Mike after John Clogg:

> .....  At least with UNDEDLOK you get to choose which process
> dies, which may serve to mitigate the damage.

I've got no argument with that....  That's why I have used it a couple
times in the (now somewhat distant) past...    :-)

> Still, it is dangerous, and anytime you encounter a deadlock, you
> should take steps to prevent its recurrence, rather than depending
> on UNDEDLOK.

Yup...

> Ken, I tried unsuccessfully to find the new version of UNDEDLOK
> on the ITRC.

I didn't even try....:  Called the ITRC and got the SE to download it.

> A search on "UNDEDLOK" yielded nothing but some old
> documents.  Can you give some more information about its
> location?


Mike provided details on versions and patches:

> Actually, the current version is A.70.00 which can be obtained by
> 6.0  NRCLXJ5A
> 6.5  NRCLXP0A
> 7.0  the patch NRCLXP0C does NOT contain UNDEDLOK,
> probably have to call HP

After I saw Mike's post earlier today, I called the ITRC back and
mentioned that the "latest" version of UNDEDLOK that they just
downloaded to my 959 was apparently NOT the latest version after
all....  After checking the SE called back;  said "yup:  Mike's right";
said they would download the "new latest" version for me shortly.

Thanks to Mike for correcting my error....  er...  actually, all I did
was pass on what the ITRC told me....  I'll try and disclaim most if
not all of the responsibility for that mistake....    ;-)

Ken Sletten

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *