INFO-VAX Wed, 30 Jan 2008 Volume 2008 : Issue 60 Contents: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Re: Anyone interested in building a vms-like OS? Re: Anyone interested in building a vms-like OS? Re: Anyone interested in building a vms-like OS? Re: Anyone interested in building a vms-like OS? Re: DSPP Integrity remanufactured hardware offerings, no VMS option Re: M$IE; was: DSPP Integrity remanufactured h/w... Re: M$IE; was: DSPP Integrity remanufactured h/w... Re: PowerTerm 525 & eXcursion Re: PowerTerm 525 & eXcursion Re: PowerTerm 525 & eXcursion Re: PowerTerm 525 & eXcursion Re: PowerTerm 525 & eXcursion Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Re: VT100 standards Re: VT100 standards Re: VT100 standards and EDT Re: VT100 standards and EDT Re: VT100 standards and EDT Re: VT100 standards and EDT Re: VT100 standards and EDT Re: VT100 standards and EDT Re: VT100 standards and EDT Re: VT100 standards and EDT Re: VT100 standards and EDT ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 30 Jan 2008 06:30:40 -0600 From: briggs@encompasserve.org Subject: Re: "file locked by another user" mystery Message-ID: In article <479FB364.4010505@triumf.ca>, Fred Bach writes: > Mr Briggs, > > Holy crow! You're right. However, it is not explicitly stated > in the DCL Help that if you have an ON SEVERE command that you > cannot have a previous ON WARNING command and expect it to work. > The HELP just implies that, in the absence of the ON WARNING or > and ON ERROR command, execution would simply continue. The DCL > HELP does *not* say that previous ON WARNING or ON ERROR commands > are thereby nullified and rendered useless! Looks like the DCL > HELP needs to be amended to say what it really should! Perhaps so. I'd actually visited the DCL help before posting to see if there was a definitive reference that I could point to describing the actual behavior. No such luck. > The DCL Help says: > >>> ON >>> >>> Parameters >>> >>> condition >>> >>> Specifies either the severity level of an error or a Ctrl/Y >>> interrupt. Specify one of the following keywords, which may be >>> abbreviated to one or more characters: >>> >>> WARNING Return status of warning occurs ($SEVERITY equals >>> 0). >>> >>> ERROR Return status of error occurs ($SEVERITY >>> equals 2). >>> >>> SEVERE_ERROR Return status of error occurs ($SEVERITY >>> equals 4). >>> >>> CONTROL_Y Ctrl/Y character occurs on SYS$INPUT. >>> >>> The default error condition is ON ERROR THEN EXIT. >>> >>> >>> command >>> >>> Specifies the DCL command line to be executed. Optionally, you >>> can precede the command line with a dollar sign ($). >>> >>> If you specified an error condition as the condition parameter, >>> the action is taken when errors equal to or greater than the >>> specified level of error occur. >>> >>> Examples >>> >>> >>> 1.$ ON SEVERE_ERROR THEN CONTINUE >>> >>> A command procedure that contains this statement continues >>> to execute normally when a warning or error occurs during >>> execution. When a severe error occurs, the ON statement signals >>> the procedure to execute the next statement anyway. Once >>> the statement has been executed as a result of the severe >>> error condition, the default action (ON ERROR THEN EXIT) is >>> reinstated. > > > [ snip ] > > Note that the help does NOT say that it is illegal to have an > ON WARNING THEN CONTINUE or an ON ERROR THEN GOTO EXIT. The HELP > doesn't even say it's futile. Neither are futile. "ON WARNING THEN CONTINUE" means that the first error of severity WARNING or worse is ignored and the sequential flow of execution is maintained. [It is poor practice to depend on this because the ON conditions are one-shots. A second error would go unhandled. It is more appropriate to use "SET NOON" if you want to continue the normal sequential flow of execution past multiple errors] "ON ERROR THEN GOTO EXIT" means that the first error of severify ERROR or worse causes the flow of execution to branch to the EXIT label. Any errors encountered at or beyond the EXIT label will get default error handling because the one-shot ON condition has already been used up. > The above text would seem to say > that the program executes "normally" for warning and error > conditions. The word 'normally' is rather confusing - it would > suggest that you could actually use an ON WARNING or ON ERROR > command and expect its specified action to be taken when only a > warning condition happened. At least that was the way I always > understood the help. The help is correct as written in this case. If you have "ON SEVERE" in force then warnings and errors are ignored. The sequential flow of execution is not interrupted for warnings or errors but continues "normally". This does not "use up" the one-shot ON . When you get the first severe error, the ON SEVERE THEN CONTINUE causes sequential execution to proceed in that case as well. But this does use up the one-shot ON > I did this all the time. FOR YEARS, and it really did seem to > work just fine. I guess the ON command is really forgiving or > maybe I got the order accidentally correct. ;-) I avoid it like the plague. If I want to take control of error handling, I go with $ SET NOON together with $ SAVE_STATUS = $STATUS and $ IF .NOT. SAVE_STATUS ... [I always want a saved copy of the $STATUS around so that I can exit with the right condition code or use F$MESSAGE and embed an accurate copy of the underlying error code in any error message that I generate] > Typically, to handle all possible conditions that might happen to > the user, I feel that I need to specify different actions for > the various ON conditions. Such as "ON WARNING THEN CONTINUE" > and "ON ERROR THEN GOTO EXIT" and "ON SEVERE THEN STOP" which > would be the typical set of ON commands I would use. They > all seemed to function just fine together in the same DCL routine. > Over all these years they did not appear to interfere with each > other. Things worked very well and the desired action seemed > to be taken. > > I just wrote a short script that would CONFIRM WHAT YOU SAY! > I moved various ON command lines around to test their effects. > Yep. I have a short script here that I used to verify the behavior before posting as well. > It would seem that the LAST "ON" command sets the course of > events. Yes. That is correct. > Much like I do for $STATUS now, to handle errors in a custom > way I suppose that now I will have to save and test the value > of $SEVERITY if I really want different actions to be taken on > different values! Can a fellow do that? Ya learns something > every day.... Thanks for the correction! Unless you get fancy, you can only save $SEVERITY or $STATUS. Not both. Personally, I tend to save $STATUS. If I need $SEVERITY, I can compute it as $STATUS .AND. 7 If you want to save them both, you could use a construct like: $ !some-command-that-sets-$STATUS $ save_status_severity = $status + "," + $severity $ save_status = f$element ( 0, ",", save_status_severity ) $ save_severity = f$element ( 1, ",", save_status_severity ) > My above code did NOT check things in the other direction - that > is: what if I want something special to happen on an ERROR > condition and all I get is a WARNING condition, and the ON WARNING > was specified LAST. I'm not quite sure how a fellow could cleanly > create only an error condition while trying to type a file. > Can you suggest some code to test this case? Thanks! $ type /output= That'll generate a severe error. Is that what you're asking for? > One thing that IS important to know is that after an "ON" > condition is acted upon, the last pertinent ON statement is > more or less rendered 'cancelled' by its having its specified > action taken. The ON condition executed then returns to its > default condition, so another set of ON ... statements is > frequently needed. Now even though the HELP confirms this, > that IS something that I learned the hard way. And I had > built myself a little DCL test procedure to prove it and in > some of my coding you would find a block of ON conditions > repeated many times. The code looks funny, too. How does > a fellow set the *default* ON conditions themselves?? The default ON is "ON ERROR THEN EXIT" That continues sequential execution on warnings. And it exits on errors and severe errors. ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 2008 13:14:31 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Anyone interested in building a vms-like OS? Message-ID: <60bbhnF1q7tesU1@mid.individual.net> In article <47A07521.8010507@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert" writes: > Tad Winters wrote: >> >> Perhaps. When you consider that a experienced and qualified VMS person >> can manage more VMS systems than a Windows person - that's my >> experience - it should be worth more pay. >> > > > Truer than most people know. At McGraw-Hill, I, and a team of five > other system managers were responsible for 125 VMS Clusters, 25 in the > data center and the rest at 100 field offices! We used RSM (Remote > System Manager, a product no longer available) to manage the field sites. And yet here they had 4 VMS managers for two machines. While I, singlehandly, managed 50 Windows Workstations, 4 Windows servers (including AD) and 14 Unix Servers. And for a few years there were also 2 VMS systems, a RSTS system and an Ultrix-11 system. So much for yet another VMS myth. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 2008 14:33:20 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Anyone interested in building a vms-like OS? Message-ID: <60bg5fF1ol6tlU1@mid.individual.net> In article <47a07b6d$0$15756$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes: > There is a huge difference between Linux and a FreeVMS. > > Unix was gaining popularity and the proprietary vendors were marketing > it a lot. But the pesky issue of Unix licence/ownership left a door wide > open for a Linux that is un-incumbered by thoe licences to come out and > ride on the Unx train powered by the bug guys liek Sun. Linux benefited > from all the Unix marketing done by the proprietary unix vendors. There were versions of Unix that were more free than Linux. The AT&T lawsuit is yet another red-herring. development of BSD never stopped and distribution while limited never really stopped either. Those of us involved at the time knew there was little if any AT&T code left in the stuff BSD gave away. The results of the lawsuit bore this out. Linux got its start by riding the Stalman "All software must be free" wave. And then it adopted a concept that we are all too familiar with. Marketing. It had advocates who went out and hyped it to high heaven. Got stupid (but effective) little articles in trade journals. It even got its own magazine. No one in the BSD camp has ever even tried to market it. If it had been the advertising by proprietary unix vendors that was making Linux so successful then the various BSD's would have been there right along side of them because they could always claim the advertising applied more to them than Linux, but they didn't care and never tried to ride any wave. It was marketing, pure and simple, done by the Linux camp that made it what it is. > > Linux jumped into a successful and viable bandwagon. > > > FreeVMS would be jumping onto train that is running out of steam. There > is no marketing of VMS, And there you have it. The biggest problem VMS has and a real VMS clone could fix that the same way that Linux did. The developers could start giving interviews (unless you think that none of the trade rags would even be willing to print it, I don't think so...) And, if it done as I said as a reasonably priced, but not free, product there would soon be money for paid advertising. It's not like we would be trying to sell iceboxes to eskimoes. VMS has a very strong potential value, even if HP can't or won't recognize it. > and VMS has left the IT consciousness. So had IBM until Gerstner decided to save it. > People > don't consider VMS as an IT solution anymore. And that's what the people running IBM thought in the early 90's. > While it would be very > easy for HP to market VMS, it would be very hard for volunteers to gain > any traction in the market on their own. Linux hasn't had a problem getting into the press from the very beginning. Other OpenSource projects (like MySQL) have also had no problem getting into the trade rags no matter how little real value they have. Why would you think that a VMS clone would be any different. I would actually think there were major themes you could play up to, including the idea that the owner of the original fails to see the value while people all over the world are crying for it. > > > Unix is ugly. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. VMS can be pretty ugly, too. > But people who want "cute" get Ubuntu or Macs and still > get the power of unix under the hood. Actually, most Mac fanatics get mad when you tell them it's just "unix under the hood" even though I have seen place where Apple themselves flat out claims it's just BSD 4.4. > > > For VMS to rejoin the IT crowd, it would need some fairly serious > updates of its middleware, and make it possible to "constantly" run > up-to-date versions of popular middleware such as GTK, KDE etc etc etc. > It is no longer enough to port it once. It has to be a constant effort, > which means that the VMS "#ifdef" have to be part of the mainstream > codebase otherwise, you end up having to re-port everything from scratch > with every patch/version. Believe it or not, based on the mindset of the average OpenSource geek, a version of VMS without a tie to HP would probably have no problem getting itself incorporated into the codebase. > > It would be great if HP were to decide to give VMS a development boost > instead of staff cuts. It wouldn't be unrealistic to see VMS brought > into the 21st century and be able to be modern again. But it is > unrealistic to expect HP to make such a decision. And that is the reason for suggesting that now is the time to start looking at doing a clone and doing it right. Not following the broken "all software must be free" model and looking at a VMS clone as a badly needed business solution. But I hold little hope that any of this will go beyond this forum. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 2008 14:55:08 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Anyone interested in building a vms-like OS? Message-ID: <60bhebF1ol6tlU3@mid.individual.net> In article <47a0853c$0$6335$607ed4bc@cv.net>, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: > In article <60bbhnF1q7tesU1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >>In article <47A07521.8010507@comcast.net>, >> "Richard B. Gilbert" writes: >>> Tad Winters wrote: >>>> >>>> Perhaps. When you consider that a experienced and qualified VMS person >>>> can manage more VMS systems than a Windows person - that's my >>>> experience - it should be worth more pay. >>>> >>> >>> >>> Truer than most people know. At McGraw-Hill, I, and a team of five >>> other system managers were responsible for 125 VMS Clusters, 25 in the >>> data center and the rest at 100 field offices! We used RSM (Remote >>> System Manager, a product no longer available) to manage the field sites. >> >>And yet here they had 4 VMS managers for two machines. While I, singlehandly, >>managed 50 Windows Workstations, 4 Windows servers (including AD) and 14 Unix >>Servers. And for a few years there were also 2 VMS systems, a RSTS system >>and an Ultrix-11 system. So much for yet another VMS myth. > > Because that is how it was structured where you are does not necessarily > indicate that it is that way elsewhere. You need to stop performing your > statistical analysis on a sample space on one. Why? If it's good enough for everyone else here, why not me? It only takes one counter-example to disprove this constant claim that it takes more people to manage other OSes than VMS. It doesn't. > > In my travels, there are many in PeeCee support -- as many as 1 for every > 5 PeeCees. And in and amongst this support collective there is, perhaps, > one person tasked to handle VMS issues. Typically, this person is NOT as > well trained or familiar with VMS as even some of the _novices_ that post > here, and the typical response to a VMS problem is the equivalent of the > response to a PeeCee problem -- CTRL-ALT-DELETE. And I can easily point to places I have been that have a much greater ratio than that. I can even point thousands of sites that have a dozen or more PC's running Windows that do not (and are not allowed to) have any person with administrator rights at all. All the PC's are managed from central location in some cases hundreds of miles from the user. And, guess what, it all works. And they don't get re-booted every 3 hours and they don't get infected by viruses and they just work. Go figure!! bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 2008 17:33:44 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: Anyone interested in building a vms-like OS? Message-ID: <60bqnoF1qirg5U1@mid.individual.net> In article <47A092EE.7070301@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert" writes: > Bill Gunshannon wrote: >> In article <47A07521.8010507@comcast.net>, >> "Richard B. Gilbert" writes: >> >>>Tad Winters wrote: >>> >>>>Perhaps. When you consider that a experienced and qualified VMS person >>>>can manage more VMS systems than a Windows person - that's my >>>>experience - it should be worth more pay. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Truer than most people know. At McGraw-Hill, I, and a team of five >>>other system managers were responsible for 125 VMS Clusters, 25 in the >>>data center and the rest at 100 field offices! We used RSM (Remote >>>System Manager, a product no longer available) to manage the field sites. >> >> >> And yet here they had 4 VMS managers for two machines. While I, singlehandly, >> managed 50 Windows Workstations, 4 Windows servers (including AD) and 14 Unix >> Servers. And for a few years there were also 2 VMS systems, a RSTS system >> and an Ultrix-11 system. So much for yet another VMS myth. >> >> bill >> > > Just because one system manager can manage 25 clusters does not mean > that ALL system managers can do this. Exactly!!! And that is in no way dependant on the OS in use. No OS is the magic bullet. > Much depends on the situation. > In the case I mentioned: RSM was still available. The clusters all ran > the same version of VMS and the same patch level. They also ran the > same application. The hardware was identical except for the number of > workstations in each cluster. What we did to ONE, we did to ALL. > Had the situation been more complex; e.g. different hardware and/or > different software at each site, the problem could have been much more > difficult. When a team member left, it took me about five minutes to > change the SYSTEM password on 125 clusters. Most of that time was > required to look up the exact syntax to do this using RSM. All of this is true. The example I gave about thousands of PC's with no local administrator and remote administration from hundreds of miles away is precisely that kind of a situation. The machines are all configured to a standard and locked down. And, I do the same thing only in a slightly less draconian manner here in the CS Department and it works. The only crash I have had in recent memory was a disk hardware failure. And restoral from the master image takes about 10 minutes and then it is back online just like all the rest. And, you know what, once I work out the licensing issues with Terminal Services Windows is going to get even easier to set up and run. Maybe the reason so mamny VMS people are beginning to have problems finding positions has nothing to do with VMS but with the fact that as soon as some of them open their mouths it becomes apparent how out of touch with the industry they really are. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 2008 09:02:57 GMT From: Hans Bachner Subject: Re: DSPP Integrity remanufactured hardware offerings, no VMS option Message-ID: Richard Maher wrote: > It would have been even nicer to see it available to the stinking > foreigners as well :-( This would definitely be nice. Interesting enough, the EMEA DSPP newsletter promoted this offering, but pointed out that it was U.S. only... Hans, who would as well happily take this opportunity. ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 2008 12:07:44 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: M$IE; was: DSPP Integrity remanufactured h/w... Message-ID: <47a06890$0$25065$607ed4bc@cv.net> In article <479fdfb0$0$90276$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes: >VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >> I need to upgrade my OS (VMS) to support the gobbledegook reformatted >> quoted-printable shite that Micro$oft mailers create whenever they send >> out preformatted text! >> >> I just received an email from a site which should have been text -- text >> that was generated by some SDA commands I asked the customer to enter. >> I now have a display full of "= 20" and similar shite. What is it with >> M$ and text? It does NOT need to be encoded. > >Any characters outside 32-126 or any lines longer than 76 characters ? Text! However, the lines were longer than 76 characters as I had them output some information that is best viewed 132. -- 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: 30 Jan 2008 17:35:08 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: M$IE; was: DSPP Integrity remanufactured h/w... Message-ID: <60bqqcF1qirg5U2@mid.individual.net> In article , Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: > In article <47a06890$0$25065$607ed4bc@cv.net>, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: >> In article <479fdfb0$0$90276$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= writes: >>>VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >>>> I need to upgrade my OS (VMS) to support the gobbledegook reformatted >>>> quoted-printable shite that Micro$oft mailers create whenever they send >>>> out preformatted text! >>>> >>>> I just received an email from a site which should have been text -- text >>>> that was generated by some SDA commands I asked the customer to enter. >>>> I now have a display full of "= 20" and similar shite. What is it with >>>> M$ and text? It does NOT need to be encoded. >>> >>>Any characters outside 32-126 or any lines longer than 76 characters ? >> >> Text! However, the lines were longer than 76 characters as I had them >> output some information that is best viewed 132. > > Looking at the SMTP headers you should find one indicating that your > buddy Bill Gates has graciously converted the body to "quoted printable", > another great lie from Microsoft. > > I have in mind when I get the time to arrange an MTA to reject such > messages. Can you really afford to just kiss off potential customers like that? bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:25:20 +0100 From: "P. Sture" Subject: Re: PowerTerm 525 & eXcursion Message-ID: In article <479FD09D.6881FB1E@spam.comcast.net>, David J Dachtera wrote: > Marc Van Dyck wrote: > > > > Is there a Vista-compatible version of those two softwares > > available somewhere ? What is the vista compatibility status > > of the versions distributed on the OpenVMS consolidated > > distribution CDs ? > > Unless Vista has something you absolutely, positively cannot live > without, Vista is not recommended. Stay with XP/Pro for now, hold out > until W/7. > "Windows 7 won't be released in 2009 after all" (wrap alert) -- Paul Sture Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks: http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~sture/ovms-bookmarks.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 06:42:04 -0500 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: PowerTerm 525 & eXcursion Message-ID: <47a063af$0$16226$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com> P. Sture wrote: > "Windows 7 won't be released in 2009 after all" Remember: ftp://atlas.csd.net/pub/vms100.jpg OpenVMS is *today* what Microsoft wants Windows NT v8.0 to be! This was on the VMS home page in september 1998, already under "Compaq" administration. 10 years later, we are 1.5 versions away from it. ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 2008 12:08:39 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: PowerTerm 525 & eXcursion Message-ID: <60b7m7F1q8vfcU1@mid.individual.net> In article <47a063af$0$16226$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei writes: > P. Sture wrote: > >> "Windows 7 won't be released in 2009 after all" > > Remember: > ftp://atlas.csd.net/pub/vms100.jpg > > > OpenVMS is *today* what Microsoft wants Windows NT v8.0 to be! > > > This was on the VMS home page in september 1998, already under "Compaq" > administration. 10 years later, we are 1.5 versions away from it. Current MS products resemble NT about as much as VMS resembles CP/M. Microsoft never wanted NT to be like VMS. They prefer it to be wanted and used by customers. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:07:31 -0500 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: PowerTerm 525 & eXcursion Message-ID: <47A07693.1000908@comcast.net> Bill Gunshannon wrote: > In article <47a063af$0$16226$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, > JF Mezei writes: > >>P. Sture wrote: >> >> >>>"Windows 7 won't be released in 2009 after all" >> >>Remember: >>ftp://atlas.csd.net/pub/vms100.jpg >> >> >>OpenVMS is *today* what Microsoft wants Windows NT v8.0 to be! >> >> >>This was on the VMS home page in september 1998, already under "Compaq" >>administration. 10 years later, we are 1.5 versions away from it. > > > Current MS products resemble NT about as much as VMS resembles CP/M. > Microsoft never wanted NT to be like VMS. They prefer it to be wanted > and used by customers. > > bill > Go for the throat Bill!!!!!! ;-) ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 2008 14:34:36 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: PowerTerm 525 & eXcursion Message-ID: <60bg7rF1ol6tlU2@mid.individual.net> In article <47A07693.1000908@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert" writes: > Bill Gunshannon wrote: >> In article <47a063af$0$16226$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>, >> JF Mezei writes: >> >>>P. Sture wrote: >>> >>> >>>>"Windows 7 won't be released in 2009 after all" >>> >>>Remember: >>>ftp://atlas.csd.net/pub/vms100.jpg >>> >>> >>>OpenVMS is *today* what Microsoft wants Windows NT v8.0 to be! >>> >>> >>>This was on the VMS home page in september 1998, already under "Compaq" >>>administration. 10 years later, we are 1.5 versions away from it. >> >> >> Current MS products resemble NT about as much as VMS resembles CP/M. >> Microsoft never wanted NT to be like VMS. They prefer it to be wanted >> and used by customers. >> >> bill >> > > Go for the throat Bill!!!!!! ;-) Just trying to inject a bit of reality. :-) bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 03:55:07 -0800 (PST) From: Bob Gezelter Subject: Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Message-ID: On Jan 29, 6:58 pm, "Robert Jarratt" wrote: > Is it possible to restrict access to TCP/IP (5.1) and DECnet (IV) on a > per-user basis? In other words I would like someone to be able to access my > machine, but not to go from that machine to anywhere else on the network. > > Thanks > > Rob Rob, WADU, I will have to disagree with Jim Duff. Restricting access to particular images is a good idea, but since these are essentially non- privileged images, a (somewhat) inventive user can circumvent the security by finding and using copies of the images or equivalent from his own directory. It sounds effective, but can be circumvented without raising any security alarms, which is a "very bad thing". However, I do agree with Ken Robinson's comment about NETMBX. Removing NETMBX is completely safe, and cannot be circumvented from the user side of the table. There is no substitute. A spot check (TCPIP 5.5) shows that NETMBX is required to open a socket (Cautionary note: I have not checked older documentation for verification, and a check of an older version of Multinet seems to indicate that this check has not been universal among TCP/IP stacks). Another possibility is to put an ACL on the pseudo device used by TCPIP to access the ACP. I have not looked into this approach in depth, but in concept it should be airtight. I would recommend caution before implementing it as always, one may find a longer list of processes (and accounts) need access to TCPIP than is appreciated at first glance. I hope that the above is helpful, if I have been unclear, please let me know. - Bob Gezelter, http://www.rlgsc.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 23:41:33 +1100 From: Jim Duff Subject: Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Message-ID: <47a0707e$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au> Bob Gezelter wrote: > On Jan 29, 6:58 pm, "Robert Jarratt" wrote: >> Is it possible to restrict access to TCP/IP (5.1) and DECnet (IV) on a >> per-user basis? In other words I would like someone to be able to access my >> machine, but not to go from that machine to anywhere else on the network. >> >> Thanks >> >> Rob > > Rob, > > WADU, I will have to disagree with Jim Duff. Restricting access to > particular images is a good idea, but since these are essentially non- > privileged images, a (somewhat) inventive user can circumvent the > security by finding and using copies of the images or equivalent from > his own directory. > [snip] How is the user going to get a copy of the executable if it is marked ACCESS=NONE? Jim -- www.eight-cubed.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 05:09:04 -0800 (PST) From: PacoLinux Subject: Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Message-ID: On Jan 30, 2:23 am, David J Dachtera wrote: > Robert Jarratt wrote: > > > Is it possible to restrict access to TCP/IP (5.1) and DECnet (IV) on a > > per-user basis? In other words I would like someone to be able to access my > > machine, but not to go from that machine to anywhere else on the network. > > I guess it depends what you mean by "access". > > If you mean command line, you've got a lot of work to do customizing a > user-specific version of DCLTABLES. > > If you mean log in, select from a (DCL) menu and/or logout, then read up > on captive accounts. > > I'm not aware of a way to do this in UN*X, either, without breaking > almost the entire system. > > David J Dachtera > DJE Systems -> I'm not aware of a way to do this in UN*X, either, without breaking -> almost the entire system. You can use a restricted shell : http://www.gnu.org/software/bash/manual/bashref.html#The-Restricted-Shell Paco ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 05:11:02 -0800 (PST) From: FrankS Subject: Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Message-ID: On Jan 30, 7:41=A0am, Jim Duff wrote: > How is the user going to get a copy of the executable if it is marked > ACCESS=3DNONE? > > Jim =46rom a different OpenVMS system where that user does not have restricted access. File transfer by FTP or FAL would not be restricted in your solution. In a general sense, you're not concerned about users that play by the rules. It's the ones that will attempt to circumvent the security restrictions that you need to worry about. So, you have to think about other possible ways of getting a working executable onto the system and close those avenues as well. Removing NETMBX should do the trick, with the caveat that other functionality may be impacted as well. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:25:04 -0500 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Message-ID: <47a07b39$0$15756$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com> FrankS wrote: > Removing NETMBX should do the trick, with the caveat that other > functionality may be impacted as well. You can always grant those applications NETMBX privilege so that users without netmbx can still use that one application. If you are concerned about remote users downloading files from the secure system to their system, you also need to worry about programs such as kermit that don't need netmbx because they use the existing "serial line" link back to the remote user. So a user could theoretically download files to/from with a serial connection file transfer. And there is extremely little you can do to prevent this, short of preventing creation of files on the system. (thus preventing them from downloading a stub that allows them to download the kermit executable). It really depends on how paranoid you want to be. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:32:09 +0100 From: Albrecht Schlosser Subject: Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Message-ID: Jim Duff wrote: > How is the user going to get a copy of the executable if it is marked > ACCESS=NONE? From his own "home" system or any other system he can have access to and transfer it to the target system. Of course, he would need some network tool to transfer it, but there might be cut'n'paste and DCL share (IIRC) or UUDECODE or Kermit or... He might even have access to a compiler and write his own tool ;-) Albrecht ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 05:34:18 -0800 (PST) From: PacoLinux Subject: Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Message-ID: On Jan 30, 2:25 pm, JF Mezei wrote: > FrankS wrote: > > Removing NETMBX should do the trick, with the caveat that other > > functionality may be impacted as well. > > You can always grant those applications NETMBX privilege so that users > without netmbx can still use that one application. > > If you are concerned about remote users downloading files from the > secure system to their system, you also need to worry about programs > such as kermit that don't need netmbx because they use the existing > "serial line" link back to the remote user. So a user could > theoretically download files to/from with a serial connection file > transfer. And there is extremely little you can do to prevent this, > short of preventing creation of files on the system. (thus preventing > them from downloading a stub that allows them to download the kermit > executable). > > It really depends on how paranoid you want to be. -> If you are concerned about remote users downloading files from the -> secure system to their system, You can always download/upload a file to your host via cut/paste - binary files uuencoded previously - ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 06:24:03 -0800 (PST) From: Bob Gezelter Subject: Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Message-ID: <7b6815ec-b48b-438e-8475-781f3d3b6054@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com> On Jan 30, 7:41 am, Jim Duff wrote: > Bob Gezelter wrote: > > On Jan 29, 6:58 pm, "Robert Jarratt" wrote: > >> Is it possible to restrict access to TCP/IP (5.1) and DECnet (IV) on a > >> per-user basis? In other words I would like someone to be able to access my > >> machine, but not to go from that machine to anywhere else on the network. > > >> Thanks > > >> Rob > > > Rob, > > > WADU, I will have to disagree with Jim Duff. Restricting access to > > particular images is a good idea, but since these are essentially non- > > privileged images, a (somewhat) inventive user can circumvent the > > security by finding and using copies of the images or equivalent from > > his own directory. > > [snip] > > How is the user going to get a copy of the executable if it is marked > ACCESS=NONE? > > Jim > --www.eight-cubed.com Jim, The comments that have been posted in the interim have mentioned several various approaches that concern me. Preventing access to executables has its utility, but it presumes that the users being secured against have no capability of getting executables on their own power. From an auditing perspective, it is a far surer thing to prohibit access to the device that serves as a mandatory gateway to the TCP/IP stack (or to remove NETMBX, after verification that it is indeed needed for ALL network accesses), than to say "Well, I have blocked access to known network utilities". Blocking access to utilities is akin to applications level controls, they have some utility, but they are not airtight in the face of user belligerence, which is what security measures are intended to prevent. The recent high profile scandal at Societe General, which has been reported widely (see http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/29/business/worldbusiness/29trader.html an article in The New York Times), clearly points out that security and audit controls exist for the purpose of preventing deliberate misuse, not casual accidents. - Bob Gezelter, http://www.rlgsc.com ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 2008 10:48:09 -0600 From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: Restricting Access to TCP/IP and DECnet Message-ID: <+iycCzsPp9fq@eisner.encompasserve.org> In article <7dd80f60801291736h7b0673ffrf9c149fa2048c5c6@mail.gmail.com>, "Ken Robinson" writes: > On Jan 29, 2008 6:58 PM, Robert Jarratt wrote: >> Is it possible to restrict access to TCP/IP (5.1) and DECnet (IV) on a >> per-user basis? In other words I would like someone to be able to access my >> machine, but not to go from that machine to anywhere else on the network. > > If I remember correctly, a user needs the NETMBX privilege to use > DECnet (I'm not sure about TCP/IP). Take that away and I believe they > can't use DECnet. Ken is correct. Note that a restriction to prevent inbound DECnet access would be via the REMOTE (interactive) and NETWORK (program) access controls in SYSUAF. If those are enabled, lack of NETMBX privilege can prevent outbound connections. Considering the recent discussions of HP TCPIP not respecting the breakin evasion protocol, I will not venture a guess on whether TCPIP works as documented in your area of interest. ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 2008 12:44:39 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: VT100 standards Message-ID: <47a07137$0$25065$607ed4bc@cv.net> In article <24a781bc-a453-437b-a280-8ab6dd823879@m34g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, Neil Rieck writes: >On Jan 29, 11:27=A0am, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG wrote: >> In article com>, Neil Rieck writes: >> >> Those guys used to come to the DECUS trade shows back in the day. =A0I had= > a >> number of conversations with the folks that claimed to be the engineers of= > >> the product. =A0I'd demonstrate the problems with a certain escape sequenc= >e >> but they never did anything to correct it. =A0What you did was throw away = >a >> perfectly good VT420 programmer's manual. >> > >They fixed my problem then asked me to test their beta. When the code >was released they sent me about $100 worth of swag. Lucky you. I wasn't looking for any monetary or swag recompense. I was looking to have a problem fixed that was affecting ME via companies try- ing to use said product with a defective VT emulation. -- 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: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:10:28 +0000 (UTC) From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) Subject: Re: VT100 standards Message-ID: In article <2abc37c2-82e1-40e2-af07-28b22a892ac0@t1g2000pra.googlegroups.com>, AEF writes: > Well, I meant this differently: There was some talk in this newsgroup > way back about what should be done if at some point in the future HP > decided to destroy VMS source code. I initially said the code should > somehow be saved by law or whatever and some people here came down > hard on me for that and I retracted. Yes, HP owns it and if they want to destroy it, they can. > They said it's their code and > they can do what they want with it. Well, is forcing Microsoft to > share its code or access to it or whatever it is any different at this > level? Certainly MS has been fined and hauled into court over its anti- > competitive practices including doing what it wants with its own code. > So my point is why is it okay to force MS to be less anti-competitive > with what it does with "its own code" but not HP with VMS source > code? Yes, it is different, since it involves anti-trust cases, fair competition etc. Personally, I think it is rubbish. If I want to sell an OS with tightly integrated apps with no documented interfaces, then people can take it or leave it. My main gripe: by saying that MS is misusing their monopoly by not documenting the interfaces, the courts are implicitly confirming this de facto monopoly. Give me a break: people are competing with MS's IE, say, and this "competition" consists of an alternative browser FOR MS WINDOWS? Sheesh. ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 2008 12:23:35 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: VT100 standards and EDT Message-ID: <47a06c47$0$25065$607ed4bc@cv.net> In article <60aab6F1q5o77U1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >In article , > John Sauter writes: >> Bill Gunshannon wrote: >>> I remember back in my pre-academia days...... >>> >>> Working on a VT-xxx emulator, written in TurboPascal, with a good friend >>> and having it continuously bomb out running EDT. We used a datascope >>> (anybody remember them?) and hand documented all the apparently un-documented >>> things that DEC did with their terminals. Of course, I would have thought >>> that all stopped when the ANSI standard was published, but knowing the vendor >>> involved, maybe not. :-) >>> >>> bill >>> >> >> EDT supported the VT52, VT100 and its successors. All of the escape >> sequences it used were in the manual for the appropriate terminal. > >Sorry to disappoint oyu, but that just is not true. we found a number >of undocumented control sequences and we did eventually get the terminal >emulator running I supose we could have stepped back to VT52, but the >customer had their heart set on VT100. :-) Control sequences or escape sequences? I can't imagine that EDT was sending any undocumented control sequences (bell, tab, FF, LF, & CR). I have a utility that relies upon faithfully tracking escape sequences and EDT doesn't toss any wrenches (spanners for the UK readers) into the works. I have had one customer complain about it not working with one of the application that they use. It turns out that it was developed with a defective terminal emulation and they were sending out [2?J and [2?K which should be [?2J (DECSED) and [?2K (DECSEL). On a proper VT terminal, the applcation failed miserably and mimicked what my utility with interpreting. -- 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: 30 Jan 2008 13:18:40 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: VT100 standards and EDT Message-ID: <60bbpgF1q7tesU2@mid.individual.net> In article <47a06c47$0$25065$607ed4bc@cv.net>, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: > In article <60aab6F1q5o77U1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >>In article , >> John Sauter writes: >>> Bill Gunshannon wrote: >>>> I remember back in my pre-academia days...... >>>> >>>> Working on a VT-xxx emulator, written in TurboPascal, with a good friend >>>> and having it continuously bomb out running EDT. We used a datascope >>>> (anybody remember them?) and hand documented all the apparently un-documented >>>> things that DEC did with their terminals. Of course, I would have thought >>>> that all stopped when the ANSI standard was published, but knowing the vendor >>>> involved, maybe not. :-) >>>> >>>> bill >>>> >>> >>> EDT supported the VT52, VT100 and its successors. All of the escape >>> sequences it used were in the manual for the appropriate terminal. >> >>Sorry to disappoint oyu, but that just is not true. we found a number >>of undocumented control sequences and we did eventually get the terminal >>emulator running I supose we could have stepped back to VT52, but the >>customer had their heart set on VT100. :-) > > Control sequences or escape sequences? What's the difference? The VT seriesx of terminals use sequences of non-printable and printable characters to control the appearance of text ont he screen. > I can't imagine that EDT was > sending any undocumented control sequences (bell, tab, FF, LF, & CR). > I have a utility that relies upon faithfully tracking escape sequences > and EDT doesn't toss any wrenches (spanners for the UK readers) into > the works. Maybe not now, but 20 years ago....... That was before the ANSI definition became common. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 2008 14:29:30 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: VT100 standards and EDT Message-ID: <47a089ca$0$6335$607ed4bc@cv.net> In article <60bbpgF1q7tesU2@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >In article <47a06c47$0$25065$607ed4bc@cv.net>, > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: >> In article <60aab6F1q5o77U1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >>>In article , >>> John Sauter writes: >>>> Bill Gunshannon wrote: >>>>> I remember back in my pre-academia days...... >>>>> >>>>> Working on a VT-xxx emulator, written in TurboPascal, with a good friend >>>>> and having it continuously bomb out running EDT. We used a datascope >>>>> (anybody remember them?) and hand documented all the apparently un-documented >>>>> things that DEC did with their terminals. Of course, I would have thought >>>>> that all stopped when the ANSI standard was published, but knowing the vendor >>>>> involved, maybe not. :-) >>>>> >>>>> bill >>>>> >>>> >>>> EDT supported the VT52, VT100 and its successors. All of the escape >>>> sequences it used were in the manual for the appropriate terminal. >>> >>>Sorry to disappoint oyu, but that just is not true. we found a number >>>of undocumented control sequences and we did eventually get the terminal >>>emulator running I supose we could have stepped back to VT52, but the >>>customer had their heart set on VT100. :-) >> >> Control sequences or escape sequences? > >What's the difference? The VT seriesx of terminals use sequences of >non-printable and printable characters to control the appearance of >text ont he screen. > >> I can't imagine that EDT was >> sending any undocumented control sequences (bell, tab, FF, LF, & CR). >> I have a utility that relies upon faithfully tracking escape sequences >> and EDT doesn't toss any wrenches (spanners for the UK readers) into >> the works. > >Maybe not now, but 20 years ago....... That was before the ANSI definition >became common. 20 years ago: V4.7 (1987) V5.0 (1988). My VT220 which was manufactured 3-May-1984 and the sequences were/are well documented in the programmer reference that shipped with it. I have things stacked up on the VT100 or I'd check its manufacture date. I think I can safely state that the programmer reference that arrived with it also documented the sequences that controlled cursor positioning and character attributes without the need to check on its manufacture date. I don't use my VT100 because I prefer the keyboards on its later bretheren but I still use the VT220. It's still working happily after almost 24 years! -- 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: 30 Jan 2008 15:00:03 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: VT100 standards and EDT Message-ID: <60bhnjF1ol6tlU4@mid.individual.net> In article <47a089ca$0$6335$607ed4bc@cv.net>, VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: > In article <60bbpgF1q7tesU2@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >>In article <47a06c47$0$25065$607ed4bc@cv.net>, >> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: >>> In article <60aab6F1q5o77U1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >>>>In article , >>>> John Sauter writes: >>>>> Bill Gunshannon wrote: >>>>>> I remember back in my pre-academia days...... >>>>>> >>>>>> Working on a VT-xxx emulator, written in TurboPascal, with a good friend >>>>>> and having it continuously bomb out running EDT. We used a datascope >>>>>> (anybody remember them?) and hand documented all the apparently un-documented >>>>>> things that DEC did with their terminals. Of course, I would have thought >>>>>> that all stopped when the ANSI standard was published, but knowing the vendor >>>>>> involved, maybe not. :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> bill >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> EDT supported the VT52, VT100 and its successors. All of the escape >>>>> sequences it used were in the manual for the appropriate terminal. >>>> >>>>Sorry to disappoint oyu, but that just is not true. we found a number >>>>of undocumented control sequences and we did eventually get the terminal >>>>emulator running I supose we could have stepped back to VT52, but the >>>>customer had their heart set on VT100. :-) >>> >>> Control sequences or escape sequences? >> >>What's the difference? The VT seriesx of terminals use sequences of >>non-printable and printable characters to control the appearance of >>text ont he screen. >> >>> I can't imagine that EDT was >>> sending any undocumented control sequences (bell, tab, FF, LF, & CR). >>> I have a utility that relies upon faithfully tracking escape sequences >>> and EDT doesn't toss any wrenches (spanners for the UK readers) into >>> the works. >> >>Maybe not now, but 20 years ago....... That was before the ANSI definition >>became common. > > 20 years ago: V4.7 (1987) V5.0 (1988). My VT220 which was manufactured > 3-May-1984 and the sequences were/are well documented in the programmer > reference that shipped with it. I have things stacked up on the VT100 > or I'd check its manufacture date. I think I can safely state that the > programmer reference that arrived with it also documented the sequences > that controlled cursor positioning and character attributes without the > need to check on its manufacture date. I don't use my VT100 because I > prefer the keyboards on its later bretheren but I still use the VT220. > It's still working happily after almost 24 years! And, unless you have tried every possible combination, how do you know there are no undocumented escape sequences? What you need to do is run a datascope on the output of something like EDT (as we did) and then compare the things it sends to that documentation. 20 years ago EDT used escape sequences that were not in the documentation. DEC knew it and admitted it to our corporate people but would not tell us what they were or what they did. We certainly didn't invest all that time and money learning them for nothing. We were contractually bound to deliver a VT100 emulator that worked with VMS programs including MAIL and EDT. And it was a lot more work than just reading the documentation. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:14:32 -0500 From: John Sauter Subject: Re: VT100 standards and EDT Message-ID: Bill Gunshannon wrote: > And, unless you have tried every possible combination, how do you know > there are no undocumented escape sequences? What you need to do is run > a datascope on the output of something like EDT (as we did) and then > compare the things it sends to that documentation. 20 years ago EDT > used escape sequences that were not in the documentation. DEC knew it > and admitted it to our corporate people but would not tell us what they > were or what they did. We certainly didn't invest all that time and > money learning them for nothing. We were contractually bound to deliver > a VT100 emulator that worked with VMS programs including MAIL and EDT. > And it was a lot more work than just reading the documentation. > > bill I would certainly be interested in knowing who within DEC said this to you. Whoever it was did not talk to the EDT development group; we would have been happy to share the technical details of our terminal handling with you. We even had a terminal emulator in the QA system which was faithful enough to do everything that EDT needed. John Sauter (John_Sauter@systemeyescomputerstore.com) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:38:13 -0500 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: VT100 standards and EDT Message-ID: <47A099E5.6000003@comcast.net> Bill Gunshannon wrote: > In article <47a06c47$0$25065$607ed4bc@cv.net>, > VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: > >>In article <60aab6F1q5o77U1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >> >>>In article , >>> John Sauter writes: >>> >>>>Bill Gunshannon wrote: >>>> >>>>>I remember back in my pre-academia days...... >>>>> >>>>>Working on a VT-xxx emulator, written in TurboPascal, with a good friend >>>>>and having it continuously bomb out running EDT. We used a datascope >>>>>(anybody remember them?) and hand documented all the apparently un-documented >>>>>things that DEC did with their terminals. Of course, I would have thought >>>>>that all stopped when the ANSI standard was published, but knowing the vendor >>>>>involved, maybe not. :-) >>>>> >>>>>bill >>>>> >>>> >>>>EDT supported the VT52, VT100 and its successors. All of the escape >>>>sequences it used were in the manual for the appropriate terminal. >>> >>>Sorry to disappoint oyu, but that just is not true. we found a number >>>of undocumented control sequences and we did eventually get the terminal >>>emulator running I supose we could have stepped back to VT52, but the >>>customer had their heart set on VT100. :-) >> >>Control sequences or escape sequences? > > > What's the difference? The VT seriesx of terminals use sequences of > non-printable and printable characters to control the appearance of > text ont he screen. > > >> I can't imagine that EDT was >>sending any undocumented control sequences (bell, tab, FF, LF, & CR). >>I have a utility that relies upon faithfully tracking escape sequences >>and EDT doesn't toss any wrenches (spanners for the UK readers) into >>the works. > > > Maybe not now, but 20 years ago....... That was before the ANSI definition > became common. > > bill > The X3-64 standard was first published in 1979! The DEC VT100 series was one of the few to comply with it. It took a while to catch on but VT100 became the standard terminal and the terminal to emulate. Prior to this there was a hodge-podge of proprietary terminals, each with it's own unique set of control codes. Even different terminals from the same company used different control codes. This is why you still find "termcap" and "termtable" files in various Unix flavors; to define which of the myriad ways to "clear screen" would work for the terminal you were using at the moment. Thankfully, most of the non-standard terminals have perished. The VT220 hit the streets ca. 1983/84. There were VT220 emulations not long after that; I put up around $700 of my own money so I could have an emulator in my office at work. Well worth it! I sold it for about $200 when I left, several years later. ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 2008 16:21:03 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: VT100 standards and EDT Message-ID: <47a0a3ef$0$6346$607ed4bc@cv.net> In article <60bhnjF1ol6tlU4@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >{...snip...}In article <47a089ca$0$6335$607ed4bc@cv.net>, >And, unless you have tried every possible combination, how do you know >there are no undocumented escape sequences? What you need to do is run >a datascope on the output of something like EDT (as we did) and then >compare the things it sends to that documentation. 20 years ago EDT >used escape sequences that were not in the documentation. DEC knew it >and admitted it to our corporate people but would not tell us what they >were or what they did. We certainly didn't invest all that time and >money learning them for nothing. We were contractually bound to deliver >a VT100 emulator that worked with VMS programs including MAIL and EDT. >And it was a lot more work than just reading the documentation. The utility I'm working on handles VT escape sequences. I've run this against apps (EDT one of them) as far back as V3.7. Nothing surprising there. -- 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: 30 Jan 2008 17:41:24 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: VT100 standards and EDT Message-ID: <60br64F1qirg5U3@mid.individual.net> In article <47A099E5.6000003@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert" writes: > Bill Gunshannon wrote: >> In article <47a06c47$0$25065$607ed4bc@cv.net>, >> VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG writes: >> >>>In article <60aab6F1q5o77U1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes: >>> >>>>In article , >>>> John Sauter writes: >>>> >>>>>Bill Gunshannon wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I remember back in my pre-academia days...... >>>>>> >>>>>>Working on a VT-xxx emulator, written in TurboPascal, with a good friend >>>>>>and having it continuously bomb out running EDT. We used a datascope >>>>>>(anybody remember them?) and hand documented all the apparently un-documented >>>>>>things that DEC did with their terminals. Of course, I would have thought >>>>>>that all stopped when the ANSI standard was published, but knowing the vendor >>>>>>involved, maybe not. :-) >>>>>> >>>>>>bill >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>EDT supported the VT52, VT100 and its successors. All of the escape >>>>>sequences it used were in the manual for the appropriate terminal. >>>> >>>>Sorry to disappoint oyu, but that just is not true. we found a number >>>>of undocumented control sequences and we did eventually get the terminal >>>>emulator running I supose we could have stepped back to VT52, but the >>>>customer had their heart set on VT100. :-) >>> >>>Control sequences or escape sequences? >> >> >> What's the difference? The VT seriesx of terminals use sequences of >> non-printable and printable characters to control the appearance of >> text ont he screen. >> >> >>> I can't imagine that EDT was >>>sending any undocumented control sequences (bell, tab, FF, LF, & CR). >>>I have a utility that relies upon faithfully tracking escape sequences >>>and EDT doesn't toss any wrenches (spanners for the UK readers) into >>>the works. >> >> >> Maybe not now, but 20 years ago....... That was before the ANSI definition >> became common. >> >> bill >> > > The X3-64 standard was first published in 1979! The DEC VT100 series > was one of the few to comply with it. It took a while to catch on but > VT100 became the standard terminal and the terminal to emulate. I actually thought it was the other way around. I thought the ANSI committee sat down to come up with a standard, looked at VT100 and said, "Boy, this is good" the rest was history. > > Prior to this there was a hodge-podge of proprietary terminals, each > with it's own unique set of control codes. Not just prior to. I had many a Televideo 900 series after I was already very familiar with X3-64 (wasn't there a "J" on the end of that?) bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ Date: 30 Jan 2008 17:45:44 GMT From: billg999@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) Subject: Re: VT100 standards and EDT Message-ID: <60bre8F1qirg5U4@mid.individual.net> In article , John Sauter writes: > Bill Gunshannon wrote: > >> And, unless you have tried every possible combination, how do you know >> there are no undocumented escape sequences? What you need to do is run >> a datascope on the output of something like EDT (as we did) and then >> compare the things it sends to that documentation. 20 years ago EDT >> used escape sequences that were not in the documentation. DEC knew it >> and admitted it to our corporate people but would not tell us what they >> were or what they did. We certainly didn't invest all that time and >> money learning them for nothing. We were contractually bound to deliver >> a VT100 emulator that worked with VMS programs including MAIL and EDT. >> And it was a lot more work than just reading the documentation. >> >> bill > > I would certainly be interested in knowing who within DEC said this to > you. That was at the management level and I am sure there was a lot of politics involved. (Anybody here remember the DEC/PennYan/TERAK fiasco? We got caught up in that because of a business relationship with TERAK for a big government contract.) Maybe it could have been easier if it had been techie-to-techie. bill -- Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. University of Scranton | Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2008.060 ************************