INFO-VAX Mon, 16 Apr 2007 Volume 2007 : Issue 209 Contents: ANN: Jetty6 for OpenVMS C++ Garbage Collector on VMS? Re: OpenVMS IDLE application Re: OT: OpenVMS Re: OT: OpenVMS Re: OT: OpenVMS Re: OT: OpenVMS Re: OT: OpenVMS Re: OT: OpenVMS Re: OT: OpenVMS Re: OT: OpenVMS Re: TCPIP SMTP: suggestion Re: TCPIP SMTP: suggestion Re: TCPIP SMTP: suggestion Re: TCPIP SMTP: suggestion Re: TCPIP SMTP: suggestion Re: TCPIP SMTP: suggestion Re: TCPIP SMTP: suggestion Re: VMS Alpha to Itanium port Re: VMS Alpha to Itanium port ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 15 Apr 2007 12:21:01 -0700 From: thierry.uso@wanadoo.fr Subject: ANN: Jetty6 for OpenVMS Message-ID: <1176664861.691155.235680@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> Jetty is a Web server (HTTP server and servlet container) for static and dynamic content written in Java under Apache 2.0 license. Jetty6 is a new implementation of Jetty which supports Servlet 2.5 and JSP 2.1. Moreover, Jetty6 meets the needs of AJAX applications and has a better scalability than the previous versions. Jetty 6.1.1 has been ported on OpenVMS. Porting means testing all the functions, writing startup and shutdown procedures and creating a PCSI kit. Jetty6 for OpenVMS needs Java 1.4.2 or later. It MUST be installed on an ODS5 volume. Jetty6 has been tested on Alpha and Itanium. Download link: http://vmsfree.free.fr/freen/index.php?s=jetty6 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 04:44:58 +0000 From: Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson Subject: C++ Garbage Collector on VMS? Message-ID: Hi all, I've been trying to find out if the Boehm GC works on VMS, and have so far not found anything, except a mention of a porting attempt from 1995 (this group, google). Is there a garbage collector for C++ that works on VMS? Johann ------------------------------ Date: 15 Apr 2007 13:18:22 -0700 From: "Steve Bainbridge" Subject: Re: OpenVMS IDLE application Message-ID: <1176668302.463518.167920@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> On Apr 13, 9:02 pm, "Lukas Th. Hey" wrote: > Hi there, > > I recently downloaded the application IDLE.EXE so my simh-vax instances > don't consume too much cpu cycles. Unfortunately the IDLE.EXE versions I > got refuse to run with VMS 7.2/7.3. Answers usually are: > > %SYSTEM-E-UNSUPPORTED, unsupported operation or function > > -SYSTEM-W-SYSVERDIF, system version mismatch; please relink > > Does IDLE just work on Charon software or should I try to get the right > IDLE.EXE? > > Thanks so far, > > Lukas > > -- > DECADENCE IS: USING A CORDLESS PHONE TO HOOK IT UP TO YOUR ACOUSTIC COUPLER Lukas, IIRC the latest version of SIMH already has this Idle facility built in. I think it was a recent addition. Regards, Steve ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 16:29:50 -0400 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: OT: OpenVMS Message-ID: <46228b17$0$90272$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> David J Dachtera wrote: > VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >> Isn't it? > > Recent experience seems to indicate that VMS is indeed off-topic in corporate > planning sessions, budgeting processes, etc. I do not think that was what Brian was referring to. Arne ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 16:23:00 -0400 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: OT: OpenVMS Message-ID: <4622897d$0$90272$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > Isn't it? Yes - it seems to. :-( Arne ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 16:27:12 -0400 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: OT: OpenVMS Message-ID: <46228a78$0$90272$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Bill Todd wrote: > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >> Isn't it? > > If so, what of it? If you'd rather have a dead newsgroup than one with > lively but often off-topic discussions, I'm sure that you can find large > numbers of them to frequent. Excellent logic based on a false assumption giving a false conclusion. I do not see any reason to believe this group would be dead if there were only on topic posts. Arne ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 01:29:52 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: OT: OpenVMS Message-ID: <00A6632D.AAB95BEC@SendSpamHere.ORG> In article <46228b17$0$90272$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes: > > >David J Dachtera wrote: >> VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >>> Isn't it? >> >> Recent experience seems to indicate that VMS is indeed off-topic in corporate >> planning sessions, budgeting processes, etc. > >I do not think that was what Brian was referring to. > >Arne Exactly Arne! BTW, I will have a friend from Denmark (Horsens) here for a week beginning late next Monday. He's a cricket fan and runs the Danish cricket site. I going to take him to a baseball game to see if he can follow along. :) -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:38:40 +0800 From: "Richard Maher" Subject: Re: OT: OpenVMS Message-ID: Hi Brian, > BTW, I will have a friend from Denmark (Horsens) here for a week beginning > late next Monday. He's a cricket fan and runs the Danish cricket site. I > going to take him to a baseball game to see if he can follow along. :) I wonder how much power is comsumed lighting-up one of them there baseball squares :-) And is the number of rained affected (Duckworth-Whatsit) matches in the Caribbean World-Cup indicative of global climatic turmoil? Cheers Richard Maher wrote in message news:00A6632D.AAB95BEC@SendSpamHere.ORG... > In article <46228b17$0$90272$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes: > > > > > >David J Dachtera wrote: > >> VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > >>> Isn't it? > >> > >> Recent experience seems to indicate that VMS is indeed off-topic in corporate > >> planning sessions, budgeting processes, etc. > > > >I do not think that was what Brian was referring to. > > > >Arne > > Exactly Arne! > > BTW, I will have a friend from Denmark (Horsens) here for a week beginning > late next Monday. He's a cricket fan and runs the Danish cricket site. I > going to take him to a baseball game to see if he can follow along. :) > > > -- > VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM > > "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 19:48:51 -0400 From: Bill Todd Subject: Re: OT: OpenVMS Message-ID: Arne Vajhøj wrote: ... > I do not see any reason to believe this group would > be dead if there were only on topic posts. Ah - perhaps you are arithmetically-challenged, then. Or perhaps you confuse 'death' with a stage of decomposition so advanced that not even the processes of posthumous decay can still be detected (let alone the potential galvanic twitching of a more recently-deceased corpse). Of course, an alternative interpretation could be that death occurred quite a while ago, and that the above describes what we are seeing today. Choosing between the two might be based upon the definition of what one considers a newsgroup to be: a community (in which case this one is still alive, albeit in an evolved form), or purely a narrowly-defined topic (in which case this one probably died at the latest not long after 6/25/01). - bill ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:15:29 +0800 From: "Richard Maher" Subject: Re: OT: OpenVMS Message-ID: Hi Bill, "Bill Todd" wrote in message news:x4udnQPa0fZ5JL_bnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@metrocastcablevision.com... > Arne Vajhøj wrote: > > ... > > > I do not see any reason to believe this group would > > be dead if there were only on topic posts. > > Ah - perhaps you are arithmetically-challenged, then. Or perhaps you > confuse 'death' with a stage of decomposition so advanced that not even > the processes of posthumous decay can still be detected (let alone the > potential galvanic twitching of a more recently-deceased corpse). > > Of course, an alternative interpretation could be that death occurred > quite a while ago, and that the above describes what we are seeing > today. Choosing between the two might be based upon the definition of > what one considers a newsgroup to be: a community (in which case this > one is still alive, albeit in an evolved form), or purely a > narrowly-defined topic (in which case this one probably died at the > latest not long after 6/25/01). > > - bill Regardless of the state of decay of the corpse COV, I submit that the acts that you (and more notably others) are performing on it are unseamly at best and, hopefully, illegal in most of your states! Regards Richard Maher PS. There you go, I'm now as bad as the rest of you. Just couldn't shut-up could I? Now it's - "We" all make me sick! :-( ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 11:41:42 +1000 From: Phaeton Subject: Re: OT: OpenVMS Message-ID: <1325l2p7famki48@corp.supernews.com> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > In article <46228b17$0$90272$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes: >> >> David J Dachtera wrote: >>> VAXman-, @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >>>> Isn't it? >>> Recent experience seems to indicate that VMS is indeed off-topic in corporate >>> planning sessions, budgeting processes, etc. >> I do not think that was what Brian was referring to. >> >> Arne > > Exactly Arne! > > BTW, I will have a friend from Denmark (Horsens) here for a week beginning > late next Monday. He's a cricket fan and runs the Danish cricket site. I > going to take him to a baseball game to see if he can follow along. :) I think he might be more interested in the Cricket World Cup, currently under way in the Caribbean :-) Go Aussies !! Cheers, Csaba ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CSABA I. HARANGOZO |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| phaeton@internode.on.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EARTH::AUSTRALIA:[SYDNEY]HARANGOZO.CSABA;1, delete? [N]: Everything is a differentiation of one infinity. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 15:12:54 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: TCPIP SMTP: suggestion Message-ID: Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: > I think it would make sense if all messages were everywhere, or at least > if one could configure them to be in the log file of the receiver, as an > OPCOM or both. Perhaps this could be done via the SPAM-ACTION flag. It would make even more sense if the receiver wrote messages of interest to a real log file to which it would append, instead of writing to its sys$output which gets zepped a few messages later since a new version is created for every inbound email. Writing to the accounting log doesn't really make much sense. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 21:25:50 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: TCPIP SMTP: suggestion Message-ID: <28356$4622d0d2$cef8887a$491@TEKSAVVY.COM> Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: > Yes (see my (literal) comments above). However, what does "shouldn't be > sending mail directly" mean? Technically, there is no reason not to > send email directly, even from a dynamic IP address. while mail clients siuch as windows stuff speak to SMTP servers with the SMTP protocolm their implementation is such that they expect to be speaking to a single relaying SMTP server. For instance, a mail client having to send an email to cook@chocolate.com and to chef@pastry.com , the mail client sill send one copy of the message with 2 RCPT TO: to a relaying mail server operated by the ISP. The later server will then be in charge of connecting to chocolate.com and to pastry.com to deliver the 2 copies to 2 different domains. The personal computer software is dsigned to deliver all emails to a single smto server and let the later take care of delivery (and generating non-delivery notifications). Since dynamic IPs are genarally designed to serve PC workstations without full fledged smtp servers, it is normal to wish to force the workstations to funnel all emails they send through an ISP operated relaying SMTP server. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 21:05:32 +0000 (UTC) From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) Subject: Re: TCPIP SMTP: suggestion Message-ID: In article , moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes: > helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes: > > >For now, I set up just one RBL: > > >! sbl-xbl: Combined zone to reduce queries. Includes both SBL and XBL. > >! zen.spamhaus.org: sbl-xbl.spamhouse.org + pbl.spamhouse.org > >! pbl.spamhouse.org is recommended, but might block legitimate email > >! from dynamic IP addresses. I will wait on this until I can determine > >! a) if I need it (i.e. I am still getting too much spam) and b) if I > >! want to block some legitimate mail as a side-effect. > >RBLs: sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org > > >Some internet research a few weeks ago resulted in a list of RBLs which > >I thought might make sense for me. There were several in sorbs.net and, > >in addition, bl.spamcop.net, list.dsbl.org and psbl.surriel.com. How > >large is the overlap between these and sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org? More lists > >mean more blockage, but also more DNS lookup time. > > A good one is zen.spamhaus.org. It includes sbl-xbl plus their pbl, which > is a list of addresses that shouldn't be sending email directly. This > catches many 'zombies', and 'zombies' are the current favorite way for > spammers to send spam. Yes (see my (literal) comments above). However, what does "shouldn't be sending mail directly" mean? Technically, there is no reason not to send email directly, even from a dynamic IP address. In practice, much spam comes from those addresses, so blocking them will block much spam. However, in some sense that is bowing down to the spammers and letting them dictate the rules of the game. I don't take this to extremes and don't mind violating the RFCs if, for example, I don't send a bounce message when I should if I am sure that the mail is spam (and that such a message would have no positive effect, even if it reached the spammer). However, by blocking obvious spam and messages from known spam sources, no-one is disadvantaged who shouldn't be. I would also never run an open relay even though, in principle, there is no reason not to. The abuse would be too great, and of course today it is not necessary whereas it might have been at one time. But, again, by not running one I am not putting anyone at a disadvantage. Personally, since I had trouble as soon as I set up my cluster at home and sent mail from a dynamic IP address, I assumed that everyone sends email through a trusted server. However, not long ago I got a legitimate email directly from a dynamic IP address. (I happened to notice this; there are probably more.) Thus, I am hesitant about blocking those. I doubt that an appropriate message would have any effect, since anyone who sends a lot of email would certainly have moved to sending it through a "trusted server"; that email was probably from someone who rarely sends email (i.e. in some sense the opposite of a spammer). ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 21:09:11 +0000 (UTC) From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) Subject: Re: TCPIP SMTP: suggestion Message-ID: In article , JF Mezei writes: > Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: > > I think it would make sense if all messages were everywhere, or at least > > if one could configure them to be in the log file of the receiver, as an > > OPCOM or both. Perhaps this could be done via the SPAM-ACTION flag. > > It would make even more sense if the receiver wrote messages of interest > to a real log file to which it would append, instead of writing to its > sys$output which gets zepped a few messages later since a new version is > created for every inbound email. I agree. > Writing to the accounting log doesn't really make much sense. I think you have ACCOUNTING set as the SPAM-ACTION. I have OPCOM. Not so much for the fact that (some) messages are in the operator log (though that's convenient since I have it for other reasons and it's not an extra file to maintain) but more for the fact that I can see the OPCOM messages on a terminal. Something else: a while back I got a site-specific TCPIP startup file from you and modified it for my needs. I see it uses DEFINE/SYSTEM whereas TCPIP itself expects /SYSTEM/EXECUTIVE at some level. Is there any reason you left out the /EXECUTIVE? (It's convenient to have all the SMTP logicals in the SMTP startup, since on shutdown they are de-assigned, at least if they are /SYSTEM/EXECUTIVE.) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 23:13:02 GMT From: "John E. Malmberg" Subject: Re: TCPIP SMTP: suggestion Message-ID: <2kyUh.57854$oV.3049@attbi_s21> Michael Moroney wrote: > helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes: > >> For now, I set up just one RBL: > >> ! sbl-xbl: Combined zone to reduce queries. Includes both SBL and XBL. >> ! zen.spamhaus.org: sbl-xbl.spamhouse.org + pbl.spamhouse.org >> ! pbl.spamhouse.org is recommended, but might block legitimate email >> ! from dynamic IP addresses. I will wait on this until I can determine >> ! a) if I need it (i.e. I am still getting too much spam) and b) if I >> ! want to block some legitimate mail as a side-effect. >> RBLs: sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org Read the spamhaus description of the pbl zone component. The pbl zone only contains DHCP ranges where the ISP has told spamhaus.org to block it. It can also contain non-DHCP ranges that spamhaus.org has determined to be extremely unlikely to ever send legitimate e-mail and apparently the network owner does not respond to any outside contact for either spam/abuse complaints or other requests. And again, essentially as far as I can tell, if you are still deliberately accepting e-mail from known DHCP zones, then you are one of a decreasing group. If one of the widely used commercial DHCP blocking list was as up to date as the free ones, those few people still attempting to run mail servers on DHCP lists would probably find only a handful of mail servers accepting their e-mail. If the spamhaus pbl zone is up to date on DHCP zones that their ISPs which I know of that prohibit servers on DHCP addresses, then as the zen or pbl zone gets adopted more, those few people attempting to run a mail server on a DHCP address will find almost no one accepting their e-mail. Either because of the adoption of the zen/pbl zone, or that this serious competition will force the commercial service to get its act together. >> Some internet research a few weeks ago resulted in a list of RBLs which >> I thought might make sense for me. There were several in sorbs.net and, >> in addition, bl.spamcop.net, list.dsbl.org and psbl.surriel.com. How >> large is the overlap between these and sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org? More lists >> mean more blockage, but also more DNS lookup time. > > A good one is zen.spamhaus.org. It includes sbl-xbl plus their pbl, which > is a list of addresses that shouldn't be sending email directly. This > catches many 'zombies', and 'zombies' are the current favorite way for > spammers to send spam. There is a little overlap in the above lists. The sbl.spamhaus.org and the dul.dnsbl.sorbs.net are probably stable enough for a daily or so update to a local copy via rsync or other suitable protocol. list.dsbl.org also takes 24 hours to process a removal, so getting a copy once a day can also reduce network queries. Such caching can increase the chance that you might miss a removal of a repaired mail source, or an update to a dhcp zone. Chances are though, that if someone from that is listed in one the above, they either know that they can expect mail delivery problems for at least a day unless they switch to a backup outgoing MX, or they are so clueless that they will probably only have their mail working if they get lucky. Naturally, if an I.P. address passes the checks from a local copy, you must then check the live copy for late additions. bl.spamcop.net is aggressive, and while it may catch new spam sources before any others, it can also list legitimate mail sources, due to backscatter, reporter errors, and legitimate security lapses. After a day or so, there is frequently an overlap between bl.spamcop.net and other lists. And once the spam source is on the less aggressive lists, or added to one of the DHCP lists it was missing, many spam reporters will no longer see spam from it, so it may drop off the spamcop list. list.dsbl.org will probably overlap other open relay lists. One of the volunteer reporters has been infiltrating botnets, and getting them to list all the machines that are participants. I do not know much about psbl.surriel.org, except that it appears to be spam trap driven and has a automated removal system of some type. I do not know if it will list for backscatter. Some others are http://www.uceprotect.net and www.TMQcube.com. Read carefully about their listing policies. I would recommend that you look carefully at what each blocking list does, and also keep statistics about how much each of them rejects. You want the one at the beginning of the list that blocks the most spam. Unfortunately for your case, you will probably find that a dhcp list will do that, removing over 50% of the attempted spam delivery. The pbl and xbl zones of spamhaus.org will probably be the next to stop spam. The sbl spamhaus zone will probably block only about 10% or less of attempted spam delivery. The spammers know that it is so popular, that they generally do not bother using those I.P. addresses, except to host web servers. The other blocking lists will probably be in between the DHCP lists and the sbl.spamhaus.org in what they uniquely block. -John wb8tyw@qsl.network Personal Opinion Only ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 03:17:46 +0000 (UTC) From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) Subject: Re: TCPIP SMTP: suggestion Message-ID: "John E. Malmberg" writes: >You want the one at the beginning of the list that blocks the most spam. > Unfortunately for your case, you will probably find that a dhcp list >will do that, removing over 50% of the attempted spam delivery. The pbl >and xbl zones of spamhaus.org will probably be the next to stop spam. >The sbl spamhaus zone will probably block only about 10% or less of >attempted spam delivery. The spammers know that it is so popular, that >they generally do not bother using those I.P. addresses, except to host >web servers. Again, Spamhaus strongly encourages you to use zen if you want to use pbl+xbl+sbl. Why do 3 lookups when you can do one? zen probably should be 1 or 2 depending on how much a dhcp catches. Spammers have definitely moved away from fixed addresses in favor of 'zombies', so sbl doesn't catch much now. It's an effect of the success of sbl and similar lists. PBL catches many zombies. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 03:37:21 +0000 (UTC) From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) Subject: Re: TCPIP SMTP: suggestion Message-ID: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes: >> A good one is zen.spamhaus.org. It includes sbl-xbl plus their pbl, which >> is a list of addresses that shouldn't be sending email directly. This >> catches many 'zombies', and 'zombies' are the current favorite way for >> spammers to send spam. >Yes (see my (literal) comments above). However, what does "shouldn't be >sending mail directly" mean? Technically, there is no reason not to >send email directly, even from a dynamic IP address. Many ISPs want their users using their mail server as a way of separating legit email (through the server) from zombie spam (direct). Many ISPs now block outgoing port 25 as a way of stemming the flood from customers' zombies. This forces one to use the mail server. >However, in some sense that is bowing down to the spammers and letting >them dictate the rules of the game. It is, but spammers have ruined much, and forced many changes. It once was very neighborly to have an open relay. Now they are badness. Same with 'bounces'. The RFCs state they're required, but now they're the cause of 'backscatter' and are badness. My domain was/is being forged by a (probably) Russian spammer and I get enough backscatter bounces from Russian IPs that SYS$SPECIFIC:[TCPIP$SMTP]TCPIP$SMTP_RECV_RUN.LOG has reached version ;32767 a few times. The email RFCs need a serious rework. I don't take this to extremes and >don't mind violating the RFCs if, for example, I don't send a bounce >message when I should if I am sure that the mail is spam (and that such >a message would have no positive effect, even if it reached the >spammer). Despite the RFCs, that's what you should be doing. It is important that you try to reject as much spam during the SMTP session rather than accepting it and either bouncing it (floods innocents) or having it just vanishing so the sender never knows it was never delivered, if legit. Too bad it doesn't work like DECnet email. With that, when you see the MAIL> prompt after sending to a (DECnet) address, you know for a fact that it is either in the recipients mailbox (no error from send) or you know for a fact it wasn't delivered due to the error causing the message above the MAIL> prompt. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 18:06:53 -0400 From: Dave Froble Subject: Re: VMS Alpha to Itanium port Message-ID: Chris Townley wrote: > Just suddenly had the concept of porting a legacy in house application > from Alpha to Integrity given to me. > > Currently running VMS 6.2 on Alpha - application consists of some 3500 > modules Basic, with a smattering of C and macro code. This is an > application I know well, and have been maintaining/developing for some > years. However the oprogrammingh tyeam that took it in-house some 12 > years ago is now just me. > > I wont even look at the macro - if it doesnt run out of the box, I > rewrite as required, and there is nothing fancy in the C > > However the main area will be the basic. Has anyone any ideas what > issues are likely? > > TIA > -- > Chris > I participated in the most recent (Mar 2007) porting event. My Macro32 based product was up and running in about 2 hours. No mods required. Mostly the re-compile, link, and environment set-up. An associate took a bit longer to build an application that is mainly Basic. Compiled and linked with no problems. Did run into one problem, which is currently being looked at by HP. Best I can say is that I think that occasionally the frame set-up for calling a routine is getting screwed up. A reproducer is in HP's hands, and they have seen the problem. Therefore I'd expect it being fixed in a timely manner. Some issues, the version of Basic running on itanic is V1.6. You may need to be successfully using V1.5 on Alpha, or, you could run into problems that are not itanic specific, but language specific. D-Float on itanic is implemented in software, and I believe, does the actual calculations in IEEE. This can cause problems. I know there are people who will say, "why don't you just use IEEE", but what about the data files with 20 years worth of data? It's not just a programming issue. In general, things went smoothly, and I feel that the port is quite easy. -- 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: 16 Apr 2007 05:25:07 +0100 From: "Dave Weatherall" Subject: Re: VMS Alpha to Itanium port Message-ID: On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 22:06:53 UTC, Dave Froble wrote: > D-Float on itanic is implemented in software, and I believe, does the > actual calculations in IEEE. This can cause problems. > > I know there are people who will say, "why don't you just use IEEE", but > what about the data files with 20 years worth of data? It's not just a > programming issue. Or because you're talking to/controlling a system running on VAX with D-Float only. Not sure what the story is on precision. My memory is that the Dec floating points are more precise with less range than their IEEE equivalents. Or is that only the singles? OTOH I guess (hope?) that s/w emulation of G_floats would be _relatively_ swift on an Itanium and thus be capable of executing VMS code originally written for VAX at a more- than-acceptable pace. Still to find the time to try it... -- Cheers - Dave W. ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2007.209 ************************