INFO-VAX Mon, 10 Mar 2008 Volume 2008 : Issue 140 Contents: Re: Burn a CD from XP that VMS will mount/read? DHCP Server question/problem RE: DHCP Server question/problem RE: DHCP Server question/problem DLT-4 cassetes are slower than DLT-3 on the same drive? How do I get rid of LINK-W-MULTFR errors? Re: How do I get rid of LINK-W-MULTFR errors? Re: How do I get rid of LINK-W-MULTFR errors? Re: How do I get rid of LINK-W-MULTFR errors? Re: How do I get rid of LINK-W-MULTFR errors? Re: How do I get rid of LINK-W-MULTFR errors? Re: OT: Universal healthcare in England failing - boy dies ! Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Re: SYS$EXAMPLES:DAYLIGHT_SAVINGS.COM bug on VAX TCPIP$ROUTED_OUTPUT.LOG or log file maintenance! Re: VMS advertising ! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 10 Mar 2008 08:04:56 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Burn a CD from XP that VMS will mount/read? Message-ID: <6tXYTNT+Co31@eisner.encompasserve.org> In article , moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) writes: > BEGINcornelius@decuserve.orgEND (George Cornelius) writes: > >>> >>> When you get some spare time, please show me how any commonly >>> occurring attribute change damages the utility of a VMS executable. > >>Are there any attributes in Windows at all? As far as I know, the only >>thing like an attribute is a file extension. > > There seems to be some sort of textfile attributes, whether a text file > lines are delimited with , and possibly other ways. Nope. There are text editors for Windows which do not rigidly follow Windows text conventions. They will look for Windows or UNIX text conventions and accept either. Windows doesn't know jack about what's going on. > > It also seems to remember things like whether a file came from over the > internet. XP sometimes warns about running .exe files from off the net. Browsers will look at the MIME type and/or the file extension and watch out for downloading and/or running such. If you don't have admin privileges Windows will watch for and prevent running such. But it's just based on file extensions and/or MIME types, not file attributes. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 06:53:56 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: DHCP Server question/problem Message-ID: <47d513d7$0$1439$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com> This used to owrk on VAX, but haven't gotten it to work on Alpha (TCPIP Services 5.6) on both MAC 8.6 and OSX 10.4.11 My DHCPCAP.; file contains: Laser1:\ :ip=10.0.0.30:\ :sm=255.255.0.0:\ :lt=31104000:\ :ds=10.0.0.11:\ :dn=LASER1:\ :gw=10.0.0.1:\ :ht=1:\ :ha=00-40-af-16-04-b8:\ :ct=6: subnet1:\ :dn=vaxination.ca:\ :nw=10.0.0.0:\ :sm=255.255.0.0:\ :ba=10.0.255.255:\ :gw=10.0.0.1:\ :ds=10.0.0.11:\ :t2=75598:\ :t1=43198:\ :sp=smtp.vaxination.ca:\ :po=pop.vaxination.ca:\ :to=18000:\ :tu=1500:\ :rd:\ :sl:\ :lt=86400:\ :at=900:\ :xf=10.0.0.10:\ :ww=www.vaxination.ca:\ :sg=smtp.vaxination.ca:\ :lg=10.0.0.11:\ :ms:\ :hn: The NETS.; file: 10.0.0.0 10.0.0.11 10.0.0.150-10.0.0.250 (The laser1 entry had been created in case the laser printer made a DHCP request, it turns out its IP is hardcoded with a configuration utility). Requests are responded to, and the Mac is given an IP address in the 10.0.0.150 to 250 range , and TCPIP$DHCP_GUI confirms it was handed out. However, the Mac does not receive/process/access the DNS as well as the router (ds and gw parameters) and hence becomes non-functional. Does anyone know why the DNS and router/gateway parameters would not be passed ? It clearly processes the NETS.; file since the IP address is handed from that one defined pool. How do I make sure that from that point, it will absolutely link up to the "subnet1" and provide all those parameters ? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:22:56 -0400 From: "Peter Weaver" Subject: RE: DHCP Server question/problem Message-ID: <03de01c882c2$9eaad040$2802a8c0@CHARONLAP> >... > Does anyone know why the DNS and router/gateway parameters would not be passed ? >... I had a similar problem a few weeks ago, one of my wireless machines did not receive the DHCP response. It had worked the last time the device was on about a week earlier, then I started the machine and it failed to get an address. I spent a lot of time trying to figure out what I had changed during that week. I restarted another device and found that it could not get the DHCP information either so I decided the problem must be on the Alpha. I enabled the debugging on the DHCP server and I could see the requests coming in and the Alpha said that it had assigned an address, but the devices both timed out. Finally I gave up on fixing the Alpha and decided to let my router do the DHCP serving, so I enabled the DHCP serving and rebooted the router. As the router was rebooting the two devices both received their DHCP information from the Alpha. So something in my router decided to block the DHCP response. You might want to check the devices between your Alpha and your MAC to see if any of them are blocking the response. Peter Weaver www.weaverconsulting.ca CHARON-VAX CHARON-AXP DataStream Reflection PreciseMail HP Commercial Hardware ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 2008 12:49:57 -0600 From: briggs@encompasserve.org Subject: RE: DHCP Server question/problem Message-ID: In article <03de01c882c2$9eaad040$2802a8c0@CHARONLAP>, "Peter Weaver" writes: > Finally I gave up on fixing the Alpha and decided to let my router do the > DHCP serving, so I enabled the DHCP serving and rebooted the router. As the > router was rebooting the two devices both received their DHCP information > from the Alpha. What kind of router? To the best of my knowledge, the DHCP server in Cisco IOS will not act as both a DHCP server and a DHCP relay agent simultaneously -- if the server component can respond, the relay agent component won't relay. ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 2008 16:30:57 GMT From: yehavi@vms.huji.ac.il Subject: DLT-4 cassetes are slower than DLT-3 on the same drive? Message-ID: <2008Mar10.163057@hujicc> Hello, We have DLT-40/80 tape drives connected to Alpha systems running VMS-8.3; up to recently we have been using DLT-3 cassetes and now moved to DLT-4. We noticed that backups take much more time (2 times and more) with the new tapes compared to the old ones. This happens when we use the same density or use the higher densities of DLT-4. Anyone has an idea what to look for? Thanks, __Yehavi: ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:08:50 GMT From: "Ade" Subject: How do I get rid of LINK-W-MULTFR errors? Message-ID: Hi, I have a simple C program which calls some simple macro as a test. I am getting a LINK-W-MULTFR warning when I link. How do I get rid of this? Code below, please excuse the possible formatting problem. Thanks, Ade #include #include extern nat_lib_crc(); $DESCRIPTOR(t1,"Hello World"); $DESCRIPTOR(t2,"this is completely different"); int crc1, crc2; void main() { crc1 = nat_lib_crc(&t1); printf("\nCRC1 = %X",crc1); crc2 = nat_lib_crc(&t1); printf("\nCRC2 = %X",crc2); crc1 = nat_lib_crc(&t2); printf("\nCRC1 on T2 = %X",crc1); } .title nat_lib_crc .ident 'V1.0' .psect gendata,noexe,rd,wrt,long ;; ;; These values are not passed to the routine so leave them ;; hard-coded ;; crc_tbl: .blkl 16 ;crc table storage crc_coeff: .long ^x04C11DB7 ;crc coefficient crc_zero: .long 0 ;crc starting crc value ;; ;; Code starts here ;; .psect natlibcrc_code,exe,nowrt,rel,pic .entry nat_lib_crc,^m<> start: movzbl (ap),r6 ;get number of parameters cmpl #1,r6 ;we only require one beqlu 100$ ;we only got one so continue clrl r0 ;set return status = 0 ret ;return 100$: pushal crc_tbl ;set up CRC_TABLE call pushal crc_coeff calls #2,g^lib$crc_table 200$: movl 4(ap),r6 ;get address of string descriptor pushl r6 ;set up CRC call pushal crc_zero pushal crc_tbl calls #3,g^lib$crc ret ;the CRC valus should be in R0 .end nat_lib_crc ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 05:40:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Hein RMS van den Heuvel Subject: Re: How do I get rid of LINK-W-MULTFR errors? Message-ID: <98d37a02-0589-4d8b-ae7c-ed227c8a22cd@34g2000hsz.googlegroups.com> On Mar 10, 8:08=A0am, "Ade" wrote: : > I have a simple C program which calls some simple macro as a test. I am > getting a LINK-W-MULTFR warning when I link. How do I get rid of this? : > void main() > { That's one > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 .end =A0 =A0nat_lib_crc And that's two. The last one is erroneous. Change to just .end fwiw... why use a macro subroutine to call something that C can call itself? Hein. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:58:04 GMT From: "Ade" Subject: Re: How do I get rid of LINK-W-MULTFR errors? Message-ID: "Hein RMS van den Heuvel" wrote in message news:98d37a02-0589-4d8b-ae7c-ed227c8a22cd@34g2000hsz.googlegroups.com... On Mar 10, 8:08 am, "Ade" wrote: : > I have a simple C program which calls some simple macro as a test. I am > getting a LINK-W-MULTFR warning when I link. How do I get rid of this? : > void main() > { That's one > > .end nat_lib_crc And that's two. The last one is erroneous. Change to just .end fwiw... why use a macro subroutine to call something that C can call itself? Hein. Thanks for the response, I'll try it out. The reason I'm doing it this way is that a client wants to call the CRC routine from Natural on an old VAX they have and apparently this is the only way to do it (??). Thanks again, Ade ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 09:23:24 -0400 From: John Sauter Subject: Re: How do I get rid of LINK-W-MULTFR errors? Message-ID: Ade wrote (excerpted): The reason I'm doing it this way > is that a client wants to call the CRC routine from Natural on an old VAX > they have and apparently this is the only way to do it (??). I used to be a member of the Run-time Library group. We (and lots of other people) tried very hard to make sure that the LIB$ routines could be called from any language. I don't know what Natural is, but if it can call your Macro routine it should be able to call the LIB$ routines. Is Natural a compiled language that can make external calls, but does not conform to the VAX calling standard? I thought this when I saw that your routine does not preserve R6. If Natural does not conform to the VAX calling standard then you might have to write code to interface between it and the LIB$ routines. John Sauter (John_Sauter@systemeyescomputerstore.com) ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 2008 09:24:02 -0600 From: briggs@encompasserve.org Subject: Re: How do I get rid of LINK-W-MULTFR errors? Message-ID: In article , "Ade" writes: [...] > Thanks for the response, I'll try it out. The reason I'm doing it this way > is that a client wants to call the CRC routine from Natural on an old VAX > they have and apparently this is the only way to do it (??). $ HELP RTL LIB$ LIB$CRC It'd have to be a pretty old version of VMS to pre-date LIB$CRC. ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 2008 15:22:44 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: How do I get rid of LINK-W-MULTFR errors? Message-ID: <47d55243$0$25038$607ed4bc@cv.net> In article , "Ade" writes: >Hi, > >I have a simple C program which calls some simple macro as a test. I am >getting a LINK-W-MULTFR warning when I link. How do I get rid of this? Code >below, please excuse the possible formatting problem. > >Thanks, > >Ade > >#include >#include > >extern nat_lib_crc(); > >$DESCRIPTOR(t1,"Hello World"); >$DESCRIPTOR(t2,"this is completely different"); > >int crc1, crc2; > >void main() >{ > crc1 = nat_lib_crc(&t1); > printf("\nCRC1 = %X",crc1); > > crc2 = nat_lib_crc(&t1); > printf("\nCRC2 = %X",crc2); > > crc1 = nat_lib_crc(&t2); > printf("\nCRC1 on T2 = %X",crc1); > >} > > .title nat_lib_crc > .ident 'V1.0' > > .psect gendata,noexe,rd,wrt,long >;; >;; These values are not passed to the routine so leave them >;; hard-coded >;; >crc_tbl: .blkl 16 ;crc table storage >crc_coeff: .long ^x04C11DB7 ;crc coefficient >crc_zero: .long 0 ;crc starting crc value >;; >;; Code starts here >;; > .psect natlibcrc_code,exe,nowrt,rel,pic > .entry nat_lib_crc,^m<> > >start: movzbl (ap),r6 ;get number of parameters > cmpl #1,r6 ;we only require one > beqlu 100$ ;we only got one so continue > clrl r0 ;set return status = 0 > ret ;return > >100$: pushal crc_tbl ;set up CRC_TABLE call > pushal crc_coeff > calls #2,g^lib$crc_table > >200$: movl 4(ap),r6 ;get address of string descriptor > pushl r6 ;set up CRC call > pushal crc_zero > pushal crc_tbl > calls #3,g^lib$crc > > ret ;the CRC valus should be in R0 > > .end nat_lib_crc Lose this ------^^^^^^^^^^^^ -- 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: 10 Mar 2008 08:06:48 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: OT: Universal healthcare in England failing - boy dies ! Message-ID: In article , ultradwc@gmail.com writes: > > well, the US has not become England and Canada yet ... there > is still something called free speech in this country ... Not under the current administration. ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 2008 12:18:41 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Message-ID: <63kn91F27m828U2@mid.individual.net> In article <9e8ae198-931d-4702-bcfc-bcd435058de9@q78g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, AEF writes: > On Mar 9, 7:15 pm, JF Mezei wrote: >> Bill Gunshannon wrote: >> > Random numbers are a theoretical mathematical concept and nothing can >> > "generate" numbers that are truly random. >> >> In a situation where a human needs to press a key (or click mouse) to >> initiate generation of numbers, then if you use VMS time as a seed, it >> would be pretty random since the human's interpretation of time is way >> less precise than what VMS does, and as a result, the lowest bytes in >> the VMS time would be randomly selected since there would be no way for >> a human to press a key at the moment he would want all those nanoseconds >> to be a specific value. >> >> But if you have a job that automatically generates a random number at >> 20:00:00 every friday, I would agree that there would not be much >> randomness in any seed you would use. > > You have to be careful that there aren't some hidden biases in doing > stuff like this, as you yourself point out with one variation. > > I don't see how you can beat the ball machine. Unless all the balls are exactly (and I mean exactly!) the same size, shape, weight, texture and god only knows what other factors the results will not be truly random. There was a famous case in PA a long, long time ago where the lottery workers rigged the lottery by using a hypodermic needle to inject droplets of water into some of the balls. This changed the weight enough that only the balls without the water droplets could be blown into the chute by the fan. That's the reason why the lottery is now, supposedly, monitored by an outside auditing company. > Like electronic voting, > using a computer to generate winning numbers is problematic. I wonder > how the gov't verifies that electronic slot machines are fair? IIRC, > they somehow check what the chip is doing. I'll have to look into it. Define fair. The lst I heard the only ibnterest the government had was that the right percentage of the intake was paid out in prizes. The very concept belies any randomness as the house is allowed to win a certain predetermined amount. The slot machines, just like the card tables, are stacked in the houses favor. I don't play them either. > > Having the ball machine televised at advertised times is also more > dramatic. And one can see what's going on. No, one can't watch and be > sure there is no cheating, but you can't see the electrons or bits in > the computer. I'm sure the ball machine is better for lotteries than > computer-generated random numbers. Unless you have studied statistics. Then you know the futility of either approach. (Hint: I took a stat class last summer. The Prof actually had the students look at the various lottery games in PA. A bonus was offered for any student who found the one with the wrong published odds. I was the only one in the class at the start who had any understanding at all of how really poor your chances of winning are. Most of the students actually thought it was tilteed int he players favor!!) bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 2008 12:22:17 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Message-ID: <63knfpF27m828U3@mid.individual.net> In article <47d4b1c4$0$1474$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes: > AEF wrote: > >> Having the ball machine televised at advertised times is also more >> dramatic. And one can see what's going on. No, one can't watch and be >> sure there is no cheating, but you can't see the electrons or bits in >> the computer. > > I think perhaps the biggest advantage is that it is far easier for > auditors to certify that the draw is truly random with no bias for any > number etc etc. > > If the draw is done by computers, it means that auditors have to scan > thorugh not only the code, but also the code management to ensure no > covert code is put into production without anyone knowing. Which is pretty much impossible. See: Reflections on Trusting Trust" by Ken Thompson. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 2008 08:24:09 -0600 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Message-ID: In article <47d407a5$0$90274$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes: > > Certain physics stuff are considered true random. Including > radioactivity I believe. Around 1900 the world was considered > deterministic, but then came Einstein, Heissenberg and all those > guys and suddenly the world was random (and impossible > to understand). Plank. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:31:10 +0000 (UTC) From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk Subject: Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Message-ID: In article <9e8ae198-931d-4702-bcfc-bcd435058de9@q78g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, AEF writes: >On Mar 9, 7:15 pm, JF Mezei wrote: >> Bill Gunshannon wrote: >> > Random numbers are a theoretical mathematical concept and nothing can >> > "generate" numbers that are truly random. >> >> In a situation where a human needs to press a key (or click mouse) to >> initiate generation of numbers, then if you use VMS time as a seed, it >> would be pretty random since the human's interpretation of time is way >> less precise than what VMS does, and as a result, the lowest bytes in >> the VMS time would be randomly selected since there would be no way for >> a human to press a key at the moment he would want all those nanoseconds >> to be a specific value. >> >> But if you have a job that automatically generates a random number at >> 20:00:00 every friday, I would agree that there would not be much >> randomness in any seed you would use. > >You have to be careful that there aren't some hidden biases in doing >stuff like this, as you yourself point out with one variation. > >I don't see how you can beat the ball machine. Like electronic voting, >using a computer to generate winning numbers is problematic. I wonder >how the gov't verifies that electronic slot machines are fair? IIRC, >they somehow check what the chip is doing. I'll have to look into it. > ERNIE the UK premium bond winner picker is a hardware random number generator originally using the signal noise from a bank of neon tubes the latest ERNIE uses thermal noise in transistors see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premium_Bond David Webb Security team leader CCSS Middlesex University >Having the ball machine televised at advertised times is also more >dramatic. And one can see what's going on. No, one can't watch and be >sure there is no cheating, but you can't see the electrons or bits in >the computer. I'm sure the ball machine is better for lotteries than >computer-generated random numbers. > >AEF ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 06:20:23 -0700 (PDT) From: AEF Subject: Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Message-ID: <20e1fe5e-5c4d-480c-bab5-f679364d54c0@x30g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> On Mar 10, 8:18 am, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote: > In article <9e8ae198-931d-4702-bcfc-bcd435058...@q78g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > AEF writes: > > > > > On Mar 9, 7:15 pm, JF Mezei wrote: > >> Bill Gunshannon wrote: > >> > Random numbers are a theoretical mathematical concept and nothing can > >> > "generate" numbers that are truly random. > > >> In a situation where a human needs to press a key (or click mouse) to > >> initiate generation of numbers, then if you use VMS time as a seed, it > >> would be pretty random since the human's interpretation of time is way > >> less precise than what VMS does, and as a result, the lowest bytes in > >> the VMS time would be randomly selected since there would be no way for > >> a human to press a key at the moment he would want all those nanoseconds > >> to be a specific value. > > >> But if you have a job that automatically generates a random number at > >> 20:00:00 every friday, I would agree that there would not be much > >> randomness in any seed you would use. > > > You have to be careful that there aren't some hidden biases in doing > > stuff like this, as you yourself point out with one variation. > > > I don't see how you can beat the ball machine. > > Unless all the balls are exactly (and I mean exactly!) the same size, > shape, weight, texture and god only knows what other factors the > results will not be truly random. There was a famous case in PA > a long, long time ago where the lottery workers rigged the lottery > by using a hypodermic needle to inject droplets of water into some > of the balls. This changed the weight enough that only the balls > without the water droplets could be blown into the chute by the fan. > That's the reason why the lottery is now, supposedly, monitored > by an outside auditing company. I didn't mean that it was cheat-proof. I meant that I can't think of a better method to use for the lottery. > > > Like electronic voting, > > using a computer to generate winning numbers is problematic. I wonder > > how the gov't verifies that electronic slot machines are fair? IIRC, > > they somehow check what the chip is doing. I'll have to look into it. > > Define fair. The lst I heard the only ibnterest the government > had was that the right percentage of the intake was paid out in > prizes. The very concept belies any randomness as the house is > allowed to win a certain predetermined amount. The slot machines, > just like the card tables, are stacked in the houses favor. I don't > play them either. Of course the house wins a certain percentage in their favor. By "fair" I meant that you could calculate the odds based on the game and that no one who has control over the ball machine, slot machine, or what have you, tries to deceptively alter the effective odds in their favor. Example: Imagine a simple slot machine that appears to randomly pick a number from 0 to 9. Each number should appear 10% of the time. Of course the house stacks the odds in its favor. (That's the same with the lottery, of course.) By "fair" I mean that the house doesn't rig the machine so that any given number comes up significantly more than 10%. By fair I mean that a calculation of the odds based on what the machine purports to be doing is what the machine is actually doing. By fair I mean that the published odds are the real odds. By fair I mean that no one who has control over the machine is secretly and deceptively modifying its workings to his or her favor. Please, I thought all this was self-evident. The MegaMillions odds are something like 1 in 175 million. The reasonable assumption is that the number is picked by the ball machine at random with an equal chance (within reasonable "experimental error") of any combination of numbers. Of course its tilted in the states favor, but they assume it's not being deceptively manipulated to an insider's adavntage. People play anyway because there is a chance to win and if you do, you WIN! Of course, on average, in the long run, players lose. > > > > > Having the ball machine televised at advertised times is also more > > dramatic. And one can see what's going on. No, one can't watch and be > > sure there is no cheating, but you can't see the electrons or bits in > > the computer. I'm sure the ball machine is better for lotteries than > > computer-generated random numbers. > > Unless you have studied statistics. Then you know the futility of either > approach. (Hint: I took a stat class last summer. The Prof actually > had the students look at the various lottery games in PA. A bonus was > offered for any student who found the one with the wrong published odds. > I was the only one in the class at the start who had any understanding > at all of how really poor your chances of winning are. Most of the > students actually thought it was tilteed int he players favor!!) You lost me here, Bill. You're saying that most of the students are, well, mentally challenged. So? > > bill > > -- > Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves > billg...@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. > University of Scranton | > Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include AEF ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 06:24:25 -0700 (PDT) From: AEF Subject: Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Message-ID: <307e9820-6285-450d-a840-6b4a82d83751@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> On Mar 9, 10:46 pm, AEF wrote: > On Mar 9, 10:52 am, Arne Vajh=F8j wrote: > > > > > Bill Gunshannon wrote: > > > In article <47d35553$0$90265$14726...@news.sunsite.dk>, > > > Arne Vajh=F8j writes: > > >> AEF wrote: > > >>> perhaps you could set up a pure random number generator based on > > >>> radioactive decay or some other random quantum process, > > >> You can buy hardware cards that provides true random bits. I don't > > >> know what they use as source. But the stuff you mention sounds > > >> very likely. > > > > Random numbers are a theoretical mathematical concept and nothing can > > > "generate" numbers that are truly random. A method must be used to > > > pick them and that method precludes true randomness. > > > Not true. > > > Certain physics stuff are considered true random. Including > > radioactivity I believe. Around 1900 the world was considered > > deterministic, but then came Einstein, Heissenberg and all those > > guys and suddenly the world was random (and impossible > > to understand). > > > Arne > [...] > > Impossible to understand? QM is quite well understood. The problem is Well, I meant that calculating the wave function, and the probabilities of various outcomes therefrom, is well understood. What the mystery is that there is no "reasonable" known mechanism that can produce the randomness part. In fact, Feynman once said, half-jokingly, "... nobody understands quantum mechanics". So in that sense, yes, you are right. But how to do the calculations *is* well understood. [...] AEF ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 2008 13:41:31 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Message-ID: <63ks4bF2828bgU1@mid.individual.net> In article <20e1fe5e-5c4d-480c-bab5-f679364d54c0@x30g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, AEF writes: > On Mar 10, 8:18 am, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote: >> >> Unless you have studied statistics. Then you know the futility of either >> approach. (Hint: I took a stat class last summer. The Prof actually >> had the students look at the various lottery games in PA. A bonus was >> offered for any student who found the one with the wrong published odds. >> I was the only one in the class at the start who had any understanding >> at all of how really poor your chances of winning are. Most of the >> students actually thought it was tilteed int he players favor!!) > > You lost me here, Bill. You're saying that most of the students are, > well, mentally challenged. So? > I said no such thing. What I said is that until they took a stat course the average student believes what everyone else believes, which is that your chance of winning is better than a snowballs chance in hell. I actually knew an IT professional in NY who had all the numbers ever drawn in the NY State Lottery and each week he added the current set and re-ran his program (on a Univac-1100 mainframe) determined to find a pattern and thus be able to predict winning numbers. That was 28 years ago. I amn sure he is retired by now but probably still running his program (on a PC now) looking for that magic pattern. Truly a tax on the stupid. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 09:16:10 -0500 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Message-ID: <47D542AA.5050300@comcast.net> JF Mezei wrote: > Bill Gunshannon wrote: > > >>Random numbers are a theoretical mathematical concept and nothing can >>"generate" numbers that are truly random. > > > In a situation where a human needs to press a key (or click mouse) to > initiate generation of numbers, then if you use VMS time as a seed, it > would be pretty random since the human's interpretation of time is way > less precise than what VMS does, and as a result, the lowest bytes in > the VMS time would be randomly selected since there would be no way for > a human to press a key at the moment he would want all those nanoseconds > to be a specific value. > > But if you have a job that automatically generates a random number at > 20:00:00 every friday, I would agree that there would not be much > randomness in any seed you would use. There's damned little randomness to be found there!! Remember that the clock is updated every ten milliseconds by adding 10,000,000 (forgive me if I've lost a decimal point somewhere) nanoseconds to the counter! ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 2008 14:26:24 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS Message-ID: <63kuogF281sa6U1@mid.individual.net> In article <47D542AA.5050300@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert" writes: > JF Mezei wrote: >> Bill Gunshannon wrote: >> >> >>>Random numbers are a theoretical mathematical concept and nothing can >>>"generate" numbers that are truly random. >> >> >> In a situation where a human needs to press a key (or click mouse) to >> initiate generation of numbers, then if you use VMS time as a seed, it >> would be pretty random since the human's interpretation of time is way >> less precise than what VMS does, and as a result, the lowest bytes in >> the VMS time would be randomly selected since there would be no way for >> a human to press a key at the moment he would want all those nanoseconds >> to be a specific value. >> >> But if you have a job that automatically generates a random number at >> 20:00:00 every friday, I would agree that there would not be much >> randomness in any seed you would use. > > There's damned little randomness to be found there!! Remember that the > clock is updated every ten milliseconds by adding 10,000,000 (forgive me > if I've lost a decimal point somewhere) nanoseconds to the counter! And, all of these schemes ignore the fact that if you start with the same seed they repeat the same sequence. Hardly seems random when the numbers are generated by a fixed and predictable mathematical formula. There is nothing random in a computer and some of us seriously doubt there is any true randomness in the universe. (Hint: just because you don't see the pattern or can't determine all of the root causes doesn't mean it's random.) bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:24:20 -0500 From: Brendan Welch Subject: Re: SYS$EXAMPLES:DAYLIGHT_SAVINGS.COM bug on VAX Message-ID: Volker Halle wrote: > JF, > > this problem was fixed for OpenVMS Alpha in X-3 on 01-MAY-2001. The > fix for OpenVMS seems to have been included in VAXDTSS01_073 released > 25-OCT-2002. > > Volker. > I have been out of VMS for many years, but I remember that making a radical change ( a whole hour, especially if subtracting, in the Fall) could cause big problems. You first had to shut down some monitoring utilities, so as not to cause discontinuities. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 10:02:51 -0700 (PDT) From: "pcoviello@gmail.com" Subject: TCPIP$ROUTED_OUTPUT.LOG or log file maintenance! Message-ID: <215f7ade-1f72-47ee-b255-b8114ff0e708@p73g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> Hi, we have a similar issue with another post with the same subject but there was no replies to his post, I thought I tacked on to that one and emailed him instead :-) sorry! any ways I have an 8.2 system with a log file at about 1 GB and a cluster running 7.3-2 that each node is around 1.5 GB so what do others do to clean this up? and reboot should not be an option :-) thanks Paul ------------------------------ Date: 10 Mar 2008 12:06:56 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: VMS advertising ! Message-ID: <63kmivF27m828U1@mid.individual.net> In article , "Main, Kerry" writes: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Bill Gunshannon [mailto:billg999@cs.uofs.edu] >> Sent: March 5, 2008 7:52 AM >> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com >> Subject: Re: VMS advertising ! >> >> In article <47cdfb85$0$31313$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, >> JF Mezei writes: >> > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >> > >> >> Does VMS use VMS to process these violations? >> > >> > If there was a VMS management eager to grow sales instead of avoid >> the >> > next round of HP layoffs, they could donate VMS machines/licences to >> > this VMS company. Then, with this company running our VMS, every bit >> of >> > advertising they would make would benefit our VMS. And this would >> > totally bypass the advertising ban that seems to be in place at HP >> > against our VMS. >> >> Reality check!!! You couldn't give a VMS system away (well, except >> maybe to a hobbyist) today. Remember me? I provided VMS systems >> here, at no cost to the University or the Department. I provided >> and maintained the hardware. I installed and maintained all the >> software. I administered the machines. And before you say, "Well >> they were VAXen and the performance sucked.", you would be wrong. >> No one ever complained about the performance and at one time it >> included Alphas as well. They went away because no one wanted to >> use VMS. Period. End of story. If you offered to give the "VMS" >> operation a bunch of machines running OpenVMS I would imagine they >> would be: >> a) turned down >> b) never used >> or, most likely, >> c) converted to Linux machines. >> > > Mmmm.. Bill, the typical University IT environment at the College level > is not what anyone would call a stable environment. Kerry, you obviously know nothing at all about "the typical University IT environment". > The various depts > primarily do their own thing and usually jump on different technologies > every few years. Bullcrap, as usual. Universities have IT departments, CIO's and all the same trappings as any other business. And their IT needs to be just as bulletproof. (Some would say more bulletproof as the environment tends to be more dangerous!) I have worked at two Univesities directly and a number of others as a contractor for a major corporation. "The various departments" usually have no say at all in their IT infrastructure. About the only exception tends to be the CS department as their needs tend to differ from most of the other departments (The CS department here is the only department to have its own IT staff everyone else comes under the datacenter staff.) There are basicly two differnt environments, administrative and academic. The administrative is just like any other business, AR, AP, Payroll, GL, plus the additi9onal things like registration and grading, etc. Not something that can be done without any more than any other business could. And then you have the academic. Guess what, can't do without that either. My department systems are just as much a 24/7 operation as any bank, hotel, airline or factory. > > At the US University I was at (server consolidation study) about > a year ago, they used to be almost all Solaris. Now, Solaris has only > a fraction of what it used to be. In each of the various depts., there > is now MAC's (including scientific clusters), Linux, and a number of > *BSD's .. Freeware and open source is everywhere because they do not > have much budget and the College types like getting knee deep in bit > twiddling at the OS level. More bullcrap. The days of colleges "bit twiddling at the OS level" are all but gone. With the exception of the periodic research project (I currently have some machines running Plan9), which gets its own equipment and does not impact day-to-day operations, there is much less "bit twiddling" then there was 20 years ago. And no one "twiddles" on production machines in either the administrative or academic side of the house. > > This wild diversity and everyone doing their own thing drives the > senior mgmt at the Univ crazy, but that is reality as each College > usually has the purse strings for their dept. And yet more bullcrap. Most departments beyond the CS dept are pure MS shops, funded, installed, and maintained by the datacenter people. Individual departments control their budgets. They don't get to set them, but they do get to spend them as they see fit. > > If the Univ I was at is similar in thinking to what other Univ's are > thinking, then this wild diversity at the College level days are > numbered. The Univ simply can not afford for each College to be > maintaining their own mini-IT depts. Obviously, which is why it isn't so at any college I have ever visited going back almost 30 years. > > Anyway, as I recall, most of the production processing (registrations, > Financials etc) at your University runs Banner on OpenVMS .. is that > not correct? Funny you should mention that. I have already been told by people I know in our datacenter that Banner is talking about adopting Windows and this place can't wait!! I actually visited the SungardHE site. Lots of mention of Windows, AIX, Solaris and HPUX. I could not find any mention of VMS anywhere on their site. Conspicuous in its absence? bill > >:-) Yeah, the smiley applies to most of what you usually say. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves billg999@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2008.140 ************************