Michael Holmes <mholmes10 at hotmail.com> writes:
>Hi all,
>
> I was trying to search the "Ask the Wizard" archive, but HP seems to ha=
>ve screwed up the URL so that it points to HPE's OpenVMS info page, but can=
>'t find a link to the Wizard index.
>
>
> Anyone know of a mirror for "Ask the Wizard" or a short cut url to the =
>working old url or to a new HPE url?
>
>
> Thanks in advance.
Hoff wrote most of those responses. He may have them on hit site and or a
link to where they've landed at HPE.com
--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG
I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
Michael Holmes <mholmes10 at hotmail.com> writes:
>Was trying to find a wizard article on restricting which accounts can login=
> via telnet.
>
>I use multinet and OpenVMS 8.3.
>
>
>Would like to allow only a few captive accounts to login via telnet and for=
>ce all others to use SSH (or console).
>
>
>Since I figured this is been done before, it would be in Ask the Wizard ind=
>ex.
I don't know about Multinet but under TCPIP Services, TELNET is REMOTE and
SSH is LOCAL. You can easily restrict accounts based upon that.
--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG
I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
Hi all,
I was trying to search the "Ask the Wizard" archive, but HP seems to have screwed up the URL so that it points to HPE's OpenVMS info page, but can't find a link to the Wizard index.
Anyone know of a mirror for "Ask the Wizard" or a short cut url to the working old url or to a new HPE url?
Thanks in advance.
From: Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se>
Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 01:09:24 +0200
>Interesting, as XXDP V2 have a format that appears to be pretty much the
>same as RT-11. (Including FLX being able to read it, more or less.)
Hmm. My experience (of reading XXDP V2 disks with my own code) disagrees.
And the RSX doc says that FLX supports DOS-11 disks/DECtapes (in addition
to DOS-11 magtapes which are *much* easier), which are very similar to
XXDP+ format (so maybe FLX has tweaks for the slight differences?).
John Wilson
D Bit
From: <Paul_Koning at Dell.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 18:17:11 +0000
>>I didn't even know that there was a DOS-11 disk format, but thinking about
>>it, it would seem obvious there should be one.
>
>Yes, there is, different from everything else as far as I know. I think
>the DECtape format is faintly related. Some DOS manuals may give some
>clues, but I've never looked into it or had any exposure to DOS disk file
>system internals.
Yes it's in the manuals, and the (commented) source code to PUTR.COM
has some explanation too. I believe the DECtape and disk formats are
the same, except that the MFD1 is located at block 1 on disks and
block 64. (^O100) on DECtapes.
The DOS/BATCH disk format is also used by XXDP before V2. XXDP V2 has
its own similar (but different) format.
John Wilson
D Bit
> Isn't the documentation wrong, since it says 2621?
... copy/paste/transcription error on my part. The file clearly
says 2021. Copied sort of by hand from a .pdf file...
> Either way, I believe this field was expanded to be interpreted as
> unsigned later than your code and documentation, meaning it will work a
> while longer. However, I doubt that the TOPS-10 code have been updated
> for that. Something for you to do?
As I said, the text indicates that the (monitor) code stops working in
2021, but the code does in fact allow one more bit, no change needed here.
The thing to wonder about is a piece of (ehum) software called NML.
Written in the wonderful language BLISS. (sarcasm)
> There is a similar issue with FAL, where the date field was also
> extended to be unsigned. RSX only got these updated in 1999 in the code.
> I'm sure VMS also have this. But for other OSes, I have no idea.
Time for some experimentation.
> Johnny
--Johnny
Okay,
Now it's static so long as I stop switching routers...;)
50.131.218.138 is now handled by a 7301.
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects
When browsing the Tops-10 sources I stumbled onto this (d36com.mac):
NMXTIM:
IFN FTOPS10,<
MOVE T1,DATE## ;GET CURRENT UDT (IN DAYS,,FRACTION)
MOVE T2,TIME## ;GET CURRENT TIME (IN JIFFIES SINCE MIDNIGHT)
LSH T1,-^D17 ;TRUNCATE TO NUMBER OF HALF DAYS.
SUBI T1,124210_1 ;CONVERT DAYS SINCE 1858 TO DAYS SINCE 1977
MOVE T3,[^D60*^D60*^D12]
IMUL T3,TICSEC## ;SECONDS SINCE HALF-DAY
TRNE T1,1 ;IS THIS THE SECOND HALF OF A DAY?
SUB T2,T3 ;YES, RECORD SECONDS SINCE HALF-DAY
IDIV T2,TICSEC## ;CONVERT JIFFIES INTO SECONDS.
IMULI T3,^D1000 ;CONVERT TO NUMBER OF MILLISECONDS*TICSEC
IDIV T3,TICSEC## ;CONVERT TO NUMBER OF MILLISECONDS.
SKIPL T2 ;MAKE SURE WE HAVE A POSITIVE NUMBER OF SECONDS
TDNE T1,[XWD -1,600000] ;MAKE SURE NO DATE OVERFLOW
BUG.(HLT,COM911,D36COM,SOFT,<The date is past 9 November 2021>,,<
Cause: The 2 byte julian half-day field in an event message is limited
to 9 november 2021. The routine above has calculated the julian
half-day, and has found that it overflowed.
I doubt very much that the date itself has really gone past 2021.
Probably someone smashed an AC or the routine to get the time
from the monitor is returning junk.
>)
RET
>;END IFN FTOPS10
This made me search for some documentation, and I found aa-k181a-tk
which said, amongst other things:
EVENT TIME Is the source node date and time of event
processing. Consists of:
+----------+--------+-------------+
! JULIAN ! SECOND ! MILLISECOND !
! HALF DAY ! ! !
+----------+--------+-------------+
where:
JULIAN HALF DAY (2) : B = Number of half days
since 1 Jan 1977 and
before 9 Nov 2621
(0-32767). For example,
the morning of Jan 1,
1977 is 0.
SECOND (2) : B = Second within current
half day (0-43199).
MILLISECOND (2) : B = Millisecond within
current second (0-999).
If not supported, high
order bit is set,
remainder are clear, and
field is not printed
when formatted for
output.
Some observations/questions:
* The code in Tops-10 actually checks for the half day value beeing
not more than 16 bits, i.e. it will not trigger until 2066. This
means that I will consinder it a typical case of SEP when it does.
* I have no idea what will happen when the date goes past 9-Nov-2021,
i.e. when the sixteen bit field gets the sign bit set and possibly
some software somewhere goes belly up. Maybe we should try to do a
controlled test?
* Will this be/become a problem? What to do about it?
--Johnny
Hi All,
After some effort, I got an PDP-11/93 (simh) online running RSX-11M+ 4.6
bl 87. It is reachable as ROJIN (1.542) and I've configured a guest
account on this box if anyone is interested in nosing around on this
sytem. Do note, I just have about 2 weeks of experience with rsx, so be
gentle with me :)
Kind Regards,
Lex van Roon
--
LRO-RIPE | 570DE0BE | 9BF5 922E AF87 8584 E9CA C3AD C508 39A9 570D E0BE
