CIFS under V8.4-2L1 - VSI CL

[Chris Townley]

Is this available under the CL?

I never got it running under 8.3 as I couldn't get the required patches installed - that was when they were available

TIA

Chris

[Volker Halle]

Chris,

SAMBA/CIFS seems to be freely available (GPL licensed) from VSI:

https://vmssoftware.com/products/samba-cifs/

Volker.

[Chris Townley]

Post by Volker Halle
Chris,
https://vmssoftware.com/products/samba-cifs/
Volker.

Thanks - I found the VSI kit - U was unaware they had reverted the name to Samba

Chris

[Rod Regier]

I got VSI I64VMS SAMBA V4.6-5E running on HPE OpenVMS/I64 V8.4 w/8.4 patches in place.

Attempting to install the corresponding VSI SAMBA Alpha kit is a no-go, it rejects
the underlying O/S version detail (V/A 8.4).

Since the prior CIFS/SAMBA from HPE highwatered at underling SAMBA 3.0.28a
VSI's release is a major version jump from 3.x to 4.x. That is especially important
as SAMBA V3.x only supported SMB V1, while later SAMBA V4.x release supports SMB V2 and V3.
Eventually Windows Server PDCs are going to drop SMB V1 support.

[Chris Townley]

Post by Rod Regier
I got VSI I64VMS SAMBA V4.6-5E running on HPE OpenVMS/I64 V8.4 w/8.4 patches in place.
Attempting to install the corresponding VSI SAMBA Alpha kit is a no-go, it rejects
the underlying O/S version detail (V/A 8.4).
Since the prior CIFS/SAMBA from HPE highwatered at underling SAMBA 3.0.28a
VSI's release is a major version jump from 3.x to 4.x. That is especially important
as SAMBA V3.x only supported SMB V1, while later SAMBA V4.x release supports SMB V2 and V3.
Eventually Windows Server PDCs are going to drop SMB V1 support.

Using the VSI kit shouldn't be a problem for me - I am running their 8.4-2L1

Must try it!

Chris

[Craig A. Berry]

Post by Rod Regier
I got VSI I64VMS SAMBA V4.6-5E running on HPE OpenVMS/I64 V8.4 w/8.4 patches in place.
Attempting to install the corresponding VSI SAMBA Alpha kit is a no-go, it rejects
the underlying O/S version detail (V/A 8.4).

That could probably be remedied by disassembling the PCSI kit, modifying
the dependencies, and reassembling it. Sounds like work to me. Why not
just get the OS from VSI? It's the only game in town at this point anyway.

Post by Rod Regier
Since the prior CIFS/SAMBA from HPE highwatered at underling SAMBA 3.0.28a
VSI's release is a major version jump from 3.x to 4.x. That is especially important
as SAMBA V3.x only supported SMB V1, while later SAMBA V4.x release supports SMB V2 and V3.
Eventually Windows Server PDCs are going to drop SMB V1 support.

Any network that has not already disabled SMB v1 either on each machine
or via internal firewall is in an awfully dodgy place already.

[Rod Regier]

Post by Craig A. Berry
That could probably be remedied by disassembling the PCSI kit, modifying
the dependencies, and reassembling it. Sounds like work to me. Why not
just get the OS from VSI? It's the only game in town at this point anyway.

Can an end-user do those PCSI manipulations, or only the kit author? VSI is the kit author.

My inhouse system running HPE V/A 8.4 also generates application binaries for HPE EDU license installed base HPE V/A sites. Upgrade to VSI V/A is a no-go unless all of those downstream sites also upgrade. We're hoping to get them to upgrade to Integrity servers running HPE V/I64 V8.4

In answer to a possible observation about HPE V/I64 life cycle:

My inhouse system running HPE V/I64 8.4 also generates application binaries for HPE EDU license installed base HPE V/I64 8.4 sites. Upgrade to VSI V/I64 is a no-go unless all of those downstream sites also upgrade.

In answer to a possible observation about HPE EDU license life cycle, my installed base sites still running those licenses will be encouraged to purchase permanent licenses for their system, which are still being open-ended offered by HPE leasing division. (Current HPE EDU licenses expire on 01-Jan-2022 with no current prospect of any further offerings).

[Simon Clubley]

Post by Rod Regier

Post by Craig A. Berry
That could probably be remedied by disassembling the PCSI kit, modifying
the dependencies, and reassembling it. Sounds like work to me. Why not
just get the OS from VSI? It's the only game in town at this point anyway.

Can an end-user do those PCSI manipulations, or only the kit author? VSI is the kit author.

Is the PCSI kit signed ?

Simon.

[Craig A. Berry]

Post by Simon Clubley

Post by Rod Regier

Post by Craig A. Berry
That could probably be remedied by disassembling the PCSI kit, modifying
the dependencies, and reassembling it. Sounds like work to me. Why not
just get the OS from VSI? It's the only game in town at this point anyway.

Can an end-user do those PCSI manipulations, or only the kit author? VSI is the kit author.

I can't think of any reason why you couldn't. As far as I know, if you
can run the PRODUCT command on a kit to install it, you could also run
it on that same kit to extract everything in it. Then you'd have to
fiddle with the dependencies in the description file and pack it all up
into your own PCSI kit to install it. Or manually move all the pieces
into place on your system and then manually run any post-installation
steps (there would probably be things with Samba like creating service
accounts, etc.).

For all the gory details, search for "POLYCENTER Software Installation
Utility Developer's Guide."

Post by Simon Clubley
Is the PCSI kit signed ?

The one from VSI almost certainly would be, and the HP binary checker
would likely not recognize that signature, so you'd have to ignore the
warning about that to unpack the kit. At least I think that's what would
happen (I've never actually tried to unpack a VSI-built kit on HPE VMS).
Once unpacked, you've got the same files everyone else gets -- as long
as they didn't build it with the C99 kit installed you should be all set
:-).

[Stephen Hoffman]

Post by Rod Regier

Post by Craig A. Berry
That could probably be remedied by disassembling the PCSI kit,
modifying the dependencies, and reassembling it. Sounds like work to
me. Why not just get the OS from VSI? It's the only game in town at
this point anyway.

Can an end-user do those PCSI manipulations, or only the kit author?
VSI is the kit author.

For those using VSI OpenVMS releases, see the
SYS$UPDATE:VSI$CVT_KIT_DEPENDENCY.COM DCL command procedure. The
resulting kit won't pass the signature checks, though those can be
overridden.