In <001001ce8b97$9def20a0$d9cd61e0$@mcn.org>, on 07/28/2013
at 09:37 AM, Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> said:
>Here was the first battle I had to fight. The program in question is
>a STC that installs exits and so I implemented Signal handling so
>that in the event of a problem it could shut down gracefully. To test
>that code I added an undocumented MODIFY command to force a S0C4. I
>encountered the problem while testing that intentional S0C4/signal
>handling code. That was how I could reproduce the problem. I went
>around and around with the level 1 folks saying "we found your
>problem -- you are trying to store into low core" and me saying "I am
>doing that on purpose to force this problem.
The magic word is "escalate".
>Then IBM came back to me and said "do you really, really, REALLY
>need this fixed?" and I said "no, of course not, I've been living
>for eight months with it not fixed."
That was the wrong answer if FIN was not acceptable. I can't blame IBM
for taking you at your word.
Of course, I do blame Level 1 for not reading the record before
responding )-:
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2 <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
