[Info-vax] Whither VMS?

[Doug Phillips]

On Sep 17, 4:55 pm, billg... at cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
> In article <Td2dnSX7ar73ACzXnZ2dnUVZ_jydn... at giganews.com>,
>         "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber... at comcast.net> writes:
>
>
>
> > Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> >> In article <HcednTKQvIhBiCzXnZ2dnUVZ_rWdn... at giganews.com>,
> >>        "Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilber... at comcast.net> writes:
> >>> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> >>>> In article <V49+bpWWD... at eisner.encompasserve.org>,
> >>>>        koeh... at eisner.nospam.encompasserve.org (Bob Koehler) writes:
> >>>>> In article <7haqjjF2ssv0... at mid.individual.net>, billg... at cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) writes:
> >>>>>> You just won't accept that there are other ways tio us Unix than a shell,
> >>>>>> will you.  At least there has been since the TTY went away.  :-)
> >>>>>    I have, and I do, but the application's interface is not the OS
> >>>>>    interface.
>
> >>>> So, now we are back to arguing what is OS and what is an application
> >>>> on top of the OS.  Is BASH part of the OS?  Is DCL?  I really don't
> >>>> think any "OS" has a "user" inteface.  They all have an API for which
> >>>> various user interfaces get written.  Under Unix, a "shell" is just a
> >>>> user level program.  One is not even necessary in order for the OS to
> >>>> be functional for regular users.  Kind of like menu driven captive
> >>>> accounts on VMS that offer no access to DCL for the user.
>
> >>> I think you could make a very reasonable case that DCL is part of the O/S.
>
> >>> 1. DCL is part of system startup.
>
> >> So is the UNix Shell.
>
> > I know that there is some sort of a Unix-like shell on some recent
> > releases but I think it was only in recent releases.  V3.7-V5.5-2 didn't
> > have a Unix like shell.  I don't recall one in V6.x.  I'm not sure just
> > when Posix came along.  I do know that the POSIX shell is a piss poor
> > substitute for a genuine Unix shell.  The last time I tried (it was
> > maybe four years ago) the VMS POSIX shell was not capable of running the
> > "configure" script for NTP.
>
> I am not talking about a "shell" on VMS.  We are talking about wether
> or not DCL is a part of the OS as it has already been stated that
> the Unix shell is not.  I was pointing out that the Unix shell has
> the same functions that were listed as making DCL a part of the OS.
> I claim it does not and that DCL is just an application that runs on
> top of the VMS Kernel.
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> 2. DCL is part of system shutdown.
>
> >> So is the UNix Shell.
>
> >>> 3. DCL ships with the VMS binaries.
>
> >> So is the UNix Shell.
>
> >> And yet, not part of the OS.  Simple question.  Forget about the
> >> inability to configure anything, would the VMS kernel run if DCL.EXE
> >> were not present on the system?  If the answer is yes, you make the
> >> call.
>
> > Probably, but THEN what would you do?  There is a hell of a lot more to
> > VMS than "running the kernel".
>
> Of course there is.  and the same is true of Unix.  But that doesn't
> make DCL or the Unix shell a part of the OS.  It is still just an
> application that runs on top of the OS.
>
> >                                 There has to be SOME interface that lets
> > you do some useful work with the system.  Without such, a computer is
> > nothing more than a very expensive electric heater!
>
> And that wasn't the question at hand.
>


So, you missed or have forgotten the definition of operating system? I
believe you have a computer sciences department close by that could
help you with that.

How one specific operating system works and whatever various services
it does or doesn't include has absolutely no relevance to any other
operating system, anymore than one CPU's architecture has any
relevance to any other CPU.

DCL is part of OpenVMS. Read the SPD to see what other services and
utilities are considered part of the OpenVMS operating system.

-------------------