command language interpreter is a ; better design as seen from a purely security point of view.    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 05:29:18 -0800. From: "Parikh Kaushal" <etheticgame@gmail.com>! Subject: Regarding SDA Extension. C Message-ID: <1140701358.582538.261600@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>   E I really want to know that, can we right the sda extension using C++.  Please guide me via mail   ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 07:04:45 -0600 From: briggs@encompasserve.org3 Subject: Re: Size limit on filename created by zip? 3 Message-ID: <84CpSobtQ6FM@eisner.encompasserve.org>   _ In article <mi9Lf.34114$Jd.16246@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net>, noone <noone@nowhere.com> writes: K > I would **guess** that ZIP may be using the older VAX standard which was  
 > 32.32;32767   A I think you mean [39.39.39...]39.39;32767 in an overall file spec D length of 255 characters.  I'm not sure what limits apply/applied to+ the device name length or node name length.    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 07:40:05 -0800) From: "Ken Robinson" <kenrbnsn@gmail.com> 3 Subject: Re: Size limit on filename created by zip? C Message-ID: <1140709205.642848.162930@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   " Steven M. Schweda wrote (in part):J >    If you're really dealing with files bigger than a few megabytes, thenJ > I really do recommend versions later than Zip 2.3 and UnZip 5.51.  AfterG > those, the VMS I/O got some non-trivial changes (RMS parameters), and ; > the I/O speed increase is significant in many situations.   E Where can I download the newer versions of Zip & UnZip for the Alpha?    Ken    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 07:45:12 -0800) From: "Ken Robinson" <kenrbnsn@gmail.com> 3 Subject: Re: Size limit on filename created by zip? C Message-ID: <1140709512.300200.272230@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>    briggs@encompasserve.org wrote: C > I think you mean [39.39.39...]39.39;32767 in an overall file spec F > length of 255 characters.  I'm not sure what limits apply/applied to- > the device name length or node name length.   E After an OK night's sleep (really can't call 4.5 hours a good night's ? sleep) I saw the name part of the filename was exceeding the 39 ? character limit. I just wish that ZIP could have put out a more  meaningful error message.    Ken Robinson   ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 10:04:07 -0600 (CST) * From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)3 Subject: Re: Size limit on filename created by zip? 2 Message-ID: <06022310040694_20331674@antinode.org>  ) From: "Ken Robinson" <kenrbnsn@gmail.com>   G > Where can I download the newer versions of Zip & UnZip for the Alpha?   2    Generally, start at "http://www.info-zip.org/".  C    If you have a C compiler, the source kits should be available at  links from:   &       http://www.info-zip.org/Zip.html(       http://www.info-zip.org/UnZip.html  I Otherwise, there should be links to VMS binary kits on those same pages.  , I generally build the stuff from the source.  /    For the latest (public) betas (source only):   2       ftp://ftp.info-zip.org/pub/infozip/OLD/beta/  F Be sure to complain when you find a problem.  (Unless, of course, yourB complaint is missing crucial details, like, say, a file name which caused an error.)   H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547    ------------------------------  + Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 10:16:21 -0600 (CST) * From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)3 Subject: Re: Size limit on filename created by zip? 2 Message-ID: <06022310162133_20331674@antinode.org>  ) From: "Ken Robinson" <kenrbnsn@gmail.com>   G > After an OK night's sleep (really can't call 4.5 hours a good night's A > sleep) I saw the name part of the filename was exceeding the 39 A > character limit. I just wish that ZIP could have put out a more  > meaningful error message.   >    I'll look into it.  Generally, these programs pass around aE Zip-specific error code, rather than an OS-specific error code, so it H may be difficult and/or ugly to add an OS-specific message in cases likeC this.  My guess is thet it won't improve, but I can't say for sure.   H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  4    Steven M. Schweda               (+1) 651-699-98183    382 South Warwick Street        sms@antinode-org     Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547    ------------------------------    Date: 23 Feb 2006 09:35:07 +01006 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER)# Subject: [OpenVMS V8] JUMP Freeware , Message-ID: <43fd81cb$1@news.langstoeger.at>  : As I noted does the JUMP freeware no longer run on VMS V8:  ; -SYSTEM-W-SYSVERDIF, system version mismatch; please relink   ; Before I try to rebuild JUMP on V8.2 and see if this works, E is there a newer version of JUMP freeware than V4.2 from freeware60 ?    TIA    --   Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER % Network and OpenVMS system specialist  E-mail  peter@langstoeger.atF A-1030 VIENNA  AUSTRIA              I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist   ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2006.108 ************************