[Info-vax] %SYSTEM-F-ACCVIO again

[Dave Froble]

On 4/9/2024 8:45 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> On 2024-04-08, Arne Vajhøj <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>
>> But I think it would be very problematic with VMS complaining
>> over configs that are not known to work.
>>
>> Because removing that test would require a release.
>>
>> We would see:
>>
>> ...
>> VMS 9.2-2H41 - added support for VM Foo 17 and VM Bar 3
>> VMS 9.2-2H42 - added support for VM Bar 4 and VM FooBar 7
>> ..
>>
>> No thanks.
>>
>
> It does not have to be a release - it could be a patch. It is also
> absolutely no different from in the past when a new version of VMS
> used to add support for new CPUs from DEC.
>
> IOW, my suggested approach is a very long-established part of the
> VMS world. The only difference now is that VMS would be allowed to
> continue booting if you set an override flag or SYSGEN parameter.
>
> Also, there should be no need to add support for "VM Bar 4" unless
> it brought new functionality over "VM Bar 3" that you wanted to
> support in VMS.
>
> VMS is used in mission-critical production environments. You should
> not be allowed to accidentally boot into an unsupported configuration
> without being made _VERY_ aware of that fact.
>
> Simon.
>

But hasn't the discussion been about the CL stuff?  I don't think CL and mission 
critical co-exist.  I'm sure VSI doesn't think that.

As for due diligence, when did that go away?  Any reasonable customer would 
check, and re-check, that they are using supported stuff.

-- 
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