| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 274.1 | Because...
| NECK::THOMPSON | | Fri Aug 18 1989 12:15 | 12 |
| All PDP's were shut down for a scheduled hardware check of RA60 packs.
IS cleared the shutdown with me at the beginning of this week.
I checked that U3 and SEPTIC were OK, but clearly I must have 'missed'
the U39 system manager.
I apologise to you and all the other U39 users who were affected.
To stop it happening again can you please tell me who 'looks after'
U39/U3/SEPTIC.
Jerry
who-thought-he-left-system-management-12-months-ago
|
| 274.2 | | CURRNT::BADMAN | Standardization breeds mediocrity. | Fri Aug 18 1989 17:16 | 5 |
| you-*never*-leave-system-management-its-with-you-for-LIFE!
Jamie.
|
| 274.3 | Security problem?
| NECK::THOMPSON | Jerry Thompson (7)781-4421 | Mon Oct 23 1989 12:47 | 15 |
| So nobody runs U39 then, it just runs itself. Just as I thought, these
state of the art RSTS operating systems must be years ahead of VMS.
But seriously though folks...
Q1 - If U39 has no system manager, who's responsible for implementing security
patches on it?
Q2 - If the answer to Q1 = "nobody is responsible", then shouldn't IS be taking
taking U39 off the air until some poor innocent can be found to take on
the role?
Surely if this is an essential 'support' machine then the users can
volunteer at least one suitable candidate for the post of U39 system
mangler.
|
| 274.4 | | HEWIE::RUSSELL | This is the dawning of the age of... | Tue Oct 24 1989 13:08 | 11 |
| re .2;
Q1 - there are no relevant patches for RSTS/E V8.0; it's hard enough
to talk to it when you want to....
Q2 - there should be an allocated system mangler for each system;
I'm "it" for MAIDEN and SEPTIC, but I dunno for U39 and the 11/44
system.
Peter.
|