COBOL v5

Thanks Peter Farley and Don Poitras. I last used listserv in about 1999. Wow I thought, they've got a gui now. Err, no. So I subscribed with the message in the subject. Hah. Nope. They've changed that bit. And making another attempt to get a post on the list itself... I don't think the Binary

Re: COBOL v5

Charles Mills wrote: I was going to post about this but could not remember whether it was still under NDA or not and was too busy to research. Yes! Customers told IBM what has been posted on this thread: "COBOL v5.2 is out of the question because we have existing load modules in (PDS)

Re: System Trace Table SSIR entries

Thanks for this. Steve -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Jim Mulder Sent: 26 January 2016 07:01 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: System Trace Table SSIR entries > I'm using IPCS to look at the System Trace

Re: COBOL v5

On Jan 26, 2016, at 4:05 AM, Bill Woodger wrote: Thanks Peter Farley and Don Poitras. I last used listserv in about 1999. Wow I thought, they've got a gui now. Err, no. So I subscribed with the message in the subject. Hah. Nope. They've changed that bit. And making another attempt to get a

Re: COBOL v5

Well, the OPZ name would tend to support you on that ... Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of John Eells Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 4:08 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: COBOL v5 Charles Mills

Re: COBOL v5

IIRC: At Share 2015 in Seattle, wasn't it stated that the COBOL 5 code generator is the one that PL/1, C/C++, and a few others are using or will (soon) be using? IOW: The "architecture aware" code generator was going to be common. That means it will be generating program objects. Regards,

Re: COBOL v5

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 04:05:17 -0600, Bill Woodger wrote: >Thanks Peter Farley and Don Poitras. I last used listserv in about 1999. Wow I >thought, they've got a gui now. Err, no. So I subscribed with the message in >the subject. Hah. Nope. They've changed that bit. And making another attempt

Re: COBOL v5

In the PL/1 mailing list, Peter Elderon (IBM) explicitly stated that there are no plans to force the PL/1 users to PDSEs, so IMO this is not true for PL/1, at least. Kind regards Bernd Am 26.01.2016 um 15:10 schrieb Steve Thompson: IIRC: At Share 2015 in Seattle, wasn't it stated that the

COBOL v5

On Tuesday, 26 January 2016 13:40:26 UTC, Ed Gould wrote: > IMO IBM blew it on this alone and will loose customers. Maybe even > the account I am helping out now. At best it was a short sighted > attempt to get people to buy new hardware. In case IBM didn't realize > money is extremely

Re: COBOL v5

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 7:39 AM, Ed Gould wrote: > On Jan 26, 2016, at 4:05 AM, Bill Woodger wrote: > >> Yes, it does mention the PDS thing. No, it doesn't work on V5 programs. >> >> Enterprise COBOL generating Program Objects is not new with V5. It is new >> that all

COBOL v5

On Tuesday, 26 January 2016 15:19:25 UTC, Bernd Oppolzer wrote: > In the PL/1 mailing list, Peter Elderon (IBM) explicitly stated that there > are no plans to force the PL/1 users to PDSEs, so IMO this is not true > for PL/1, > at least. > > Kind regards > > Bernd > Perusing the latest PL/I

Re: COBOL v5

Well, gee guys, you can't always have it both ways. "I want feature X but I don't want to be forced into prerequisite Y." Sometimes it does not work that way. Sometimes there is a "hard" reason -- feature X is truly built on top of Y -- and sometimes developers just do things a certain way. "I

Re: COBOL v5

I use Enterprise PLI V3 and it does require you to compile into a PDSE -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Bernd Oppolzer Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 10:19 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: COBOL v5 In the

Re: the Queen of Coding - Adm. Grace Hoper

Oak Ridge TN borrowed 15,000 tons (30M pounds) of silver. http://www.atomicheritage.org/location/oak-ridge-tn On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Ed Finnell <000248cce9f3-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > Oh Ned. The 'Energy Dept' Showed up mid sixties to reclaim some motor > generators on

LinuxONE Press Release

For those running Linux on z Systems: http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/48827.wss -- John Eells IBM Poughkeepsie ee...@us.ibm.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to

z13 BC????

Hi, I just installed a new version of IBM Configurator and now appers a new z13 machine called "z13s" with Machine type 2965 and models L10, L20 (seems to be linux only machines) and N10 N20 (seems to be machines with CP, ICF and IFL processors). I looked for in Announcement Letter database

Re: z13 BC????

Rumored to be announced this spring! Is this new z13s (from Small) equivalent to old zXX BC machines??? This email – including attachments – may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not copy, distribute or act on it. Instead, notify the sender

COBOL v5

On Tuesday, 26 January 2016 16:22:32 UTC, Warren, Cliff wrote: > I use Enterprise PLI V3 and it does require you to compile into a PDSE > The PROC you are using is set up to use the Binder. Other PROCs are set up to use the Link-Editor. You can use those other PROCs, as long as you don't need

Re: LinuxONE Press Release

>>> On 1/26/2016 at 11:42 AM, John Eells wrote: > For those running Linux on z Systems: > > http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/48827.wss Hmm. Interesting. The first sentence "The updated IBM LinuxONE Rockhopper, the entry point into the portfolio, is now enabled

Re: COBOL v5

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:48:40 -0600, Bill Woodger wrote: >On Tuesday, 26 January 2016 16:22:32 UTC, Warren, Cliff wrote: >> I use Enterprise PLI V3 and it does require you to compile into a PDSE > >The PROC you are using is set up to use the Binder. Other PROCs are set >up to use the

Re: Identifying creator of SMF records

On 25 Jan 2016 16:54:35 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >Dale R. Smith wrote: > >>Hey Phil! Shouldn't they be 220?! :-)> > > > >220, 221, whatever it takes. > > > >Actually, 229 = decimal for the letter V in EBCDIC. Seemed appropriate. > I assume the original poster and others have

Re: COBOL v5

The Binder manual Appendix A says All of the services of the linkage editor and batch loader can be performed by the program management binder. We recommend that you convert to exclusive use of the binder. However, if you do need to use the linkage editor or batch loader, most of the

Re: LinuxONE Press Release

Hi, You can download a data sheet for the new LinuxOne RockHopper Machine type 2965. on the IBM LinuxOne website: www.ibm.com/systems/linuxone/ More promotion is done on the Wired seb site: www.wired.com So far, I only have seen reference to machine type 2965 models L10 and L20. Michel

Re: LinuxONE Press Release

http://www.zdnet.com/article/linuxone-ibms-new-linux-mainframes/ A Rockhopper is a species of penguin. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Mark Post Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 10:00 AM To:

Re: LinuxONE Press Release

>>> On 1/26/2016 at 01:41 PM, Charles Mills wrote: > http://www.zdnet.com/article/linuxone-ibms-new-linux-mainframes/ That's from back in August when the Rockhopper was announced as a BC12, so not quite what Carlos was talking about. > A Rockhopper is a species of penguin.

Binder (was: COBOL v5)

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:36:58 -0800, Charles Mills wrote: > >AFAIK, the Binder can do anything that the Linkage Editor can do. In >particular, the Binder is perfectly capable of producing a load module, which >is stored in a PDS, or a program object, stored in a PDSE or Unix file. > We had a

Re: Binder (was: COBOL v5)

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 12:59:08 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote: >On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:36:58 -0800, Charles Mills wrote: >> >>AFAIK, the Binder can do anything that the Linkage Editor can do. In >>particular, the Binder is perfectly capable of producing a load module, which >>is stored in a PDS, or

Re: LinuxONE Press Release

I thought Rockhopper was Grace's secret movie-star husband ... Chris Hoelscher Technology Architect, Database Infrastructure Services Technology Solution Services : humana.com 123 East Main Street Louisville, KY 40202 Humana.com (502) 714-8615, (502) 476-2538 > A Rockhopper is a species of

COBOL v5

On Tuesday, 26 January 2016 18:03:13 UTC, Tom Marchant wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:48:40 -0600, Bill Woodger wrote: > > >On Tuesday, 26 January 2016 16:22:32 UTC, Warren, Cliff wrote: > >> I use Enterprise PLI V3 and it does require you to compile into a PDSE > > > >The PROC you are using

Re: LinuxONE Press Release

That was Rock Hopper. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Chris Hoelscher Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 11:35 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: LinuxONE Press Release I thought Rockhopper was Grace's

Re: COBOL v5

FALAICR listserv.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html In a message dated 1/26/2016 9:06:29 A.M. Central Standard Time, 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu writes: That worked. But try: https://listserv.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=IBM-MAIN

Re: z13 BC????

They've been doing announcements around SHARE so might be a good place to find out more faster. WSC's Harv Emery's Seattle Presentation on z13/zBX rollout super informative. https://share.confex.com/share/124/webprogram/Handout/Session16704 In a message dated 1/26/2016 10:45:13

OMVS file changes for z/OS 1.13 -> z/OS 2.1

Reviewing, developing the Unix files portion of my BPXPRMxx for my new z/OS 2.1 target system I am sure I remember see some discussion of this, but GInMF today. I can't find any documentation about this. SBBNCON1 (Webshere ?) SBBN7HFS (Webshere ?) SHPEROOT (Perl ?) SHPHROOT (Python ?) Are

Re: LinuxONE Press Release

>>> On 1/26/2016 at 01:30 PM, Michel Beaulieu wrote: > You can download a data sheet for the new LinuxOne RockHopper Machine type > 2965. > on the IBM LinuxOne website: > www.ibm.com/systems/linuxone/ Hi, Michael, That data sheet is sorely lacking compared to the

Re: OMVS file changes for z/OS 1.13 -> z/OS 2.1

Z/OSMF Perl PHP Perl and PHP must now be obtained from Rocket Software but that is with 2.2 not 2.1. Did you order Ported Tools with z/OS 2.1? On Tuesday, 26 January 2016, Gibney, David Allen,Jr wrote: > Reviewing, developing the Unix files portion of my BPXPRMxx for my new >

Re: LinuxONE Press Release

http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg248251.pdf is a z13 reference. On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Mark Post wrote: On 1/26/2016 at 01:30 PM, Michel Beaulieu wrote: >> You can download a data sheet for the new LinuxOne RockHopper Machine

Re: LinuxONE Press Release

>>> On 1/26/2016 at 05:41 PM, Mike Schwab wrote: > http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg248251.pdf is a z13 reference. For the new z13s? I already have the Redbooks for the z13. Mark Post --

Re: Were you at SHARE in Seattle? Watch your credit card statements!

Argh, found this in my Drafts folder, never sent. Figured with SHARE coming up, might be worth correcting some misapprehensions. Lynn wrote: >The problem was 1) it was as easy to make counterfeit chipcards as magstipe >and 2) they had moved business rules out into the chip. A chipcard terminal

Re: z13 BC????

W dniu 2016-01-26 o 17:42, Carlos Bodra pisze: Hi, I just installed a new version of IBM Configurator and now appers a new z13 machine called "z13s" with Machine type 2965 and models L10, L20 (seems to be linux only machines) and N10 N20 (seems to be machines with CP, ICF and IFL

Re: LinuxONE Press Release

ZDnet says the Linuxone Emperor is based on z13 technology and the Rockhopper is based on z12. So why change machine type? $$$ http://www.zdnet.com/article/linuxone-ibms-new-linux-mainframes/ In a message dated 1/26/2016 4:01:45 P.M. Central Standard Time, mp...@suse.com writes: That

Re: OMVS file changes for z/OS 1.13 -> z/OS 2.1

> -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Dan Little > Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 2:38 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: OMVS file changes for z/OS 1.13 -> z/OS 2.1 > > Z/OSMF > Perl > PHP > > Perl and

O/T Suits Claim Disney Abused Visa Rules

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/01/25/suit-claims-disney- abused-visa-rules.html?via=newsletter=CSAMedition Two lawsuits filed in federal court allege that Disney, along with two global consulting businesses, colluded to break the law by using temporary H-1B visas to hire

Re: OMVS file changes for z/OS 1.13 -> z/OS 2.1

Probably the most concise route... Locate "IBM z/OS Management Facility Version 2 Release 1" in "Migrating to z/OS V2.1 (Marna Walle)." Believe the rest of your questions follow closely after the z/OSMF paragraph. http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/iea/pdf/Mig_to_V2.1_Part_1.pdf Regards, Kevin

Re: LinuxONE Press Release

>>> On 1/26/2016 at 06:56 PM, Ed Finnell <000248cce9f3-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > ZDnet says the Linuxone Emperor is based on z13 technology and the > Rockhopper is based on z12. So why change machine type? $$$ > >

Re: OMVS file changes for z/OS 1.13 -> z/OS 2.1

Well, from the IYO.PDF A.36 IBM Ported Tools for z/OS - Xvfb 1.3.0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 A.49 IBM z/OS Management Facility - Core Functions 2.1.0 . . . . . . . . . . . 222 A.50 IBM z/OS Management Facility - Configuration Assistant 2.1.0 . . . . . . 223 A.51 IBM z/OS

Re: OMVS file changes for z/OS 1.13 -> z/OS 2.1

I don't find any explanation here about where these missing ZFS files (or their content) has gone. I am still preparing for my first IPL of z/OS 2.1. Or put another way, revising my cloning procedure. > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List

Hillgang presentations

The presentations from January’s Hillgang meeting are available at https://www.sinenomine.net/publications/conference/hillgang/2016 Neale -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to