Re: No Source for load modules not linkedited since 1980-90's
What about The Source Recovery Company? I've heard their presentations at Share (and Guide, I think, back in the day). Not sure they're still around but there is a Web site: http://www.source-recovery.com/ Gene Lynd -- 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: No Source for load modules not linkedited since 1980-90's
On Fri, 17 Oct 2008 09:23:51 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... Alas, no. They give you could that, with luck, will compile into the same object code, but it is *not* the source code, and you will have lost the labels, variable names and comments. ... And I would guess that there have been enough changes in code generation in the past 20+ years that it probably will not generate the same object code. Hopefully equivalent, but not the same. But that is trivial compared to the labels, variable names and comments that you mentioned - the clues that would help make sense of the code. Pat O'Keefe -- 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: No Source for load modules not linkedited since 1980-90's
Herman, If the source code is lost, did the application promotion process (development == QA == Production) by any chance save the compiler listings? Source is *much* more easily recovered from a listing than from a load module. Recovery from a listing could be handled with some Rexx code (or your text-scripting language of choice). Maybe it's my ISV background, but for most of my professional programming career I have believed that saving *all* of the outputs of a compile was *essential* to be able to provide production problem resolution, whether it's an abend or even just incorrect output. And I can well believe that the application programmers were not happy with disassembler output. I was involved a few years ago with a source recovery process for a couple of assembler modules, and even being an assembler whiz did not make the disassembler output very decipherable. Much work and many disassembly passes went into figuring out which was/were the base register(s) at different places in the code, which were the data register(s), for what data areas, etc. Just decoding the standard IBM macro output from object code can be difficult if you no longer have the version of the macros with which the original was compiled. BTDTGTTS. Decoding disassembler output to deduce COBOL source code is a job for serious code generation/optimization experts, not ordinary programmers (or even systems programmers). If the source code and listings are both truly lost, I do agree with other responses you have gotten that it's definitely a job for an expert third-party provider. HTH Peter -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stocker, Herman Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:50 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: No Source for load modules not linkedited since 1980-90's We have a large number of modules that have link dates in the 80's and 90's (still running, can that be done on windows and Unix platform?). We want to reverse the modules to be able to go to LE and maybe even make changes. Does any one know of any vendors and/or products on the market that can be used to reverse engineer these modules - in COBOL. I have suggested the disassembler but the development people were not happy with the output, Cobol people do not like assembler, go figure:-) they are not assembler programmers and the disassembled code was unreadable to them. Thank you. Regards, Herman Stocker This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. -- 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: No Source for load modules not linkedited since 1980-90's
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 10/14/2008 at 02:55 PM, Tom Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: And you can recover your source by using the services of a 3rd party, Source Recovery Company: http://www.source-recovery.com/ They take load modules and give you back source code! Alas, no. They give you could that, with luck, will compile into the same object code, but it is *not* the source code, and you will have lost the labels, variable names and comments. It may be the only viable option if you have lost the source code, but it's not nearly as good as keeping the source code around. -- 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: No Source for load modules not linkedited since 1980-90's
The LE conversion guide show you how to rebind the programs without recompilation. In essence, map the program, code REPLACE statements for all of the runtime CSECTs, and rebind using the LE link library. There is no need to code the REPLACE statements, just use the sample linkage editor control statements provided with LE in SAMPLIB. If the programs were compiled with RES, you can skip this step and just change the concatenation to have SCEERUN in place of COBLIB. That said, getting back to source and recompiled is the way to go, IMHO. And you can recover your source by using the services of a 3rd party, Source Recovery Company: http://www.source-recovery.com/ They take load modules and give you back source code! Cheers, TomR COBOL is the Language of the Future! -- 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: No Source for load modules not linkedited since 1980-90's
On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 20:00:34 -0400, Robert A. Rosenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... the disassembled code was unreadable to them. Which means that they are claiming to also be unable to read/use a Cobol created PMAP (a task which I would expect that a Cobol PROGRAMMER [as opposed to a CODER] should be able to do). ... To be fair (an uncommon stance for me!), there's a big difference between looking at the code generated by a compiler when you have the source statements, and looking at disassembled instructions when you do not have the source.Even if you were familiar enough with the code generated by current compilers to be able to reconstruct COBOL source, our would also have to be familiar the way older compilers generated code. (The good news is that there was probably less optimization in the older code.) Pat O'Keefe -- 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: No Source for load modules not linkedited since 1980-90's
http://www.source-recovery.com/ This email/fax message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution of this email/fax is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all paper and electronic copies of the original message. -- 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: No Source for load modules not linkedited since 1980-90's
The LE conversion guide show you how to rebind the programs without recompilation. In essence, map the program, code REPLACE statements for all of the runtime CSECTs, and rebind using the LE link library. That said, getting back to source and recompiled is the way to go, IMHO. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stocker, Herman Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 10:50 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: No Source for load modules not linkedited since 1980-90's We have a large number of modules that have link dates in the 80's and 90's (still running, can that be done on windows and Unix platform?). We want to reverse the modules to be able to go to LE and maybe even make changes. Does any one know of any vendors and/or products on the market that can be used to reverse engineer these modules - in COBOL. I have suggested the disassembler but the development people were not happy with the output, Cobol people do not like assembler, go figure:-) they are not assembler programmers and the disassembled code was unreadable to them. Thank you. Regards, Herman Stocker The sender believes that this E-mail and any attachments were free of any virus, worm, Trojan horse, and/or malicious code when sent. This message and its attachments could have been infected during transmission. By reading the message and opening any attachments, the recipient accepts full responsibility for taking protective and remedial action about viruses and other defects. The sender's employer is not liable for any loss or damage arising in any way from this message or its attachments. -- 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 NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message, together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies. -- 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: No Source for load modules not linkedited since 1980-90's
At 11:50 -0400 on 10/10/2008, Stocker, Herman wrote about No Source for load modules not linkedited since 1980-90's: I have suggested the disassembler but the development people were not happy with the output, Cobol people do not like assembler, go figure:-) they are not assembler programmers and the disassembled code was unreadable to them. Which means that they are claiming to also be unable to read/use a Cobol created PMAP (a task which I would expect that a Cobol PROGRAMMER [as opposed to a CODER] should be able to do). -- 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: No Source for load modules not linkedited since 1980-90's
Does any one know of any vendors and/or products on the market that can be used to reverse engineer these modules - in COBOL. Haven't researched this market in a while. Only one I know of is: http://www.essential-systems.com/resource/index.htm -- 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
