On 1/6/2023 2:44 am, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2023-05-31, John Reagan <xyzzy1959@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I missed those questions from Mark (and I couldn't easily find them),
>> but the forums are not an official support channel (even with frowny faces)
>>
>
> https://forum.vmssoftware.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=8654

Encouraging additional comment

https://forum.vmssoftware.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=8654&start=10#p18818

> Your management keep pushing community people towards the forums, along
> with promises that people from VSI will review the issues raised there
> on a regular basis.

Early on I posted

https://forum.vmssoftware.com/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=8480&p=17485#p17485

echoing similar sentiments.

> Simon.

--
Anyone, who using social-media, forms an opinion regarding anything
other than the relative cuteness of this or that puppy-dog, needs
seriously to examine their critical thinking.

On 2023-05-31, Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
> In article <nnd$6f0d1a96$39b9159a@34e78233e2c9d371>,
> MG <em_geeNO@SPAMxs4all.nl> wrote:
>>On 31-May-2023 21:34, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> The totally new to VMS just wanting to try a few DCL commands
>>> probably do not care what architecture they are running on - most
>>> likely they will not even know. VMS is VMS.
>>
>>On what other platform can one run "a few DCL commands"?
>
> VAX. The future is VAX. Digital has it now!

"Nothing sucks like a VAX". :-)

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On 2023-06-01, terry-...@glaver.org <terry-groups@glaver.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 31, 2023 at 6:33:17?PM UTC-4, Dave Froble wrote:
>> If my feeble memory still works, I think that has already been answered.
>>
>> x86 cluster communications will be modified, and to include Alpha and/or itanic,
>> a patch for either will be required. No patches for VAX, since VSI does not
>> have a VAX release to which patches can be provided.

Correct. If you are going to show off VMS clustering then it has to be
secure clustering, which means the VSI changes and which means no VAX.

>
> As a reminder, the VSI FAQ still says "Clustering of VSI OpenVMS for x86-64 with VAX/VMS systems is still under investigation at this time." See: https://vmssoftware.com/about/v9-qa/

That will be unencrypted clustering because otherwise VSI would have to
create a clustering compatibillity kit for existing VAX versions, which
they are not allowed to do.

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On 6/1/2023 12:44 AM, terry-...@glaver.org wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 31, 2023 at 6:33:17 PM UTC-4, Dave Froble wrote:
>> If my feeble memory still works, I think that has already been answered.
>>
>> x86 cluster communications will be modified, and to include Alpha and/or itanic,
>> a patch for either will be required. No patches for VAX, since VSI does not
>> have a VAX release to which patches can be provided.
>
> As a reminder, the VSI FAQ still says "Clustering of VSI OpenVMS for x86-64 with VAX/VMS systems is still under investigation at this time." See: https://vmssoftware.com/about/v9-qa/
>

Yes, but if VSI decides to "improve" the cluster communications, and there are
reasons to do so, then I see two possibilities for clustering with a VAX.

1) Issue a patch for VAX/VMS, which my understanding is they cannot do.

2) Include both any new protocol along with the current protocol on Alpha,
itanic, and x86. And that would sort of wipe out any security measures that
might be in the new protocol.

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

MG <em_geeNO@SPAMxs4all.nl> writes:

> On 31-May-2023 21:34, Arne Vajhøj wrote:

>> The totally new to VMS just wanting to try a few DCL commands
>> probably do not care what architecture they are running on - most
>> likely they will not even know. VMS is VMS.

> On what other platform can one run "a few DCL commands"?

Umm, RSTS/E springs immediately to mind, followed closely by IAS...

--
Rich Alderson news@alderson.users.panix.com
Audendum est, et veritas investiganda; quam etiamsi non assequamur,
omnino tamen proprius, quam nunc sumus, ad eam perveniemus.
--Galen

On 2023-05-31 21:43, MG wrote:
> On 31-May-2023 21:34, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> The totally new to VMS just wanting to try a few DCL commands
>> probably do not care what architecture they are running on - most
>> likely they will not even know. VMS is VMS.
>
> On what other platform can one run "a few DCL commands"?

I know that Arne's point was that such users just look at it as "VMS",
not knowing or caring what hardware architecture they might be running on.

But to answer your question more literally, I could say RSX or RSTS/E as
well. DCL was not VMS only. Just telnet to mim.stupi.net, and log in as
user guest with password guest, and play with DCL under RSX...

Johnny

On 2023-06-01 14:03, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2023-05-31, Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>> In article <nnd$6f0d1a96$39b9159a@34e78233e2c9d371>,
>> MG <em_geeNO@SPAMxs4all.nl> wrote:
>>> On 31-May-2023 21:34, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> The totally new to VMS just wanting to try a few DCL commands
>>>> probably do not care what architecture they are running on - most
>>>> likely they will not even know. VMS is VMS.
>>>
>>> On what other platform can one run "a few DCL commands"?
>>
>> VAX. The future is VAX. Digital has it now!
>
> "Nothing sucks like a VAX". :-)

I wonder if people will ever get that this quote is incorrect.

There is a vacuum brand called VAX, but the quoted slogan was from
another brand - Electrolux. "Nothing sucks like Electrolux". Which even
rhymes properly.

Johnny

On 2023-06-01 20:28, Rich Alderson wrote:
> MG <em_geeNO@SPAMxs4all.nl> writes:
>
>> On 31-May-2023 21:34, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>
>>> The totally new to VMS just wanting to try a few DCL commands
>>> probably do not care what architecture they are running on - most
>>> likely they will not even know. VMS is VMS.
>
>> On what other platform can one run "a few DCL commands"?
>
> Umm, RSTS/E springs immediately to mind, followed closely by IAS...

I can't remember for sure if DCL was originally for IAS or RSX-11M-PLUS,
and everything else came after that.

Johnny

On 2023-06-01 14:06, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2023-06-01, terry-...@glaver.org <terry-groups@glaver.org> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, May 31, 2023 at 6:33:17?PM UTC-4, Dave Froble wrote:
>>> If my feeble memory still works, I think that has already been answered.
>>>
>>> x86 cluster communications will be modified, and to include Alpha and/or itanic,
>>> a patch for either will be required. No patches for VAX, since VSI does not
>>> have a VAX release to which patches can be provided.
>
> Correct. If you are going to show off VMS clustering then it has to be
> secure clustering, which means the VSI changes and which means no VAX.
>
>>
>> As a reminder, the VSI FAQ still says "Clustering of VSI OpenVMS for x86-64 with VAX/VMS systems is still under investigation at this time." See: https://vmssoftware.com/about/v9-qa/
>
> That will be unencrypted clustering because otherwise VSI would have to
> create a clustering compatibillity kit for existing VAX versions, which
> they are not allowed to do.

Says who?

Why would they not be allowed to create any software for VMS for VAX? I
strongly suspect that is an incorrect statement.

They cannot issue licenses for VMS for VAX without creating a new
version of VMS, but that have no bearing on the ability to distribute
some other software for VMS on VAX.

It would be like saying that noone is allowed to create any new software
for VMS on VAX. Which would be an extremely weird thing to claim.

Johnny

On 6/1/2023 6:34 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> On 2023-06-01 14:06, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2023-06-01, terry-...@glaver.org <terry-groups@glaver.org> wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, May 31, 2023 at 6:33:17?PM UTC-4, Dave Froble wrote:
>>>> If my feeble memory still works, I think that has already been answered.
>>>>
>>>> x86 cluster communications will be modified, and to include Alpha and/or
>>>> itanic,
>>>> a patch for either will be required. No patches for VAX, since VSI does not
>>>> have a VAX release to which patches can be provided.
>>
>> Correct. If you are going to show off VMS clustering then it has to be
>> secure clustering, which means the VSI changes and which means no VAX.
>>
>>>
>>> As a reminder, the VSI FAQ still says "Clustering of VSI OpenVMS for x86-64
>>> with VAX/VMS systems is still under investigation at this time." See:
>>> https://vmssoftware.com/about/v9-qa/
>>
>> That will be unencrypted clustering because otherwise VSI would have to
>> create a clustering compatibillity kit for existing VAX versions, which
>> they are not allowed to do.
>
> Says who?
>
> Why would they not be allowed to create any software for VMS for VAX? I strongly
> suspect that is an incorrect statement.
>
> They cannot issue licenses for VMS for VAX without creating a new version of
> VMS, but that have no bearing on the ability to distribute some other software
> for VMS on VAX.
>
> It would be like saying that noone is allowed to create any new software for VMS
> on VAX. Which would be an extremely weird thing to claim.
>
> Johnny
>

You may be correct. Would be nice. However, we're discussing something tightly
coupled with the OS. A good question for VSI.

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

On 6/1/2023 6:34 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> On 2023-06-01 14:06, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2023-06-01, terry-...@glaver.org <terry-groups@glaver.org> wrote:
>>> As a reminder, the VSI FAQ still says "Clustering of VSI OpenVMS for
>>> x86-64 with VAX/VMS systems is still under investigation at this
>>> time." See: https://vmssoftware.com/about/v9-qa/
>>
>> That will be unencrypted clustering because otherwise VSI would have to
>> create a clustering compatibillity kit for existing VAX versions, which
>> they are not allowed to do.

They are certainly allowed.

VSI has stated numerous times that they are allowed to release
a VMS VAX version but that they have no intention of doing so
for commercial reasons.

> Says who?
>
> Why would they not be allowed to create any software for VMS for VAX? I
> strongly suspect that is an incorrect statement.
>
> They cannot issue licenses for VMS for VAX without creating a new
> version of VMS, but that have no bearing on the ability to distribute
> some other software for VMS on VAX.
>
> It would be like saying that noone is allowed to create any new software
> for VMS on VAX. Which would be an extremely weird thing to claim.

VSI could certainly create a chess game for VMS VAX or any
other type of application without any complications.

But clustering is pretty tightly integrated into VMS.

I suspect that they may not be able to change the
cluster protocol without releasing a new VMS version.

Which they can but won't.

Arne

On 6/1/2023 9:53 AM, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 6/1/2023 12:44 AM, terry-...@glaver.org wrote:
>> On Wednesday, May 31, 2023 at 6:33:17 PM UTC-4, Dave Froble wrote:
>>> If my feeble memory still works, I think that has already been answered.
>>>
>>> x86 cluster communications will be modified, and to include Alpha
>>> and/or itanic,
>>> a patch for either will be required. No patches for VAX, since VSI
>>> does not
>>> have a VAX release to which patches can be provided.
>>
>> As a reminder, the VSI FAQ still says "Clustering of VSI OpenVMS for
>> x86-64 with VAX/VMS systems is still under investigation at this
>> time." See: https://vmssoftware.com/about/v9-qa/
>>
>
> Yes, but if VSI decides to "improve" the cluster communications, and
> there are reasons to do so, then I see two possibilities for clustering
> with a VAX.
>
> 1) Issue a patch for VAX/VMS, which my understanding is they cannot do.
>
> 2) Include both any new protocol along with the current protocol on
> Alpha, itanic, and x86.  And that would sort of wipe out any security
> measures that might be in the new protocol.

I am not sure that I understand the problem.

We are talking about a PR stunt here - running a VMS cluster with
4 architecture to get some good press.

Nobody cares whether that system uses encrypted clustering
traffic or not.

Some will care about encrypted clustering traffic in a production
environment.

But such an environment is not likely to want such a 4
architecture cluster or to include VAX (it seems reasonable
to assume that a VMS VAX system today is "frozen" aka don't
want to change anything).

If the new VMS cluster software negotiate encryption and only
enable if both ends support it then sites could patch and
get encryption for Alpha - x86-64 and Itanium - x86-64
if they want to (or auditors force them to).

Arne

Apologies, I regret having created this thread.

- MG

On Thu, 2023-06-01 at 19:48 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> > It would be like saying that noone is allowed to create any new
> > software
> > for VMS on VAX. Which would be an extremely weird thing to claim.
>
> VSI could certainly create a chess game for VMS VAX or any
> other type of application without any complications.
>
> But clustering is pretty tightly integrated into VMS.
>
> I suspect that they may not be able to change the
> cluster protocol without releasing a new VMS version.

I know DEC used to release the source code on microfiche. It should be
straightforward to scroll through the listings and see if your
assertion can be proved.
--
Tactical Nuclear Kittens

On Friday, June 2, 2023 at 4:06:30 AM UTC-4, Single Stage to Orbit wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-06-01 at 19:48 -0400, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> > > It would be like saying that noone is allowed to create any new
> > > software
> > > for VMS on VAX. Which would be an extremely weird thing to claim.
> >
> > VSI could certainly create a chess game for VMS VAX or any
> > other type of application without any complications.
> >
> > But clustering is pretty tightly integrated into VMS.
> >
> > I suspect that they may not be able to change the
> > cluster protocol without releasing a new VMS version.
> I know DEC used to release the source code on microfiche. It should be
> straightforward to scroll through the listings and see if your
> assertion can be proved.
> --
> Tactical Nuclear Kittens

Just for clarity:

VMS (and later OpenVMS) source LISTINGS were available on microfiche until V5.4-2. After that the listings were on CD.
You could purchase sources on a separate license and those were available as well, but there were restrictions. Some portions of VMS havenever been available either as source or listings (licensing parts for example). I am not aware of these listings being available for VSI versions though.

Dan

On 2023-06-01, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>
> I am not sure that I understand the problem.
>

That's obvious. :-)

> We are talking about a PR stunt here - running a VMS cluster with
> 4 architecture to get some good press.
>
> Nobody cares whether that system uses encrypted clustering
> traffic or not.
>

How good do you think the press coverage will be when they find out
this super-duper clustering technology is using completely unencrypted
protocols ?

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On 2023-06-01, Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> wrote:
> MG <em_geeNO@SPAMxs4all.nl> writes:
>
>> On 31-May-2023 21:34, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>
>>> The totally new to VMS just wanting to try a few DCL commands
>>> probably do not care what architecture they are running on - most
>>> likely they will not even know. VMS is VMS.
>
>> On what other platform can one run "a few DCL commands"?
>
> Umm, RSTS/E springs immediately to mind, followed closely by IAS...
>

I still miss /MO:4096 :-) ...

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On 2023-06-01, Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
> On 2023-06-01 14:03, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2023-05-31, Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>>> In article <nnd$6f0d1a96$39b9159a@34e78233e2c9d371>,
>>> MG <em_geeNO@SPAMxs4all.nl> wrote:
>>>> On 31-May-2023 21:34, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>> The totally new to VMS just wanting to try a few DCL commands
>>>>> probably do not care what architecture they are running on - most
>>>>> likely they will not even know. VMS is VMS.
>>>>
>>>> On what other platform can one run "a few DCL commands"?
>>>
>>> VAX. The future is VAX. Digital has it now!
>>
>> "Nothing sucks like a VAX". :-)
>
> I wonder if people will ever get that this quote is incorrect.
>
> There is a vacuum brand called VAX, but the quoted slogan was from
> another brand - Electrolux. "Nothing sucks like Electrolux". Which even
> rhymes properly.
>
> Johnny
>

No, it was used by the VAX vacuum cleaner people as well.

Could not find any direct advertising material references, but did find
these references:

http://catb.org/jargon/html/V/VAX.html

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14884244

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On 2023-06-01, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> On 2023-06-01 14:06, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>> On 2023-06-01, terry-...@glaver.org <terry-groups@glaver.org> wrote:
>>>> As a reminder, the VSI FAQ still says "Clustering of VSI OpenVMS for
>>>> x86-64 with VAX/VMS systems is still under investigation at this
>>>> time." See: https://vmssoftware.com/about/v9-qa/
>>>
>>> That will be unencrypted clustering because otherwise VSI would have to
>>> create a clustering compatibillity kit for existing VAX versions, which
>>> they are not allowed to do.
>
> They are certainly allowed.
>
> VSI has stated numerous times that they are allowed to release
> a VMS VAX version but that they have no intention of doing so
> for commercial reasons.
>

Please note the phrase "for existing VAX versions" above.

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On 6/2/2023 8:26 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2023-06-01, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>
>> I am not sure that I understand the problem.
>>
>
> That's obvious. :-)

Yes ...

>> We are talking about a PR stunt here - running a VMS cluster with
>> 4 architecture to get some good press.

There appear to be users of emulated VAX systems. These could be serious
production systems. Perhaps such users would like to add an x86 VMS system, and
to cluster it with their emulated VAX systems. Why? I don't know, and it
doesn't matter. So, considering it a "PR stunt" is unfair to such users.

>> Nobody cares whether that system uses encrypted clustering
>> traffic or not.
>>
>
> How good do you think the press coverage will be when they find out
> this super-duper clustering technology is using completely unencrypted
> protocols ?

Nothwithstanding Simon's paranoia, it is an issue for potential customers.
Myself, I'd suggest a bit of security. But it isn't my horse in this race.

--
David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: davef@tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA 15486

On Friday, June 2, 2023 at 8:38:55 AM UTC-4, Dave Froble wrote:
> On 6/2/2023 8:26 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> > On 2023-06-01, Arne Vajhøj <ar...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
> >>
> >> I am not sure that I understand the problem.
> >>
> >
> > That's obvious. :-)
> Yes ...
> >> We are talking about a PR stunt here - running a VMS cluster with
> >> 4 architecture to get some good press.
> There appear to be users of emulated VAX systems. These could be serious
> production systems. Perhaps such users would like to add an x86 VMS system, and
> to cluster it with their emulated VAX systems. Why? I don't know, and it
> doesn't matter. So, considering it a "PR stunt" is unfair to such users.
> >> Nobody cares whether that system uses encrypted clustering
> >> traffic or not.
> >>
> >
> > How good do you think the press coverage will be when they find out
> > this super-duper clustering technology is using completely unencrypted
> > protocols ?
> Nothwithstanding Simon's paranoia, it is an issue for potential customers..
> Myself, I'd suggest a bit of security. But it isn't my horse in this race..
> --
> David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: da...@tsoft-inc.com
> DFE Ultralights, Inc.
> 170 Grimplin Road
> Vanderbilt, PA 15486

I have real VAX, Alpha and Itanium systems. Perhaps if I spin up an X86 version and cluster all of them together that would suffice?
I can add some emulated systems to the mix for fun too.

What would make this a PR win? What proof would you want for this? I am willing to put it together if it makes sense.

Dan

On 2023-06-02, abrsvc <dansabrservices@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Friday, June 2, 2023 at 8:38:55?AM UTC-4, Dave Froble wrote:
>> On 6/2/2023 8:26 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> > On 2023-06-01, Arne Vajhøj <ar...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I am not sure that I understand the problem.
>> >>
>> >
>> > That's obvious. :-)
>> Yes ...
>> >> We are talking about a PR stunt here - running a VMS cluster with
>> >> 4 architecture to get some good press.
>> There appear to be users of emulated VAX systems. These could be serious
>> production systems. Perhaps such users would like to add an x86 VMS system, and
>> to cluster it with their emulated VAX systems. Why? I don't know, and it
>> doesn't matter. So, considering it a "PR stunt" is unfair to such users.
>> >> Nobody cares whether that system uses encrypted clustering
>> >> traffic or not.
>> >>
>> >
>> > How good do you think the press coverage will be when they find out
>> > this super-duper clustering technology is using completely unencrypted
>> > protocols ?
>> Nothwithstanding Simon's paranoia, it is an issue for potential customers.
>> Myself, I'd suggest a bit of security. But it isn't my horse in this race.
>> --
>> David Froble Tel: 724-529-0450
>> Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc. E-Mail: da...@tsoft-inc.com
>> DFE Ultralights, Inc.
>> 170 Grimplin Road
>> Vanderbilt, PA 15486
>
> I have real VAX, Alpha and Itanium systems. Perhaps if I spin up an X86 version and cluster all of them together that would suffice?
> I can add some emulated systems to the mix for fun too.
>
> What would make this a PR win? What proof would you want for this? I am willing to put it together if it makes sense.
>

To be honest Dan, I am not really seeing the PR merits of just linking
a current architecture (x86-64), two obsolete architectures (VAX and Alpha),
and one mostly obsolete architecture (Itanium) together in a cluster.

The general reaction to that outside of the VMS world is likely to be
"so what ?".

I should also point out you can build a Linux cluster across a larger
range of architectures. Even if the Linux clustering capabilities are
not as advanced as VMS, these days they can be made to be suitable for
a good range of tasks.

What _would_ be PR worthy is exactly what HP/HPE did 15 years ago, when
they physically destroyed cluster nodes and then everyone watched while
the remaining nodes recovered without data loss, especially if VMS was
still the way fastest to recover as it was back then.

However, expectations have moved on since then and such an explosion
and simulated workload would have to be on a far larger scale than it
was back then to be really newsworthy.

Simon.

--
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.

On Thursday, June 1, 2023 at 6:31:16 PM UTC-4, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> On 2023-06-01 20:28, Rich Alderson wrote:
> > MG <em_g...@SPAMxs4all.nl> writes:
> >
> >> On 31-May-2023 21:34, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> >
> >>> The totally new to VMS just wanting to try a few DCL commands
> >>> probably do not care what architecture they are running on - most
> >>> likely they will not even know. VMS is VMS.
> >
> >> On what other platform can one run "a few DCL commands"?
> >
> > Umm, RSTS/E springs immediately to mind, followed closely by IAS...
> I can't remember for sure if DCL was originally for IAS or RSX-11M-PLUS,
> and everything else came after that.
>
> Johnny
Johnny,

VAX/VMS DCL was present at the initial public handbook point, and highly likely earlier.

RSX-11M-PLUS genesis is later. RSX-11M DCL is well later (I was a field test site for RSX-11M 3.2).

IAS I cannot speak to. Also, did not encounter RSTS/E till later.

Somewhere I had a TOPS-20 reference card, but cannot go looking for it.

- Bob Gezelter, http://www.rlgsc.com

On 5/31/23 1:34 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 5/31/2023 7:41 AM, MG wrote:
>> As an almost daily user of the EISNER:: node of DECUServe,
>> I began to wonder: Couldn't DECUServe serve as a cost-
>> effective method for VSI to demonstrate both OpenVMS for
>> x86-64 and its cross-architecture clustering capabilities
>> to a wider audience?  Since VSI operates this physical
>> hardware and adding a modestly configured x86-64 virtual
>> machine would probably not add too much to the existing
>> operating and maintenance costs of DECUServe.
>>
>> It could thereby also save a lot of potentially interested
>> users the time and effort of having to apply for a suitable
>> evaluation license and having to prepare, install and
>> configure a (virtual) system, especially those who are
>> entirely new and unfamiliar to OpenVMS and simply wish to
>> have an end-user experience.
>>
>> It's been long since a capable public access VMScluster
>> system has been available (especially since "Deathrow"
>> shut down, already quite some years ago).
>
> The totally new to VMS just wanting to try a few DCL commands
> probably do not care what architecture they are running on - most
> likely they will not even know. VMS is VMS.
>
> But setting up a mixed mode cluster would be a pretty cool
> demo.
>
> And why not go all out? VAX + Alpha + Itanium + x86-64!!
>
> Send a news flash to all IT magazines in the world and get
> a bit of press.

I have a running Alpha/Itanium/X86_64 cluster (which makes it trivially
easy to use the cross tools (when necessary) for x86 builds). I could
add a simh VAX if that is really necessary.

What, exactly, would you like to see?

Mark Berryman

Bob Gezelter <gezelter@rlgsc.com> writes:

> VAX/VMS DCL was present at the initial public handbook point, and highly
> likely earlier.

> RSX-11M-PLUS genesis is later. RSX-11M DCL is well later (I was a field test
> site for RSX-11M 3.2).

> IAS I cannot speak to. Also, did not encounter RSTS/E till later.

> Somewhere I had a TOPS-20 reference card, but cannot go looking for it.

The TOPS-20 EXEC is very different from DCL, and predates the VAX and VMS by
several years. Most of the lessons learned from EXEC were thrown away.

--
Rich Alderson news@alderson.users.panix.com
Audendum est, et veritas investiganda; quam etiamsi non assequamur,
omnino tamen proprius, quam nunc sumus, ad eam perveniemus.
--Galen