On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:03:52 -0600, Mark Zelden <mark.zel...@zurichna.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 08:55:59 -0600, John P Kalinich <jkali...@csc.com> wrote: > >>> I know that using dynamic proclibs gives you the ability to change >>> the proclib concatenations dynamically and also the ability to >>> rebuild pointers if a library has gone into extents or been compressed. >>> >>> My shop uses static concatenations. We haven't needed to change the >>> proclib concatenations in several years and JCL can be used to >>> rebuild JES2's pointers if needed. I'd like to convert to dynamic >>> proclibs because it seems more modern and cooler. But I wonder if >>> it's really necessary for my installation and maybe I'd just be >>> doing work for work's sake. >>> >>> Any opinions? Am I missing some benefits? >> > >Several people responded about using JCLLIB. Just to be clear, JCLLIBs >have their advantages, but that is a different issue than converting >from static to dynamic PROCLIBs and requires JCL changes (especially >if the formerly static PROCLIBs are changed to dynamic definitions in JES2!). That should have been written "are NOT changed" to dynamic. :-( -- Mark Zelden Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO mailto:mark.zel...@zurichna.com z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
