On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 10:15:57 -0600, McKown, John wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin >> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 9:56 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Why isn't OMVS command integrated with ISPF? > ><snip> > >> >> And I'll repeat my wish for "background initiated foreground". x3270 >> is open source; it could be recast to operate as an agent so an x3270 >> invoked on the mainframe might open an X11 window on the desktop. >> As many concurrent sessions as one wishes, even on a single host. > >Actually, this should be rather simple. Set up a UNIX environment. Set >the DISPLAY environment variable to have the IP or host name of the >desktop. Set your X server on the desktop to allow connections from the >z/OS system (xhost). Invoke x3270. > >How is this superior to doing a x3270 on my desktop? I am not >understanding the reason to run x3270 on z/OS instead of the desktop. > Because that way you can have only one x3270 TSO ISPF or OMVS session per user ID at a time.
I can have several TTY z/OS Unix sessions concurrently. Suppose in each of those (or in concurrent processes from a single TTY session) I could invoke a Rexx EXEC which says "ADDRESS TSO ISPGUI", or "ADDRESS TSO WSA" displaying a 3270 terminal emulator on my desktop. I could then have a 3270 OMVS session and a 3270 TSO session displaying in terminal emulators on my desktop. Of course, this would be exactly the effect of having multiple concurrent 3270 TSO/ISPF sessions for a single user ID, but IBM seems determined not to address that problem. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
