Re: Under z/OS Unix
Terminal (not command) behaviour: No Surely you're not thinking of the dreadful RUNNING/INPUT toggle (I try not to). IBM should be ashamed. Can't remember what I'm thinking of ;-) too long since I last used (or was force to use) TSO/OMVS. -- Peter Hunkeler -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Tue, 17 May 2011 07:57:38 +0200, Hunkeler Peter (KIUP 4) wrote: The Unix syntax is the same whether the commands come from a Telnet session or from the TSO OMVS command. Syntax: Yes Terminal (not command) behaviour: No Surely you're not thinking of the dreadful RUNNING/INPUT toggle (I try not to). IBM should be ashamed. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
In listserv%201105161217371283.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/16/2011 at 12:17 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said: Because you trimmed the essence of my remark, I quoted the part that I was challenging. then disputed what remained out of context. Context is not always relevant. I was challenging the claim It allows function reference before definition, so a typo in a function name would cause the interpreter to swallow all input looking for the definition. I don't see how anything prior to the comma changes the claim after the comma. -- 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
In listserv%201105151611482534.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/15/2011 at 04:11 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said: certainly not in an interactive shell I'm not sure what you mean by an interactive shell, nor why you would describe Rexx as being one, but there is nothing in Rexx that precludes compiling the entire file before executing any of it, and some implementations do just that. Rexx is a scripting language, not a shell. -- 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.comwrote: On Mon, 16 May 2011 08:42:32 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: In listserv%201105151611482534.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/15/2011 at 04:11 PM, Paul Gilmartin said: certainly not in an interactive shell I'm not sure what you mean by an interactive shell, nor why you would describe Rexx as being one, but there is nothing in Rexx that precludes compiling the entire file before executing any of it, and some implementations do just that. Rexx is a scripting language, not a shell. I forked this fiber of the thread by musing: Yeah, you forked it up real good didn't you ;-) http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1105L=ibm-mainP=80293 I've sometimes imagined Rexx as a shell language, but it has a couple severe flaws: ... We seem to be in considerably acrimonious agreement here. Because you trimmed the essence of my remark, then disputed what remained out of context. Context, schmontext. You don't expect Seymour to read all the posts in a thread do you? If he did that he wouldn't have a chance to answer questions that had already been answered days before, or to reply several times in a row to the same thread! -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html CONFIDENTIALITY/EMAIL NOTICE: The material in this transmission contains confidential and privileged information intended only for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that you have received this material in error and that any forwarding, copying, printing, distribution, use or disclosure of the material is strictly prohibited. If you have received this material in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the material. Emails are not secure and can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by email. Thank you. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Mon, 16 May 2011 08:42:32 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: In listserv%201105151611482534.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/15/2011 at 04:11 PM, Paul Gilmartin said: certainly not in an interactive shell I'm not sure what you mean by an interactive shell, nor why you would describe Rexx as being one, but there is nothing in Rexx that precludes compiling the entire file before executing any of it, and some implementations do just that. Rexx is a scripting language, not a shell. I forked this fiber of the thread by musing: http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1105L=ibm-mainP=80293 I've sometimes imagined Rexx as a shell language, but it has a couple severe flaws: ... We seem to be in considerably acrimonious agreement here. Because you trimmed the essence of my remark, then disputed what remained out of context. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
Paul, I agree that Rexx is Language, scripting or otherwise, you can compile it or interpret it and with Object rexx , its Object oriented.. Scott J Ford From: Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Sent: Mon, May 16, 2011 1:17:37 PM Subject: Re: Under z/OS Unix On Mon, 16 May 2011 08:42:32 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: In listserv%201105151611482534.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/15/2011 at 04:11 PM, Paul Gilmartin said: certainly not in an interactive shell I'm not sure what you mean by an interactive shell, nor why you would describe Rexx as being one, but there is nothing in Rexx that precludes compiling the entire file before executing any of it, and some implementations do just that. Rexx is a scripting language, not a shell. I forked this fiber of the thread by musing: http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1105L=ibm-mainP=80293 I've sometimes imagined Rexx as a shell language, but it has a couple severe flaws: ... We seem to be in considerably acrimonious agreement here. Because you trimmed the essence of my remark, then disputed what remained out of context. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
The Unix syntax is the same whether the commands come from a Telnet session or from the TSO OMVS command. Syntax: Yes Terminal (not command) behaviour: No -- Peter Hunkeler -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
In dc74548a025aff4a85f46926802a9b23064ed...@chsa1035.share.beluni.net, on 05/12/2011 at 04:54 PM, Hunkeler Peter (KIUP 4) peter.hunke...@credit-suisse.com said: I don't get what youre asking me? Your original statement was People primarily using TSO foreground will not gain much from their 3270 experience, because UNIX shell command line is so much different from TSO/ISPF that you better start to learn it and then feel comfortable working in that other environment. The Unix syntax is the same whether the commands come from a Telnet session or from the TSO OMVS command. IIRC, it was about working in a UNIX shell environment that was established via TSO/OMVS versus SSH/rlogin/telnet environment. Yes, which is why I questioned it - the syntax is the same in both. That's why I thought that you might have meant ISHELL vs Telnet rather than OMVS vs Telnet. -- 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
In listserv%201105121129497094.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/12/2011 at 11:29 AM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said: o It allows function reference before definition, I consider that an advantage. so a typo in a function name would cause the interpreter to swallow all input looking for the definition. No. o It lacks an Include, That I do consider to be a serious flaw. (Well I understand Object Rexx has one. REQUIRE is not the same as include. Whether it is better, worse or just different is an argument for another thread. -- 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Sun, 15 May 2011 12:34:06 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: In listserv%201105121129497094.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/12/2011 at 11:29 AM, Paul Gilmartin said: o It allows function reference before definition, I consider that an advantage. Perhaps in a programming language, but not if functions are first-class objects as in POSIX shell or PostScript (but structured programming fanatics have reason to dislike such a facility); certainly not in an interactive shell. (Well, I suppose if a shell encountered a reference to an undefined function it might prompt for the definition.) so a typo in a function name would cause the interpreter to swallow all input looking for the definition. No. Yes. But hypothetical and moot because Rexx as constituted on z/OS ingests the entire script before interpreting any of it. Unacceptable behavior for an interactive shell. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
In dc74548a025aff4a85f46926802a9b23063d2...@chsa1035.share.beluni.net, on 05/09/2011 at 09:55 AM, Hunkeler Peter (KIUP 4) peter.hunke...@credit-suisse.com said: No, I was thinking of an SSH/rlogin/telnet environment. You meant that SSH/rlogin/telnet is better than SSH/rlogin/telnet? -- 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
In listserv%201105081808485863.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/08/2011 at 06:08 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said: Content-Type: text/plain With no charset you shoulod be sending only ASCII. Does one exist? I'm not aware of an FTP client with TSO syntax, but I wouldn't guaranty that there is none. Chacun á son go t. That's not ASCII; you need, e.g., charset=iso-8859-15. -- 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
No, I was thinking of an SSH/rlogin/telnet environment. You meant that SSH/rlogin/telnet is better than SSH/rlogin/telnet? I don't get what youre asking me? This is the relevant part of the post your referring to: I never claimed that the OMVS command was a substitute to learning Unix syntax; in fact, I don't see how it has any relevance to the issue of familiarity. Were you thinking of ISHELL? No, I was thinking of an SSH/rlogin/telnet environment. ISHELL is even worse that TSO/OMVS when doing UNIX work, i.e. running more than a single UNIX command. It is, however, a valuable interface for many other tasks. IIRC, it was about working in a UNIX shell environment that was established via TSO/OMVS versus SSH/rlogin/telnet environment. I do not consider ISHELL to be a UNIX shell environment in that context. -- Peter Hunkeler -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Hunkeler Peter (KIUP 4) peter.hunke...@credit-suisse.com wrote: IIRC, it was about working in a UNIX shell environment that was established via TSO/OMVS versus SSH/rlogin/telnet environment. I do not consider ISHELL to be a UNIX shell environment in that context. Agreed. ISHELL can be useful, but the name itself is a false assertion :-) Kirk Wolf Dovetailed Technologies http://dovetail.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
IBM will soon be forced to change ISHELL to some other name, I'm sure. Because Apple will be suing them for having something computer related which starts with an i. This will cause confusion in the marketplace for Apple products. Speaking of which, the I in IBM needs to change by the same logic. On Thu, 2011-05-12 at 10:29 -0500, Kirk Wolf wrote: On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Hunkeler Peter (KIUP 4) peter.hunke...@credit-suisse.com wrote: IIRC, it was about working in a UNIX shell environment that was established via TSO/OMVS versus SSH/rlogin/telnet environment. I do not consider ISHELL to be a UNIX shell environment in that context. Agreed. ISHELL can be useful, but the name itself is a false assertion :-) Kirk Wolf Dovetailed Technologies http://dovetail.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- John McKown Maranatha! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Thu, 12 May 2011 10:29:48 -0500, Kirk Wolf wrote: Agreed. ISHELL can be useful, but the name itself is a false assertion :-) Does it preserve the environment (CWD, umask, variables, ...) between commands? And, of course, you can't put a command in background. I've sometimes imagined Rexx as a shell language, but it has a couple severe flaws: o It allows function reference before definition, so a typo in a function name would cause the interpreter to swallow all input looking for the definition. o It lacks an Include, read, source, . command. (Well I understand Object Rexx has one. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
John McKown wrote: IBM will soon be forced to change ISHELL to some other name, I'm sure. Because Apple will be suing them for having something computer related which starts with an i. This will cause confusion in the marketplace for Apple products. Speaking of which, the I in IBM needs to change by the same logic. So IBM (or is it iBM hmm? ;-D ) should be renamed to BM? (B)less (M)e! ;-D Then the competitors will refer to (B)ullsh*t (M)achines... John, I like your sense of humor, be a nice sport and post more of your funnies ... ;-D :-D;-D8-D:-) Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
because UNIX shell command line is so much different from TSO/ISPF that you better start to learn it and then feel comfortable working in that other environment. I never claimed that the OMVS command was a substitute to learning Unix syntax; in fact, I don't see how it has any relevance to the issue of familiarity. Were you thinking of ISHELL? No, I was thinking of an SSH/rlogin/telnet environment. ISHELL is even worse that TSO/OMVS when doing UNIX work, i.e. running more than a single UNIX command. It is, however, a valuable interface for many other tasks. -- Peter Hunkeler -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
Doping is shameful. Ask Floyd Landis. -- Regards, Gord Tomlin Action Software International (a division of Mazda Computer Corporation) Tel: (905) 470-7113, Fax: (905) 470-6507 On 2011-05-08 18:40, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: Inlistserv%201105060855478227.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/06/2011 at 08:55 AM, Paul Gilmartinpaulgboul...@aim.com said: Now, that's terse enough to be remniscent of Shmuel; and misleading to boot. Assuming I understand Chris's explanation, that is shameful pedantry. There seems to be a tradition of labelling any response that you don't understand as pedantry. Doping so, IMHO, is what is shameful. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
In listserv%201105041333007021.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/04/2011 at 01:33 PM, Mark Zelden m...@mzelden.com said: The part I was addressing wasn't what is z/OS Unix, rather it was what people meant when they write or say I was doing blah blah under USS. I've never heard anyone say I was FTPing under USS for example unless they were executing FTP interactively from a shell of some sort. Well, I would certainly say that I was FTP'ing under Unix unless I had an FTP cleint with classic TSO syntax that wasn't a port of a Unix client. -- 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
In BANLkTi=n_dd0an1qiqmv7_cvhwfjssa...@mail.gmail.com, on 05/04/2011 at 02:50 PM, Kirk Wolf k...@dovetail.com said: Good discussion. As OP, I was hoping for some consensus that Under z/OS Unix or Under USS are not very useful terms since most people don't recognize them as meaning any dubbed z/OS Unix process. The impression that I have is that there is no consensus on what is covered by the terms. -- 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
In dc74548a025aff4a85f46926802a9b23063d2...@chsa1035.share.beluni.net, on 05/05/2011 at 09:06 AM, Hunkeler Peter (KIUP 4) peter.hunke...@credit-suisse.com said: You're right. But, using a unix shell through a 3270 data stream interface the way TSO provides it, is a PITA, IMHO. I'm not denying that the OMVS command is klunky, nor that it imposes restrictions not dictated either by the 3270 or by TSO I/O services. But sometimes it is more convenient than maintaining separate sessions. because UNIX shell command line is so much different from TSO/ISPF that you better start to learn it and then feel comfortable working in that other environment. I never claimed that the OMVS command was a substitute to learning Unix syntax; in fact, I don't see how it has any relevance to the issue of familiarity. Were you thinking of ISHELL? -- 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
In listserv%201105060855478227.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/06/2011 at 08:55 AM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said: Now, that's terse enough to be remniscent of Shmuel; and misleading to boot. Assuming I understand Chris's explanation, that is shameful pedantry. There seems to be a tradition of labelling any response that you don't understand as pedantry. Doping so, IMHO, is what is shameful. -- 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Sun, 8 May 2011 18:27:48 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
Well, I would certainly say that I was FTP'ing under Unix unless I had
an FTP cleint with classic TSO syntax ...
Does one exist? I'm imagining something such as:
GET INDATASET('SYS1.MACLIB(SPLEVEL)') -
OUTDATASET(MYDSN) TYPE(A) MODE(B)
Perhaps from Interlink?
Chacun à son goût.
-- gil
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Sun, 8 May 2011 18:37:03 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: I'm not denying that the OMVS command is klunky, nor that it imposes restrictions not dictated either by the 3270 or by TSO I/O services. But sometimes it is more convenient than maintaining separate sessions. OTOH, sometimes it's valuable to have the extra window, especially since it doesn't lock up when a command is running in the other split. ... Were you thinking of ISHELL? Not when I can avoid it. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
Timothy I have to assume you are referring to the IP component of Communications Server. I don't believe there has ever actually been a TCP/IP for z/OS since TCP/IP for MVS was absorbed into Communications Server when it was OS/390 Communications Server. But I'm just a pedant, as if that had any virtue when discussing matters to do with z/OS! And to think Mark Zelden is on record as accusing me of not knowing/understanding the structure of z/OS. Incidentally, the list tradition of quoting the post to which you are responding also has some merit. I was obliged to dig out those posts to which I happened to recall you were referring: 1. Paul Gilmartin Is TCP/IP for z/OS a separately priced item? http://alabamamaps.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1105L=ibm- mainT=0F=S=P=33947 2. Mark Zelden Is TCP/IP for z/OS a separately priced item? Yes. Along with a some other base components that have competitive alternatives from other vendors. Besides TCP/IP, ... http://alabamamaps.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1105L=ibm- mainT=0F=S=P=34668 I guess you could also have covered the assertion that there are alternatives to what should have been described as Communications Server (?) Chris Mason On Fri, 6 May 2011 13:52:14 +0800, Timothy Sipples timothy.sipp...@us.ibm.com wrote: Is TCP/IP for z/OS a separately priced item? Yes. Actually, no. - - - - - Timothy Sipples -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Fri, 6 May 2011 02:52:58 -0500, Chris Mason wrote: I have to assume you are referring to the IP component of Communications Server. I don't believe there has ever actually been a TCP/IP for z/OS since TCP/IP for MVS was absorbed into Communications Server when it was OS/390 Communications Server. Let me see if I understand: o Communications server is a separately priced component of z/OS. o IBM's TCP/IP exists only as part of Communications Server. o Therefore there is no such thing as a separately priced TCP/IP from IBM.. But I'm just a pedant, as if that had any virtue when discussing matters to do with z/OS! No, not a pedant; you supplied valuable clarification. And to think Mark Zelden is on record as accusing me of not knowing/understanding the structure of z/OS. Mark spoke to the spirit of the question I asked; no offense. Incidentally, the list tradition of quoting the post to which you are responding also has some merit. I was obliged to dig out those posts to which I happened to recall you were referring: 1. Paul Gilmartin Is TCP/IP for z/OS a separately priced item? http://alabamamaps.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1105L=ibm-mainT=0F=S=P=33947 2. Mark Zelden Is TCP/IP for z/OS a separately priced item? Yes. Along with a some other base components that have competitive alternatives from other vendors. Besides TCP/IP, ... http://alabamamaps.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1105L=ibm-mainT=0F=S=P=34668 I guess you could also have covered the assertion that there are alternatives to what should have been described as Communications Server (?) Chris Mason On Fri, 6 May 2011 13:52:14 +0800, Timothy Sipples timothy.sipp...@us.ibm.com wrote: Is TCP/IP for z/OS a separately priced item? Yes. Actually, no. Now, that's terse enough to be remniscent of Shmuel; and misleading to boot. Assuming I understand Chris's explanation, that is shameful pedantry. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
The OMVS TSO command is still a convenience for people primarily using foreground TSO. A separate telnet session is not always convenient, and in some cases[1] not even possible. You're right. But, using a unix shell through a 3270 data stream interface the way TSO provides it, is a PITA, IMHO. People primarily using TSO foreground will not gain much from their 3270 experience, because UNIX shell command line is so much different from TSO/ISPF that you better start to learn it and then feel comfortable working in that other environment. This is the background for my statement I consider it TSO/OMVS obsolete. It doesn't help, as you mentioned, when SSH/telnet/rlogin is not available or not allowed. -- Peter Hunkeler -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
Peter, I am curious about your last statement. While I can understand not allowing telnet/rlogin, what would be the reasoning for denying SSH access? Rob Schramm On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 3:06 AM, Hunkeler Peter (KIUP 4) peter.hunke...@credit-suisse.com wrote: The OMVS TSO command is still a convenience for people primarily using foreground TSO. A separate telnet session is not always convenient, and in some cases[1] not even possible. You're right. But, using a unix shell through a 3270 data stream interface the way TSO provides it, is a PITA, IMHO. People primarily using TSO foreground will not gain much from their 3270 experience, because UNIX shell command line is so much different from TSO/ISPF that you better start to learn it and then feel comfortable working in that other environment. This is the background for my statement I consider it TSO/OMVS obsolete. It doesn't help, as you mentioned, when SSH/telnet/rlogin is not available or not allowed. -- Peter Hunkeler -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- Rob Schramm Senior Systems Engineer w: 513.305.6224 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
I am curious about your last statement. While I can understand not allowing telnet/rlogin, what would be the reasoning for denying SSH access? Can't tell you (I think it was Shmuel that brought up this arument). I can think of: - Installation doesn't want to install SSH daemon software. - Installation doesn't want to enable TCP/IP access to z/OS. Reasons? I don't have them handy :-) -- Peter Hunkeler -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
I might understand (due to I don't want to set it up) not setting up SSH. But are there any installations not running TCP/IP these days? Rob Schramm On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Hunkeler Peter (KIUP 4) peter.hunke...@credit-suisse.com wrote: I am curious about your last statement. While I can understand not allowing telnet/rlogin, what would be the reasoning for denying SSH access? Can't tell you (I think it was Shmuel that brought up this arument). I can think of: - Installation doesn't want to install SSH daemon software. - Installation doesn't want to enable TCP/IP access to z/OS. Reasons? I don't have them handy :-) -- Peter Hunkeler -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- Rob Schramm Senior Systems Engineer w: 513.305.6224 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Thu, 5 May 2011 07:26:59 -0400, Rob Schramm wrote: I am curious about your last statement. While I can understand not allowing telnet/rlogin, what would be the reasoning for denying SSH access? Of course and alas, SSH is not in the base installation. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Thu, 5 May 2011 08:55:15 -0400, Rob Schramm wrote: I might understand (due to I don't want to set it up) not setting up SSH. But are there any installations not running TCP/IP these days? Some of our lab systems don't; they rely on shared DASD. Described as an economy measure. Is TCP/IP for z/OS a separately priced item? The mind would boggle. Perhaps it's hardware cost. -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Thu, 5 May 2011 08:55:15 -0400, Rob Schramm wrote: I might understand (due to I don't want to set it up) not setting up SSH. But are there any installations not running TCP/IP these days? I should add we have SSH installed but not successfully configured on some of our systems because we lack the (separately priced? Am I correct?) hardware feature required for /dev/random. The mind boggles; z/OS /dev/random uses a PRNG, and for that specialized hardware is necessary? -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Thu, 5 May 2011 08:47:30 -0500, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote: Some of our lab systems don't; they rely on shared DASD. Described as an economy measure. Is TCP/IP for z/OS a separately priced item? Yes. Along with a some other base components that have competitive alternatives from other vendors. Besides TCP/IP, examples I can think of are: Security Server (RACF), DFSMSdss/DFSMShsm/DFSMSrmm, DFSORT, SDSF and RMF. Mark -- Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS mailto:m...@mzelden.com Mark's MVS Utilities: http://www.mzelden.com/mvsutil.html Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin On Thu, 5 May 2011 08:55:15 -0400, Rob Schramm wrote: I might understand (due to I don't want to set it up) not setting up SSH. But are there any installations not running TCP/IP these days? I should add we have SSH installed but not successfully configured on some of our systems because we lack the (separately priced? Am I correct?) hardware feature required for /dev/random. The mind boggles; z/OS /dev/random uses a PRNG, and for that specialized hardware is necessary? The specialized hardware (crypto card) is not _required_, even at z/OS 1.11. Our only use of the ssh capability (so far) is sftp, for which the software PRNG works acceptably well for us. -jc- -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
Gil, Using Ported Tools OpenSSH does not *require* /dev/random, but if you don't have it it falls back to a slow ssh-rand-helper thing. In OpenSSH, this is used for PRNG during initialization of a session (only). Its a PITA that z/OS doesn't include a secure software /dev/random, like every other modern Unix/Linux implementation. Some shops, especially in sandbox LPARs, don't have a crypto card and ICSF. We have considered writing an open source ssh-rand-helper (or even a /dev/random device or daemon) that uses the CPACF and reasonable z/OS entropy sources for a low-cost alternative, but haven't gotten around to it. But you don't need a hardware /dev/random to run Ported Tools OpenSSH, but it does speed up session startup(only) if you do have it. Kirk Wolf Dovetailed Technologies http://dovetail.com PS We offer a new product that accelerates the ciphers and HMACs in Ported Tools OpenSSH 1.2 using CPACF instructions. See: OpenSSH Accelerator for z/OS http://dovetail.com/solutions.html Also, there is a chart on slide 14 of the following presentation that compares crypto features of Ported Tools OpenSSH file transfer to FTP/TLS: http://dovetail.com/docs/oshxl/openssh-accelerator-webinar.pdf On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote: On Thu, 5 May 2011 08:55:15 -0400, Rob Schramm wrote: I might understand (due to I don't want to set it up) not setting up SSH. But are there any installations not running TCP/IP these days? I should add we have SSH installed but not successfully configured on some of our systems because we lack the (separately priced? Am I correct?) hardware feature required for /dev/random. The mind boggles; z/OS /dev/random uses a PRNG, and for that specialized hardware is necessary? -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
Using the hardware is optional, there's a software implementation too. Some smaller lpars may not have enough cpu share to drive the software process though in Ported Tools 1.1, I know that this was the case with some of our sandbox lpars that experienced chronic timeouts. IBM remedied this in Ported Tools 1.2 with the new variable _ZOS_SSH_PRNG_CMDS_TIMEOUT. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin Sent: May 5, 2011 8:55 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: Under z/OS Unix On Thu, 5 May 2011 08:55:15 -0400, Rob Schramm wrote: I might understand (due to I don't want to set it up) not setting up SSH. But are there any installations not running TCP/IP these days? I should add we have SSH installed but not successfully configured on some of our systems because we lack the (separately priced? Am I correct?) hardware feature required for /dev/random. The mind boggles; z/OS /dev/random uses a PRNG, and for that specialized hardware is necessary? -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
Helpful and a bit weird all at the same time. Wouldn't it have been easier to just fix the PRNG issue in the first place by creating a ssh_rand_helper that used an assembler module to gather entropy.. than creating an option to deal with the slow PRNG with OpenSSH? Rob Schramm On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Mullen, Patrick patrick.mul...@gwl.cawrote: Using the hardware is optional, there's a software implementation too. Some smaller lpars may not have enough cpu share to drive the software process though in Ported Tools 1.1, I know that this was the case with some of our sandbox lpars that experienced chronic timeouts. IBM remedied this in Ported Tools 1.2 with the new variable _ZOS_SSH_PRNG_CMDS_TIMEOUT. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin Sent: May 5, 2011 8:55 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: Under z/OS Unix On Thu, 5 May 2011 08:55:15 -0400, Rob Schramm wrote: I might understand (due to I don't want to set it up) not setting up SSH. But are there any installations not running TCP/IP these days? I should add we have SSH installed but not successfully configured on some of our systems because we lack the (separately priced? Am I correct?) hardware feature required for /dev/random. The mind boggles; z/OS /dev/random uses a PRNG, and for that specialized hardware is necessary? -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html -- Rob Schramm Senior Systems Engineer w: 513.305.6224 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
Is TCP/IP for z/OS a separately priced item? Yes. Actually, no. - - - - - Timothy Sipples Resident Enterprise Architect Value Creation Complex Deals Team IBM Growth Markets (Based in Singapore) E-Mail: timothy.sipp...@us.ibm.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
Some thoughts and comments from my side. More may follow. 2) Lower level APIs (assembler or other HLLs) These are used to implement (1). Just about any program / job can call these or (1), and the first time it does it gets dubbed (8) with a z/OS Unix PID and can use the kernel (below) By calling (2), programs are in fact calling the kernel. The kernel may then recognize that the unit of work (TCB or SRB, task for short hereafter) has not yet been authorized to use its services. If so, the kernel will see if the task can become an authorized user, i.e. does the userid the task is running under have UNIX credentials (uid/gid). If it has, then the task is said as being dubbed (which involves creation of some control blocks, an possibly more). 3) The Kernel Address space (BPXOINIT?) Common services for (1), (2) System address space OMVS is the kernel. BPXOINIT is the so called init process. The former provides the services the latter is the process with PID=1, becoming parent of all orphaned processes. 5) z/OS Unix command binaries Program binder objects that are stored in (or linked to by) a file in the zFS or HFS filesystem (4). Unix command binaries can be invoked by BPXBATCH/COZBATCH (see 10), or via fork()/spawn() APIs in (1) or (2), or more commonly by a shell (see 6). You can sometimes read a distinction between commands and utilities. The former is then referring to the shell built in commands and the latter is referring to the standalone binaries. Mostly this distinction is not of importance but sometimes it may well be. UNIX binaries (the binder objects) may also be stored in a PDSE and then called via EXEC PGM= directly. If there is a corresponding entry in the file system (external link or null file with sticky bit set), then these binaries may also be called from a shell command line (or any of the other means you listed). 6) The Unix shell program (/bin/sh, and example of (5) [snip] The shell can be run interactively, under TSO OMVS (see 10), [snip] I'd prefer The shell can be run interactively, via TSO OMVS... It sufficient that tasks run under z/OS UNIX :-) 7) BPXAS initiator and its forked / (non locally) spawned address spaces. Typically associated with the z/OS Unix shell (6) and Unix commands (5), but not necessarily so. Better: BPXAS initiator and its forked / (non locally) spawned *processes*. BPXAS *is* the address space where forked()/spawned() processes run. 8) A z/OS job that is dubbed (has issued a service (1) or (2) and has a Unix PID. This doesn't preclude it from accessing other resources, like traditional z/OS Datasets, etc. You may add obtaining and freeing storage. There is no separate storage management for z/OS UNIX, its all done by the single VSM/RSM/ASM. You may add workload management. There are no separate work unit queues, undubbed TCBs/SRBs are on the same queues as dubbed ones. Etc, etc. - The OMVS TSO command is also contributory to the Under z/OS UNIX problem - it allows you to run a shell under TSO, but it is not integrated well with ISPF (IMO). The OMVS TSO command processor had its rights in the nineties; it is obsolete today. Its a PITA. People having a need to work with UNIx shells interactively should use SSH/rlogin(/telnet) to login. So, when people say Under z/OS UNIX ( or Under USS), which of these do they mean? No offence intended: They probably don't know :-) -- Peter Hunkeler -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
FWIW, IBM publications now use the current terminology: z/OS UNIX System Services (z/OS UNIX). This is not a discussion of the commonly used yet disputed TLA. Please. Go to the z/OS V1.12 doc site and do a search on USS over all books (some 370+), be surprised and be amused. http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/Shelves/EZ2ZBK0K A great one from the Communication Server's bookshelf (watch the wrap): http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/f1a1c8a0/11.3 42?ACTION=MATCHESREQUEST=USSTYPE=FUZZYSHELF=EZ2ZBK0K.bksDT=201006010 44843CASE=searchTopic=TOPICsearchText=TEXTsearchIndex=INDEXrank=RAN KScrollTOP=FIRSTHIT#FIRSTHIT -- Peter Hunkeler -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
Peter, Thanks for your earlier info and corrections. But everyone, PLEASE resist more discussions of the TLA on this thread. Re: BPXOINIT - do you find it surprising that in z/OS Unix that all processes don't inherit from pid=1 ? This is a PITA, since the environment variables established by BPXINIT will not be set in, say, a batch job that gets dubbed. How many places should, say, TZ settings be maintained? How should vendor applications that use z/OS Unix services get the installation defined environment variables? Kirk Wolf Dovetailed Technologies http://dovetail.com On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Hunkeler Peter (KIUP 4) peter.hunke...@credit-suisse.com wrote: FWIW, IBM publications now use the current terminology: z/OS UNIX System Services (z/OS UNIX). This is not a discussion of the commonly used yet disputed TLA. Please. Go to the z/OS V1.12 doc site and do a search on USS over all books (some 370+), be surprised and be amused. http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/Shelves/EZ2ZBK0K A great one from the Communication Server's bookshelf (watch the wrap): http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/f1a1c8a0/11.3 42?ACTION=MATCHESREQUEST=USSTYPE=FUZZYSHELF=EZ2ZBK0K.bksDT=201006010 44843CASE=searchTopic=TOPICsearchText=TEXTsearchIndex=INDEXrank=RAN KScrollTOP=FIRSTHIT#FIRSTHIT -- Peter Hunkeler -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
In listserv%201105031010589557.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/03/2011 at 10:10 AM, Mark Zelden m...@mzelden.com said: But I think your last part I quoted is probably closer. People don't say under USS when they use FTP or Telnet for example, Which people? I certainly consider FTP and telnet in z/OS to be Unix services. Where it gets stickier is an application that is native MVS except for using the TCP/IP protocol stack. -- 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
In dc74548a025aff4a85f46926802a9b23063d2...@chsa1035.share.beluni.net, on 05/04/2011 at 10:08 AM, Hunkeler Peter (KIUP 4) peter.hunke...@credit-suisse.com said: The OMVS TSO command processor had its rights in the nineties; it is obsolete today. Its a PITA. People having a need to work with UNIx shells interactively should use SSH/rlogin(/telnet) to login. The OMVS TSO command is still a convenience for people primarily using foreground TSO. A separate telnet session is not always convenient, and in some cases[1] not even possible. [1] I consider the restriction misguided, but it exists at some shops. -- 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Wed, 4 May 2011 12:48:14 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: In listserv%201105031010589557.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/03/2011 at 10:10 AM, Mark Zelden m...@mzelden.com said: But I think your last part I quoted is probably closer. People don't say under USS when they use FTP or Telnet for example, Which people? I certainly consider FTP and telnet in z/OS to be Unix services. The part I was addressing wasn't what is z/OS Unix, rather it was what people meant when they write or say I was doing blah blah under USS. I've never heard anyone say I was FTPing under USS for example unless they were executing FTP interactively from a shell of some sort. Mark -- Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS mailto:m...@mzelden.com Mark's MVS Utilities: http://www.mzelden.com/mvsutil.html Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Mark Zelden m...@mzelden.com wrote: On Wed, 4 May 2011 12:48:14 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: In listserv%201105031010589557.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/03/2011 at 10:10 AM, Mark Zelden m...@mzelden.com said: But I think your last part I quoted is probably closer. People don't say under USS when they use FTP or Telnet for example, Which people? I certainly consider FTP and telnet in z/OS to be Unix services. The part I was addressing wasn't what is z/OS Unix, rather it was what people meant when they write or say I was doing blah blah under USS. I've never heard anyone say I was FTPing under USS for example unless they were executing FTP interactively from a shell of some sort. Mark -- Mark Zelden When I FTP a tersed dump or log to IBM, I use a batchjob with no step lib and control cards that reference z/OS PS files. Yes, I did have to get a OMVS RACF segment in order to run, but the appearance of the control cards just look like a login FTP logoff sequence. Used to do this (or very similar sequences) with compuserve forums in the early about 1992-1994 on MS-DOS 5. -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
Good discussion. As OP, I was hoping for some consensus that Under z/OS Unix or Under USS are not very useful terms since most people don't recognize them as meaning any dubbed z/OS Unix process. Under a z/OS Unix shell or program in a zFS filesystem are closer to what most people see to think of.But I don't care to discuss proper terminology - there is enough of that around here. More interesting to me is to better understand how z/OS Unix works and what needs improvement. Kirk Wolf Dovetailed Technologies http://dovetail.com On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Mike Schwab mike.a.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Mark Zelden m...@mzelden.com wrote: On Wed, 4 May 2011 12:48:14 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: In listserv%201105031010589557.0...@bama.ua.edu, on 05/03/2011 at 10:10 AM, Mark Zelden m...@mzelden.com said: But I think your last part I quoted is probably closer. People don't say under USS when they use FTP or Telnet for example, Which people? I certainly consider FTP and telnet in z/OS to be Unix services. The part I was addressing wasn't what is z/OS Unix, rather it was what people meant when they write or say I was doing blah blah under USS. I've never heard anyone say I was FTPing under USS for example unless they were executing FTP interactively from a shell of some sort. Mark -- Mark Zelden When I FTP a tersed dump or log to IBM, I use a batchjob with no step lib and control cards that reference z/OS PS files. Yes, I did have to get a OMVS RACF segment in order to run, but the appearance of the control cards just look like a login FTP logoff sequence. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
Kirk Wolf wrote: If this is you, please go back to discussing the TLA ;-) Damn! You're confusing me! Two, Three or Thousand Letter Acronym? ;-D Ok, seriously. If you could get good replies, would you be kind to post it here? Please. Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On Tue, 3 May 2011 08:29:53 -0500, Kirk Wolf k...@dovetail.com wrote: big snip To me, Under USS is as almost nondescript as saying Under TSO to refer to: TN3270+ISPF or IKJEFT01 in batch or a TSO/REXX exec. I believe that some people have a conception model of z/OS Unix that is similar to the old OS/2 Windows so called Penalty Box. Again, I believe that the TSO OMVS command and BPXBATCH have fostered this incorrect notion. Nice post. This is close... Under z/OS Unix / Under USS is good enough granularity to describe all the crap that they can't stand. But without the last part as I don't think everyone who uses that terminology dislikes z/OS Unix. But I think your last part I quoted is probably closer. People don't say under USS when they use FTP or Telnet for example, so I think it referrers more to interactive or batch execution of processes - other than those that didn't used to required z/OS unix (like FTP and Telnet). Mark -- Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS mailto:m...@mzelden.com Mark's MVS Utilities: http://www.mzelden.com/mvsutil.html Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
In banlktimb1q91h1vus0kl9aweaedr3fl...@mail.gmail.com, on 05/03/2011 at 08:29 AM, Kirk Wolf k...@dovetail.com said: What is z/OS Unix, The Unix API, the file systems, the commands, the librairies and the shells. This includes address spaces added to support them. and what do people mean when they say under USS (or the more proper: under z/OS Unix) ? Anything requiring dubbing. To me, Under USS is as almost nondescript as saying Under TSO to refer to: TN3270+ISPF or IKJEFT01 in batch or a TSO/REXX exec. Or CLIST or 2741 or 3270 without ISPF ... -- 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On 3 May 2011 09:29, Kirk Wolf k...@dovetail.com wrote: What is z/OS Unix, and what do people mean when they say under USS (or the more proper: under z/OS Unix) ? [...] My own conception model (perhaps flawed) is that there are a bunch of related things: [...] I think you're unnecessarily mixing interface definitions (commands, shell(s), APIs, file semantics, etc.), with implementation details. Clearly you don't get the first without the second, but to answer what is z/OS UNIX? I think you need to consider only the first. However there is clearly a common usage that groups things like uses UNIX files, uses a shell, runs executables from a UNIX directory, and perhaps a few more as runs under z/OS UNIX, but does not comprise things like uses TCP/IP services, has a UID and GID, and similar service-related details. Somewhere in between lies is written in C/C++. *We* all know that C/C++ code can run on z/OS without any use of UNIX, but I think many people perceive a tight connection. Perhaps another way of putting this is that there is an operations view along the lines of the above, which makes a lot of sense when the important questions are about how to keep the machine humming along, how to handle failures and who to call, and so on. What goes on under the covers is of much less importance and interest to people in those jobs. I believe that some people have a conception model of z/OS Unix that is similar to the old OS/2 Windows so called Penalty Box. Again, I believe that the TSO OMVS command and BPXBATCH have fostered this incorrect notion. I agree. As Kernel Don used to say, There is no wall. I still find myself having to explain that to people who by now should know better. Further confusion is added by the many references to z/OS Linux out there. I've been fighting that one for 10+ years now, and I still get asked if we support it. Tony H. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
Try being a vendor and explaining to non-technical or non-REAL Tony: Try being a vendor and explaining to non-technical or non-REAL-Mainframe people what z/OS does and its functions. Its a challenge. I have offen said its not a 'PC'..So to a certain degree I agree with whats been said about confusion of terms. Additionally, as I was once told business/tech expertise has changed a lot. This adds to the confusion. Scott J Ford From: Tony Harminc t...@harminc.net To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Sent: Tue, May 3, 2011 12:13:26 PM Subject: Re: Under z/OS Unix On 3 May 2011 09:29, Kirk Wolf k...@dovetail.com wrote: What is z/OS Unix, and what do people mean when they say under USS (or the more proper: under z/OS Unix) ? [...] My own conception model (perhaps flawed) is that there are a bunch of related things: [...] I think you're unnecessarily mixing interface definitions (commands, shell(s), APIs, file semantics, etc.), with implementation details. Clearly you don't get the first without the second, but to answer what is z/OS UNIX? I think you need to consider only the first. However there is clearly a common usage that groups things like uses UNIX files, uses a shell, runs executables from a UNIX directory, and perhaps a few more as runs under z/OS UNIX, but does not comprise things like uses TCP/IP services, has a UID and GID, and similar service-related details. Somewhere in between lies is written in C/C++. *We* all know that C/C++ code can run on z/OS without any use of UNIX, but I think many people perceive a tight connection. Perhaps another way of putting this is that there is an operations view along the lines of the above, which makes a lot of sense when the important questions are about how to keep the machine humming along, how to handle failures and who to call, and so on. What goes on under the covers is of much less importance and interest to people in those jobs. I believe that some people have a conception model of z/OS Unix that is similar to the old OS/2 Windows so called Penalty Box. Again, I believe that the TSO OMVS command and BPXBATCH have fostered this incorrect notion. I agree. As Kernel Don used to say, There is no wall. I still find myself having to explain that to people who by now should know better. Further confusion is added by the many references to z/OS Linux out there. I've been fighting that one for 10+ years now, and I still get asked if we support it. Tony H. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu 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 lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Under z/OS Unix
On 5/3/2011 at 12:13 PM, Tony Harminc t...@harminc.net wrote: Further confusion is added by the many references to z/OS Linux out there. I've been fighting that one for 10+ years now, and I still get asked if we support it. Yeah, a lot of people hate that one. Mark Post -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
