Re: COBOL Compiler APF
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 8:23 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: COBOL Compiler APF Why does the compiler have to be APF'd? That's the way I have seen it at every shop I have worked at. (PS: RIM is screwing up my account(s), so check the REPLYTO before you reply to) When in doubt. PANIC!! Sure as blazes isn't APF auth'ed here! And reply-to is still to your account, not IBM-MAIN shrug -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its content is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. -- 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: COBOL Compiler APF
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:23:07 +, Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why does the compiler have to be APF'd? That's the way I have seen it at every shop I have worked at. Never heard of such a thing. Is anything in the load library linked AC=1? 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: COBOL Compiler APF
It is not APFed here - never has been. Never has been at any shop I've ever been too. I find it interesting that you've only every seen it APFed and many of us have never seen it so. Don Imbriale -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 9:23 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: COBOL Compiler APF Why does the compiler have to be APF'd? That's the way I have seen it at every shop I have worked at. *** Bear Stearns is not responsible for any recommendation, solicitation, offer or agreement or any information about any transaction, customer account or account activity contained in this communication. *** -- 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: COBOL Compiler APF
It is not APFed here - never has been. Never has been at any shop I've ever been too. I find it interesting that you've only every seen it APFed and many of us have never seen it so. So do I. But, I'm going to ask our Service Provider why? When in doubt. PANIC!! -- 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: COBOL Compiler APF
Our IGY.SIGYCOMP is APF too because it's in PROG00 member of the CPAC.PARMLIB shipped with the serverpac of z/OS 1.6 (and Z/OS 1.4, and OS/390 2.10) Yolanda Lobo -Mensaje original- De: Ted MacNEIL [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Enviado el: jueves, 28 de septiembre de 2006 17:15 Para: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Asunto: Re: COBOL Compiler APF It is not APFed here - never has been. Never has been at any shop I've ever been too. I find it interesting that you've only every seen it APFed and many of us have never seen it so. So do I. But, I'm going to ask our Service Provider why? When in doubt. PANIC!! -- 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: COBOL Compiler APF
Hi, I don't think I can answer the question: Why does the compiler have to be APF'd? That's the way I have seen it at every shop I have worked at. What I can say is that on the ADCD systems IBM supply the library is in the default PROGxx member of PARMLIB. It is possible that who ever built the member simply copied the LNKLST libraries into the APF concatenation. Another anomaly I noticed was the inclusion of SYS1.PROCLIB in the SYSPROC concatenation of the TSO LOGON procedures. I suppose it is possible that people place CLISTS and REXX in SYS1.PROCLIB, but unlikely.) Kind regards - Terry Terry Sambrooks Director KMS-IT Limited 228 Abbeydale Road South Dore Sheffield S17 3LA UK Tel: +44 (0)114 262 0933 WEB: www.legac-e.co.uk Reg: England Wales 3767263 at the above address All outgoing E-mails are scanned but it remains the recipients responsibility to ensure that their system is protected from viruses, trojans, worms, and spy-ware. -- 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: COBOL Compiler APF
We have IGY.SIGYCOMP in lnklist and therefore its authorized. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of McKown, John Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 9:02 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: COBOL Compiler APF -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 8:23 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: COBOL Compiler APF Why does the compiler have to be APF'd? That's the way I have seen it at every shop I have worked at. (PS: RIM is screwing up my account(s), so check the REPLYTO before you reply to) When in doubt. PANIC!! Sure as blazes isn't APF auth'ed here! And reply-to is still to your account, not IBM-MAIN shrug -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its content is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. -- 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: COBOL Compiler APF
Our z/OS 1.7 ServerPac also includes it in the IBM-supplied APF list, but we do not add it to our own version. Checking the COBOL program directory, I came across the following: All target libraries listed which contain load modules have the following attributes: * The data set may be in the LPA. * It is not required for the data set to be in the LPA. * The data set may be in the LNKLST. * It is not required for the data set to be APF-authorized. So why does IBM build systems which include it in APF? Don Imbriale -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lobo Santa María, Yolanda Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 11:32 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: COBOL Compiler APF Our IGY.SIGYCOMP is APF too because it's in PROG00 member of the CPAC.PARMLIB shipped with the serverpac of z/OS 1.6 (and Z/OS 1.4, and OS/390 2.10) Yolanda Lobo *** Bear Stearns is not responsible for any recommendation, solicitation, offer or agreement or any information about any transaction, customer account or account activity contained in this communication. *** -- 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: COBOL Compiler APF
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 11:52:28 -0400, Kittendorf, Craig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We have IGY.SIGYCOMP in lnklist and therefore its authorized. What? Assuming you have LNKAUTH=LNKLST specified (or defaulted) it behaves as authorized when referenced through the link list. If you have it in a STEPLIB/JOBLIB it is only authorized if it is the APF list. I just looked at IGY.SIGYCOMP here and there is nothing linked AC=01 so it doesn't matter whether or not it is authorized in LNKLST. I can't think of a reason for a STEPLIB concatenation that would contain a compiler and a load lib that needs authorization. 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: COBOL Compiler APF
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Marchant Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 11:33 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: COBOL Compiler APF snip I just looked at IGY.SIGYCOMP here and there is nothing linked AC=01 so it doesn't matter whether or not it is authorized in LNKLST. I can't think of a reason for a STEPLIB concatenation that would contain a compiler and a load lib that needs authorization. Tom Marchant How about a started task which listens on a TCPIP port, uses RACF to logon a user (which requires APF authorization), and then allows an interactive compile and link? OK, a contrived example. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and its content is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this transmission, or taking any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. -- 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: COBOL Compiler APF
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 09/28/2006 at 01:23 AM, Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Why does the compiler have to be APF'd? It doesn't. That's the way I have seen it at every shop I have worked at. I'm not surprised, but that doesn't mean that it has to be or even should be. My guess is the dusty deck syndrome, where somebody copied something that was either incorrect or well out of date. -- 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
Re: COBOL Compiler APF
Bill Klein provided the necessary reference, to wit http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/igy3c130/3.4 If you consult it, you will discover that the [COBOL] compiler needs to be authorized iff it is to occupy shared storage. [In my own experience it may be useful to put a compiler into shared storage in, for example, a testing/development LPAR.] So many posts; so much careless misunderstanding. John Gilmore Ashland, MA 01721-1817 USA _ The next generation of Searchsay hello! http://imagine-windowslive.com/minisites/searchlaunch/?locale=en-usFORM=WLMTAG -- 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: COBOL Compiler APF
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of john gilmore Bill Klein provided the necessary reference, to wit http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/igy3c130/3.4 If you consult it, you will discover that the [COBOL] compiler needs to be authorized iff it is to occupy shared storage. Though it certainly reads that way, I don't recall that z/OS (or MVS) *requires* that a library or load module be authorized simply to reside or execute in shared storage. Rather, load modules that reside in (certain) shared storage attain authorization as a consequence of residing therein (e.g.: LPA). [In my own experience it may be useful to put a compiler into shared storage in, for example, a testing/development LPAR.] It's arguably better for many address spaces to share one copy of a module in real storage than to have multiple copies of the same module in real storage, each being used by a single address space. -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: COBOL Compiler APF
It's arguably better for many address spaces to share one copy of a module in real storage than to have multiple copies of the same module in real storage, each being used by a single address space. It's only 78 tracks. I wouldn't bother. When in doubt. PANIC!! -- 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: COBOL Compiler APF
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:23:07 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote: Why does the compiler have to be APF'd? That's the way I have seen it at every shop I have worked at. I don't recall having seen that at any account. It would raise my eyebrows for sure. The ROT is to avoid APF unless there is a proven reason why your site actually needs it. Even then I spend time looking for alternatives before adding a library to the APFLIST (PROGxx member). The compiler itself isn't marked AC=1 at your shop, is it?? Is the compiler library a part of an APF-required concatenation in some other PROC? (Do you allow compiles via CICS or something?) -- Tom Schmidt Madison, WI -- 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
