1 INFO-VAX	Wed, 22 Nov 2006	Volume 2006 : Issue 643       Contents:  Debugger newbie question (Alpha)$ Re: Debugger newbie question (Alpha)$ Re: Debugger newbie question (Alpha)$ Re: Debugger newbie question (Alpha)$ Re: Debugger newbie question (Alpha)% deleing messages in Office Server 6.1 G Re: End of life question for VAX 3100-96 and Alphaserver 5/533 question G Re: End of life question for VAX 3100-96 and Alphaserver 5/533 question P Re: End of life question for VAX 3100-96 and Alphaserver 5/533 question question, Re: increase in spam and what to do about it, Re: increase in spam and what to do about it, Re: increase in spam and what to do about it, Re: increase in spam and what to do about it, Re: increase in spam and what to do about it, Re: increase in spam and what to do about it, Re: increase in spam and what to do about it, Re: increase in spam and what to do about it, Re: increase in spam and what to do about it, Re: increase in spam and what to do about it, Re: increase in spam and what to do about it, Re: increase in spam and what to do about it, Re: increase in spam and what to do about it, Re: increase in spam and what to do about it$ Re: Is HP trying to kill VMS again ?$ Re: Is HP trying to kill VMS again ?0 OpenVMS 7.3-2 MSL2024 LTO-3 Ultrium 960 support?' Pathworks Advanced Server 6.1 and W2003  Re: Problem with CMS MOB LIB) The Register and Gartner on Itanium sales - Re: The Register and Gartner on Itanium sales - Re: The Register and Gartner on Itanium sales - Re: The Register and Gartner on Itanium sales , Re: Western Dayligh Time. Starts in 12 days!, Re: Western Dayligh Time. Starts in 12 days!, Re: Western Dayligh Time. Starts in 12 days!, Re: Western Dayligh Time. Starts in 12 days! Re: Who called me?  F ----------------------------------------------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 03:41:11 -0500 - From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> ) Subject: Debugger newbie question (Alpha) 7 Message-ID: <3cb08$45640d1b$cef8887a$7710@TEKSAVVY.COM>   L I got my first "ABEND" (to use IBM terminology) while developping a program I on an Alpha :-) (previous development was always on a VAX, and never had  J program crash on alpha since it was always debugged before compiled there)  G The help/message for %SYSTEM-F-HPARITH mentions that when an exception  I occurs, any/all instructions already in progress are allowed to complete  8 (and each can also set their own bit if they also fail).    J Is it therefore normal for a C program in the DEBUGger to have the cursor J still on the line above the line with the guilty operation ? (i.e. it was F doing both at the same time, first line was integer incrementing of a ; value, second line was a flawed floating point comparison).   F (adding a printf between the two then causes the debugger to have the L cursor on the guilty line of code when the exception happens, so I was able # to find the guilty line that way !)     F Also, if one does a STEP by STEP approach instead of a GO, would this L garantee that the assembler code for a line of source code has all executed I before assembler code for the next line of source code begins execution ?     C if one does a CC/DEBUG/NOPTIMIZE, does it make a difference in the  L instruction prefetching and parallel execution streams done at the hardware  level on Alpha ?   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2006 02:13:26 -0800) From: "Bob Gezelter" <gezelter@rlgsc.com> - Subject: Re: Debugger newbie question (Alpha) B Message-ID: <1164190405.956427.327080@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>   JF Mezei wrote: M > I got my first "ABEND" (to use IBM terminology) while developping a program J > on an Alpha :-) (previous development was always on a VAX, and never hadL > program crash on alpha since it was always debugged before compiled there) > H > The help/message for %SYSTEM-F-HPARITH mentions that when an exceptionJ > occurs, any/all instructions already in progress are allowed to complete: > (and each can also set their own bit if they also fail). >  > K > Is it therefore normal for a C program in the DEBUGger to have the cursor K > still on the line above the line with the guilty operation ? (i.e. it was G > doing both at the same time, first line was integer incrementing of a = > value, second line was a flawed floating point comparison).  > G > (adding a printf between the two then causes the debugger to have the M > cursor on the guilty line of code when the exception happens, so I was able % > to find the guilty line that way !)  >  > G > Also, if one does a STEP by STEP approach instead of a GO, would this M > garantee that the assembler code for a line of source code has all executed K > before assembler code for the next line of source code begins execution ?  >  > D > if one does a CC/DEBUG/NOPTIMIZE, does it make a difference in theM > instruction prefetching and parallel execution streams done at the hardware  > level on Alpha ?   JF,   @ The /NOOPTIMIZE switch certainly makes a difference. /NOOPTIMIZEA suppresses all but the most trivial optimizations at the compiler E level. Thus, lines of code will be executed precisely in the order in ! which they appear in the program.   C Optimizing compilers frequently re-organize the code within a basic G block (a section of code with one entry and one exit). Subroutine calls = also end a basic block, because of the side effects on global  variables.    $ - Bob Gezelter, http://www.rlgsc.com   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 10:22:39 GMT + From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= - Subject: Re: Debugger newbie question (Alpha) 2 Message-ID: <PxV8h.23986$E02.9770@newsb.telia.net>   Bob Gezelter wrote :   > JF Mezei wrote: E >> if one does a CC/DEBUG/NOPTIMIZE, does it make a difference in the N >> instruction prefetching and parallel execution streams done at the hardware >> level on Alpha ?  >  > JF,  > B > The /NOOPTIMIZE switch certainly makes a difference. /NOOPTIMIZEC > suppresses all but the most trivial optimizations at the compiler G > level. Thus, lines of code will be executed precisely in the order in # > which they appear in the program.   @ Note that JF asked about the HW level, which I do not think that the C compiler can change.  	 Jan-Erik.    ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2006 04:47:35 -06004 From: cornelius@encompasserve.org (George Cornelius)- Subject: Re: Debugger newbie question (Alpha) 3 Message-ID: <8hz8MGndeTdb@eisner.encompasserve.org>   g In article <3cb08$45640d1b$cef8887a$7710@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes: I > The help/message for %SYSTEM-F-HPARITH mentions that when an exception  K > occurs, any/all instructions already in progress are allowed to complete  : > (and each can also set their own bit if they also fail).  K I never understood this stuff.  But I understand that alpha has "imprecise" F exceptions and it is up to the O/S to try to reconstruct what sequenceG of events resulted in the failure.  Whether it can back out the results H of subsequent instructions successfully so that the debugger sees thingsG as they would have been if there had been no pipelining I really do not  know.   L > Is it therefore normal for a C program in the DEBUGger to have the cursor L > still on the line above the line with the guilty operation ? (i.e. it was H > doing both at the same time, first line was integer incrementing of a = > value, second line was a flawed floating point comparison).   G I don't do much floating point, but when the cursor jumps around in the F debugger I usually take it to mean that I am debugging optimized code,E where the various instructions associated with any given line of code E can be intermingled with instructions from other lines in the module.   E Optimization can result in completely out of order execution, removal E of redundant operations, the moving of loop invariant code to outside  its containing loop, and so on.   E It is generally best to avoid using the debugger with optimized code.   H > (adding a printf between the two then causes the debugger to have the N > cursor on the guilty line of code when the exception happens, so I was able % > to find the guilty line that way !)  > H > Also, if one does a STEP by STEP approach instead of a GO, would this N > garantee that the assembler code for a line of source code has all executed K > before assembler code for the next line of source code begins execution ?   . For optimized code there is no way to do that.  @ I have always assumed that it did machine instruction by machineD instruction, serially, though. Since the longest integer instructionF I know about is 23 cycles (quadword multiply on EV4), even the slowestF Alpha will single step in vastly less time than you can type an "S".    F The debugger may in fact be enforcing serialization with step commandsH even if you ask for 1000's of instructions at a time.  Someone else willD have to supply the details, though.  Historically there was a bit in@ the PS that a debugger could set to cause a trap to its own code after each machine instruction.   E Just do SET STEP INS instead of SET STEP LINE (or the gui equivalent) D if you want to watch it execute the machine instructions one by one.E Your floating point compare may be several machine code instructions.   F And STEP/CALL and STEP/INTO can be good for getting quickly to a blockD of code you want to examine without having to put breakpoints there.  E > if one does a CC/DEBUG/NOPTIMIZE, does it make a difference in the  N > instruction prefetching and parallel execution streams done at the hardware  > level on Alpha ?  G It will not change the hardware level.  It changes the compiled code so J that it fairly literally matches the source code in sequence of execution.H There are things that could be done at the machine code level that wouldH basically ensure that an exception would not carry forward to a followon: line of code, but I don't see that in any compiler output.  C Oh, that reminds me: for Fortran, at least, isn't there a qualifier ? for precise exceptions?  See $ FORTRAN/SYNCHRONOUS_EXCEPTIONS .    --9 George Cornelius              cornelius@encompasserve.org 9                               cornelius@ANTISPAM.mayo.edu    ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2006 07:37:34 -0600; From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) - Subject: Re: Debugger newbie question (Alpha) 3 Message-ID: <nKZ74o76U3XU@eisner.encompasserve.org>   n In article <1164190405.956427.327080@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>, "Bob Gezelter" <gezelter@rlgsc.com> writes: > E > Optimizing compilers frequently re-organize the code within a basic I > block (a section of code with one entry and one exit). Subroutine calls ? > also end a basic block, because of the side effects on global 
 > variables.    C    DEC's compilers for VAX and Alpha have done global optimizations D    (across basic blocks) for years.  If never seen an Alpha compiler    that wouldn't.    ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2006 09:20:44 -0800 From: tomarsin2015@comcast.net. Subject: deleing messages in Office Server 6.1C Message-ID: <1164216044.316490.277180@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>    Hello C I'm running Office Server 6.1 on a VAX  3100-95 with VMS 7.3. In my  inbox I have almost 8000F messages. I read the users guide but cannot find the command to delete all unread messages.D If I do a XD (Delete all Select) it tells me that I need to read the message. I am not about to read ? 8000 spam messages. Anybody out there (JF) recall the command??  thanks phillip    ------------------------------    Date: 21 Nov 2006 22:53:13 -0800/ From: "Volker Halle" <volker_halle@hotmail.com> P Subject: Re: End of life question for VAX 3100-96 and Alphaserver 5/533 questionC Message-ID: <1164178393.336061.234770@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>   A Yesterdays OpenVMS.org newsletter has this paragraph about end of  service life for Alpha systems:    Service Policy: 9 HP will offer service (maintenance, repair, and advisory) 8 for all currently selling Alpha Systems for a minimum of& five years after last system shipment.5 Note: Warranty coverage ends one year after shipment. 7 Typically, HP offers services much longer than the five 7 year minimum commitment. HP still offers service on all 8 Alpha Systems shipped since the original introduction 13 years ago in 1993.7 No End of Service date has been scheduled for any Alpha  System.   A This information has been taken directly from the OpenVMS Roadmap  Notes:.   [ http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/roadmap/openvms_roadmaps_files/openvms_roadmaps_notes.pdf    Volker.    ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2006 09:24:10 -0800! From: "Ian Miller" <gxys@uk2.net> P Subject: Re: End of life question for VAX 3100-96 and Alphaserver 5/533 questionC Message-ID: <1164216250.434156.290270@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>   / Another quote from the VMS Roadmap presentation 3 "Alpha Systems begin their phase down at the end of 9 October 2006 with the end of normal ordering for systems. 9 After October, HP cannot guarantee that a product will be 6 available, but will accept an order if the company has some left over inventory."  F So you might be able to buy one if they happen to have one left of the model you want.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 23:43:16 +0800  From: prep@prep.synonet.com Y Subject: Re: End of life question for VAX 3100-96 and Alphaserver 5/533 question question 0 Message-ID: <87psbfsd0r.fsf@k9.prep.synonet.com>  1 "Volker Halle" <volker_halle@hotmail.com> writes:   C > Yesterdays OpenVMS.org newsletter has this paragraph about end of ! > service life for Alpha systems:  >  > Service Policy: ; > HP will offer service (maintenance, repair, and advisory) : > for all currently selling Alpha Systems for a minimum of           ^^^^^^^^^   ( > five years after last system shipment.7 > Note: Warranty coverage ends one year after shipment. 9 > Typically, HP offers services much longer than the five 9 > year minimum commitment. HP still offers service on all : > Alpha Systems shipped since the original introduction 13 > years ago in 1993.9 > No End of Service date has been scheduled for any Alpha 	 > System.  > C > This information has been taken directly from the OpenVMS Roadmap 	 > Notes:.  > ] > http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/roadmap/openvms_roadmaps_files/openvms_roadmaps_notes.pdf  > 	 > Volker.  >   G Um Volker, it is November. There are now NO Alphas `currently selling'.    --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +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.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:25:25 +0000 (UTC) P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)5 Subject: Re: increase in spam and what to do about it $ Message-ID: <ek1525$46b$1@online.de>  C In article <06112117350642_2020028F@antinode.org>, sms@antinode.org  (Steven M. Schweda) writes:   - > >   Are the entries on the list only those  M > > who have sent spam, or do they include for example ranges of volatile IP   > > addresses? > , >    Probably depends on whose list you use.   Which lists do you recommend?    ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:27:02 +0000 (UTC) P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)5 Subject: Re: increase in spam and what to do about it $ Message-ID: <ek1556$46b$2@online.de>  A In article <7d7b6$45639ef8$cef8887a$10159@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei ' <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:    N > Researchers found evidence that about 73,000 computers in 166 countries are K > part of the SpamThru botnet, adding up to a mighty spam cannon. (This is  J > some virus which transform an innocent PC in to a member of a centrally J > controlled spamming network whene central servers provide templates etc.  H Whether a PC running an OS which is so easily compromised is "innocent"  is a different question.   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:33:39 +0000 (UTC) P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)5 Subject: Re: increase in spam and what to do about it $ Message-ID: <ek15hi$46b$3@online.de>  F In article <45640642@news.langstoeger.at>, peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes:    L > >In particular, I'm getting a large number of messages with [SPAM] in the G > >subject line, which is NOT being provided by any filtering under my   > >control.  > C > Then it is your provider. I'm my own mail provider and I can tell . > not one of the spams I receive is flagged...  E I don't think so.  I am my own highest-priority MX-server, so all my  H provider does is have such a DNS record so that email comes directly to E me.  (It only goes through my provider if I have a problem, in which  H case his backup MX server kicks in.  My provider does offer the service ' of spam filtering at his site, though.)    Or so I thought.  I It seems that these emails HAVE gone through the backup MX server of the  H provider.  However, since I haven't been offline, there must be another F reason.  Maybe when the cannon shoots, my SMTP server is so busy that I some email goes through the backup MX server of the provider.  I'll have   to investigate this.   ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:54:07 +0000 (UTC) P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)5 Subject: Re: increase in spam and what to do about it $ Message-ID: <ek16nv$6vi$1@online.de>  D In article <ek15hi$46b$3@online.de>, helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de3 (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:    H > In article <45640642@news.langstoeger.at>, peter@langstoeger.at (Peter > 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER) writes:   > N > > >In particular, I'm getting a large number of messages with [SPAM] in the I > > >subject line, which is NOT being provided by any filtering under my  
 > > >control.  > > E > > Then it is your provider. I'm my own mail provider and I can tell 0 > > not one of the spams I receive is flagged... > G > I don't think so.  I am my own highest-priority MX-server, so all my  J > provider does is have such a DNS record so that email comes directly to G > me.  (It only goes through my provider if I have a problem, in which  J > case his backup MX server kicks in.  My provider does offer the service ) > of spam filtering at his site, though.)  >  > Or so I thought. > K > It seems that these emails HAVE gone through the backup MX server of the  J > provider.  However, since I haven't been offline, there must be another H > reason.  Maybe when the cannon shoots, my SMTP server is so busy that K > some email goes through the backup MX server of the provider.  I'll have   > to investigate this.  D After some research, it looks like the following is happening:  I'm C rejecting the email, due to a Bad-Clients entry or whatever.  As a  F result, the sender can't reach me, so the backup MX server kicks in.  I This then sends the email to me, with the (automatically generated) spam   tag.  D I have the option to have the provider block spam (in a configurableB manner) and/or send all my email through the provider, rather thanA having it come directly to me.  I haven't set up either of these,  though.   G Obviously, a backup MX server is a good thing, so that mail doesn't get A lost as a result of transient problems at my end.  However, if my H anti-spam configuration rejects something, I don't want it to go to the 6 MX server of my ISP and thus get sent to me after all.  / Is there a technical way around this at my end?   F Of course, since such mails are tagged by the DNS provider (since theyH are spam, not since I rejected them), I can easily filter them out at myH end, but that's extra work if I've already rejected them.  (Emails which@ for some other reason go through the backup MX server at the DNSD provider are not, of course, tagged as spam, unless they are spam.)    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 03:42:16 -0600 % From: Dan Foster <usenet@evilphb.org> 5 Subject: Re: increase in spam and what to do about it 5 Message-ID: <slrnem86ro.5bi.usenet@zappy.catbert.org>   v In article <ek15hi$46b$3@online.de>, Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply <helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de> wrote: > K > It seems that these emails HAVE gone through the backup MX server of the  J > provider.  However, since I haven't been offline, there must be another H > reason.  Maybe when the cannon shoots, my SMTP server is so busy that K > some email goes through the backup MX server of the provider.  I'll have   > to investigate this.  C Simpler explanation: the spam goes through the secondary MX because " spambots are often coded that way.  F It is 'legal' to contact a secondary MX mail server to send a message;B it's just not normal common practice by 'civilized' (or civilised): software. That doesn't bother the spambot writers one bit.  G They do it because they correctly reason that some of the time, you may D hit sites that protects "the front door" well but essentially leavesG "the back door" unlocked -- and slip spam messages through more easily.   G It costs them nothing to at least try the secondary MX(es) hosts first.    -Dan   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 10:04:53 GMT + From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= 5 Subject: Re: increase in spam and what to do about it 2 Message-ID: <9hV8h.23984$E02.9743@newsb.telia.net>  0 Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote :  = > Obviously, a backup MX server is a good thing, so that mail @  > doesn't get lost as a result of transient problems at my end.  > They souldn't get "lost", the smtp server at the sender should= (normaly) try to resend the mail for a couple of days (5 days  seems quite normal).  @ The only case when the sender should "give up" at once, is if it@ can't get an MX record for the receiver. But if it *does* get an! valid MX record, it should retry.   G Now, if you have "transient problems" for more then 5 days, well... :-)    Regards,	 Jan-Erik.    ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:55:08 +0000 (UTC) P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)5 Subject: Re: increase in spam and what to do about it $ Message-ID: <ek16ps$6vi$2@online.de>  @ In article <slrnem86ro.5bi.usenet@zappy.catbert.org>, Dan Foster <usenet@evilphb.org> writes:    x > In article <ek15hi$46b$3@online.de>, Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply <helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de> wrote: > > M > > It seems that these emails HAVE gone through the backup MX server of the  L > > provider.  However, since I haven't been offline, there must be another J > > reason.  Maybe when the cannon shoots, my SMTP server is so busy that M > > some email goes through the backup MX server of the provider.  I'll have   > > to investigate this. > E > Simpler explanation: the spam goes through the secondary MX because $ > spambots are often coded that way.   Interesting point.  H > It is 'legal' to contact a secondary MX mail server to send a message;D > it's just not normal common practice by 'civilized' (or civilised)< > software. That doesn't bother the spambot writers one bit.   Nor one gigabyte.  :-(   ------------------------------   Date: 22 Nov 2006 13:26:32 GMT( From: bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)5 Subject: Re: increase in spam and what to do about it 0 Message-ID: <4sj1g8F100l1kU2@mid.individual.net>  C In article <1164168707.352713.194240@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,  	davidc@montagar.com writes: > Bill Gunshannon wrote:J >> There is a perfect way to get email back under control.  Go back to theK >> old way it was done in the original USENET days (Yes, Email predates the J >> INTERNET).  Setup mail maps again and have email exchanged only betweenM >> agreeing hosts.  That would immediately eliminate the ability for infected K >> machines on the INTERNET to send email anywhere.  It would eliminate the K >> need for RBL's as it would take explicit permission to inject email into N >> the system.  People who don't want to play by the rules get shunned.  Works >> fine for the Amish!!  > I > What I would like to do is have a DNS server that does an RBL check for C > every host requesting an MX lookup.  If it's on the RBL, return a ; > 127.0.0.1 as the prefered MTA!  Save me a lot of traffic.   ? The problem with that is that machines can become infected much A faster then the RBL's can learn of them.  This is not a technical A problem it is a social problem.  There are no technical solutions ? to social problems.  It takes a social solution.  That solution ? is for email to only be exchanged between consenting sysadmins. B And when someone violates the consent agreement, you cut them off.B Being as every schmuck on the INTERNET should not be sending Email@ from their desktop PC this system is not as complex as you mightB think. The increase (actually, just s a return to) in the value ofA Email is more than worth it.  The only flaw in the old system was C the speed (or lack thereof) of the phone system over which the mail > traveled, sometimes having to wait several hours for each hop.B Today, using the INTERNET to provide the transport, a message thatC actually had to pass thru 5, or a dozen or even a hundred different C hosts to get from originator to destination would still take little D more than seconds to maybe a few minutes.  Hardly to high a price to7 pay considering the ability to make Email usable again.    bill   --  J Bill Gunshannon          |  de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n.  Three wolvesD bill@cs.scranton.edu     |  and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton   |A Scranton, Pennsylvania   |         #include <std.disclaimer.h>       ------------------------------  + Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 08:49:43 -0600 (CST) * From: sms@antinode.org (Steven M. Schweda)5 Subject: Re: increase in spam and what to do about it 2 Message-ID: <06112208494376_2020028F@antinode.org>  P From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply)  / > > >   Are the entries on the list only those  O > > > who have sent spam, or do they include for example ranges of volatile IP   > > > addresses? > > . > >    Probably depends on whose list you use. >  > Which lists do you recommend?   G    I don't pay enough attention to _recommend_ any, but I'll admit that 8 I use these (from SYS$SPECIFIC:[TCPIP$SMTP]SMTP.CONFIG):  : RBLs: relays.ordb.org, dnsbl.sorbs.net, combined.njabl.org  G    These organizations tend to have Web pages which explain how they do G what they do, and which server to specify to get which things blocked.  / "combined.njabl.org", for example, differs from 9 "<other_things>.njabl.org".  See "http://www.njabl.org/".   H ------------------------------------------------------------------------  3    Steven M. Schweda               sms@antinode-org 4    382 South Warwick Street        (+1) 651-699-9818    Saint Paul  MN  55105-2547    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 10:07:50 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 5 Subject: Re: increase in spam and what to do about it 9 Message-ID: <dt6dnSEDN-NS-vnYnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@libcom.com>   / Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: C > In article <7d7b6$45639ef8$cef8887a$10159@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei ) > <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:   > O >> Researchers found evidence that about 73,000 computers in 166 countries are  L >> part of the SpamThru botnet, adding up to a mighty spam cannon. (This is K >> some virus which transform an innocent PC in to a member of a centrally  K >> controlled spamming network whene central servers provide templates etc.  > J > Whether a PC running an OS which is so easily compromised is "innocent"  > is a different question. >   G Sorry, while I may agree with the concept, I have to jump all over you   on this one.  G Just because you might look like an easy target, is that justification   for you to be mugged?   = If a young lady wears a miniskirt, is she asking to be raped?   , Blaming the victims really isn't the answer.   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com DFE Ultralights, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 10:03:24 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 5 Subject: Re: increase in spam and what to do about it 9 Message-ID: <dt6dnSYDN-NU-_nYnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@libcom.com>    Bill Gunshannon wrote:: > In article <7d7b6$45639ef8$cef8887a$10159@teksavvy.com>,2 > 	JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> writes:2 >> Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:K >>> Has anyone else noticed a large increase in spam in the last few weeks? X >> http://news.com.com/Tis+the+season+to+send+spam/2100-7349_3-6136901.html?tag=nefd.top >> >>Q >> Very interesting article on spam volumes increasing for this christmas season.  >>L >> The volumes are now up to 819 terabytes of spam per day, compared to 275  >> per day a year ago. >>O >> Researchers found evidence that about 73,000 computers in 166 countries are  L >> part of the SpamThru botnet, adding up to a mighty spam cannon. (This is K >> some virus which transform an innocent PC in to a member of a centrally  K >> controlled spamming network whene central servers provide templates etc.  >>H >> I can attest to the "cannon" thing. When spam hits my machine, it is F >> usually in bursts lasting a few minutes con constant call attempts. >>L >> Reducing the number of concurent sessiosn my SMTO server will handle has J >> reduced the attacks. After two calls, the subquent ones fail until the 8 >> first 2 have ended their unsuccesful delivey attempt. >>L >> BTW, they often harvest email adresses in a very dumb way which includes  >> usenet message ids. >> >> Re: RBLs are very efficient.  >>A >> Here is my smtp.config : ( a few things not available in 5.4 )  >>- >> $ type $disk4:[sys0.tcpip$smtp]smtp.config  >> Good-Clients: 10.0.0.0/8  >> Bad-Clients: 220.144.0.0/16,  >>          200.45.190.0/23  >> !
 >> ! Chinanet  >> Bad-Clients: 58.0.0.0/8,  >>          59.0.0.0/8,  >>          60.0.0.0/8,  >>          218.66.0.0/15, >>          220.160.0.0/11,  >>          220.192.0.0/10,  >>          221.0.0.0/8, >>          222.0.0.0/8, >>          61.12.0.0/16,  >>          61.206.0.0/16  >> ! >> Relay-Zones: vaxination.ca ! >> Relay-Zones: www.vaxination.ca   >> Relay-Zones: gw.vaxination.ca >> !% >> Reject-Unbacktranslatable-IP: TRUE / >> Accept-Mail-From: <email address of friends>  >> SPAM-Action: ACCOUNTING >> Security: FRIENDLY  >> RBLs: combined.njabl.org  >> RBLs: sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org  >> Allow-EXPN: NEVER >> Allow-VRFY: LOCALLY( >> Symbiont-Checks-Deliverability: FALSE >> Try-A-Records: IFNOMX >> ! >> !C >> Unbacktranslatable-IP-Text: Can't backtranslate SMTP server's IP 8 >> Client-In-RBL-Text: SMTP server is blacklisted in RBL@ >> Bad-Clients-Text: Your network is blocked: sent too much SPAM< >> Unqualified-Sender-Text: Sender's email address illformed? >> Unresolvable-Domain-Text: Sender's email domain unresolvable L >> SPAM-Relay-Text: This facility does not tolerate spammers, relay disabledO >> EXPN-Used-Text: Environmental regulations forbid the Mining of distribution   >> lists0 >> VRFY-Used-Text: Spammers are not welcome here > I > There is a perfect way to get email back under control.  Go back to the J > old way it was done in the original USENET days (Yes, Email predates theI > INTERNET).  Setup mail maps again and have email exchanged only between L > agreeing hosts.  That would immediately eliminate the ability for infectedJ > machines on the INTERNET to send email anywhere.  It would eliminate theJ > need for RBL's as it would take explicit permission to inject email intoM > the system.  People who don't want to play by the rules get shunned.  Works  > fine for the Amish!! >  > bill >    >    A rather drastic solution.  B Consider, an entity (not a spammer) that has not gone through the G process of setting up an e-mail agreement with you, who wishes to send  5 you an e-mail, which you might be pleased to receive.   G Consider, an entity that you have reason to contact, but don't have an   agreement with.   I I agree that spam is a problem.  Your solution would cripple the concept  I of e-mail, as it's now implemented.  (I won't deny that spam has already   crippled e-mail.)   B A better method for 'shunning' spammers might be more appropriate.   --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com DFE Ultralights, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2006 07:35:25 -0800 From: davidc@montagar.com 5 Subject: Re: increase in spam and what to do about it B Message-ID: <1164209725.524594.74340@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>   Bill Gunshannon wrote:E > In article <1164168707.352713.194240@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,  > 	davidc@montagar.com writes:K > > What I would like to do is have a DNS server that does an RBL check for E > > every host requesting an MX lookup.  If it's on the RBL, return a = > > 127.0.0.1 as the prefered MTA!  Save me a lot of traffic.  > A > The problem with that is that machines can become infected much * > faster then the RBL's can learn of them.  4 I know, but it would still save me a lot of traffic.   >  This is not a technicalC > problem it is a social problem.  There are no technical solutions 2 > to social problems.  It takes a social solution.  8 There are technical solutions that can help quite a bit.E Unfortunately, that would require a technical solution from Microsoft A that would harden their Windows platform, as the vast majority of : zombies are Billy-boxes.  ISP's could be more proactive inE identification and isolation of zombies, but they don't have the guts E to do it (even if they just blocked port 25, that would solve a lot).   F The big social problem is that just enough people BUY from these scamsC to make them profitable enough (even if only the gambling sense - I D almost won all my money back, so just one more spam run and I should finally hit to big one!).    > That solution A > is for email to only be exchanged between consenting sysadmins. D > And when someone violates the consent agreement, you cut them off.  E The problem is creating the "trust relationships" in the first place, E when you have a userbase which is orders of magnitude larger than the G original UUCP network. And unless you smart-hosted, generating paths to E nodes was rather pain-staking - but someone had to do it so you could  figure out the "trusted" path.  E When the predominate problem was with "trusted hosts", i.e. most mail F running through an ISP's mail servers, the spam wasn't as bad and evenC RBL's more effective.  Even early in the battle with Walt Rines and E Sanford Wallace, there was substantial blackholing of the entire AGIS @ backbone (a very string social statement) against spam and their, support to two of the worst known offenders.  D The problem is today, you can't take that kind of risk with 99.9% ofD your customers getting their e-mail dropped because that 0.1% causedC you to lose your trust relationships and got you blacklisted.  That G doesn't mean they can't identify and isolate that 0.1%, but the problem E is getting harder and more frequently occuring than ever before (i.e.  the new SpamThru trojan).   D > Being as every schmuck on the INTERNET should not be sending EmailB > from their desktop PC this system is not as complex as you might > think.  B Which is why ISP's should route all port 25 through their own mailB servers so they can help isolate the culprits rather than let themG loose.  But because of potential social repercussions, they don't/can't  do that.  E Social solutions are can only be part of the solution.  The technical G ability to zombie a box has got to be eliminated/reduced as well.  That B is Gates true legacy - a world full of insecure systems subjectingE everyone else to spam, DDoS attacks, fraud, identify theft, and more.    ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 00:00:38 +0800  From: prep@prep.synonet.com 5 Subject: Re: increase in spam and what to do about it 0 Message-ID: <87lkm3sc7t.fsf@k9.prep.synonet.com>  ' Dan Foster <usenet@evilphb.org> writes:   B > It costs them nothing to at least try the secondary MX(es) hosts > first.  B In fact they win. the primary host can, normally, do a user lookupI and bounce or bin `no such luzer' messages. A MX host normally can't tell  if a username is valid or not.  ) OK, it should be mailboz, not username...    --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +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.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  % Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 00:04:26 +0800  From: prep@prep.synonet.com 5 Subject: Re: increase in spam and what to do about it 0 Message-ID: <87hcwrsc1h.fsf@k9.prep.synonet.com>  R helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:  1 > Is there a technical way around this at my end?   G I'm not sure if this will work, but see if your ISP will create a CNAME H for your machine and then point the first 2 MX records at the CNAME  and@ then your A name. Have a 3rd MX pointing to the real MX machine.  0 That sort of thing could be a usefull spam trap.   --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +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.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 13:40:22 GMT 5 From: rdeininger@mindspringdot.com (Robert Deininger) - Subject: Re: Is HP trying to kill VMS again ? Z Message-ID: <rdeininger-2211060840380001@dialup-4.233.149.40.dial1.manchester1.level3.net>  I In article <456438f1$0$26895$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>, "Neil Rieck"  <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> wrote:   C >"Robert Deininger" <rdeininger@mindspringdot.com> wrote in message V >news:rdeininger-2111062359570001@dialup-4.233.149.223.dial1.manchester1.level3.net...= >> In article <12m6r7djjvb181a@corp.supernews.com>, "Syltrem" $ >> <syltremzulu@videotron.ca> wrote: >>
 >[...snip...]  >>I >> I got some configurations and prices from the configurator tool on the K >> web.  Of course the prices are not official, and the configurator is not 4 >> capable of getting detailed configurations right. >>
 >[...snip...]  >>M >> Since the system has 4 CPU cores, 4 units of the FOE license are required.  >>K >> FOE (Foundation Operating Environment) does not include clustering.  The J >> configurator doesn't seem to let me add a clustering license a la carte# >> (for either Alpha or Integrity).  >>
 >[...snip...]  > J >I attended a really cool Parsec webinar in July which covered changes to % >OpenVMS licensing including Itanium.  > J >FOE provides you with the basics as well as an unlimited number of users. > F >If you also want shadowing (and other management tools) you need EOE 3 >(Enterprise Operating Environment) rather than FOE  > L >If you also want clustering, you need an  MCOE (Mission Critical Operating ) >Environment) license rather than an EOE.   H You are supposed to be able to buy individual products, like clustering,H in addition to the OE's.  I haven't found them in any configuration tool or price list yet.  I >There was also a little section on PPL (Per Processor Licensing) but no   >mention of cores.    F It was out of date.  Per-Core licensing is new with V8.3; it basicallyD extends the previous PPL business model to dual-core Montecito CPUs.  8 >As I mentioned in another thread yesterday, I recently M >attended a quad-code webinar at Intel where many manufacturers (like Oracle  M >and Microsoft) mentioned they were going to shift their licensing away from  K >counting CPUs and Cores toward counting users. I wonder if HP will do the   >same?  E I've heard of no plans for VMS to do so, but I often don't hear about H business practice changes around licensing ahead of time.  There doesn'tH seem to be an HP-wide business practice.  VMS on Integrity has tended to7 follow whatever the HP-UX practice of the day has been.   B If you have real interest, it would be best to contact VMS product management directly.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 13:41:39 GMT ' From: jls <jeffls-nospam@sbcglobal.net> - Subject: Re: Is HP trying to kill VMS again ? 8 Message-ID: <jkk8m2h898a4fhsgod2p4n172tuthsvs9u@4ax.com>  0 On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 19:00:58 -0500, "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> wrote:      >>J >I attended an Intel QuadCore webinar last week where most vendors stated K >they would be changing their licensing strategies to a per user basis and  N >not count cores or CPUs. This was even shocking to hear from Oracle and less N >shocking to hear from Microsoft. I guess the geniuses at HP would rather tap G >each others phones rather than watch what their competition was doing.  >   D Imho, this is good news, and way overdue.  Heck, I was fighting hardA for this with my vendors back in 1990.  I was always annoyed that B upgrading a VAX or Alpha due to adding more apps would force me to> also upgrade software licenses for apps which were not growing (concurrent-user wise anyway).  C A $200-400,000 hardware upgrade would easily cost $1.5Million (USD) 4 for all the software upgrades that vendors required.  D Concurrent user licenses make the most sense for customers, imho (asC long as they have the option of "unlimited user" licenses when that  also makes sense).   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 11:27:01 -0500 & From: "Hal Kuff" <Halkuff@Veriozn.Net>9 Subject: OpenVMS 7.3-2 MSL2024 LTO-3 Ultrium 960 support? - Message-ID: <pT_8h.3240$pM.2700@newsfe13.lga>   G Hi, anyone running or know of support for the MSL2024 LTO-3 on version   7.3-2?   --Hal    ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2006 03:09:16 -0800+ From: "Dave Gullen" <dave.gullen@gap.co.uk> 0 Subject: Pathworks Advanced Server 6.1 and W2003C Message-ID: <1164193756.684885.140180@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   G It's a long story, including good reasons why we can't upgrade, but has E anyone any experience of getting Pathworks 6.1 and W2003 to interact? C Yes, I know it's an officially unsuported combo, but the VMS Wizard E says HP are 'aware' of sites where this does work, so I'm hoping this B is actually possible.  What we're getting at the moment is a totalG failure to join the existing domain as a member server, or to establish ; a trust between Pathworks as its own PDC in its own domain. = Planning on going back with a Windows/networking wiz and some F network/packet sniffers etc in the near future to look at it from that3 angle, but wondered if anyone had been here before.  We have: VMS 6.2-1H3  Pathworks v6.1# Enabled transports: NetBEUI, TCP/IP  Name resolution: DNS & WINS    Thanks in advance,   Dave Gullen    ------------------------------    Date: 21 Nov 2006 23:09:05 -0800 From: sean@obanion.us % Subject: Re: Problem with CMS MOB LIB C Message-ID: <1164179345.298906.274450@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>   C When you Create Element the default is /NoReference, so you have to  explicitly specify /Reference.C I think even the DECWindows interface for CMS defaulted this way...   > Modify Element /Reference will change an exsiting element from
 /NoReference.   F All of the elements in the library when you used Modifiy Library where< updated as if you had Modified each of them with /Reference.  9 You can find CMS doumentation under DECset, in this case: I http://ftp.openvms.compaq.com/doc/82final/decset/CMS_REFERENCE_MANUAL.PDF        Sean   ababeel wrote: > HiF > I created a lib MYLIB and when I created it I didnt have a reference9 > area, which I changed using CMS MOD LIB /REF=[blah dir] F > Now whenever I create an elem, it shows up in the CMS but not in theG > reference area. I asked a few colleagues and they seem to recall some H > kind of problem using cms mod lib. I dunno whether it is a bug or do IG > need to to do anything else for it to pick up the new reference area.   > Any ideas greatly appreciated. > Thanks...    ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 13:23:54 GMT ( From: Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net>2 Subject: The Register and Gartner on Itanium sales9 Message-ID: <KbY8h.1566$Pk.398@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk>   6 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/21/itanium_q3_hp/    Rough going for the Itanic in Q36 By Ashlee Vance in Mountain View ? More by this author. Published Tuesday 21st November 2006 21:05 GMT  H The curse of the Itanic continued to haunt HP in the third quarter. The F server maker suffered through the period as the only Tier 1 unable to E post a significant uptick in sales. Most of HP's woes appear to have  E resulted from flagging high-end server sales, as some customers side  < with Itanium, while others move to IBM and Sun Microsystems.  I All told, worldwide server shipments rose 13 per cent to 2m units during  D the third quarter, according to a fresh data plop from Gartner. The ; vendors combined to sell $13bn worth of kit - a 4 per cent   year-over-year rise.  G Sun and Dell - the oddest couple - led the revenue charge. Sun's sales  G increased a stunning 25 per cent, while Dell enjoyed a nice turnaround  I on the back of an 11 per cent sales hike. IBM boosted sales as well by 7  	 per cent.   C HP joined Fujitsu as the biggest losers in the quarter. HP's sales  2 slipped 6 per cent, and Fujitsu's fell 9 per cent.  A We'll let you guess which two of the five vendors mentioned sell   Itanium-based servers.  H HP remains the server shipment leader (541,000 units), followed by Dell E (460,000 units), IBM (333,000 units), Sun (83,000 units) and Fujitsu   (65,000 units).   G In terms of revenue, IBM is still king at $4.4bn in sales, followed by  B HP at $3.3bn, Dell at $1.4bn, Sun at $1.3bn and Fujitsu at $634m,  according to Gartner.   D Much of the third quarter action happened in the Unix/Itanium realm D where Sun kept its shipments lead but lost its revenue title to IBM.  H IBM saw its Unix server sales jump 12 per cent, while Sun's rose 20 per E cent. HP, by contrast, watched its high-end server sales fall 21 per  J cent. Fujitsu's sales fell 10 per cent, and Bull's sales fell 12 per cent.  C We'll let you guess which three of the five vendors mentioned sell   Itanium-based servers.  I The Itanic crowd's pains likely stem from the transition taking place in  G recent months to Intel's new dual-core version of the 64-bit ship. The  I "Montecito" flavor of Itanium represents a significant performance boost  A over previous product, and boxes based on the processor are just  3 starting to make their way to customers in earnest.   E HP has been enjoying a rising Itanium business, but is watching Unix  F server sales (Alpha/PA-RISC) fall at a faster rate. For example, HP's F high-end server revenue dipped 4 per cent in its most recent quarter, , despite a 77 per cent rise in Itanium sales.  F Now that CEO Mark Hurd's cost-cutting exercises are over, he can face D off with Itanium and really try to convince us of his magic touch.  Related stories   5 Dell's PC sales keep falling in Q3 (21 November 2006) H Dell knocks back Q3 results as SEC probe turns formal (16 November 2006)0 Linux Networx develops a LiSP (14 November 2006). Sun turns in another Q1 loss (27 October 2006)F Forget market share, Opteron is a market cap maker (14 September 2006): HP's Itanium boxes finally go dual-core (7 September 2006)@ Sun's server sales soar, while Dell bores in Q2 (23 August 2006)   --  
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------    Date: 22 Nov 2006 09:39:55 -0800- From: "Doug Phillips" <dphill46@netscape.net> 6 Subject: Re: The Register and Gartner on Itanium salesB Message-ID: <1164217195.400622.40900@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>   FredK wrote:7 > "Alan Greig" <greigaln@netscape.net> wrote in message 5 > news:KbY8h.1566$Pk.398@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk... : > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/21/itanium_q3_hp/ > > 	 <ARTICLE>  > > L > I love the spin.  HP's transition from PA-RISC to Itanium is gloom & doom,D > and Sparc continuing to drown in red ink is cause for celibration? > M > Income -$797 million, net profit margin -5.89%.  5 year sales growth -6.5%. M > They've lost about $5 billion over the last 5 years and lept back up from a M > $107 million dollar loss last year to $864 million.  If they increase sales I > any faster they might have to file chapter 11.  AMD-64 hasn't saved the  > sinking Sparc yet. > = > The sales increase is stunning - the loss is also stunning.  >   F With all due respect, a large portion of Sun's loss is from changes inB accounting for stock compensation and restructuring charges due to
 acquisitions.   F Sun also reports a decline in Enterprise level system sales, offset byA increases in Opteron and "entry level" Sparc sales. AMD-64 is not A intended to "save" Sparc, but to supplant it. Can anyone still be  surprised by that?  F I'm not a Sun fan, but they are moving in the right direction. WhetherG their recent acquisitions and their steady transition from Sparc to AMD B servers will be enough to pull them back up or not, only time willD tell. They've looked like merger & acquisition fodder for some time,0 but I haven't a clue as to who might be looking.   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 17:46:23 GMT ( From: Alan Greig <greigaln@netscape.net>6 Subject: Re: The Register and Gartner on Itanium sales: Message-ID: <P109h.1326$qd7.747@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>   FredK wrote:M > I love the spin.  HP's transition from PA-RISC to Itanium is gloom & doom,  D > and Sparc continuing to drown in red ink is cause for celibration? >   D Wall Street has Sun's stock hitting an intra-day 52-week High today.  / http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=SUNW   % 5.61	+0.07 / +1.26% Nov 22 12:25pm ET    Open:	5.575	Volume:	27,154,847! High:	5.64	Volume Avg:	59,129,300  Low:	5.55	P/E Ratio:	0.00 % Prev. Close:	5.54	Dividend Yield:	N/A ' 52-Week Range (Low - High):	3.74 - 5.62    --  
 Alan Greig   ------------------------------  # Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 18:17:28 GMT # From: "FredK" <fred@nospam.dec.com> 6 Subject: Re: The Register and Gartner on Itanium sales2 Message-ID: <Yu09h.2799$sb2.1080@news.cpqcorp.net>  9 "Doug Phillips" <dphill46@netscape.net> wrote in message  < news:1164217195.400622.40900@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > FredK wrote:8 >> "Alan Greig" <greigaln@netscape.net> wrote in message     > H > With all due respect, a large portion of Sun's loss is from changes inD > accounting for stock compensation and restructuring charges due to > acquisitions.  >   M What was the loss without "other stuff"?  Why did they still lose money when  # MS threw what, a billion $ at them?   H > Sun also reports a decline in Enterprise level system sales, offset byC > increases in Opteron and "entry level" Sparc sales. AMD-64 is not C > intended to "save" Sparc, but to supplant it. Can anyone still be  > surprised by that? >   ( Just like Itanium will supplant PA-RISC.  H > I'm not a Sun fan, but they are moving in the right direction. WhetherI > their recent acquisitions and their steady transition from Sparc to AMD D > servers will be enough to pull them back up or not, only time willF > tell. They've looked like merger & acquisition fodder for some time,2 > but I haven't a clue as to who might be looking. >   L They aren't moving in the right direction until they show a few quarters in L the black.  I'm not sure anyone wants to take over Sun...  maybe Fujitsu if L they look like they are going under.  There isn't a lot of return in buying  them.    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 15:35:29 +0800  From: prep@prep.synonet.com 5 Subject: Re: Western Dayligh Time. Starts in 12 days! 0 Message-ID: <87lkm4x7b2.fsf@k9.prep.synonet.com>  8 "Michael D. Ober" <obermd.@.alum.mit.edu.nospam> writes:  I > On Dec 3rd, turn off all Daylight Savings time support and change your  $ > system time to the "new" timezone.  ? Ah huh. So you are going to go around and `change' all the ATM, C EFTPOS, and other trivial bits of flumage? And the many thousand PC $ and servers at each uni? etc, etc...  # My thought is to totally ignore it.    --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +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.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 06:23:53 -0500 ) From: "Neil Rieck" <n.rieck@sympatico.ca> 5 Subject: Re: Western Dayligh Time. Starts in 12 days! < Message-ID: <45643278$0$26927$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>  ) <prep@prep.synonet.com> wrote in message  * news:87ejrxyxlx.fsf@k9.prep.synonet.com...B > The excuses for leaders we have in the local parlement have just@ > passed a 3 year trial of daylight saving time. Starting on the > 3rd of December. > @ > You all WILL have your systems updated for this, won't you.... > G > We appologise for the idiocy. I said that they needed 2 years notice,  > preferably 3.  >  > --  > > Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,9 > +61 (08) 9257-1001                           Kalamunda. A >                                             West Australia 6076 , > comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot0 > Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.H > EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.  D Most systems larger than a PC allow the system operator to create a H user-defined time zone and then implement it immediately. To do this on H OpenVMS just check your system manager's manual or Google the following  phrases:   SYS$COMMON:[SYS$ZONEINFO.USER]  SYS$COMMON:[SYS$ZONEINFO.SYSTEM]! SYS$EXAMPLES:DAYLIGHT_SAVINGS.COM  TCPWARE:TIMEZONES.LOCAL  TCPWARE:TIMEZONES.DAT   
 Neil Rieck Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge,  Ontario, Canada.8 http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/cool_openvms.html: http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/links/openvms_demos.html    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 10:30:06 -0500 ' From: Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> 5 Subject: Re: Western Dayligh Time. Starts in 12 days! 9 Message-ID: <me6dnU4BdNiV8PnYnZ2dnUVZ_uidnZ2d@libcom.com>    prep@prep.synonet.com wrote:: > "Michael D. Ober" <obermd.@.alum.mit.edu.nospam> writes: > J >> On Dec 3rd, turn off all Daylight Savings time support and change your % >> system time to the "new" timezone.  > A > Ah huh. So you are going to go around and `change' all the ATM, E > EFTPOS, and other trivial bits of flumage? And the many thousand PC & > and servers at each uni? etc, etc... > % > My thought is to totally ignore it.  >    A bit of sanity.  :-)    --  4 David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com DFE Ultralights, Inc.  170 Grimplin Road  Vanderbilt, PA  15486    ------------------------------  % Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 23:34:19 +0800  From: prep@prep.synonet.com 5 Subject: Re: Western Dayligh Time. Starts in 12 days! 0 Message-ID: <87u00rsdfo.fsf@k9.prep.synonet.com>  D To add to the irony, soon after the news of daylight savings I got aC message about the new VMS time patch file for NEXT year and 2008 in  the US.    --  < Paul Repacholi                               1 Crescent Rd.,7 +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.F EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.   ------------------------------    Date: 21 Nov 2006 23:23:55 -0800/ From: "Volker Halle" <volker_halle@hotmail.com>  Subject: Re: Who called me? B Message-ID: <1164180235.579964.144550@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>   Bryan,  A the TBK$ API is not a publicly documented interface and therefore G subject to change in every release of OpenVMS. Starting with V8.3, some # TBK$ routines have been documented.   F You can find the TBK$SHOW_TRACEBACK interface shown in an ATW (Ask The Wizard) article:  . http://h71000.www7.hp.com/wizard/wiz_5175.html  @ The idea given by VAXman to use TBK$SHOW_TRACEBACK and using theE USER_ACTION_PROCEDURE to capture the output is probably the best idea F given in this thread up to now, if you don't want to use the SS$_DEBUG signal method.  F Using internal and undocumented interfaces always poses a certain riskF and needs 'knowledge' about these interfaces, generally available fromG the OpenVMS source listings and the ability to read and understand them ) and write code using these internal APIs.   @ Without knowing these mechanisms you cannot expect to be able to/ 'overcome the ACCVIO'  in your example program.    Volker.    ------------------------------   End of INFO-VAX 2006.643 ************************