POSTMAST@CUVMA.BITNET (06/28/87)
Received: by CUVMA (Mailer X1.24) id 1408; Sat, 27 Jun 87 05:05:41 EDT
Received: from CUCCVX(POSTMAST) by CUVMA (Mailer X1.24) id 1407;
Sat, 27 Jun 87 05:05:41 EDT
Date: Sat, 27-JUN-1987 05:02 EST
From: <POSTMASTER@CUCCVX>
Subject: Returned Network Mail
To: MAILER@CUVMA
ReSent-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 87 05:05:41 EDT
ReSent-From: Network Mailer <MAILER@CUVMA>
ReSent-To: POSTMAST@CUVMA
Your mail is being returned to you.
Reason for return is:
%MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user MRGNAIR at node CUCCVX
Returned mail follows:
------------------------------
Received: From CUVMA(MAILER) by CUCCVX with RSCS id 1403
for MRGNAIR@CUCCVX; Sat, 27-JUN-1987 05:02 EST
Received: from CUVMA.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMA.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer X1.24) with
BSMTP id 1402; Sat, 27 Jun 87 05:05:28 EDT
Received: from CU20B.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMA.COLUMBIA.EDU on 06/27/87 at 05:05:28
EDT
Received: from KL.SRI.Com by CU20B.COLUMBIA.EDU with TCP; Sat 27 Jun 87
05:05:17-EDT
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by KL.SRI.COM with TCP; Fri 26 Jun 87 21:42:21-PDT
Received: from relay2.cs.net by RELAY.CS.NET id aa09983; 27 Jun 87 0:20 EDT
Received: from northeastern.edu by RELAY.CS.NET id ad00121; 27 Jun 87 0:15 EDT
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 87 20:32 EDT
From: "Scott Elfman(Admiral Kirk)"
<ACM0D%nuhub.acs.northeastern.edu@RELAY.CS.NET>
To: info-vax@KL.SRI.COM
X-VMS-To: NET%"info-vax@kl.sri.com",ACM0D
Please take my name off of the info-vax list! I cant keep up with its volume,
the quote is beeing eaten up to fast. Thank You Scott Elfman.
------ End of forwarded mail by POSTMAionionifr4campbell@maynard.BSW.COM (Larry Campbell) (06/29/87)
I think it's time to admit that there are several gateways through which comp.os.vms (a.k.a. INFO-VAX) passes that are completely out of control. It's bad enough seeing dozens of messages every week with the useless header line "Subject: (none)", but when an ignorant or inconsiderate user sends mail to the WHOLE LIST requesting his removal from the list, and his message gets bounced at a relay point and the gateway then broadcasts the bounced mail message to the WHOLE LIST, well, things are out of control. It's only a matter of time (probably weeks rather than months) before we get yet another infinite loop where some berserk mailer starts causing every disk in the free world to overflow. Maybe it's just selective recall, but it seems to me that the most broken gateway software in the world is at BITNET sites. At least some of these BITNET nodes have the good taste, humor, or cynicism (pick one) to add the following "Comment:" header to articles they forward: > X-Bitnet-Sender: General Delivery <POSTMASTER@CRUXNMC> > Comments: This is gatewayed mail. Warning: Mail may not > necessarily be returnable through this path. I won't even bother to discuss the ridiculous routing some of these messages take; the one from which the above header lines were excerpted was posted at the University of New Hampshire (USA) and arrived here, a distance of about seventy miles, via Amsterdam, Geneva, Berkeley, and Los Angeles. (I can understand odd paths in the USA, where interstate calls are often cheaper than intrastate, but the trip across the ocean and back makes little sense.) Is it too much to ask the BITNET people to get their gateways working more robustly before the comp.os.vms (INFO-VAX) distribution goes completely berserk and fills up everyone's disk? -- Larry Campbell The Boston Software Works, Inc. Internet: campbell@maynard.BSW.COM 120 Fulton Street, Boston MA 02109 uucp: {husc6,mirror,think}!maynard!campbell +1 617 36 An An
POSTMAST@CUVMA.BITNET (07/13/87)
Received: by CUVMA (Mailer X1.24) id 3818; Mon, 13 Jul 87 05:26:11 EDT
Received: from CUCCVX(POSTMAST) by CUVMA (Mailer X1.24) id 3817;
Mon, 13 Jul 87 05:26:11 EDT
Date: Mon, 13-JUL-1987 05:23 EST
From: <POSTMASTER@CUCCVX>
Subject: Returned Network Mail
To: MAILER@CUVMA
ReSent-Date: Mon, 13 Jul 87 05:26:11 EDT
ReSent-From: Network Mailer <MAILER@CUVMA>
ReSent-To: POSTMAST@CUVMA
Your mail is being returned to you.
Reason for return is:
%MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user MRGNAIR at node CUCCVX
Returned mail follows:
------------------------------
Received: From CUVMA(MAILER) by CUCCVX with RSCS id 3814
for MRGNAIR@CUCCVX; Mon, 13-JUL-1987 05:23 EST
Received: from CUVMA.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMA.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer X1.24) with
BSMTP id 3813; Mon, 13 Jul 87 05:25:57 EDT
Received: from CU20B.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMA.COLUMBIA.EDU on 07/13/87 at 05:25:56
EDT
Received: from KL.SRI.Com by CU20B.COLUMBIA.EDU with TCP; Mon 13 Jul 87
05:26:28-EDT
Received: from wiscvm.wisc.edu by KL.SRI.COM with TCP; Fri 10 Jul 87
18:54:25-PDT
Received: from UOFMCC.BITNET by wiscvm.wisc.edu ; Fri, 10 Jul 87 20:51:57 CDT
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 87 16:42 CDT
From: Dave Bell - ACADEMIC CONSULTANT (U. of Winnipeg)
<UOWDJB%UOFMCC.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu>
To: info-vax@sri-kl.arpa
Subject: SPERRY MODEL 37 LASER PRINTER
Is there anyone out there that has any experience with a
Sperry Model 37 Laser Printer. I'm looking for setup modules
for this laser printer.
Any replies can be sent to my BITNET address. Thanks in advance.
-------------------------------------
David Bell
Academic Consultant
Computer Services
E-mail: UOWDJB@UOFMCC.BITNET
V-mail: 204/786-9494
S-mail: Computer Services,
The University of Winnipeg,
515 Portage Avenue,
Winnipeg, Manitoba,
Canada R3B 2E9
-------------------------------------
------ End of forwarded mail by POSTMAST@CUVMA.POSTMAST@CUVMA.BITNET (07/13/87)
Received: by CUVMA (Mailer X1.24) id 2700; Sun, 12 Jul 87 04:40:26 EDT
Received: from CUCCVX(POSTMAST) by CUVMA (Mailer X1.24) id 2699;
Sun, 12 Jul 87 04:40:25 EDT
Date: Sun, 12-JUL-1987 04:37 EST
From: <POSTMASTER@CUCCVX>
Subject: Returned Network Mail
To: MAILER@CUVMA
ReSent-Date: Sun, 12 Jul 87 04:40:25 EDT
ReSent-From: Network Mailer <MAILER@CUVMA>
ReSent-To: POSTMAST@CUVMA
Your mail is being returned to you.
Reason for return is:
%MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user MRGNAIR at node CUCCVX
Returned mail follows:
------------------------------
Received: From CUVMA(MAILER) by CUCCVX with RSCS id 2695
for MRGNAIR@CUCCVX; Sun, 12-JUL-1987 04:37 EST
Received: from CUVMA.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMA.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer X1.24) with
BSMTP id 2694; Sun, 12 Jul 87 04:40:11 EDT
Received: from CU20B.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMA.COLUMBIA.EDU on 07/12/87 at 04:40:11
EDT
Received: from KL.SRI.Com by CU20B.COLUMBIA.EDU with TCP; Sun 12 Jul 87
04:40:45-EDT
Received: from ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU by KL.SRI.COM with TCP; Thu 9 Jul 87
09:34:49-PDT
Received: by ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (5.58/1.27)
id AA21547; Thu, 9 Jul 87 07:38:31 PDT
Received: from USENET by ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU with netnews
for info-vax@kl.sri.com (info-vax@kl.sri.com)
(contact usenet@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU if you have questions)
Date: 8 Jul 87 19:35:42 GMT
From: newton.physics.purdue.edu!pur-phy!mrstve!mdbs!jon@ee.ecn.purdue.edu (Jon
D. Reid)
Organization: Micro Database Systems, Inc., Lafayette IN
Subject: Re: DEC phone support (was Re: C ON VMS)
Message-Id: <386@mdbs.UUCP>
References: <1050@aldebaran.UUCP>, <14344@teknowledge-vaxc.ARPA>
Sender: info-vax-request@kl.sri.com
To: info-vax@kl.sri.com
In article <14344@teknowledge-vaxc.ARPA> mkhaw@teknowledge-vaxc.ARPA
(Michael Khaw) writes:
>in article <1050@aldebaran.UUCP>, jimp@cognos.uucp (Jim Patterson) says:
>>
>>[mentions that DEC phone support only recognizes 3 "designated names" ]
>> I've heard that there are . . . a number of designates named Mickey Mouse ...
>
>Yes, but what happens when . . . all the support people are busy and
>they have to call back? How do you tell which Mickey Mouse in your
>organization called them?
>
In our company we have one person who is the official DEC Support "contact";
if I have a problem I describe it to him and he calls it in (he knows the
magic numbers they want and all that). He tells DEC Support to ask for me
(my unregistered, for-real name) when they call back (they *always* call back),
and we've had no problems.
------ End of forwarded mail by POSTMAST@CUVMA.POSTMAST@CUVMA.BITNET (07/13/87)
Received: by CUVMA (Mailer X1.24) id 3884; Mon, 13 Jul 87 06:53:35 EDT
Received: from CUCCVX(POSTMAST) by CUVMA (Mailer X1.24) id 3883;
Mon, 13 Jul 87 06:53:34 EDT
Date: Mon, 13-JUL-1987 06:50 EST
From: <POSTMASTER@CUCCVX>
Subject: Returned Network Mail
To: MAILER@CUVMA
ReSent-Date: Mon, 13 Jul 87 06:53:34 EDT
ReSent-From: Network Mailer <MAILER@CUVMA>
ReSent-To: POSTMAST@CUVMA
Your mail is being returned to you.
Reason for return is:
%MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user MRGNAIR at node CUCCVX
Returned mail follows:
------------------------------
Received: From CUVMA(MAILER) by CUCCVX with RSCS id 3878
for MRGNAIR@CUCCVX; Mon, 13-JUL-1987 06:50 EST
Received: from CUVMA.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMA.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer X1.24) with
BSMTP id 3877; Mon, 13 Jul 87 06:53:17 EDT
Received: from CU20B.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMA.COLUMBIA.EDU on 07/13/87 at 06:53:17
EDT
Received: from KL.SRI.Com by CU20B.COLUMBIA.EDU with TCP; Mon 13 Jul 87
06:53:51-EDT
Received: from ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU by KL.SRI.COM with TCP; Sat 11 Jul 87
13:56:44-PDT
Received: by ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (5.58/1.27)
id AA11219; Sat, 11 Jul 87 13:36:33 PDT
Received: from USENET by ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU with netnews
for info-vax@kl.sri.com (info-vax@kl.sri.com)
(contact usenet@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU if you have questions)
Date: 11 Jul 87 13:36:33 GMT
From: ece-csc!ncrcae!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!ucsdhub!jack!man!crash!jeh@mcnc.org (Jamie
Hanrahan)
Organization: Crash TS, El Cajon, CA
Subject: Re: Help with a Kernal mode macro program
Message-Id: <1369@crash.CTS.COM>
References: <870708122836.001@sitvxb>
Sender: info-vax-request@kl.sri.com
To: info-vax@kl.sri.com
In article <870708122836.001@sitvxb> dstevens@sitvxb (David L Stevens) writes:
>
> ...the MOVC3
> statement in the Kernal Mode code, crashes the system every time I run it.
I replied to this via mail, but since then several not-quite-correct
responses have been posted as news, so here goes...
The folks who point out that MOVC3 clobbers R0-R5 are correct. (And,
by the bye, LOC3 hits R0-R3.) BUT, simply mentioning R2 through R5
in the kernel (not "kernal", please!) mode routine's entry point mask
is not sufficient to avoid the crashes.
The code shown is calling the VMS system routines EXE$IOLOCKR (lock
I/O data base via mutex for read) and EXE$IOUNLOCK (unlock I/O data
base mutex). These routines require R4 to point to the current
process's PCB. The call to IOLOCKR works because the $CMKRNL service
calls the target routine with R4 pointing to the PCB, but after the
MOVC3, R4 contains 0. The mutex-handling routines check to ensure
that R4 is pointing to a valid PCB and bugcheck if it doesn't; hence
the crash.
R4 can be pushed at the beginning of the routine and popped just
before the call to UNLOCK, or pushed and popped around the MOVC3s.
Personally, I would put the following statement just before the calls
to both EXE$IOUNLOCK and EXE$IOLOCKR:
MOVL G^SCH$GL_CURPCB, R4 ; get addr of cur proc PCB
Sure, it's not necessary for IOLOCKR because of the context that
this code happens to run in... but that might change someday.
The MOVL makes the code less context-dependent, and also more
understandable.
One other thing: All references to system-space labels
(EXE$IOLOCKR, EXE$UNLOCK) should be preceded with the G^ prefix
to ensure that they're position independent.
DISCLAIMER: Names of system-space labels in the above were typed
from memory. The suffixes are correct but the prefixes (EXE$,
SCH$, etc.) may be mixed up... it's late/early/not good.
------ End of forwarded mail by POSTMAST@CUVMA.