DEAN@engvax.UUCP (11/04/85)
Brent Sterner <cit-vax!A105%UWOCC1.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA> asks > We have systems here from IBM, CDC, and DEC. 2 of them are TOPS-10, >and I had hoped that accounting over there would map well onto accounting >here (ie on the VAX). It almost does, and it's infuriatingly close. One >bit, to be precise. > TOPS-10 uses the concept of project and programmer numbers. It maps >closely onto uics, where the project is a group and the programmer is a >member. TOPS allows these fields to be 6 octal digits each, but we only >use 5 for the project and 4 for the programmer. "Ah ha" thought I, DEC >will split the uic in the middle for release 4 and I'll get 16 bits + 16 >bits. Wrong again. Seems like they went out of their way to split the >bits somewhere else. > So now I have a bunch of accounts that have no VAX mapping. At least >not a tidy 1:1 mapping. We are "migrating" eventually, so such a mapping >would be a very useful assist. It would also allow users to understand >uic based file protections real quick, and accelerate users learning curve. From page DCL-106 in the DCL dictionary, "the system translates a UIC to a 32-bit value that represents a group number and a member number; the high-order 16 bits contain the group number and the low-order 16 bits contain the member number." Later, it says, "The group number is an octal number in the range of 0 through 37776; the member number is an octal number in the range of 0 through 177776." Doesn't sound good for your migration. Dean Stephan { engvax!dean @ CIT-VAX.ARPA } Hughes Aircraft Company.