On 26 April 2017 at 20:27, Paul Gilmartin < 0000000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> But what happens when "z/OS" goes the way of "OS/390" and "MVS 5.2"? > Yeah, that happens too. But it's a pretty easy context-free change to make, and of course we've had to do it. Not that customers wouldn't continue to understand "OS/390", but it makes it look as though the doc hasn't been updated for years. (The first time around, we briefly had a lot of "an z/OS dataset" and the like from a careless change all command.) > > > ... So that's what we say now: "UNIX > >file", or in the rare case it's possible to be confused with a file on > >another UNIX system, "z/OS UNIX file". > > > Is that intended to exclude NFS files (and possibly others) which > don't support zFS extended attributes? (Don't know about TFS.) > Not explicitly. But I can't imagine a product the customer knows is going to run as a z/OS started task with significant performance requirements is going to decide to put a transaction-containing file on an NFS server on a Linux box across the country. Nor, for that matter, are they going to make it a temporary file. What about sockets? Can SVC 99 allocate a DDNAME to a socket? > I'm willing to bet not. Can JCL? Tony H. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
