Re: A tale of two macro libraries LIB vs STARLET

From: Forrest Kenney (forrest_dot_kenney_at_hp_dot.com)
Date: 07/04/05 

Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 13:36:04 -0400

1) Starlet and LIB have always belonged toOpenVMS.

2) The point about help is we told folks they can put stuff in there we take
    pains to not break it

3) IMAGELIB I am not 100% certain what the current or historical
    answer is. The safe one it to not use. The person who does the
installation
    kits can give you a better answer about what steps are taken during
upgrades.

Forrest

Richard Maher wrote:

> Hi Forrest,
>
> > I would treat imaglib like LIB and STARLET it belongs to the O.S. and
> > can get replaced.
>
> Just for curiosity's sake, when did this last happen? And, for example, what
> did you do with all the help calls from the SQL/Services API users whose
> apps just stopped linking? Rdb enginnering gets told and create a patch?
>
> > If you stick a shareable in there you have to be prepared
> > on an upgrade to replace it.
>
> How would you even begin to coordinate a "fix" to evry layered product on
> the system?
>
> > In addition any visible symbols in there have
> > to be unique and not comflict with anything put in there.
>
> Yep. That's why we have the lovely Product Registry isn't it?
>
> Product Id: TIER3
> Facility: 333
> Prefix: T3$
> Registration# PRO908
>
> Convention works!
>
> Anyway, as I've previously pointed out, I already ship my own shareable
> image library so a macro library isn't a lot more skin off my beak, but I'd
> just like to seperate any personal prejudices (and I have many) from what is
> the official VMS line on this.
>
> Regards Richard Maher
>
> "Forrest Kenney" <forrest_dot_kenney@hp_dot.com> wrote in message
> news:42C947B9.1BDA8954@hp_dot.com...
> > I would treat imaglib like LIB and STARLET it belongs to the O.S. and
> > can get replaced. If you stick a shareable in there you have to be
> prepared
> > on an upgrade to replace it. In addition any visible symbols in there
> have
> > to be unique and not comflict with anything put in there. So my advice is
> > don't put it in there. Yes I know that means folks have to link against
> your
> > shareable.
> >
> > Forrest
> >
> >
> >
> > Richard Maher wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Forrest,
> > >
> > > OK, I've got to make a decision on this (And it's already caused far too
> > > much grief for the tiny bit of functionality it provides) so it looks
> like
> > > I'll ship a macro library and be done with it.
> > >
> > > But before I close the book (and to give others a chance to reply) I'd
> just
> > > like to ask you a question if I may. And that is "How do you feel about
> > > shareables in IMAGELIB.OLB?" I.E. Can anyone tell me why
> (philisophically)
> > > STARLET or LIB should be treated differently from IMAGELIB? in the "It's
> all
> > > mine!" sense of things?
> > >
> > > Regards Richard Maher
> > >
> > > "Forrest Kenney" <forrest_dot_kenney@hp_dot.com> wrote in message
> > > news:42C93ECD.F3860439@hp_dot.com...
> > > >
> > > > 1) Do not put your stuff in either LIB or STARLET they belong to
> > > OpenVMS
> > > > group and
> > > > may be replaced or updated as needed.
> > > >
> > > > 2) Starlet is public definitions that are only supposed to be
> changed
> > > in an
> > > > upward compatible
> > > > fashion. LIB is mostly privileged semi-private definitions,
> that
> > > may
> > > > change to suit the
> > > > developers needs. But typically if changed care is taken to
> make
> > > it
> > > > upward compatible.
> > > >
> > > > 3) The pseudo terminal driver stuff PTD$XXXX is a public interface
> and
> > > is
> > > > documented in
> > > > the I/O users section of the OpenVMS documentation.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Forrest Kenney
> > > > OpenVMS
> > > >
> > > > Richard Maher wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Larry,
> > > > >
> > > > > > No, I believe that your definition (presuming T3 is a registered
> > > > > > facility name) should be T3$whateverDEF, with the dollar sign
> > > > > > following the facility name.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sounds good to me. Certainly makes more sense and is more consistent
> > > that
> > > > > way, but I couldn't find any fac$def stuff in my libs. (But then I
> don't
> > > > > have a lot of layered products on this box at the moment.
> > > Pseudo-terminal
> > > > > driver seems to stand out.) Is this documented anywhere?
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, I just re-read your earlier post and realized a big difference
> : -
> > > > >
> > > > > Starlet.MLB
> > > > > > A. You can guarantee the definitions *WILL NOT* change for
> > > > > > a new version of VMS
> > > > >
> > > > > LIB.MLB
> > > > > > A. You reasonably believe the definitions *WILL* change for
> > > > > > a new version of VMS
> > > > >
> > > > > Why the difference? Are you saying that LIB gets replaced with a new
> > > version
> > > > > of VMS and STARLET is just updated?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the interest BTW.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards Richard Maher
> > > > >
> > > > > "Larry Kilgallen" <Kilgallen@SpamCop.net> wrote in message
> > > > > news:mxJwnKFnXUmN@eisner.encompasserve.org...
> > > > > > In article <daal13$s4i$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>,
> > > "Richard
> > > > > Maher" <maher_rj@hotspamnotmail.com> writes:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Only if both:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> A. You can guarantee the definitions will not change for
> > > > > > >> a new version of VMS
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> B. The names are all qualified by a VMS facility name
> > > > > > >> (with dollar sign) registered to you by the Product
> > > > > > >> Registrar.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It looks like we've got a winner!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But I think I'll stick it in LIB anyway. Why? Well :-
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1) Rightly or wrongly, I've always saw Starlet as the home of
> the SS
> > > > > > > definitions and LIB as the symbol-def place.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2) There's already a $TT3DEF macro in Starlet (terminal stuff
> I'd
> > > > > imagine)
> > > > > > > so a $T3DEF there as well may be confusing?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No, I believe that your definition (presuming T3 is a registered
> > > > > > facility name) should be T3$whateverDEF, with the dollar sign
> > > > > > following the facility name.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Do not expect customers to code in Macro.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Customers can do whatever they want! (At least that's the way it
> was
> > > > > with
> > > > > > > the VMS that I knew and loved. Before the "Use C you ignorant
> scum!"
> > > > > > > dictates were handed down.) However, I do not expect customers
> to
> > > code
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > Macro. As discussed in previous posts, these symbols will just
> let
> > > > > customers
> > > > > > > do binary ORs of flags at "compile" time. Here's your chance to
> tell
> > > us
> > > > > how
> > > > > > > ADA could do it :-) But COBOL certainly can't. If you don't care
> > > about
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > itsy bitsy CPU resources needed to do an OR at "runtime"? Then
> feel
> > > free
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > forget that the $T3DEF macro exists.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If it is just bit flags, I would think using SDL to output the
> > > > > > definitions in multiple languages would be good, although there
> > > > > > might not be an SDL back end for Cobol. But writing one should
> > > > > > not be hard, especially if you only supported the pieces you need.
> > > > > > Shipping a Macro/Copybook/include/require/package file in all
> > > > > > the languages would ensure the customer has what they need.
> > > >
> >

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Terminal Services after Migration to SBS 2003
    ... It's funny, but there are a fair number of folks that I can say "yes, I ... remember we talked about this last time we did that upgrade". ... Kit reference because at least it's a standardized ... emails I get start with "Jeff, I'm in Phase 2, Step B, Item 5 and I'm stuck. ...
    (microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz2000)
  • VMS upgrade changed program behavior, what could cause this?
    ... I have a very puzzling problem, folks, that shakes my group's confidence in ... This averaging is done for each column, ... This is just straight addition and division, folks, nothing fancy. ... HOUR_AVERAGE ran before the upgrade last Dec. ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: Upgrading laptop processor
    ... 50% of the folks who buy PC parts from these stores have no idea how to ... The gentleman in question has a newish notebook with a Sempron CPU... ... developing expertise and imparting it freely - encouraging consumerism by ... telling someone who wants to upgrade his laptop he must be joking. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware)
  • Re: [fw-wiz] Variations of firewall ruleset bypass via FTP
    ... "Check the specific OS line, or your version number, or upgrade." ... folks using IPF don't get the wrong idea. ... If I were still admining NetBSD systems in production, ... entry well before I'd look at the NetBSD entry because I'd expect you to ...
    (Firewall-Wizards)