[Info-vax] OpenVMS in the future, Open sourced or Closed? Intent is to keep it...

[seasoned_geek]

On Wednesday, May 6, 2015 at 10:09:28 AM UTC-5, Stephen Hoffman wrote:
> >>> seasoned_geek wrote:

> >>>> As was pointed out by Hoff. Building VMS from source requires 
> >>>> phenomenal setup and significant resources.
> 
> Could you point out where I wrote that?  While I did indicate that the 
> build -- back when I was familiar with it -- was complex and it was very 
> much tailored to the then-current clusters, but nothing precludes 
> simplifying and productizing the build.  Productizing the build would 
> be a moderate-sized project, and the complexity here comes largely from 
> the scale.   The build is a collection of specific tools and data 
> files, and a whole lot of DCL.

Hoff, you are a highly intelligent individual. When you state something is complex and that _you_ had difficulty setting it up when you had "direct" access to the people responsible for it . . . 

> 
> There are no specialized hardware requirements, beyond the entirely 
> unsurprising "more is faster".

Currently one needs something other than a sub $300 X86 to build it on, correct?


> 
> >> There is also the issue of all the conditional compilation in the 
> >> source code which exists for military and/or very high security 
> >> clearance eyes only.
> 
> That's a new one.  Never heard of that version of OpenVMS before.
> 
> I've never heard of a military or high-security or variant version of 
> OpenVMS, beyond Security-Enhanced OpenVMS; SEVMS.  The SEVMS package 

I first became exposed to it while working on a project for DEC back when they had the Elk Grove Village office. This was when the Alpha was still being worked on and some time near/post Compaq consumption. I was not working on a clearance related project at the time, just an inventory management one, so my exposure was limited to whatever those who had worked on it happened to say. I had no interest in poking or prodding. I do know the features/enhancements were conditionally compiled in and those who worked on it claimed the stuff was developed at the behest of some area of DOD. For all I know it could have been a one-off for Great Lakes. Perhaps we are both speaking of SEVMS, but your description doesn't sound like what I was told.

Stumbled into the entire thing via help requests/bug reports for lexical functions and system services which referenced parameters that didn't exist in any of the documentation I had access to on the system. When I asked for clarification I was told the little I have posted here some 20+ years later. All of the DEC people I was working with seemed to know about it though.