INFO-VAX Sun, 11 Feb 2007 Volume 2007 : Issue 84
Contents:
Re: Help wanted with Pathworks 5.0a
RE: Migrating C application from VMS to LINUX
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 11 Feb 2007 00:38:04 -0800
From: "Antoniov" <antoniov@shs-av.it>
Subject: Re: Help wanted with Pathworks 5.0a
Message-ID: <1171183084.015584.220380@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>
Wilm,
I guess, before the move you had:
-one (or more) Windows W2K or W2K3 server configurated in mixed mode
(that means it managed one active directory with PDC emulation for an
old NT3.5 or NT4.0 domain).
- One (or more) unix server in TCP/IP domain;
- One (or more) VMS server V6.2, UCX 4.0, Pathwork V5 in the same TCP/
IP network of the other hosts.
First question: how PC accessed to network? I guess they were in MS
domain managed by Win2K(3) server. Because Pathwork 5 can't work as
memebr in MS domain, it were PDC of another domain.
2.nd question: How your users did access to shared resourre in VMS
server?
I guess ther were registered in MS domain and they did logon in MS
Domain. Then they could access di VMS server if they also were
registered in VMS domain via NetBEUI or via NetBEUI over TCP/IP. They
also accessed via ftp but I guess windows xp can't manage a ftp
resourse managed by VMS due multiple versione files.
The reasons because the PCs cannot access to VMS managed resourse may
be:
1) The PCs in not registered in VMS license [See pwrk event on PC]
2) The user of PC is not registered in VMS database (or password is
changed) [Try access via NET LOGON on VMS box]
3) PC used NetBEUI and now NetBEUI is disabled on PC [Check for
MyNetwork property on PC]
4) DNS in not right configurated [type ping vms_servername from PC]
5) PC now cannot access to uncripted channel [PC controlpanel]
>From PC you can use nbtstat command to check for domain working.
About services, I don't remember PCSA syntax; on the most recent
version ther is the START <service> command.
Antoniov
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 08:15:44 -0500
From: "Main, Kerry" <Kerry.Main@hp.com>
Subject: RE: Migrating C application from VMS to LINUX
Message-ID: <FA60F2C4B72A584DBFC6091F6A2B868402096FD4@tayexc19.americas.cpqcorp.net>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard B. gilbert [mailto:rgilbert88@comcast.net]=20
> Sent: February 10, 2007 4:56 PM
> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com
> Subject: Re: Migrating C application from VMS to LINUX
>=20
> Main, Kerry wrote:
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Richard B. gilbert [mailto:rgilbert88@comcast.net]=20
> >>Sent: February 9, 2007 8:41 PM
> >>To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com
> >>Subject: Re: Migrating C application from VMS to LINUX
> >>
> >=20
> >=20
> > [snip ...]
> >=20
> >=20
> >>I have done my share of porting things to VMS. It can be a=20
> >>bitch. If=20
> >>you want to see how bad it can get, download the current=20
> >>version of the=20
> >>NTP reference implementation from http://ntp.org/
> >>
> >>VMS Engineering did a port of a ten year old version. I=20
> >>doubt that it=20
> >>was easy. I tried to build the current version from source=20
> >>on VMS V7.2=20
> >>without success. It wants Unixy things that VMS does not have.
> >>
> >=20
> >=20
> > So, you tried porting a 10 year old UNIX application to an OpenVMS
> > release (V7.2) from 1999?
> >=20
> No I tried to port a 2004 version of the code, V4.1, to VMS V7.2.
>=20
OK, so you tried to port an application written in 2004 to an OS
released in 1999?
Whats wrong with this picture? Five years perhaps?
My point remains that you are criticizing OpenVMS as being difficult to
port UNIX apps to, but using a very old version of OpenVMS to base your
criticism on. You are not taking into acount the huge effort made to
incorpiorate UNIX portability in the last few releases.
It likely does not have everything that everyone would like to see, but
check out the TCPIP V5.6 notes:
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/network/tcpip.html
And the VMS V8.3 summary notes: (scroll down to portability features
added - and there were numerous others added in V8.2, V7.3-2, v7.3-1 etc
etc)
http://h71000.www7.hp.com/openvms/integrity/v83features.html
> I wrote that {\bold\italic VMS Engineering} had ported a ten year old=20
> version!! What ships with TCP/IP services is NTP V3-5.91=20
> which is eight=20
> to ten years old! V4.2 is current. This may have changed=20
> since TPC/IP=20
> services V5.1 but I'm inclined to doubt it.
>=20
> > That's like saying Windows is no good because you tried=20
> Windows NT4 and
> > it did not have all you were looking for. Someone might ask=20
> if you had
> > also tried W2K3 as well.
>=20
> Actually, I think Windows is pretty good WHEN IT WORKS!
> <snip>
>=20
Yeah - I think so to - as a client.=20
As a server, it can also reach 100% availability - between crashes and
hangs and monthly security patch reboots that is ..=20
:-)
Kerry Main
Senior Consultant
HP Services Canada
Voice: 613-592-4660
Fax: 613-591-4477
kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom
(remove the DOT's and AT)=20
OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.
------------------------------
End of INFO-VAX 2007.084
************************