Nope - we never distributed HACS externally. I also worked on HACS for HONE/IBMLINK in the 80's - putting in mods for those specific systems in the US. I remember when we hit the architectural limit of HACS when we reached 64K guests on a single system ..
Scott Rohling On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 3:59 AM, James Laing - Hotmail < james_la...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: > Been out of the game for a long time.. > > Does IBM not distribute some version of HACS .. I worked on in the 90's ? > took over from Aad Van Tol .. IBM Uithoorn? An amazing programmer and top > guy! > > *From:* George Henke/NYLIC <george_he...@newyorklife.com> > *Sent:* Friday, December 10, 2010 11:41 PM > *To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > *Subject:* Re: Mandatory ESMs? > > z/VM has LE ported over from z/OS. > > So things cannot be all that bad in the world of CMS compilers. > > "I have heard people rant and rave and bellow > That we're done and we might as well be dead > But I'm only a cockeyed optimist > And I can't get it into my head" > > Oscar Hammerstein > > > > *David Boyes <dbo...@sinenomine.net>* > Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> > > 12/10/2010 05:34 PM > Please respond to > The IBM z/VM Operating System <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> > > To > IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > cc > Subject > Re: Mandatory ESMs? > > > > > > GCC for CMS [snip] > > Building a non-trivial program that involves existing libraries or code > that must access things like CSL services is pretty hard to do with the CMS > GCC port. It's a good tool for writing apps totally from scratch, but it's > not something yet that I would rely on for really large mission-critical > applications. The generated code is still very conservative in the > instructions it uses and what machine functions it can/does exploit, to it's > detriment. > > I'm concerned that there's no Enterprise COBOL, no more development on > FORTRAN, no up to date PL/1… etc, etc. The IBM C/C++ compiler is still > maintained and current, but only because it's necessary for CP development. > You can't order CMS VSAM any longer, so there's no direct access file > capability from the old compilers without directly interfacing to assembler > yourself. Nothing's been touched in SQL/DS for VM for ages now. TSM is gone. > 2/3 of the function of DFSMS/VM is pretty much gutted in terms of usability > or functionality. ISPF/VM is ancient, and pretty much no longer maintained > in any real sense (a lot has happened in ISPF since 3.2). No Java since 1.3 > (although that's no real loss, IMHO). APL2 is frozen in time. Pascal is > frozen in time (and only still exists to service the bits of the VM TCP > stack that aren't in C or assembler). Ditto RXSQL. Ditto Kerberos (the > shipped K4 is nothing you'd want to build new apps on). Interactive > Debugger? DMS/CMS? All pretty much in a zombie state. OpenVM? Not much to > see there either — although we finally have some reason for BFS to exist > with the new SSL server (not that it's all that much fun to use). > > You're pretty much left with assembler, C, C++, XEDIT, REXX and CMS > Pipelines as the supported application development languages on CMS. > That's a pretty powerful set of tooling by itself, but if you're trying to > preflight applications and do development in the CMS world that is intended > for other places and other uses, that's not much. 3 out of 6 aren't widely > portable outside VM at all, and the other 3 are restricted to a small number > of interfaces with a tiny subset of their function on other platforms. > > The writing is pretty much on the wall. I know the reason why, but it's > still sad. > > -- db > >
