INFO-VAX Sat, 29 Sep 2007 Volume 2007 : Issue 531 Contents: Re: lexical for terminal attributes? Re: lexical for terminal attributes? Re: OpenVMS and Smart Array Controllers Re: OpenVMS and Smart Array Controllers RE: The Future of Computing, According to Intel Re: Time to PAK it in? Re: Time to PAK it in? Re: Time to PAK it in? Re: Time to PAK it in? Re: wierd backup behavior Re: wierd backup behavior Re: Wireless mail and connectivity with VMS server Re: Wireless mail and connectivity with VMS server Re: Wireless mail and connectivity with VMS server ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 28 Sep 2007 16:35:46 -0500 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: lexical for terminal attributes? Message-ID: In article , Ron Johnson writes: > Hi, > > Something like F$GETJPI("", "TT_TERMCOLS")? > > Or do I have to parse SHOW TERM/BRIEF ? You want to know what? The width? Usually that's the same as the default buffer size, which you can get from f$getdvi("tt:","devbufsiz") But sometimes it's not. I think you can't get it via lexicals when it's not and I don't know anyway to tell whether it is from DCL. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 19:09:46 -0700 From: AEF Subject: Re: lexical for terminal attributes? Message-ID: <1191031786.524350.276810@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> On Sep 28, 5:35 pm, koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote: > In article , Ron Johnson writes: > > Hi, > > > Something like F$GETJPI("", "TT_TERMCOLS")? > > > Or do I have to parse SHOW TERM/BRIEF ? > > You want to know what? The width? Usually that's the same as the > default buffer size, which you can get from > f$getdvi("tt:","devbufsiz") > > But sometimes it's not. I think you can't get it via lexicals when > it's not and I don't know anyway to tell whether it is from DCL. When is it not? Sometimes the terminal may different from the SET TERMINAL width, but the defbufsiz always gives the latter, no? AEF ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 20:00:10 GMT From: dittman@dittman.net Subject: Re: OpenVMS and Smart Array Controllers Message-ID: dittman@dittman.net wrote: > Robert Deininger wrote: > > VMS hasn't formally qualified the SATA disks because the platform HW > > teams haven't done so. Even if VMS did all the OS testing required, > > there'd still be no supported systems to put the cards into. > > Understandable. > > > There could be FW problems lurking in the SATA disks that have been > > fixed in the SAS disks. > > That's entirely possible. After getting a SAS drive and the proper cable this appears to be the case. I booted from CD and did a BACKUP/IMAGE from the SCSI system disk to the SAS disk (just as I had done with the SATA disk earlier). VMS booted just fine from the SAS disk. > > At some point, Integrity servers and VMS may start supporting SATA disks. > > That would be nice. While I was testing everything I found that SATA disks seem to have problems with being shadowset members. I had one of the SATA disks dropped out of the shadowset while doing heavy I/O. -- Eric Dittman dittman@dittman.net ------------------------------ Date: 28 Sep 2007 16:52:37 -0500 From: brooks@cuebid.zko.hp.nospam (Rob Brooks) Subject: Re: OpenVMS and Smart Array Controllers Message-ID: article , dittman@dittman.net writes: > dittman@dittman.net wrote: > While I was testing everything I found that SATA disks seem to have problems > with being shadowset members. I had one of the SATA disks dropped out of > the shadowset while doing heavy I/O. If the device doesn't support the SCSI readlong/writelong commands, then shadowing won't be real happy. If a bad spot is found on one member, shadowing will want to replicate that bad spot on all members. If it can't, it'll punt that member. Within SDA if DEV$V_NOFE is set, then readlong/writelong aren't supported. I think it's in UCB$L_DEVCHAR2. There may be other barriers to using SATA drives with shadowing that caused your problem, however. -- Rob Brooks MSL -- Nashua brooks!cuebid.zko.hp.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 03:16:38 +0000 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: The Future of Computing, According to Intel Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Neil Rieck [mailto:n.rieck@sympatico.ca] > Sent: September 28, 2007 7:06 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: The Future of Computing, According to Intel > > The Future of Computing, According to Intel > > http://www.technologyreview.com/Biztech/19432/?a=3Df > > Neil Rieck > Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge, > Ontario, Canada. > http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/ Advanced chips without advanced software that can really take advantage of = advanced chips leads to .... not much. Solutions 101 - you need to think about the entire stack. Hardware, softwar= e, security, Culture acceptance (read black helicopter theories) etc etc.. Regards Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT) OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 21:11:30 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: Time to PAK it in? Message-ID: <66eLi.1639$hP.1190@newsfe12.lga> In article , John Reagan writes: > > >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > >> John Egolf sent me a PAK! >> >> I am grateful for the PAK but I would like to have had an explaination >> as to why there was no PAK in what I'd downloaded. However, since you >> have posted here that it was a mistake/oversight, I'm content. >> >> Back to work... >> > >Not to speak for John (he sits nearby) but the systems for PAK >generation were upgraded (newer HW, etc.) a few months back. He also >cleaned up the command procedures, etc. to get rid of lots of cruft that >had built up over the years. I know because he had me look at some of it. The PAK John sent me is FOE which does not contain clustering. It got the Itanium up and running but I can't access any of the software that I build which is on drives on another machine (Alpha) without clustering. Prior PAKs were MCOE. I hope this is being corrected as well. -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" http://tmesis.com/drat.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 23:48:15 GMT From: John Santos Subject: Re: Time to PAK it in? Message-ID: <3pgLi.8087$Im1.3525@trnddc01> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > In article , John Reagan writes: > >> >>VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >> >> >>>John Egolf sent me a PAK! >>> >>>I am grateful for the PAK but I would like to have had an explaination >>>as to why there was no PAK in what I'd downloaded. However, since you >>>have posted here that it was a mistake/oversight, I'm content. >>> >>>Back to work... >>> >> >>Not to speak for John (he sits nearby) but the systems for PAK >>generation were upgraded (newer HW, etc.) a few months back. He also >>cleaned up the command procedures, etc. to get rid of lots of cruft that >>had built up over the years. I know because he had me look at some of it. > > > The PAK John sent me is FOE which does not contain clustering. It got the > Itanium up and running but I can't access any of the software that I build > which is on drives on another machine (Alpha) without clustering. Prior > PAKs were MCOE. I hope this is being corrected as well. > Holy Cow! I just realized all the DSPP licenses on my Itanium (from the porting workshop) expire on Monday! Better get new ones right away. Need clustering, though! -- John Santos Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 00:20:24 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: Time to PAK it in? Message-ID: In article <3pgLi.8087$Im1.3525@trnddc01>, John Santos writes: > > >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >> In article , John Reagan writes: >> >>> >>>VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >>> >>> >>>>John Egolf sent me a PAK! >>>> >>>>I am grateful for the PAK but I would like to have had an explaination >>>>as to why there was no PAK in what I'd downloaded. However, since you >>>>have posted here that it was a mistake/oversight, I'm content. >>>> >>>>Back to work... >>>> >>> >>>Not to speak for John (he sits nearby) but the systems for PAK >>>generation were upgraded (newer HW, etc.) a few months back. He also >>>cleaned up the command procedures, etc. to get rid of lots of cruft that >>>had built up over the years. I know because he had me look at some of it. >> >> >> The PAK John sent me is FOE which does not contain clustering. It got the >> Itanium up and running but I can't access any of the software that I build >> which is on drives on another machine (Alpha) without clustering. Prior >> PAKs were MCOE. I hope this is being corrected as well. >> > >Holy Cow! I just realized all the DSPP licenses on my Itanium (from the porting http://www.tmesis.com/holycow.html >workshop) expire on Monday! > >Better get new ones right away. Need clustering, though! It's as if Monday's aren't bad enough! :) -- VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)COM "Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?" http://tmesis.com/drat.html ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 04:54:41 GMT From: John Santos Subject: Re: Time to PAK it in? Message-ID: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > In article <3pgLi.8087$Im1.3525@trnddc01>, John Santos writes: > >> >>VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >> >>>In article , John Reagan writes: >>> >>> >>>>VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>John Egolf sent me a PAK! >>>>> >>>>>I am grateful for the PAK but I would like to have had an explaination >>>>>as to why there was no PAK in what I'd downloaded. However, since you >>>>>have posted here that it was a mistake/oversight, I'm content. >>>>> >>>>>Back to work... >>>>> >>>> >>>>Not to speak for John (he sits nearby) but the systems for PAK >>>>generation were upgraded (newer HW, etc.) a few months back. He also >>>>cleaned up the command procedures, etc. to get rid of lots of cruft that >>>>had built up over the years. I know because he had me look at some of it. >>> >>> >>>The PAK John sent me is FOE which does not contain clustering. It got the >>>Itanium up and running but I can't access any of the software that I build >>>which is on drives on another machine (Alpha) without clustering. Prior >>>PAKs were MCOE. I hope this is being corrected as well. >>> >> >>Holy Cow! I just realized all the DSPP licenses on my Itanium (from the porting > > > http://www.tmesis.com/holycow.html > > Must be one a them there Swiss cows! LOL > > >>workshop) expire on Monday! >> >>Better get new ones right away. Need clustering, though! > > > It's as if Monday's aren't bad enough! :) > > Just downloaded the Alpha and I64 PAKs... My MCOE on Itanium still expires on Oct 1, but there is now a VAXCLUSTER PAK that expires 30-Nov-2008. I hope that suffices! There is also a DVNETEXT PAK, but no TCPIP/UCX nor DECWindows nor VOLSHAD nor ... (What else will go away when MCOE lapses???) -- John Santos Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc. 781-861-0670 ext 539 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 15:08:30 -0400 From: norm.raphael@metso.com Subject: Re: wierd backup behavior Message-ID: This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 0069262185257364_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" JF Mezei wrote on 09/28/2007 01:39:42 PM: > AEF wrote: > > I'd also check whether you really want /IGNORE=NOBACKUP. > > > But no data need be restored! > > Some people actually use SET FILE/NOBACKUP for various other large files > or directories which are either backed up separately, or are themselves > backups from another system and don't need to be backed up. > > But when you wish to move disks around, you then need to use > /IGNORE=NOBACKUP to ensure you truly get a full image of the drive. I'm sure you meant this last to be "if you used SET FILE/NOBACKUP for various other ..., then" as if not, the files normally marked NOBACKUP would not want their contents moved to a new disk for the same reasons they would not want their contents restored from the backup volume. In fact, if the disk in question is a system volume, and it has user-marked- NOBACKUP files, the correct procedure would be to unmark only those, not use the qualifier /IGNORE=NOBACKUP, and remark the files on the new volume before attempting a backup operation on it. ..but you knew that. > > So during daily operations, the backup will skip over large areas that > don't need to be dealt with by that backup, but during special > operations, you need to specify the /IGNORE to make sure you capture > that data. Special operations are always special. --=_alternative 0069262185257364_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"



JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote on 09/28/2007 01:39:42 PM:

> AEF wrote:
> > I'd also check whether you really want /IGNORE=NOBACKUP.
>
> > But no data need be restored!
>
> Some people actually use SET FILE/NOBACKUP for various other large files
> or directories which are either backed up separately, or are themselves
> backups from another system and don't need to be backed up.
>
> But when you wish to move disks around, you then need to use
> /IGNORE=NOBACKUP to ensure you truly get a full image of the drive.

I'm sure you meant this last to be "if you used SET FILE/NOBACKUP for various
other ..., then"  as if not, the files normally marked NOBACKUP would not
want their contents moved to a new disk for the same reasons they would
not want their contents restored from the backup volume.

In fact, if the disk in question is a system volume, and it has user-marked-
NOBACKUP files, the correct procedure would be to unmark only those, not use
the qualifier /IGNORE=NOBACKUP, and remark the files on the new volume before
attempting a backup operation on it.

...but you knew that.
 
>
> So during daily operations, the backup will skip over large areas that
> don't need to be dealt with by that backup, but during special
> operations, you need to specify the /IGNORE to make sure you capture
> that data.

Special operations are always special.

--=_alternative 0069262185257364_=-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 18:30:50 -0700 From: AEF Subject: Re: wierd backup behavior Message-ID: <1191029450.210720.130860@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> On Sep 28, 3:08 pm, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > JF Mezei wrote on 09/28/2007 01:39:42 PM: > > > AEF wrote: > > > I'd also check whether you really want /IGNORE=NOBACKUP. > > > > But no data need be restored! > > > Some people actually use SET FILE/NOBACKUP for various other large files > > or directories which are either backed up separately, or are themselves > > backups from another system and don't need to be backed up. > > > But when you wish to move disks around, you then need to use > > /IGNORE=NOBACKUP to ensure you truly get a full image of the drive. > > I'm sure you meant this last to be "if you used SET FILE/NOBACKUP for > various > other ..., then" as if not, the files normally marked NOBACKUP would not > want their contents moved to a new disk for the same reasons they would > not want their contents restored from the backup volume. Exactly. And that's what I said: Check if you really need / IGNORE=NOBACKUP. > > In fact, if the disk in question is a system volume, and it has > user-marked- > NOBACKUP files, the correct procedure would be to unmark only those, not > use > the qualifier /IGNORE=NOBACKUP, and remark the files on the new volume > before > attempting a backup operation on it. > > ..but you knew that. > > > > > So during daily operations, the backup will skip over large areas that > > don't need to be dealt with by that backup, but during special > > operations, you need to specify the /IGNORE to make sure you capture > > that data. It will only skip copying the data. The file headers will still be saved and restored, making quite a mess of "empty files" upon a restore operation. We discussed this already in a previous thread. I'd find it hard to believe that this NO BACKUP feature wasn't introduced primarily for the purpose of skipping page, swap, and dump file data. Another use might be to skip data in LD container files, assuming that data therein are backed up separately if needed. In fact, that's probably the best way to mark a non-trivial number of files "no baclup". > > Special operations are always special. Indeed. AEF ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 14:00:16 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Wireless mail and connectivity with VMS server Message-ID: Rich Jordan wrote: > Is there a smartphone and smartphone service (in the continental US, > preferably available nationwide) that is actually designed to run with > "open" standards, like IMAP/SMTP/POP, etc, and will play nicely with > relatively standards based servers? First: You need a GPRS plan which does not limit you to a wireless provider's sanbox and granst IP access to the internet, not the wireless' intranet. Most vendors now provide, by default, a crippled GPRS plan that allows only access to wireless-approved sites. (so you can't download free ringtones from the internet and are forced to buy it from the wireless vendor). Such a data plan makes it impossible for you to use SMTP/POP/IMAP to your own server. Second: If you have a true GPRS plan that grants you access to the internet with the handset being given an internet accessible IP address, then the wireless vendor becomes transparent to you in terms of applications on the handset. (With exception of the browser which will usually go through a wireless network proxy which compresses content and will, if required, convert HTML to WML (WAP) so your phone can understand it. Third: I have had an old Siemens phone (about to change it very soon now) and it has had no problems connecting via SMTP to send mail, and has no problem with POP or IMAP to access mail on my server (haven't used IMAP often, so I can't vouch for it working flawlessly). The quirk about POP is that my handset remembers which message IDs it has seen before, and if I connect, it will not download just what is in NEWMAIL, but also what is in READ that it hasn't seen yet. So when I go away and know I will be using my handset for email, I have to move everything in "MAIL" to another folder so that the handset doesn't try to download hundreds of messages :-) Newer handsets have an IMAP "push email" functionality. It seems there have been some additions to IMAP where the handset keeps an active IP connection to the IMAP server and the IMAP server sends a special packet whenever a new email comes in for that user, allowing the phone to retrieve it right away. (to emailate what a blackberry does). Blackberry solutions require extremely proprietary software at your site which connects to a proprietary server operated either by blackberry (RIM) or by your mobile vendor which then passes your emails to your blackberry handset. (this is how/why the USA courts would have been able to shutdown blackberry service throughout the USA had that patent case not been solved). Obviously, Blackberry software isn't available for VMS, so you can forget about it. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 16:12:23 -0400 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: Wireless mail and connectivity with VMS server Message-ID: <46FD6027.2070102@comcast.net> Rich Jordan wrote: > We've been seeing a rash of customers being sold "new wonderful do- > all" phones with service that will make their lives easier, keep them > in touch with everything, wash their cars and clean their kids > diapers. They often buy these without checking if there's any > possibility of their current email infrastructure actually supporting > the phones or the associated services. This has happened at sites > running TCPIP Services with basic SMTP/POP/IMAP and PC sites running > Mailtraq, Communigate Pro, and other mail packages. > > In each case when the inevitable problems crop up, the phone vendor > demands an MS Exchange installation and expresses shock and dismay > that they are not already running exchange, and that they cannot > support their phones and all the wonderful features if the customer is > not running exchange. > > This is even the case with Palm phones not running the windows phone > software. They claim to support IMAP and other standards, but in > practice use of the phone is wretched; where standard IMAP and SMTP > clients work perfectly with any or all of the servers (even one old > VAX running IMAP; its leisurely but reliable), the phones hang, are > puke slow, etc (they run much faster when talking to an exchange > server even if that server is on an older/slower box) > > So my question, in case anyone knows: > > Is there a smartphone and smartphone service (in the continental US, > preferably available nationwide) that is actually designed to run with > "open" standards, like IMAP/SMTP/POP, etc, and will play nicely with > relatively standards based servers? For now it would be great if that > means TCPIP Services or TCPware, but the various alternative PC mail > servers too. > > Not just phones that have the ability to connect but ones that > actually _work_. > > Putting exchange in means a huge cascade of MS crap following along; > got to have active directory, which means you need a server for that > (or SBS which is a crock of s***), and windows has to take control of > DNS, and windows has to take control of DHCP.... etc. > I can send e-mail to my cell-phone! Anybody else can too if they know how. Excuse me if I don't explain, the spammers haven't figured it out yet! It's a Motorola STAR-TAC Model ST7868W and my provider is Verizon Wireless. I have to pay something like six dollars extra per month to have my service "web enabled". I used to use it to get e-mail from my VMS systems when they needed "professional help" outside of working hours. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 18:02:17 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Wireless mail and connectivity with VMS server Message-ID: <43b2$46fd79ed$cef8887a$9237@TEKSAVVY.COM> Richard B. Gilbert wrote: > I can send e-mail to my cell-phone! If it is via a email-SMS gateway (not sure how they call "SMS" on the proprietary Qualcomm "CDMA" networks used by Verizon/Sprint), then this isn't really an email, and you are limited in the number of characters per message (160 in case of GSM SMS). There is MMS (or whatever it is called in the CDMA proprietary universe), and this would allow transfer of contents of greater sizes. > Wireless. I have to pay something like six dollars extra per month to > have my service "web enabled". I used to use it to get e-mail from my > VMS systems when they needed "professional help" outside of working hours. Modern GSM phones have a real email client that supports SMTP for outgoing emails and POP or IMAP for incoming mail. I would assume that the proprietary Qualcomm systems would support something similar. However, it requires that the network grant your phone access to the real internet, and many networks in north america do not do that. They let you access their servers, and their servers may in turn access your emails. But you won't be able to use a real email client with such a setup. ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2007.531 ************************