On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 02:02:20 +0000, you wrote:
I've been thinking that it's a bit silly to have two separate hobby DECNETs,
so I figured we should get connected to the Italian net as well.
Any ideas?
In truth, HECnet and the Italian DECnet network are not alone: we were made
aware of at least another similar Croatian-based project named SLON (the
Croatian word for elephant and also the name of the SLOvenska Network in the
SPAN/HEPnet time-frame). They started experimenting with Multinet tunnels
and then maybe switched to our fork of Johnny's bridge. But we haven't heard
anything from them since years, and we have no way to contact them either,
so I cannot say for sure if they are still doing something or if they are in
deep sleep since then. Unfortunately, the name they gave to their project is
really not a good choice for Google lookups...
HTH,
G.
(I'm one of the guys from the Italian DECnet)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of hvlems at zonnet.nl
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 9:44 PM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Linker warnings
It's very good to read the words 'I'm new to VMS'.
Hopefully you enjoy the ride!
It's amazing, thank you!
It's very good to read the words 'I'm new to VMS'.
Hopefully you enjoy the ride!
-----Original Message-----
From: "Pinoccio" <pinoccio at gmx.com>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 21:34:04
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SESubject: RE: [HECnet] Linker warnings
Thank you!
I am new to VMS so some of its useful facilities (as HELP /MESSAGE) not yet
known to me.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf
Of Peter Coghlan
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 9:17 PM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Linker warnings
Can anyone bring some light on these linker warnings:
%LINK-W-TRUNC, truncation error in psect CODE offset %X0000046C
in module XXX file YYY
-LINK-W-TRUNCDAT, computed value is %X00000080
value written is %XFFFFFF80 at location %X0000A2B8
Assuming this is VMS, $ HELP /MESSAGE says:
TRUNCDAT, computed value is 'value1'
value written is 'value2' at location 'address'
Facility: LINK, Linker Utility
Explanation: Usually, this error occurs when a reference using byte or
word PC-relative displacement is made to a target requiring
longword relative displacement. 'Value1' is the value the
linker needed to store; 'value2' is the value the linker is
able to store (a truncated version).
User Action: Correct the reference to use longword relative addressing
mode.
For something more specific, it would help to know more background.
Regards,
Peter Coghlan.
Thank you!
I am new to VMS so some of its useful facilities (as HELP /MESSAGE) not yet
known to me.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On Behalf
Of Peter Coghlan
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 9:17 PM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Linker warnings
Can anyone bring some light on these linker warnings:
%LINK-W-TRUNC, truncation error in psect CODE offset %X0000046C
in module XXX file YYY
-LINK-W-TRUNCDAT, computed value is %X00000080
value written is %XFFFFFF80 at location %X0000A2B8
Assuming this is VMS, $ HELP /MESSAGE says:
TRUNCDAT, computed value is 'value1'
value written is 'value2' at location 'address'
Facility: LINK, Linker Utility
Explanation: Usually, this error occurs when a reference using byte or
word PC-relative displacement is made to a target requiring
longword relative displacement. 'Value1' is the value the
linker needed to store; 'value2' is the value the linker is
able to store (a truncated version).
User Action: Correct the reference to use longword relative addressing
mode.
For something more specific, it would help to know more background.
Regards,
Peter Coghlan.
Can anyone bring some light on these linker warnings:
%LINK-W-TRUNC, truncation error in psect CODE offset %X0000046C
in module XXX file YYY
-LINK-W-TRUNCDAT, computed value is %X00000080
value written is %XFFFFFF80 at location %X0000A2B8
Assuming this is VMS, $ HELP /MESSAGE says:
TRUNCDAT, computed value is 'value1'
value written is 'value2' at location 'address'
Facility: LINK, Linker Utility
Explanation: Usually, this error occurs when a reference using byte or
word PC-relative displacement is made to a target requiring
longword relative displacement. 'Value1' is the value the
linker needed to store; 'value2' is the value the linker is
able to store (a truncated version).
User Action: Correct the reference to use longword relative addressing
mode.
For something more specific, it would help to know more background.
Regards,
Peter Coghlan.
Hi all!
Can anyone bring some light on these linker warnings:
%LINK-W-TRUNC, truncation error in psect CODE offset %X0000046C
in module XXX file YYY
-LINK-W-TRUNCDAT, computed value is %X00000080
value written is %XFFFFFF80 at location %X0000A2B8
Thanks.
He is on this mailinglist...
Johnny
On 2011-11-26 19.11, Steve Davidson wrote:
Send a mail message to:
gerry77 at mail.com
He should be able to provide you with a list of nodenames (and
addresses).
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2011 11:25 AM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Integrating with the Italian network.
On 2011-11-26 15:37, Bob Armstrong wrote:
Johnny wrote:
That is not really a big issue. DECnet do not have a requirement for
a coherent nodename database. Every machine can have its own.
This is technically true, but it's really not very useful to have a
network with duplicate node names. After all, if I post a message
saying "phone me on ABC::" or "copy these files from XYZ::" and half
the users have a different ABC or XYZ, then people are not going to be
happy.
Yeah. That is very true. However, you could just have a subset that is
"common", and then have your own names for local machines that noone
else cares about, and name conflict between such machines wouldn't be an
issue.
But that is up to people to decide how they want it. I like it better to
have a global name space, and all my machines pick the nodename database
from MIM so I have them as much in synch as possible. I occasionally
also ping people when I notice nodes for which I have no name, but from
which communication have been visible.
Sure, it may be that the Italian guys never access our nodes and
vice versa, but if that's true then what's the point in integrating?
Yup.
P.S. Does anybody have a list of the nodes on the Italian network?
I can probably get a list... But how about exploring if they'd be
interested in hooking up first maybe?
Johnny
Send a mail message to:
gerry77 at mail.com
He should be able to provide you with a list of nodenames (and
addresses).
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2011 11:25 AM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Integrating with the Italian network.
On 2011-11-26 15:37, Bob Armstrong wrote:
Johnny wrote:
That is not really a big issue. DECnet do not have a requirement for
a coherent nodename database. Every machine can have its own.
This is technically true, but it's really not very useful to have a
network with duplicate node names. After all, if I post a message
saying "phone me on ABC::" or "copy these files from XYZ::" and half
the users have a different ABC or XYZ, then people are not going to be
happy.
Yeah. That is very true. However, you could just have a subset that is
"common", and then have your own names for local machines that noone
else cares about, and name conflict between such machines wouldn't be an
issue.
But that is up to people to decide how they want it. I like it better to
have a global name space, and all my machines pick the nodename database
from MIM so I have them as much in synch as possible. I occasionally
also ping people when I notice nodes for which I have no name, but from
which communication have been visible.
Sure, it may be that the Italian guys never access our nodes and
vice versa, but if that's true then what's the point in integrating?
Yup.
P.S. Does anybody have a list of the nodes on the Italian network?
I can probably get a list... But how about exploring if they'd be
interested in hooking up first maybe?
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On 2011-11-26 15:37, Bob Armstrong wrote:
Johnny wrote:
That is not really a big issue. DECnet do not have a requirement for a
coherent nodename database. Every machine can have its own.
This is technically true, but it's really not very useful to have a
network with duplicate node names. After all, if I post a message saying
"phone me on ABC::" or "copy these files from XYZ::" and half the users have
a different ABC or XYZ, then people are not going to be happy.
Yeah. That is very true. However, you could just have a subset that is "common", and then have your own names for local machines that noone else cares about, and name conflict between such machines wouldn't be an issue.
But that is up to people to decide how they want it. I like it better to have a global name space, and all my machines pick the nodename database from MIM so I have them as much in synch as possible. I occasionally also ping people when I notice nodes for which I have no name, but from which communication have been visible.
Sure, it may be that the Italian guys never access our nodes and vice
versa, but if that's true then what's the point in integrating?
Yup.
P.S. Does anybody have a list of the nodes on the Italian network?
I can probably get a list... But how about exploring if they'd be interested in hooking up first maybe?
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
Johnny wrote:
That is not really a big issue. DECnet do not have a requirement for a
coherent nodename database. Every machine can have its own.
This is technically true, but it's really not very useful to have a
network with duplicate node names. After all, if I post a message saying
"phone me on ABC::" or "copy these files from XYZ::" and half the users have
a different ABC or XYZ, then people are not going to be happy.
Sure, it may be that the Italian guys never access our nodes and vice
versa, but if that's true then what's the point in integrating?
Bob
P.S. Does anybody have a list of the nodes on the Italian network?
