INFO-VAX Tue, 18 Sep 2007 Volume 2007 : Issue 509 Contents: Re: ACS (was: Will Linux bloat itself out of existence ?) Re: ACS (was: Will Linux bloat itself out of existence ?) Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Re: despair Hypervisor Re: Hypervisor Re: Portmapper / access control files? Re: TCP/IP Re: TCP/IP Re: TCP/IP Re: tz88 - green-brick for BA350 shelf Re: VMS as hypervisor ? Re: VMS as hypervisor ? Re: VMS as hypervisor ? Re: VMS as hypervisor ? Re: VMS as hypervisor ? Re: VMS as hypervisor ? RE: VMS as hypervisor ? Re: VMS as hypervisor ? Re: VMS as hypervisor ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 17 Sep 2007 14:56:10 -0500 From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: ACS (was: Will Linux bloat itself out of existence ?) Message-ID: In article , koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes: > In article , Ron Johnson writes: >> On 09/14/07 15:46, Bob Koehler wrote: >>> In article , Ron Johnson writes: >>>> Unless CMS was originally a 3rd party product, one would hope that >>>> DEC ate it's own dog food. >>> >>> The presentation I was at made it sound like MMS and CMS originated >>> with the ACS required by the original ACS spec, but then worked on >> >> ACS? >> > > Oops, I meant ACS required by the original Ada spec. The > capabilities DEC put into the Ada Compile System were required by the > Ada spec, but the name ACS was DEC's invention. I see no external similarity between ACS and MMS/CMS. They may be intended to fill the same gap in the software development process, but the way they do this is entirely different. ------------------------------ Date: 17 Sep 2007 16:02:49 -0500 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: ACS (was: Will Linux bloat itself out of existence ?) Message-ID: <6GJ+O6PWQIUC@eisner.encompasserve.org> In article , Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) writes: > > I see no external similarity between ACS and MMS/CMS. They may be > intended to fill the same gap in the software development process, > but the way they do this is entirely different. Externally they are very different. Internally I think they may be using the same or similar engines. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:53:56 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: <93AHi.100185$GO6.18576@newsfe21.lga> On 09/17/07 11:45, norm.raphael@metso.com wrote: > > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field. > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file > and run against the renamed data file. Something's somewhere changing $STATUS, and you just don't realize it. (That's why I don't like "magic variables".) > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1". > In the nomatch case Sever is "3". > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong > result as there should have been a match. $SEVERITY is too generic for my taste. I'd use $STATUS instead. Thus, (like you saving the value) I'd do something like: $ SAY := WRITE SYS$STATUS $ MSG_NOMATCHES = %X08D78053 $ MSG_NOFILE = %X08D7804A $ MSG_SUCCESS = %X00000001 $! $ PIPE ... $ HOLD_STAT = $STATUS $ SAY HOLD_STAT $ IF HOLD_STAT .EQ. MSG_SUCCESS blah > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed > file. (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.) > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1] > === Actual log excerpt: > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes. > QUIT > <221 > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1" > $ ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3) > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > $ pipe diff/igno=trail *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;* nl: > /nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > *%SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched* > $ sever=$severity > $ if sever .eq. "1" > $ endif > $write sys$output "File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1" > File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 > $rename/log JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 > *.xml_2007091522383962;* > %RENAME-I-RENAMED, *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1* renamed to > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1* > === Extracted batch log except: > $ pipe diff/igno=trail - > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 -* > nl: /nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > $ sever=$severity > $ show sym sever > SEVER = "1" > === -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:03:04 -0400 From: norm.raphael@metso.com Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 0068A6B385257359_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Ron, The message in the output logfile > *%SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched* indicates that there was no match, but the rerun indicates (no message) that there was a match. There should have been a match. the stat variable is not wrong, the result of the embedded search is wrong in the batch, correct in the at-ed procedure file. This seems not to be an issue of the stat variable. -Norm Ron Johnson wrote on 09/17/2007 02:53:56 PM: > On 09/17/07 11:45, norm.raphael@metso.com wrote: > > > > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field. > > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect > > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file > > and run against the renamed data file. > > Something's somewhere changing $STATUS, and you just don't realize > it. (That's why I don't like "magic variables".) > > > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1". > > In the nomatch case Sever is "3". > > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong > > result as there should have been a match. > > $SEVERITY is too generic for my taste. I'd use $STATUS instead. > > Thus, (like you saving the value) I'd do something like: > > $ SAY := WRITE SYS$STATUS > $ MSG_NOMATCHES = %X08D78053 > $ MSG_NOFILE = %X08D7804A > $ MSG_SUCCESS = %X00000001 > $! > $ PIPE ... > $ HOLD_STAT = $STATUS > $ SAY HOLD_STAT > $ IF HOLD_STAT .EQ. MSG_SUCCESS blah > > > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed > > file. (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.) > > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1] > > === Actual log excerpt: > > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes. > > QUIT > > <221 > > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1" > > $ ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3) > > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;* nl: > > /nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > > *%SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched* > > $ sever=$severity > > $ if sever .eq. "1" > > $ endif > > $write sys$output "File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1" > > File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 > > $rename/log JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 > > *.xml_2007091522383962;* > > %RENAME-I-RENAMED, *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1* renamed to > > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1* > > === Extracted batch log except: > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail - > > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 -* > > nl: /nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > > $ sever=$severity > > $ show sym sever > > SEVER = "1" > > === > > > -- > Ron Johnson, Jr. > Jefferson LA USA > > Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. > Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! --=_alternative 0068A6B385257359_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Ron,

The message in the output logfile
> *%SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched*
indicates that there was no match, but the rerun indicates (no message) that there was
a match.  There should have been a match.  the stat variable is not wrong, the result
of the embedded search is wrong in the batch, correct in the at-ed procedure file.
This seems not to be an issue of the stat variable.

-Norm
Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net> wrote on 09/17/2007 02:53:56 PM:

> On 09/17/07 11:45, norm.raphael@metso.com wrote:
> >
> > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field.
> > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect
> > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file
> > and run against the renamed data file.
>
> Something's somewhere changing $STATUS, and you just don't realize
> it.  (That's why I don't like "magic variables".)
>
> > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1".
> > In the nomatch case Sever is "3".
> > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong
> > result as there should have been a match.
>
> $SEVERITY is too generic for my taste.  I'd use $STATUS instead.
>
> Thus, (like you saving the value) I'd do something like:
>
> $  SAY := WRITE SYS$STATUS
> $  MSG_NOMATCHES = %X08D78053
> $  MSG_NOFILE    = %X08D7804A
> $  MSG_SUCCESS   = %X00000001
> $!
> $  PIPE ...
> $  HOLD_STAT = $STATUS
> $  SAY HOLD_STAT
> $  IF HOLD_STAT .EQ. MSG_SUCCESS blah
>
> > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed
> > file.  (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.)
> > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1]
> > === Actual log excerpt:
> > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes.
> > QUIT
> > <221  
> > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;"
> > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1"
> > $ ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3)
> > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;"
> > $ pipe diff/igno=trail *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;*  nl:
> > /nonumb | -
> >        sear sys$pipe "<Consignee>"/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | -
> >         sear sys$pipe "<PostalZip>" /exact/nonumb | -
> >          sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl:
> > *%SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched*
> > $ sever=$severity
> > $ if sever .eq. "1"
> > $  endif
> > $write sys$output "File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1"
> > File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1
> > $rename/log JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1
> > *.xml_2007091522383962;*
> > %RENAME-I-RENAMED, *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1* renamed to
> > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1*
> > === Extracted batch log except:
> > $ pipe diff/igno=trail -
> > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 -*
> >      nl: /nonumb | -
> >        sear sys$pipe "<Consignee>"/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | -
> >         sear sys$pipe "<PostalZip>" /exact/nonumb | -
> >          sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl:
> > $ sever=$severity
> > $ show sym sever
> >   SEVER = "1"
> > ===
>
>
> --
> Ron Johnson, Jr.
> Jefferson LA  USA
>
> Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
> Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!
--=_alternative 0068A6B385257359_=-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:30:39 -0700 From: AEF Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: <1190057439.966663.301910@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com> On Sep 17, 3:03 pm, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > Ron, > > The message in the output logfile> *%SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched* > > indicates that there was no match, but the rerun indicates (no message) > that there was > a match. There should have been a match. the stat variable is not wrong, > the result > of the embedded search is wrong in the batch, correct in the at-ed > procedure file. > This seems not to be an issue of the stat variable. > > -Norm Where below is the @-run version? Could PIPE or SEARCH be defined as different symbols in batch and interactive mode? (Check login procedures.) Doesn't using a PIPE command complicate figuring out which subcommand generated the $STATUS and $SEVERITY? AEF > Ron Johnson wrote on 09/17/2007 02:53:56 PM: > > > > > On 09/17/07 11:45, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > > > > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field. > > > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect > > > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file > > > and run against the renamed data file. > > > Something's somewhere changing $STATUS, and you just don't realize > > it. (That's why I don't like "magic variables".) > > > > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1". > > > In the nomatch case Sever is "3". > > > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong > > > result as there should have been a match. > > > $SEVERITY is too generic for my taste. I'd use $STATUS instead. > > > Thus, (like you saving the value) I'd do something like: > > > $ SAY := WRITE SYS$STATUS > > $ MSG_NOMATCHES = %X08D78053 > > $ MSG_NOFILE = %X08D7804A > > $ MSG_SUCCESS = %X00000001 > > $! > > $ PIPE ... > > $ HOLD_STAT = $STATUS > > $ SAY HOLD_STAT > > $ IF HOLD_STAT .EQ. MSG_SUCCESS blah > > > > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed > > > file. (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.) > > > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1] > > > === Actual log excerpt: > > > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes. > > > QUIT > > > <221 > > > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1" > > > $ > > ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3) > > > > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;* nl: > > > /nonumb | - > > > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | > - > > > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > > > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > > > *%SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched* > > > $ sever=$severity > > > $ if sever .eq. "1" > > > $ endif > > > $write sys$output "File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1" > > > File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 > > > $rename/log JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 > > > *.xml_2007091522383962;* > > > %RENAME-I-RENAMED, *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1* renamed > to > > > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1* > > > === Extracted batch log except: > > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail - > > > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 -* > > > nl: /nonumb | - > > > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | > - > > > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > > > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > > > $ sever=$severity > > > $ show sym sever > > > SEVER = "1" > > > === > > > -- > > Ron Johnson, Jr. > > Jefferson LA USA > > > Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. > > Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 16:45:13 -0400 From: norm.raphael@metso.com Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 007200E685257359_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" AEF wrote on 09/17/2007 03:30:39 PM: > On Sep 17, 3:03 pm, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > > Ron, > > > > The message in the output logfile> *%SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched* > > > > indicates that there was no match, but the rerun indicates (no message) > > that there was > > a match. There should have been a match. the stat variable is not wrong, > > the result > > of the embedded search is wrong in the batch, correct in the at-ed > > procedure file. > > This seems not to be an issue of the stat variable. > > > > -Norm > > Where below is the @-run version? > > > === Extracted batch log except: > > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail - > > > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 -* > > > nl: /nonumb | - > > > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | > - > > > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > > > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > > > $ sever=$severity > > > $ show sym sever > > > SEVER = "1" > > > === > > Could PIPE or SEARCH be defined as different symbols in batch and > interactive mode? (Check login procedures.) > Nope. Same account. PIPE and SEARCH are not overdefined in either batch or interactive (I rechecked). > Doesn't using a PIPE command complicate figuring out which subcommand > generated the $STATUS and $SEVERITY? Does it? I would think it still would be the same given the same pipe command. Remember the only variables are one is batch and the other is at-ed, and one is the original file and the other is the renamed file. > > AEF > > > Ron Johnson wrote on 09/17/2007 02:53:56 PM: > > > > > > > > > On 09/17/07 11:45, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > > > > > > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field. > > > > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect > > > > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file > > > > and run against the renamed data file. > > > > > Something's somewhere changing $STATUS, and you just don't realize > > > it. (That's why I don't like "magic variables".) > > > > > > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1". > > > > In the nomatch case Sever is "3". > > > > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong > > > > result as there should have been a match. > > > > > $SEVERITY is too generic for my taste. I'd use $STATUS instead. > > > > > Thus, (like you saving the value) I'd do something like: > > > > > $ SAY := WRITE SYS$STATUS > > > $ MSG_NOMATCHES = %X08D78053 > > > $ MSG_NOFILE = %X08D7804A > > > $ MSG_SUCCESS = %X00000001 > > > $! > > > $ PIPE ... > > > $ HOLD_STAT = $STATUS > > > $ SAY HOLD_STAT > > > $ IF HOLD_STAT .EQ. MSG_SUCCESS blah > > > > > > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed > > > > file. (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.) > > > > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1] > > > > === Actual log excerpt: > > > > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes. > > > > QUIT > > > > <221 > > > > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > > > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1" > > > > $ > > > > ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3) > > > > > > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;* nl: > > > > /nonumb | - > > > > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | > > - > > > > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > > > > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > > > > *%SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched* > > > > $ sever=$severity > > > > $ if sever .eq. "1" > > > > $ endif > > > > $write sys$output "File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1" > > > > File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 > > > > $rename/log JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 > > > > *.xml_2007091522383962;* > > > > %RENAME-I-RENAMED, *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1* renamed > > to > > > > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1* > > > > === Extracted batch log except: > > > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail - > > > > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 -* > > > > nl: /nonumb | - > > > > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | > > - > > > > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > > > > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > > > > $ sever=$severity > > > > $ show sym sever > > > > SEVER = "1" > > > > === > > > > > -- > > > Ron Johnson, Jr. > > > Jefferson LA USA > > > > > Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. > > > Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! > > --=_alternative 007200E685257359_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"



AEF <spamsink2001@yahoo.com> wrote on 09/17/2007 03:30:39 PM:

> On Sep 17, 3:03 pm, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote:
> > Ron,
> >
> > The message in the output logfile> *%SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched*
> >
> > indicates that there was no match, but the rerun indicates (no message)
> > that there was
> > a match.  There should have been a match.  the stat variable is not wrong,
> > the result
> > of the embedded search is wrong in the batch, correct in the at-ed
> > procedure file.
> > This seems not to be an issue of the stat variable.
> >
> > -Norm
>
> Where below is the @-run version?


> > > === Extracted batch log except:
> > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail -
> > > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 -*
> > >      nl: /nonumb | -
> > >        sear sys$pipe "<Consignee>"/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb |
> -
> > >         sear sys$pipe "<PostalZip>" /exact/nonumb | -
> > >          sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl:
> > > $ sever=$severity
> > > $ show sym sever
> > >   SEVER = "1"
> > > ===



>
> Could PIPE or SEARCH be defined as different symbols in batch and
> interactive mode? (Check login procedures.)
>


Nope.  Same account.  PIPE and SEARCH are not overdefined in either
batch or interactive (I rechecked).

> Doesn't using a PIPE command complicate figuring out which subcommand
> generated the $STATUS and $SEVERITY?

Does it?  I would think it still would be the same given the same
pipe command.  Remember the only variables are one is batch and the other
is at-ed, and one is the original file and the other is the renamed file.


>
> AEF
>
> > Ron Johnson <ron.l.john...@cox.net> wrote on 09/17/2007 02:53:56 PM:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 09/17/07 11:45, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote:
> >
> > > > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field.
> > > > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect
> > > > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file
> > > > and run against the renamed data file.
> >
> > > Something's somewhere changing $STATUS, and you just don't realize
> > > it.  (That's why I don't like "magic variables".)
> >
> > > > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1".
> > > > In the nomatch case Sever is "3".
> > > > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong
> > > > result as there should have been a match.
> >
> > > $SEVERITY is too generic for my taste.  I'd use $STATUS instead.
> >
> > > Thus, (like you saving the value) I'd do something like:
> >
> > > $  SAY := WRITE SYS$STATUS
> > > $  MSG_NOMATCHES = %X08D78053
> > > $  MSG_NOFILE    = %X08D7804A
> > > $  MSG_SUCCESS   = %X00000001
> > > $!
> > > $  PIPE ...
> > > $  HOLD_STAT = $STATUS
> > > $  SAY HOLD_STAT
> > > $  IF HOLD_STAT .EQ. MSG_SUCCESS blah
> >
> > > > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed
> > > > file.  (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.)
> > > > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1]
> > > > === Actual log excerpt:
> > > > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes.
> > > > QUIT
> > > > <221
> > > > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;"
> > > > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1"
> > > > $
> >
> > ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3)
> >
> > > > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;"
> > > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;*  nl:
> > > > /nonumb | -
> > > >        sear sys$pipe "<Consignee>"/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb |
> > -
> > > >         sear sys$pipe "<PostalZip>" /exact/nonumb | -
> > > >          sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl:
> > > > *%SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched*
> > > > $ sever=$severity
> > > > $ if sever .eq. "1"
> > > > $  endif
> > > > $write sys$output "File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1"
> > > > File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1
> > > > $rename/log JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1
> > > > *.xml_2007091522383962;*
> > > > %RENAME-I-RENAMED, *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1* renamed
> > to
> > > > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1*
> > > > === Extracted batch log except:
> > > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail -
> > > > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 -*
> > > >      nl: /nonumb | -
> > > >        sear sys$pipe "<Consignee>"/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb |
> > -
> > > >         sear sys$pipe "<PostalZip>" /exact/nonumb | -
> > > >          sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl:
> > > > $ sever=$severity
> > > > $ show sym sever
> > > >   SEVER = "1"
> > > > ===
> >
> > > --
> > > Ron Johnson, Jr.
> > > Jefferson LA  USA
> >
> > > Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
> > > Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!
>
>
--=_alternative 007200E685257359_=-- ------------------------------ Date: 17 Sep 2007 16:01:13 -0500 From: koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: In article , norm.raphael@metso.com writes: > $ pipe diff/igno=trail JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1; nl: > /nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > %SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched > $ sever=$severity Note the -I- in the message. The severity is 1, just like it is for a match. Only a file not found (or protected against your reading it) are likely to return any other severity and you already parsed to find a file which does exist. You need to check $status which contains the whole message code. The message id part of the code is different for match and no match. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 23:26:29 +0200 From: "P. Sture" Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: In article , norm.raphael@metso.com wrote: > Remember the only variables are one is batch and the other > is at-ed, and one is the original file and the other is the renamed file. Sorry, I haven't followed this thread, but I have seen cases where the the batch log file can consume just enough resources to exceed a quota. -- Paul Sture Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks: http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~sture/ovms-bookmarks.html ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 21:41:52 GMT From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jan-Erik_S=F6derholm?= Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: Bob Koehler wrote: > In article , norm.raphael@metso.com writes: >> $ pipe diff/igno=trail JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1; nl: >> /nonumb | - >> sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | - >> sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - >> sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: >> %SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched >> $ sever=$severity > > Note the -I- in the message. The severity is 1, just like it is for > a match. Only a file not found (or protected against your reading it) > are likely to return any other severity and you already parsed to find > a file which does exist. > > You need to check $status which contains the whole message code. The > message id part of the code is different for match and no match. > SEARCH gives different $SEVERITY for a match then for a NOMATCHES. "3" or "1", don't remember witch is which, but it's easy enough to check. I've often used it to check for a "hit". Regards, Jan-Erik. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:08:50 -0400 From: norm.raphael@metso.com Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 0079A7DD85257359_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote on 09/17/2007 05:01:13 PM: > In article 005C1937@metso.com>, norm.raphael@metso.com writes: > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1; nl: > > /nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > > %SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched > > $ sever=$severity > > Note the -I- in the message. The severity is 1, just like it is for > a match. No. Here is the -I- status %SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched $ stat=$status $ show sym stat STAT = "%X18D78053" It ends in 3 which is the severity for informationals. Here is the matches-found status $ stat=$status $ show sym stat STAT = "%X10000001" It ends in 1 which is the severity for successful. (The others are 0 = warning 2 = error 4 = fatal (or severe) error These are all even. " status-code " Defines a numeric value for the reserved global symbol $STATUS. You can specify the status-code parameter as an integer or an expression equivalent to an integer value. The value can be tested by the next outer command level. The low-order 3 bits of the value determine the value of the global symbol $SEVERITY. " If you specify a status code, DCL interprets the code as a condition code. Note that even numeric values produce warning, error, and fatal error messages, and that odd numeric values produce either no message or a success or informational message. If you do not specify a status code, the current value of $STATUS is saved. When control returns to the outer command level, $STATUS contains the status of the most recently executed command or program." Nevertheless, I can submit this against the renamed file and get the severity 1 $severity of the $status shown. That does not explain why the original run against the unrenamed file got "no strings matched" and thus a status other than that. I'm going to retry the original, but this is not the first time this has occurred. It is a puzzlement. Only a file not found (or protected against your reading it) > are likely to return any other severity and you already parsed to find > a file which does exist. > > You need to check $status which contains the whole message code. The > message id part of the code is different for match and no match. > --=_alternative 0079A7DD85257359_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"



koehler@eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) wrote on 09/17/2007 05:01:13 PM:

> In article <OFC8427FA0.F512545A-ON85257359.005AD5F3-85257359.
> 005C1937@metso.com>, norm.raphael@metso.com writes:
> > $ pipe diff/igno=trail JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;  nl:
> > /nonumb | -
> >        sear sys$pipe "<Consignee>"/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | -
> >         sear sys$pipe "<PostalZip>" /exact/nonumb | -
> >          sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl:
> > %SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched
> > $ sever=$severity
>
>    Note the -I- in the message.  The severity is 1, just like it is for
>    a match.  


No.  Here is the -I- status

%SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched
$ stat=$status
$ show sym stat
  STAT = "%X18D78053"

It ends in 3 which is the severity for informationals.

Here is the matches-found status

$ stat=$status
$ show sym stat
  STAT = "%X10000001"

It ends in 1 which is the severity for successful.

(The others are 0 = warning
                2 = error
                4 = fatal (or severe) error
These are all even.

"    status-code

"      Defines a numeric value for the reserved global symbol $STATUS.
       You can specify the status-code parameter as an integer or an
       expression equivalent to an integer value. The value can be
       tested by the next outer command level. The low-order 3 bits
       of the value determine the value of the global symbol $SEVERITY.

"      If you specify a status code, DCL interprets the code as a
       condition code. Note that even numeric values produce warning,
       error, and fatal error messages, and that odd numeric values
       produce either no message or a success or informational message.
       If you do not specify a status code, the current value of $STATUS
       is saved. When control returns to the outer command level,
       $STATUS contains the status of the most recently executed command
       or program."

Nevertheless, I can submit this against the renamed file
and get the severity 1 $severity of the $status shown.
That does not explain why the original run against the
unrenamed file got "no strings matched" and thus a
status other than that.

I'm going to retry the original, but this is not the
first time this has occurred.

It is a puzzlement.

Only a file not found (or protected against your reading it)
>    are likely to return any other severity and you already parsed to find
>    a file which does exist.
>
>    You need to check $status which contains the whole message code.  The
>    message id part of the code is different for match and no match.
>
--=_alternative 0079A7DD85257359_=-- ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:43:36 -0700 From: Doug Phillips Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: <1190069016.609764.57890@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com> On Sep 17, 11:45 am, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field. > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file > and run against the renamed data file. > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1". > In the nomatch case Sever is "3". > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong > result as there should have been a match. > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed > file. (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.) > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1] > === Actual log excerpt: > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes. > QUIT > <221 > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1" > $ > ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3) > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > $ pipe diff/igno=trail JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1; nl: Is the semicolon ";" *after* the version (i.e. .XML;1;) a posting typo or is it really in your command? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 15:54:47 -0700 From: AEF Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: <1190069687.438603.257450@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com> On Sep 17, 4:45 pm, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > AEF wrote on 09/17/2007 03:30:39 PM: > > On Sep 17, 3:03 pm, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > > > Ron, > > > > The message in the output logfile> *%SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings > matched* > > > > indicates that there was no match, but the rerun indicates (no > message) > > > that there was > > > a match. There should have been a match. the stat variable is not > wrong, > > > the result > > > of the embedded search is wrong in the batch, correct in the at-ed > > > procedure file. > > > This seems not to be an issue of the stat variable. > > > > -Norm > > > Where below is the @-run version? > > > > === Extracted batch log except: > > > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail - > > > > *JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 -* > > > > nl: /nonumb | - > > > > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb > | > > - > > > > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > > > > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > > > > $ sever=$severity > > > > $ show sym sever > > > > SEVER = "1" > > > > === > > > Could PIPE or SEARCH be defined as different symbols in batch and > > interactive mode? (Check login procedures.) > > Nope. Same account. PIPE and SEARCH are not overdefined in either > batch or interactive (I rechecked). You checked for mode-dependent symbols in SYLOGIN.COM? > > > Doesn't using a PIPE command complicate figuring out which subcommand > > generated the $STATUS and $SEVERITY? > > Does it? I would think it still would be the same given the same > pipe command. Remember the only variables are one is batch and the other > is at-ed, and one is the original file and the other is the renamed file. Well, how would it tell you, for example, which search command is finding your string? If you are troubleshooting, you want to reduce the complexity as much as possible and isolate the bugger. The PIPE command, while convenient, is not helpful for this! One thing you could try is to SEARCH for "" at different search levels and see what actually comes up. Did you try just removing /OUT=NL: or redirecting the output to a file you can examine afterwards? AEF [...] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:17:12 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: <46EF2718.145A2365@spam.comcast.net> norm.raphael@metso.com wrote: > [snip] O.K. Here is the part I don't get: > $ pipe diff/igno=trail JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1; nl: /nonumb | What is the purpose of comparing the file to the contents of the null device? ("TYPE filespec" would seem a better choice, or just SEARCH it directly without the first pipeline segment.) Any chance this is confusing something downstream in the pipeline, but only in batch? -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:26:36 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: <46EF294C.55F554E1@spam.comcast.net> Doug Phillips wrote: > > On Sep 17, 11:45 am, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field. > > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect > > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file > > and run against the renamed data file. > > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1". > > In the nomatch case Sever is "3". > > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong > > result as there should have been a match. > > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed > > file. (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.) > > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1] > > === Actual log excerpt: > > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes. > > QUIT > > <221 > > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1" > > $ > > ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3) > > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1; nl: > > Is the semicolon ";" *after* the version (i.e. .XML;1;) a posting typo > or is it really in your command? Interesting thought; however, ... DJAS02::DDACHTERA$ pipe diff/nonumb/igno=trail login.com;1; nl: %DCL-W-PARMDEL, invalid parameter delimiter - check use of special characters \;NL\ DJAS02::DDACHTERA$ sh sym $status $STATUS == "%X00038110" (VMS V7.3-2, V7.2-2 gives same result interactively.) Gives a different message/status. -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:33:00 -0700 From: Doug Phillips Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: <1190079180.161409.154260@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> On Sep 17, 8:26 pm, David J Dachtera wrote: > Doug Phillips wrote: > > > On Sep 17, 11:45 am, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > > > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field. > > > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect > > > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file > > > and run against the renamed data file. > > > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1". > > > In the nomatch case Sever is "3". > > > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong > > > result as there should have been a match. > > > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed > > > file. (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.) > > > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1] > > > === Actual log excerpt: > > > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes. > > > QUIT > > > <221 > > > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1" > > > $ > > > ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3) > > > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1; nl: > > > Is the semicolon ";" *after* the version (i.e. .XML;1;) a posting typo > > or is it really in your command? > > Interesting thought; however, ... > > DJAS02::DDACHTERA$ pipe diff/nonumb/igno=trail login.com;1; nl: > %DCL-W-PARMDEL, invalid parameter delimiter - check use of special characters > \;NL\ > DJAS02::DDACHTERA$ sh sym $status > $STATUS == "%X00038110" > > (VMS V7.3-2, V7.2-2 gives same result interactively.) > > Gives a different message/status. > Yes it does. It pipes the error to the next command, but it doesn't display it. The $status is from the last command in the pipe, no? Try piping it your example. Here's mine: .TEST>pipe diff/ignor=trail test.fil;1; nl: /nonum | type sys$pipe %DCL-W-PARMDEL, invalid parameter delimiter - check use of special characters \;NL\ .TEST>pipe diff/ignor=trail test.fil;1; nl: /nonum | search sys$pipe "whatever" %SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:34:45 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: <46EF2B35.F1DD9FA5@spam.comcast.net> Doug Phillips wrote: > > On Sep 17, 8:26 pm, David J Dachtera > wrote: > > Doug Phillips wrote: > > > > > On Sep 17, 11:45 am, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > > > > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field. > > > > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect > > > > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file > > > > and run against the renamed data file. > > > > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1". > > > > In the nomatch case Sever is "3". > > > > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong > > > > result as there should have been a match. > > > > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed > > > > file. (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.) > > > > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1] > > > > === Actual log excerpt: > > > > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes. > > > > QUIT > > > > <221 > > > > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > > > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1" > > > > $ > > > > ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3) > > > > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1; nl: > > > > > Is the semicolon ";" *after* the version (i.e. .XML;1;) a posting typo > > > or is it really in your command? > > > > Interesting thought; however, ... > > > > DJAS02::DDACHTERA$ pipe diff/nonumb/igno=trail login.com;1; nl: > > %DCL-W-PARMDEL, invalid parameter delimiter - check use of special characters > > \;NL\ > > DJAS02::DDACHTERA$ sh sym $status > > $STATUS == "%X00038110" > > > > (VMS V7.3-2, V7.2-2 gives same result interactively.) > > > > Gives a different message/status. > > > > Yes it does. It pipes the error to the next command, but it doesn't > display it. The $status is from the last command in the pipe, no? Try > piping it your example. Here's mine: > > .TEST>pipe diff/ignor=trail test.fil;1; nl: /nonum | type sys$pipe > %DCL-W-PARMDEL, invalid parameter delimiter - check use of special > characters > \;NL\ > .TEST>pipe diff/ignor=trail test.fil;1; nl: /nonum | search sys$pipe > "whatever" > %SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched I think my point was that the DCL-W message did not appear in his log segments. -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:41:03 -0700 From: Doug Phillips Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: <1190079663.153475.285460@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com> On Sep 17, 8:34 pm, David J Dachtera wrote: > Doug Phillips wrote: > > > On Sep 17, 8:26 pm, David J Dachtera > > wrote: > > > Doug Phillips wrote: > > > > > On Sep 17, 11:45 am, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > > > > > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field. > > > > > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect > > > > > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file > > > > > and run against the renamed data file. > > > > > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1". > > > > > In the nomatch case Sever is "3". > > > > > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong > > > > > result as there should have been a match. > > > > > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed > > > > > file. (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.) > > > > > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1] > > > > > === Actual log excerpt: > > > > > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes. > > > > > QUIT > > > > > <221 > > > > > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > > > > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1" > > > > > $ > > > > > ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3) > > > > > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > > > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1; nl: > > > > > Is the semicolon ";" *after* the version (i.e. .XML;1;) a posting typo > > > > or is it really in your command? > > > > Interesting thought; however, ... > > > > DJAS02::DDACHTERA$ pipe diff/nonumb/igno=trail login.com;1; nl: > > > %DCL-W-PARMDEL, invalid parameter delimiter - check use of special characters > > > \;NL\ > > > DJAS02::DDACHTERA$ sh sym $status > > > $STATUS == "%X00038110" > > > > (VMS V7.3-2, V7.2-2 gives same result interactively.) > > > > Gives a different message/status. > > > Yes it does. It pipes the error to the next command, but it doesn't > > display it. The $status is from the last command in the pipe, no? Try > > piping it your example. Here's mine: > > > .TEST>pipe diff/ignor=trail test.fil;1; nl: /nonum | type sys$pipe > > %DCL-W-PARMDEL, invalid parameter delimiter - check use of special > > characters > > \;NL\ > > .TEST>pipe diff/ignor=trail test.fil;1; nl: /nonum | search sys$pipe > > "whatever" > > %SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched > > I think my point was that the DCL-W message did not appear in his log segments. > But it won't! The message is piped as part if the diff output. Try it yourself if you don't believe my test example. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:48:50 -0700 From: AEF Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: <1190080130.247985.200510@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com> On Sep 17, 9:33 pm, Doug Phillips wrote: > On Sep 17, 8:26 pm, David J Dachtera > wrote: > > > > > Doug Phillips wrote: > > > > On Sep 17, 11:45 am, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > > > > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field. > > > > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect > > > > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file > > > > and run against the renamed data file. > > > > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1". > > > > In the nomatch case Sever is "3". > > > > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong > > > > result as there should have been a match. > > > > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed > > > > file. (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.) > > > > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1] > > > > === Actual log excerpt: > > > > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes. > > > > QUIT > > > > <221 > > > > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > > > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1" > > > > $ > > > > ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3) > > > > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1; nl: > > > > Is the semicolon ";" *after* the version (i.e. .XML;1;) a posting typo > > > or is it really in your command? > > > Interesting thought; however, ... > > > DJAS02::DDACHTERA$ pipe diff/nonumb/igno=trail login.com;1; nl: > > %DCL-W-PARMDEL, invalid parameter delimiter - check use of special characters > > \;NL\ > > DJAS02::DDACHTERA$ sh sym $status > > $STATUS == "%X00038110" > > > (VMS V7.3-2, V7.2-2 gives same result interactively.) > > > Gives a different message/status. > > Yes it does. It pipes the error to the next command, but it doesn't > display it. The $status is from the last command in the pipe, no? Apparently so! See below. Try > piping it your example. Here's mine: > > .TEST>pipe diff/ignor=trail test.fil;1; nl: /nonum | type sys$pipe > %DCL-W-PARMDEL, invalid parameter delimiter - check use of special > characters > \;NL\ > .TEST>pipe diff/ignor=trail test.fil;1; nl: /nonum | search sys$pipe > "whatever" > %SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched Yes, this extra semicolon appears to be the cause of the problem: $ PIPE DIFF LOGIN.COM;4; NL: | SEAR SYS$PIPE SET %SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched $ PIPE DIFF LOGIN.COM;4 NL: | SEAR SYS$PIPE SET 2 $ set noon 7 $ set terminal/inquire/noeightbit/INSERT/FORM $ Apparently, errors in the first steps aren't reported to SYS$ERROR or SYS$ERROR isn't the screen until the last command is run (deja vu: why is this only a warning?!): $ PIPE DIFF LOGIN.COM;4; NL: | SEAR SYS$PIPE invalid %DCL-W-PARMDEL, invalid parameter delimiter - check use of special characters $ This looks like a good reason _not_ to use PIPE in a command procedure. In this case it saves you from working with temporary files and their cleanup but makes troubleshooting more difficult. Friendly comments welcome on this. AEF ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:37:03 -0700 From: AEF Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: <1190083023.696989.273120@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com> On Sep 17, 12:45 pm, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field. > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file > and run against the renamed data file. > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1". > In the nomatch case Sever is "3". > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong > result as there should have been a match. > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed > file. (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.) > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1] > === Actual log excerpt: > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes. > QUIT > <221 > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" The extra semicolon in the line above is your problem. See my prior post on this. > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1" > $ > ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3) > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > $ pipe diff/igno=trail JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1; nl: > /nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > %SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched > $ sever=$severity > $ if sever .eq. "1" > $ endif So the error message is sent to the search commands and that's why they don't find your search strings. > $write sys$output "File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1" > File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 > $rename/log JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 > *.xml_2007091522383962;* > %RENAME-I-RENAMED, JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 renamed to > JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 > === Extracted batch log except: > $ pipe diff/igno=trail - > JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 - > nl: /nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > $ sever=$severity > $ show sym sever > SEVER = "1" > === Here the spurious semicolon is gone and it then works correctly. [Someone else spotted the extra semicolon.] AEF ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:51:09 -0700 From: AEF Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: <1190083869.340575.224120@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com> On Sep 17, 10:48 pm, Doug Phillips wrote: > On Sep 17, 9:37 pm, AEF wrote: > > > > > On Sep 17, 12:45 pm, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > > > > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field. > > > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect > > > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file > > > and run against the renamed data file. > > > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1". > > > In the nomatch case Sever is "3". > > > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong > > > result as there should have been a match. > > > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed > > > file. (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.) > > > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1] > > > === Actual log excerpt: > > > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes. > > > QUIT > > > <221 > > > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > > The extra semicolon in the line above is your problem. See my prior > > post on this. > > > > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1" > > > $ > > > ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3) > > > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1; nl: > > > /nonumb | - > > > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | - > > > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > > > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > > > %SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched > > > $ sever=$severity > > > $ if sever .eq. "1" > > > $ endif > > > So the error message is sent to the search commands and that's why > > they don't find your search strings. > > > > $write sys$output "File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1" > > > File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 > > > $rename/log JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 > > > *.xml_2007091522383962;* > > > %RENAME-I-RENAMED, JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 renamed to > > > JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 > > > === Extracted batch log except: > > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail - > > > JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 - > > > nl: /nonumb | - > > > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | - > > > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > > > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > > > $ sever=$severity > > > $ show sym sever > > > SEVER = "1" > > > === > > > Here the spurious semicolon is gone and it then works correctly. > > > [Someone else spotted the extra semicolon.] > > Only if the ;1; is in his actual command and not just a posting typo > -- which was my original question. I guess Norm doesn't read my posts. Well he said it was an "actual log excerpt" and it doesn't look short enough for anyone in our day and age to have typed it in. I think this has got to be it. You made the catch! I think we can put this to rest. AEF ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:48:24 -0700 From: Doug Phillips Subject: Re: Command fails in batch, seems to work at-ed interactively Message-ID: <1190083704.540834.143160@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> On Sep 17, 9:37 pm, AEF wrote: > On Sep 17, 12:45 pm, norm.raph...@metso.com wrote: > > > > > This code checks for an empty or blanked PostalZip field. > > When run inside the batch, is seems to give a different, incorrect > > result then when the code is extracted to another procedure file > > and run against the renamed data file. > > In this case there is a match and Sever is "1". > > In the nomatch case Sever is "3". > > Here the "no strings matched" sets Sever to "3" indicating a wrong > > result as there should have been a match. > > Why would the same code fail to work and later work on the renamed > > file. (The diff command is to eliminate the trailing spaces first.) > > [OpenVMS Alpha V7.3-1] > > === Actual log excerpt: > > Sent file JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML.1, 571384 bytes. > > QUIT > > <221 > > $@mfgcom:check_postal.com "JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > The extra semicolon in the line above is your problem. See my prior > post on this. > > > $!$ ffile="jamdata:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_2007090603045085;1" > > $ > > ffile=f$search(f$parse("JAMDATA:FRONTIER_SHR.XML_*;",,,,"SYNTAX_ONLY"),3) > > $ if p1 .nes. "" then ffile="JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1;" > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1; nl: > > /nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > > %SEARCH-I-NOMATCHES, no strings matched > > $ sever=$severity > > $ if sever .eq. "1" > > $ endif > > So the error message is sent to the search commands and that's why > they don't find your search strings. > > > > > $write sys$output "File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1" > > File: JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 > > $rename/log JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 > > *.xml_2007091522383962;* > > %RENAME-I-RENAMED, JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML;1 renamed to > > JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 > > === Extracted batch log except: > > $ pipe diff/igno=trail - > > JAM317:[CM_PROD.DATA]FRONTIER_ATO.XML_2007091522383962;1 - > > nl: /nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe ""/window=(0,6)/mat=or/exact/nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe "" /exact/nonumb | - > > sear sys$pipe "> ","><"/exact/out=nl: > > $ sever=$severity > > $ show sym sever > > SEVER = "1" > > === > > Here the spurious semicolon is gone and it then works correctly. > > [Someone else spotted the extra semicolon.] > Only if the ;1; is in his actual command and not just a posting typo -- which was my original question. I guess Norm doesn't read my posts. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 10:40:40 +0800 From: Bruce Cook Subject: Re: despair Message-ID: <1190083290.306666@grimiore.conceptual.net.au> Interesting discussion. As someone who's been denied the DEC world for about 10 years this shows the fairly stark difference between "old time DEC philosophy" and the UNIX/windoze approach to things. The DEC way of doing things was for applications/libraries to be aware of everything that is occurring at every level, and dealing with that in a sensible manner. This meant that if you had a failure in an application or library you would be returned an error and the documentation for that component would tell you exactly what errors would occur under what circumstances. Makes debugging and fault tracing easy and also means that every process would behave in a specifically predetermined manner, no matter how it was used. In the UNIX world, we write code that charges ahead and relies on the underlying modules to deal with error conditions. This has the result that often error conditions go unnoticed, have bizare/unexpected side effects, or when the error is noticed, it's so out of context it's almost impossible to trace. The more recent try/except/catch constructs in languages have helped improve this somewhat, however it's still used so infrequently in libraries that a lot of "modern" programming is trying to work out what the designer of some random library was thinking when they wrote the thing. The first ARPAnet worm illustrates this quite well. The sin committed in that script wasn't not realizing that node adjacency is commutative until the enter key was hit, that was just a basic bug in the algorithm, but rather the first line of the script: SET NOON which was employed so that the script wouldn't bomb out when trying to submit jobs to the many '11s on the net at the time. The proper "DEC" approach would have been to test for the failed submit condition and continue at that point. Using SET NOON meant that the script was close to impossible to stop. And to continue the theme of scripts not being run by the same person in the way intended; remember that the worm had a second coming when someone on one of those '11s found the worm in one of the job spools, wondered what it did and so submitted to his nearest VAX :) Bruce RIP ~prep Ron Johnson wrote: > On 09/13/07 23:26, AEF wrote: >> On Sep 13, 6:19 pm, "David P. Murphy" wrote: >>> Real code at the beginning of the "daily backup" batch job: >>> >>> $ ON ERROR THEN CONTINUE >>> $ ALLOCATE 'tape_drive' >>> $ INIT 'tape_drive' 'label' >>> $ BACKUP/IMAGE/REWIND/'quals' - >>> 'disk' - >>> 'tape_drive'DAILY.BCK/SAVE >>> >>> I have lost what little faith in humanity remained in me. >>> >>> ok >>> dpm >> >> >> My questions: >> >> Is the same tape in the drive every day? >> >> Are there any more BACKUP commands in the rest of the procedure? > > Does it matter? Defensive programming says you defend against > hardware glitches other people's mistakes. > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 17:11:36 -0700 From: "Tom Linden" Subject: Hypervisor Message-ID: IIRC, Hypervisor, was (trademarked?) name Amdahl used for one of their systems where they first introduced this, ca. mid 80's -- PL/I for OpenVMS www.kednos.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:19:19 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: Hypervisor Message-ID: <46EF2797.690B5BBE@spam.comcast.net> Tom Linden wrote: > > IIRC, Hypervisor, was (trademarked?) name Amdahl used for one of their > systems where they first introduced this, ca. mid 80's SSSSHHHH!!!! Don't tell IBM! -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: 17 Sep 2007 23:13:06 GMT From: Hans Bachner Subject: Re: Portmapper / access control files? Message-ID: Well, a bit late, but nevertheless... Paul Raulerson wrote: > Anyone have a pointer to the documentation for the basic TCP/IP > Portmapper programs? What I am looking for is the equivalent to the > Unix/Linux /etc/hosts.allow files. I want to run a different version of > telnet/ssh for a few particular IP addresses... 8/ > > Under Unix/Linux, I would just modify /etc/hosts.allow to do something > like this... > > in.telnetd : 10.10.10.0/255.255.255.0 : twist /usr/local/sbin/local_telnetd > in.telnetd : ALL : \ > twist /bin/echo -e "\n\raccess from %h declined.\n\rGo away.";sleep 2 You can define restrictions in the service definition: $ TCPIP HELP SET SERVICE /ALLOW $ TCPIP HELP SET SERVICE /REJECT Hans. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:54:42 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: TCP/IP Message-ID: <46EF21D2.7A8C82D6@spam.comcast.net> Ron Johnson wrote: > > On 09/16/07 20:58, David J Dachtera wrote: > [snip] > > > > UCX also has a major "gotcha": when multiple interfaces are assigned to the same > > subnet the loss of any one interface will render the entire subnet unusable. > > This is due to a UCX feature where in it "round robins" the outgoing traffic > > among the available interfaces on a subnet. This feature cannot be defeated, and > > although most folks recommend "failSAFE-IP" as a remedy, this does not work > > because UCX cannot properly detect connectivity failure above the physical > > layer. > > v5 was a port from Digital Unix, was it not? (That's why upper-case > commands like GET and CD don't work anymore.) That's what we were told at DECUS past. > Does that gotcha still happen in v5? It was discovered in V5.x. AFAIK, the technique is new for V5.x. I don't recall seeing anything about it in the V4 doc.'s. Then again, UCX documentation is only slightly less bad than the DECnet-V docset. -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:05:19 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: TCP/IP Message-ID: <46EF244F.3EA1301E@spam.comcast.net> Larry Kilgallen wrote: > > In article <46EDDF2A.31D97C73@spam.comcast.net>, David J Dachtera writes: > > > Performance wise, ... > > > > PSC's products still use Direct I/O for the network. Hence, each network I/O > > generates an interrupt. This can result in CPU saturation in extreme cases, > > mostly with huge databases and other applications with tens of thousands of > > active connections. > > > > UCX uses Buffered I/O for the network resulting in more CPU time being available > > in User Mode; hence, more actual work gets done than when the CPUs are busy > > performing interrupt service. > > But behind Buffered I/O there is Direct I/O In so far as that may be true, if you examine T4 data using a CSVPNG six-mode overlay graph for the CPU modes and a buffered vs. direct I/O overlay graph: - For Multinet, you'll see interrupt time track with direct I/O and at extreme times interrupt mode will exceed user mode. SMP time tracks with interrupt time. - For UCX, you'll see vastly reduced Direct I/O and greatlyincreased buffered I/O vs. Multinet, and interrupt time tracking lower than kernel time. (Oracle application (Cerner).) > and buffered I/O also has > the overhead of copying the data from user memory to the device buffer. > That should take up _more_ CPU time that the direct I/O case. Does DMA account for any of this? > Was the problem you experienced using very small buffers ? Unknown. Analysis at that level is beyond our resources. That's why we have vendors (is the corporate line). -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: 17 Sep 2007 22:37:05 -0500 From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: TCP/IP Message-ID: In article <46EF244F.3EA1301E@spam.comcast.net>, David J Dachtera writes: > Larry Kilgallen wrote: >> But behind Buffered I/O there is Direct I/O > > In so far as that may be true, if you examine T4 data using a CSVPNG six-mode > overlay graph for the CPU modes and a buffered vs. direct I/O overlay graph: > > - For Multinet, you'll see interrupt time track with direct I/O and at extreme > times interrupt mode will exceed user mode. SMP time tracks with interrupt time. Ok. > - For UCX, you'll see vastly reduced Direct I/O and greatlyincreased buffered > I/O vs. Multinet, and interrupt time tracking lower than kernel time. That all makes sense, but does not necessarily say one is more efficient. I think the telling metrics are (in order): Data throughput Total CPU time left free (if any) > (Oracle application (Cerner).) > >> and buffered I/O also has >> the overhead of copying the data from user memory to the device buffer. >> That should take up _more_ CPU time that the direct I/O case. > > Does DMA account for any of this? > >> Was the problem you experienced using very small buffers ? > > Unknown. Analysis at that level is beyond our resources. That's why we have > vendors (is the corporate line). Then I don't think we have enough data for a comparison. But if you have chosen something that works best for the application you have (and cannot change), then you have done what is right for your situation. The right answer might not be the same for the original poster. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:08:21 -0500 From: David J Dachtera Subject: Re: tz88 - green-brick for BA350 shelf Message-ID: <46EF2505.55A27615@spam.comcast.net> Michael Austin wrote: > > Does any one have one of these old devices they want to get rid of - > cheaply? I have one that flashes all lights on the front after a power > glitch. I had 2 in this shelf - and luckily only one of them got hit. > I have tried re-seating and following the instructions to clear the > error, but it looks like it is toast. > > Or if you just have the drive - I am sure my former DEC FS skills can > take care of placing it into the canister. Have you opened the drive up yet? Take it out of the canister and verify that the leader is still set. Not sure why a power glitch would have any effect on that, but... The clear cover over the take-up spool just snaps off and back on. Look for the catches and release them carefully so as not to break anything. -- David J Dachtera dba DJE Systems http://www.djesys.com/ Unofficial OpenVMS Marketing Home Page http://www.djesys.com/vms/market/ Unofficial Affordable OpenVMS Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/soho/ Unofficial OpenVMS-IA32 Home Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/ia32/ Unofficial OpenVMS Hobbyist Support Page: http://www.djesys.com/vms/support/ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:38:32 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: VMS as hypervisor ? Message-ID: On 09/17/07 11:26, John Vottero wrote: > "Richard B. Gilbert" wrote in message > news:46ECD24B.7080604@comcast.net... [snip] >> >> The whole virtualization movement is about the fact that Windows is >> not very good at protecting applications from each other! Virtual >> servers compensate for Windows' shortcomings by providing the >> necessary isolation. >> > > The really crazy part is that Windows *IS* good at protecting > applications from each other but, there's nowhere to set the limits and > the default is "use the whole machine". Huh? It (the OS) is supposed to know how to effectively time slice in a multiprocessing environment, and not allow one process to "white out" the entire screen by not refreshing it's own window. The world would be a much better place if Bill Gates had stayed in school and gotten (I gag as I say this) an MBA. -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:44:48 GMT From: VAXman- @SendSpamHere.ORG Subject: Re: VMS as hypervisor ? Message-ID: In article , Ron Johnson writes: > > >On 09/17/07 11:26, John Vottero wrote: >> "Richard B. Gilbert" wrote in message >> news:46ECD24B.7080604@comcast.net... >[snip] >>> >>> The whole virtualization movement is about the fact that Windows is >>> not very good at protecting applications from each other! Virtual >>> servers compensate for Windows' shortcomings by providing the >>> necessary isolation. >>> >> >> The really crazy part is that Windows *IS* good at protecting >> applications from each other but, there's nowhere to set the limits and >> the default is "use the whole machine". > >Huh? > >It (the OS) is supposed to know how to effectively time slice in a >multiprocessing environment, and not allow one process to "white >out" the entire screen by not refreshing it's own window. > >The world would be a much better place if Bill Gates had stayed in >school and gotten (I gag as I say this) an MBA. Master Borg Assimilator? There's a degree for that? -- 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: 17 Sep 2007 14:57:50 -0500 From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Subject: Re: VMS as hypervisor ? Message-ID: In article , "John Vottero" writes: > "Richard B. Gilbert" wrote in message > news:46ED540F.3040006@comcast.net... >>> >>> That applies for VMS as well, if you need two different versions of >>> VMS and prefer to have only one hardware box. >> >> When did this happen? It used to be that images linked on a VAX ca. >> 1978/79 would run without problems on any later version. >> >> Now if you have third party software, the vendor might not it support it >> on all versions of VMS but it should still WORK on the version it was >> built on and all later versions unless someone is doing something very >> strange. >> > > Well, if you happen to be a third party software vendor that wants to > support many versions of VMS, you need to be running the oldest supported > version, the newest supported version and a few versions in between for VAX, > Alpha and IA64. It sure would be nice to do that with virtual machines. And your version list for "supported" can be quite longer than HP's. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 21:03:16 GMT From: "John Vottero" Subject: Re: VMS as hypervisor ? Message-ID: wrote in message news:gIyHi.65$iA.22@newsfe12.lga... > In article , "John > Vottero" writes: >> >> >>"Richard B. Gilbert" wrote in message >>news:46ED540F.3040006@comcast.net... >>>> >>>> That applies for VMS as well, if you need two different versions of >>>> VMS and prefer to have only one hardware box. >>> >>> When did this happen? It used to be that images linked on a VAX ca. >>> 1978/79 would run without problems on any later version. >>> >>> Now if you have third party software, the vendor might not it support it >>> on all versions of VMS but it should still WORK on the version it was >>> built on and all later versions unless someone is doing something very >>> strange. >>> >> >>Well, if you happen to be a third party software vendor that wants to >>support many versions of VMS, you need to be running the oldest supported >>version, the newest supported version and a few versions in between for >>VAX, >>Alpha and IA64. It sure would be nice to do that with virtual machines. > > What makes you think that John? > Think what, that you need to run the versions of VMS that you want to support or that it would be nice to run VMS on virtual machines? I've seen hacks that let you link against older versions of libraries on newer versions of VMS and I've seen VMSINSTAL kits that ship object modules and link during the install but, I wouldn't want to support either of those. I don't want to guess or assume what the linker MAP looks like and, if we say we support VAX/VMS V6.2 I want to be able to log on to VAX/VMS V6.2 to test, debug etc. Why would we like to run VMS in virtual machines? We support VMS V6.2 or higher on VAX, Alpha and Itanium running DECnet, TCP/IP Services, Multinet or TCPware. That a lot of combinations. With virtual machines, any combination we wanted to put together becomes just a big file (virtual disk image). Like it or not, we're doing a lot of work on Windows. Every developer has 4GB of RAM on their workstation so they can fire up two or three virtual machines running whatever they need to run. We just setup a test server that has two quad core processors and 24GB of RAM, it's running 3 instances of Windows Server 2003, a couple instances of Windows XP, a couple instances of Windows Server 2008 Beta, Windows 2000, two versions of Linux and Solaris. We have two Itaniums with 4GB of RAM and they can only run one instance of VMS on each one. I would love to add memory and slice them up into 4 or 8 virtual machines. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 21:08:04 GMT From: "John Vottero" Subject: Re: VMS as hypervisor ? Message-ID: "Ron Johnson" wrote in message news:KQzHi.85$sS6.47@newsfe14.lga... > On 09/17/07 11:26, John Vottero wrote: >> "Richard B. Gilbert" wrote in message >> news:46ECD24B.7080604@comcast.net... > [snip] >>> >>> The whole virtualization movement is about the fact that Windows is >>> not very good at protecting applications from each other! Virtual >>> servers compensate for Windows' shortcomings by providing the >>> necessary isolation. >>> >> >> The really crazy part is that Windows *IS* good at protecting >> applications from each other but, there's nowhere to set the limits and >> the default is "use the whole machine". > > Huh? > > It (the OS) is supposed to know how to effectively time slice in a > multiprocessing environment, and not allow one process to "white > out" the entire screen by not refreshing it's own window. What version of Windows are you using? That may have been a problem with Windows 9X but, I wouldn't touch that with a 10 foot pole and a kevlar suit. Anything in the Windows NT line has no problem time slicing. > > The world would be a much better place if Bill Gates had stayed in > school and gotten (I gag as I say this) an MBA. > Before he gets the MBA he would have to get his BA, he dropped out to start Microsoft. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 16:35:38 -0500 From: Ron Johnson Subject: Re: VMS as hypervisor ? Message-ID: On 09/17/07 16:08, John Vottero wrote: > "Ron Johnson" wrote in message > news:KQzHi.85$sS6.47@newsfe14.lga... [snip] > >> >> The world would be a much better place if Bill Gates had stayed in >> school and gotten (I gag as I say this) an MBA. >> > > Before he gets the MBA he would have to get his BA, he dropped out to > start Microsoft. Yes........ What's you point? -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 21:55:44 +0000 From: "Main, Kerry" Subject: RE: VMS as hypervisor ? Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: John Vottero [mailto:JVottero@mvpsi.com] > Sent: September 17, 2007 5:03 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: VMS as hypervisor ? > > > wrote in message > news:gIyHi.65$iA.22@newsfe12.lga... > > In article , "John > > Vottero" writes: > >> > >> > >>"Richard B. Gilbert" wrote in message > >>news:46ED540F.3040006@comcast.net... > >>>> > >>>> That applies for VMS as well, if you need two different versions > of > >>>> VMS and prefer to have only one hardware box. > >>> > >>> When did this happen? It used to be that images linked on a VAX > ca. > >>> 1978/79 would run without problems on any later version. > >>> > >>> Now if you have third party software, the vendor might not it > support it > >>> on all versions of VMS but it should still WORK on the version it > was > >>> built on and all later versions unless someone is doing something > very > >>> strange. > >>> > >> > >>Well, if you happen to be a third party software vendor that wants to > >>support many versions of VMS, you need to be running the oldest > supported > >>version, the newest supported version and a few versions in between > for > >>VAX, > >>Alpha and IA64. It sure would be nice to do that with virtual > machines. > > > > What makes you think that John? > > > > Think what, that you need to run the versions of VMS that you want to > support or that it would be nice to run VMS on virtual machines? > > I've seen hacks that let you link against older versions of libraries > on > newer versions of VMS and I've seen VMSINSTAL kits that ship object > modules > and link during the install but, I wouldn't want to support either of > those. > I don't want to guess or assume what the linker MAP looks like and, if > we > say we support VAX/VMS V6.2 I want to be able to log on to VAX/VMS V6.2 > to > test, debug etc. > > Why would we like to run VMS in virtual machines? We support VMS V6.2 > or > higher on VAX, Alpha and Itanium running DECnet, TCP/IP Services, > Multinet > or TCPware. That a lot of combinations. With virtual machines, any > combination we wanted to put together becomes just a big file (virtual > disk > image). > > Like it or not, we're doing a lot of work on Windows. Every developer > has > 4GB of RAM on their workstation so they can fire up two or three > virtual > machines running whatever they need to run. We just setup a test > server > that has two quad core processors and 24GB of RAM, it's running 3 > instances > of Windows Server 2003, a couple instances of Windows XP, a couple > instances > of Windows Server 2008 Beta, Windows 2000, two versions of Linux and > Solaris. > > We have two Itaniums with 4GB of RAM and they can only run one instance > of > VMS on each one. I would love to add memory and slice them up into 4 > or 8 > virtual machines. Well, OS virtualization certainly does have its place, but, keep in mind th= e following: - each OS instance still needs to be properly licensed. As an example, a si= ngle VMware server or desktop with 5 active Windows VM's requires 5 Windows OS platform= licenses. - at least in the Windows space, a number of vendors (like Microsoft) do no= t support any of their products running on VMware or any non-Microsoft VM. - many Cust's want their QA and test environments to match production as cl= osely as possible. Since a VM uses virtual drivers, the QA/Test environment virtual = driver becomes a pretty big difference between Prod and QA/Test. Another alternative to using virtualization in a dev /QA/test environment i= s to simply use a single Integrity server and simply specify via the console which OS e= nvironment you want to boot off. With a different OS environment pre-built on a small = SAN, this is easy to do and it uses native drivers and hence you do not have the Vdri= ver vs real driver + ISV support issues that a virtual environment has. A reboot t= ypically takes only a few minutes these days. Regards Kerry Main Senior Consultant HP Services Canada Voice: 613-592-4660 Fax: 613-591-4477 kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom (remove the DOT's and AT) OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 22:06:21 +0000 (UTC) From: Cydrome Leader Subject: Re: VMS as hypervisor ? Message-ID: Cydrome Leader wrote: > Richard B. Gilbert wrote: >> Lee K. Gleason wrote: >>> "JF Mezei" wrote in message >>> news:dd217$46ec7b84$cef8887a$24782@TEKSAVVY.COM... >>> >>>>OK, So HP has made HP-UX capable of hosting multiple OS instances. >>>>(glorifided VM from IBM). >>>> >>> >>> >>> This while virtualization movement is a bit of a puzzle to me. When I >>> question it, the PC types at work tell me it's great, since you can run lots >>> of different things on the same machine, and can buy fewer servers. Since >>> VMS already has a decent scheduler and excellent inter-process memory >>> protection and resource allocation, I'm always left wondering, why couldn't >>> they just use an operating system that can allow you to "run lots of >>> different things on the same machine", each in their own process? That way >>> you don't have to drag the overhead of a whole copy of Windows along with >>> each separate thing you want to do. As they try to explain, I often feel >>> like President Not Sure, listening to his cabinet tell him about the >>> electrolytes in Brawndo (if you;'ve seen Idiocracy...). >>> -- >>> >>> >> >> The whole virtualization movement is about the fact that Windows is not >> very good at protecting applications from each other! Virtual servers >> compensate for Windows' shortcomings by providing the necessary isolation. > > It's about windows. It's about consolidation. blah, missing a NOT after the "about". ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:45:55 -0700 From: AEF Subject: Re: VMS as hypervisor ? Message-ID: <1190083555.031684.314620@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com> On Sep 15, 11:06 pm, "Lee K. Gleason" wrote: > "JF Mezei" wrote in message > > news:dd217$46ec7b84$cef8887a$24782@TEKSAVVY.COM... > > > OK, So HP has made HP-UX capable of hosting multiple OS instances. > > (glorifided VM from IBM). > > > Out of curiosity, would VMS be well suited for such a task ? What are > > the traits of a good OS to become a hypervisor ? > > > In the case of IO, is it correct to state that VMS , as a hypervisor, > > would not actually be performing IO on bealf of the instances it hosts > > and that the later would have direct access to their disk drives ? > > > Does HP-UX have advantages over VMS in terms of process switching, > > priority and general multi-tasking, or is VMS up to par on that aspect ? > > This while virtualization movement is a bit of a puzzle to me. When I > question it, the PC types at work tell me it's great, since you can run lots > of different things on the same machine, and can buy fewer servers. Since > VMS already has a decent scheduler and excellent inter-process memory > protection and resource allocation, I'm always left wondering, why couldn't > they just use an operating system that can allow you to "run lots of > different things on the same machine", each in their own process? That way > you don't have to drag the overhead of a whole copy of Windows along with > each separate thing you want to do. As they try to explain, I often feel > like President Not Sure, listening to his cabinet tell him about the > electrolytes in Brawndo (if you;'ve seen Idiocracy...). > -- So what do they say in response to your "why not run VMS" spiel? (I haven't seen Idiocracy or even heard of it.) The main advantage, I think, of VM running multiple instances of Windows, appears to be the ability to restart the OS just for one app, as someone else already mentioned. But what if you have to reboot the VM OS? What if you reboot the wrong OS instance? Would that be an easier mistake to make than rebooting the wrong server? [DISCLAIMER: Just some slightly random musings late at night.] AEF ------------------------------ End of INFO-VAX 2007.509 ************************