At 10:32 AM 3/24/03 -0600, you wrote: <Snipped> >The translation when talking to the HMC should match real hardware >(though perhaps with a switch; the default should match the hardware).
Do you by any chance know just exactly what *is* the HMC on a real-iron G5/6 or z900/800? Is there a document that describes the character set on the beastie? I do not think it's a 3215 any more, is it?
>If that is CP 500, so be it. Both 500 and 037 are slightly wrong >from the customer usage standpoint. This opens up old wounds. >EBCDIC square brackets are AD and BD in practice, not 500 or 037.
Old wounds, indeed. BTDT. 'Nuff said.
>The translation when talking to VM, specifically the 3215, >should be either CP 1047 or (better) "CP 37 version 2", >which is a customer-defined animal (more like a protest). >1047 is the "open extensions" codepage and gets the brackets right. >"CP 37 v2" goes further and gets the ASCII circumflex "hat" >and EBCDIC "not" mapped properly.
I can't speak to this without knowing what the "real iron" HMC really is. Whatever *that* beastie is needs to define the translation, don't you think?
And under VM, of course, the translation should follow the 3215 HW capabilities, requiring at least as many kernel tables as there could be legitimate "consoles" for it to talk to, I would think. That or VM needs to provide an HMC virtual device (I know, that one's a lot less likely to get done).
>I haven't had time to create patches to fix this >let alone maintain any such patches. :-( > >> Any idea why that is so? Shouldn't those tables be symmetrical? > >Even with the above recommended translations, >it is fair that console kernel codepages be asymmetrical: >The console is vital to system operation and not used much >for things like code development, so you want to be able to >issue commands, though their output might look funny. >(Square brackets ... it's always the square brackets.) >The idea is that what is typed-in gets mapped to the >most likely useable subset.
But commands from the real HMC to a linux LPAR (and by extension, from a hercules HMC) might well need to include any characters needed to do shell-level scripting in an emergency. The translation needs to be accurate for those cases, I would think.
>Here too, a switch after the fact would be reasonable.
??? After which fact? You lost me here. --------------------------------------------------------- Peter J. Farley III ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
