INFO-VAX Sun, 20 May 2007 Volume 2007 : Issue 276 Contents: Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Re: Digital *is* a Software Company? (Was Re: Sun Studio 11 (Solaris Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? RE: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? mainframe survey: TCPIP 5.4 ECO 6 and shareable images from ECO 5 Re: survey: TCPIP 5.4 ECO 6 and shareable images from ECO 5 Re: SYSMAN problem Re: SYSMAN problem Re: SYSMAN problem ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 10:43:12 -0400 From: Chip Coldwell Subject: Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Message-ID: On Fri, 18 May 2007, ChrisQuayle wrote: > > Why would anyone in their right mind want to run Linux for mission critical > stuff when Solaris is now free, industrial strength, has decades of > professional development effort and runs on Sparc or X86 ? Because they are pessimistic about the long-term prospects for Sun as a company. Linux has the property that it is owned by nobody, so there is nobody to go broke and strand the customer. For example, you can now buy support for the Red Hat Enterprise Linux distro from either Red Hat or Oracle. If one of those two goes broke, switch to the other one. Chip -- Charles M. "Chip" Coldwell "Turn on, log in, tune out" ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 15:42:54 +0000 (UTC) From: david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk Subject: Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Message-ID: In article , Chip Coldwell writes: >On Fri, 18 May 2007, ChrisQuayle wrote: >> >> Why would anyone in their right mind want to run Linux for mission critical >> stuff when Solaris is now free, industrial strength, has decades of >> professional development effort and runs on Sparc or X86 ? > >Because they are pessimistic about the long-term prospects for Sun as a >company. Linux has the property that it is owned by nobody, so there is >nobody to go broke and strand the customer. Rather ironic really since that was the original sales patter for Unix. Unix is Unix is Unix you want to move away from all these proprietary systems which tie you to a particular vendor etc etc >For example, you can now buy >support for the Red Hat Enterprise Linux distro from either Red Hat or >Oracle. If one of those two goes broke, switch to the other one. > Except that , apart from a very small amount selling CDs, the only income stream for Redhat is providing support. If a large percentage of that support revenue were to go to other companies such as Oracle then you would have to worry where Redhat would make a profit. Oracle of course has no such problems. I wonder if in 5 years/10 years time any of the large independent Linux distributors will survive or whether they will all have been bought up by the likes of Novell, Oracle etc David Webb Security team leader CCSS Middlesex University >Chip > >-- >Charles M. "Chip" Coldwell >"Turn on, log in, tune out" > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 12:02:22 -0400 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Message-ID: <4650710b$0$90266$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: > I wonder if in 5 years/10 years time any of the large independent Linux > distributors will survive or whether they will all have been bought up by > the likes of Novell, Oracle etc Redhat already has a bigger market cap than Novell. My guess is that their sales will pass Novell as well within 2 years. Arne ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 12:03:37 -0400 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Message-ID: <46507155$0$90266$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Chip Coldwell wrote: > On Fri, 18 May 2007, ChrisQuayle wrote: >> Why would anyone in their right mind want to run Linux for mission critical >> stuff when Solaris is now free, industrial strength, has decades of >> professional development effort and runs on Sparc or X86 ? > > Because they are pessimistic about the long-term prospects for Sun as a > company. Linux has the property that it is owned by nobody, so there is > nobody to go broke and strand the customer. For example, you can now buy > support for the Red Hat Enterprise Linux distro from either Red Hat or > Oracle. If one of those two goes broke, switch to the other one. We know the direction when Solaris sales speak is emphasizing Linux compatibility. Arne ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 12:55:04 -0400 From: Chip Coldwell Subject: Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Message-ID: On Sun, 20 May 2007 david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: > In article , Chip Coldwell writes: > >On Fri, 18 May 2007, ChrisQuayle wrote: > >> > >> Why would anyone in their right mind want to run Linux for mission critical > >> stuff when Solaris is now free, industrial strength, has decades of > >> professional development effort and runs on Sparc or X86 ? > > > >Because they are pessimistic about the long-term prospects for Sun as a > >company. Linux has the property that it is owned by nobody, so there is > >nobody to go broke and strand the customer. > > Rather ironic really since that was the original sales patter for Unix. Fair enough. All that work on "open systems", POSIX, "Single Unix Specification", etc was supposed to make all the unices combatible, but in the end it turns out that POSIX is a small subset of what any one of the unices supplies and the devil is in the details. With Linux, you get incompatibility between the distros. > >For example, you can now buy > >support for the Red Hat Enterprise Linux distro from either Red Hat or > >Oracle. If one of those two goes broke, switch to the other one. > > Except that , apart from a very small amount selling CDs, the only income > stream for Redhat is providing support. If a large percentage of that support > revenue were to go to other companies such as Oracle then you would have to > worry where Redhat would make a profit. Oracle of course has no such problems. Yes, the Oracle pricing model is kinda funny. You can get support from Oracle for your RH-alike OS for $99/year. Oh, but that database license will cost you $100K/year. They might as well support the OS for free, for all it contributes to their bottom line. I guess the danger for Oracle is that a lot of non-database customers will sign up for Linux support. Those customers will probably find that the quality of their support isn't quite as good as the guy down the street who *did* buy a database license. AFAICS, most Linux customers are switching from a proprietary Unix or VMS (relatively fewer are switching from Windows). Ten years ago, what drove them was actually the hardware costs: the big iron that runs proprietary Unix/VMS was much more expensive than pee-cees. Now, there's that plus the additional fear of being stranded by HP/IBM/whatever. And I mean stranded in both the software (Tru64) and hardware (Alpha) sense, here. Not only is Linux supported by multiple vendors (Red Hat, Oracle, etc), but the IBM PC and all of its components right down to the CPU are manufactured by multiple vendors. > I wonder if in 5 years/10 years time any of the large independent Linux > distributors will survive or whether they will all have been bought up by > the likes of Novell, Oracle etc It's a weird business model, giving away software and selling support. IBM Global Services made a lot of money essentially selling support (although they've really screwed the pooch lately if you believe Robert X. Cringely). But you're right that necessarily the margins on supporting Linux will have to be small if everybody has access to the source code and therefore anybody could offer to sell support. Chip -- Charles M. "Chip" Coldwell "Turn on, log in, tune out" ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 13:11:24 -0400 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Message-ID: <46508137$0$90268$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Chip Coldwell wrote: > It's a weird business model, giving away software and selling support. > IBM Global Services made a lot of money essentially selling support > (although they've really screwed the pooch lately if you believe Robert X. > Cringely). But you're right that necessarily the margins on supporting > Linux will have to be small if everybody has access to the source code and > therefore anybody could offer to sell support. Mass producing cars using an assembly line also brought the prices of cars downs. Arne ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 13:18:08 -0400 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Message-ID: <465082D0.8040207@comcast.net> Chip Coldwell wrote: > On Fri, 18 May 2007, ChrisQuayle wrote: > >>Why would anyone in their right mind want to run Linux for mission critical >>stuff when Solaris is now free, industrial strength, has decades of >>professional development effort and runs on Sparc or X86 ? > > > Because they are pessimistic about the long-term prospects for Sun as a > company. Linux has the property that it is owned by nobody, so there is > nobody to go broke and strand the customer. For example, you can now buy > support for the Red Hat Enterprise Linux distro from either Red Hat or > Oracle. If one of those two goes broke, switch to the other one. > > Chip > The biggest problem with Linux is "too many cooks". What's everyone's responsibility is no ones responsibility. Even in a software engineering environment, things happen that should never have seen the light of day. Consider Sun's telnet bug in which telnet -lf bin could get you logged in as bin. VMS has had a few incidents of this class. With Linux, who's minding the store? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 13:47:36 -0400 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: Anyone know why the Alpha market is so so quiet? Message-ID: <465089B8.50706@comcast.net> Chip Coldwell wrote: > On Sun, 20 May 2007 david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: > > >>In article , Chip Coldwell writes: >> >>>On Fri, 18 May 2007, ChrisQuayle wrote: >>> >>>>Why would anyone in their right mind want to run Linux for mission critical >>>>stuff when Solaris is now free, industrial strength, has decades of >>>>professional development effort and runs on Sparc or X86 ? > > It's a weird business model, giving away software and selling support. > IBM Global Services made a lot of money essentially selling support > (although they've really screwed the pooch lately if you believe Robert X. > Cringely). But you're right that necessarily the margins on supporting > Linux will have to be small if everybody has access to the source code and > therefore anybody could offer to sell support. > Everybody has access to the Solaris source code, or at least substantial portions of it. (Copyright on some of it is held by third parties.) Access to the source code is not quite the same as understanding it. Trying to wrap your mind around 100,000 lines of somebody else's code is not a task to be undertaken lightly. Or maybe it's 100,000,000 lines; I haven't tried to count. A lot of "support" is thanks to failure of the customer to RTFM. I'd guess that less than 1% is fixing something that's actually broken. Maybe 2-5% is due to poorly written documentation. Poorly indexed documentation is another problem; I've made support calls because even though the answer was in TFM I couldn't find it and wasn't inclined to read through 500 pages looking for it. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 11:14:54 +0200 From: "P. Sture" Subject: Re: Digital *is* a Software Company? (Was Re: Sun Studio 11 (Solaris Message-ID: In article , koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote: > In article , "Tom Linden" > writes: > > On Fri, 11 May 2007 05:33:20 -0700, Bob Koehler > > wrote: > >> > >> Where does one find these TPU-like keystroke commands? > > You can customize Emacs to do that, you just need to learn Lisp. In > > fact, there is even a vi mode! > > We were talking about the supposed capabilities of the (sub)standard > full screen editor that traditionally shipped with UNIX. Not the > useable raving madness of Stallman. LOL! -- Paul Sture ------------------------------ Date: 20 May 2007 00:11:29 -0700 From: urbancamo Subject: Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Message-ID: <1179645089.903353.315550@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> System Configuration: --------------------- System Information: System Type AlphaServer DS10L 466 MHz Primary CPU ID 0. Cycle Time 2.16 nsec (463 MHz) Pagesize 8192 Byte Memory Configuration: Cluster PFN Start PFN Count Range (MByte) Usage #000 0 256 0.0 MB - 2.0 MB Console #001 256 65173 2.0 MB - 511.2 MB System #002 65429 107 511.2 MB - 512.0 MB Console Per-CPU Slot Processor Information: CPU ID 0. CPU State rc,pa,pp,cv,pv,pmv,pl CPU Type EV6 Pass 2.3 (21264) PAL Code 1.98-83 Halt PC 00000000.20000000 CPU Revision .... Halt PS 00000000.00001F00 Serial Number .......... Halt Code "Bootstrap or Powerfail" Console Vers V7.2-1 Halt Request "Default, No Action" Adapter Configuration: ---------------------- TR Adapter ADP Hose Bus BusArrayEntry Node CSR Vec/IRQ Port Slot Device Name / HW-Id -- ----------- ----------------- ---- ----------------------- ---- ------------- --------- ---- ---- --------------------------- 1 KA2208 FFFFFFFF.81C5AAC0 0 BUSLESS_SYSTEM 2 PCI FFFFFFFF.81C5AF00 0 PCI FFFFFFFF.81C5B560 38 FFFFFFFF.83D1 5800 40 7 ACER 1543 PCI-ISA Bridge FFFFFFFF.81C5B650 48 FFFFFFFF.83D2 A800 B4 EWA: 9 DE504-BA (quad Fast Ethernet) FFFFFFFF.81C5B740 58 FFFFFFFF.83D2 F800 B8 EWB: 11 DE504-BA (quad Fast Ethernet) FFFFFFFF.81C5B830 68 FFFFFFFF.83D3 2800 38 13 00000000.00000ACE (?) FFFFFFFF.81C5BA10 88 FFFFFFFF.83D3 6800 FC 17 10021002.4C571002 (..WL....) 3 ISA FFFFFFFF.81C5BD00 0 ISA FFFFFFFF.81C5C018 0 FFFFFFFF.83D1 8000 0 0 EISA_SYSTEM_BOARD Adapter Configuration: ---------------------- TR Adapter ADP Hose Bus BusArrayEntry Node CSR Vec/IRQ Port Slot Device Name / HW-Id -- ----------- ----------------- ---- ----------------------- ---- ------------- --------- ---- ---- --------------------------- 4 XBUS FFFFFFFF.81C5C7C0 0 XBUS FFFFFFFF.81C5CAD8 0 FFFFFFFF.83D1 8000 C 0 MOUS FFFFFFFF.81C5CB50 1 FFFFFFFF.83D1 8000 1 1 KBD FFFFFFFF.81C5CBC8 2 FFFFFFFF.83D1 8000 4 SRA: 2 Console Serial Line Driver FFFFFFFF.81C5CC40 3 FFFFFFFF.83D1 8000 3 TTA: 3 Serial Port FFFFFFFF.81C5CCB8 4 FFFFFFFF.83D1 8000 7 LRA: 4 Line Printer (parallel port) FFFFFFFF.81C5CD30 5 FFFFFFFF.83D1 8000 6 DVA: 5 Floppy FFFFFFFF.81C5CE20 7 FFFFFFFF.83D1 8000 1F IIA: 7 I2C bus driver Adapter Configuration: ---------------------- TR Adapter ADP Hose Bus BusArrayEntry Node CSR Vec/IRQ Port Slot Device Name / HW-Id -- ----------- ----------------- ---- ----------------------- ---- ------------- --------- ---- ---- --------------------------- 5 PCI FFFFFFFF.81C5D6C0 0 PCI FFFFFFFF.81C5D9D8 68 FFFFFFFF.83D3 2800 38 DQA: 13 ACER 5229 IDE Controller FFFFFFFF.81C5DA50 69 FFFFFFFF.83D3 2800 3C DQB: 13 ACER 5229 IDE Controller ------------------------------ Date: 20 May 2007 00:12:02 -0700 From: urbancamo Subject: Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Message-ID: <1179645122.562778.108400@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com> >>>show config AlphaServer DS10L 466 MHz SRM Console: V7.2-1 PALcode: OpenVMS PALcode V1.98-83, Tru64 UNIX PALcode V1.92-73 Processors CPU 0 Alpha EV6 pass 2.3 466 MHz SROM Revision: V1.14.208 Bcache size: 2 MB Core Logic Cchip DECchip 21272-CA Rev 2 Dchip DECchip 21272-DA Rev 2 Pchip 0 DECchip 21272-EA Rev 2 TIG Rev 2.1 Arbiter Rev 7.30 (0xfe) MEMORY Array # Size Base Addr ------- ---------- --------- 0 512 MB 000000000 Total Bad Pages = 0 Total Good Memory = 512 MBytes PCI Hose 00 Bus 00 Slot 07: Acer Labs M1543C Bridge to Bus 1, ISA Bus 00 Slot 09: DE500-BA Network Controller ewa0.0.0.9.0 08-00-2B-87-53-A6 Bus 00 Slot 11: DE500-BA Network Controller ewb0.0.0.11.0 08-00-2B-87-53-BC Bus 00 Slot 13: Acer Labs M1543C IDE dqa.0.0.13.0 dqa0.0.0.13.0 Maxtor 6 Y120P0 dqb0.0.1.13.0 Pioneer CD- ROM ATAPI Bus 00 Slot 17: 4C571002/10021002 ISA Slot Device Name Type Enabled BaseAddr IRQ DMA 0 0 MOUSE Embedded Yes 60 12 1 KBD Embedded Yes 60 1 2 COM1 Embedded Yes 3f8 4 3 COM2 Embedded Yes 2f8 3 4 LPT1 Embedded Yes 3bc 7 5 FLOPPY Embedded Yes 3f0 6 2 ------------------------------ Date: 20 May 2007 00:22:20 -0700 From: urbancamo Subject: Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Message-ID: <1179645740.166057.25090@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> > The ATI Radeon 7500 isn't generally still available in a retail shop, so I > am guessing it is something else. I bought this card specifically for the DS10L off ebay. The retail box is labelled 'ATI R7500 32M PCI Card' ACOR R7532P 06120195. However, it looks like ATI might have marketed a mobility chipset on a PCI card, as a google search comes up with: drv-1002-4c57 ATI Technologies Inc. - fdds Radeon Mobility M7 LW Assuming this card is compatible with the 7500, is there anyway of convincing the bios/VMS of this fact? Thanks for the help, Mark. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 07:42:25 -0500 From: Dan Foster Subject: Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Message-ID: In article <1179645740.166057.25090@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, urbancamo wrote: > >> The ATI Radeon 7500 isn't generally still available in a retail shop, so I >> am guessing it is something else. > > I bought this card specifically for the DS10L off ebay. The retail box > is labelled 'ATI R7500 32M PCI Card' ACOR R7532P 06120195. Ooh... lots of these were made, but mostly for other platforms. If the DS10L doesn't see the card from SRM, odds are probably reasonably good it wasn't actually a Compaq/HP-sold card for the VMS systems. Island Computers sells specifically for DEC/Compaq/HP VMS and Tru64 hardware so their version is fully compatible and is a well known vendor whom also hangs out here: http://islandco.com/graphics.html Looks like the Radeon 7500 is currently going for USD $179 from Island. -Dan ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 11:15:17 -0400 From: "David Turner, Island Computers US Corp" Subject: Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Message-ID: <3CZ3i.30700$Cr2.26440@bignews1.bellsouth.net> We ship the Radeon 64MB All in Wonder card now as the others (we bought out ATI excess last year (2500 cards) HP bought the rest. The All in Wonder card comes up in the BIOS as ATI Radeon 75 (next liine) 00 It works for VMS 7.3-1> perfectly make sure though to update the Alpha firmware Important ! dt "Steven M. Schweda" wrote in message news:07052009143013_202002DA@antinode.org... > From: urbancamo > > mine> 12 51571002/013B1002 > yours> Bus 00 Slot 17: 4C571002/10021002 > > That's different. > >> I bought this card specifically for the DS10L off ebay. The retail box >> is labelled 'ATI R7500 32M PCI Card' ACOR R7532P 06120195. > > I saw those listed. The supported card has 64MB. It looks like this > one: > > http://cgi.ebay.com/_W0QQitemZ250111359544QQ > >> However, it looks like ATI might have marketed a mobility chipset on a >> PCI card, as a google search comes up with: >> >> drv-1002-4c57 ATI Technologies Inc. - fdds Radeon Mobility M7 LW >> >> Assuming this card is compatible with the 7500, is there anyway of >> convincing the bios/VMS of this fact? > > As a wise man once said, "compatible" is an engineering term meaning > "not identical". Other than recognition, I assume that the problem > would be with the VMS driver. (I assume that the console firmware can > use the VGA mode successfully.) I don't know whether the driver > (SYS$GHDRIVER.EXE) would be able to deal with that card/chip. > > If you look for "ATI Radeon 7500" in SYS$SYSTEM:SYS$CONFIG.DAT, you > should be able to find the entry for the supported card. You could try > to add something similar (but appropriately different) to > SYS$SYSTEM:SYS$USER_CONFIG.DAT, and see what happens. (My expectations > would be low, of course, but the experiment could be interesting.) > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Steven M. Schweda sms@antinode-org > 382 South Warwick Street (+1) 651-699-9818 > Saint Paul MN 55105-2547 ------------------------------ Date: 20 May 2007 10:46:12 -0700 From: urbancamo Subject: Re: DS10L ATI 7500 PCI Graphics Problems Message-ID: <1179683172.286806.191780@z24g2000prd.googlegroups.com> So, I edited SYS$CONFIG.DAT to include and entry for the ATI 7500 with the relevant PCI id (and commented out the existing ATI 7500 entry). At the end of startup I get the following: %DECW-I-BADVALUE, SYSGEN parameter WINDOW_SYSTEM set to 1. %RUN-S-PROC_ID, identification of created process is 00000223 >From the output of commands that follow, can I assume that I can forget using this card? Can I point out that my purchase of the DS10L off ebay was only because it could be had for 120 GBP, so as much as I'd like to be a patron of Island Computers I really can't justify it. Besides, I'm big into LK201's instead of LK4xx's at the moment, so my DEC3000/600 (which was running tru64 but which I plan to 'upgrade' to OpenVMS 8.3) with 24-bit graphics looks like a better bet for an interactive box. Having said that, I'm having problems getting the OpenVMS 8.3 CDROM to boot (the 512/2048 setting is correct), but I'll leave that for another thread (and day). Thanks very much for everyone's help, Mark. $ show dev g/full Device GHA0:, device type DECwindows output device, is offline, device set /NOAVAILABLE, record-oriented device, carriage control, shareable. Error count 0 Operations completed 0 Owner process "" Owner UIC [SYSTEM] Owner process ID 00000000 Dev Prot S:RWPL,O:RWPL,G:RWPL,W:RWPL Reference count 0 Default buffer size 0 $ type DECW$SERVER_0_ERROR.LOG;1 20-MAY-2007 07:21:05.7 Hello, this is the X server This is the DECwindows X11 display server for OpenVMS Alpha V8.3-060629 compiled on Jun 29 2006 at 18:33:00 Main address = 00038CB8 Activating extension image DECW$SVEXT_XIE, extension name: Xie, entry address 003D8700 Activating extension image DECW$SVEXT_DEC_XTRAP, extension name: DEC-XTRAP, entry address 004CA548 Activating extension image DECW$SVEXT_MULTI_BUFFERING, extension name: Multi-Buffering, entry address 0051C0A0 Activating extension image DECW$SVEXT_SEC_XAG, extension name: SEC_XAG, entry address 0056E6B8 Activating extension image DECW$SVEXT_GLX, extension name: GLX, entry address 005C0EF8 DECW$XPORT_SERVICES image base address: 7C880000 DECW$TRANSPORT_DECNET image base address: 00C22000 %DECW-W-ATT_FAIL, failed to attach transport DECNET -SYSTEM-W-NOSUCHDEV, no such device available DECW$TRANSPORT_LOCAL image base address: 00DD0000 DECW$TRANSPORT_TCPIP image base address: 00E12000 %DECW-I-ATTACHED, transport TCPIP attached to its network DECWINDOWS Hewlett-Packard Development Company OpenVMS, Release 8.3 Shareable Image DDX GH, InitOutput loaded at 00E540A0 Setting affinity to CPU 0 (active CPU mask = 0x1) Radeon Server DDX for OpenVMS Copyright 2002, 2004 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. Compiled on Jun 29 2006, at 18:32:40 Radeon: Init Screen Number 0 vmsInitDevice: Can't get DVI, status: 132 %SYSTEM-F-DEVOFFLINE, device is not in configuration or not available Unrecoverable server internal error (error code = 132) found, terminating all co nnections. Mapped Images... START END LENGTH IMAGE NAME ----- --- ------ ---------- 10000 301ff 201ff DECW$SERVER_MAIN 32000 243dff 211dff DECW$SERVER_DIX 7c8a2000 7c8adfff bfff DECW$XAUSHR 7c898000 7c8a1fff 9fff DECW$SETSHODISSHR 244000 2d55ff 915ff DECW$LBXUTIL 7bf76000 7bfe7fff 71fff TRACE 7bb26000 7bb57fff 31fff DECW$SECURITY_VMS 7b906000 7b977fff 71fff SECURESHR 7b3ca000 7b44bfff 81fff SECURESHRP 7c88e000 7c897fff 9fff DECW$TRANSPORT_COMMON 7c886000 7c88dfff 7fff DECW$LCNLIBSHR 7c87a000 7c885fff bfff DECW$XPORT_SERVICES 81824530 81839a20 154f0 SYS$BASE_IMAGE 7bed0000 7bf75fff a5fff DECC$SHR_EV56 7bb70000 7bbb5fff 45fff DPML$SHR 7b98a000 7b99bfff 11fff CMA$TIS_SHR 7b648000 7b699fff 51fff LIBRTL 7b69a000 7b6a1fff 7fff LIBOTS 81804e18 818076a8 2890 SYS$PUBLIC_VECTORS 3d8000 4c93ff f13ff DECW$SVEXT_XIE 4ca000 51a3ff 503ff DECW$SVEXT_DEC_XTRAP 51c000 56c3ff 503ff DECW$SVEXT_MULTI_BUFFERING 56e000 5be3ff 503ff DECW$SVEXT_SEC_XAG 5c0000 8a1bff 2e1bff DECW$SVEXT_GLX_RADEON aea000 b9a7ff b07ff DECW$DRM_RADEON b9c000 c1e270 82270 DECW$DRM_PRIV 8a2000 9629ff c09ff DECW$SERVER_DDX_XAA 9d6000 a669ff 909ff DECW$SERVER_DDX_CFB a68000 ae87ff 807ff DECW$SERVER_DDX_MFB 964000 9d45ff 705ff DECW$SERVER_DDX_FB c22000 da39ff 1819ff DECW$TRANSPORT_DECNET da4000 da7fff 3fff DECC$MSG da8000 dae9ff 69ff SHRIMGMSG db0000 dc01ff 101ff DECW$TRANSPORTMSG dc2000 dcf9ff d9ff DBGTBKMSG dd0000 e103ff 403ff DECW$TRANSPORT_LOCAL e12000 e523ff 403ff DECW$TRANSPORT_TCPIP e54000 eb49ff 609ff DECW$SERVER_DDX_RADEON faa000 ffa5ff 505ff DECW$SERVER_DRI f38000 fa89ff 709ff DECW$SERVER_DDX_CFB32 eb6000 f369ff 809ff DECW$SERVER_DDX_CFB16 Exception Call stack dump follows: PC IMAGE+offset of call -- -------------------- fc09c DECW$SERVER_DIX + ca09c e84684 DECW$SERVER_DDX_RADEON + 30684 d5a24 DECW$SERVER_DIX + a3a24 e84414 DECW$SERVER_DDX_RADEON + 30414 f16ac DECW$SERVER_DIX + bf6ac d4184 DECW$SERVER_DIX + a2184 ********** marking the end of call stack dump ********** ******************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 11:54:58 +0200 From: Michael Kraemer Subject: Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Message-ID: Tom Linden schrieb: > In the world of commerce the mainframe is still king I wouldn't call that "king". At best, "count". Amont other counts. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 12:32:50 +0200 From: Michael Kraemer Subject: Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Message-ID: Main, Kerry schrieb: > > You are joking, right? not at all. > While mainframes may have disappeared from Universities etc, that market > is a pebble on the beach compared to financial, insurance, banks, I'm not sure if your "pebbles" comparison could be applied in the 1990 time frame (and this is what the Gartner prediction referred to). The number of german national labs alone (several dozens) is about as large as the number of german based banks and insurances, and each of those ran at least one mainframe. Plus about hundred or more universities, each of which probably also with at least one mainframe. Even if the total market volume in $$$ was less than those of financial customers, I wouldn't call it insignificant. And don't count out the fact that fresh blood is usually trained at universities. > and > many other mission critical environments. such as ? > > It was only a couple of years ago, that's a pretty long time > there was a report that something > like 50% of all *business* transactions were still done on mainframe now this is a rather silly measure of importance, IMHO. In today's networked IT any component can claim such importance. How about "Windoze is indispensable because 90+x% of all online banking is processed through Windoze based desktops" ? How about cash dispensers (dunno what OS they use to run) ? Or the bank clerk's office PCs ? Without all those boxes, mainframes wouldn't have that much to transact. > or > mainframe compatible servers. Do these still exist ? I seem to remember they are physically extinct by now. Does Amdahl still make PCMs ? > Even if that dropped a few % since then > that is still a huge, huge market. Huge ? Compared to what ? IBM used to be a $60B company in 1990 with the majority of income from mainframe-related sales. By now they are a $80B+x company with mainframe business of the order of maybe $4B (that's the number I seem to remember). In view of such numbers, Gartner is perfectly right. > For those who have not been exposed to that mainframe market, it's a bit > like "if you are on a farm and you spend all your time in the chicken > house, it is hard to understand just how many other animals there are > and how big the farm really is." The farm obviously isnt big enough to feed more than one significant vendor. It isnt important enough (any more) for universities to offer general mainframe courses. > > And with many Customers getting fed up with all the issues of managing > so many smaller systems all over the place and that are running at less > than 15% in peak times, some companies are even expanding their use of > the mainframe. How many are "some" ? And: provided they find enough mainframe experts. Most of these have retired together with their machines. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 08:01:30 -0400 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Message-ID: <4650389A.6080305@comcast.net> Michael Kraemer wrote: > Main, Kerry schrieb: > >> >> You are joking, right? > > > not at all. > >> While mainframes may have disappeared from Universities etc, that market >> is a pebble on the beach compared to financial, insurance, banks, > > > I'm not sure if your "pebbles" comparison could be applied in the > 1990 time frame (and this is what the Gartner prediction referred to). > The number of german national labs alone (several dozens) is about as > large as the number of german based banks and insurances, > and each of those ran at least one mainframe. Plus about hundred or > more universities, each of which probably also with at least one mainframe. > Even if the total market volume in $$$ was less than those of > financial customers, I wouldn't call it insignificant. > And don't count out the fact that fresh blood is usually > trained at universities. > >> and >> many other mission critical environments. > > > such as ? > >> >> It was only a couple of years ago, > > > that's a pretty long time > >> there was a report that something >> like 50% of all *business* transactions were still done on mainframe > > > now this is a rather silly measure of importance, IMHO. > In today's networked IT any component can claim such importance. > How about "Windoze is indispensable because 90+x% of all online banking > is processed through Windoze based desktops" ? I knew there was a reason I always did my banking at the bank! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 10:45:40 -0400 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Kraemer [mailto:M.Kraemer@gsi.de] > Sent: May 20, 2007 6:33 AM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? >=20 > Main, Kerry schrieb: >=20 > > > > You are joking, right? >=20 > not at all. >=20 > > While mainframes may have disappeared from Universities etc, that > market > > is a pebble on the beach compared to financial, insurance, banks, >=20 > I'm not sure if your "pebbles" comparison could be applied in the > 1990 time frame (and this is what the Gartner prediction referred to). > The number of german national labs alone (several dozens) is about as > large as the number of german based banks and insurances, > and each of those ran at least one mainframe. Plus about hundred or > more universities, each of which probably also with at least one > mainframe. > Even if the total market volume in $$$ was less than those of > financial customers, I wouldn't call it insignificant. > And don't count out the fact that fresh blood is usually > trained at universities. >=20 And you think this is not understood by the mainframe supporters? Check out these links related to Universities, SOA, Web Services and mainframes: http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/3604231 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/06/09/students_love_mainframes/ I am not saying that mainframes are the right go forward strategy, but many mission critical Customers literally have PB of existing data and applications. Converting these would literally take years of effort And these folks understand applying monthly OS security patches is not something that should have to be done every month. And they have been doing virtualization for about 30+ years, so just try and impress them about how good VMware or Zen is. If you want to play in their sand box, you need to understand their culture. > > and > > many other mission critical environments. >=20 > such as ? >=20 Retail, manufacturing, telecommunication, transportation ... > > > > It was only a couple of years ago, >=20 > that's a pretty long time >=20 As compared to what? > > there was a report that something > > like 50% of all *business* transactions were still done on mainframe >=20 > now this is a rather silly measure of importance, IMHO. Let me clarify this by stating *server based business transactions* > In today's networked IT any component can claim such importance. > How about "Windoze is indispensable because 90+x% of all online > banking > is processed through Windoze based desktops" ? > How about cash dispensers (dunno what OS they use to run) ? > Or the bank clerk's office PCs ? > Without all those boxes, mainframes wouldn't have that much to > transact. >=20 > > or > > mainframe compatible servers. >=20 > Do these still exist ? > I seem to remember they are physically extinct by now. > Does Amdahl still make PCMs ? >=20 > > Even if that dropped a few % since then > > that is still a huge, huge market. >=20 > Huge ? Compared to what ? > IBM used to be a $60B company in 1990 with the majority > of income from mainframe-related sales. > By now they are a $80B+x company with mainframe business > of the order of maybe $4B (that's the number I seem to remember). > In view of such numbers, Gartner is perfectly right. >=20 I am not saying their mainframe revenue has not declined. It certainly has. However, even if it is *only* $4-5B / year, think about this in terms of revenue per server. Very big numbers. Having stated this, what is by far the biggest target for server consolidation today? Windows and x86 platforms. No other platform even comes close. > > For those who have not been exposed to that mainframe market, it's a > bit > > like "if you are on a farm and you spend all your time in the > chicken > > house, it is hard to understand just how many other animals there > are > > and how big the farm really is." >=20 > The farm obviously isnt big enough to feed more than one > significant vendor. > It isnt important enough (any more) for universities > to offer general mainframe courses. >=20 > > > > And with many Customers getting fed up with all the issues of > managing > > so many smaller systems all over the place and that are running at > less > > than 15% in peak times, some companies are even expanding their use > of > > the mainframe. >=20 > How many are "some" ? > And: provided they find enough mainframe experts. > Most of these have retired together with their machines. J2EE, Java, SOA are all relatively platform independent. Develop on one platform, QA and deploy on another platform for additional security and scalability is done quite a bit these days. See article in link above about SOA and web enabling applications. I remember an article a couple of years back that stated the hands down biggest resources you could want or have skills in these days are Cobol application programmers who understand SOA and can web enable Cobol/PL1 applications. Like I said before, I am certainly not promoting mainframe environments, but you need to have a healthy respect for what they provide. Don't get caught up in the "we can do anything they can do" hype that is all to often circulating around.=20 Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT)=20 OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 12:58:26 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Message-ID: <20309$46507e56$cef8887a$11665@TEKSAVVY.COM> re: mainframes Mainframes used to be big, expensive, very very expensive. And IBM used its social muscle to convince MIS directors (that is what they were called back then) that only IBM could do the job. In the 1990s, even mainframe shops couldn't ignore the growing "minis" (aka: Solaris) and even banks starts to accept Solaris in their shops. IBM reacted by making its mainframes more competitively priced. It was far more agressive at preserving its mainframe business than DEC was. DEC was in fact purposefully sabotaging its VMS business while IBM was trying to salvage its MVS business. The scope of computing has widened. Banks now have web sites, they have automated telephone banking etc. Those were deployed on Unix because the software was available on Unix. But their core remains in the mainframe because that is where the big software exists and because it is already installed and has taken a lot of roots over the years with many many applications tying into the mainframe databases. The mainframe may not have 100% of banking left, but it still has a significant chunk of it. IBM actively protects its markets. HP actively is pushing away ISVs from VMS. Mainframe customers tend to be more mature about IT and not jump onto the latest and greatest bandwagon just for the sake of it. With Oracle, it makes Unix platforms quite serious for real business. So IBM's competition is no longer from Amdhal, it is from Solaris for the serious applications. For anciliary apps, Solaris and Linux and Windows are acceptable. The big question is whether Oracle will succeed in making Linux a serious platform, acceptable to banks for serious applications. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 13:13:22 -0400 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: Is VMS losing the Financial Sector, also? Message-ID: <465081ad$0$90268$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> JF Mezei wrote: > The big question is whether Oracle will succeed in making Linux a > serious platform, acceptable to banks for serious applications. Replacing the mainframe stuff: probably not. Replacing all the Unix/VMS/Windows stuff: it is already happening. Arne ------------------------------ Date: 20 May 2007 02:46:35 -0700 From: Sri Subject: mainframe Message-ID: <1179654395.747593.43360@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com> Related Link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mfresource/ Mainframe Resources Group(mfresource -Mainframe Resources & Jobs ) Group useful for Professionals working on Mainframe. MFRESOURCE Group consits of Mainframe Materials & Mainframe Jobs. Mainframe Job Postings in INDIA & US and other Countries. Related Link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mfresource/ Post message: mfresource@yahoogroups.com Subscribe: mfresource-subscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 12:41:02 +0000 (UTC) From: helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) Subject: survey: TCPIP 5.4 ECO 6 and shareable images from ECO 5 Message-ID: Getting back to the recent thread about problems with TCPIP 5.4 ECO 6 and the use of a shareable image from ECO 5, I'm considering whether to upgrade. (I hope to move to VMS 8.3 this summer, so it's only a temporary problem, nevertheless I would like to upgrade if possible, especially in case something allows my upgrade to VMS 8.3 and thus a newer version ot TCPIP.) Thus, I would like to conduct a survey based on responses from folks using TCPIP 5.4: o Are you using ECO 5 or ECO 6? o If using ECO 6, are you using the shareable images from ECO 5? o If so, just for good measure or did you experience the problems with ECO 6 (hostnames don't resolve)? o If not, do you have the hostname problem? ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 14:46:02 +0100 From: Roy Omond Subject: Re: survey: TCPIP 5.4 ECO 6 and shareable images from ECO 5 Message-ID: Phillip Helbig wrote: Speaking on behalf of one of my customer sites where we got bitten by this before it became widely known: > Thus, I would like to conduct a survey based > on responses from folks using TCPIP 5.4: > > o Are you using ECO 5 or ECO 6? ECO 6 > o If using ECO 6, are you using the shareable images from ECO 5? Yes. No problems so far. > o If so, just for good measure or did you experience the problems > with ECO 6 (hostnames don't resolve)? The customer was using only local hostnames, and therefore experienced this problem. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 07:56:23 -0400 From: "Richard B. Gilbert" Subject: Re: SYSMAN problem Message-ID: <46503767.6040705@comcast.net> david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: > In article , JF Mezei writes: > >>P. Sture wrote: >> >>>So please enlighten us. What's so evil about bridging? >> >> >>The younglings don't realise that a "bridge" is nothing more than a >>switch and think of a bridge as "legacy" stuff. Many of the younglings >>do not really understand ethernet. They understand IP and routers. They >>may have heard of ARP, but likely don't understand it. >> > > > Well to be fair they also don't like the fact that bridging relies upon > broadcasting to locate unknown devices. > Really? Oh horrors!!!! Doesn't ARP do the same thing? Once a bridge has figured out which side an address is on, it remembers until rebooted or power cycled. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 12:47:10 -0400 From: JF Mezei Subject: Re: SYSMAN problem Message-ID: <2bac7$46507bb2$cef8887a$10467@TEKSAVVY.COM> david20@alpha2.mdx.ac.uk wrote: > A limited amount of bridging is OK. However when you have a large amount of > bridging going on with redundant paths (so you need to use spanning-tree which > also just occasionally goes wrong and can lead to isolation of parts of the > network) you can get problems with excessive broadcasts. Funny how companies think a bridge is to be avoided for the above reasons, but have no problems deploying many many switches, especially switches with trunks between them. Functionally, they are bridges. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 13:06:21 -0400 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?= Subject: Re: SYSMAN problem Message-ID: <46508009$0$90268$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> P. Sture wrote: >> I talked with an OpenVMS customer in Texas (where VMS has a small >> presence, without any clout) who had been running a multi-site cluster >> for a number of years but had received a declaration from the network >> group that all bridging in the network would be shut down in a year, >> killing his multi-site cluster at that time. >> > > So please enlighten us. What's so evil about bridging? I guess it is a management security issue where they want to replace the bridge with something that can filter more. BTW, bridges can be bad. I remember 20 years ago - too many bridges between something and LAT would cause tons of problems. Arne ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2007.276 ************************