On Tuesday, 08/28/2007 at 11:58 EDT, Adam Thornton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm pretty sure it was current.
>
> The server system, as it happens, reported that FTPSERVE had been forced
by
> SYSTEM after 2G were transferred. It's a 5.2 system with pretty close
to the
> current maintenanc
On Aug 28, 2007, at 6:09 PM, Mike Walter wrote:
Well, there **used** to be an undocumented 2G limit to FTP
transfers into VM. The error messages indicated that the disk was
full.
But that was supposed to have been fixed a long time ago.
Are you 100% positive that you are using the curre
Cross posted to IBMVM, Linux-390, and IBM-MAINfor your reading pleasure
Hello IBM mainframe enthusiasts,
Are you looking for the next opportunity for System z education ?
If you were unable to attend SHARE, or even if you did, consider
attending the IBM System z Expo in San Antonio, Sept 17-21,
> > z/VM TCP/IP can use any OSA you can find.
>
> Try it :-)http://www.rvdheij.nl/osacard.jpg
Sir Rob ...
I AM NEVER gonna let the Cat Herder call me "geek" again!!
Eques James ...
Look! He's even wearing hiking boots (well, rugged enough shoes,
but look at him standing there on a rock). T
Well, there **used** to be an undocumented 2G limit to FTP transfers into
VM. The error messages indicated that the disk was full.
But that was supposed to have been fixed a long time ago.
Are you 100% positive that you are using the current CMS FTP client and
server code (can't remember the gu
Hi, Adam.
I am not sure that there *is* a file size limit on either the FTP client
or server. Are you sure you simply did not fill up the file system your
where FTPing to?
Adam Thornton wrote:
So, is the 2GB file size limit on FTP transfers a limitation in the z/VM
FTP client, or in the FTP
So, is the 2GB file size limit on FTP transfers a limitation in the z/
VM FTP client, or in the FTP server?
I just tried to do a large VM-VM FTP and it crapped out at 2GB, which
is why I'm asking.
Adam
Yes, it was. It is a temporary V-disk..
Regards,
Richard Schuh
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Kris Buelens
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 12:16 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: LISTFILE Order
LIS
LISTFILE always produces a sorted output for R/O minidisk only. Your D-disk
must have been R/W.
2007/8/28, Schuh, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Thanks. That worked.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Richard Schuh
>
>
> --
>
> *From:* The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL
Thanks. That worked.
Regards,
Richard Schuh
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Stracka, James (GTI)
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 11:52 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: LISTFILE Order
You need to rea
Got me ...
I'll change it and have TCPIP recycled tonight..
I'll let you know.
Thanks
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of William Moy
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 1:52 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Z/LINUX START-UP E
Hi Thomas,
Does the SSLSERVERID statement in your TCPIP PROFILE match the user ID
of your linux guest running the z/VM SSL server?
Best Regards,
Bill Moy
"Huegel, Thomas"
You need to reaccess the disk. The FAT (FST) will be changed then.
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Schuh, Richard
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 2:47 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subjec
SLES-9
I am pretty sure I did everything by the book (sometimes the book is
confusing).
I do have two (2) deviations 1) the VM name is LINMSTR not SSLSERV -- I am
sure I made all of the changes required DTCPARMS etc. 2) My IPL disk is 200
not 201.
But all that stuff seems to work since it gets t
I have 4 files on a disk. When I enter the command LISTFILE * * D, the
result seems to be out of the expected order.
pipe cms l * * d (noh alldates | sort | cons
PMR18561 TRACE1 D1- - - 08/28/07 18:00:00
PMR18561 TRACE2 D1- -
Late to the party (I must have been in the other room that David was
searching for), but adding on to Colin's reply below:
> "I certainly do not want a user to be able to FORCE another simply
because they have LOGONBY authority"
We wrote a mod to CP to prevent users with PRIVCLAS 'N' from compl
On Tuesday, 08/28/2007 at 01:14 EDT, "Huegel, Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> New LINUX-SSL on Z/VM 5.3
>
> I am getting the following messages.
> Does anyone have a clue as to what they mean?
> Where I can look to find help?
Did you install this on a supported version of SLES? If you h
New LINUX-SSL on Z/VM 5.3
I am getting the following messages.
Does anyone have a clue as to what they mean?
Where I can look to find help?
Thanks
*** vmssl started: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 07:50:58 -0500 ***
Master Resource Control: runlevel 3 has been reached
DTCSSL015I
James Vincent writes:
> Moments ago, on August 15th, 2007 at VM's 35th birthday party at SHARE in
> San Diego, CA, the following new Companions were inducted into the Order of
> the Knights of VM:
Getting back to work after a good and long vacation, I discover this
announcement that, lo and behold
This is just what I would say (except for VM:Secure
rather than RACF).
Shimon
> I want to wind back a bit on this one:-
>
> We do use RACF as an ESM and we do use LOGONBY (controlled by RACF
> profiles) extensively.
>
> I understand that any user with LOGONBY authority can log on and give any
I don't understand the use of the words
"insert into the library". I never wanted to make
my installation tapes part of the *library*, I just
wanted to mount the tape on a drive, and COPY
it to a tape that IS part of my library.
For that I used the "stand alone device" function
of the 3494. So,
> One other
> good technique for minimising the number of disks you have to map to move
> data is to define an ISLINK over an attached CTC between the 2nd level
> system and one of the 1st level systems. You can then use SFS to move
> files.
I seem to remember an EXEC tool that would copy
an enti
On 8/28/07, Alan Altmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> z/VM TCP/IP can use any OSA you can find.
Try it :-)http://www.rvdheij.nl/osacard.jpg
On Tuesday, 08/28/2007 at 08:28 EDT, Daniel Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Can z/VM TCPIP use 100mb full duplex OSA ? or is it limited to 10mb
half
> duplex ?
The speed and "plex-ness" of the OSA is transparent to the host. z/VM
TCP/IP can use any OSA you can find.
Alan Altmark
z/VM De
If your OSA supports 100mb full duplex, VM TCP can use it.
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Daniel Allen
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 8:28 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Another z/VM OSA question
Can z/V
Can z/VM TCPIP use 100mb full duplex OSA ? or is it limited to 10mb half
duplex ?
**
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are add
Some folks might be interested in this:
"IBM Wheels Up Heavy Guns To Defend its Mainframe Monopoly"
http://www.sys-con.com/read/421070.htm
--
DJ
V/Soft
A short while ago I asked if there was any VM tool to convert HTML source
into print format. The only options that came up was to run a converter
under Linux.
While I would expect this to give a good quality print result, this was
over the top for what we needed.
I have now developed a prototy
28 matches
Mail list logo
