Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!mcvax!enea!sommar
From: sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog)
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Subject: Re: Help us defend against VMS!
Message-ID: <2851@enea.se>
Date: 15 Mar 88 15:09:48 GMT
References: <2814@enea.se> <20597@bu-cs.BU.EDU>
Reply-To: sommar@enea.UUCP(Erland Sommarskog)
Followup-To: comp.os.vms
Organization: ENEA DATA AB, Sweden
Lines: 58

Barry Shein (bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU) responds to my article and ask if 
can spell a certain word. Hm, let's see. Was it "bolschytt", no, hm...
No I give up. Anyway, doesn' matter, Mr. Scein seems to know quite 
well how write it.

>Are they bundled or not? I'm sorry you don't like the quality of the
>compilers, they seem to serve quite a number of people fairly well. Is

I don't know. May be they only know Unix compilers and believe that all
langauges but C are so goddamn slow. They should try some on VMS :-)

>>But, hey, you argue for Unix for that yuo can keep the security because
>>you can have the source code. But with the same arguments you use against
>>the VMS privilieges, can be used against the code: Will you ever fully
>>understand it? Zillions of line of code. (Zillion seems to mean 30+ here.)
>
>Oh, I see, you fix security bugs in VMS by playing with the security
>privilege bits. 

No. First you argue in favour of Unix that the code is available, 
intimating that anyone can hack around with it. Then you argue
against the security system of VMS, and say that is too complicated. 
If you can't learn to understand the VMS privilieges you will never
grasp your Unix code either. 

>A lie? I dunno, it's on my machine in /usr/doc, go speak to your
>vendor, or tell your sysadmins not to delete the docs. The pc command
>should document the pc command, not the entire Pascal language. I
>think you use the term "liar" a little freely.

On my machine, it is not. And if it had, it would have been of no
interest, since "man pc" doesn't refer to it. (I don't say that the
pc page should describe Pascal, but it should give the reference.
And it does. But not to an on-line document.)

>>And this brings us on to another issue which Barry does not mention:
>>Unix may have some clever tricks, but it's user interface is really
>>arcane. One-letter options is certainly not state-of-the-art.
>
>I don't mention it because I believe it's a chocolate/vanilla issue I
>specifically said I would avoid. 

Well, may be as a acquinted Unix user you may find user interfaces
as just a matter of taste. Me, who being used to a slightly more
modern fashion, think it is. (Wonder if you call pipes and redirection
as a chocolate/vanilla issue as well. That's typically a thing I find
nice to have, but can live without. Guess why.)

>And if you bothered to read my note I said the same thing.

Sorry, if I missed it. But your article was so full emotional arguments
and intimations about DEC's motives for doing things, it was hard to
see the wood for the trees.
-- 
Erland Sommarskog       
ENEA Data, Stockholm        
sommar@enea.UUCP           "Si tu crois l'amour tabou...
                            Regarde bien, les yeux d'un fou!!!" -- Ange