[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference bulova::decw_jan-89_to_nov-90

Title:	DECWINDOWS 26-JAN-89 to 29-NOV-90
Notice:	See 1639.0 for VMS V5.3 kit; 2043.0 for 5.4 IFT kit
Moderator:	STAR::VATNE

Created:	Mon Oct 30 1989
Last Modified:	Mon Dec 31 1990
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	3726
Total number of notes:	19516

847.0. "VMS V5.2 SSB kit announcement premature...install gotchas" by 29224::LEVY (Bound to cover just a little more ground) Fri May 26 1989 11:35

I didn't see this elswhere in this file and thought it might be useful to
others.

I recently was notified via mail of the availability of the VMS V5.2 SSB (or
SDC for you old-timers) kit.  Like a good do-bee, I went out and upgraded.  It 
became clear that this is NOT the SSB kit.  The version of VMS that is 
generated is VMS V5.2-42W.  Still Field Test.

Problems I encountered with the upgrade:

  -	If you've got the PostScript Previwer installed, the upgrade can hang.
	The PSVIEWER fonts reside in SYS$COMMON:[SYSFONT.DECW.PSVIEWER]. The
	upgrade will hang in Phase 3 if you leave them there.  You've got to
	move the PSVIEWER fonts out of SYS$COMMON before the upgrade.

  -	Licenses!  I had multiple copies of VAX-VMS, DVNETEND, and DVNETRTG on
	the system.  Some were old T5.0-mumble PAKs.  After the upgrade, the 
	system didn't combine them "correctly" and told me that I was not 
	licensed to run VMS and I was not licenced to use DECnet.  I was able
	to re-create my license database with a brand new set of PAKs from VTX.

  -	I also had a problem with the install hanging in Phase 3 that I 
	attribute to the TK50 not unloading properly, but I'm not sure about 
	that one...

	- Dave

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
847.1		19584::MFOLEY	Rebel without a Clue	`Fri May 26 1989 14:57`	7
	File a QAR please..... mike VMS Development
847.2	Give the engineers a break here, will you?	29623::BOWMAN	Bob Bowman, CSC/CS SPACE Team	`Fri May 26 1989 16:00`	18
	Soapbox Flame Warning: RE: .0 How much more do you expect at SSB time? The PSViewer is a non-issue! It is not part of the SSB V5.1 kit, so if it is on your system, then it is there illegally because you chose to add field test non-supported software to your system. VMS and DECwindows really have no obligation to see that a new upgrade works on anything other than a standard VMS SSB kit. How can you complain about V5.2-42N not being SSB when you explicitly chose to put the non SSB PSViewer on your system? The license issues have been fairly clearly documented as far as I can tell. Did you read any of the available installation guides and release notes? <Set Flame off>
847.3	Pardon my ignorance... but...	38644::BILLMERS	Meyer Billmers, AI Applications	`Fri May 26 1989 16:42`	2
	What does SSB stand for?
847.4		32905::SWEENEY	Gotham City's Software Consultant	`Fri May 26 1989 17:17`	3
	Software Supply Business (SSB) is the new name for Software Distribution Center (SDC)
847.5		2702::WINALSKI	Paul S. Winalski	`Fri May 26 1989 17:35`	13
	RE: .2 I expect to encounter bugs and glitches when putting up pre-release software, but the announcement for this note said that this was the "SSB kit" when what they meant to say was "this is the kit from the build on which the SSB kit will be based." It's a bit annoying to suddenly find yourself an unwilling participant in a field test when you thought you were putting up customer release software. I trust that this semantic misunderstanding won't ever be repeated. --PSW
847.6	I'll defend myself once, and then shut up...	EZWIND::LEVY	Bound to cover just a little more ground	`Wed May 31 1989 12:35`	29
	RE: .2 I don't want to get into a shouting match here, but the reply in .2 bothered me enough that I felt a need to respond. I realize that the PSVIEWER is a non-issue from "supported" software standpoint. However, it did serve to point out a potential glitch with the upgrade in that a third party could easily have an application that inserted fonts in the SYS$COMMON:[SYSFONT.DECW...] directory tree (which would presumably cause the same problem as the PSVIEWER). Engineering has now had the opportunity to address this potential problem. The license stuff IS pretty well documented and I did read the installation guide and scanned the release notes. I approach the license stuff much as I'd assume many customers do: "I'll learn just as much about this as I absolutely have to in order to get my system working." I just don't have time to do it any other way. I did not see anything in the Release Notes or the installation documentation about combining licenses. I received a very polite response from engineering on my QAR regarding the license issue. Perhaps I'm just a poor reader. If you seriously expect workstation users to become intimately familiar with LMF just to move to new versions of the operating system, I think you're not being realistic. My note was intended to help other folks out as they move to the new version of VMS, so that others can avoid the pitfalls that I experience. Sorry if it offended you. BTW - it did not seem to offend the engineers... - Dave_on_his_own_soapbox_for_a_while
847.7	"me too"	AIRBAG::SWATKO	Brother, can 'ya spare a Meg?	`Wed May 31 1989 14:51`	19
	I too spent a good bit of time upgrading by system. I too got bit my the PSViewer thing. When I submitted a QAR, Ron Summer politely responded and told me to remove the PSViewer directory. He also said that the installation would be fixed in the REAL SSB version so that it would not hang. I also went through a great deal of frustration with licensing. After all this, I wind up with VMS V5.2-42N and not the V5.2 that is was advertised to be. Needless to say, I too was/am a little steamed, especially because I'll have to do it all over again to get to the REAL V5.2. RE: PSViewer: The PSViewer did not modify the base VMS system, it created a new subdirectory just as any customer might. Its nasty to have the installation hang because of something like this. RE: Licenses: I didn't see any documentation that foretold of such problems with licensing.