[Info-vax] Fortran

[Dave Froble]

On 12/4/2018 12:54 AM, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
> In article <pu4gpr$4v6$1 at dont-email.me>, Dave Froble
> <davef at tsoft-inc.com> writes:
>
>> Your claim about how hard it will be to move is just that, your claim.
>> I feel that you are mistaken.  But you are entitled to your opinion.
>
> That obviously depends on the system.  Some will be easier, some less
> so.  Some will benefit greatly from a mixed-architecture cluster, some
> less so.
>
>> I'm rather sure that x86 VMS will still mount disks, should the
>> interface be the same, from VAX, Alpha, and that sinking ship.
>
> So x86 machines running VMS will have SCSI interfaces?

Don't know, we'll see.

>> I'm even more sure that BACKUP will be able to take images from those
>> disks and restore them to disks on an x86 running x86 VMS.
>
> Sure.  But that won't work out of the box for all users.

When hasn't VMS BACKUP not worked?

>> I'm guessing that x86 VMS will be able to have network links to Alpha
>> and that sinking ship, and files, and save sets, could be copied, and /
>> or restored.
>
> Sure.  But that won't work out of the box for all users.

When hasn't networks not worked on VMS?

>> As you should be able to see, the above is even better than using a
>> cluster, since even moving from VAX will be possible.
>
> VAX is not an issue for me.

But still would work.

> Think about compiled code.  It has to be recompiled.  It has to be
> tested.  Much easier to do in a mixed-architecture cluster.
>

Everything will need to be compiled and linked on x86.  Unless you're 
using one of the VEST type of things.  I fail to see how mixed anything 
has a thing to do with the compilers and linkers.

This ain't rocket science ....

-- 
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef at tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486