Linux zSeries questions

[Miklos Szigetvari]

Hi

If some can help in some Linux questions:
- I would need a good newsgroup for Linux questions
- Where can I found the IPL  wait state codes for zLinux ?
- Can we start zLinux under VM without IFL processors ?

--
Miklos Szigetvari

Development Team
ISIS Information Systems Gmbh 
tel: (+43) 2236 27551 570
Fax: (+43) 2236 21081 

E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Hotline: +43-2236-27551-111 

Visit our Website: http://www.isis-papyrus.com 
---

This e-mail is only intended for the recipient and not legally
binding. Unauthorised use, publication, reproduction or
disclosure of the content of this e-mail is not permitted.
This email has been checked for known viruses, but ISIS accepts
no responsibility for malicious or inappropriate content.
--- 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Rich Smrcina]

Miklos,

Marist College runs a Linux for System z newsgroup.  Sign up by sending 
an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put this in the body of the message:


subscribe linux-390 your-name

You'll get follow-up emails with additional details.

As to your other questions...
I don't know about the IPL state codes.

Yes you can run Linux under z/VM without an IFL processor, but you run 
the risk of affecting the workload on your other CP(s).  The potential 
being that you may cause a CP upgrade sooner, which will raise your 
software prices, no only for IBM software but also any ISV software.


If you have alot if white space (capacity) on your CP(s) now, then you 
can comfortably run Linux on your existing CP(s), and add IFL(s) when 
your ready.


Miklos Szigetvari wrote:

Hi

If some can help in some Linux questions:
- I would need a good newsgroup for Linux questions
- Where can I found the IPL  wait state codes for zLinux ?
- Can we start zLinux under VM without IFL processors ?



--
Rich Smrcina
VM Assist, Inc.
Phone: 414-491-6001
Ans Service:  360-715-2467
rich.smrcina at vmassist.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/richsmrcina

Catch the WAVV!  http://www.wavv.org
WAVV 2008 - Chattanooga - April 18-22, 2008

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Chase, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Miklos Szigetvari
> 
> Hi
> 
> If some can help in some Linux questions:
> - I would need a good newsgroup for Linux questions

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

> - Where can I found the IPL  wait state codes for zLinux ?

Can't answer this one yet.

> - Can we start zLinux under VM without IFL processors ?

Certainly.

-jc-

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Miklos Szigetvari]

Hi

Thank you very much.
(We try to get a used z/... machine, and the offered machine has no IFL, 
but we need  Linux )


Chase, John wrote:


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Miklos Szigetvari

Hi

If some can help in some Linux questions:
- I would need a good newsgroup for Linux questions
   



[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 


- Where can I found the IPL  wait state codes for zLinux ?
   



Can't answer this one yet.

 


- Can we start zLinux under VM without IFL processors ?
   



Certainly.

   -jc-

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html


 



--
Miklos Szigetvari

Development Team
ISIS Information Systems Gmbh 
tel: (+43) 2236 27551 570
Fax: (+43) 2236 21081 

E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Hotline: +43-2236-27551-111 

Visit our Website: http://www.isis-papyrus.com 
---

This e-mail is only intended for the recipient and not legally
binding. Unauthorised use, publication, reproduction or
disclosure of the content of this e-mail is not permitted.
This email has been checked for known viruses, but ISIS accepts
no responsibility for malicious or inappropriate content.
--- 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Timothy Sipples]

1. In addition to the general Linux information sources, all of which still
apply -- Linux is Linux -- you may wish to try the LINUX-390 LISTSERV,
hosted by Marist University. You can sign up here:

http://www2.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?linux-390

Please scroll down toward the bottom of that page, and there's a sign-up
form.

2. I'm not sure about the wait state codes, but they may not be too useful
to you anyway. You may want to ask in LINUX-390.

3. Yes, you can certainly start and run Linux under z/VM on CPs (general
purpose processors). General purpose means you can run anything on them --
CPs are the "universal" processors. IFLs are the processors dedicated to
Linux, but CPs work just fine, too. If you want to run a "trivial" amount
of Linux -- booting it, having fun with it, experimenting with it, doing a
little real work with it, etc. -- then existing CPs you already own are
probably the most economical. (You already own them, and spare capacity is
basically free.) Once you get "serious" about running Linux beyond some
trivial amount you'll probably want to invest in at least one IFL.

Enjoy.

- - - - -
Timothy Sipples
IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect
Specializing in Software Architectures Related to System z
Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan and IBM Asia-Pacific
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Ed Gould]

On Feb 14, 2008, at 7:15 AM, Timothy Sipples wrote:

1. In addition to the general Linux information sources, all of  
which still

apply -- Linux is Linux -- you may wish to try the LINUX-390 LISTSERV,
hosted by Marist University. You can sign up here:

http://www2.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?linux-390

Please scroll down toward the bottom of that page, and there's a  
sign-up

form.


Timothy,

Can I ask an innocent(?) question here.. LINUX is it documented like  
MVS or something like early 360 (YES 360) manuals ?


I do not have access to any of them to see.

Ed

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Jim Elliott, IBM]

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:19:26 -0600, Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Can I ask an innocent(?) question here.. LINUX is it documented like
>MVS or something like early 360 (YES 360) manuals ?
>
>I do not have access to any of them to see.

Ed:

There is LOTS of documentation for Linux on System z. First, Linux on System
z is very much like any other Linux so any general Linux doc is very useful
(check out your local Barnes & Noble, Borders or equivalent). There are also
lots of Redbooks on Linux on System z (go to http://ibm.com/redbooks) but
make sure you get current books (some on this site are pretty out of date).
The formal docs from IBM on the System z unique stuff is at
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/linux390/.

Jim

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Timothy Sipples]

Ed Gould asks:
>Can I ask an innocent(?) question here.. LINUX is it documented like
>MVS or something like early 360 (YES 360) manuals ?

Linux is maintained and enhanced in a community-driven manner, with no
single entity (e.g. IBM) controlling its entire development. As a
consequence the documentation won't be IBM-style or for that matter
HP-style.

While Linux developers in the community do produce a lot of documentation,
and there's a lot more beyond that in books and on the Web, one of the
major benefits of a Linux distributor, such as Novell and Red Hat, is in
their packaging and documentation services, especially concerning
installation and configuration procedures. But, for example, while you'll
find wonderful diagnostic code numbers on every line as you observe a z/OS
IPL, the Linux kernel doesn't provide such troubleshooting niceties. You'll
have to figure out what a sometimes cryptic string means without a code
number, much less a book with a list of code numbers and troubleshooting
guidance. It's a bit more Wild West. Which is not to say it's "bad," it
just has different design origins and different community values.

Linux does tend to inherit UNIX-style in-built documentation features. The
man pages ("man" command) are notable examples.

You can download Linux from lots of places and take a look at the
documentation it includes (or doesn't include), depending on the
distribution. To pick one example at random, you can download Linux on
System z from Novell by going here:

http://www.novell.com/mainframe

and clicking on one of the download links at right. Novell recently
introduced a "starter system" package for System z, a pre-built image which
is more convenient to set up than the traditional approach. Wikipedia lists
many other Linux distributions for System z. To cite another example, Red
Hat posts their documentation here:

http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/

- - - - -
Timothy Sipples
IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect
Specializing in Software Architectures Related to System z
Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan and IBM Asia-Pacific
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Alan Altmark]

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:15:27 +0900, Timothy Sipples 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>3. Yes, you can certainly start and run Linux under z/VM on CPs (general
>purpose processors). General purpose means you can run anything on 
them --
>CPs are the "universal" processors. IFLs are the processors dedicated to
>Linux, but CPs work just fine, too. If you want to run a "trivial" amount
>of Linux -- booting it, having fun with it, experimenting with it, doing a
>little real work with it, etc. -- then existing CPs you already own are
>probably the most economical. (You already own them, and spare capacity is
>basically free.) Once you get "serious" about running Linux beyond some
>trivial amount you'll probably want to invest in at least one IFL.

However, you will pay z/VM and Linux middleware license fees based on the 
total number of CPs, even if you have just one LPAR with one logical CPU.  
Those with larger CP counts will likely find adding a couple of IFLs to be a 
better strategy.

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Phil Smith III]

Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Can I ask an innocent(?) question here.. LINUX is it documented like  
>MVS or something like early 360 (YES 360) manuals ?

>I do not have access to any of them to see.

Linux is Open Source, and as such is documented to whatever standard someone 
felt like.  This is one of the barriers to Linux adoption by mainframers: we're 
used to good and complete documentation, whereas with Linux, the answers are:
1) Read what doc there is
2) Read the source
3) Ask on various lists
4) Try it
5) Write it up yourself

And since it's a brave new world, #3 above often isn't that helpful.

The good news is, it's worth the trouble...

...phsiii

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Scott Ford]

Seymour,

I also use a lot of Linux including Redhat and Fedora. I used TLDP and
Yolinux and several others. 

Regards,
Scott IDF

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 10:29 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Linux zSeries questions

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/14/2008
   at 09:19 PM, Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>Can I ask an innocent(?) question here.. LINUX is it documented like  
>MVS or something like early 360 (YES 360) manuals ?

No, the Linux community depends much more on softcopy than on hardcopy.
See the Linux documentation project (TLDP) and O'Reilly web sites for some
of the available documentation. I'd recomment bookmarking TLDP, buying a
hardcopy Linux in a Nutshell and checking over the other available books.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html> 
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Stephen Mednick]

 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Ford
> Sent: Saturday, 16 February 2008 8:52 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Linux zSeries questions
> 
> Seymour,
> 
> I also use a lot of Linux including Redhat and Fedora. I used 
> TLDP and Yolinux and several others. 
> 
> Regards,
> Scott IDF
> 

Somewhat slight OT, I flew on the new Singapore Airlines A380 back in October a
week after it commenced flights between Sydney and Singapore. There was a 
problem
with my inflight AVOD screen and the flight attendant had the Panasonic engineer
who was onboard babysitting the system come and see me. He said that he would go
and re-boot my screen.

As the screen was re-booting in front of me I could see all these LINUX messages
pop-up. When he came back to my seat to check if everything was ok I commented
about the usage of LINUX. He said that they're using the free downloadable
version of LINUX to drive the onboard flight entertainment system and that they
had a huge onboard storage array to handle the entertainment system for the 400+
passengers onboard. I didn't dare want to know if it was the free LINUX that was
also managing the flight control systems for the A380 itself!!

Stephen Mednick
Computer Supervisory Services
Sydney, Australia

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/14/2008
   at 09:19 PM, Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>Can I ask an innocent(?) question here.. LINUX is it documented like  
>MVS or something like early 360 (YES 360) manuals ?

No, the Linux community depends much more on softcopy than on hardcopy.
See the Linux documentation project (TLDP) and O'Reilly web sites for some
of the available documentation. I'd recomment bookmarking TLDP, buying a
hardcopy Linux in a Nutshell and checking over the other available books.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Scott Ford]

Stephen,

Versions of Linux run in a lot of hardware, i.e; Linksys NSLU2 Storage
Access Point runs a version of it. Many other CISCO routers run it too.
The biggest reason for Linux was simple, it didn't crash, period. The flip
side is the earlier versions were that they were not user friendly at all.
This has changed With Fedora Core 6+ and Redhat also. The new Linux/Fedora
GUI is great..even for a Linux beginner.

Regards,
Scott
IDF

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Stephen Mednick
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 5:13 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Linux zSeries questions

 
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Ford
> Sent: Saturday, 16 February 2008 8:52 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Linux zSeries questions
> 
> Seymour,
> 
> I also use a lot of Linux including Redhat and Fedora. I used 
> TLDP and Yolinux and several others. 
> 
> Regards,
> Scott IDF
> 

Somewhat slight OT, I flew on the new Singapore Airlines A380 back in
October a
week after it commenced flights between Sydney and Singapore. There was a
problem
with my inflight AVOD screen and the flight attendant had the Panasonic
engineer
who was onboard babysitting the system come and see me. He said that he
would go
and re-boot my screen.

As the screen was re-booting in front of me I could see all these LINUX
messages
pop-up. When he came back to my seat to check if everything was ok I
commented
about the usage of LINUX. He said that they're using the free downloadable
version of LINUX to drive the onboard flight entertainment system and that
they
had a huge onboard storage array to handle the entertainment system for the
400+
passengers onboard. I didn't dare want to know if it was the free LINUX that
was
also managing the flight control systems for the A380 itself!!

Stephen Mednick
Computer Supervisory Services
Sydney, Australia

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Scott Ford]

Phil,

I learned VM and CICS by reading IBM's source code..no issue here, made me a
Better sysprog...

Regards,
Scott
IDF

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Phil Smith III
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 8:44 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Linux zSeries questions

Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Can I ask an innocent(?) question here.. LINUX is it documented like  
>MVS or something like early 360 (YES 360) manuals ?

>I do not have access to any of them to see.

Linux is Open Source, and as such is documented to whatever standard someone
felt like.  This is one of the barriers to Linux adoption by mainframers:
we're used to good and complete documentation, whereas with Linux, the
answers are:
1) Read what doc there is
2) Read the source
3) Ask on various lists
4) Try it
5) Write it up yourself

And since it's a brave new world, #3 above often isn't that helpful.

The good news is, it's worth the trouble...

...phsiii

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Fwd: Linux zSeries questions

[Ed Gould]

On Feb 15, 2008, at 7:44 AM, Phil Smith III wrote:


Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Can I ask an innocent(?) question here.. LINUX is it documented like
MVS or something like early 360 (YES 360) manuals ?



I do not have access to any of them to see.


Linux is Open Source, and as such is documented to whatever  
standard someone felt like.  This is one of the barriers to Linux  
adoption by mainframers: we're used to good and complete  
documentation, whereas with Linux, the answers are:

1) Read what doc there is
2) Read the source
3) Ask on various lists
4) Try it
5) Write it up yourself

And since it's a brave new world, #3 above often isn't that helpful.

The good news is, it's worth the trouble...



Phil:

Well that is somewhat true but then are we ready for them? The best  
argument is look what happen 30+ years ago when IBM provided "some"  
documentation. While some would say the PLM and source was all you  
needed there were not enough then (nor is there now and in the  
foreseeable future) to be able to debug source this way. In a  
nutshell IBM is creating (IMO) a real opportunity for disaster for  
itself? I can just see it now the 1-800 line for IBM will be  
inundated with what is this error: the quick brown fox jumped over  
the hedge. The answer is of course and S0C4 (well didn't you know  
the secret handshake?) The product (LINUX) will essentially bomb  
because there is are extremely few people out there that will  
support it.
Its all well and good that its open source but if no one can read  
it what difference does it make? *EVEN* if IBM started now  
attempting to train people it would be 10-20 (or more years) before  
they had enough people out there to support the number of LINUX  
type environments that there could be out there. IBM will  
(possibly) be out of business because there is no one out there to  
support themselves. IBM has essentially dug a bomb shelter with no  
door . Leaving the next gen without a way to stop the blast. We  
have seen the dumbing down of everything IT related yet LINUX (IMO)  
is meant for a rather smart type of environment. To me that will  
NEVER happen unless some sort of smart pill is invented.


If the ruse of LINUX is to re-write MVS (to start over but with a  
different design point)  it is still going to be a real disaster  
for IBM and the future generations (if IBM survives this). Yes it  
will provide a LOT of new jobs (for the short term) running up  
major costs at IBM. The employees at IBM are getting screwed by IBM  
for insisting on OT because IBM is trying to save money. The future  
IBM employee (almost any technical type) will be saying screw my  
employer and IBM will not have a happy relationship with its  
people. Where will that be in the mix? I won't go into the the  
other IBM-EMPLOYEE issues here, but you think things are bad today  
just wait 5-10-15 years (if IBM lasts that long) see how this has  
affected the LINUX OS and you will see that we are in great bit of  
trouble.


Ed



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Ed Gould]

On Feb 15, 2008, at 5:35 PM, Scott Ford wrote:


Phil,

I learned VM and CICS by reading IBM's source code..no issue here,  
made me a

Better sysprog...

Regards,
Scott
IDF



Scott:

Apparently Phil has a problem with a misconfigured email client and  
the reply went to him rather than the group. I have since reshipped  
the reply to the group.


But to your answer thats fine but IBM is not doing real education (ie  
assembler) or any other low level language in colleges (to the best  
of my knowledge). How else do you think these future people will  
support LINUX? PLX? hahaha IBM does *NOT* externalize it. So how can  
they teach it?



In order to read source you must understand the language teaching  
people COBOL does not qualify them to read a source level OS (unless  
its written in COBOL ((thank heaven for that)). ahhh of course there  
is JAVA that will get you laughed right out of the US. I just see  
*NO* reasonable amount of people being available to take over LINUX  
support in the say 20 year time frame. Oh wait we will start  
tomorrow give me a break IBM has been shutting down education  
support for the last say 18 years (maybe before) and now they are  
magically going to come up with 20,000 (guess) people to support  
LINUX within 20 years? Maybe in INDIA (or China) not in most other  
parts of the world. I won't go into the issues of the US government  
running their super TS applications on code that was written in a  
foreign country. That leaves the US government having to write and  
design their own OS , boy are we in trouble.


Ed

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Shane]

On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 18:35 -0500, Scott Ford wrote:

> I learned VM and CICS by reading IBM's source code..no issue here, made me a
> Better sysprog...

And I'm trying to likewise with the (open source) Linux kernel source.
The difference this time is that if I get fed up/discouraged/pissed
off ... I just stop and go open a beer.
Great learning environment ... :0)

Shane ...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Shane]

On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 09:13 +1100, Stephen Mednick wrote:

> As the screen was re-booting in front of me I could see all these LINUX 
> messages
> pop-up. When he came back to my seat to check if everything was ok I commented
> about the usage of LINUX. He said that they're using the free downloadable
> version of LINUX to drive the onboard flight entertainment system and that 
> they
> had a huge onboard storage array to handle the entertainment system for the 
> 400+
> passengers onboard. I didn't dare want to know if it was the free LINUX that 
> was
> also managing the flight control systems for the A380 itself!!

A Redhat derivative (hopefully not Red Flag to ease Steves paranoia
index) running on VIA hardware.
A few other airlines are running it - or planning to. Entertainment
system only.

Shane ...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Stephen Mednick]

 

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shane
> Sent: Saturday, 16 February 2008 11:19 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Linux zSeries questions
> 
> On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 09:13 +1100, Stephen Mednick wrote:
> 
> > As the screen was re-booting in front of me I could see all these 
> > LINUX messages pop-up. When he came back to my seat to check if 
> > everything was ok I commented about the usage of LINUX. He 
> said that 
> > they're using the free downloadable version of LINUX to drive the 
> > onboard flight entertainment system and that they had a 
> huge onboard 
> > storage array to handle the entertainment system for the 400+ 
> > passengers onboard. I didn't dare want to know if it was 
> the free LINUX that was also managing the flight control 
> systems for the A380 itself!!
> 

> A Redhat derivative (hopefully not Red Flag to ease Steves paranoia
> index) running on VIA hardware.
> A few other airlines are running it - or planning to. 
> Entertainment system only.
> 
> Shane ...
> 

Yes, now that you mention it, it was REDHAT. A few Singapore Slings took care of
any anxiety that I was having at the time.

Stephen Mednick
Marketing & Support Manager
Computer Supervisory Services
Tel: +61 (2) 9665 1104
Fax: +61 (2) 9665 7382

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Shane]

On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 09:13 +1100, Stephen Mednick wrote:

> I didn't dare want to know if it was the free LINUX that was
> also managing the flight control systems for the A380 itself!!

I knew I'd seen this somewhere; found it just after I'd posted.
Here's one on the new 767 -
http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2008/01/dreamliner_security

It should be noted this is (already) old news. The networks are now
(apparently) isolated.
Of course no-one would allow such a thing on z now would they ...

Shane ...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Natarajan Krishnaswami]

In bit.listserv.ibm-main, Miklos Szigetvari wrote:
> - I would need a good newsgroup for Linux questions
> - Can we start zLinux under VM without IFL processors ?

Others have answered these two, but I didn't see any address this one:

> - Where can I found the IPL  wait state codes for zLinux ?

The codes are the instruction addresses of the callers of routines
that caused the disabled wait.  So they're not consistent codes, but
rather depend on (and identify) where the panic, unrecoverable machine
check, etc., occurred.

For most distributions, the System.map file in /boot corresponding to
the running kernel (uname -r prints the version number) will be
suitable for locating the name of the function in which the wait or
panic was triggered (assuming it was not initiated inside a loadable
module).


HTH,
N.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Scott Ford]

Ed,

None of the kids ( I am over 50 ) want to learn Cobol or Assembler. I am
working for a software company writing in assembler and loving it. 
Your right about colleges they are not teraching the older languages, only
the web languages not a good thing. The shortage of z/OS system programmer
Jobs after we all retire should be interesting...


Btw -- a few cold brews help me out...lol

Regards,
Scott
IDF
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Ed Gould
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 7:28 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Linux zSeries questions

On Feb 15, 2008, at 5:35 PM, Scott Ford wrote:

> Phil,
>
> I learned VM and CICS by reading IBM's source code..no issue here,  
> made me a
> Better sysprog...
>
> Regards,
> Scott
> IDF
>

Scott:

Apparently Phil has a problem with a misconfigured email client and  
the reply went to him rather than the group. I have since reshipped  
the reply to the group.

But to your answer thats fine but IBM is not doing real education (ie  
assembler) or any other low level language in colleges (to the best  
of my knowledge). How else do you think these future people will  
support LINUX? PLX? hahaha IBM does *NOT* externalize it. So how can  
they teach it?


In order to read source you must understand the language teaching  
people COBOL does not qualify them to read a source level OS (unless  
its written in COBOL ((thank heaven for that)). ahhh of course there  
is JAVA that will get you laughed right out of the US. I just see  
*NO* reasonable amount of people being available to take over LINUX  
support in the say 20 year time frame. Oh wait we will start  
tomorrow give me a break IBM has been shutting down education  
support for the last say 18 years (maybe before) and now they are  
magically going to come up with 20,000 (guess) people to support  
LINUX within 20 years? Maybe in INDIA (or China) not in most other  
parts of the world. I won't go into the issues of the US government  
running their super TS applications on code that was written in a  
foreign country. That leaves the US government having to write and  
design their own OS , boy are we in trouble.

Ed

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Timothy Sipples]

Alan Altmark writes:
>However, you will pay z/VM and Linux middleware license fees based on the
>total number of CPs, even if you have just one LPAR with one logical CPU.
>Those with larger CP counts will likely find adding a couple of IFLs to be
a
>better strategy.

True. Just to expand on what Alan is saying, for z/VM and much (but not
all) Linux middleware you have to license all CPs in the machine (if you
run on at least one CP), all IFLs (if you run on at least one IFL), or both
(if you run on both). So if you have a large number of CPs that's something
to consider.

That said, licenses are portable. For example, if today you have 3 CPs in
your machine, you can start running Linux on, say, a fraction of one CP.
You'll then have to buy three z/VM processor licenses (assuming you're
running under z/VM) and three middleware licenses (with the exception of
some sub-capacity products, e.g. WebSphere Application Server for Linux on
z). But if you then decide you like what you see, you can buy 3 IFLs, move
z/VM and Linux onto the IFLs (and off the CPs), and you already have all
the software licenses you need. Also, at least in IBM's case, middleware
licenses for Linux are portable. For example, you can retire a Windows X86
processor and move that platform's IBM middleware licenses to Linux on z
without even phoning IBM.

I got the sense the original poster just wanted to boot up Linux on a CP
and have "fun" with it, probably in an LPAR or two without z/VM and without
any particular licensed middleware products. (Or that he already had z/VM.)
Hence my original answer responded to that situation. But hopefully Alan
and I are helping explain the bigger picture now. In short, there's
certainly no technical impediment to running Linux on CPs, and, at least
for "kicking the tires," that often makes financial sense, too.

- - - - -
Timothy Sipples
IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect
Specializing in Software Architectures Related to System z
Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan and IBM Asia-Pacific
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Ed Gould]

On Feb 15, 2008, at 8:17 PM, Scott Ford wrote:


Ed,

None of the kids ( I am over 50 ) want to learn Cobol or Assembler.  
I am

working for a software company writing in assembler and loving it.
Your right about colleges they are not teraching the older  
languages, only
the web languages not a good thing. The shortage of z/OS system  
programmer

Jobs after we all retire should be interesting...


Btw -- a few cold brews help me out...lol

Regards,
Scott
IDF
---SNIP-


Scott,

Well IBM and its 64 bit stuff was enough for me to see all my IBM  
stock. This Linux atrocity has utterly convinced myself that I made  
the right decision in the long term and I am looked at the 10-20 year  
time frame. Only time will tell.


Ed

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Jim Elliott, IBM]

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 18:27:56 -0600, Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>In order to read source you must understand the language teaching
>people COBOL does not qualify them to read a source level OS (unless
>its written in COBOL ((thank heaven for that)). ahhh of course there
>is JAVA that will get you laughed right out of the US. I just see
>*NO* reasonable amount of people being available to take over LINUX
>support in the say 20 year time frame. Oh wait we will start
>tomorrow give me a break IBM has been shutting down education
>support for the last say 18 years (maybe before) and now they are
>magically going to come up with 20,000 (guess) people to support
>LINUX within 20 years? Maybe in INDIA (or China) not in most other
>parts of the world. I won't go into the issues of the US government
>running their super TS applications on code that was written in a
>foreign country. That leaves the US government having to write and
>design their own OS , boy are we in trouble.
>
>Ed

Ed:



You are full of it. Linux is written in C, not COBOL or Assembler. Also,
there is not a different version of Linux for mainframes, the vast majority
of the code is the same on all platforms. What is difference is memory
management and of course I/O. This is done mostly through IFDEF statements
in the Linux kernel C code. And the System z "changes" are integrated into
the mainstream Linux code, not something kept separate by IBM.

Also, Linux is the NUMBER TWO operating system in the world now in terms of
units (more than all other UNIX variants combined). It is the fastest
growing operating system and will continue to grow. 

There have been some other comments in this thread about the entertainment
system on A380s (and other planes) running on Linux. Well you should be
aware that ALL the systems on the international space station are running on
Linux.

I could respond to your paranoia about code written in a 'foreign country',
but do you really think anyone develops software exclusively in the US any
more? IBM, Microsoft, et all have development labs all over the world. The
internet has erased the boundaries for software development (and a lot more)
and it will continue to do so. 

Linux will be around long after you are dust!



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.


[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Elliott, IBM) writes:
> You are full of it. Linux is written in C, not COBOL or Assembler. Also,
> there is not a different version of Linux for mainframes, the vast majority
> of the code is the same on all platforms. What is difference is memory
> management and of course I/O. This is done mostly through IFDEF statements
> in the Linux kernel C code. And the System z "changes" are integrated into
> the mainstream Linux code, not something kept separate by IBM.
>
> Also, Linux is the NUMBER TWO operating system in the world now in terms of
> units (more than all other UNIX variants combined). It is the fastest
> growing operating system and will continue to grow. 

as an aside ... as per various previous posts ... most of the mainframe
unix ports in the 80s were products deployed under vm370 (uts, aix/370)
... in large part because field engineering and service people had
requirement for mainframe EREP and RAS. the issue was that adding
mainframe EREP and RAS to unix was a project several times larger effort
than the port itself (i.e for those unix functions that existed
... porting/adapting as necessary to mainframe dependencies ... however,
mainframe EREP and RAS were functions that didn't already exist).
running under vm370, they could rely on vm370 to provide the mainframe
EREP and RAS.

the primary exception was the special project for internal AT&T use
... which was adapting unix functions to sit ontop a stripped down
tss/370 kernel.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Shane]

Jim Elliott, (referring to Ed G) wrote:

> You are full of it.

No argument so far ...

> Linux is written in C, not COBOL or Assembler.

Mmmm - go look at the mm (memory management) code; sufficient (in-line)
assembler there.
Cobol ??? - wtf !!!. Linus goes ballistic when anyone asks about C+ ...

> Linux will be around long after you are dust!

We can but hope.

Shane ...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Phil Smith III]

Scott Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Phil,

>I learned VM and CICS by reading IBM's source code..no issue here, made me a
>Better sysprog...

Absolutely; I've made a career out of source-level CP and CMS mods and fixes.  
In no way was I intending to disparage the use of source -- rather, I was 
assuming that the question meant that the OP really wanted to find/understand 
"the" Linux library, in which case "go read the source" wouldn't have been a 
very useful answer.  And certainly when you're in a hurry and trying to Just 
Get The D*** Thing Working, reading the source isn't usually what you want to 
have to do.

Let's not start the OCO discussion again, especially since we'll be on the same 
side...!

Cheers,

...phsiii

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Phil Smith III]

Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Apparently Phil has a problem with a misconfigured email client and  
>the reply went to him rather than the group. I have since reshipped  
>the reply to the group.

Ed:

Nothing misconfigured here: I explicitly CCed you, and you replied to the CC, 
not to the list copy.  With Digested list delivery widespread, it's common 
courtesy to CC folks so they get delivery promptly, and can reply easily.  
Bandwidth is cheap.

>But to your answer thats fine but IBM is not doing real education (ie  
>assembler) or any other low level language in colleges (to the best  
>of my knowledge). How else do you think these future people will  
>support LINUX? PLX? hahaha IBM does *NOT* externalize it. So how can  
>they teach it?

It sounds like you're unclear on what Linux is: IBM doesn't own it.  And it's 
written in C/C++, which are somewhat common* in the real world.  What does PL/X 
have to do with anything?

>From your postings, you're either a visionary or a loon; time will tell which.

...phsiii 

*"Somewhat common": like sand, or leaves, or water.

P.S. *plonk*

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.


[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phil Smith III) writes:
> Absolutely; I've made a career out of source-level CP and CMS mods and
> fixes.  In no way was I intending to disparage the use of source --
> rather, I was assuming that the question meant that the OP really
> wanted to find/understand "the" Linux library, in which case "go read
> the source" wouldn't have been a very useful answer.  And certainly
> when you're in a hurry and trying to Just Get The D*** Thing Working,
> reading the source isn't usually what you want to have to do.

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#47 Linux zSeries questions

a little source x-over from zVM mailing list
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#42 VM/370 Release 6 Waterloo tape (CIA 
MODS)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#48 VM/370 Release 6 Waterloo tape (CIA 
MODS)

internally, there was similar collection of mods ... analogous to what
waterloo did for share. in the dawn of the oco-period ... there was a
study done of both the waterloo share tape and the internal repository
... one of the summaries was the approx. size of collected new/changes
was the same for the two respositories ... and the features provided
were approx. the same (even tho they were two independent communities).

the online vm (vmshare) service (provided by tymshare, vm370 platform
online commercial timesharing service bureau, starting nov76)
... provided community communication analogous to what is found in the
mailing lists and usenet (that came along later). vmshare archive
http://vv.marist.edu/~vmshare/

and a little x-over bringing in a little of issues raised in the COTS
thread
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#43 more on (the new 40+ yr old) 
virtualization

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Scott Ford]

Man..it sure is nice to find friends who feel that same as I do about
Software..A lot of the younger folks don't realize or appreciate the
'growing pains' many of us have experienced. I loved working on VM/CP/CMS
and Linux reminds me of them. Very similar in the area of command line
interface...The gui is a different story...

Best Regards,
Scott
IDF


"When the going gets tough the tough get going "...

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Phil Smith III
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 8:49 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Linux zSeries questions

Scott Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Phil,

>I learned VM and CICS by reading IBM's source code..no issue here, made me
a
>Better sysprog...

Absolutely; I've made a career out of source-level CP and CMS mods and
fixes.  In no way was I intending to disparage the use of source -- rather,
I was assuming that the question meant that the OP really wanted to
find/understand "the" Linux library, in which case "go read the source"
wouldn't have been a very useful answer.  And certainly when you're in a
hurry and trying to Just Get The D*** Thing Working, reading the source
isn't usually what you want to have to do.

Let's not start the OCO discussion again, especially since we'll be on the
same side...!

Cheers,

...phsiii

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Scott Ford]

All,

Assembler and Cobol over the last 30 years has sure earned me a fair bit of
money because simply put, no one else knew it. Now I am doing software
development with one guy who knows java and other who know java and the IBM
world, including i5 series..I feel like no wine before it's time and now its
my turn..I think every language has it's plus and minus. I like Ruby on
Linux and PC's but the syntax is a bit rough. I learned rexx as a scripting
language in 1984 on VM and still write in Open Object Rexx and love it.
But what is really interesting is that all scripting languages are
similar...just like cobol and assembler translates into machine language..

I will now get off my soapbox .


Regards,
Scott
IDF






-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Jim Elliott, IBM
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 2:21 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Linux zSeries questions

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 18:27:56 -0600, Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>In order to read source you must understand the language teaching
>people COBOL does not qualify them to read a source level OS (unless
>its written in COBOL ((thank heaven for that)). ahhh of course there
>is JAVA that will get you laughed right out of the US. I just see
>*NO* reasonable amount of people being available to take over LINUX
>support in the say 20 year time frame. Oh wait we will start
>tomorrow give me a break IBM has been shutting down education
>support for the last say 18 years (maybe before) and now they are
>magically going to come up with 20,000 (guess) people to support
>LINUX within 20 years? Maybe in INDIA (or China) not in most other
>parts of the world. I won't go into the issues of the US government
>running their super TS applications on code that was written in a
>foreign country. That leaves the US government having to write and
>design their own OS , boy are we in trouble.
>
>Ed

Ed:



You are full of it. Linux is written in C, not COBOL or Assembler. Also,
there is not a different version of Linux for mainframes, the vast majority
of the code is the same on all platforms. What is difference is memory
management and of course I/O. This is done mostly through IFDEF statements
in the Linux kernel C code. And the System z "changes" are integrated into
the mainstream Linux code, not something kept separate by IBM.

Also, Linux is the NUMBER TWO operating system in the world now in terms of
units (more than all other UNIX variants combined). It is the fastest
growing operating system and will continue to grow. 

There have been some other comments in this thread about the entertainment
system on A380s (and other planes) running on Linux. Well you should be
aware that ALL the systems on the international space station are running on
Linux.

I could respond to your paranoia about code written in a 'foreign country',
but do you really think anyone develops software exclusively in the US any
more? IBM, Microsoft, et all have development labs all over the world. The
internet has erased the boundaries for software development (and a lot more)
and it will continue to do so. 

Linux will be around long after you are dust!



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Ed Gould]

On Feb 16, 2008, at 1:21 AM, Jim Elliott, IBM wrote:

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 18:27:56 -0600, Ed Gould  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



In order to read source you must understand the language teaching
people COBOL does not qualify them to read a source level OS (unless
its written in COBOL ((thank heaven for that)). ahhh of course there
is JAVA that will get you laughed right out of the US. I just see
*NO* reasonable amount of people being available to take over LINUX
support in the say 20 year time frame. Oh wait we will start
tomorrow give me a break IBM has been shutting down education
support for the last say 18 years (maybe before) and now they are
magically going to come up with 20,000 (guess) people to support
LINUX within 20 years? Maybe in INDIA (or China) not in most other
parts of the world. I won't go into the issues of the US government
running their super TS applications on code that was written in a
foreign country. That leaves the US government having to write and
design their own OS , boy are we in trouble.

Ed


Ed:



You are full of it. Linux is written in C, not COBOL or Assembler.  
Also,
there is not a different version of Linux for mainframes, the vast  
majority

of the code is the same on all platforms. What is difference is memory
management and of course I/O. This is done mostly through IFDEF  
statements
in the Linux kernel C code. And the System z "changes" are  
integrated into

the mainstream Linux code, not something kept separate by IBM.


Go back and read what I was saying it was being sarcastic turning the  
hose back on (directed at IBM) well lets see.. c is written in   
guess what again who is write system level C ? Its one thing to  
write application code in C (or C++) an entirely different item to  
write system level C. Probably a lot  of the operating system level  
items will have to be done by C generating assembler instructions you  
still will need to know ASSEMBLER.


Also, Linux is the NUMBER TWO operating system in the world now in  
terms of

units (more than all other UNIX variants combined). It is the fastest
growing operating system and will continue to grow.


So? all that says that servers are cheap.


There have been some other comments in this thread about the  
entertainment
system on A380s (and other planes) running on Linux. Well you  
should be
aware that ALL the systems on the international space station are  
running on

Linux.


No wonder we have spy satellites crashing. Mind you are the ones you  
are talking about mission critical? Not just entertainment system  
runners? I remember seeing MS running similar configs and also have  
seen a BSOD on airplane screens.  Management is just looking for  
cheaper not the best an they get what they pay for.


I could respond to your paranoia about code written in a 'foreign  
country',
but do you really think anyone develops software exclusively in the  
US any
more? IBM, Microsoft, et all have development labs all over the  
world. The
internet has erased the boundaries for software development (and a  
lot more)

and it will continue to do so.


Well I am well aware that MS develops code around the world does it  
make it better? Nope in fact its one of the worst OS's around. Talk  
to any IT professional and have them compare MS to say UNIX  
(assuming) you are talking to real professional you will get a finger  
pointed down at MS. The issue that MS is afraid to compare is  
security. Security (and integrity) has *NEVER* been part of the an MS  
design point. Unix (not that UNIX is great mind you) but it has a  
proven track record with security. IBM's MVS at least has a security  
designation can any of MS's OS say the same ? Which begs the point  
does LINUX have a security rating?




Linux will be around long after you are dust!


It depends  as I am planning on being cremated so it  may be sooner.  
In any case LINUX will have to grow into another MVS before it comes  
close to that. People are taking DUMB pills or is the education  
system can't educate because the government keeps taking money away  
to pay for tax breaks to the corporate world or is it   never  
mind I am sure you will find an excuse that its not my problem.





Before you try and flame get some fuel in your lighter.

Ed

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Mark Post]

>>> On Sat, Feb 16, 2008 at  5:14 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ed Gould
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
-A whole mess of drivel completely out of touch with reality-

Sad to see that his general level of coherency and intelligence hasn't risen 
any over the last 6-7 years.

> On Feb 16, 2008, at 1:21 AM, Jim Elliott, IBM wrote:

Jim, you were way too polite.  If you have to tell someone you're flaming them, 
you're not doing it right.  :)  Then again, I'm not sure Ed would ever figure 
it out, even with a warning.  Just do what I (and several others) did 6.5 years 
ago, and just kill-file the poor slob.


Mark Post

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Ed Gould]

On Feb 16, 2008, at 7:46 AM, Phil Smith III wrote:


Ed Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Apparently Phil has a problem with a misconfigured email client and
the reply went to him rather than the group. I have since reshipped
the reply to the group.


Ed:

Nothing misconfigured here: I explicitly CCed you, and you replied  
to the CC, not to the list copy.  With Digested list delivery  
widespread, it's common courtesy to CC folks so they get delivery  
promptly, and can reply easily.  Bandwidth is cheap.


Phil:

After double checking and I stand corrected you did CC me on it and I  
replied to the message. I have not heard of cc:ing the original  
sender; I have always replied to the email that arrives in my email  
box first.


BTW does anyone know how many people are in digest mode? I have been  
on a few lists in digest and never noticed a separate CC was needed.


Ed






But to your answer thats fine but IBM is not doing real education (ie
assembler) or any other low level language in colleges (to the best
of my knowledge). How else do you think these future people will
support LINUX? PLX? hahaha IBM does *NOT* externalize it. So how can
they teach it?


It sounds like you're unclear on what Linux is: IBM doesn't own  
it.  And it's written in C/C++, which are somewhat common* in the  
real world.  What does PL/X have to do with anything?


Its been IBM's mode of writing OS code since OS/360 and if I am not  
to far off some version of PLS has been responsible for every release  
of OS/360 all the way up to Z/os . of course if ita not done in PLx  
it was written in assembler its almost always been one or the other.


If LINUX is written in C then whose version of C is it? DIGNUS/SAS 
(?)/ or ? it certainly can't be IBM's (at least the one they released  
to to the general public).




From your postings, you're either a visionary or a loon; time will  
tell which.


...phsiii

*"Somewhat common": like sand, or leaves, or water.

P.S. *plonk*


Its typical of people like you to end the discussion with an ignore.  
I tend to read everybody's opinion then form a judgement but with the  
new generation if you don't want to hear you just turn them off.  
Thats up to you but you are destined to not understand someone else's  
opinion by doing so. You will also follow people unquestioningly  
usually that shows where you fall.


Ed

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Rick Fochtman]

BTW does anyone know how many people are in digest mode? I have been  on 
a few lists in digest and never noticed a separate CC was needed.

-
It's not "needed"; it's a small courtesy that many in digest mode choose 
to extend; I do it myself when in digest mode, which isn't very often. I 
have no idea who many on this list are in digest mode; frankly, I never 
cared.


---
Its been IBM's mode of writing OS code since OS/360 and if I am not  to 
far off some version of PLS has been responsible for every release  of 
OS/360 all the way up to Z/os . of course if ita not done in PLx  it was 
written in assembler its almost always been one or the other.


If LINUX is written in C then whose version of C is it? DIGNUS/SAS (?)/ 
or ? it certainly can't be IBM's (at least the one they released  to to 
the general public).


From what I've seen in looking at various bits and pieces of source 
code, PL/S or its replacement(s) have been most heavily used in the MVS 
code; not so much in OS/360, except SMP.


---
From your postings, you're either a visionary or a loon; time will  
tell which.


I would hesitate to make a judgement here; in 35+ years I've seen some 
pretty strange things happen in this industry.


-
Its typical of people like you to end the discussion with an ignore.  I 
tend to read everybody's opinion then form a judgement but with the  new 
generation if you don't want to hear you just turn them off.  Thats up 
to you but you are destined to not understand someone else's  opinion by 
doing so. You will also follow people unquestioningly  usually that 
shows where you fall.

-
Don't just blame the "new generation"; it takes all sorts to make a 
world. And I've known some pretty opiniated "old curmudgeons" in my 
time, who refused to try anything newer than sliced bread! Generation 
has very little to do with whether one is soft-headed, hard-headed or 
open-minded.


"Be kind to your kids; someday they'll choose your nursing home!"  :-)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Alan Altmark]

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 21:11:53 -0600, Ed Gould 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Its been IBM's mode of writing OS code since OS/360 and if I am not
>to far off some version of PLS has been responsible for every release
>of OS/360 all the way up to Z/os . of course if ita not done in PLx
>it was written in assembler its almost always been one or the other.
>
>If LINUX is written in C then whose version of C is it? DIGNUS/SAS
>(?)/ or ? it certainly can't be IBM's (at least the one they released
>to to the general public).

Ed, you're either not listening, have just crawled out from under a rock, or 
are 
being obstinate.  Didn't you hear?  Linux is an Open Source operating 
system!  Please stop trying to paint it with 50 years of IBM mainframe 
operating system history.  As an open source effort, it is developed with open 
source tools.  To wit, the GNU C/C++ compiler (gcc).  Yes, you can write an 
operating system, including device drivers, in C.  If MVS were being written 
anew today, much of it would be in C.

To the extent that machine-level instructions are present in open code (similar 
to PL/X GENERATE), they are there because they are doing things that the 
compiler cannot do.  This is true on ANY operating system written in ANY 
language; there are times when only machine language (platform assembler) 
will do.  And before you ask, the assembler in Linux is open source, too.. 
What is it?  You may have guessed: the GNU Assembler (gas).

>Its typical of people like you to end the discussion with an ignore.
>I tend to read everybody's opinion then form a judgement but with the
>new generation if you don't want to hear you just turn them off.
>Thats up to you but you are destined to not understand someone else's
>opinion by doing so. You will also follow people unquestioningly
>usually that shows where you fall.

LOL, Ed.  Phil is not of the New Generation and is actually a careful listener, 
willing to learn new things.  You have made yet another uninformed 
judgement.  :-(

I get the impression that you have an internal picture of the universe that is 
colored just so, oriented just so, shaded just so, and are not of a mind to 
perceive the universe anew when presented with new information, or to 
accept that there are other pictures that are just as valid as your own.

Alan Altmark
speaking for himself

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Ted MacNEIL]

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 21:11:53 -0600, Ed Gould 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Its been IBM's mode of writing OS code since OS/360 and if I am not
>to far off some version of PLS has been responsible for every release
>of OS/360 all the way up to Z/os . of course if ita not done in PLx
>it was written in assembler its almost always been one or the other.

IBM did not write LINUX, in any way shape or form.
It was originally written, in the early 1990's, by a bunch of PFCSK's.
I believe it was written for the INTEL platform first, but I could be wrong 
(and, not blowing smoke).
The initial person was a Scandinavian named Linus Torvalds.
There is a 15-company consortium that works on changes to the source streams 
for the various platforms. IBM is a member.
IBM does not send you a distribution, rather they recommend which one(sy) to 
use.

>If LINUX is written in C then whose version of C is it? DIGNUS/SAS
>(?)/ or ? it certainly can't be IBM's (at least the one they released
>to to the general public).

Does it matter? There is a gcc compiler that comes with most distributions. 
IBM's compiler may or may not work -- I've never used it for LINUX.

>Its typical of people like you to end the discussion with an ignore.

There is a reason for that!


>I tend to read everybody's opinion then form a judgement

Is this judgement based on facts?

IBM did not set the standard for LINUX.
They are following it, just like they do for JAVA, APACHE, and other open 
products.

They were 'late' jumping on the LINUX band-wagon.
I had a working Caldera distribution on my IBM laptop, long before IBM 
acknowledged it.

I don't believe it runs on a MAC, yet.
But, it runs on WINTEL, SOLARIS, AIX boxes, and (of course zBOX), embedded 
systems and many more.
IBM is not setting a trend.
Rather they are following one.

Before you pass judgement, try reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LINUX

But, this is not an IBM boondoggle.
Rather, it's an attempt to expand what can run on a z.

There are a lot of strong (most seem to be ex-VM'rs) team of LINUX supporters 
within IBM who are trying to bring the OS to the great unwashed.

The two biggest are Alan Atmark (US) and Jim Elliot (Canada).
And, I tend to believe them before I will even listen to you.

Rather than painting LINUX with the same (out-dated) brush that you are 
painting MVS with, why don't you do some research and verify your facts.

IBM has changed!
You have not!!!

-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Scott Ford]

All,

Ted,,,I am an ex-VM, VM/SP1 thru z/VM. MVS -- OS/VS2 thru z/OS 1.6. I was
once a big VM bigot working as an internals VM System Programmer for
10+ years before jumping into MVS because of the availability of work. I
enjoy both systems and love Linux too. Every Operating system and
programming languages have pros-cons. Your experience tells you which one
is best for you to write in and use based on functionality and performance.

I also am very familiar with the VM and Linux link. They are like kissing
cousins , amazing how alike. Yes I have worked in software development also
and at the present time do with Identity Management. So I am seeing the
security issues many fold..working with a product using RACF, ACF2 and
Top-Secret. Once final thought, the mainframe knowledge is rapidly
disappearing in a lot of old mainline mainframe shops. Who will take of them
when us old 'dinosaurs' retire or whatever. Outsourcing is not always a good
solution. 

Regards,
Scott
IDF
http://www.identityforge.com
Host Systems Developer

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 4:47 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Linux zSeries questions

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 21:11:53 -0600, Ed Gould 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Its been IBM's mode of writing OS code since OS/360 and if I am not
>to far off some version of PLS has been responsible for every release
>of OS/360 all the way up to Z/os . of course if ita not done in PLx
>it was written in assembler its almost always been one or the other.

IBM did not write LINUX, in any way shape or form.
It was originally written, in the early 1990's, by a bunch of PFCSK's.
I believe it was written for the INTEL platform first, but I could be wrong
(and, not blowing smoke).
The initial person was a Scandinavian named Linus Torvalds.
There is a 15-company consortium that works on changes to the source streams
for the various platforms. IBM is a member.
IBM does not send you a distribution, rather they recommend which one(sy) to
use.

>If LINUX is written in C then whose version of C is it? DIGNUS/SAS
>(?)/ or ? it certainly can't be IBM's (at least the one they released
>to to the general public).

Does it matter? There is a gcc compiler that comes with most distributions.
IBM's compiler may or may not work -- I've never used it for LINUX.

>Its typical of people like you to end the discussion with an ignore.

There is a reason for that!


>I tend to read everybody's opinion then form a judgement

Is this judgement based on facts?

IBM did not set the standard for LINUX.
They are following it, just like they do for JAVA, APACHE, and other open
products.

They were 'late' jumping on the LINUX band-wagon.
I had a working Caldera distribution on my IBM laptop, long before IBM
acknowledged it.

I don't believe it runs on a MAC, yet.
But, it runs on WINTEL, SOLARIS, AIX boxes, and (of course zBOX), embedded
systems and many more.
IBM is not setting a trend.
Rather they are following one.

Before you pass judgement, try reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LINUX

But, this is not an IBM boondoggle.
Rather, it's an attempt to expand what can run on a z.

There are a lot of strong (most seem to be ex-VM'rs) team of LINUX
supporters within IBM who are trying to bring the OS to the great unwashed.

The two biggest are Alan Atmark (US) and Jim Elliot (Canada).
And, I tend to believe them before I will even listen to you.

Rather than painting LINUX with the same (out-dated) brush that you are
painting MVS with, why don't you do some research and verify your facts.

IBM has changed!
You have not!!!

-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[John S. Giltner, Jr.]

Ted MacNEIL wrote:
On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 21:11:53 -0600, Ed Gould 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:





I don't believe it runs on a MAC, yet.


Just as F.Y.I.:

Linux does and has run MAC's.  The most recent non-Intel MAC's are Power 
based.  Here is document from IBM about Linux on MAC from 2004.


   http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-pmac.html

As Ted has pointed out, Linux will run on all IBM hardware platforms; 
zSeries, pSeries, iSeries, and xSeries (obviously as they are x86 based) 
and their older incarnations: S/390's, RS/6000, AS/400 (Power base only 
I believe).


Although it did take IBM awhile to jump on the Linux bandwagon, I am not 
really that sure it took them any longer than any of the other major 
computer vendors. I would have to research it but I when did companies 
like Dell, Compaq/HP, NEC, and Unisys start supporting Linux on their 
boxes?  I don't know who else might be considered a major computer 
vendor, I am sure there are others that I don't know about.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[A. Harry Williams]

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 18:27:56 -0600 Ed Gould said:
>
>But to your answer thats fine but IBM is not doing real education (ie
>assembler) or any other low level language in colleges (to the best
>of my knowledge). How else do you think these future people will
>support LINUX? PLX? hahaha IBM does *NOT* externalize it. So how can
>they teach it?

IBM has never done "real education ... in colleges".  The content of
courses is a matter for college's and university's faculty.  It's a
small matter called academic freedom.  Often people poke fun at it, but
it is a division of labor based on expertise, much like any other
business.

However, to say IBM has done nothing would be completely unfair.
They've done a lot to promote assembler and z/OS via the IBM Scholastic
Alliance.  They have provided teaching modules.  They've provided
resources, and they support the System z Knowledge Center, a place
where colleges and universities can use a z/OS system to teach System z
skills, at no charge to the colleges and universities.  The colleges and
universities have to WANT to teach System z skills (see above re
academic freedom).  Having businesses asking for such skills via college
career service offices helps immensely.

Now, I'm not a totally neutral observer in this.  One of my hats is to
support the Knowledge Center here at Marist.  Do we teach System z
Assembler?  Yes.  Is it required in all CS degrees?  No.  Do all
students take it?  No. (see employers recruiting via career services
office above)



>
>
>In order to read source you must understand the language teaching
>people COBOL does not qualify them to read a source level OS (unless
>its written in COBOL ((thank heaven for that)). ahhh of course there
>is JAVA that will get you laughed right out of the US. I just see

Hardly.  There are a lot of employeers recruiting for Java skills.
We even have several systems, supporting mission critical (to us)
systems totally written in Java.  If I didn't tell you that it was
in Java, you wouldn't know.  We've moved the system around from Intel
to System z.  We'll also play with it on System p at some point.
We've also moved another application from Linux on System p to Linux
on System z, and the vendor that supports the application would not have
known if we had not told them.

>*NO* reasonable amount of people being available to take over LINUX
>support in the say 20 year time frame. Oh wait we will start

I don't know where you get this.  When I have a job opening for Linux
support, I get 5-10 times the number of applications as I do for z/OS
jobs, and the average skill level is higher.  In part, that is due to
the lack of availability of people to get access to a z/OS to play
on their own time, but let's not revisit that rabbit hole again now.


>tomorrow give me a break IBM has been shutting down education
>support for the last say 18 years (maybe before) and now they are
>magically going to come up with 20,000 (guess) people to support
>LINUX within 20 years? Maybe in INDIA (or China) not in most other
>parts of the world. I won't go into the issues of the US government
>running their super TS applications on code that was written in a
>foreign country. That leaves the US government having to write and
>design their own OS , boy are we in trouble.

Well, Red Flag Linux exists for a reason.

>
>Ed
/ahw

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Timothy Sipples]

FWIW, there's a fair (and increasing) amount of z/OS written in C and/or
C++.  The SDK for Java immediately leaps to mind as an example.

- - - - -
Timothy Sipples
IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect
Specializing in Software Architectures Related to System z
Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan and IBM Asia-Pacific
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/17/2008
   at 02:07 PM, Alan Altmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>To the extent that machine-level instructions are present in open code
>(similar  to PL/X GENERATE), they are there because they are doing things
>that the  compiler cannot do.  This is true on ANY operating system
>written in ANY  language; there are times when only machine language
>(platform assembler) will do. 

Sometimes it's for efficiency reasons. And sometimes the assembler code
gets replaced by code in another language, e.g., ALM code replaced by PL/I
in Multics.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/17/2008
   at 12:06 PM, Rick Fochtman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

> From what I've seen in looking at various bits and pieces of source 
>code, PL/S or its replacement(s) have been most heavily used in the MVS 
>code; not so much in OS/360, except SMP.

Do you count BSL as being PL/S? It was heavily used in OS/360, for TSO.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/16/2008
   at 01:59 PM, Scott Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>But what is really interesting is that all scripting languages are
>similar

I see sharp divisions among scripting languages, the most striking of
which is the way that they handle variable substitution.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/16/2008
   at 08:46 AM, Phil Smith III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>Nothing misconfigured here: I explicitly CCed you, and you replied to the
>CC, not to the list copy.  With Digested list delivery widespread, it's
>common courtesy to CC folks 

No, it's common discourtesy to cc them, unless you know that they want two
copies.

>and can reply easily.

It takes more work to detect that there is a duplicate message rather than
a private reply. What happened in this case is a perfect example of that.

BTW, I have no problem with the text of your message, just with the
duplicate copy and the fallout from the duplicat copy.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Mark S. Waterbury]

BSL was the first version of IBM's internal HLL for systems programming.

BSL is to PL/S as PL/S is to PL/X.

AFAIK, OS/360 PCP, MFT and MVT were developed almost entirely in BAL. It 
was not until well into the evolution of MVT that BSL was first used for 
much of TSO and some other utilities.


You can find some BSL manuals at http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/360/bsl/

> Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:

Do you count BSL as being PL/S? It was heavily used in OS/360, for TSO.
  


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[McKown, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
> Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 3:47 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Linux zSeries questions

[snip]

> 
> I don't believe it runs on a MAC, yet.

[snip]

Linux most certainly runs on Macs. Both the new Intel Macs and even the
older PPC (Power) based Macs. Do a quick Google (or other) seach on
"linux mac" and you'll get tons of hits.

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged
and/or confidential.  It is for intended addressee(s) only.  If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is
strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal
offense.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing
it. 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[McKown, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Timothy Sipples
> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 12:16 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Linux zSeries questions
> 
> 
> FWIW, there's a fair (and increasing) amount of z/OS written 
> in C and/or
> C++.  The SDK for Java immediately leaps to mind as an example.
> 
> - - - - -
> Timothy Sipples

I think we need to distinush between the "z/OS kernel" and "ancillary
functions" such as Java (or even TCPIP, VTAM, JESn, etc). Now, does
anybody know if C or C++ is used in the "kernal" of z/OS? How about the
OMVS kernel?

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged
and/or confidential.  It is for intended addressee(s) only.  If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is
strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal
offense.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing
it. 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 11:59:08 -0600, McKown, John wrote:

>> -Original Message-
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Timothy Sipples
>> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 12:16 AM
>>
>> FWIW, there's a fair (and increasing) amount of z/OS written
>> in C and/or
>> C++.  The SDK for Java immediately leaps to mind as an example.
>
>I think we need to distinush between the "z/OS kernel" and "ancillary
>functions" such as Java (or even TCPIP, VTAM, JESn, etc). Now, does
>anybody know if C or C++ is used in the "kernal" of z/OS? How about the
>OMVS kernel?
>
Some years ago, an IBM employee posting on MVS-OE declared (emphatically,
proudly, as it struck me) that the OMVS kernel (or kernal) is _not_
written in C.  I'd hardly be able to provide a citation.  Don Ault?
 Mark Warden? Jeff Trawick?  Walt F.?  Not, IIRC, Bill Schoen.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Ted MacNEIL]

>Now, does anybody know if C or C++ is used in the "kernal" of z/OS?

When I first took a C++ course, I was told that it should not be used to write 
operating systems (too slow).
But, I would like to know if C is used in the 'kernal'.

-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Ted MacNEIL]

>> I don't believe it runs on a MAC, yet.

>[snip]

>Linux most certainly runs on Macs. Both the new Intel Macs and even the older 
>PPC (Power) based Macs.

Okay. Nice to know.
(Guess I was 'blowing smoke', again.)

-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Mark S. Waterbury]

C++ is a low-level language comparable to C, being only slightly 
higher-level than assembler or machine language. So, there is no 
technical reason why parts of an OS kernel (even the z/OS nucleus) could 
not be written in C++.


It is well-documented that when IBM transitioned the AS/400 from CISC 
(IMPI) to RISC (PowerPC) hardware, they re-wrote the IMPI HLIC and VLIC 
(Horizontal and Vertical Licensed Internal Code) in C++ for the PowerPC 
RISC, to create what is now called "SLIC" (System :Licensed Internal 
Code).  See:


   http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/sj/372/schmidt.html

It is possible that some parts of z/OS might now be written in C++, but 
I expect that the nucleus is fairly stable and so probably remains in 
PL/X or BAL.


> Ted MacNEIL wrote:

Now, does anybody know if C or C++ is used in the "kernal" of z/OS?



When I first took a C++ course, I was told that it should not be used to write 
operating systems (too slow).
But, I would like to know if C is used in the 'kernal'.
  


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Thomas David Rivers]

McKown, John wrote:

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Timothy Sipples

Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 12:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Linux zSeries questions


FWIW, there's a fair (and increasing) amount of z/OS written 
in C and/or

C++.  The SDK for Java immediately leaps to mind as an example.

- - - - -
Timothy Sipples



I think we need to distinush between the "z/OS kernel" and "ancillary
functions" such as Java (or even TCPIP, VTAM, JESn, etc). Now, does
anybody know if C or C++ is used in the "kernal" of z/OS? How about the
OMVS kernel?



I can say without fear of contridiction, but at the same time not
being free to give out details, that some of the "kernel" is written
in C.

Also - you may want to look at z/VM; some of its "kernel" is written
in C too.  I believe if you have access to the z/VM source (I'm
not sure if that's still made available) you'll find it.

I also seem to recall an article in the IBM technical journals
about porting C code into z/OS and z/VM; and the efficacy
of code-reuse that provided.

- Dave Rivers -

--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Work: (919) 676-0847
Get your mainframe programming tools at http://www.dignus.com

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[McKown, John]

> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thomas David Rivers
> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 2:27 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Linux zSeries questions

[snip]

> I can say without fear of contridiction, but at the same time not
> being free to give out details, that some of the "kernel" is written
> in C.

Thanks. That's interesting to know. And may explain some of the recent
enhancements that IBM has made in their C compiler.

> 
> Also - you may want to look at z/VM; some of its "kernel" is written
> in C too.  I believe if you have access to the z/VM source (I'm
> not sure if that's still made available) you'll find it.

Ah, for the days when I had access to z/VM.

> 
> I also seem to recall an article in the IBM technical journals
> about porting C code into z/OS and z/VM; and the efficacy
> of code-reuse that provided.

Now that is curious. Why would C code be more efficient for code reuse
than PL/X? Not to be overly tacky, but is IBM hoisting some BSD licensed
code into various z/OS areas? I know that they did with OpenSSH. Much
less expensive to port it than to create an SSH server / client from
scratch. I wish, as usual, that IBM made their patches public. But I
will guess that is why IBM likely will not use much GPL'ed software in
z/OS.

> 
>   - Dave Rivers -

--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Technology

The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged
and/or confidential.  It is for intended addressee(s) only.  If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is
strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal
offense.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing
it. 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Ted MacNEIL]

>C++ is a low-level language comparable to C, being only slightly higher-level 
>than assembler or machine language. So, there is no technical reason why parts 
>of an OS kernel (even the z/OS nucleus) could 
not be written in C++.

Since C++ is the object oriented language and C is the procedural one, I always 
thought it was the other way around.



-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Mark S. Waterbury]

C++ was intentionally developed by grafting on OO concepts to C, while 
still keeping the language at essentially the same level. In other 
words, you can still do pretty much the same kinds of "low-level" things 
in C++ that you could do in C. The main difference is, you can also use 
the OO extensions to create libraries of object classes that 
(ostensibly) make it easier to re-use code.


> Ted MacNEIL wrote:

...(snip)...
Since C++ is the object oriented language and C is the procedural one, I always 
thought it was the other way around.
  


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Shane]

On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 11:59 -0600, McKown, John wrote:

> Now, does
> anybody know if C or C++ is used in the "kernal" of z/OS? How about the
> OMVS kernel?

The kernel is in C - with assembler for the performance critical bits.
I've posted before about Linus derisive comments on suggestions of C++
inclusion (he has tried it BTW).
And *nothing* gets into mainline without Linus say-so.

As for OMVS - no idea.

Shane ...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Alan Altmark]

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 15:26:37 -0500, Thomas David Rivers 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Also - you may want to look at z/VM; some of its "kernel" is written
>in C too.  I believe if you have access to the z/VM source (I'm
>not sure if that's still made available) you'll find it.

I can confirm that there is C code in the Control Program, but we do not ship 
the source for the modules that use it.

Alan Altmark
z/VM Development
IBM

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Timothy Sipples]

Yes, the various C/C++ compiler enhancements (Metal C, graphical workbench
support in Rational Developer for System z, improved debugging, etc.) that
recently shipped aren't only for external use. Although please enjoy them,
too.

Other bits I'd take an educated guess (without inside knowledge) that are
largely or entirely C and/or C++:

- parts of the XML Toolkit for z/OS
- at least parts of UNIX System Services (one would think most of the
command binaries have got to be, for example)
- the IBM HTTP Server for z/OS (including the Apache-derived one shipping
with WebSphere Application Server V6.1 for z/OS)
- some security bits (like the GSKKYMAN stuff)

And there's probably a lot more.

- - - - -
Timothy Sipples
IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect
Specializing in Software Architectures Related to System z
Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan and IBM Asia-Pacific
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

SV: Linux zSeries questions

[Thomas Berg]

Some opinions by Linus Torvalds regarding C++ ( ;) ):

An interviws 1998:

Many people ask why the kernel is written in C instead of C++. What is your 
point against using C++ in the kernel? What is the language you like best, 
excluding C?

Linus: C++ would have allowed us to use certain compiler features that I 
would have liked, and it was in fact used for a very short timeperiod just 
before releasing Linux-1.0. It turned out to not be very useful, and I don't 
think we'll ever end up trying that again, for a few reasons. 

One reason is that C++ simply is a lot more complicated, and the compiler 
often does things behind the back of the programmer that aren't at all obvious 
when looking at the code locally. Yes, you can avoid features like virtual 
classes and avoid these things, but the point is that C++ simply allows a lot 
that C doesn't allow, and that can make finding the problems later harder. 

Another reason was related to the above, namely compiler speed and 
stability. Because C++ is a more complex language, it also has a propensity for 
a lot more compiler bugs and compiles are usually slower. This can be 
considered a compiler implementation issue, but the basic complexity of C++ 
certainly is something that can be objectively considered to be harmful for 
kernel development. 

An email reply 2007:
> 
> When I first looked at Git source code two things struck me as odd:
> 1. Pure C as opposed to C++. No idea why. Please don't talk about portability,
> it's BS.

*YOU* are full of bullshit.

C++ is a horrible language. It's made more horrible by the fact that a lot 
of substandard programmers use it, to the point where it's much much 
easier to generate total and utter crap with it. Quite frankly, even if 
the choice of C were to do *nothing* but keep the C++ programmers out, 
that in itself would be a huge reason to use C.

In other words: the choice of C is the only sane choice. I know Miles 
Bader jokingly said "to piss you off", but it's actually true. I've come 
to the conclusion that any programmer that would prefer the project to be 
in C++ over C is likely a programmer that I really *would* prefer to piss 
off, so that he doesn't come and screw up any project I'm involved with.

C++ leads to really really bad design choices. You invariably start using 
the "nice" library features of the language like STL and Boost and other 
total and utter crap, that may "help" you program, but causes:

 - infinite amounts of pain when they don't work (and anybody who tells me 
   that STL and especially Boost are stable and portable is just so full 
   of BS that it's not even funny)

 - inefficient abstracted programming models where two years down the road 
   you notice that some abstraction wasn't very efficient, but now all 
   your code depends on all the nice object models around it, and you 
   cannot fix it without rewriting your app.

In other words, the only way to do good, efficient, and system-level and 
portable C++ ends up to limit yourself to all the things that are 
basically available in C. And limiting your project to C means that people 
don't screw that up, and also means that you get a lot of programmers that 
do actually understand low-level issues and don't screw things up with any 
idiotic "object model" crap.

So I'm sorry, but for something like git, where efficiency was a primary 
objective, the "advantages" of C++ is just a huge mistake. The fact that 
we also piss off people who cannot see that is just a big additional 
advantage.

If you want a VCS that is written in C++, go play with Monotone. Really. 
They use a "real database". They use "nice object-oriented libraries". 
They use "nice C++ abstractions". And quite frankly, as a result of all 
these design decisions that sound so appealing to some CS people, the end 
result is a horrible and unmaintainable mess.

But I'm sure you'd like it more than git.

Linus

 

> -Ursprungligt meddelande-----
> Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För Mark S. Waterbury
> Skickat: den 18 februari 2008 21:03
> Till: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
> Ämne: Re: Linux zSeries questions
> 
> C++ is a low-level language comparable to C, being only slightly 
> higher-level than assembler or machine language. So, there is no 
> technical reason why parts of an OS kernel (even the z/OS 
> nucleus) could 
> not be written in C++.
> 
> It is well-documented that when IBM transitioned the AS/400 from CISC 
> (IMPI) to RISC (PowerPC) hardware, they re-wrote the IMPI 
> HLIC and VLIC 
> (Horizontal and Vertical Licensed Internal Code) in C++ for 
> the PowerPC 
> RISC, to create what is now called "SLIC" (System :License

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Phil Smith III]

"Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>No, it's common discourtesy to cc them, unless you know that they want two
>copies.

I guess this is yet another netiquette issue that has no objective answer.  I 
could cite multiple cases of lists I'm on where it's considered courtesy, but 
you obviously believe otherwise.

>It takes more work to detect that there is a duplicate message rather than
>a private reply. What happened in this case is a perfect example of that.

Now that I don't understand. The From: is clear, and having to cut/paste the 
text from a digest, including replacing the Subject: line, is a LOT more work 
than reading the From: line.  Getting the CC in realtime as opposed to waiting 
for a digest is also something I appreciate.

I wish the common list managers had a "flush" command to say "OK, I know I get 
it digested, but please send me today's stuff so far".  (I suspect that turning 
Digest mode off and on might cause a 'flush' with some list managers, but 
haven't tried it.  And maybe there is such a command and I just haven't noticed 
it...)  I often get IMs from people saying "Do you know the answer to xyz's 
question on abcd-L?" and have to say "Haven't seen it, I get that list 
digested, send me the post please...".

But now we're way OT...

...phsiii (not CCing Shmuel)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Tom Marchant]

On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 06:45:25 -0500, Phil Smith III wrote:

>"Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>No, it's common discourtesy to cc them, unless you know that they want 
two
>>copies.
>
>>It takes more work to detect that there is a duplicate message rather than
>>a private reply. What happened in this case is a perfect example of that.
>
>Now that I don't understand. The From: is clear, and having to cut/paste 
>the text from a digest, including replacing the Subject: line, is a LOT more 
>work than reading the From: line.  Getting the CC in realtime as opposed to 
>waiting for a digest is also something I appreciate.

Apparently you like the digest.  You are ignoring the fact that many do not.  
Consider someone who gets every post emailed to them.  This list averages 
nearly 70 messages per day.  Now go back and read what Shmuel wrote and 
your response.

-- 
Tom Marchant

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/18/2008
   at 01:09 PM, "Mark S. Waterbury" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>BSL was the first version of IBM's internal HLL for systems programming.
>BSL is to PL/S as PL/S is to PL/X.

Correct.

>AFAIK, OS/360 PCP, MFT and MVT were developed almost entirely in BAL.

ITYM Assembleer (E) or Assembler (F), except for some early work on a
7094.

>was not until well into the evolution of MVT that BSL was first used for
> much of TSO and some other utilities.

Well, as I recall TSO didn't come along until release 20.1, and I'm not
aware of any earlier BSL use.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 02/19/2008
   at 06:45 AM, Phil Smith III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

>Now that I don't understand. The From: is clear,

The From doesn't tell the recipient that you sent another copy to the
list.
 
-- 
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
 ISO position; see  
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.

Anne & Lynn Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> vulnerability database ... and having difficulty categorizing exploits
> ... and lobbying the CVE interests to improve the strucuture/nature of
> CVE reports.
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004e.html#43 security taxonomy and CVE
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#28 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#32 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007q.html#20 Hackers Attack Apps While Still in 
> Development

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#58 Linux zSeries questions

and past posts mentioning c-language programming environment proclivity
for buffer overflows
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subintegrity.html#overflow

The common cold of IT security
http://www.gcn.com/online/vol1_no1/45864-1.html

from above:

IT security experts are not ready to admit defeat by one of the most
common types of exploits, but the battle against buffer overflows so far
has produced about the same results as medical science has against the
common cold: We can treat it, but we haven’t found a way to cure it.

“It’s the same problem over and over again,” independent security
consultant Shawn Moyer said Thursday at the Black Hat Federal Briefings
in Washington. “We patch, we scan, we patch, we scan, and the cycles
get shorter and shorter and the problem is worse.” The result, he said,
is a “flailing death spiral of updates and patches.”

... snip ...

we had done quite a bit of implementations using vs/pascal ... including
the original mainframe tcp/ip implementation ... w/o having any buffer
length problems (not that they couldn't happen ... but it took quite a
bit more effort in pascal to have a buffer length problem ... compared
to c language programming environment).

for other drift ... the original base tcp/ip implementation had
44kbytes/sec thruput consuming a full 3090 processor ... in large part
because of the characteristics of the controller used to interface to
LANs. i had done the rfc 1044 enhancements (to support a controller box
from another vendor) and in some tuning tests at cray research between a
cray and 4341 clone ... was getting 1mbyte/sec using only a modest
amount of the 4341 processor (approx. three orders of magnitude
improvement in bytes transfered per instruction executed)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#1044

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Fwd: Linux zSeries questions

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 18:00:23 -0600, Ed Gould wrote:
(apparently quoting himself)
>>
>> On Feb 15, 2008, at 7:44 AM, Phil Smith III wrote:
>>>
>>> The good news is, it's worth the trouble...
>>>
You mean, such as unrestricted 64-bit capability?

>> If the ruse of LINUX is to re-write MVS (to start over but with a
>> different design point)  it is still going to be a real disaster
>> for IBM and the future generations (if IBM survives this). Yes it
>> will provide a LOT of new jobs (for the short term) running up
>> major costs at IBM. The employees at IBM are getting screwed by IBM
>>
Apple has done this succesfully twice in hardware (M68K => PPC => i86)
and once in hardware (Mac OS Classic => (UNIX-based) OS X).  The tactics
that IBM might follow:

o Expose the bare metal (below the microcode).  Caution customers not
  to discard their source code this time around.

o Provide compiler(s) as necessary, generating code for that bare
  metal.

o Provide a UNIX-like (or not) bottom layer OS.  For business and
  legal reasons, BSD-like might be preferred to GPL.

o Provide z/Series emulation in software (Millicode?  Possible
  hardware assists?), possibly based on one of the existing
  emulators.

o Run z/OS in a virtual environment to support technology transition.

Of course, there would be much wailing and gnashing of teeth from
customers discovering that code compiled to the bare metal far
outperformed their beloved Assembler programs on the emulated
hardware.  The vendor would need to cover its collective ears and
encourage the customers to migrate to better technology.

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: Fwd: Linux zSeries questions

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.


[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Gilmartin) writes:
> Of course, there would be much wailing and gnashing of teeth from
> customers discovering that code compiled to the bare metal far
> outperformed their beloved Assembler programs on the emulated
> hardware.  The vendor would need to cover its collective ears and
> encourage the customers to migrate to better technology.

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#47 Linux zSeries questions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#49 Linux zSeries questions

this is somewhat 30yrs gone ...

some number of this has all been encountered before ... recent thread in
comp.arch mentioning 360/370 vertical microcode microprocessors having
10:1 execution ... i.e. avg. of 10 microcode instructions executed for
every 360/370 instructions. this gave rise to "ECPS" on 138/148 &
43xx machines ... moving kernel code into microcode getting 10:1
performance improvement:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#39 Throwaway cores
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#46 Throwaway cores
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#52 Throwaway cores
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#54 Throwaway cores
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008d.html#56 Throwaway cores

however, this was the low-end and mid-range 370s ... using vertical
microcode microprocessors ... and wasn't true for the high-end machines
using horizontal microcode microprocessors.

as also mentioned in the comp.arch thread ... the wide proliferation of
different (vertical microcode) microprocessors (systems, controllers,
channels, etc) resulted in projects circa 1980 to move corporation to
single 801/risc microprocessor architecture (iliad chips). However, for
various reasons this effort floundered. As mentioned, the 4341-followon
(4381) started out being one of these 801/risc processors ... and I
contributed to the writeups killing that strategy. the issue was that
chips were getting complex enuf that it was starting to be possible to
implement the 370 instructions directly in circuits ... rather than
having intermediate microcode level.

now, the high-end product line was using horizontal microcode
microprocessors ... this required extremely complex programming
... since different fields in the same instruction controlled different
functions ... like starting a data move from one unit to another unit
... overlapped with variety of other functions. the programmer then had
to manually count machine cycles (instructions) before the data could be
expected to have finished the moved. because of the overlap complexity,
these machines measured performance in the avg. machine cycles per 370
instruction (rather than avg. number of microcode instructions executed
per 370 instruction). 370/165 was measured in an avg. of 2.1 machine
cycles per 370 instruciton. this was optimized for 370/168 for an
avg. of 1.6 machine cycles per 370 instruction. For 3033 it was approx.
one machine cycle per 370 instruction.

this resulted in various problems  ECPS virtual machine microcode
assist on 148 & 4341 (i.e. moving part of the kernel instructions into
microcode) got a 10:1 performance improvement. However, an attempt to do
something similar on 3033 actually resulted in slight performance
degradation (there was no gain doing a one-for-one translation from 370
instruction to 3033 native).

as in the discussion regarding virtual machine microcode assist:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#21 370 ECPS VM microcode assist
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#27 370 ECPS VM microcode assist
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#28 370 ECPS VM microcode assist

there was one set of (ECPS) things that just did a 1:1 kernel 370
instruction into microcode (for 10:1 performance improvement). there
were another set of things that directly executed privilege instruction
(but according to virtual machine rules) w/o interrupting into
kernel. This later set of things showed performance improvements across
all hardware implementations ... since it eliminated interrupts into the
kernel, state change overhead, register save/restore overhead, etc (aka
eliminated virtual machine kernel execution at all ... as opposed to
trying to make the kernel execution run faster). this shows up in amdahl
hypervisor, 3090 pr/sm and current day LPARs.

in this day & age, the place where ECPS approach might be useful would
be the intel platform 370 simulators (ala hercules implementation)
... where there is (again) the equivalent of vertical microcode
implementing 370 instructions.

the slight caveat in all this is 370 architecture allowing
self-modifying instructions ... supposedly half the cycles in many
(earlier) hardware implementations, involved double checking whether the
previous instruction has modified the current instruction (impacting
instruction execution thruput).

current generations of c

Re: SPAM: Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Rick Fochtman]

-
Mark Post wrote:


On Sat, Feb 16, 2008 at  5:14 PM, in message
   


<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ed Gould
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
-A whole mess of drivel completely out of touch with reality-


Sad to see that his general level of coherency and intelligence hasn't risen 
any over the last 6-7 years.

 


On Feb 16, 2008, at 1:21 AM, Jim Elliott, IBM wrote:
   



Jim, you were way too polite.  If you have to tell someone you're flaming them, 
you're not doing it right.  :)  Then again, I'm not sure Ed would ever figure 
it out, even with a warning.  Just do what I (and several others) did 6.5 years 
ago, and just kill-file the poor slob.
 



I have to admit that I disagree with Ed far more often than I agree, but 
he does make one significant point: security. At best, Windoze security 
is abysmal; Linux and Unix security aren't really bad, but there's a lot 
of room for improvement. z/OS security is far and away more 
comprehensive and robust than any of the "smaller platform" security 
mechanisms. That's one of the biggest reasons for using z/OS in 
security-conscious environments, such as banking and financial 
management. Many health-care providers and insurers also use z/OS, where 
security and privacy protection are important considerations.


IMHO, the programming language, whether for applications or operating 
systems, is unimportant, PROVIDED that all the necessary functions can 
be provided in an efficient manner. The important matter is whether the 
desired end can be reached efficiently or not. There lots of ways to 
drive from Chicago to Houston; which route best serves your needs?


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: SPAM: Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Anne & Lynn Wheeler]

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers as well.


[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rick Fochtman) writes:
> IMHO, the programming language, whether for applications or operating
> systems, is unimportant, PROVIDED that all the necessary functions can
> be provided in an efficient manner. The important matter is whether
> the desired end can be reached efficiently or not. There lots of ways
> to drive from Chicago to Houston; which route best serves your needs?

lots of past posts discussing common C language environment having a
paradigm that promotes buffer length programming errors.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subintegrity.html#overflow

up threw 1999, (c-language related) buffer overflow exploits accounted
for the majority of all internet related vulnerabilities.

the majority of these buffer overflow exploits wouldn't happen in PLI
and PASCAL. They also wouldn't occur in 360 assembler conforming to
standard system services (because os/360 system services avoided buffer
length shortcoming convention that was part of common C language
programming convention).

in the early part of this decade ... there was a big increase in
internet-related exploits involving the greater use in some platforms
and/or associated (personal) applications which would automatically
execute scripts arriving over the network. this increased until
automagic script execution exploits were about equal to buffer length
related exploits.

a couple past posts related to doing frequency analysis on the CVE
vulnerability database ... and having difficulty categorizing exploits
... and lobbying the CVE interests to improve the strucuture/nature of
CVE reports.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004e.html#43 security taxonomy and CVE
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#28 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#32 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007q.html#20 Hackers Attack Apps While Still in 
Development

some amount of the problem was that common personal computer platforms
had started out on stand-alone environment with possible terminal
emulation connection
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#emulation

and then LAN connections were introduced for local departmental
networking. The automatic scripting grewup (as purely content enrichment
enhancement) in a purely non-hostile environment.

The problem was treating the LAN connections, in a purely non-hostile
departmental networking environment, as the same as LAN connections in
the extremely hostile internet networking environment ... and not having
evolved the appropriate countermeasures for the wide variety of possibly
attacks.

for other drift, recent reference to the cms xmas exec 
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007u.html#87 CompUSA to Close after Jan. 1st 2008
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008c.html#2 folklore indeed

on bitnet 
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#bitnet

a year before the morris worm 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris_worm

on the internet
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internet

and for other topic drift ... attempted reproduction (in html) of an
old '81 3279 xmas tree exec
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007v.html#54 An old fashioned Christmas
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007v.html#55 An old fashioned Christmas
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007v.html#56 An old fashioned Christmas

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: SPAM: Re: Linux zSeries questions

[Rick Fochtman]

---

From what I've seen in looking at various bits and pieces of source 
code, PL/S or its replacement(s) have been most heavily used in the MVS 
code; not so much in OS/360, except SMP.
   



Do you count BSL as being PL/S? It was heavily used in OS/360, for TSO.
 


--
I can't speak for that, since I've never looked at TSO source. I think 
it's reasonable to add BSL to the PL/S set of languages.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

HTTPD Roots (was: Linux zSeries questions)

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:23:06 +0900, Timothy Sipples wrote:
>
>Other bits I'd take an educated guess (without inside knowledge) that are
>largely or entirely C and/or C++:
>
>- the IBM HTTP Server for z/OS (including the Apache-derived one shipping
>with WebSphere Application Server V6.1 for z/OS)
>
Now I'm confused.  I've seen flat denials among these lists from IBM
employees that IBM's HTTPD is Apache-derived.  But which HTTPD?  So:

o How many HTTP servers does IBM supply for z/OS?

o Which one(s) are Apache-derived?

I assume this is in addition to the customers' building pure Apache
for z/OS.

Thanks,
gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: HTTPD Roots (was: Linux zSeries questions)

[Gray, Larry - Larry A]

NOTICE:
All information in and attached to the e-mail(s) below may be proprietary, 
confidential, privileged and otherwise protected from improper or erroneous 
disclosure.  If you are not the sender's intended recipient, you are not 
authorized to intercept, read, print, retain, copy, forward, or disseminate 
this message.  If you have erroneously received this communication, please 
notify the sender immediately by phone (704-758-1000) or by e-mail and destroy 
all copies of this message (electronic, paper, or otherwise).  Thank you.

There are two that I know of.  The older IBM HTTP Server that is based
on CERN.  There is a newer IBM HTTP Server powered by Apache.  I know
this one comes with WAS as part of the optional installed materials, but
I thought you could also order it with z/OS.  I have not seen a z/OS
order in a while, so that last bit of information might be wrong.


Larry Gray
Large Systems Engineering
Lowe's Companies
336-658-7944

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 8:38 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: HTTPD Roots (was: Linux zSeries questions)

On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:23:06 +0900, Timothy Sipples wrote:
>
>Other bits I'd take an educated guess (without inside knowledge) that 
>are largely or entirely C and/or C++:
>
>- the IBM HTTP Server for z/OS (including the Apache-derived one 
>shipping with WebSphere Application Server V6.1 for z/OS)
>
Now I'm confused.  I've seen flat denials among these lists from IBM
employees that IBM's HTTPD is Apache-derived.  But which HTTPD?  So:

o How many HTTP servers does IBM supply for z/OS?

o Which one(s) are Apache-derived?

I assume this is in addition to the customers' building pure Apache for
z/OS.

Thanks,
gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: HTTPD Roots (was: Linux zSeries questions)

[R.S.]

Paul Gilmartin wrote:
[...]


Now I'm confused.  I've seen flat denials among these lists from IBM
employees that IBM's HTTPD is Apache-derived.  But which HTTPD?  So:

o How many HTTP servers does IBM supply for z/OS?


AFAIK two or three.
IMWEB which is part of z/OS base
WAS (websphere) which is separately ordered and paid.
? Apache as a part of "free tools for USS".

I'm not sure, but possibly IMW is inherited from Lotus Domino Go Webserver.

--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland


--
BRE Bank SA
ul. Senatorska 18
00-950 Warszawa
www.brebank.pl

Sąd Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy 
XII Wydział Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sądowego, 
nr rejestru przedsiębiorców KRS 025237

NIP: 526-021-50-88
Według stanu na dzień 01.01.2008 r. kapitał zakładowy BRE Banku SA  wynosi 
118.642.672 złote i został w całości wpłacony.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: HTTPD Roots (was: Linux zSeries questions)

[Mark Post]

>>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at  8:37 AM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Gilmartin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
-snip-
> Now I'm confused.  I've seen flat denials among these lists from IBM
> employees that IBM's HTTPD is Apache-derived.  But which HTTPD?  So:
> 
> o How many HTTP servers does IBM supply for z/OS?
Currently, only one: IBM HTTP Server (IHS).  WAS is not a web server, it is a 
Web Application Server, i.e., a J2EE monster.

> o Which one(s) are Apache-derived?

Since there's only one, all of them.  :)  If you go back and do some Google 
searches, you'll likely find the various stories of how IBM got involved with 
open source software to start with.  To summarize, they decided it was silly to 
continue to develop/maintain an IBM web server when Apache was already being 
used by 60% of the world.  The Apache license allows you to take their source, 
modify it, and turn around and license the package for profit, which is what 
they've done.  They think of it as their mods adding value to the whole 
package, making it worth people paying for.

> I assume this is in addition to the customers' building pure Apache
> for z/OS.

Right.


Mark Post
  

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: HTTPD Roots (was: Linux zSeries questions)

[Ulrich Boche]

Mark Post wrote:

On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at  8:37 AM, in message

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Gilmartin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
-snip-

Now I'm confused.  I've seen flat denials among these lists from IBM
employees that IBM's HTTPD is Apache-derived.  But which HTTPD?  So:

o How many HTTP servers does IBM supply for z/OS?

Currently, only one: IBM HTTP Server (IHS).  WAS is not a web server, it is a 
Web Application Server, i.e., a J2EE monster.


o Which one(s) are Apache-derived?


Since there's only one, all of them.  :)  If you go back and do some Google 
searches, you'll likely find the various stories of how IBM got involved with 
open source software to start with.  To summarize, they decided it was silly to 
continue to develop/maintain an IBM web server when Apache was already being 
used by 60% of the world.  The Apache license allows you to take their source, 
modify it, and turn around and license the package for profit, which is what 
they've done.  They think of it as their mods adding value to the whole 
package, making it worth people paying for.


I assume this is in addition to the customers' building pure Apache
for z/OS.


Right.

The IBM HTTP Server for z/OS (current version is 5.3) that comes with 
z/OS is definitely not Apache based. Its basis is the old CERN web 
server. Just look at the httpd.conf file format and you will see.


I've been told by reliable IBM sources that an IBM port of the Apache 
web server is delivered with WebSphere Application Server V.6. I'd like 
to know if that one can be obtained/installed without WAS but I Haven't 
been able to find reliable information about that.


In any case, WAS is big enough that a little web server such as Apache 
can hide within it :-)


And, of  course, WAS is not only J2EE, that's only the business logic 
part of WAS. For the presentation logic portion of WAS you'll need a web 
server (if you want to run it on z/OS, for that matter).

--
Ulrich Boche
SVA GmbH, Germany
IBM Premier Business Partner

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: HTTPD Roots (was: Linux zSeries questions)

[Aaron Walker]

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:22:51 +0100, Ulrich Boche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>And, of  course, WAS is not only J2EE, that's only the business logic
>part of WAS. For the presentation logic portion of WAS you'll need a web
>server (if you want to run it on z/OS, for that matter).


You seem to be suggesting that WAS does not handle static content.  You
don't need a HTTP server (on z/OS or otherwise) if you have WAS for z/OS. 
WAS handles static content just fine, if much more expensively than an HTTP
server.  You are highly recommended, though, to use an HTTP server (if you
are running a web-app) on the front-end for just that reason.

Well, now come to think of it, I'm not sure which would be more expensive in
a TCO-sort of way.  WAS would be using your zAAPs, while HTTP server would
be using the regular CPs.

Aaron

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html

Re: HTTPD Roots (was: Linux zSeries questions) + jinsight

[Aaron Walker]

According to the WebSphere InfoCenter
(http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/wasinfo/v6r1/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.websphere.ihs.doc/info/ihs/ihs/welc6miginstallihsz.html
):


Note: IBM HTTP Server for z/OS, which is provided with WebSphere Application
Server, is different from the Version 5.3 HTTP Server for z/OS, which is
provided with the z/OS base operating system and is not powered by Apache.
The information contained within the IBM HTTP Server product documentation
pertains to IBM HTTP Server for WebSphere Application Server, not the
Version 5.3 HTTP Server.

You can install the IBM HTTP Server for WebSphere Application Server product
on z/OS systems. Order the Version 6.1 PTF for WebSphere Application Server
that contains the IBM HTTP Server for z/OS to get started.


I believe I saw another announcement about how to order this without WAS,
but I can't locate it.  Go figure.



More on the Apache-based version in
http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/WebIndex/WP101170


Abstract: For many years IBM has provided an HTTP Server for the z/OS
operating system. That HTTP Server was based on an earlier HTTP Server
called the “Domino Go Webserver,” and for that reason it is sometimes
referred to informally as “DGW.” More often it was referred to as “the HTTP
Server” or “IHS.” Lately that HTTP Server has been delivered as part of the
base operating system. It is currently at the V5R3 level. In 2006 IBM
released a different HTTP Server for z/OS. This was based on the open source
Apache web server, and extended to be z/OS-aware. This web server is known
as the “IBM HTTP Server for z/OS Powered by Apache.” That is presently at
Version V6R1. Future functional enhancements will be made to this HTTP
Server on z/OS. The purpose of this document is to make you aware of this
new IBM HTTP Server for z/OS and help you understand how to acquire it and
use it.


***

And, of course, there is the documentation for the DGW-based HTTP server
which some of us know and love (or hate) - SC34-4826-09 (for the z/OS V1R9
version).

And, as a side note, for you WAS on z/OSers, IBM has publicly (re)released
Jinsight (http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/tech/jinsightlive), which, I can say
as an ex-IBMer, was an *awesome* tool.  It could be used on any platform
before, and perhaps this one can too, but they are only advertising it to
the z-crowd.  Not sure why. 

Aaron

>> o How many HTTP servers does IBM supply for z/OS?
>Currently, only one: IBM HTTP Server (IHS).  WAS is not a web server, it is
a Web Application Server, i.e., a J2EE monster.
>
>> o Which one(s) are Apache-derived?
>
>Since there's only one, all of them.  :)  If you go back and do some Google
searches, you'll likely find the various stories of how IBM got involved
with open source software to start with.  To summarize, they decided it was
silly to continue to develop/maintain an IBM web server when Apache was
already being used by 60% of the world.  The Apache license allows you to
take their source, modify it, and turn around and license the package for
profit, which is what they've done.  They think of it as their mods adding
value to the whole package, making it worth people paying for.
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html