INFO-VAX Thu, 13 Sep 2007 Volume 2007 : Issue 500 Contents: Re: -SYSTEM-F-WRITLCK, write lock error Re: changes to MONITOR PROCESS/TOPCPU Re: DECServer 700 help Re: Free DS10L Drawing again ! Re: Free DS10L Drawing again ! Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Re: Is this a bug or expected behaviour in C99? Re: Is this a bug or expected behaviour in C99? Re: Itanium: determine object file main or sub maintenance downtime on our supercomputer Re: maintenance downtime on our supercomputer Re: maintenance downtime on our supercomputer Re: Product Install, UNDO and recovery data (again!) Re: Will Linux bloat itself out of existance ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 13 Sep 2007 08:12:16 +0200 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOeGER) Subject: Re: -SYSTEM-F-WRITLCK, write lock error Message-ID: <46e8f0e0$1@news.langstoeger.at> In article <46E89C14.6EBF6725@spam.comcast.net>, David J Dachtera writes: >See HELP PRODUCT INSTALL /REMOTE How is your hint related? No mention of write access/locks there... -- Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Network and OpenVMS system specialist E-mail peter@langstoeger.at A-1030 VIENNA AUSTRIA I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 01:29:45 -0700 From: fuku Subject: Re: changes to MONITOR PROCESS/TOPCPU Message-ID: <1189672185.222452.16940@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com> > >> However, I don't see why the vertical lines were removed! Please put > >> them back! > >They are not removed, hold down CTRL-W, you'll see them. > >If you are meaning the ones, that indicated the 0,25,50,75,100 marks, > >I believe they used to be on the "blank" lines you mentioned earlier, > >that have now been removed. These vertical lines are not removed rather they are filled with more information. In older version where the vertical lines are coming is now filled with more process information. >OK, I'll give it a try, but running the 7.3-2 and 8.3 montors side by >side, they were always visible in the former. In 7.3-2 the number of process information is specific to the number of CPU's but from 8.2 it is giving top 16 process information irespective of number of CPU's. > If you look carefully, they're drawn at startup but quickly erased. > Since for the first time monitor prints the display template it prints that but latter when the information are displayed it is being written on the top of that. > >I would suggest this is most likely a bug introduced in the PLI to C > >port. > > Almost certainly unintentional. I wouldn't say this as a bug insted this is something better than the old one. Ranjan ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 11:54:32 +0200 From: Albrecht Schlosser Subject: Re: DECServer 700 help Message-ID: David J Dachtera wrote: > Albrecht Schlosser wrote: >> David J Dachtera wrote: >>> The point remains, however, that these are in conflict with the device's port >>> configuration as indicated by the OP. >> Sorry, if I insist, but ... >> >> no, he said XON, but you said hardware flow control. > > Well, actually, no I didn't. Go back and re-read the earlier posts - you may be > confusing yourself. If English is not your first language, be careful - some of > my contextual constructs can be complex and potentially confusing. You're right, English is not my first language. And I went back and re-read the earlier posts. You did not explicitly write it down in clear words, but what does this mean? [from your earlier post:] > You said "(4800 baud, XON, 1 stop bit, noparity)". That is, XON/XOF flow > control. > > You indicated that the DECserver port is set up for: > > [...] > Parity: None Signal Control: Disabled > Stop Bits: Dynamic Signal Select: CTS-DSR-RTS-DTR > [...] > > That is, hardware flow control. > > What's wrong with this picture? > > (Hint: XON/XOF != Hardware flow control.) Didn't YOU write "That is, hardware flow control?" You omitted, however, one important line from the port configuration output: > Flow Control: XON Output Speed: 4800 So, this all together means: the terminal server port is configured with XON/XOFF flow control, and hardware flow control is disabled. > > ...which IS what he said, as I quoted. I also indicated that the TERMINAL SERVER > PORT (-NOT- the device port) was configured for hardware flow control, and then > you indicated that signalling was disabled which is effectively NO flow control. Yes, no HARDWARE flow control, but still XON flow control. > So, that's still a mismatch. No. > Are there any other questions? Shouldn't we better stop this academic discussion? Regards Albrecht ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 07:32:16 -0700 From: Rich Jordan Subject: Re: Free DS10L Drawing again ! Message-ID: <1189693936.385407.93130@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> On Sep 12, 4:00 pm, "David Turner, Island Computers" wrote: > If you haven't sent in your request to be in the drawing then do so with > DS10L in the subject line > > If you sent in your request then don't worry, your request is still in the > system and will be in the draw later this month > > FYI - Alpha systems have been selling like Hot Cakes with VMS > I would say 90% with VMS and the others with T64 > > David Turner > > -- > David B Turner > Island Computers US Corp > 2700 Gregory St, Suite 180 > Savannah GA 31404 > > T: 877-6364332 x201 > Intl: 001 912 447 6622 > > E: dtur...@islandco.com > F: 912 201 0402 > W:http://www.islandco.com David glad to hear Alphas are selling well now, especially after your comments last May. Most of what our customers are leaning towards is itanic now; not that they need the boost over Alpha, but just to get on current hardware and longer term software upgrades. But we may still have a few Alpha upgrades in our future (including our one remaining VAX location). Rich ------------------------------ Date: 13 Sep 2007 17:42:34 +0200 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOeGER) Subject: Re: Free DS10L Drawing again ! Message-ID: <46e9768a$1@news.langstoeger.at> In article <13egkq6krrfpb44@news.supernews.com>, "David Turner, Island Computers" writes: >FYI - Alpha systems have been selling like Hot Cakes with VMS Glad to here. >I would say 90% with VMS and the others with T64 What did you expect? OpenVMS is still alive and supports the Alpha (unlike eg. WinNT ;-) and if you want U**X, you surely find faster and cheaper machines than Alphas now. So, Alpha is almost exclusively for [Open]VMS now. I only wonder, that the Tru64 percentage is still so high (10%)... SCNR -- Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Network and OpenVMS system specialist E-mail peter@langstoeger.at A-1030 VIENNA AUSTRIA I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 05:01:00 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Message-ID: On 09/12/07 23:01, AEF wrote: [snip] > > Again, the kashrut laws are not necessarily motivated by "danger". No > one alive today knows their true motivation. Yes, some of them have > health benefits, but the rest do not. So what? Does this somehow mean > that all possible dangers should be listed in Leviticus? It does if you are trying to attack religion. -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 05:09:41 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Message-ID: On 09/13/07 00:09, JF Mezei wrote: > AEF wrote: >> The above makes no sense to me. The Hasidim were smoking. Fine. But >> they were not telling others not to smoke. So where is the hypocrisy >> (someone OTHER than VAXMAN please)? Leviticus has the kashrut laws but >> doesn't forbid smoking. How is this hypocritical? (someone other than >> VAXMAN please). >> >> Leviticus is not supposed to be a book to outlaw all dangerous acts. >> That would make it a very long book indeed! > > > The problem is with people who take the Bible too litterally. If one > bases his lifestyle on what the bible says, that person will be allowed > to do all sorts of truly nasty modern stuff (like smoking) and still > claiming to follow his religion and being good to his body as per what > the bible says. > > A religion must either be able to update its "guide to hygiene/health" > with the times, or change the bible/documents to only contain general > guidelines and let the health care systems of each time period decide > what is good and bad for a body. [snip] > > You either enumerate all the dangers, or none of them and instead > provide general guidelines. Or, you update the manual as new knowledge > about health/hygiene arises. But it is not smart to take information > that is thousands of years old and still apply it litterally today. > > Blindly following health rules that are thousands of years old just > because they are in the Bible is like still believing that the earth is > flat and at the centre of the solar system. And (allegedly) God has already done that, with the blanket statement: 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 (NASB) Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body. -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 06:08:08 -0700 From: AEF Subject: Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Message-ID: <1189688888.680323.285520@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com> On Sep 13, 6:01 am, Ron Johnson wrote: > On 09/12/07 23:01, AEF wrote: > [snip] > > > > > Again, the kashrut laws are not necessarily motivated by "danger". No > > one alive today knows their true motivation. Yes, some of them have > > health benefits, but the rest do not. So what? Does this somehow mean > > that all possible dangers should be listed in Leviticus? > > It does if you are trying to attack religion. I didn't know the purpose of religion was to be a super-OSHA for all aspects of life. When it comes to religious law I always thought it was supposed to be about morality, sins, mitzvahs (good deeds), and required rituals and such. (Actually I still think that! :-) Listing all possible dangerous things and actions would be rather impractical. And what words would you use for things that don't exist yet! It's pretty ridiculous to use this to attack religion. (Not to say anything about the "validity" of any religion.) > > -- > Ron Johnson, Jr. > Jefferson LA USA AEF ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 13:58:52 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Message-ID: In article <1189656074.218009.35920@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>, AEF writes: > > >On Sep 11, 10:53 am, davi...@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: >> In article , koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:>In article , VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: >> >> >> FYI; Today, I stopped for gas at a station on the border of Lakewood, >> >> a hasidic Jewish community. I watched two Hasidim standing outside of >> >> the associated convenience store inhaling the shit combustibles exuded >> >> from an ignited cigarette and thought to myself that the regulations >> >> in Leviticus prohibit the injesting of a ham sandie but putting that >> >> carcinogenic shit into one's system was OK. Sure seems hypocritical >> >> to me. > >The above makes no sense to me. The Hasidim were smoking. Fine. But >they were not telling others not to smoke. So where is the hypocrisy >(someone OTHER than VAXMAN please)? Leviticus has the kashrut laws but >doesn't forbid smoking. How is this hypocritical? (someone other than >VAXMAN please). > >Leviticus is not supposed to be a book to outlaw all dangerous acts. >That would make it a very long book indeed! > >There seems to be a serious misconception here of the motivation of >the kashrut laws (kosher). Nowhere in the Torah does it say these are >for health reasons. Many of the kashrut laws clearly have nothing to >do with health. See Read Leviticus 15:19-30... re "unclean women". The last passage being: and on the eighth day she shall take unto her two turtles, or two young pigeons, and bring them unto the priest, to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And the priest shall offer the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for her before the lord for the issue of her uncleanness. (uncleanness = menstruation) Man that's a lot of 'fricasseed' squab every 28 days! I believe there are some conflicts here with USC 18 sect. 3. However, it sure is a great boon to keeping windscreens clear of certain aerial precipitated avian alimentary effluent. ;) ...and leviticus 21:18-20 is rather prejudiced toward the affirmed and physically handicapped. "for whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose, or any thing superfluous, ... or a man that is brokenfooted, or brokenhanded, ... or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken; Ouch, broken stones... that hurts me where I live. ;) What ever happened to the tenet that man was created in god's image? Is god embarrassed that he made mistakes in the handicapped such that he can not bear to look upon them in his temples? And if a man falls and breaks his hand, why is he no longer welcome in god's presence? I must really be unwelcomed having had 34 fractured in one fell swoop. Christians have sillinesses in the doctrine of their testament too. My fave sillinesses evolve around those of the L. Ron doctrines. I am not picking on the Jewish faith; I find all religion reprehens- ible. -- 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: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:26:18 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Message-ID: On 09/13/07 08:58, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: [snip] > > > ...and leviticus 21:18-20 is rather prejudiced toward the affirmed and Affirmed? [snip] > > > Christians have sillinesses in the doctrine of their testament too. > My fave sillinesses evolve around those of the L. Ron doctrines. I Are you confabulating Christianity and Scientoloty? Or am I misinterpreting what you wrote? -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 15:24:19 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Message-ID: In article , Ron Johnson writes: > > >On 09/13/07 08:58, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >[snip] >> >> >> ...and leviticus 21:18-20 is rather prejudiced toward the affirmed and > >Affirmed? Oops.... infirmed. I was typing in a rush as I was late getting my son from school soccer practice. No classes today but the more important as- pects of public education -- sports -- are in full swing. >> Christians have sillinesses in the doctrine of their testament too. >> My fave sillinesses evolve around those of the L. Ron doctrines. I > >Are you confabulating Christianity and Scientoloty? Or am I >misinterpreting what you wrote? Just mentioning all the sillinesses in so called 'religions'. -- 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: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 11:40:33 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Message-ID: <6KdGi.300317$5y.241846@newsfe18.lga> On 09/13/07 10:24, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > In article , Ron Johnson writes: >> >> On 09/13/07 08:58, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >> [snip] >>> >>> ...and leviticus 21:18-20 is rather prejudiced toward the affirmed and >> Affirmed? > > Oops.... infirmed. The word is *crippled*. > I was typing in a rush as I was late getting my son > from school soccer practice. No classes today but the more important as- > pects of public education -- sports -- are in full swing. But it's /soccer/. >>> Christians have sillinesses in the doctrine of their testament too. >>> My fave sillinesses evolve around those of the L. Ron doctrines. I >> Are you confabulating Christianity and Scientoloty? Or am I >> misinterpreting what you wrote? > > Just mentioning all the sillinesses in so called 'religions'. ACK. -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 13:09:22 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Message-ID: <7e6a5$46e96ed7$cef8887a$26370@TEKSAVVY.COM> AEF wrote: > I didn't know the purpose of religion was to be a super-OSHA for all > aspects of life. When it comes to religious law I always thought it > was supposed to be about morality, sins, mitzvahs (good deeds), and > required rituals and such. When you look at most of leviticus, it is an OSHA/health advisory put into rules. Prohibition to eat pork for instance can have no thing to do with your faith in god or good morality. It is all about the fact that lack of refrigiration would often result in pork meat making people sick. And since muslims who also emanate from middle east also have a similar rule, it is most likely just a standard practice in the middle east in those days that was incorporated in both religions as common sense rules. But with modern hygiene, running water and refrigiration, a lot of leviticus (even the little deed done on boys) is no longer required to lead a healthy lifestyle. Instead of adapting to the new hygiene standards, certain religions have elected instead of make those original health recommendations a strong sign of belonging to that religion and if you don't follow them, they label you a bad member of that faith. Consider a smoking orthodox jew or muslim who would call me "unclean/unhealthy" because I eat pork. But since I don't smoke, I would be far healthier than that orthodox jew/muslim. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 13:13:53 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Here's one for Bob (hope it makes your head spin) Message-ID: <378a2$46e96fe6$cef8887a$26463@TEKSAVVY.COM> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: > ...and leviticus 21:18-20 is rather prejudiced toward the affirmed and > physically handicapped. "for whatsoever man he be that hath a blemish, > he shall not approach: a blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat > nose, or any thing superfluous, ... or a man that is brokenfooted, or > brokenhanded, ... or crookbackt, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in > his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken; Darwin. Make sure those with deffective genes don't reproduce. Make sure those with communicable diseases dont have sex to pass the disease to others. You end up with a superior race. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 04:26:07 -0600 From: Louis Krupp Subject: Re: Is this a bug or expected behaviour in C99? Message-ID: <13ei42jics2ja4a@corp.supernews.com> chrisj.doran@proemail.co.uk wrote: > On 12 Sep, 21:58, "Ed Vogel" wrote: >> "Jim Duff" wrote in message >> >> news:46e71344@dnews.tpgi.com.au... >> >>> Questions: Is my code legal C99? If so, is this expected compiler >>> behaviour, or is it a bug? I can't find anything in the 7.3/7.2 release >>> notes (yes, I'm aware I'm on an old compiler) that seems to address this. >> I asked our expert (and C standard rep) about this. He confirms what >> others >> have said. This is not valid C99. There is no compiler bug here. >> >> Ed Vogel >> >> HP/Compaq/DEC C/C++ Engineering. > > Further investigation finds this article on exactly what is and is not > valid C99 or an extension to it: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/cpp/Variadic-Macros.html > > Chris > I read that article. And I totally missed the bit about ##__VA_ARGS__ being a gcc extension. Louis ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 04:30:47 -0600 From: Louis Krupp Subject: Re: Is this a bug or expected behaviour in C99? Message-ID: <13ei4bcqeqcsn2d@corp.supernews.com> Jim Duff wrote: > Richard Brodie wrote: >> "Louis Krupp" wrote in message >> news:13efdi5ku0g9o14@corp.supernews.com... >>> Jim Duff wrote: >>>> Questions: Is my code legal C99? >> No. >> >>> I tried compiling your code on a UNIX system with gcc version 2.95.2 (which is also >>> old). It worked >> # gcc -std=c99 --pedantic test.c >> # test.c:14:14: warning: ISO C99 requires rest arguments to be used >> >> >> > > Ah thanks Richard. This clearly shows it's a GCC extension. Looks like > I'll have to dig further into the called routines to see how they deal > with additional, unexpected NULLs (or some other VMS-specific code I > choose for the port) passed to them. If you're desperate (and if you don't have too many calls to TEST), you could do something like this: #define COMMA , #define TEST(x) test("hello", 7, x) static void test (int a, int b, ...) { return; } int main (void) { TEST (1 COMMA 2 COMMA 3); TEST (1 COMMA 2); } gcc -E produces: int main (void) { test("hello", 7, 1 , 2 , 3 ) ; test("hello", 7, 1 , 2 ) ; } ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 11:41:47 -0400 From: John Reagan Subject: Re: Itanium: determine object file main or sub Message-ID: dreherthomi wrote: > Integrity/Itanium: Does anybody know how to determine from an object > file whether it is a main module or a sub module? On the Alpha, the > output of analyze/object contained data about a transfer address and > made it possible to distinguish that. > Look for a symbol named ELF$TFRADR in the symbol table. However, note that languages like C and COBOL put weak transfer addresses in just about every object they generate. It is the linker that picks the ultimate transfer address. $ pipe anal/obj/section=symtab conf001.obj | search sys$input ELF$TFRADR -- John Reagan OpenVMS Pascal/Macro-32/COBOL Project Leader Hewlett-Packard Company ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 16:31:02 +0100 From: Anton Shterenlikht Subject: maintenance downtime on our supercomputer Message-ID: <20070913153102.GA95510@mech-aslap33.men.bris.ac.uk> Below is a message from the administrator of our supercomputer, www.bris.ac.uk. Clearly, VMS cluster rolling update features would be very useful here. Although I understand that cluster shutdown is also necessary in some cases. [...] You have received this email because you have an account on bluecrystal, a beowulf cluster managed by the Advanced Computing Research Centre, Bristol University. Greetings, It is necessary to schedule some maintenance downtime on bluecrystal to update the parallel filesystem software, amongst other things. The system will be shutdown on Wednesday 26th September (obviously all running jobs will be killed when this happens). Hopefully this work will be completed on the same day. We apologise for any inconvenience caused by this essential maintenance work. [...] -- Anton Shterenlikht Room 2.6, Queen's Building Mech Eng Dept Bristol University University Walk, Bristol BS8 1TR, UK Tel: +44 (0)117 928 8233 Fax: +44 (0)117 929 4423 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 11:43:31 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: maintenance downtime on our supercomputer Message-ID: On 09/13/07 10:31, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: > Below is a message from the administrator of our supercomputer, www.bris.ac.uk. > Clearly, VMS cluster rolling update features would be very useful here. > Although I understand that cluster shutdown is also necessary in some > cases. > > [...] > > You have received this email because you have an account on bluecrystal, > a beowulf cluster managed by the Advanced Computing Research Centre, > Bristol University. > > Greetings, > > It is necessary to schedule some maintenance downtime on bluecrystal > to update the parallel filesystem software, amongst other things. How do Beowulf clusters sync file accesses? Thru the master node? > The system will be shutdown on Wednesday 26th September (obviously > all running jobs will be killed when this happens). Hopefully this > work will be completed on the same day. > > We apologise for any inconvenience caused by this essential > maintenance work. -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 13:16:09 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: maintenance downtime on our supercomputer Message-ID: <514cf$46e9706d$cef8887a$26463@TEKSAVVY.COM> Anton Shterenlikht wrote: > Below is a message from the administrator of our supercomputer, www.bris.ac.uk. Oh, that is one system Mr Vaxman probably wouldn't want to get near :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) ------------------------------ Date: 13 Sep 2007 08:28:02 +0200 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOeGER) Subject: Re: Product Install, UNDO and recovery data (again!) Message-ID: <46e8f492@news.langstoeger.at> In article <5krph7F54itfU1@mid.individual.net>, Ken Fairfield writes: >That process is all fine and well (3a,b,c), but in a case like mine, >DFU wasn't installed when the other full kits were, and indeed, >subsequent ECO kits were installed, thus the various PSCI$UNDO >directories are present. But now I'm installing a "full kit" for >DFU. Just seems counter-intuitive to me that DFU installation >deletes recovery data for VMS732* ECO's. But such is life... :-} Yes, it is hard to find out, that you forgot to install a full kit at "full kit time" and you would therefore loose recovery data. But in my case, the full kit will have to wait till the next installation session a few weeks later (as I want to find out which of the ECOs - if any - brought troubles with it). -- Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTOEGER Network and OpenVMS system specialist E-mail peter@langstoeger.at A-1030 VIENNA AUSTRIA I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 04:59:09 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: Will Linux bloat itself out of existance ? Message-ID: On 09/12/07 22:10, Neil Rieck wrote: > On Sep 11, 2:41 pm, JF Mezei wrote: >> http://www.cio.com/article/135700/Seven_Wonders_of_the_IT_World/7 >> >> It lists Linux as one of the 7 wonders of the IT world. It mentions 8.2 >> million lines of code and growing at 10% per year, and 2.89 changes to >> the kernel per hour. >> >> Is this really sustainable ? >> > > 3,200 developers for the kernel 2.6.22 ! > > This seems more like evolution through natural selection :-) > > You've got to hand it to them though because 3200 pairs of eyes are > much better than the smaller numbers found at most software houses. I Most of them work on radically different subsystems. And most of those 3200 just submit small patches. > had been doing trial installs of Linux and Solaris (along with > development tools) every year since around 2002 and have seen real > improvements over the years. So has Gates because he borrowed lots of > stuff from the OpenSource community like the software firewall stuffed > into Windows-XP-SP2 and that tabbed browser thing from Mozilla which > was stuffed into IE7. > > I still prefer OpenVMS but only a fool would ignore the advances made > by the UNIX/Linux/OpenSource community. > > p.s. on the flip side, anyone who has tried to make sense of either > CVS or SVN knows that drug abuse is still rampant over there Which is why Linus never used cvs for the kernel. -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2007.500 ************************