Good that you weren't sure. The command entered was a CMS (SFS Administrator) command, not CP. In order to get a CP command executed using the COMMAND filter, it would need to begin with CP, just as it would if you were to try to issue a CP command from an EXEC that had "address command" in effect. In this case, the command was not being executed, even though it is a CMS command. There should be no CP involvement because the command should never be sent to CP.
________________________________ From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Walter Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 3:17 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: COMMAND vs. CMS Shot_in_the_dark: ON Not sure of this, because we do not do a lot with SFS here, but could the SFS commands somehow be treated as CP commands? >From PIPE HELP COMMAND (in part): ---<snip>--- The response from the CMS commands is not written to the terminal. The response from each command is buffered until the command ends and is then written to the primary output stream. "command" does not intercept CP-generated terminal output. ---<snip>--- Note the last sentence. Shot_in_the_dark: OFF Mike Walter Hewitt Associates Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates. "Schuh, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "The IBM z/VM Operating System" <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> 12/14/2006 04:49 PM Please respond to "The IBM z/VM Operating System" <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: COMMAND vs. CMS Irrelevant in this case. Translation is a by-product, not the main thrust, of the command environment. In any event, the commands entered were all upper case. The problem is that either CMS does not recognize SFS administrative commands (and who knows what others) when entered from the Pipelines COMMAND filter, or Pipelines is screwed up. There is no separate command environment for these commands, so they must be CMS commands, and should be so treated, by both Pipelines and CMS. Try the experiment of executing the DELETE USER command from within the "address command" environment. It will work. -----Original Message----- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Feldman (WFF) Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 1:53 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: COMMAND vs. CMS This appears to be a SFS admin command. The Command vs CMS is usually in regards to 'address'ing an environment. Addressing Command will issue the command in CMS without translation. Ex. In vanilla CMS if you have a file such as JOEUSER Ofslogfl A In an exec you could issue: 'RENAME JOEUSER Ofslogfl A JOEUSER OFSLOGFL A' this defaults to CMS and will fail because the lower case chars will be translated to upper and the input file will not be found. If you code: Address COMMAND 'RENAME JOEUSER Ofslogfl A JOEUSER OFSLOGFL A' it will succeed because address command passes the exact phrase without trans. Hope that helps, Richard Feldman Senior IT Architect Kelly, Douglas / Westfair Foods Ltd. Ph:(403)291-6339 Fax:(403)291-6585 -----Original Message----- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Nielsen Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 2:22 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: COMMAND vs. CMS The COMMAND stage bypasses the normal search order and won't find EXECs. = Since DELETE USER is not a CMS or CP command it fails. The COMMAND stage= ends when it gets a negative return code if it's secondary output stream = is not connected. Brian Nielsen On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 13:08:43 -0800, Schuh, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot= e: >I have a file containing records that look like this: > > DELETE USER JOEUSER fpid (TYPE NOCONFIRM > >This file is read by a pipe and the commands passed to a stage for >execution. I have seen and heard the arguments for using COMMAND vs. CMS= >stages, so I passed the records to COMMAND (as in 'PIPE < fid | command >| cons'.) Nothing happens as a result. If I change the COMMAND stage to >CMS, the commands are acted upon. Funny thing, an appended command of >"ERASE fid" does get executed in either instance. There must be some >simple explanation for what is happening, but I must be even simpler. >What am I missing? > >Thanks, >Richard Schuh > > > > ________________________________ The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.
