From: Carlos Costa [calo@shaw.ca]
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2002 4:09 AM
To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com
Subject: Re: OpenVMS 7.3-1 and CSWING

On 10/25/02 7:34 PM, in article
rdeininger-2510022234130001@1cust118.tnt2.nashua.nh.da.uu.net, "Robert
Deininger" <rdeininger@mindspring.com> wrote:

> 
>> Yes, that is true. That is why they added the statement "If an
>> application compatibility problem is discovered, Compaq will assign
>> the problem a high priority and commit to providing a fix.". They know
>> that that may happen, and guess what? It did. No surprise there. The
>> only surprise is why people are opposed to finding a solution.
> 
> I think several folks _here_ have offered pointers toward a solution.
>

Yes, you are right. My sincere apologies if I sounded like I was disparaging
the group. I didn't mean to. 99% of the postings have been very helpful. I
just got riled by the particular poster's tone. Not like me, actually, I'm
usually meek and mild... My only excuse is that I'm going through CWS
(CSWING Withdrawal Syndrome. :-)

 
> The first part of the solution is to remove any latent bugs in CSWING that
> might be the cause of the symptom.  If bugs remain that are due to V7.3-1,
> then it's time to beat HP over the head with them.
> 
> IMHO, Compaq's compatibility statement is far too strong to be realistic.
> It was probably written by a marketing person.  I can't picture a sane
> engineer making this statement with a straight face.  HP will have to sort
> it out.
> 

It does seem strong to me too. I was not trying to say that it was true,
only that that's what HP said. But there are several types of updates and
this one is supposed to be the mildest sort (Enhancement Release) so I
really think that they expected most, if not all, code to be compatible. It
just looks like something slipped between the cracks. And really, it matters
little to me whether it is a VMS or a CSWING bug or a combination. I'd just
like to get CSWING working again.

>> 
>> Actually, I did. What I got was:
>> 
>> Searching, root = SHODAN:[000000]
>> %SYSTEM-W-NOSUCHFILE, no such file
> 
> Ah!  This is useful.  "No such file" means we asked for a file spec that
> isn't there.
> 
> Might be worth looking at whether the program deals with this condition
> properly.

Actually, it does. The next little bit of code checks for this condition. It
looks to me that NOSUCHFILE and the NOMOREFILES seem to be the two
conditions checked for.

> 
> The traceback is useful if you are trying to debug with a link map and
> compiler listings.  It shows each level in the call chain of functions.
> The addresses given here can be matched up with specific lines of code and
> specific machine instructions.  The traceback answers the question, "how
> did we get here".
> 
> But this isn't a very fun way to debug.  It's much easier to use the VMS
> debugger.  There's a fair learning curve for that, but the debugger manual
> is quite good.

 
>> %TRACE-W-TRACEBACK, symbolic stack dump follows
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> %SYSTEM-W-NOMOREFILES, no more files
> 
> This is a different condition, "no more files".
> 
>> %SYSTEM-W-NOSUCHFILE, no such file
> 
> And another "no such file"...
> 
> etc.
> 
> 
>> It means absolutely nothing to me. Told you I was weak in VMS systems
>> programming.
> 
> I given one or two hints above.  I don't have the program in front of me
> to do more investigating.  See the C documentation and the debugger manual
> if you are interested in gaining debugging skills, and feel free to post
> questions here.

Thanks for your hints. I have also been reading the stuff that was suggested
earlier (VMS Answer Man articles, etc). The debugger manual is BIG and
daunting, but I think that will be my next go at trying to see what is
happening. I guess one must start somewhere, but I suspect that someone will
get CSWING working before I do.


Carlos