Re: Use of zCX

[David Crayford]

On 26/4/22 20:29, Seymour J Metz wrote:

I mean "Are there current Z ports for those languages?".

Yes. ooRexx has the package files for download 
https://sourceforge.net/projects/oorexx/files/oorexx/4.2.0/. It only 
includes an rpm for s390x so you need to use alien to convert to a deb 
on Debian distros.




--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
kekronbekron [02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 11:19 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Use of zCX

Sorry, what do you mean?

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Monday, April 25th, 2022 at 3:29 PM, Seymour J Metz  wrote:



Icon? oorexx? Perl? Perl6 (Raku)?


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
kekronbekron [02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2022 11:37 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Use of zCX

Okay, maybe I'm mixing things up.
So 'tainers are doable, assuming the program can first compile to s390x?
What about code that does CPU instruction set specific things.
How likely is the success of its compilation on s390x with minimal work.
If it's "easy", why is the IBM Z and LinuxOne Open Source list not bigger - 
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fcommunity%2Fz%2Fopen-source-software%2F&data=05%7C01%7Csmetz3%40gmu.edu%7C4895635bc4f84c17577c08da27339c74%7C9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb%7C0%7C0%7C637865399868023883%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=T9iby7JlClkVTybxiXBCI0VIrtkplMWIh1kLLeZXxCs%3D&reserved=0

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Monday, April 25th, 2022 at 7:41 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com 
wrote:




On 23/4/22 14:10, kekronbekron wrote:


Building the s390x containers is straight forward.
Again, really? (honest question).
Are there any public examples for reference?
You know, small enough that it isn't 50 million lines of code or something.

I don't want to speak for Matt but building docker images for a specific
architecture is trivial. To build a s390x container that includes native
binaries you just compile/link you programs and then build the docker
image scrom scratch and specify the --platform. See
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1RsVWbknHmIkB5knRo-X8Ne-wwMLqIvEZ8HugRK1pXz5Ylef966nE16O81t_PTZBA8VofMaJCFQRe-T54L4WVvCzGJPZWJtsqvefO4PGxVgReKWp_1yxu-NEsGD6fi4SfuVOk8Zmu-QeHOZnYqzJQJO4CcM_ECK9VDKssTGw4CY9oE1sdH_YX_gRbyKVQcH9rwXgq0ZuMlZXOKvgtf2AGqYewtLgack4HJSNMUjoR2r9smrlkqIcn62jby6kFS9Fjc-aHHycLBtcOn15_kQJ-RyPaUi1jhJ_7TztO4BhRh1GBimeHMc2V6Tc7trOeinXk_9mXkgPFneiOJr-6JBKMiTnnuK6kuMv3yQ_4d-3OAT8mVXWzW_1A_lRKPCAz7Srdzp2JRJnN_JtLEMAZIJ7cl8GiCkBOWrd9IM5LBGMUuDQ7g6RYOpO9ka4XwqO4GCok_DSE6dEZGNLzdDsP7pLQ-Q/https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.docker.com%2Fdesktop%2Fmulti-arch%2F.


- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Friday, April 22nd, 2022 at 9:49 PM, Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org wrote:


On Apr 22, 2022, at 3:42 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote:


If you already deliver container images that support your product that 
currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, it’d be a great 
idea to add s390x compatibility to your container images so your customers have 
greater deployment flexibility. That’s usually quite easy to do.
Good advice. I would also add that if you are a vendor planning to deliver zCX 
container images then make sure you add other compatibilities just in case your 
customers don't run zCX. It could be a POC obstacle.

Building the s390x containers is straight forward. It’s the POC challenge. It’s 
like showing up with SAE tools to work on a car that is metric. Not going to be 
very useful.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org
+1-919-656-0564
PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
Facebook 
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffacebook.com%2Fmatt.hogstrom&data=05%7C01%7Csmetz3%40gmu.edu%7C4895635bc4f84c17577c08da27339c74%7C9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb%7C0%7C0%7C637865399868023883%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=WkKjx2CHAF23ekuFm7Y8QjLvwXhqqyTtrkySMz1YOhY%3D&reserved=0
 LinkedIn 
https://secure-web.cisco.com/19EIjF3gPAVO-1Ucm1mk8vLALV1kA_wrr1ctjTr6GqBuQqBdOALNuvq8AebqxiAezp7aIkseab-pvuPhnk8LA0iGMBc9N2eYZXDxTskRDC8psM8hiJg1SRvR2WrOeJ4MDXMGnk4Vqzi93ruxtfQTITU8UPOv4HsRyRXGMupAuZO4ldnkPyQf3ZeNURTMt85S8MjFfqFJ7t2ww7nRlJ8ob9ncc4ORRbjZmfu8Ktv-_bivfjc3SvWv8GDRliUDF_zEs8qlkvh1kMG10v2sLpbOkVnwqg_5il4vvm2mEx_4lJHTZwhPZ7vBGX1PWW-YGtWnzrBEhfDhWd4djKrLFLJVnLUDizsFfCQ_KGL8YDcOQxEM3Nioe7XLFLfNM1i02l_RM0Ry3OUzBWtB0uMjVUF7kILOKC4WGKvjVC3BPUtC1YNw/https%3A%2F%2Flinkedin%2Fin%2Fmhogstrom
 Twitter 
https://secure-web.cisco.com/1rYiRmhHGT

Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?

[David Crayford]

You can always fall back on good old cksum which is usually good enough.

cat "//'SYS1.LPALIB(IEFBR14)'" | cksum


On 27/4/22 07:31, Charles Mills wrote:

FSUMF437 ICSF is required but not available.

:-(

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Gord Tomlin
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 3:59 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?

On 2022-04-26 18:30 PM, Charles Mills wrote:

Is there any z/OS utility that will give a hash of a (traditional,
old-fashioned) load module in a PDS?

Specifically what I am trying to do is answer the question "is load module X
in PDS Y.Z on box A binary equal to load module X in PDS Y.Z on box B?"
without copying and comparing. I suspect the BLKSIZEs are the same so that
may make the task easier (or prevent false negatives).

I'd want an IBM-included utility because if I have to install a CBT utility
I might just as well do the copy and compare. A UNIX utility is suitable if
it will handle a PDS load module.

Charles

Have a look in the z/OS UNIX System Services Command Reference (June
2020 refresh or newer). A set of hash utilities has been added, and they
can work with classic sequential, PDS and PDSE data sets. Check the
dependency note in the description of each utility to ensure you can
meet the requirements.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?

[Tony Harminc]

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 at 19:32, Charles Mills  wrote:
>
> FSUMF437 ICSF is required but not available.
>
> :-(

Dallas?

Works on this zPDT under VM. And even better, gives the same answer as
on Gord's system! So either we both have the correct IEFBR14 or we
both have the same corrupted/infected one. Or the tool always gives
the same answer. Or [insert favourite crypto attack here].

Tony H.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?

[Charles Mills]

FSUMF437 ICSF is required but not available.

:-(

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Gord Tomlin
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 3:59 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?

On 2022-04-26 18:30 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
> Is there any z/OS utility that will give a hash of a (traditional,
> old-fashioned) load module in a PDS?
> 
> Specifically what I am trying to do is answer the question "is load module X
> in PDS Y.Z on box A binary equal to load module X in PDS Y.Z on box B?"
> without copying and comparing. I suspect the BLKSIZEs are the same so that
> may make the task easier (or prevent false negatives).
> 
> I'd want an IBM-included utility because if I have to install a CBT utility
> I might just as well do the copy and compare. A UNIX utility is suitable if
> it will handle a PDS load module.
> 
> Charles

Have a look in the z/OS UNIX System Services Command Reference (June 
2020 refresh or newer). A set of hash utilities has been added, and they 
can work with classic sequential, PDS and PDSE data sets. Check the 
dependency note in the description of each utility to ensure you can 
meet the requirements.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?

[Charles Mills]

That should do it!

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Gord Tomlin
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 3:59 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?

On 2022-04-26 18:30 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
> Is there any z/OS utility that will give a hash of a (traditional,
> old-fashioned) load module in a PDS?
> 
> Specifically what I am trying to do is answer the question "is load module X
> in PDS Y.Z on box A binary equal to load module X in PDS Y.Z on box B?"
> without copying and comparing. I suspect the BLKSIZEs are the same so that
> may make the task easier (or prevent false negatives).
> 
> I'd want an IBM-included utility because if I have to install a CBT utility
> I might just as well do the copy and compare. A UNIX utility is suitable if
> it will handle a PDS load module.
> 
> Charles

Have a look in the z/OS UNIX System Services Command Reference (June 
2020 refresh or newer). A set of hash utilities has been added, and they 
can work with classic sequential, PDS and PDSE data sets. Check the 
dependency note in the description of each utility to ensure you can 
meet the requirements.

Here's a trivial example:

 > sha256 "//'SYS1.LPALIB(IEFBR14)'"
SHA256 (//'SYS1.LPALIB(IEFBR14)') = 
ec62f77b12bf26b56ce14148ff5efd43da5732951b9392afd85a3cdc4abfc5f7

-- 

--

Regards, Gord Tomlin
Action Software International
(a division of Mazda Computer Corporation)
Tel: (905) 470-7113, Fax: (905) 470-6507
Support: https://actionsoftware.com/support/

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?

[Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw]

I realise it is not exactly what you aske for but have you looked at program
signing?
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.5.0?topic=verification-enabling-racf-verif
y-signed-programs

Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw
Director: Reverse Sweep Consulting Limited
https://rsclweb.com 
Phone: +44 (0) 7504 304158

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of
Charles Mills
Sent: 26 April 2022 23:30
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Checksum of "legacy" load module?

Is there any z/OS utility that will give a hash of a (traditional,
old-fashioned) load module in a PDS?

Specifically what I am trying to do is answer the question "is load module X
in PDS Y.Z on box A binary equal to load module X in PDS Y.Z on box B?"
without copying and comparing. I suspect the BLKSIZEs are the same so that
may make the task easier (or prevent false negatives).  

I'd want an IBM-included utility because if I have to install a CBT utility
I might just as well do the copy and compare. A UNIX utility is suitable if
it will handle a PDS load module.

Charles 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: help with abend 60D reason code 14 SDWALSLV value

[Joseph Reichman]

This what I see for 60d
60D
Explanation
The recovery termination manager (RTM) discovered an error in a calling
program.
A hexadecimal reason code in the following explains the error:
. Field RTM2CRC of the RTM2 work area (RTM2WA)
. Message IEA995I
. TCBARC field of the task control block (TCB)
Code
Explanation
00
RTM percolates past the previous exit routine because the recursion limit
had been reached for that routine.
04
A program issued the ABEND, CALLRTM, or SETRP macro with the DUMPOPT or
DUMPOPX parameter.
DUMPOPT or DUMPOPX contains a pointer to a parameter list, but RTM cannot
access the parameter list.
Chapter 2. System completion codes 435
08
A program issued the ABEND, CALLRTM, or SETRP macro with the DUMPOPT or
DUMPOPX parameter.
DUMPOPT or DUMPOPX contains a pointer to a parameter list. The parameter
list contains a storage range
list, but RTM cannot access the storage range list.
0C
A program issued the ABEND, CALLRTM, or SETRP macro with the DUMPOPT or
DUMPOPX parameter.
DUMPOPT or DUMPOPX contains a pointer to a parameter list. The parameter
list contains a subpool list, but
RTM cannot access the subpool list.
10
A program issued the ABEND, CALLRTM, or SETRP macro with the DUMPOPT or
DUMPOPX parameter.
DUMPOPT or DUMPOPX contains a pointer to a parameter list. The parameter
list contains a range of data
space storage to be dumped, but RTM cannot access this storage.
14
Retry was attempted from an FRR, but the retry linkage stack is inconsistent
with the requested retry
environment.
18
Retry was attempted from an FRR, but the linkage stack entry is not in the
currently active linkage stac

Since I am running a FRR I have  to take into consideration PC Calls

. When retry is from an FRR, the value can reflect entries caused by a PC
instruction. All other times, the value can reflect only entries caused by a
BAKR  

I passed IARV64 an invalid pointer the abend occurred in the PC rtn 
When I primed a Half word  linkage storage ctr to 1 (it was a parm to the
recovery) and I set it to SDWALSLV the abend went away  
 
Thanks
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of
Peter Relson
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 6:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: help with abend 60D reason code 14 SDWALSLV value

In what way is RTM telling you to use SDWALSLV?
That is not what 60D-14 is telling you.

In fact, the doc for 60D-14 says "For reason codes 14 -18, search problem
reporting databases for a fix for the problem. If no fix exists, contact the
IBM Support Center."

I couldn't tell whether you were or were not trying to use SDWALSLV and, if
you were, what value you provided.

Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email
to lists...@listserv.ua.edu   with the
message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?

[Gord Tomlin]

On 2022-04-26 18:30 PM, Charles Mills wrote:

Is there any z/OS utility that will give a hash of a (traditional,
old-fashioned) load module in a PDS?

Specifically what I am trying to do is answer the question "is load module X
in PDS Y.Z on box A binary equal to load module X in PDS Y.Z on box B?"
without copying and comparing. I suspect the BLKSIZEs are the same so that
may make the task easier (or prevent false negatives).

I'd want an IBM-included utility because if I have to install a CBT utility
I might just as well do the copy and compare. A UNIX utility is suitable if
it will handle a PDS load module.

Charles


Have a look in the z/OS UNIX System Services Command Reference (June 
2020 refresh or newer). A set of hash utilities has been added, and they 
can work with classic sequential, PDS and PDSE data sets. Check the 
dependency note in the description of each utility to ensure you can 
meet the requirements.


Here's a trivial example:

> sha256 "//'SYS1.LPALIB(IEFBR14)'"
SHA256 (//'SYS1.LPALIB(IEFBR14)') = 
ec62f77b12bf26b56ce14148ff5efd43da5732951b9392afd85a3cdc4abfc5f7


--

--

Regards, Gord Tomlin
Action Software International
(a division of Mazda Computer Corporation)
Tel: (905) 470-7113, Fax: (905) 470-6507
Support: https://actionsoftware.com/support/

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 15:30:29 -0700, Charles Mills  wrote:
>
>Specifically what I am trying to do is answer the question "is load module X
>in PDS Y.Z on box A binary equal to load module X in PDS Y.Z on box B?"
>without copying and comparing. I suspect the BLKSIZEs are the same so that
>may make the task easier (or prevent false negatives).
> 
I once suggested that a co-worker with a similar requirement compare
AMBLIST outputs.  AMBLIST?  She had a rapid "Aha!' moment"
displacements differed -- macro level inconsistecy.

Checksum of TSO TRANSMIT output?  Bind into zFS program objects
and cksum?

Regardless, timestamps and headers are apt to bite you.

Nostalgia:  I recall a Mac OS (ISV?) utility that compared two
APPLs and generated a patch file.

-- 
gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Checksum of "legacy" load module?

[Charles Mills]

Is there any z/OS utility that will give a hash of a (traditional,
old-fashioned) load module in a PDS?

Specifically what I am trying to do is answer the question "is load module X
in PDS Y.Z on box A binary equal to load module X in PDS Y.Z on box B?"
without copying and comparing. I suspect the BLKSIZEs are the same so that
may make the task easier (or prevent false negatives).  

I'd want an IBM-included utility because if I have to install a CBT utility
I might just as well do the copy and compare. A UNIX utility is suitable if
it will handle a PDS load module.

Charles 

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: help with abend 60D reason code 14 SDWALSLV value

[Peter Relson]

In what way is RTM telling you to use SDWALSLV?
That is not what 60D-14 is telling you.

In fact, the doc for 60D-14 says "For reason codes 14 -18, search problem 
reporting databases for a fix for the problem. If no fix exists, contact the 
IBM Support Center."

I couldn't tell whether you were or were not trying to use SDWALSLV and, if you 
were, what value you provided.

Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Silly linklist dataset question

[Peter Relson]

Mark J wrote:

Datasets in our linklist are APF authorized via LINKAUTH=LNKLST. Is there any 
differences on how program fetch behaves if a dataset in the linklist is also 
APF authorized in PROGxx as far as modules being fetched from the linklist?


To the specific question: "no". When LNKAUTH=LNKLST, for a fetch from the 
LNKLST, there is no querying of the APF status of the LNKLST (and/or any data 
sets within it).

FWIW, for a fetch from DCB/TASKLIB/STEPLIB/JOBLIB, there is generally no 
querying of an individual data set at the time of fetch, instead the DEB is 
looked at (DEBAPFIN) to see if the entire concatenation is APF-authorized. 
"OPEN" does the querying.

Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

[Charles Mills]

RACF Discussion List ; on behalf of; Mautalen Juan
Guillermo 

Is the origin of this thread.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 1:12 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

I receive the RACF-L digest every day and I see no references to IPLINFO in
any of the digests for the last week or ten days.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of
Phil Smith III
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 3:55 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

Oops. Wrong list! RACF not IBM-MAIN.

From: Phil Smith III  
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 2:39 PM
To: ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

This is a pointless discussion. Protecting this storage will break myriad
programs, and adding a subsystem or service to provide controlled access
would be a huge undertaking, both for IBM to implement and for customers and
ISVs to use. I would predict that even if IBM did it, people would turn it
off so they could get work done. (Think early days of Windows UAC-and yes,
that got better, but with significant investment in/revamp of Windows, plus
it's mostly transparent to programs. Not the same thing, just similar in
that folks just turned it off because it was too intrusive.)

Put another way: this is arguably a fundamental design flaw in OS/360. At
this point, it's not fixable.

...phsiii

P.S. There's gotta be a joke about "Marx" Zelden and universal access to low
core in there somewhere!
--

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 lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

[Farley, Peter x23353]

Never mind, I just checked the RACF-L archive and that thread started today so 
I haven't seen it in any digest yet.

Based on the OP's initial question and a couple of the other "hide everything" 
responses on RACF-L, I agree with Phil - it would be pointless to discuss 
hiding all the information in low-core and other system-wide accessible control 
blocks at this late stage of OS history.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 4:12 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

I receive the RACF-L digest every day and I see no references to IPLINFO in any 
of the digests for the last week or ten days.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Phil Smith III
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 3:55 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

Oops. Wrong list! RACF not IBM-MAIN.

From: Phil Smith III 
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 2:39 PM
To: ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

This is a pointless discussion. Protecting this storage will break myriad 
programs, and adding a subsystem or service to provide controlled access would 
be a huge undertaking, both for IBM to implement and for customers and ISVs to 
use. I would predict that even if IBM did it, people would turn it off so they 
could get work done. (Think early days of Windows UAC-and yes, that got better, 
but with significant investment in/revamp of Windows, plus it's mostly 
transparent to programs. Not the same thing, just similar in that folks just 
turned it off because it was too intrusive.)

Put another way: this is arguably a fundamental design flaw in OS/360. At this 
point, it's not fixable.

...phsiii

P.S. There's gotta be a joke about "Marx" Zelden and universal access to low 
core in there somewhere!
--

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 lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 12:55:56 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:

>> Put another way: this is arguably a fundamental design flaw in OS/360
>
>I remember well the early days of OS/360. There was no concept of the
>insider threat. We were all in this together, and we were all good guys.
>...
I suspect a similar history governed MS DOS/Windows.  When there were
only LANs; no Internet (which Microsoft was slow to adopt), "all good guys"
became accustomed  to, even depended on sending each other .exe and
.bat that opened automatically.  The Internet should have changed
everything, but too few wanted to sacrifice old practices.

-- 
gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

[Farley, Peter x23353]

I receive the RACF-L digest every day and I see no references to IPLINFO in any 
of the digests for the last week or ten days.

Peter

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Phil Smith III
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 3:55 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

Oops. Wrong list! RACF not IBM-MAIN.

From: Phil Smith III  
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 2:39 PM
To: ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

This is a pointless discussion. Protecting this storage will break myriad
programs, and adding a subsystem or service to provide controlled access
would be a huge undertaking, both for IBM to implement and for customers and
ISVs to use. I would predict that even if IBM did it, people would turn it
off so they could get work done. (Think early days of Windows UAC-and yes,
that got better, but with significant investment in/revamp of Windows, plus
it's mostly transparent to programs. Not the same thing, just similar in
that folks just turned it off because it was too intrusive.)

Put another way: this is arguably a fundamental design flaw in OS/360. At
this point, it's not fixable.

...phsiii

P.S. There's gotta be a joke about "Marx" Zelden and universal access to low
core in there somewhere!
--

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 lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

[Charles Mills]

> Put another way: this is arguably a fundamental design flaw in OS/360

I remember well the early days of OS/360. There was no concept of the
insider threat. We were all in this together, and we were all good guys.
Maybe one or two of the application folks were suspect  but the sysprogs
were certainly all good guys, and the application folks didn't know about
this control block stuff.

There was of course no online access, so threats were largely contained by
the lock on the computer room door.

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Phil Smith III
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 11:39 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

This is a pointless discussion. Protecting this storage will break myriad
programs, and adding a subsystem or service to provide controlled access
would be a huge undertaking, both for IBM to implement and for customers and
ISVs to use. I would predict that even if IBM did it, people would turn it
off so they could get work done. (Think early days of Windows UAC-and yes,
that got better, but with significant investment in/revamp of Windows, plus
it's mostly transparent to programs. Not the same thing, just similar in
that folks just turned it off because it was too intrusive.)

 

Put another way: this is arguably a fundamental design flaw in OS/360. At
this point, it's not fixable.

 

...phsiii

 

P.S. There's gotta be a joke about "Marx" Zelden and universal access to low
core in there somewhere!


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

[Phil Smith III]

Oops. Wrong list! RACF not IBM-MAIN.

 

From: Phil Smith III  
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 2:39 PM
To: ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

 

This is a pointless discussion. Protecting this storage will break myriad
programs, and adding a subsystem or service to provide controlled access
would be a huge undertaking, both for IBM to implement and for customers and
ISVs to use. I would predict that even if IBM did it, people would turn it
off so they could get work done. (Think early days of Windows UAC-and yes,
that got better, but with significant investment in/revamp of Windows, plus
it's mostly transparent to programs. Not the same thing, just similar in
that folks just turned it off because it was too intrusive.)

 

Put another way: this is arguably a fundamental design flaw in OS/360. At
this point, it's not fixable.

 

...phsiii

 

P.S. There's gotta be a joke about "Marx" Zelden and universal access to low
core in there somewhere!


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

[Charles Mills]

@Lennie, earlier today:

"It's native control block structure allows this kind of delving. Other
operating systems provide more protection of this type of information.
System calls are needed to extract information about the setup."

Charles


-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 12:14 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

On Apr 26, 2022, at 12:39:06, Phil Smith III wrote:
> 
> This is a pointless discussion. ...
> 
> Put another way: this is arguably a fundamental design flaw in OS/360. At
> this point, it's not fixable.
>  
Is this a Reply to something not cited, perhaps on BIT.LISTSERV?

-- 
gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

[ITschak Mugzach]

Just a question… how Mark became Marx?

ITschak

בתאריך יום ג׳, 26 באפר׳ 2022 ב-22:14 מאת Paul Gilmartin <
000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>:

> On Apr 26, 2022, at 12:39:06, Phil Smith III wrote:
> >
> > This is a pointless discussion. ...
> >
> > Put another way: this is arguably a fundamental design flaw in OS/360. At
> > this point, it's not fixable.
> >
> Is this a Reply to something not cited, perhaps on BIT.LISTSERV?
>
> --
> gil
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
-- 
ITschak Mugzach
*|** IronSphere Platform* *|* *Information Security Continuous Monitoring
for z/OS, x/Linux & IBM I **| z/VM coming soon  *

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Apr 26, 2022, at 12:39:06, Phil Smith III wrote:
> 
> This is a pointless discussion. ...
> 
> Put another way: this is arguably a fundamental design flaw in OS/360. At
> this point, it's not fixable.
>  
Is this a Reply to something not cited, perhaps on BIT.LISTSERV?

-- 
gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Marx Zelden - IPLINFO utility

[Phil Smith III]

This is a pointless discussion. Protecting this storage will break myriad
programs, and adding a subsystem or service to provide controlled access
would be a huge undertaking, both for IBM to implement and for customers and
ISVs to use. I would predict that even if IBM did it, people would turn it
off so they could get work done. (Think early days of Windows UAC-and yes,
that got better, but with significant investment in/revamp of Windows, plus
it's mostly transparent to programs. Not the same thing, just similar in
that folks just turned it off because it was too intrusive.)

 

Put another way: this is arguably a fundamental design flaw in OS/360. At
this point, it's not fixable.

 

...phsiii

 

P.S. There's gotta be a joke about "Marx" Zelden and universal access to low
core in there somewhere!


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Phil Smith III]

The LINUX-390 list is also archived, of course:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-390@vm.marist.edu/


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Ed Jaffe]

On 4/26/2022 5:05 AM, kekronbekron wrote:

ESG = ?



Environmental, Social and Governance issues...


--
Phoenix Software International
Edward E. Jaffe
831 Parkview Drive North
El Segundo, CA 90245
https://www.phoenixsoftware.com/



This e-mail message, including any attachments, appended messages and the
information contained therein, is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient or have otherwise
received this email message in error, any use, dissemination, distribution,
review, storage or copying of this e-mail message and the information
contained therein is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies
of this email message and do not otherwise utilize or retain this email
message or any or all of the information contained therein. Although this
email message and any attachments or appended messages are believed to be
free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into
which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient
to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by the
sender for any loss or damage arising in any way from its opening or use.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: How to update ZSTART variable in ISP Profile

[Lionel B. Dyck]

Glad you found it useful - have a blessed day.


Lionel B. Dyck <><
Website: https://www.lbdsoftware.com
Github: https://github.com/lbdyck

“Worry more about your character than your reputation. Character is what you 
are, reputation merely what others think you are.”   - - - John Wooden

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Don 
Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 10:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: How to update ZSTART variable in ISP Profile

Lionel, thank you for this tool. It works perfectly, and saved me a lot of time 
and effort!

Have a great day!
Don

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[kekronbekron]

Found it.

LINUX-390 discussion

Linux-390 focuses on Linux on IBM Z including Linux on z/VM. To subscribe to 
the LINUX-390 discussion, send an email to:
lists...@vm.marist.edu

In the body of the email, write the following line, substituting only your name:
SUBSCRIBE LINUX-390 firstname lastname

View and search the LINUX-390 discussion archives 
(http://www2.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?linux-390).

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, April 26th, 2022 at 8:49 PM, Michael Watkins 
<032966e74d0f-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:


> Does anyone have a URL for the LINUX-390 list?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU On Behalf Of 
> Kirk Wolf
>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 10:11 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Use of zCX
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Texas Comptroller's email 
> system.
> DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you expect them from the sender 
> and know the content is safe.
>
> Very good point.
> Phil - I haven't been subscribed for a year or two to linux-390 - are they 
> discussing arch=390x docker packages as needed for zCX as well? VM/Linux vs 
> zCX? I would assume yes to both.
>
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2022, at 10:07 AM, Phil Smith III wrote:
>
> > I'm compelled to note that all of the discussion of third-party
> > product availability, difficulty (or not) of porting, etc. has been
> > rehashed over the last 20 years on the LINUX-390 list. That doesn't
> > mean it's not a valid discussion, just that joining that list will
> > likely get more detailed answers.
> >
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
> > email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>
> Kirk Wolf
> Dovetailed Technologies
> https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdovetail.com%2F&data=05|01|michael.watkins%40CPA.TEXAS.GOV|9357a9407d7f43a4d39408da27971f94|2055feba299d4d0daa5a73b8b42fef08|0|0|637865827534086101|Unknown|TWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D|3000|||&sdata=L7bqJzoJVj6jRnbCeyFMxEz3Votf6UStcw4UfUFDdtY%3D&reserved=0
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
> lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: How to update ZSTART variable in ISP Profile

[Don Johnson]

Lionel, thank you for this tool. It works perfectly, and saved me a lot of time 
and effort!

Have a great day!
Don

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[kekronbekron]

Thanks, thought you were about to suggest I somehow time travel to get to it.
Will look up that list.

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, April 26th, 2022 at 8:37 PM, Phil Smith III  wrote:


> I'm compelled to note that all of the discussion of third-party product
> availability, difficulty (or not) of porting, etc. has been rehashed over
> the last 20 years on the LINUX-390 list. That doesn't mean it's not a valid
> discussion, just that joining that list will likely get more detailed
> answers.
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Michael Watkins]

Does anyone have a URL for the LINUX-390 list?

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Kirk Wolf
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 10:11 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Use of zCX

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Texas Comptroller's email 
system.
DO NOT click links or open attachments unless you expect them from the sender 
and know the content is safe.

Very good point.
Phil - I haven't been subscribed for a year or two to linux-390  - are they 
discussing arch=390x docker packages as needed for zCX as well?   VM/Linux vs  
zCX?   I would assume yes to both.

On Tue, Apr 26, 2022, at 10:07 AM, Phil Smith III wrote:
> I'm compelled to note that all of the discussion of third-party 
> product availability, difficulty (or not) of porting, etc. has been 
> rehashed over the last 20 years on the LINUX-390 list. That doesn't 
> mean it's not a valid discussion, just that joining that list will 
> likely get more detailed answers.
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send 
> email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

Kirk Wolf
Dovetailed Technologies
https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdovetail.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cmichael.watkins%40CPA.TEXAS.GOV%7C9357a9407d7f43a4d39408da27971f94%7C2055feba299d4d0daa5a73b8b42fef08%7C0%7C0%7C637865827534086101%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=L7bqJzoJVj6jRnbCeyFMxEz3Votf6UStcw4UfUFDdtY%3D&reserved=0

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Kirk Wolf]

Very good point.
Phil - I haven't been subscribed for a year or two to linux-390  - are they 
discussing arch=390x docker packages as needed for zCX as well?   VM/Linux vs  
zCX?   I would assume yes to both.

On Tue, Apr 26, 2022, at 10:07 AM, Phil Smith III wrote:
> I'm compelled to note that all of the discussion of third-party product
> availability, difficulty (or not) of porting, etc. has been rehashed over
> the last 20 years on the LINUX-390 list. That doesn't mean it's not a valid
> discussion, just that joining that list will likely get more detailed
> answers.
> 
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> 

Kirk Wolf
Dovetailed Technologies
http://dovetail.com

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Phil Smith III]

I'm compelled to note that all of the discussion of third-party product
availability, difficulty (or not) of porting, etc. has been rehashed over
the last 20 years on the LINUX-390 list. That doesn't mean it's not a valid
discussion, just that joining that list will likely get more detailed
answers.


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: How to update ZSTART variable in ISP Profile

[Lionel B. Dyck]

Don - I've written a tool, called ZSTART, that does exactly what you are 
looking for.

You can get it at my website, my github repository, or from the CBTTAPE file 
314.

Hope this helps - let me know you have any questions/issues/suggestions for it.


Lionel B. Dyck <><
Website: https://www.lbdsoftware.com
Github: https://github.com/lbdyck

“Worry more about your character than your reputation. Character is what you 
are, reputation merely what others think you are.”   - - - John Wooden

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Don 
Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 09:05 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: How to update ZSTART variable in ISP Profile

Hi all, I have a teammate who wants to change his ISPF ZSTART profile variable 
in the ISP profile, and I wanted to see if there is an easy way to do this.

ISPF 7.3 won't work, as that is only showing ISR profile variables.

I can write a quick little utility that will (1) copy ISPPROF to some other 
member, (2) VPUT the ZSTART data into the variable and save it, and (3) submit 
a batch job (using DISP=OLD for ENQ purposes) that will copy the "other" member 
back into ISPPROF after he logs off.

Before I do that, I thought that someone here might have done something like 
this already. It seems like IBM have a utility to do this very thing called 
ISTA in their Data Set Commander product, but we don't have that here.

Thanks!
Don

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

How to update ZSTART variable in ISP Profile

[Don Johnson]

Hi all, I have a teammate who wants to change his ISPF ZSTART profile variable 
in the ISP profile, and I wanted to see if there is an easy way to do this.

ISPF 7.3 won't work, as that is only showing ISR profile variables.

I can write a quick little utility that will (1) copy ISPPROF to some other 
member, (2) VPUT the ZSTART data into the variable and save it, and (3) submit 
a batch job (using DISP=OLD for ENQ purposes) that will copy the "other" member 
back into ISPPROF after he logs off.

Before I do that, I thought that someone here might have done something like 
this already. It seems like IBM have a utility to do this very thing called 
ISTA in their Data Set Commander product, but we don't have that here.

Thanks!
Don

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Seymour J Metz]

I mean "Are there current Z ports for those languages?".


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
kekronbekron [02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 11:19 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Use of zCX

Sorry, what do you mean?

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Monday, April 25th, 2022 at 3:29 PM, Seymour J Metz  wrote:


> Icon? oorexx? Perl? Perl6 (Raku)?
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
> kekronbekron [02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
> Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2022 11:37 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Use of zCX
>
> Okay, maybe I'm mixing things up.
> So 'tainers are doable, assuming the program can first compile to s390x?
> What about code that does CPU instruction set specific things.
> How likely is the success of its compilation on s390x with minimal work.
> If it's "easy", why is the IBM Z and LinuxOne Open Source list not bigger - 
> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ibm.com%2Fcommunity%2Fz%2Fopen-source-software%2F&data=05%7C01%7Csmetz3%40gmu.edu%7C4895635bc4f84c17577c08da27339c74%7C9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb%7C0%7C0%7C637865399868023883%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=T9iby7JlClkVTybxiXBCI0VIrtkplMWIh1kLLeZXxCs%3D&reserved=0
>
> - KB
>
> --- Original Message ---
> On Monday, April 25th, 2022 at 7:41 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 23/4/22 14:10, kekronbekron wrote:
> >
> > > > Building the s390x containers is straight forward.
> > > > Again, really? (honest question).
> > > > Are there any public examples for reference?
> > > > You know, small enough that it isn't 50 million lines of code or 
> > > > something.
> >
> > I don't want to speak for Matt but building docker images for a specific
> > architecture is trivial. To build a s390x container that includes native
> > binaries you just compile/link you programs and then build the docker
> > image scrom scratch and specify the --platform. See
> > https://secure-web.cisco.com/1RsVWbknHmIkB5knRo-X8Ne-wwMLqIvEZ8HugRK1pXz5Ylef966nE16O81t_PTZBA8VofMaJCFQRe-T54L4WVvCzGJPZWJtsqvefO4PGxVgReKWp_1yxu-NEsGD6fi4SfuVOk8Zmu-QeHOZnYqzJQJO4CcM_ECK9VDKssTGw4CY9oE1sdH_YX_gRbyKVQcH9rwXgq0ZuMlZXOKvgtf2AGqYewtLgack4HJSNMUjoR2r9smrlkqIcn62jby6kFS9Fjc-aHHycLBtcOn15_kQJ-RyPaUi1jhJ_7TztO4BhRh1GBimeHMc2V6Tc7trOeinXk_9mXkgPFneiOJr-6JBKMiTnnuK6kuMv3yQ_4d-3OAT8mVXWzW_1A_lRKPCAz7Srdzp2JRJnN_JtLEMAZIJ7cl8GiCkBOWrd9IM5LBGMUuDQ7g6RYOpO9ka4XwqO4GCok_DSE6dEZGNLzdDsP7pLQ-Q/https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.docker.com%2Fdesktop%2Fmulti-arch%2F.
> >
> > > - KB
> > >
> > > --- Original Message ---
> > > On Friday, April 22nd, 2022 at 9:49 PM, Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > On Apr 22, 2022, at 3:42 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > If you already deliver container images that support your product 
> > > > > > that currently run outside z/OS, or if that’s what you plan to do, 
> > > > > > it’d be a great idea to add s390x compatibility to your container 
> > > > > > images so your customers have greater deployment flexibility. 
> > > > > > That’s usually quite easy to do.
> > > > > > Good advice. I would also add that if you are a vendor planning to 
> > > > > > deliver zCX container images then make sure you add other 
> > > > > > compatibilities just in case your customers don't run zCX. It could 
> > > > > > be a POC obstacle.
> > > >
> > > > Building the s390x containers is straight forward. It’s the POC 
> > > > challenge. It’s like showing up with SAE tools to work on a car that is 
> > > > metric. Not going to be very useful.
> > > >
> > > > Matt Hogstrom
> > > > m...@hogstrom.org
> > > > +1-919-656-0564
> > > > PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
> > > > Facebook 
> > > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffacebook.com%2Fmatt.hogstrom&data=05%7C01%7Csmetz3%40gmu.edu%7C4895635bc4f84c17577c08da27339c74%7C9e857255df574c47a0c00546460380cb%7C0%7C0%7C637865399868023883%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=WkKjx2CHAF23ekuFm7Y8QjLvwXhqqyTtrkySMz1YOhY%3D&reserved=0
> > > >  LinkedIn 
> > > > https://secure-web.cisco.com/19EIjF3gPAVO-1Ucm1mk8vLALV1kA_wrr1ctjTr6GqBuQqBdOALNuvq8AebqxiAezp7aIkseab-pvuPhnk8LA0iGMBc9N2eYZXDxTskRDC8psM8hiJg1SRvR2WrOeJ4MDXMGnk4Vqzi93ruxtfQTITU8UPOv4HsRyRXGMupAuZO4ldnkPyQf3ZeNURTMt85S8MjFfqFJ7t2ww7nRlJ8ob9ncc4ORRbjZmfu8Ktv-_bivfjc3SvWv8GDRliUDF_zEs8qlkvh1kMG10v2sLpbOkVnwqg_5il4vvm2mEx_4lJHTZwhPZ7vBGX1PWW-YGtWnzrBEhfDhWd4djKrLFLJVnLUDizsFfCQ_KGL8YDcOQxEM3Nioe7XLFLfNM1i02l_RM0Ry3O

Re: Use of zCX

[kekronbekron]

ESG = ?

- KB

--- Original Message ---
On Tuesday, April 26th, 2022 at 3:30 PM, Matt Hogstrom  
wrote:


> I did have an interesting conversation with a customer recently where given 
> ESG they wanted to move relevant workload to zLinux because the power / VM / 
> container ratio was lower than an x86 farm to lower their carbon footprint; 
> I’m not sure if this is an edge case or not.
>
> For many Z customers they do want their supporting software on their platform 
> to ensure that they have control over those services. Again, its a personal 
> choice. My strategy is to move all functions that do not need to run in z/OS 
> available in containers on any platform the customer chooses to optimize 
> their cost on Z.
>
> Exciting times.
>
> Matt Hogstrom
> PGP key 0F143BC1
>
> > On Apr 25, 2022, at 23:29, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > On 26/4/22 01:03, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> >
> > > > Given this constraint, we try to put CPU-intensive activities (such as 
> > > > code page conversion) on the faster-executing platforms.
> > > > and for that reason zCX is very important for ISVs because it does 
> > > > offload to Ziips, provides an open technology platform and for 
> > > > customers that do not have vZM or IFLs we can deliver software easier 
> > > > using a familiar CI/CVD pipeline.
> >
> > The elephant in the room is that almost all customers will have x86 
> > platforms available and it's trivial to stand up VMs using automation such 
> > as Red Hat Ansible. I suppose it comes down to politics again. The 
> > mainframe folks at some sites may be determined to run everything on z. 
> > That's not my experience with our customers who use our streaming products. 
> > They all run Splunk, Elastic, Kafka stacks on x86 and there's practically 
> > zero chance of them moving to z. I'm not knocking zCX. I think it's a great 
> > solution and can see a lot of use cases where it makes sense both 
> > technically and economically. I'm just highly dubious that running 
> > medium/large distributed software stacks is one of them.
> >
> > > Matt Hogstrom
> > > m...@hogstrom.org mailto:m...@hogstrom.org
> > >
> > > "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by 
> > > stupidity.” - Hanlon’s Razor
> > >
> > > > > On Apr 25, 2022, at 12:44 PM, Ed Jaffe edja...@phoenixsoftware.com 
> > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The z/OS version is not zIIP-eligible and is therefore running on 
> > > > knee-capped CPs in our environment. When running on Linux for Z it runs 
> > > > on an IFL which is fast (and SMT-threaded). The Linux for x86 version 
> > > > is also fast (and hyper-threaded). Given this constraint, we try to put 
> > > > CPU-intensive activities (such as code page conversion) on the 
> > > > faster-executing platforms.
> > >
> > > --
> > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Recovery in a SRB and completion code, return code reason code

[Joseph Reichman]

Just want to see if I understand things correctly

In a SRB initiated with IEAMSCHD 
  
 When my recovery  routine or FRR gets control first of it  seems both
SDWAGR regs and SDWASR regs are always the same

As opposed to normal estate when I can pretty much count on SDWASR regs not
being corrupted since I do it all the way in the beginning of the program

If I determine that the registers are not mine i.e some system service
(maybe I passed bad parms causing it to  blow up)

The I can only percolate but that doesn't mean I don't get control back
after the IEAMSCHD (doing it with synch=yes)

In that case ,SYNCHCOMPADDR will have an 8 

And SYNCHCODEADDR will have SDWAABCC

And SYNCHRSNADDR has SDWACRC

If I am able to do a retry (the registers are mine)

Then SYNCHCOMPADDR IS 0 SYNCHCODEADDR, SYNCHRSNADDR are r15 and r0 values
that were in the SRB


thanks
   

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Matt Hogstrom]

I did have an interesting conversation with a customer recently where given ESG 
they wanted to move relevant workload to zLinux because the power / VM / 
container ratio was lower than an x86 farm to lower their carbon footprint; I’m 
not sure if this is an edge case or not.

For many Z customers they do want their supporting software on their platform 
to ensure that they have control over those services.  Again, its a personal 
choice.  My strategy is to move all functions that do not need to run in z/OS 
available in containers on any platform the customer chooses to optimize their 
cost on Z.   

Exciting times.

Matt Hogstrom
PGP key 0F143BC1

> On Apr 25, 2022, at 23:29, David Crayford  wrote:
> 
> On 26/4/22 01:03, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>>> Given this constraint, we try to put CPU-intensive activities (such as code 
>>> page conversion) on the faster-executing platforms.
>> and for that reason zCX is very important for ISVs because it does offload 
>> to Ziips, provides an open technology platform and for customers that do not 
>> have vZM or IFLs we can deliver software easier using a familiar CI/CVD 
>> pipeline.
> 
> The elephant in the room is that almost all customers will have x86 platforms 
> available and it's trivial to stand up VMs using automation such as Red Hat 
> Ansible. I suppose it comes down to politics again. The mainframe folks at 
> some sites may be determined to run everything on z. That's not my experience 
> with our customers who use our streaming products. They all run Splunk, 
> Elastic, Kafka stacks on x86 and there's practically zero chance of them 
> moving to z. I'm not knocking zCX. I think it's a great solution and can see 
> a lot of use cases where it makes sense both technically and economically. 
> I'm just highly dubious that running medium/large distributed software stacks 
> is one of them.
> 
> 
>> 
>> Matt Hogstrom
>> m...@hogstrom.org 
>> 
>> "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.” 
>> - Hanlon’s Razor
>> 
 On Apr 25, 2022, at 12:44 PM, Ed Jaffe  wrote:
>>> 
>>> The z/OS version is not zIIP-eligible and is therefore running on 
>>> knee-capped CPs in our environment. When running on Linux for Z it runs on 
>>> an IFL which is fast (and SMT-threaded). The Linux for x86 version is also 
>>> fast (and hyper-threaded). Given this constraint, we try to put 
>>> CPU-intensive activities (such as code page conversion) on the 
>>> faster-executing platforms.
>> 
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> 
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Use of zCX

[Matt Hogstrom]

> On Apr 25, 2022, at 11:19 PM, kekronbekron 
> <02dee3fcae33-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> 
>> If it's "easy", why is the IBM Z and LinuxOne Open Source list not bigger
> 

A significant factor from my perspective is the lack of availability of IBM Z 
hardware to the broader community as well as not enough interest in the IBM Z 
community to participate and build them.   Ubiquity being the major issue.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org

I’m reading a book on anti-gravity.
I can’t put it down.



--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN