I prefer JCLLIB to be used only for proclib overrides. For our standard set of application procs I prefer they either not be specified explicitly at all (JES2 class default), or at the very least be specified simply (using the JOBLIB PROCLIB statement). That way we don't have people not using the standard set of application proclibs. Frank
>________________________________ > From: Lizette Koehler <stars...@mindspring.com> >To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 6:38 PM >Subject: Re: JES2 JOBCLASS PROCLIB > >Frank, > >You do not need to put PROCLIBs in JES2 if you do not want to. > >Instead look at the JCLLIB statement in JCL. > >Or do you require the use of the PROCLIB statements? > >For application users, I prefer they use JCLLIBs rather than relying on JES2 >Proclibs > >Lizette > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On >Behalf >> Of Frank Swarbrick >> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 4:10 PM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: JES2 JOBCLASS PROCLIB >> >> We have the following: >> >> JOBCLASS(?) AUTH=ALL, /* All commnds accepted >> [...] >> PROCLIB=00, >> [...] >> >> PROCLIB(PROC00) DD(1)=(DSNAME=SYS2.&SYSNAME..PROCLIB), >> [...] >> >> PROCLIB(APPL) DD(1)=(DSNAME=DEV.APPLIB.INCLUDE), >> [...] >> >> In our "application" jobs we specify: >> /*JOBPARM PROCLIB=APPL >> >> It looks like in the JES2 parmlib member the following limitation is in >place: >> PROCLIB=nn|00 >> Specifies the default procedure library number (00-99) which is to be >used for this >> job class. >> >> Am I missing something, or is the use of the JOBPARM JES2 JCL statement >the only >> way that a non-numeric JES2 PROCLIB concatentation can be referred to? >> >> Obviously we could just rename PROCLIB(APPL) to something like PROCLIB(10) >and >> then add something like JOBCLASS(A) PROCLIB=10, so any job executing in >CLASS=A >> will use the "applications" proclib, PROCLIB=10. I would prefer being >able to say >> PROCLIB=APPL or something, because "APPL" has more implicit meaning than >"10". >> >> I am not a sysprog and cannot test this out myself. I want to suggest it >to our >> sysprogs, but I want to make sure I am suggesting something that can be >done. >> >> Thanks! >> Frank >> > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
