HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Richard Ault <ault@max.queens.edu>
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
Subject: Local agent crash with $STR-F-NOMSG (%x1024808C)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 21:57:12 EDT
Organization: Mx-List<==>Vmsnet.Mail.Mx Gateway
X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List

We have been using MX sucessfully since May and are QUITE pleased with its
installation, documentation, and functionality.  Today we noted that we didn't
seem to be getting any internet mail and noted that the Local agent process on
one of our machines had gone away.  The log shows nothing beyond the Local
agent started message and accounting shows a detached process termination with
error code 1024808C (which f$message claims is STR-F_NOMSG).  I'm not sure what
the STR facility is (string manipulation library?).  All other processes were
running and when I did MX_STARTUP LOCAL, all our queued up mail came in.

Any ideas?

Thanks
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard H. Ault, Computing Services Center      ault@queens.edu
Queens College, 1900 Selwyn Ave                 ault@alumni.caltech.edu
Charlotte, NC 28274-0001                        (704) 337-2303
From: "John F. Sandhoff" <syssand@CCVAX.CCS.CSUS.EDU>
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
Subject: RE: A question and an enhancement request.
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 16:52:20 PDT
Organization: Mx-List<==>Vmsnet.Mail.Mx Gateway
X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List


> The question is this: is it typical for MX to lock the SYSTEM_QUEUE.FLQ_CTL
> file when it is receiving mail?

My system is what I consider busy (typically over 1000 messages a day) and
I don't recall seeing this problem. I seem to recall that ONCE I got
a 'currently locked' error from FLQU SHOW but other than that I don't
see locks. CPU speed may have a lot to do with it - MX runs on an 8820
here (though sometimes at priority 1 - ouch!)

> My enhancement request is that MX open the log files differently, like VMS
> opens log files, so that one can TYPE the current log file...

Yes, frustrating. There's a workaround if you really want to see
the file:

$ BACKUP/IGNORE=INTERLOCK MX_LOCAL_DIR:MX_LOCAL_NODE1.LOG FOOLOG.LOG
$ TYPE/PAGE FOOLOG.LOG
$ DELETE/ERASE FOOLOG.LOG

Be *sure* you're careful with the output file spec so you don't clobber
a real log file :-)

Note: requires SYSPRV to work. We all have that, right? :-)

    John F. Sandhoff, University Network Support
      California State University, Sacramento - USA
        sandhoff@csus.edu

Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
From: bhp116@phys.anu.edu.au
Subject: Outgoing mail problems
Organization: Research School of Physical Sciences, ANU
Date: 22 Jul 92 12:13:31 GMT

I have just installed MX v3.1 on a 4000/60 (vms 5.5). 

Mail arriving to the machine is not a problems. However, sending mail only 
works if you are running as SYSTEM. i.e. Ordinary accounts (having only 
NETMBX & TMPMBX privs) attempting to send mail, fail. There is no error 
message, nothing. An entry is made in the queue directory, but the files
are empty. I have check the protections, but no luck. 

Has anyone run into this problem ?
From: Helmut Springer <helmut@bonnie.physik.uni-stuttgart.de>
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
Subject: RE: help!!  need information on lists on MX V3.1c
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 09:34:24 +0200
Organization: Mx-List<==>Vmsnet.Mail.Mx Gateway
X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List

sorry for sending the reply to the list, forgot that this list
creates it's address as sender  8-(

helmut
--
Helmut Springer                    University of Stuttgart, FRG
User HelpDesk Computing Center           CipPool Physics Department
springer@rus.uni-stuttgart.de            helmut@bonnie.physik.uni-stuttgart.de
phone: +49 711 685-4828                  1291::helmut (BelWue)

%SYSTEM-W-MAILONSYS, there is real mail installed on this system
From: hunterl@uwwvax.uww.edu
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
Subject: Re: A question and an enhancement request.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 09:58:35 CDT
Organization: Mx-List<==>Vmsnet.Mail.Mx Gateway
X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List

The only time we have seen a locked message is when it is compressing
or purging.

Lyle Hunter
Computer Center
University Wisconsin-Whitewater
hunterl@uwwvax.uww.edu
From: Hunter Goatley <goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET>
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
Subject: RE: Mail problems with MX3.1 & UUCP2.0
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 14:05:15 EDT
Organization: Mx-List<==>Vmsnet.Mail.Mx Gateway
X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List

frzmtdb@aspentec.com writes:
>
>Has anyone experienced problems with the interface to UUCP from MX?
>I recently installed UUCP 2.0 onto my system (which had been running
> MX3.1C and UUCP1.3 just fine.
>After the upgrade to UUCP2.0 I get the following messages in the
>uucp_log:uuxqt.log file.
>
I just installed DECUS UUCP v2.0 this morning and have encountered no
problems.  Not sure what you're seeing, unfortunately.

A note for DECUS UUCP users (I don't think this has been mentioned
before): v2.0 provides direct support for MX---you no longer have to
modify UUXQT_DCL.COM to invoke MX_RMAIL.  Instead, you just need to
add the following to your UUCP_CFG:CONTROL. file:

!+
!
!       -- Define the appropriate logical so the MX is used by UUXQT
!
!-
UUCP_UUXQT_DCL_RMAIL_MX                 TRUE


Hunter
------
Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University
goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251
From: "Brian Tillman, Smiths Industries, VAX Support, x8425"
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
Subject: RE: A question and an enhancement request.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 08:56:24 EDT
Organization: Mx-List<==>Vmsnet.Mail.Mx Gateway
X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List

John F. Sandhoff (sandhoff@csus.edu) writes:

>My system is what I consider busy (typically over 1000 messages a day) and
>I don't recall seeing this problem. I seem to recall that ONCE I got
>a 'currently locked' error from FLQU SHOW but other than that I don't
>see locks. CPU speed may have a lot to do with it - MX runs on an 8820
>here (though sometimes at priority 1 - ouch!)

Well, we use MX a *whole* lot less (about six people) and it's happened twice in
the past month.  Now, that may seem very little, but it seems that if we release
MX to all 500 of our accounts, we could very well see this much more frequently.
This would mark MX in the minds of the Email people here as a flawed product and
we would be forced to use our previous SMTP mailer (yuck!).

John, if you still use FLQU, then you must still be using V2.x.  Perhaps this
problem didn't exist in versions prior to V3.x (we're using V3.1C).

At any rate, thanks for the comments.

If anyone else can comment on incoming mail locking SYSTEM_QUEUE.FLQ_CTL in such
a way as to elicit file locked errors from VMS mail when trying to *send* using
MX% as the transport, please comment as well.

-----------------------------+--------------------------------
 Brian Tillman               | Internet: tillman@swdev.si.com
 Smiths Industries, Inc.     |
 4141 Eastern Ave. MS129     | Hey, I said this stuff myself.
 Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 | My company has no part in it.
-----------------------------+--------------------------------
From: DWING@UH01.Colorado.EDU (Dan Wing)
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
Subject: MX and TCPware
Date: 24 Jul 92 21:24:15 GMT
Organization: Mx-List<==>Vmsnet.Mail.Mx Gateway
X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List

Is anyone sucessfully using MX with Process Software's "TCPware for VMS"?

Did you purchase their SMTP mailer?

Comments on this software/company/support?

-Dan Wing, DWING@UH01.Colorado.EDU or WING_D@UCOLMCC.BITNET (DGW11)
 Systems Programmer, University Hospital, Denver
From: bob@ccs.ios.bc.ca (Bob Johns, (604)363-6520)
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
Subject: Distrib list stripped from "To:" header
Date: 30 Jul 92 16:12:20 GMT
Organization: Mx-List<==>Vmsnet.Mail.Mx Gateway
X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List

Can anyone explain why MX displays only my name in the "To:" header
when a colleague has sent the message to several names via a distribution
list from a Sun workstation?

The colleague says on Sun's, the received message's "To:" header shows
the complete list.  But on MX v3.1B, only one name is shown.

By the "To:" header, I mean the actual header as printed within the
long list of various headers, not the "To:" extracted for VMSmail and
displayed by VMSmail at the top.

Not having any indication the message was originally sent to a list is
confusing to the recipient.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Bob Johns                               |                            |
| Manager, Central Systems & Networks     |   Internet:  bob@ios.bc.ca |
| Scientific Computing                    |                            |
| Institute of Ocean Sciences             |   Tel     :  (604)363-6520 |
| 9860 West Saanich Rd., Sidney, B.C.     |   FAX     :  (604)363-6390 |
| Canada  V8L 4B2                         |                            |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
From: madison@Drago.TGV.COM (Matt Madison)
Subject: Re: A question and an enhancement request.
Reply-To: madison@tgv.com
Organization: TGV, Incorporated
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 15:45:13 GMT

In article <0095DFF6.ECCA0860.29487@uwwvax.uww.edu>, hunterl@uwwvax.uww.edu writes:
>The only time we have seen a locked message is when it is compressing
>or purging.

Lyle has hit on what is the likely source of the problem -- trying to access
queue file while a CONVERT/RECLAIM is being done by the Router process.  That's
about the only time that the file will be inaccessible to others.

What I probably should have done was modified the code that opens the queue
file so that it tries several times before giving up.  Currently it tries
just once.  Brian's case is the first I've heard of that seems to be a
frequent occurrence...  maybe the disk on which the queue file resides
is excessively fragmented or excessively busy, causing the reclaim passes
to take a long time?

-Matt
--
Matthew Madison | madison@tgv.com    | +1 408 427 4366
TGV, Inc.       | 603 Mission Street | Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA
From: Hunter Goatley <goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET>
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
Subject: RE: A question and an enhancement request.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 08:37:08 EDT
Organization: Mx-List<==>Vmsnet.Mail.Mx Gateway
X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List

"Brian Tillman, Smiths Industries, VAX Support, x8425" writes:
>
>>My system is what I consider busy (typically over 1000 messages a day) and
>>I don't recall seeing this problem. I seem to recall that ONCE I got
>>a 'currently locked' error from FLQU SHOW but other than that I don't
>>see locks. CPU speed may have a lot to do with it - MX runs on an 8820
>>here (though sometimes at priority 1 - ouch!)
>
[...]
>John, if you still use FLQU, then you must still be using V2.x.  Perhaps this
>problem didn't exist in versions prior to V3.x (we're using V3.1C).
>
>At any rate, thanks for the comments.
>
>If anyone else can comment on incoming mail locking SYSTEM_QUEUE.FLQ_CTL in suc
h
>a way as to elicit file locked errors from VMS mail when trying to *send* using
>MX% as the transport, please comment as well.
>
In all the time I've been using MX, I've seen what you're describing
once or twice.  MX here processes well over 2000 messages a day and
I've never heard of a user complaining about this problem.  In fact, I
haven't seen it since v2.x, so I'm not sure what to tell you.  Maybe
Matt has some ideas?

Hunter
------
Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University
goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251
From: Hunter Goatley <goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET>
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
Subject: RE: MX <-> PC connection via dialup modems
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 07:50:08 EDT
Organization: Mx-List<==>Vmsnet.Mail.Mx Gateway
X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List

Matthias Clausen DESY -KRYK- / D-Hamburg <claus@HERACC.desy.de> writes:
>
>I want to send and receive mail from one (or more) PC's.
>The connection VAX<->PC shall be setup by means of dialup modems.
>I read about MultiTech's new MultiModem II which shall 'support' UUCP.
>
>Software on the VAX:    VMS 5.4-3 / MX 3.1 and (UUCP ?)
>  Questions:
>  -     Where do I get a UUCP version which will also do the dialup?
>  -     If dialup is not possible - where can I get the DECUS UUCP 2.0 from?
>
DECUS UUCP can do both incoming and outgoing calls.

You can the latest UUCP via anonymous ftp from:

        ftp.spc.edu in [.decus_uucp]
        mis1.mis.mcw.edu
        ftp.uu.net
        mvb.saic.com in [.decus_uucp]

You can also get it from the latest DECUS VMS SIG tapes, or my U.S.
Mail from Kent Brodie (brodie@fps.mcw.edu).  Note that you have to
send Kent the tape with a SASE.  Contact Kent for more details.


>Software on the PC:     DOS (sigh)
>  Questions:
>  -     Is there a way to get 'something' running under DOS? -how?
>  -     If only UNIX is possible - what would be the solution?
>
I use UUPC/extended, which is available from a number of sites,
including wuarchive.wustl.edu in "mirrors/msdos/uucp".  We've used it
for almost a year now to let our Novell LANs exchange e-mail with VMS.

Hunter
------
Hunter Goatley, VMS Systems Programmer, Western Kentucky University
goathunter@WKUVX1.BITNET, 502-745-5251
From: "Brian Tillman, Smiths Industries, VAX Support, x8425"
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
Subject: A question and an enhancement request.
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 11:57:38 EDT
Organization: Mx-List<==>Vmsnet.Mail.Mx Gateway
X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List

The question is this: is it typical for MX to lock the SYSTEM_QUEUE.FLQ_CTL file
when it is receiving mail?  I've noticed a few times that when mail is incoming
from SMTP and I try to send a message outbound, I get a message from mail that
it can't send mail and that the error is: %RMS-E-FLK, file currently locked by
another user.  At the same time, if I go to a terminal and say MCP QUE
SHOW/ALL/FULL, it also reports:

%MCP-E-QOPENERR, error occurred opening system message queue
-RMS-E-FLK, file currently locked by another user

Once the inbound mail gets delivered, all is well again.  Can I expect to see
more and more instances of this as my use of MX grows?  If so, it's a fairly
sizable drawback.

My enhancement request is that MX open the log files differently, like VMS opens
log files, so that one can TYPE the current log file to see what's going on.
Riht now, I can see previous versions of the log, but when I try to type the
current version, I get:

$ typ mx_local_dir:mx_local_*.log
%TYPE-W-OPENIN, error opening MX_ROOT:[LOCAL]MX_LOCAL_NODE1.LOG;14 as input
-RMS-E-FLK, file currently locked by another user
$ typ mx_router_dir:mx_router_*.log
%TYPE-W-OPENIN, error opening MX_ROOT:[ROUTER]MX_ROUTER_NODE1.LOG;13 as input
-RMS-E-FLK, file currently locked by another user
%TYPE-W-OPENIN, error opening MX_ROOT:[ROUTER]MX_ROUTER_NODE2.LOG;5 as input
-RMS-E-FLK, file currently locked by another user
$ typ mx_smtp_dir:mx_smtp_*.log
%TYPE-W-OPENIN, error opening MX_ROOT:[SMTP]MX_SMTP_NODE1.LOG;13 as input
-RMS-E-FLK, file currently locked by another user
%TYPE-W-OPENIN, error opening MX_ROOT:[SMTP]MX_SMTP_NODE2.LOG;5 as input
-RMS-E-FLK, file currently locked by another user

It would be nice if MX would take out a different kind of lock on the log files.

-----------------------------+--------------------------------
 Brian Tillman               | Internet: tillman@swdev.si.com
 Smiths Industries, Inc.     |
 4141 Eastern Ave. MS129     | Hey, I said this stuff myself.
 Grand Rapids, MI 49518-8727 | My company has no part in it.
-----------------------------+--------------------------------
From: "Jonathan E. Hardis" <hardis@vax844.phy.nist.gov>
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
Subject: RE: ADDRESSING PROBLEM
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 09:44:36 EDT
Organization: Mx-List<==>Vmsnet.Mail.Mx Gateway
X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List

>> Does someone known what is the Internet translation for this address :
>>         uunet.UU.NET!apexepa!jcj

>  Try jcj@apexepa.uunet.UU.NET

Better, try:  jcj%apexepa@uunet.uu.net
From: Matt The Midnight Mortician <harttree@vax1.elon.edu>
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.mx
Subject: help
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 07:55:00 EDT
Organization: Mx-List<==>Vmsnet.Mail.Mx Gateway
X-Gateway-Source-Info: Mailing List

I appreciate the answers to my original questions about listservers on
MX.

I have created the following list using mlf_config:


! MX_DEVICE:[MX]MLF_CONFIG.MCP;2
! Created: 31-JUL-1992 03:51:24.19 by MLF_CONFIG
!
DEFINE LIST "emedia"-
  /OWNER="XXXXXXXXX@vax1.elon.edu"-
  /ERRORS_TO="XXXXXXXX@vax1.elon.edu"-
  /DESCRIPTION="Electronic Media Issues in Libraries"-
  /ARCHIVE=dua5:[emedia]-
  /PROTECTION=(S:RWED,O:RWED,G:RWED,W:E)

XXXXXX=valid username on our system

I sent (several) messages to emedia-request with "SUBSCRIBE" as the body and
they just sit in the queue.  This is a vax 8350 running vms 5.5.  Any takers on
this one????

also here is the queue listing

$ mcp queue show /all /full
Entry: 3317, Origin: [Local] <harttree@vax1.elon.edu>
  Status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 321 bytes
  Created: 31-JUL-1992 06:21:43.48, expires 30-AUG-1992 06:21:43.48
  Last modified 31-JUL-1992 06:28:00.89
  MLIST/FSRV entry #3319, status: READY, size: 321 bytes
    Created: 31-JUL-1992 06:27:59.92, expires 30-AUG-1992 06:21:43.48
    Last modified 31-JUL-1992 06:28:00.93
      Recipient #1: emedia-request, Route=vax1.elon.edu

Entry: 3332, Origin: [Local] <harttree@vax1.elon.edu>
  Status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 328 bytes
  Created: 31-JUL-1992 06:54:28.62, expires 30-AUG-1992 06:54:28.62
  Last modified 31-JUL-1992 06:55:10.61
  MLIST/FSRV entry #3333, status: READY, size: 328 bytes
    Created: 31-JUL-1992 06:55:09.90, expires 30-AUG-1992 06:54:28.62
    Last modified 31-JUL-1992 06:55:10.65
      Recipient #1: emedia-request, Route=vax1.elon.edu

Entry: 3335, Origin: [Local] <harttree@vax1.elon.edu>
  Status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 16 bytes
  Created: 31-JUL-1992 07:17:13.69, expires 30-AUG-1992 07:17:13.69
  Last modified 31-JUL-1992 07:17:29.28
  MLIST/FSRV entry #3336, status: READY, size: 16 bytes
    Created: 31-JUL-1992 07:17:28.30, expires 30-AUG-1992 07:17:13.69
    Last modified 31-JUL-1992 07:17:29.31
      Recipient #1: listserv, Route=vax1.elon.edu

I even tried sending it to listserv

Entry: 3337, Origin: [Local] <harttree@vax1.elon.edu>
  Status: IN-PROGRESS, size: 4 bytes
  Created: 31-JUL-1992 07:17:31.88, expires 30-AUG-1992 07:17:31.88
  Last modified 31-JUL-1992 07:17:40.42
  MLIST/FSRV entry #3338, status: READY, size: 4 bytes
    Created: 31-JUL-1992 07:17:39.49, expires 30-AUG-1992 07:17:31.88
    Last modified 31-JUL-1992 07:17:40.46
      Recipient #1: listserv, Route=vax1.elon.edu


HELP!!!!!

Thanks in advance,
Matt


    "System security is a state of mind.  Real security is a warm blanket."
                            Matthew T. Harttree
                           HARTTREE@VAX1.ELON.EDU
         +919-584-2295  / +919-570-8120 (voice mail)  / +919-584-2575 (FAX)
------------------------------
[insert famous libility release statement here!]
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: Problem with timezone names
From: rollo.ross@levels.unisa.edu.au
Date: 27 Jul 1992 02:07:11 +0930
Organization: University of South Australia
Return-Path: <epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Resent-Date: 27 Jul 1992 02:07:11 +0930
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-ID: <01GMTVV1WDTU9GVN2F@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
X-Vms-To: IN%"info-pmdf@ymir.claremont.edu"
X-Vms-Cc: CCAJR
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

	PMDF_STARTUP (in 4.1) overrides the site's specification for
PMDF_TIMEZONE if MULTINET_TIMEZONE is defined:

$ if f$logical("MULTINET_TIMEZONE") .nes. "" then -
  pmdf_define/exec/nolog pmdf_timezone "''f$logical("MULTINET_TIMEZONE")'"

	(Similarly for JAN_TIME_ZONE.) Unfortunately, it then makes
unwarranted assumptions about what MULTINET_TIMEZONE means. In South
Australia, the appropriate value for MULTINET_TIMEZONE is "CST". PMDF
assumes that this means -0600, and constructs a Date header like this:

Date: 27 Jul 1992 01:07:54 -0600 (CST)

	However, in this country CST means +0930. Could PMDF_STARTUP please be
changed so that it only uses the value of MULTINET_TIMEZONE if PMDF_TIMEZONE
is not defined? Then our carefully-chosen *unambiguous* timezone will not be
overidden.

                                    Rollo Ross, Network Manager (CLW campuses)

Computer Centre,  University of South Australia, The Levels, SA 5095, Australia
Ph +61 8 302 3158 Fax 302 3385 DTE 505282622004  Rollo.Ross@Levels.UniSA.Edu.Au
From: mwilder%frmnvax1.bitnet@ymir.claremont.edu (MIKE WILDER)
Newsgroups: vmsnet.mail.pmdf
Subject: Problem with TMP files and security
Date: 22 Jul 92 14:34:52 GMT
Organization: The Internet
Resent-Date: 22 Jul 1992 09:34:52 -0500 (EST)
Resent-From: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Errors-To: epmdf@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU
Resent-Message-Id: <01GMO4DP30429GVA0N@YMIR.CLAREMONT.EDU>
X-Vms-To: IN%PMDF
X-Vms-Cc: MWILDER
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT

I have what I know is probably a real simple problem, but I can't for the life
of me find the solution.  I don't think it's a PMDF problem but rather a
VMSMail problem (I know it's hard to believe :-).  The problem seems to be that
temporary files created on SYS$SCRATCH are being created with SYSTEM as the
owner instead of the user.  When VMSMail tries to open the file (as in a
FORWARD or REPLY) or tries to delete it upon exiting, a security violation
obviously occurs.  I've watched the files as they get created and sometimes
they are created with correct owner and sometimes not; I don't see a pattern.
 
One solution I've pondered is to define SYS$SCRATCH to SYS$LOGIN, but we use
disk quotas on the users' drive and not on the system drive where SYS$SCRATCH
is defined to be.  Doing this could very quickly lead to quota overruns.  Even
then, I don't know if it will cure the ownershipproblem.
 
If there's any information that I can provide that will help, please let me
know.  Like I said, this is not a PMDF problem; I'm asking here because all you
folks are so good about helping and I'm a new sys mgr who needs help with a
simple problem.
 
____________________________________________________________________________
Mike Wilder
Postmaster, TechRep
Furman University Computer Center
Greenville, SC
BITNET: MWILDER@FRMNVAX1