Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?

Liste des GroupesRevenir à co vms 
Sujet : Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?
De : usenet (at) *nospam* cropcircledogs.com (Richard Jordan)
Groupes : comp.os.vms
Date : 07. Aug 2024, 23:18:48
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v90rs8$3dapl$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 8/7/24 2:31 PM, Craig A. Berry wrote:
 On 8/7/24 11:21 AM, Richard Jordan wrote:
On 8/7/24 6:59 AM, Craig A. Berry wrote:
 
Do you get anything interesting from:
>
$ MCR TCPIP$SYSTEM:TCPIP$SMTP_SFF.EXE sys$input: -log sys$error: -loglevel 1
...
^Z
>
?
>
Yes and no.  Thanks for reminding that many of these utilities have those options!  I had forgotten; I rarely get to be in VMS anymore.
>
I ran it with one of the temp files sendmail.com created, and with the -log and -loglevel options, as well as with SYS$INPUT.
>
The one run with the sendmail temp file for input placed the %LIB-F-INVNBDS error as the first line in the error log, then a blank line, then SMTP configuration data, then the expected text from the input file appropriately escaped (munged).
>
The run with SYS$INPUT did the same.  If I just hit return, SFF exits with an error and the error log shows the %LIB-F-INVNBDS error at the top.  If I enter a valid SMTP command (MAIL FROM:) then ctrl-z errorlog shows the same; the LIB error, followed by a blank line, the contents of the SMTP config file, my one line and an end of input file notice.  And same if I hit ctrl-z immediately after running SFF, I get the LIB error, a blank line, then the SMTP config dump.
>
So the error is occurring 'early' and the cause is not logged.  Feels like a bug in the program.  Despite the fact that its listed as a 'fatal' error, the exit status from SFF on all of these tests was the same:
%0x00000001
 I can't reproduce the INVNBDS error with TCP/IP Services 5.7 ECO 5 on
8.4-2L3 or 6.0 on 9.2-2.  So I don't think it is a simple HPE/VSI
difference that you're seeing.  I wouldn't rule out the possibility you
have bad data somewhere.  Based on SET WATCH FILE, the following data
files are accessed early by SFF, so something could be off in one of those:
 TCPIP$SERVICE.DAT
TCPIP$HOST.DAT
VMSMAIL_PROFILE.DATA
 and your timezone file.  I would check VMSMAIL_PROFILE.DATA first.  What
to check for?  Dunno, really.  Maybe a multibyte character in a personal
name or columns that don't line up because somebody edited the file or
something.  I don't think that the columns are documented anywhere, so a
robust validator for that file might be hard to come by.
Thanks for following up; I didn't have time at work to do that but we have determined its not an SFF issue after all.  It might be related to the VSI upgrade (from HP) done last year.  I reviewed a system startup log from last year then the most recent one, and when the TCPIP START MAIL command is executed, the same error showed up in the log, followed by normal continuation messages.
I then stopped SMTP and got the same error (that was not verified so not sure which command tripped it), then ran the SMTP startup again with verification on and it produced the error in the same place.
So its definitely an issue in the configuration, either a DAT file or the SMTP config file.  Since the error did not cause any performance issues we didn't realize it was in the log or happening.  SFF popped it up in our faces.
We did not change anything in the mail config when VMS was upgraded so its still tied to the VSI installation somehow.  I updated the VSI ticket with the info and will try to do some more testing like yours tomorrow (tonight their batches are running and pumping out emails so I can't).
Thanks again.
Rich

Date Sujet#  Auteur
6 Aug 24 * SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?24Richard Jordan
7 Aug 24 +* Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?2Lawrence D'Oliveiro
7 Aug 24 i`- Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?1Arne Vajhøj
7 Aug 24 +* Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?2Oswald Knoppers
7 Aug 24 i`- Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?1Richard Jordan
7 Aug 24 +* Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?4Craig A. Berry
7 Aug 24 i`* Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?3Richard Jordan
7 Aug 24 i `* Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?2Craig A. Berry
7 Aug 24 i  `- Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?1Richard Jordan
7 Aug 24 +* Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?2Simon Clubley
7 Aug 24 i`- Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?1Craig A. Berry
7 Aug 24 +* Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?2Arne Vajhøj
7 Aug 24 i`- Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?1Arne Vajhøj
13 Aug 24 `* Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?11Richard Jordan
14 Aug 24  `* Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?10Stephen Hoffman
14 Aug 24   `* Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?9Richard Jordan
14 Aug 24    +* Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?2Craig A. Berry
14 Aug 24    i`- Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?1Arne Vajhøj
15 Aug 24    `* Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?6Stephen Hoffman
15 Aug 24     +* Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?3Lawrence D'Oliveiro
17 Aug 24     i`* Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?2Scott Dorsey
19 Aug 24     i `- Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?1Rich Alderson
15 Aug 24     +- Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?1Richard Jordan
15 Aug 24     `- Re: SFF problem with VSI on Integrity?1Simon Clubley

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal