At the last conference I attended, the Unix Systems Services table was
used for serving Guinness, and was one of the busiest tables. 


-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Dick Bond
Sent: April 12, 2012 4:47 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: A z/OS Redbook Corrected - just about!

Oh, so USSTAB means Unix Systems Services table.  Wonder what that's
used
for, mate?

On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Ron Hawkins
<ronjhawk...@sbcglobal.net>wrote:

> Chris,
>
> I took your advice and read this post, but then I took it to a higher
> authority for validation. Yes, I googled "acronym USS.'
>
> Mate, I'm sure I don't have to tell you that the internet holds the
keys
> that unlock all mysteries, and for this one I was horrified to find
that
> for
> all your hard work, the first hit in Google just simply did not
support
> your
> position. There was the site with all the answers staring me in the
face,
> waiting for the USS conundrum to be unraveled at a hit labeled "USS -
> Definition by AcronymFinder." I mean, this has to be place to find the
> correct meaning of an acronym - forget all these red books and stuff.
>
> And so I curtailed my googling activities, sallied forth, clicked my
mouse
> button, and infiltrated this place of purveyance to negotiate the
reading
> of
> some contracted comestibles.
>
> And there it was, on the fifth line of the list: "Unix System Services
> (IBM)."
>
> I'm afraid there was no mention of that other meaning you are always
> talking
> about. I mean, based on this unassailable reference it is hard to
believe
> that Unformatted System Services was ever abbreviated to USS, and
probably
> should not have been because all the math's majors working in
mainframes
> back then would have immediately been misled into thinking one was
talking
> about the Uncorrected Sum of Squares (did you know that SAS has a USS
> function - you should write to them and get them to change it).
>
> So I'm afraid we have Internet 1, Chris nil, and we should all start
using
> USS the way God and Google intended us to.
>
> Ron
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On
> > Behalf Of Chris Mason
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 5:35 AM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> > Subject: [IBM-MAIN] A z/OS Redbook Corrected - just about!
> >
> > Back in early February, I sent off this "comment" to the "redbooks"
site:
> >
> > <comment>
> >
> > To whom it may concern,
> >
> > -
> >
> > This feedback concerns redbook z/OS Version 1 Release 13
Implementation,
> > SG24-7946-00, which is described still to be in "Draft" status.
> >
> > -
> >
> > Recently I wanted to check on what z/OSMF was all about. Expecting
to be
> > more quickly enlightened by finding a suitable redbook, I tried
"z/OSMF"
> as a
> > search word on the "redbooks" site.
> >
> > There were 3 "hits", the first, gratifyingly, was entitled "z/OS
> Management
> > Facility". The other two were "z/OS Version 1 Release xx
Implementation",
> > where xx was 12 and 13.
> >
> > I happened to notice the following at the beginning of the "z/OS
UNIX
> > System Services" chapter in the release 13 redbook:
> >
> > <quote>
> >
> > z/OS UNIX System Services, is an element of z/OS, is a UNIX
operating
> > environment, and is implemented within the z/OS operating system. It
is
> also
> > known as z/OS UNIX. In addition, there is a short abbreviation
called
> USS.
> >
> > </quote>
> >
> > How very curious, I thought. How did this mistake creep in?
> >
> > I then checked the beginning of the "z/OS UNIX System Services"
chapter
> in
> > the release 12 redbook and found that the curious addition had been
> slipped
> > in only in the later V1R13 edition:
> >
> > <quote>
> >
> > The UNIX System Services element of z/OS is a UNIX operating
environment,
> > implemented within the z/OS operating system. It is also known as
z/OS
> > UNIX.
> >
> > </quote>
> >
> > Since the V1R13 redbook is still in draft status, the inappropriate
text
> can be
> > removed.
> >
> > -
> >
> > First, in order to confirm that the abbreviation sanctioned by the
> authors
> of
> > the manuals when UNIX System Services was introduced, we can pick
any of
> > the "front-line" manuals, the OS/390 MVS Initialization and Tuning
> Reference
> > being one:
> >
> > <quote>
> >
> > CHANGES Summary of Changes
> >
> > ...
> >
> > As part of the name change of OS/390 OpenEdition to OS/390 UNIX
System
> > Services, occurrences of OS/390 OpenEdition have been changed to
OS/390
> > UNIX System Services or its abbreviated name, OS/390 UNIX.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > </quote>
> >
> > http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-
> > bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/IEA1E211/CHANGES
> >
> > Thus we have it confirmed that "OS/390 UNIX" is the supported
> abbreviation,
> > clearly to be transformed to "z/OS UNIX" when z/OS was introduced
and
> that
> > there is nary a mention of any other abbreviation. After all, one
> abbreviation
> > should be sufficient, shouldn't it?
> >
> > In case there is any doubt over the ancestry of this other
abbreviation,
> we
> > have the following web page in order to remind us what, within IBM,
is
> the
> > correct attribution:
> >
> > http://www-
> > 01.ibm.com/software/globalization/terminology/u.html#x2042481
> >
> > <quote>
> >
> > IBM Terminology
> >
> > ...
> >
> > This site contains terms and definitions from many IBM software and
> > hardware products as well as general computing terms.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > unformatted system service (USS)
> > A communications function that translates a character-coded command,
such
> > as a LOGON or LOGOFF command, into a field-formatted command for
> > processing by formatted system services. See also formatted system
> service.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > USS
> > See unformatted system service.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > </quote>
> >
> > Now there are some - particularly to be found in the IBM-MAIN list -
who
> will
> > swear that this is now out-of-date and so the abbreviation is
vacant.
> >
> > Well, it's evident they haven't been paying attention to a function
which
> may
> > well have been assisting them to access TSO through an SNA-oriented
> > TELNET server as recently as today! Nor perhaps a function which may
be
> > assisting them to logon to TSO (or other applications supporting
3270s)
> using
> > an OSA feature configured as an ICC.
> >
> > But then there are none so blind as those who will not see!
> >
> > While locating the above reference, I found the following:
> >
> > Glossary of z/OS terms and abbreviations
> >
> >
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/zos/basics/index.jsp?topic=/com
> .
> > ibm.zglossary.doc/zglossary.html
> >
> > Note that this does *not* include the second abbreviation you
propose but
> > does, of course, include the first:
> >
> > <quote>
> >
> > z/OS UNIX System Services (z/OS UNIX). z/OS services that support a
UNIX-
> > like environment. ...
> >
> > </quote>
> >
> > Another point I noticed was the inherent confusion likely to be
caused by
> > anyone searching the IBM site for this abbreviation. The 10th "hit"
can
> be
> > guaranteed to confuse anyone familiar only with the persistent
misuse of
> > this abbreviation:
> >
> > "USS messages sent to terminal users"
> >
> >
>
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/zos/v1r11/index.jsp?topic=/com.
i
> > bm.zos.r11.istmnc0/f1a1c69005.htm
> >
> > Yes, you are right, it's about time this misuse was addressed
thoroughly
> by
> > IBMers.
> >
> > If there are still any lingering hesitation, there is always this
seminal
> post
> > from John Eells which makes the position clear:
> >
> > <quote>
> >
> > Re: USS misuse
> >
> > Tue, 28 Jul 2009 09:55:04 -0700
> >
> > Eric Bielefeld wrote:
> > I still think that IBM should have chosen another acronym for Unix
than
> USS. I
> > believe VTAM USS table is still valid, and still used, so it is
confusing
> to me
> > that IBM should use the same acronym for something that is still in
use.
> > <snip>
> >
> > We did not chose "USS" as an acronym for z/OS UNIX System Services.
It's
> > not on the list of names people are supposed to use, and nobody in
IBM
> > should use this abbreviation to mean z/OS UNIX System Services.
(Anyone
> > from IBM who thinks differently should contact me so I can tell them
why
> > they're wrong.)
> >
> > In reality, herding cats is easier than making absolutely sure that
> everyone
> > uses the correct full and short names all the time in all contexts,
> formal
> and
> > informal, but we keep trying.
> >
> > --
> > John Eells
> > z/OS Technical Marketing
> > IBM Poughkeepsie
> > ee...@us.ibm.com
> >
> > </quote>
> >
> > But I expect you noticed the final lament reflecting Hamlet's
> observation:
> >
> > <quote>
> >
> > But to my mind, though I am native here
> > And to the manner born, it is a custom
> > More honor'd in the breach than the observance,
> >
> > </quote>
> >
> > There is also a question to be answered as to why, in the whole z/OS
UNIX
> > System Services bookshelf where surely such a seemingly convenient
> > abbreviation would be in use ad infinitum, only 5 manuals out of 11
> actually
> > contain the abbreviation. There are a total of only 18 affected
logical
> pages,
> > of which 11 in the Planning manual can be ascribed to one notable
"stray
> cat",
> > the infamous "IBM Health Checker for z/OS" program.[1] Of the
remainder,
> a
> > paltry 5 mistakes in text - 1 introduced with V1R13[2] - can be
corrected
> by
> > being replaced with "z/OS UNIX" and a still more paltry 2 mistakes
in
> "code"
> > could also be similarly corrected. One is a comment - and there is
space
> > available - while another is a log file heading which is highly
unlikely
> to be
> > sensitive to programming.[3]
> >
> > I should probably spend some time submitting RCFs to get these
misuses
> > corrected. It's even debateable whether any harm would be done by
having
> > the Health Checker program fixed.
> >
> > This is all a matter of formal correctness which some reject as too
rigid
> an
> > approach to this some would say theoretical misuse. I'm thinking of
the
> > denizens of the IBM-MAIN list again, of course.
> >
> > However, it is not quite so straightforward. There is one
environment
> where
> > even on one logical page within the manual, the abbreviation can be
found
> in
> > its correct and in its incorrect guise, the description of the
EZZ6035I
> message -
> > which covers the diagnostic codes explaining problems with the SNA-
> > oriented TELNET server, TN3270E - in the z/OS Communications Server
IP
> > Messages: Volume 4 (EZZ, SNM) manual.
> >
> > http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-
> > bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/f1a1d1b0/6.23
> >
> > Yes, the instances of the incorrect use are well separated from the
> instances
> > of the correct use but that is of no consequence when a computer is
doing
> > the searching. Also explaining the incorrect use is not really that
> helpful since
> > the correct use - as is its right - is not explained.
> >
> > So this exposes the bright sparks who say there is no ambiguity when
> > wallowing in misuse. Well, I've news for them all, there is
ambiguity!
> >
> > But this only leads to another reason why this misuse is insidious.
A
> relatively
> > novice system programmer, led astray - by all the "stray cats" - is
very
> likely
> > to acquire an orientation towards the abbreviation which will need
to be
> > wiped clean - or set aside - unnecessary mental gymnastics - should
he or
> she
> > be tasked with supporting the Communications Server IP SNA-oriented
> > TELNET server - or possibly some sort of "outboard" SNA-oriented
TELNET
> > server - or with supporting an OSA feature configured as an ICC
which is
> also
> > employed in order to access SNA applications.
> >
> > I could be severely judgemental and propose that there are those who
make
> > their views known in the IBM-MAIN list who seem to want to confuse
these
> > upstarts who are entering the z/OS fold - but I won't be so harsh!
> >
> > As evidence of this point, I can bring up two instances, curiously
from
> the
> > same person who, even after I had explained his first misconception,
was
> so
> > focused on the pernicious misuse that he made essentially the same
> mistake
> > a few months later. If that doesn't indicate how destructive this
misuse
> is, I at
> > a loss to know what further proof is needed!
> >
> > First instance - February 2009:[4]
> >
> > <quote>
> >
> > I have the following entry in my USSTAB:
> >
> > P39TMMVS USSCMD CMD=P39TMMVS,REP=LOGON,FORMAT=BAL
> >          USSPARM PARM=APPLID,DEFAULT=TMONMVS
> >
> > When I key in P39TMMVS we are really getting TMONMVS as the
> > executable.
> >
> > What I don't understand is what path is followed to execute TMONMVS?
> >
> > </quote>
> >
> > Second instance - July 2009:
> >
> > The post which lead to the evidence in a thread which discussed lack
of
> > security:
> >
> > <quote>
> >
> > I had one once, circa 1992-1993. ... Someone got the uss screen, was
able
> to
> > get into the production CICS, ...
> >
> > </quote>
> >
> > The evidence:
> >
> > <quote>
> >
> > Interesting, I didn't think that back in '93 MVS 4.3 had a USS
piece.
> >
> > </quote>
> >
> > I have also recently been dealing with some IBM-MAIN contributors
with
> > Southern or South-eastern Asiatic names - as far as I can tell - who
> blithely
> > use the abbreviation in its incorrect form even while the topic
under
> > discussion is the SNA-oriented TELNET server. As the introduction to
the
> > famous TV series had it: "Confused? You soon will be!".
> >
> > I rest my case.
> >
> > -
> >
> > [1] If justice were served, the responsible programmer would have
very
> sore
> > knuckles!
> >
> > [2] Actually there is here another abbreviation which is wrong only
in
> that, in
> > the whole z/OS UNIX bookshelf, it is not explained. It is explained
in
> the
> MVS
> > Data Areas Volume 1 manual as CSR = Callable Service Request.
Prepare to
> be
> > an intrepid explorer if you need to make sense of z/OS manuals!
> >
> > [3] The manual at fault here is a "sister" manual - by title - to
the
> original
> > manual - strangely enough both relating to a component which
appeared
> > *before* the general change from OpenEdition to UNIX System Services
-
> > which "strayed". This was "OS/390 UNIX System Services Parallel
> > Environment: MPI Programming and Subroutine Reference, SC33-6696-00.
It
> > is noteworthy is that, when SC33-6696-01 appeared, the aberration
had
> been
> > expunged.
> >
> > SC33-6696-00: http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-
> > bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/IPEPRE01/
> >
> > SC33-6696-01: http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-
> > bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/ASSPRE00/
> >
> > Also the two "sister" manuals eschewed the misuse - until the log
file
> header
> > appeared.
> >
> > [4] There is sufficient text here in order to enable the actual
posts to
> be
> > unearthed for anyone who needs proof of everything. I wouldn't want
to
> > embarrass the poor chap by making it too easy to find those posts!
> >
> > </comment>
> >
> > I have recently received the ITSO e-mail - thanks to information
from
> John
> > Gilmore that such a service was offered - indicating that the final
> version of
> > "z/OS Version 1 Release 13 Implementation" was now available.
> >
> > Not only was the offending text describing the supposed additional
> > abbreviation removed but - almost completely - all other appearances
in
> text
> > were removed where there wasn't a reference to an incorrect use in
report
> > output. Having struggled with shuffling text within the bounds of
> > presentation pages over many years, it's understandable - if a
little
> > disappointing - that the corrections didn't extend to the many
diagrams.
> I'm
> > aware that (a) correcting the diagrams could have been rather
laborious
> with
> > 3 characters expanding to 9 - on one line but two times 4 characters
on
> two
> > lines - (b) the person in charge of the text source may not have
charge
> of
> the
> > source for the diagrams.
> >
> > The "almost completely" refers to 11.8, "Hardware Instrumentation
> Services
> > miscellaneous update" where there may have been some doubt over some
> > external use of the abbreviation and so the change was not
introduced.
> Thus
> > 2 changes were missed. Interestingly enough, these missed changes
appear
> > before the "z/OS UNIX System Services" chapter. All dozen or so text
> > appearances from within this chapter and in later chapters were
> corrected.
> >
> > From the acknowledgement I received from the "redbooks" site I
believe I
> > have to thank my erstwhile - John Gilmore would surely use the word
> > "quondam" here! - colleague - and I hope he will not object to my
adding
> the
> > complementary complimentary adjective - dapper Paul Rogers!
> >
> > -
> >
> > Chris Mason
> >
> >
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
> email
> to
> > lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to