INFO-VAX Thu, 25 Oct 2007 Volume 2007 : Issue 583 Contents: Re: Bush, Rice actions may bring judgment of God on U.S. Re: Dialup then pass port to application Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ? Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ? Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ? Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ? Re: OT: MAC OS-X or Linux ? Re: OT: MAC OS-X or Linux ? Re: OT: MAC OS-X or Linux ? Re: Pathworks vs CIFS performance Re: Restarting Mozilla to where I was before Re: Restarting Mozilla to where I was before Re: SUBMIT command Re: SUBMIT command Re: SUBMIT command Re: SUBMIT command Re: SUBMIT command Re: SUBMIT command Re: SUBMIT command Re: sudo Re: unix "batch processing" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:09:09 -0700 From: AEF Subject: Re: Bush, Rice actions may bring judgment of God on U.S. Message-ID: <1193278149.992365.80300@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com> On Oct 24, 7:24 pm, davi...@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: > In article , koeh...@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:>In article , davi...@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk writes: > > >> No WNT is a fallen angel it's heart (kernel) was originally created in the > >> image of VMS but became corrupted and twisted and was cast out to torment > >> mankind. > > > Only the I/O subsystems in any way resemble each other. The rest of > > the kernels do not. > > As I recall Helen Custer's Inside Windows NT showed that a lot more than just > the I/O subsystems resembled those of VMS. Hard to believe. I remember NT as riding a road along the edge of a cliff without any guard rails. > > David Webb > Security team leader > CCSS > Middlesex University > > > But it is surely Satan's spawn and his name is Bill. AEF ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 14:07:56 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Dialup then pass port to application Message-ID: <75907$471f89fd$cef8887a$32137@TEKSAVVY.COM> I thought of another way for you to do it. Your detached process: $ALLOCATE TTax: $REQUEST "Please dial to service XXX on port TTAx:" $RUN myapplication.exe Then, from an account which has PHYIO and/or SHARE privileges, you SET HOST/DTE to TTAX: after the "Please dial to service..." message has been issued. You dial out and when done, you then get back to the $ sign and REPLY/TO=y "OK to Proceed" and then the "REQUEST" command in the detached process will complete. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:33:13 +0100 From: "John Wallace" Subject: Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ? Message-ID: <13hv3vfhvj5o4dc@corp.supernews.com> "JF Mezei" wrote in message news:327ef$471ef2d1$cef8887a$21072@TEKSAVVY.COM... > Ok, I ask here because there is more chance of getting informed agnostic > opinions from people who know from both owrkstation to data centre machines. > > From a features and future point of view, would people rate MAC-OS-X > roughly the same as Linux, more desirable or less desirable than Linux ? > > When I look at MAC-OSX, from both the workstation and server sides, I am > quite impressed with all the features that come in, and OS-X comes with > a better "finish" while Linux appears to still be a bit rough on some edges. > > But linux has a lot of market mind share right now, but not sure if it > is a flash in the pan or whether it will be a truly serious contender in > the long term. > > > In terms of documentation, would either have an edge on the other ? OS_X > for desktop's documentation has not impressed me, being used to VMS > documentation standards. > > From an 8086 hardware point of view, MACs come with support for their > hardware so no need to hunt for drivers. But with Linux, one sometimes > need to hunt for drivers. Is that a fair statement ? There are many factors come into this decision, and you have said very little about which of them may be important to you. Despite this, there have been many helpful replies, and I'd like to add my 2p: 1) There is not one Linux, there are many. There is quite a difference between the ubergeek flavours and the "batteries included" flavours. If you are new to Linux you may prefer a "batteries included" one; I've found SuSe not bad, others may have other preferences. Ubuntu seems to be trendy, you decide whether trendy=good. One aspect of "batteries included"ness which SuSE still doesn't have quite right is the ability to play a wide variety of media formats "out of the box" without undue hassle; Novell/SuSE appear to want to stick strictly within the law as regards redistribution of codecs etc which aren't theirs to redistribute, or are of questionable legality. This isn't a problem in the Windows world where stuff which isn't part of Windows (such as a DVD player) is often supplied by the PC vendor, and there are plenty of websites which will supply a comprehensive codec pack (maybe of dubious legality, but does anyone care?). Dunno how this works on Macs, or on Linuxes other than SuSE. 2) Wrt WiFi drivers: allegedly more and more Windows drivers are usable under Linux via NDISwrapper, for example the Broadcom on my laptop. Didn't work for me last time I tried it though (on SuSe 10.2, haven't yet updated to recently-released 10.3). As Ron said though, best bet is to pick something supported in your chosen Linux(es). 3) Wrt documentation: Linux has lots to choose from, none of it like VMS's. SuSE's I've bought (yes you can pay for it as well as freeload it) have come with some of those "book" things, which some people find helpful, but any decent IT-type bookstore should have plenty of Linux books to choose from. Whether they will be up to date with your current chosen distribution is a different question, which is why SuSE's own books were interesting to me. Do you read computer comics er sorry magazines? There are a couple of Linux magazines I know of, there's probably a Mac magazine or two, is this a factor in your decision? 4) Printing: as has already been said, this isn't the world of Windows. If you have special printing needs, Linux may not be for you, check first. Even if you don't have special needs, you still need to tread carefully, some printers are rather too dependent on Windows (or even specific versions of Windows). 5) Development tools: do they matter to you? There's lots of free stuff for the GNU/Linuxes, what about for MACs? 6) PDA synchronisation: do you have a PDA/smartphone and require it to sync with primary Calendar/Contacts/Email elsewhere? Then do some research. There are lots of things you can do under Windows which you can also do under Linux and (presumably) on a Mac, but only you know which are your essentials and which are your "would be nice"s. Do you have a list? You need one for your own benefit, even if you don't share it here. If the Linux world is "a flash in the pan", it's a rather long lived one. It's already been around a lot longer than some of the things talked about in this group, and it will be here long after some of them are gone. Whether Linux is a "serious contender" today depends largely on what industry sector you're looking in; in some, it has been a serious contender for years, in applications from consumer equipment (set top boxes and routers) to supercomputers, and a great deal in between. It just doesn't have the kind of visibility and "business ecosystem" that Windows has built up - for one thing, Linux doesn't *need* much of the Windows PC-jockey-administrivia-ecosystem stuff, regardless of what Kerry may sometimes try to have us believe. Similarly there aren't many commercial opportunities to "sell" stuff on the back of a "free" OS, so it doesn't show up in mass market shops much. Best of luck anyway, John ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:37:29 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ? Message-ID: John Wallace wrote: > There are many factors come into this decision, and you have said very > little about which of them may be important to you. Despite this, there have > been many helpful replies, and I'd like to add my 2p: I purposefully did not write what type of usage/apps I would want in order to get a more comprehensive set of responses from you guys (and they have been good so far). I've had a MAC since the fall of 1986. However, OS-X has very little in common with the classic OS, other than essentially being able to run an instance of OS-9 as an application. The Unix underpinnings make it interesting as a learning exercise, and that puts it in an equal footing with Linux. However, Linux appears to be a better carreer choice, even though the OS-X server, on paper (or rather on Apple's web site:-) appears to be much better packaged and fully loaded with what you need. Looking at all the advancements made by Apple, it makes VMS very very pale in comparison. Lets be brutally honest here, what we have to look forward to with VMS is essentially upgrades to support whatever hardware HP wants to sell. Both OS-X and Linux are growing, so either is better than VMS since HP is perfectly happy with the current pace of VMS shrinkage. OS-X appears to be better quality, but Linux seems to be more popular. Going from VMS to OS-X would be moving from underdog to underdog, but maintaining higher standards of quality. Going to Linux would be moving to a winner but lowering standards somewhat. Thing is that OS-X may still be seen as underdog in the server market, but what Apple has planned for it and the resources assigned to it gives me hope that perhaps it may become a much more popular platform. ------------------------ A joke I heard from space (litterally !): What's at the bottom of the ocean and twitches ? A nervous wreck. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:46:11 GMT From: Bob Harris Subject: Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ? Message-ID: In article <13hv3vfhvj5o4dc@corp.supernews.com>, "John Wallace" wrote: > "JF Mezei" wrote in message > news:327ef$471ef2d1$cef8887a$21072@TEKSAVVY.COM... > > Ok, I ask here because there is more chance of getting informed agnostic > > opinions from people who know from both owrkstation to data centre > machines. > > > > From a features and future point of view, would people rate MAC-OS-X > > roughly the same as Linux, more desirable or less desirable than Linux ? > > > > When I look at MAC-OSX, from both the workstation and server sides, I am > > quite impressed with all the features that come in, and OS-X comes with > > a better "finish" while Linux appears to still be a bit rough on some > edges. > > > > But linux has a lot of market mind share right now, but not sure if it > > is a flash in the pan or whether it will be a truly serious contender in > > the long term. > > > > > > In terms of documentation, would either have an edge on the other ? OS_X > > for desktop's documentation has not impressed me, being used to VMS > > documentation standards. > > > > From an 8086 hardware point of view, MACs come with support for their > > hardware so no need to hunt for drivers. But with Linux, one sometimes > > need to hunt for drivers. Is that a fair statement ? > > There are many factors come into this decision, and you have said very > little about which of them may be important to you. Despite this, there have > been many helpful replies, and I'd like to add my 2p: > > 1) There is not one Linux, there are many. There is quite a difference > between the ubergeek flavours and the "batteries included" flavours. If you > are new to Linux you may prefer a "batteries included" one; I've found SuSe > not bad, others may have other preferences. Ubuntu seems to be trendy, you > decide whether trendy=good. One aspect of "batteries included"ness which > SuSE still doesn't have quite right is the ability to play a wide variety of > media formats "out of the box" without undue hassle; Novell/SuSE appear to > want to stick strictly within the law as regards redistribution of codecs > etc which aren't theirs to redistribute, or are of questionable legality. > This isn't a problem in the Windows world where stuff which isn't part of > Windows (such as a DVD player) is often supplied by the PC vendor, and there > are plenty of websites which will supply a comprehensive codec pack (maybe > of dubious legality, but does anyone care?). Dunno how this works on Macs, > or on Linuxes other than SuSE. > > 2) Wrt WiFi drivers: allegedly more and more Windows drivers are usable > under Linux via NDISwrapper, for example the Broadcom on my laptop. Didn't > work for me last time I tried it though (on SuSe 10.2, haven't yet updated > to recently-released 10.3). As Ron said though, best bet is to pick > something supported in your chosen Linux(es). > > 3) Wrt documentation: Linux has lots to choose from, none of it like VMS's. > SuSE's I've bought (yes you can pay for it as well as freeload it) have come > with some of those "book" things, which some people find helpful, but any > decent IT-type bookstore should have plenty of Linux books to choose from. > Whether they will be up to date with your current chosen distribution is a > different question, which is why SuSE's own books were interesting to me. Do > you read computer comics er sorry magazines? There are a couple of Linux > magazines I know of, there's probably a Mac magazine or two, is this a > factor in your decision? > > 4) Printing: as has already been said, this isn't the world of Windows. If > you have special printing needs, Linux may not be for you, check first. Even > if you don't have special needs, you still need to tread carefully, some > printers are rather too dependent on Windows (or even specific versions of > Windows). > > 5) Development tools: do they matter to you? There's lots of free stuff for > the GNU/Linuxes, what about for MACs? Developer tools are included on the distribution DVD as an optional install or you can download them from the developer.apple.com web site (you have to sign up for the free ADC membership). Many of the Open Source software has been ported to Mac OS X via fink.sourceforge.net or macports.org X11 is also an optional install from the distribution DVD, which is needed by some of the open source packages. > 6) PDA synchronisation: do you have a PDA/smartphone and require it to sync > with primary Calendar/Contacts/Email elsewhere? Then do some research. > > There are lots of things you can do under Windows which you can also do > under Linux and (presumably) on a Mac, but only you know which are your > essentials and which are your "would be nice"s. Do you have a list? You need > one for your own benefit, even if you don't share it here. > > If the Linux world is "a flash in the pan", it's a rather long lived one. > It's already been around a lot longer than some of the things talked about > in this group, and it will be here long after some of them are gone. Whether > Linux is a "serious contender" today depends largely on what industry sector > you're looking in; in some, it has been a serious contender for years, in > applications from consumer equipment (set top boxes and routers) to > supercomputers, and a great deal in between. It just doesn't have the kind > of visibility and "business ecosystem" that Windows has built up - for one > thing, Linux doesn't *need* much of the Windows > PC-jockey-administrivia-ecosystem stuff, regardless of what Kerry may > sometimes try to have us believe. Similarly there aren't many commercial > opportunities to "sell" stuff on the back of a "free" OS, so it doesn't show > up in mass market shops much. > > Best of luck anyway, > John ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:38:40 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: MAC OS-X or Linux ? Message-ID: On 10/24/07 15:37, JF Mezei wrote: > John Wallace wrote: >> There are many factors come into this decision, and you have said very >> little about which of them may be important to you. Despite this, >> there have >> been many helpful replies, and I'd like to add my 2p: > > I purposefully did not write what type of usage/apps I would want in > order to get a more comprehensive set of responses from you guys (and > they have been good so far). > > I've had a MAC since the fall of 1986. However, OS-X has very little in > common with the classic OS, other than essentially being able to run an > instance of OS-9 as an application. The Unix underpinnings make it > interesting as a learning exercise, and that puts it in an equal footing > with Linux. > > However, Linux appears to be a better carreer choice, even though the > OS-X server, on paper (or rather on Apple's web site:-) appears to be > much better packaged and fully loaded with what you need. The popularity at geek-fests of MacBooks running OSX belies your assertion. > Looking at all the advancements made by Apple, it makes VMS very very > pale in comparison. Lets be brutally honest here, what we have to look > forward to with VMS is essentially upgrades to support whatever hardware > HP wants to sell. > > Both OS-X and Linux are growing, so either is better than VMS since HP > is perfectly happy with the current pace of VMS shrinkage. OS-X appears > to be better quality, but Linux seems to be more popular. In the server space, but everything I've read indicates that OSX is more popular in the client space. Of course, the hidden masses of wiped Windows installs, and the difficulty of measuring such things *might* be under-representing Linux. > Going from VMS to OS-X would be moving from underdog to underdog, but > maintaining higher standards of quality. Going to Linux would be moving > to a winner but lowering standards somewhat. I've used desktop Linux for many years, and occasionally used OSX. My experience is that configuring wifi on OSX is a breeze, but that the GUI aggravates me. All those little icons popping up as you roll the mouse pointer over them really aggravates *me*. One of the things that I *REALLY LIKE* about Linux (specifically Debian) is that I can do most everything from a terminal window. Use the GUI when it gives better functionality, use a "DECterm" everywhere else. I'm sure that there are GUI tools for most of what I do at the CLI, but I *like* the CLI. I get the impression, though, that most management tasks in OSX *must* be performed via the GUI. > Thing is that OS-X may still be seen as underdog in the server market, > but what Apple has planned for it and the resources assigned to it gives > me hope that perhaps it may become a much more popular platform. Who in their right mind needs or wants a server with a GUI on it??? -- 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: 24 Oct 2007 15:01:57 -0500 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: OT: MAC OS-X or Linux ? Message-ID: In article <327ef$471ef2d1$cef8887a$21072@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei writes: > > From a features and future point of view, would people rate MAC-OS-X > roughly the same as Linux, more desirable or less desirable than Linux ? Depends very much on what features as you're sure to find something ported to Linux and not OS X, or vice-versa. I prefer OS X because I think Apple has long had the best GUI in the business and OS X is the best GUI-over-UNIX I've ever seen. KDE and GNOME followers will, of course, disagree, but you can certainly look for KDE and GNOME ports to OS X. One of my WNT die-hard-fan friends recently got a new Intel Mac and regularly runs OS X and Vista in parallel. He's going to load Linux on it soon. And my kids have been running OS X and Linux on thier PPC Macs for more years than I can remember, so even non-Intel Mac users don't really have to choose between OS X and Linux. They just don't have to worry about MS virii so much. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:36:04 GMT From: Bob Harris Subject: Re: OT: MAC OS-X or Linux ? Message-ID: In article <327ef$471ef2d1$cef8887a$21072@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei wrote: > Ok, I ask here because there is more chance of getting informed agnostic > opinions from people who know from both owrkstation to data centre machines. > > From a features and future point of view, would people rate MAC-OS-X > roughly the same as Linux, more desirable or less desirable than Linux ? Each has their strengths. A lot depends on what you want to do with it. I favor Mac OS X, but I also use Linux and a little Windows at work, and I've also work 12 years with OpenVMS, 7 years with Tru64 UNIX, 2 years with HP-UX, not to mention systems that used 1's compliment binary numbers, or 12 or 18 bit words :-) > When I look at MAC-OSX, from both the workstation and server sides, I am > quite impressed with all the features that come in, and OS-X comes with > a better "finish" while Linux appears to still be a bit rough on some edges. > > But linux has a lot of market mind share right now, but not sure if it > is a flash in the pan or whether it will be a truly serious contender in > the long term. Linux is going to be around for a long time. It has more than sufficient critical mass. Plus what do you think all the "Baby Boomer" software engineers are going to do with their time when they retire from the corporate world? Linux is just going to get better over time. > In terms of documentation, would either have an edge on the other ? OS_X > for desktop's documentation has not impressed me, being used to VMS > documentation standards. While OpenVMS documentation may be more to your liking, both Linux and Mac OS X have a lot more sources for getting questions resolved. More Usenet groups, more web pages devoted to them, more on-line forums, more published books, and both platforms have a growing user base. Plus for Mac OS X, some of the Unix oriented documentation is just as valid for the Unix side of Mac OS X. > From an 8086 hardware point of view, MACs come with support for their > hardware so no need to hunt for drivers. But with Linux, one sometimes > need to hunt for drivers. Is that a fair statement ? While the term "It just works" is sometimes overrated, for the most part if you are the typical home user (which you being an OpenVMS type are most definitely NOT!), Mac OS X does just work. Apple gets to control a lot more of the hardware and software so that they have a well integrated system. And 3rd party developers of both hardware and software get to play off of both the integration as well as the simi-uniform nature of the Mac hardware. Other things to note about Mac OS X. There are 2 separate projects that provide ports of many Open Source project to Mac OS X. Fink.sourceforge.net and MacPorts.org so that a lot of software that runs on Linux is available on the Mac. Mac OS X is pretty. If this is for home, then I would say go with Mac OS X as you can then spend your time using the system, and not maintaining it. If this is a work question, then that is a more difficult question to answer. Linux with maybe a support contract from RedHat or SuSE might be the correct answer, especially if there are a lot of systems to distribute, and you can justify the cost of a support tech or 2. Or you can get a Mac OS X system, and try it. If you want to try both side-by-side, you can install VMware Fusion or Parallels on the Mac and boot any version of Linux you like to see if you like that better. If you find you like Linux better, then just throw out Mac OS X and boot Linux native on the hardware. You might have spend additional time and money finding this out, but it will not all be wasted as you can use that hardware to run Linux. Granted you can buy a dirt cheap box to run Linux, but what fun would that be :-) Bob Harris ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:48:53 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: OT: MAC OS-X or Linux ? Message-ID: On 10/24/07 16:36, Bob Harris wrote: [snip] > > If this is for home, then I would say go with Mac OS X as you can > then spend your time using the system, and not maintaining it. That's just out-and-out bull. The one professional down-side of Linux is that it server suff Just Works. Back in 2004 I set up Postfix to handle in- and outbound mail, and courier-IMAP to store my (and my family's) email. It works so perfectly with lack of any maintenance that I've forgotten how I installed it. If I had to do it all again from scratch, I'd have to go back to the documentation. Of course, I'd *never* set it up from scratch again, instead just copy of the /etc files and modify as needed. -- 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: 24 Oct 2007 23:43:46 +0200 From: peter@langstoeger.at (Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOeGER) Subject: Re: Pathworks vs CIFS performance Message-ID: <471fd8b2@news.langstoeger.at> In article , VMS is Virus Free writes: >Any experiences and comments relative to the merits of Pathworks >versus CIFS (aka Samba in VMS clothes) would be most appreciated. Pathworks vs. SAMBA V1 I had experiences with. And the conclusio was that SAMBA V1 was awful, dead slow and brought the whole VMS system to its knees (permanently 100% CPU, one single process per client means hundreds vs. 30% CPU and 9 processes total with PATHWORKS) Now, it's ASOVMS vs. SAMBA V3 (?) and my experiences are worthless, I think. Why not try it yourself and let us know? -- 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: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:35:27 GMT From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= Subject: Re: Restarting Mozilla to where I was before Message-ID: <38NTi.12124$ZA.7976@newsb.telia.net> Rich Jordan wrote: > XP doesn't clear unless I > reboot, which I have to do every 2-4 > days to maintain performance. Is this a server ? Or do you personaly work 24h days ? Or why is the system running when not beeing used ? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:00:57 -0700 From: Rich Jordan Subject: Re: Restarting Mozilla to where I was before Message-ID: <1193266857.955192.25580@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com> On Oct 24, 2:35 pm, Jan-Erik S=F6derholm wrote: > Rich Jordan wrote: > > XP doesn't clear unless I > > reboot, which I have to do every 2-4 > > > days to maintain performance. > > Is this a server ? Or do you personaly work 24h days ? > Or why is the system running when not beeing used ? Because its slow to shut down, and as often as not when I come in in the morning I already have a call waiting and don't want to wait for it to boot up, so it gets locked at night, not shut down. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:42:06 +0200 From: "P. Sture" Subject: Re: SUBMIT command Message-ID: In article , Joseph Huber wrote: > P. Sture wrote: > > Yes, but neither command is currently recognized by DCL, as tested on > > Alpha 8.3 and VAX 7.3: > > > > $ job fred > > %DCL-W-IVVERB, unrecognized command verb - check validity and spelling > > \JOB\ > > $ password xxxxxx > > %DCL-W-IVVERB, unrecognized command verb - check validity and spelling > > \PASSWORD\ > > > > You have to PUNCH the JOB and PASSWORD commands, and feed it to the > cardreader, then they are recognized :-) :-) I had a nagging memory that way back in early V2.n, you could simulate a card reader without having one. Thanks Bob and John for your explanations of the mechanism involved. -- Paul Sture Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks: http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~sture/ovms-bookmarks.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:45:16 +0200 From: "P. Sture" Subject: Re: SUBMIT command Message-ID: In article <1NrnvRfesLyH@eisner.encompasserve.org>, briggs@encompasserve.org wrote: > In article , "P. Sture" > writes: > > In article , > > briggs@encompasserve.org wrote: > > > >> In article <4de54$471e57db$cef8887a$17324@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei > >> writes: > >> > Doug Phillips wrote: > >> >> Absolutely! To run a job as another user on VMS, you must be > >> >> authorized to do so. > >> > > >> > > >> > Are there not any remnants of the punched card days where you could > >> > specify username/password to create a batch job running under that user > >> > ? (is it the $DECK stuff ?) > >> > >> $ help job > >> JOB > >> > >> Identifies the beginning of a batch job submitted through a card > >> reader. Each batch job submitted through the system card reader > >> must be preceded by a JOB card. > >> > >> JOB cannot be abbreviated. > >> > >> Format > >> > >> JOB user-name > >> [...] > >> > >> $ help password > >> > >> PASSWORD > >> > >> Provides the password associated with the user name that you > >> specify with the JOB card when you submit a batch job through a > >> card reader. Although the PASSWORD card is required, the password > >> on the card is optional if the account has a null password. > > > > Yes, but neither command is currently recognized by DCL, as tested on > > Alpha 8.3 and VAX 7.3: > > Have you tried them in the context of a job submitted via a card > reader? > > It's entirely plausible that they would be processed by INPSMB, not DCL. > IIRC SIMH supports the card reader device type. Something to play with on a dark and cold winter's evening perhaps... :-) -- Paul Sture Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks: http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~sture/ovms-bookmarks.html ------------------------------ Date: 24 Oct 2007 14:37:28 -0500 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: SUBMIT command Message-ID: <5qq3cWb5iy48@eisner.encompasserve.org> In article <5o8v4sFlpmppU3@mid.individual.net>, bill@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: > In article , > koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: >> >> su == "set host 0" >> su == "telnet 127.0.0.1" >> >> Although the behaviour more closely matches "su -" than "su", I >> almost always "su -" anyhow. > > But you are assuming (like so many people who actually think "su" > is short for "super user", which it's not) that su is strictly for > getting the priviledges of "root". neither of your two examples > above actually comes close to simulating "su". My examples of having PRIV and NOPRIV setup are closer to what the OP wanted than they were to su. My examples of setting up symbols for "su" have nothing to do with a specific username. ------------------------------ Date: 24 Oct 2007 14:47:16 -0500 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: SUBMIT command Message-ID: <5M7+5CHKtLD$@eisner.encompasserve.org> In article , koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: > > There are "DCL" USERNAME and PASSWORD commands, but they are actually > implemented in the card reader input symbiont, not the DCL image, > and thus are VAX only. And the only supported card reader was a > UNIBUS device, so most VAXen don't actually support them, either. Oops, I never did hook up my CR-11 to my 11/780. The username command is spelled "JOB". And EOJ is still a usefull command. ------------------------------ Date: 24 Oct 2007 14:49:36 -0500 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: SUBMIT command Message-ID: In article <7a60d$471f8707$cef8887a$31797@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei writes: > > Well, there you go. One HUGE reason why the roughly 1/3 of the installed > base is still on VAX and why Alpha failed and why that IA64 contraption > will fail too: LACK OF SUPPORT FOR PUNCHED CARDS ! > > :-) Oh, come now, VAX succeeded without support for paper tape, didn't it? 8-) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 23:16:28 +0200 From: "P. Sture" Subject: Re: SUBMIT command Message-ID: In article , koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote: > In article <7a60d$471f8707$cef8887a$31797@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei > writes: > > > > Well, there you go. One HUGE reason why the roughly 1/3 of the installed > > base is still on VAX and why Alpha failed and why that IA64 contraption > > will fail too: LACK OF SUPPORT FOR PUNCHED CARDS ! > > > > :-) > > > Oh, come now, VAX succeeded without support for paper tape, didn't > it? 8-) Are you sure it never supported paper tape? I distinctly remember something in early V2 documentation about a logical PAPERTAPEREADER, which I always misread as Paper Taper Eater. :-) -- Paul Sture Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks: http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~sture/ovms-bookmarks.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:07:23 -0700 From: AEF Subject: Re: SUBMIT command Message-ID: <1193278043.185450.127820@y27g2000pre.googlegroups.com> On Oct 24, 12:59 pm, AEF wrote: > On Oct 24, 10:39 am, davi...@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: > > > > > In article <1193149624.407810.325...@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, a13...@yahoo.com writes: > > >Hello, > > > >About Submit command, if I use /user=scott, dose VMS check user's > > >password? > > > Assuming the node has a SYS$BATCH queue setup then you might be able to try > > submit/remote which allows you to specify a username and password to run the > > job under eg > > > submit/remote yournode"scott password"::test1.com > > > should run test1.com which resides in scott's home directory under scott's > > account > > > submit/remote yournode"scott password"::device:[account]test2.com > > > should run test2.com under scott's account provided scott has the required > > access to the file device:[account]test2.com > > > David Webb > > Security team leader > > CCSS > > Middlesex University > > > >Thanks > > Of course! And don't forget to put the pinter-suppressor line at the > top of the com file: $ DEFINE SYS$PRINT NOSUCHQUE ! to prevent the > deletion and printing of the log file. (I saw this trick in this > newsgroup years ago.) > > AEF Better yet: $ IF (F$MODE().EQS."BATCH") THEN DEFINE SYS$PRINT NOSUCHQUE AEF ------------------------------ Date: 24 Oct 2007 14:44:30 -0500 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: sudo Message-ID: In article <1193230102.969817.137920@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, AEF writes: > > bash-2.03$ man 5 sudoers > No manual entry for 5. > > So I get the pages, but the 5 is ignored. I guess your and his Unix is > different from mine. (Mine is SunOS 5.8.) Or your sessions are > configured differently? What's up? Section 5 describes the layout of certain files. Perhaps your implementation of sudoers doesn't use that file (usually listed at the bottom of the manpage that you do get)? But, of course, UNIX is the portable operating system that's different on every platform. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:23:04 GMT From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= Subject: Re: unix "batch processing" Message-ID: Bob Koehler wrote: > I used to have a privileged program that would > capture the default directory, relavent DCL symbols, and relavent > logical names, write them to a .com file, append a command, and > submit that to batch under a different username. All using > documented APIs. BAT using the /USER switch, maybe ? http://vms.process.com/scripts/fileserv/fileserv.com?BAT ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2007.583 ************************