Discussion:
VSI OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1 Layered Product Subset Available
(too old to reply)
Stephen Hoffman
2017-04-26 15:50:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Haven't seen it posted here yet, and it's not posted on the VSI web site...

VSI have announced the availability of a subset of the layered products
for the VSI OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1 release.

The following products are included:

ACMS, AvailMan, BASIC, C, C++. COBOL, CXML, DTR, DECdfs, DECforms,
DCPS, DECset, DFO, DCE, DQS, Enterprise Directory LDAP, FMS. Fortran,
I18N, MRU, Pascal, SSM, T4, TDMS

Licensing changes announced, too. One VSI ALPHA-SYSTEM PAK for
OpenVMS, one VSI ALPHA-LP PAK for the layered products.
--
Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC
Stephen Hoffman
2017-04-26 15:56:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stephen Hoffman
Haven't seen it posted here yet, and it's not posted on the VSI web site...
VSI have announced the availability of a subset of the layered products
for the VSI OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1 release.
Good news, BTW.
More of these announcements, please.
More preparation around these sorts of announcements too, please.
Look forward.
Advertise and build on the VSI achievements and advancements.
Also mention about how these steps lead OpenVMS folks to x86-64, which
is the future of the platform.
Discussing the past can be entertaining for some, but these products
and the future (of OpenVMS and of VSI) are what folks are buying.
--
Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC
Bill Gunshannon
2017-04-26 16:45:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stephen Hoffman
Haven't seen it posted here yet, and it's not posted on the VSI web site...
VSI have announced the availability of a subset of the layered products
for the VSI OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1 release.
ACMS, AvailMan, BASIC, C, C++. COBOL, CXML, DTR, DECdfs, DECforms, DCPS,
DECset, DFO, DCE, DQS, Enterprise Directory LDAP, FMS. Fortran, I18N,
MRU, Pascal, SSM, T4, TDMS
Licensing changes announced, too. One VSI ALPHA-SYSTEM PAK for
OpenVMS, one VSI ALPHA-LP PAK for the layered products.
What no Ada?

bill
Simon Clubley
2017-04-26 23:44:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bill Gunshannon
What no Ada?
Given that it's probably going to be an Adacore port, I suspect
VSI/Adacore are trying to work out if Ada on VMS is still viable
from a financial viewpoint.

Simon.
--
Simon Clubley, ***@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
Bill Gunshannon
2017-04-27 00:10:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Simon Clubley
Post by Bill Gunshannon
What no Ada?
Given that it's probably going to be an Adacore port, I suspect
VSI/Adacore are trying to work out if Ada on VMS is still viable
from a financial viewpoint.
Finally, someone bit. Adacore? What was it someone was saying about
not using Open Source on VMS? Adacore's Ada compiler is a derivative
of the GPLed GNAT AdaCompiler from NYU. While they work very hard to
keep it out of the Open Source world it is in fact Open Source Software.

bill
Ian Miller
2017-05-02 11:18:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bill Gunshannon
Post by Simon Clubley
Post by Bill Gunshannon
What no Ada?
Given that it's probably going to be an Adacore port, I suspect
VSI/Adacore are trying to work out if Ada on VMS is still viable
from a financial viewpoint.
Finally, someone bit. Adacore? What was it someone was saying about
not using Open Source on VMS? Adacore's Ada compiler is a derivative
of the GPLed GNAT AdaCompiler from NYU. While they work very hard to
keep it out of the Open Source world it is in fact Open Source Software.
bill
See here http://www.vmsadaall.org/index.php/en/80-category-en-gb/72-article-en-gb for another port of GNAT Ada to OpenVMS I64
Simon Clubley
2017-05-02 17:21:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Miller
See here http://www.vmsadaall.org/index.php/en/80-category-en-gb/72-article-en-gb for another port of GNAT Ada to OpenVMS I64
The author never answered my question about whether this port is based
on the FSF gcc or the Adacore gcc.

Simon.
--
Simon Clubley, ***@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOeGER
2017-05-06 12:08:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Simon Clubley
Post by Ian Miller
See here http://www.vmsadaall.org/index.php/en/80-category-en-gb/72-article-en-gb for another port of GNAT Ada to OpenVMS I64
The author never answered my question about whether this port is based
on the FSF gcc or the Adacore gcc.
There is a logo with "FSF GNAT" on the webpage. Could this be a hint?

Just curious

PS: Page has a 2017 date, but mentioned pia-sofer page has nothing newer than 2015
--
Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTÖGER
Network and OpenVMS system specialist
E-mail ***@LANGSTOeGER.at
A-1030 VIENNA AUSTRIA I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist
j***@yahoo.co.uk
2017-05-06 12:57:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOeGER
Post by Simon Clubley
Post by Ian Miller
See here http://www.vmsadaall.org/index.php/en/80-category-en-gb/72-article-en-gb for another port of GNAT Ada to OpenVMS I64
The author never answered my question about whether this port is based
on the FSF gcc or the Adacore gcc.
There is a logo with "FSF GNAT" on the webpage. Could this be a hint?
Just curious
PS: Page has a 2017 date, but mentioned pia-sofer page has nothing newer than 2015
--
Peter "EPLAN" LANGSTÖGER
Network and OpenVMS system specialist
A-1030 VIENNA AUSTRIA I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist
Wander over to comp.lang.ada where on 2 Mar 2017 there is a
thread titled "Gnat Ada on OpenVMS is back". If you haven't
seen it before, you might find it interesting, you will
probably recognise some contributors names.

Having watched attempts to update a non-Linux-hosted gcc/gnat
from gcc 3.4.4? to 4.x not that many years ago for an obscure
target, if Linux isn't where the toolchain is built, life gets
very complicated very quickly. That applies whether the
non-Linux system is VMS or Windows. An appropriate pre-built
toolset does make life rather simpler in that respect.

Have a lot of fun.
Simon Clubley
2017-05-07 23:57:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOeGER
Post by Simon Clubley
Post by Ian Miller
See here http://www.vmsadaall.org/index.php/en/80-category-en-gb/72-article-en-gb for another port of GNAT Ada to OpenVMS I64
The author never answered my question about whether this port is based
on the FSF gcc or the Adacore gcc.
There is a logo with "FSF GNAT" on the webpage. Could this be a hint?
Yes and No.

I've tried to build the FSF GNAT for a VMS Alpha target and didn't get
very far as it appears there are significant issues with the VMS Alpha
specific code in the FSF version of the gcc codebase.

The IA64 version looks to be in better shape as it shares (IIRC) some
backend code with other targets; however I have never tried to build
the IA64 version because I don't have a machine to run it on.

I was trying to find out if Gerard's build is based on pure FSF gcc
or if some of the Adacore gcc code had to be used to get gcc to build
for an IA64 target.

You also need an Ada compiler to build the Ada compiler. IIRC, Gerard
used GNAT Pro running on Alpha to build the IA64 compiler which probably
avoided a good number of issues. This wasn't an option available to me
so I had to take the cross-compiler running on Linux approach which
didn't work very well for me for this specific case of a VMS Alpha target.
Post by j***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOeGER
Just curious
PS: Page has a 2017 date, but mentioned pia-sofer page has nothing newer than 2015
Wander over to comp.lang.ada where on 2 Mar 2017 there is a
thread titled "Gnat Ada on OpenVMS is back". If you haven't
seen it before, you might find it interesting, you will
probably recognise some contributors names.
Having watched attempts to update a non-Linux-hosted gcc/gnat
from gcc 3.4.4? to 4.x not that many years ago for an obscure
target, if Linux isn't where the toolchain is built, life gets
very complicated very quickly. That applies whether the
non-Linux system is VMS or Windows. An appropriate pre-built
toolset does make life rather simpler in that respect.
Tell me about it John, tell me about it. :-(

While we are sending people over to comp.lang.ada, they may find several
threads started by me (with varying degrees of politeness and frustration)
which all basically say the Ada language is a good language but the
Ada compiler situation in general is lousy.
Post by j***@yahoo.co.uk
Have a lot of fun.
Try "Have a lot of frustration. :-)" when to comes to building GNAT
for a non-mainstream target...

Simon.
--
Simon Clubley, ***@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
Jan-Erik Soderholm
2017-04-27 00:27:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Simon Clubley
Post by Bill Gunshannon
What no Ada?
Given that it's probably going to be an Adacore port, I suspect
VSI/Adacore are trying to work out if Ada on VMS is still viable
from a financial viewpoint.
Simon.
I would not expect that, on Alpha.
Simon Clubley
2017-04-27 00:38:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
Post by Simon Clubley
Post by Bill Gunshannon
What no Ada?
Given that it's probably going to be an Adacore port, I suspect
VSI/Adacore are trying to work out if Ada on VMS is still viable
from a financial viewpoint.
Simon.
I would not expect that, on Alpha.
I forgot about the "Alpha" bit when writing my reply (which was
directed towards Ada on x86-64 VMS). Sorry. :-)

Ada 95 on VMS Alpha exists today and is provided by Adacore. (I don't
know about the later Ada versions.)

There's also Ada 83 in the form of DEC Ada (which VSI should control)
so that is actually a valid question from Bill and I would be interested
to see VSI's response.

Simon.
--
Simon Clubley, ***@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
David Froble
2017-04-27 04:33:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Simon Clubley
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
Post by Simon Clubley
Post by Bill Gunshannon
What no Ada?
Given that it's probably going to be an Adacore port, I suspect
VSI/Adacore are trying to work out if Ada on VMS is still viable
from a financial viewpoint.
Simon.
I would not expect that, on Alpha.
I forgot about the "Alpha" bit when writing my reply (which was
directed towards Ada on x86-64 VMS). Sorry. :-)
Ada 95 on VMS Alpha exists today and is provided by Adacore. (I don't
know about the later Ada versions.)
There's also Ada 83 in the form of DEC Ada (which VSI should control)
so that is actually a valid question from Bill and I would be interested
to see VSI's response.
Again, I know nothing ....

Several times I've seen the statement about what HP transferred to VSI, and
perhaps some things they didn't. So, yeah, did VSI get the Ada 83 stuff?
John Reagan
2017-04-27 11:56:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Froble
Post by Simon Clubley
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
Post by Simon Clubley
Post by Bill Gunshannon
What no Ada?
Given that it's probably going to be an Adacore port, I suspect
VSI/Adacore are trying to work out if Ada on VMS is still viable
from a financial viewpoint.
Simon.
I would not expect that, on Alpha.
I forgot about the "Alpha" bit when writing my reply (which was
directed towards Ada on x86-64 VMS). Sorry. :-)
Ada 95 on VMS Alpha exists today and is provided by Adacore. (I don't
know about the later Ada versions.)
There's also Ada 83 in the form of DEC Ada (which VSI should control)
so that is actually a valid question from Bill and I would be interested
to see VSI's response.
Again, I know nothing ....
Several times I've seen the statement about what HP transferred to VSI, and
perhaps some things they didn't. So, yeah, did VSI get the Ada 83 stuff?
Wow. Google Groups must be broken. I thought I was subscribed to comp.os.vms, but it seems I've been dropped into alt.conspiracy.theories. I'm surprised nobody has suggested chemtrails yet.

Yes, we have the DEC Ada 83 compiler for Alpha. Why isn't it on the list? I just didn't get to it yet (I've been busy looking forward :) ). It builds a little different than the other GEM-based compilers. Ada uses an older variant of GEM due to Ada's unique exception handling requirements (later GEM's made some non-upward-compatible changes to the GEM IR to also handle C++ exception handling and the Ada frontend was not changed to follow along). I had asked to defer it since I needed to continue work on the x86 side.
Simon Clubley
2017-04-27 12:19:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Reagan
Post by David Froble
Post by Simon Clubley
I forgot about the "Alpha" bit when writing my reply (which was
directed towards Ada on x86-64 VMS). Sorry. :-)
Ada 95 on VMS Alpha exists today and is provided by Adacore. (I don't
know about the later Ada versions.)
There's also Ada 83 in the form of DEC Ada (which VSI should control)
so that is actually a valid question from Bill and I would be interested
to see VSI's response.
Again, I know nothing ....
Several times I've seen the statement about what HP transferred to VSI, and
perhaps some things they didn't. So, yeah, did VSI get the Ada 83 stuff?
Wow. Google Groups must be broken. I thought I was subscribed to
comp.os.vms, but it seems I've been dropped into alt.conspiracy.theories.
I'm surprised nobody has suggested chemtrails yet.
No, but you should be careful - someone might ask you to turn DEC Ada into
an Ada 95 compiler. :-)
Post by John Reagan
Yes, we have the DEC Ada 83 compiler for Alpha. Why isn't it on the
list? I just didn't get to it yet (I've been busy looking forward :) ).
It builds a little different than the other GEM-based compilers. Ada uses
an older variant of GEM due to Ada's unique exception handling requirements
(later GEM's made some non-upward-compatible changes to the GEM IR to also
handle C++ exception handling and the Ada frontend was not changed to
follow along). I had asked to defer it since I needed to continue work on
the x86 side.
I wasn't aware the Ada GEM version was different.

Thanks for the feedback John.

Simon.
--
Simon Clubley, ***@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
j***@yahoo.co.uk
2017-04-27 14:53:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Simon Clubley
Post by John Reagan
Post by David Froble
Post by Simon Clubley
I forgot about the "Alpha" bit when writing my reply (which was
directed towards Ada on x86-64 VMS). Sorry. :-)
Ada 95 on VMS Alpha exists today and is provided by Adacore. (I don't
know about the later Ada versions.)
There's also Ada 83 in the form of DEC Ada (which VSI should control)
so that is actually a valid question from Bill and I would be interested
to see VSI's response.
Again, I know nothing ....
Several times I've seen the statement about what HP transferred to VSI, and
perhaps some things they didn't. So, yeah, did VSI get the Ada 83 stuff?
Wow. Google Groups must be broken. I thought I was subscribed to
comp.os.vms, but it seems I've been dropped into alt.conspiracy.theories.
I'm surprised nobody has suggested chemtrails yet.
No, but you should be careful - someone might ask you to turn DEC Ada into
an Ada 95 compiler. :-)
Post by John Reagan
Yes, we have the DEC Ada 83 compiler for Alpha. Why isn't it on the
list? I just didn't get to it yet (I've been busy looking forward :) ).
It builds a little different than the other GEM-based compilers. Ada uses
an older variant of GEM due to Ada's unique exception handling requirements
(later GEM's made some non-upward-compatible changes to the GEM IR to also
handle C++ exception handling and the Ada frontend was not changed to
follow along). I had asked to defer it since I needed to continue work on
the x86 side.
I wasn't aware the Ada GEM version was different.
Thanks for the feedback John.
Simon.
--
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
Some customers already tried asking DEC to magick Ada 83 into
Ada 95 some years ago, but the relevant wizardry (and $$$)
could not be located at the time.

Another edge case in the Ada picture may be the current
commercial and technical situation of the former XD Ada
product (VMS front end, M68K target). I have no idea
what that current situation is; I do know at least one
household name company relies on it for some of its
products but for many years chose not to purchase
support (from EDS-Scicon?) because the contract then
on offer was "pay for the gap" as well as pay for a
new contract. Anyway, new owners may mean new rules.
Arne Vajhøj
2017-04-27 15:21:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@yahoo.co.uk
Some customers already tried asking DEC to magick Ada 83 into
Ada 95 some years ago, but the relevant wizardry (and $$$)
could not be located at the time.
If there were no business case years ago, then I doubt there
will be a business case today. Ada usage has not increased.

Arne
j***@yahoo.co.uk
2017-04-27 16:39:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Arne Vajhøj
Post by j***@yahoo.co.uk
Some customers already tried asking DEC to magick Ada 83 into
Ada 95 some years ago, but the relevant wizardry (and $$$)
could not be located at the time.
If there were no business case years ago, then I doubt there
will be a business case today. Ada usage has not increased.
Arne
The logic of a business case is sometimes over-ridden by
the personal beliefs of the 'leaders' involved, at the
supplier or the customer or both. I know quite a few Ada
customers saw no logic whatsoever in abandoning Ada 9x on
VMS, but DEC/CPQ/HP management saw things in their own
sweet way.

Like HP buying Autonomy, for example, and the subsequent
multi-billion-dollar writeoffs. Business case for the
acquisition? Invisible.

Go back a little further and there's HP abandoning PalmOs
in favour of Microsoft's mobile strategy of the week.

Plenty more where those came from - Moonshot, TheMachine,
whatever. Arguably, picking Itanium over Alpha fits the
"faith not facts" category too, though back then it
was vaguely plausible that Intel's deep pockets would
lead to IA64 not AMD64 taking the lions share of the
market. Facts turned out not to match faith eventually.

Facts are important. Sometimes faith still wins despite
the facts.
IanD
2017-04-27 22:00:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Future projections are a mix of data driven decisions, speculative insight, pure guesswork and personal likes add dislikes

Success breeds success and failures can if one of not careful become self furfilling Doomsday predictions if the negative groundswell is against you

VMS has a lot of love out there but it's nostalgic love, much from people who remember nice aspects of it but perhaps never had to battle with it day by day and who are perhaps not seeing those nice aspects in light of how far forward other platforms have now come

Groundswell trumps corporate dollars in the long run. Gotta get the next block of developers and users interested in it or its going to be a flash in the pan revival

I'm hoping the stint that Clair? did at MIT grows. To start with it might not be something that will attract new grads but if sold in a way to show that there is a business out there in keeping and transforming older systems, it would go a long way towards attracting people. Maybe even a formal discipline might come out of it rather than relying on IT folks of old?
Ian Miller
2017-05-02 11:13:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Simon Clubley
Post by John Reagan
Post by David Froble
Post by Simon Clubley
I forgot about the "Alpha" bit when writing my reply (which was
directed towards Ada on x86-64 VMS). Sorry. :-)
Ada 95 on VMS Alpha exists today and is provided by Adacore. (I don't
know about the later Ada versions.)
There's also Ada 83 in the form of DEC Ada (which VSI should control)
so that is actually a valid question from Bill and I would be interested
to see VSI's response.
Again, I know nothing ....
Several times I've seen the statement about what HP transferred to VSI, and
perhaps some things they didn't. So, yeah, did VSI get the Ada 83 stuff?
Wow. Google Groups must be broken. I thought I was subscribed to
comp.os.vms, but it seems I've been dropped into alt.conspiracy.theories.
I'm surprised nobody has suggested chemtrails yet.
No, but you should be careful - someone might ask you to turn DEC Ada into
an Ada 95 compiler. :-)
Post by John Reagan
Yes, we have the DEC Ada 83 compiler for Alpha. Why isn't it on the
list? I just didn't get to it yet (I've been busy looking forward :) ).
It builds a little different than the other GEM-based compilers. Ada uses
an older variant of GEM due to Ada's unique exception handling requirements
(later GEM's made some non-upward-compatible changes to the GEM IR to also
handle C++ exception handling and the Ada frontend was not changed to
follow along). I had asked to defer it since I needed to continue work on
the x86 side.
I wasn't aware the Ada GEM version was different.
Thanks for the feedback John.
Simon.
--
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
Some customers already tried asking DEC to magick Ada 83 into
Ada 95 some years ago, but the relevant wizardry (and $$$)
could not be located at the time.
Another edge case in the Ada picture may be the current
commercial and technical situation of the former XD Ada
product (VMS front end, M68K target). I have no idea
what that current situation is; I do know at least one
household name company relies on it for some of its
products but for many years chose not to purchase
support (from EDS-Scicon?) because the contract then
on offer was "pay for the gap" as well as pay for a
new contract. Anyway, new owners may mean new rules.
Support for XD-ADA and related items is available from DXC Technology (which is where that team are now). It runs on OpenVMS I64 now :-)
Jan-Erik Soderholm
2017-04-26 21:31:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Stephen Hoffman
Haven't seen it posted here yet, and it's not posted on the VSI web site...
VSI have announced the availability of a subset of the layered products for
the VSI OpenVMS Alpha V8.4-2L1 release.
ACMS, AvailMan, BASIC, C, C++. COBOL, CXML, DTR, DECdfs, DECforms, DCPS,
DECset, DFO, DCE, DQS, Enterprise Directory LDAP, FMS. Fortran, I18N, MRU,
Pascal, SSM, T4, TDMS
Licensing changes announced, too. One VSI ALPHA-SYSTEM PAK for OpenVMS,
one VSI ALPHA-LP PAK for the layered products.
Yes, I have been asking VSI for that list. The quote we got in early
January refered to some "LP list" but it was not included with the
quote. Now, I was not worried since I had supplied VSI with a
list of the used SW on our systems and got an "OK" on that.

We now (today) agreed on to go on the 3-year offer from VSI (that
includes the prods above, and the free x86 migration) for our systems.
It was actually cheaper then the offer from HP (MPS w/o SE) with
only TCPIP included.

Note also that, besides of the LPs above, other "extras" as Cluster,
HBVS, multi-process support and so on are also inluded. So, of needed,
we can replace our single CPU DS20e with dual CPU DS25s, using the
same PAKs and same cost.

One could always hope that this is a model for the licensing for
the upcomming x86-64 version, but we'll see...

I'm also taking for granted that the "VSI ALPHA-SYSTEM" PAK also
includes unlimited interactive users, so no "USER" PAKs.

As soon as the deal on the licence/support package can go through,
and the availablity/download of the media kit has been sorted out,
I might come back with some first impressions from our test system.

B.t.w, when you quote a 5-digit support contract, why add a extra
line with "Media Kit for OpenVMS" at $278 when it is stated that
it will be an online ISO download? No big deal, but...

Jan-Erik.
Robert A. Brooks
2017-04-26 21:44:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
I'm also taking for granted that the "VSI ALPHA-SYSTEM" PAK also
includes unlimited interactive users, so no "USER" PAKs.
Yes, it does.
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
B.t.w, when you quote a 5-digit support contract, why add a extra
line with "Media Kit for OpenVMS" at $278 when it is stated that
it will be an online ISO download? No big deal, but...
I'll pass that comment along.
--
-- Rob
Jan-Erik Soderholm
2017-04-26 22:09:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert A. Brooks
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
I'm also taking for granted that the "VSI ALPHA-SYSTEM" PAK also
includes unlimited interactive users, so no "USER" PAKs.
Yes, it does.
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
B.t.w, when you quote a 5-digit support contract, why add a extra
line with "Media Kit for OpenVMS" at $278 when it is stated that
it will be an online ISO download? No big deal, but...
I'll pass that comment along.
Thanks... :-)

It did raise some eyebrows. "Wasn't that an *online* download?" :-)
Simon Clubley
2017-04-26 23:49:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
It did raise some eyebrows. "Wasn't that an *online* download?" :-)
Are the downloadable .ISOs themselves signed (or do they at least
have a suitably robust checksum/hash available) ?

Simon.
--
Simon Clubley, ***@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
Jan-Erik Soderholm
2017-04-27 00:26:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Simon Clubley
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
It did raise some eyebrows. "Wasn't that an *online* download?" :-)
Are the downloadable .ISOs themselves signed (or do they at least
have a suitably robust checksum/hash available) ?
Simon.
Either ask VSI (if they know today) or wait.
David Froble
2017-04-27 04:39:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
Post by Robert A. Brooks
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
I'm also taking for granted that the "VSI ALPHA-SYSTEM" PAK also
includes unlimited interactive users, so no "USER" PAKs.
Yes, it does.
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
B.t.w, when you quote a 5-digit support contract, why add a extra
line with "Media Kit for OpenVMS" at $278 when it is stated that
it will be an online ISO download? No big deal, but...
I'll pass that comment along.
Thanks... :-)
It did raise some eyebrows. "Wasn't that an *online* download?" :-)
Some old DEC thinking there. I'd think VSI will ask, "how did that get in there?"

5 digit support contract sounds good. Enough of those, and VSI should have a
future.
c***@gmail.com
2017-04-27 11:15:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Froble
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
Post by Robert A. Brooks
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
I'm also taking for granted that the "VSI ALPHA-SYSTEM" PAK also
includes unlimited interactive users, so no "USER" PAKs.
Yes, it does.
Post by Jan-Erik Soderholm
B.t.w, when you quote a 5-digit support contract, why add a extra
line with "Media Kit for OpenVMS" at $278 when it is stated that
it will be an online ISO download? No big deal, but...
I'll pass that comment along.
Thanks... :-)
It did raise some eyebrows. "Wasn't that an *online* download?" :-)
Some old DEC thinking there. I'd think VSI will ask, "how did that get in there?"
5 digit support contract sounds good. Enough of those, and VSI should have a
future.
It was pointed out multiple times by reviewers that the line should be removed but it clearly didn't happen. We apologize for it being in there.
Loading...