[Info-vax] : Re: Default protection question

[Jan-Erik Soderholm]

On 2010-11-14 22:58, smithfarm wrote:
> Also, you can mix the <> and [] notation in a single filespec:
>
> %%%%%%%%%%% OPCOM 14-NOV-2010 22:54:40.19 %%%%%%%%%%%
> Message from user SYSTEM on LIVVAX
> LANACP MOP V4 Downline Load Service
> Load succeeded for PEAR on XQA0
> System image, DISK$OVMSVAXSYS:<SYS10.>[SYSCOMMON.SYSLIB]NISCS_LOAD.EXE (VAX
> image)

Just a few remarks...

Now, "DISK$OVMSVAXSYS:<SYS10.>" is (part of) your SYS$SYSROOT, right ?

On my system (not a cluster) is it defined as "DSA10:[SYS0.]" using [].

I just noticed that in CLUSTER_CONFIG.COM, they uses hardcoded <>
when building directory specifications for logical names, like :

$write tempfile1
  "$ root = f$getdvi(""SYS$SYSDEVICE"",""ALLDEVNAM"") - ""_"""
$write tempfile1
  "$ if f$trnlnm(""SYS$TOPSYS"",""LNM$SYSTEM"") .nes. """" then -"
$write tempfile1
  " root = root + ""<"" + f$trnlnm(""SYS$TOPSYS"",""LNM$SYSTEM"") + "".>"""
$write tempfile1
  "$ define/syst/exec/nolog/trans=(term,conc) sys$specific 'root'"
$write tempfile1
  "$ define/syst/exec/nolog/trans=(term,conc) sys$sysroot 'root'"

And that is where your SYS$SYSROOT got it's <>, if I'm not wrong.

Now, is there some specific reason *not* to use the (as I thought)
more common [] in this particular case ?

I know that there are some routines "out there" that expects
directories to the enclosed in [].

I've always seen the [] as the "more right" delimiters. And yes,
I do know that the lexicals like F$PARSE correctly interprets
both [] and <>, but sometimes command files don't use that.

I also see that CLUSTER_CONFIG.COM works around this to some
extends by doing things like :

$root = input_value - "[" - "]" - "<" - ">"
$root = root - "[" - "]" - "<" - ">"
$input_value == buffer - "[" - "PORT" - "]"
$dir_spec = dir_spec - "<" - ">" - "[" - "]"
$obj_dirtree = obj_dirtree - "[" - "]" - "<" - ">"

Well, just a minor comment maybe...