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

[Hans Bachner]

Robert A. Brooks schrieb am 08.04.2024 um 18:49:
> On 4/8/2024 8:34 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> 
>> If there's something VMS needs or a configuration it doesn't support,
>> then that should be probed at boot time and VMS should refuse to continue
>> booting with the reason why been made clear. The bug in this case is that
>> this check is missing from VMS.
> 
> That's one way to look at it.
> 
> Another way is that we have been quite clear what the requirements are 
> to run VMS.
> 
> Any variation from that is unsupported.  We recognize that there are 
> likely configurations
> that are technically unsupported, but will still likely work.  
> Preventing those
> configurations from working is someething we could do, but chose not to.
> 
>> The other possibility is that VMS is _supposed_ to work OK in this
>> configuration, but this specific VM setup has been untested by VSI until
>> now. That means there is a bug in the VMS code itself which needs fixing.
> 
> We are not claiming support for Proxmox, although that testing has begun.
> Given that it is a KVM-based hypervisor, getting it fully supported 
> should not
> be difficult, but we're not there yet.
> 
> It is for these reasons that we've been quite conservative about what is 
> supported.
> 
> We are interested in any feedback we get, but that doesn't mean we're 
> going to respond to every
> problem immediately when it's an unsupported configuration.

At the Connect IT Symposium, Thilo Lauer (VSI) yesterday gave an 
introduction to Proxmox and demoed an OpenVMS instance running under 
Proxmox. Camiel Vanderhoeven also mentioned that official support for 
Proxmox as a hypervisor is relatively high on their list, especially due 
to the changes at VMware since the takeover by Broadcom.

So - stay tuned...

Hans.

PS: Camiel has been appointed "Chief Architect and Strategist" at VSI 
recently. In his new role, he will relief Clair Grant from some of his 
responsibilities.