Multiple MAINT type users... how?
Hi Listers, What do you recommend as a solution to allow more than one person to fulfil the role of making changes to z/VM system configuration files such as SYSTEM CONFIG and USER DIRECT? Up until now, it has been just me making changes to z/VM. But now I have an offsider and we would both like to work on a z/VM system at the same time. I have tried defining a second user and LINK'ing to MAINT's minidisks. That only allows read access if MAINT is already logged on. SFS sounded like a possible alternative, to share at the file level instead of at the minidisk level. However, a quick trawl of the Listserver seems to say that this is a lot of work to setup and administer. And I am loath to make major changes to MAINT's minidisks without understanding the implications, especially if I will have to re-do this work at each new install of z/VM. Regards, Fred Schmidt NT Government, Australia
Re: Multiple MAINT type users... how?
You surely can work with multiple systems programmers on z/VM, even without SFS. Just don't use MAINT all the time, use your own userid and use LINK ACCESS to get access to the minidisks you need at a given time. Give you own userids the same CP classes as MAINT has. We worked like this at my former customer's installation for 20 years. Examples - at the time we didn't have DIRMAINT yet, we wrote the DRMAC EXEC It LINKs to the place of USER DIRECT, R/W if possible, ACCESS the disk start DRM USER DIRECT, at the end DETACH the linked to minidisk - We had our own VMLINK like exec: LNK to LINK and ACCESS, examples LNK MAINT (FD -- links to MAINT 191, starts FILELIST and DETACH at end LNK MAINT (MFD -- Same, but we links with mode MR LNK MAINT 193 -- Links and accesses MAINT 193 and keep it LNK MAINT 293 555 M pw Z -- just like CP LINK, but it ACCESSes as Z You just need to make sure you don't keep MDISKS linked R/W when not needing them. 2009/5/21, Fred Schmidt fred.schm...@nt.gov.au: Hi Listers, What do you recommend as a solution to allow more than one person to fulfil the role of making changes to z/VM system configuration files such as SYSTEM CONFIG and USER DIRECT? Up until now, it has been just me making changes to z/VM. But now I have an offsider and we would both like to work on a z/VM system at the same time. I have tried defining a second user and LINK’ing to MAINT’s minidisks. That only allows read access if MAINT is already logged on. SFS sounded like a possible alternative, to share at the file level instead of at the minidisk level. However, a quick trawl of the Listserver seems to say that this is a lot of work to setup and administer. And I am loath to make major changes to MAINT’s minidisks without understanding the implications, especially if I will have to re-do this work at each new install of z/VM. Regards, Fred Schmidt NT Government, Australia -- Kris Buelens, IBM Belgium, VM customer support
Re: Multiple MAINT type users... how?
How about using LOGONBY to MAINT? Don't use MAINT as your regular userid, but only as the *maintenance* userid. Whoever is doing the maintenance can log on to MAINT to do it. Another thing you can do is to change the config and directory disks (since these are the functions you mentioned) to NOT being held R/W by MAINT, either by moving them to a different owner and linking from the user doing the work, or by just changing MAINT's default link mode from MR to RR. For example, my system config files are owned by $PARM$, and to make a change I would LINK $PARM$ CF1 CF1 MR, and then RELEASE mode (DET when I am done. (Of course, first I must CPREL A, and afterwards -- ***AFTER RUNNING CPSYNTAX!!!*** do a CPACCESS). Likewise if the directory source is on MAINT 2CC (IIRC), you could make that a RR disk of MAINT, and just LINK MAINT 2CC 2CC MR from the user doing the work, when you want to update it. Good luck, Shimon Original message Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 17:16:04 +0930 From: Fred Schmidt fred.schm...@nt.gov.au Subject: Multiple MAINT type users... how? To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Hi Listers, What do you recommend as a solution to allow more than one person to fulfil the role of making changes to z/VM system configuration files such as SYSTEM CONFIG and USER DIRECT? Up until now, it has been just me making changes to z/VM. But now I have an offsider and we would both like to work on a z/VM system at the same time. I have tried defining a second user and LINK'ing to MAINT's minidisks. That only allows read access if MAINT is already logged on. SFS sounded like a possible alternative, to share at the file level instead of at the minidisk level. However, a quick trawl of the Listserver seems to say that this is a lot of work to setup and administer. And I am loath to make major changes to MAINT's minidisks without understanding the implications, especially if I will have to re-do this work at each new install of z/VM. Regards, Fred Schmidt NT Government, Australia
Re: Multiple MAINT type users... how?
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Fred Schmidt fred.schm...@nt.gov.au wrote: I have tried defining a second user and LINK’ing to MAINT’s minidisks. That only allows read access if MAINT is already logged on. Another approach is to separate the tasks on a functional level in different maintenance userids. With MAINT owning your z/VM software maintenance, you can use another account to manage the directory, be SFS admin, do performance analysis, manage your hardware, be RACF special, etc. You then provide logonby access to those who need to do that work. Assign privileges to each account as required. And if you only use that account when you actually do something with it, the contention problem goes away. Often a lot of tasks don't need full CP class ABCDEG and LNKNOPASS and what else. Take advantage of the protection that VM can offer to limit the impact of mistakes. To me the good part is that you realize someone is doing something with that part, so you can prevent breaking things that others are working on. Rob
Re: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:29:47PM -0400, Alan Altmark wrote: - The CMS VSAM feature of VSE/VSAM is no longer available. If you don't have it, you can't get it. - Someone who already has it cannot give it to you. - If you already have it, you can keep using it as long as you keep paying the monthly license charge. - It isn't licensed for use on IFLs. - If it has become incompatible with current z/VSE VSAM support, all you will receive from us are notes of sympathy and regret. - OTOH, we haven't consciously done anything to break it. If *z/VM* changes something that breaks *it*, we would likely undo whatever broke it if that doesn't in turn break something else. (i.e. the reason for the change in the first place.) I can't believe that no one remembers the SPE from around 1985 called the Alternate VSAM Emulator that enables a program to intercept the VSAM open/close/tclose calls. That means the program provides the addresses of the read write entry points as well since the program fills in the ACB. See http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/zvm/v5r3/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.zvm.v53.dmsa5/hcsd2b00628.htm. It was originally exploited by DB2 (SQL/DS) on VM, allowing it to emulate VSAM. I can envision that the VSAM calls and data could be exported via a custom-built connector to z/VSE or z/OS. Or Linux. There are those who might be willing to pay someone to provide a solution that would leave their programs intact but sever the connection to CMS/VSAM. I wonder: Perhaps the emulator could simply use the BPX1 POSIX routines to mount remote NFS server and read/write data that way. With all due respect, Sir Alan, and with no intention of shooting the messenger, this does not appear to be a solution for CMS VSAM-dependent products that we currently use. This policy has the potential to complicate, if not completely derail, a proposed upgrade to a 2098-F01 of the shop I am supporting that has been VM and VSE for decades. And here I've been bragging on IBM to the Microsofties. I know-- it's just business. What's one entry-level z10? Or two? -- May the LORD God bless you exceedingly abundantly! Dave Craig - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'So the universe is not quite as you thought it was. You'd better rearrange your beliefs, then. Because you certainly can't rearrange the universe.' --from _Nightfall_ by Asimov/Silverberg
Re: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question - PJBR
On Wed, 20 May 2009 21:46:22 -0400 Jim Bohnsack said: What was the name of that DOS 1401 emulator? The old core memory is getting a little rusty, maybe a lot rusty. Jim We ran the 1401 emulator under DOS on a 360-40 until some time in 1986. The terms I remember that referred to this set up were the 1401 Emulation Facility and Auto-Coder. The later may have been a programming facility? Larry Scollard University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Re: Multiple MAINT type users... how?
On Thu, 21 May 2009 10:18:52 +0200, Shimon Lebowitz shimon...@gmail.com wrote: Another thing you can do is to change the config and directory disks (since these are the functions you mentioned) to NOT being held R/W by MAINT, either by moving them to a different own er and linking from the user doing the work, or by just changing MAINT's default link mode from MR to RR. For example, my system config files are owned by $PARM$, and to make a change I would LINK $PARM$ CF1 CF1 MR, and then RELEASE mode (DET when I am done. MAINT as shipped already has only RR access to CF1, CF2, and CF3. No nee d to move them to another userid. Even if MAINT is logged on you can link to them with MR to get write access. In either case, whether using MAINT or another userid, you have to do CPRELEASE and CPACCESS. Brian Nielsen
Re: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question
Alan, Interesting thought, intercepting the VSAM calls and redirecting to VSE. That, of course, assumes that the customers are concerned with using CMS/VSAM to access VSE held files. So, the question is: Are people using CMS/VSAM for CMS only applications, OR, are they using it to share data with VSE? Before I, or any other vendor, would develop a new product, we would need to see a market. So, anybody who thinks they would be willing to shell out money for a new, fully supported, vendor product that lets you read VSE/VSAM files from VM, with no changes to existing programs using CMS/VSAM, send me an email off-list. Just to make it interesting, think $10k-$15k a copy. Due to other projects, figure 18 months until availability. Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Alan Altmark Sent: 05/20/2009 11:29 PM On Wednesday, 05/20/2009 at 10:01 EDT, David Boyes dbo...@sinenomine.net wrote: On 5/20/09 4:29 AM, jose raul baron jba...@calculo-sa.es wrote: - Does VSAM still exist in z/VM 5.4 ? - Is it perhaps included in the z/VM 5.4 code (e.g. as TCPIP) ? No, it's under the same terms (and prices) as of old. - The CMS VSAM feature of VSE/VSAM is no longer available. If you don't have it, you can't get it. - Someone who already has it cannot give it to you. - If you already have it, you can keep using it as long as you keep paying the monthly license charge. - It isn't licensed for use on IFLs. - If it has become incompatible with current z/VSE VSAM support, all you will receive from us are notes of sympathy and regret. - OTOH, we haven't consciously done anything to break it. If *z/VM* changes something that breaks *it*, we would likely undo whatever broke it if that doesn't in turn break something else. (i.e. the reason for the change in the first place.) I can't believe that no one remembers the SPE from around 1985 called the Alternate VSAM Emulator that enables a program to intercept the VSAM open/close/tclose calls. That means the program provides the addresses of the read write entry points as well since the program fills in the ACB. See http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/zvm/v5r3/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.zvm.v53.dmsa5/hcsd2b00628.htm. It was originally exploited by DB2 (SQL/DS) on VM, allowing it to emulate VSAM. I can envision that the VSAM calls and data could be exported via a custom-built connector to z/VSE or z/OS. Or Linux. There are those who might be willing to pay someone to provide a solution that would leave their programs intact but sever the connection to CMS/VSAM. I wonder: Perhaps the emulator could simply use the BPX1 POSIX routines to mount remote NFS server and read/write data that way. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question
As long as the current product works, we will continue to use it both for CMS applications and VSE data access. If an upgrade to VSE breaks the current support, then we may be interested in purchasing something that works. Peter -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Tony Thigpen Sent: May 21, 2009 10:13 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question Alan, Interesting thought, intercepting the VSAM calls and redirecting to VSE. That, of course, assumes that the customers are concerned with using CMS/VSAM to access VSE held files. So, the question is: Are people using CMS/VSAM for CMS only applications, OR, are they using it to share data with VSE? Before I, or any other vendor, would develop a new product, we would need to see a market. So, anybody who thinks they would be willing to shell out money for a new, fully supported, vendor product that lets you read VSE/VSAM files from VM, with no changes to existing programs using CMS/VSAM, send me an email off-list. Just to make it interesting, think $10k-$15k a copy. Due to other projects, figure 18 months until availability. Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Alan Altmark Sent: 05/20/2009 11:29 PM On Wednesday, 05/20/2009 at 10:01 EDT, David Boyes dbo...@sinenomine.net wrote: On 5/20/09 4:29 AM, jose raul baron jba...@calculo-sa.es wrote: - Does VSAM still exist in z/VM 5.4 ? - Is it perhaps included in the z/VM 5.4 code (e.g. as TCPIP) ? No, it's under the same terms (and prices) as of old. - The CMS VSAM feature of VSE/VSAM is no longer available. If you don't have it, you can't get it. - Someone who already has it cannot give it to you. - If you already have it, you can keep using it as long as you keep paying the monthly license charge. - It isn't licensed for use on IFLs. - If it has become incompatible with current z/VSE VSAM support, all you will receive from us are notes of sympathy and regret. - OTOH, we haven't consciously done anything to break it. If *z/VM* changes something that breaks *it*, we would likely undo whatever broke it if that doesn't in turn break something else. (i.e. the reason for the change in the first place.) I can't believe that no one remembers the SPE from around 1985 called the Alternate VSAM Emulator that enables a program to intercept the VSAM open/close/tclose calls. That means the program provides the addresses of the read write entry points as well since the program fills in the ACB. See http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/zvm/v5r3/index.jsp?topic=/com.i bm.zvm.v53.dmsa5/hcsd2b00628.htm. It was originally exploited by DB2 (SQL/DS) on VM, allowing it to emulate VSAM. I can envision that the VSAM calls and data could be exported via a custom-built connector to z/VSE or z/OS. Or Linux. There are those who might be willing to pay someone to provide a solution that would leave their programs intact but sever the connection to CMS/VSAM. I wonder: Perhaps the emulator could simply use the BPX1 POSIX routines to mount remote NFS server and read/write data that way. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review retransmission dissemination or other use of or taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient or delegate is strictly prohibited. If you received this in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. The integrity and security of this message cannot be guaranteed on the Internet. The sender accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail or for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of information provided. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. This disclaimer is property of the TTC and must not be altered or circumvented in any manner.
Re: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question - PJBR
Hello Everyone, A little behind as I took another day after WAVV. We are on z/VM 5.3 and have VSE/VSAM for z/VM. I have kept the tapes and Directory. We are actually using z/VM to read access the VSE/VSAM files on the z/VSE 4.1.2 systems via Nomad2 (GL4). Everything does work fine other that some mismatches to the type of device if you do z/VM LISTCAT functions. I do suspect that within two to three releases of z/VSE we will have more problems. Ed Martin Aultman Health Foundation 330-363-5050 ext 35050 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Wakser, David Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 2:31 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question - PJBR If there is no real need to create VSAM files in CMS, but merely to access VSAM files from CMS, I once had a Rexx add-on that allowed VSAM access to VSE packs linked to the user. It worked fine for my purposes, at the time. However, at this point, I don't know if I could even find it. It's been at least 10 years, perhaps more. I believe it was called VSAMIO. I'll see if any of my old tapes have it. Until (or unless) VSAM changes in VSE (as it did in MVS), I see no reason why most functions would not continue to work. David Wakser
Re: Multiple MAINT type users... how?
For us, we have two other userids that have some of the capabilities of MAINT. One shares MAINT's ability to link any disk without using a password (we have VM:Secure), and another has all the privilege classes. When we have to service z/VM, we use MAINT. For other products we use the individual install userids. Sometimes I just have to wander over to Johnny, Ron, or Steve's desk and ask them if I can have MAINT. Peter -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Fred Schmidt Sent: May 21, 2009 03:46 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Multiple MAINT type users... how? Hi Listers, What do you recommend as a solution to allow more than one person to fulfil the role of making changes to z/VM system configuration files such as SYSTEM CONFIG and USER DIRECT? Up until now, it has been just me making changes to z/VM. But now I have an offsider and we would both like to work on a z/VM system at the same time. I have tried defining a second user and LINK'ing to MAINT's minidisks. That only allows read access if MAINT is already logged on. SFS sounded like a possible alternative, to share at the file level instead of at the minidisk level. However, a quick trawl of the Listserver seems to say that this is a lot of work to setup and administer. And I am loath to make major changes to MAINT's minidisks without understanding the implications, especially if I will have to re-do this work at each new install of z/VM. Regards, Fred Schmidt NT Government, Australia The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review retransmission dissemination or other use of or taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient or delegate is strictly prohibited. If you received this in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. The integrity and security of this message cannot be guaranteed on the Internet. The sender accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail or for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of information provided. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. This disclaimer is property of the TTC and must not be altered or circumvented in any manner.
Re: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question - PJBR
It seems to me that there was a commonly used, I think 1 word, name. It was possibly not the official IBM name, but every one of my 360/30 customers before 1970 ran it. Jim Larry Scollard wrote: On Wed, 20 May 2009 21:46:22 -0400 Jim Bohnsack said: What was the name of that DOS 1401 emulator? The old core memory is getting a little rusty, maybe a lot rusty. Jim We ran the 1401 emulator under DOS on a 360-40 until some time in 1986. The terms I remember that referred to this set up were the 1401 Emulation Facility and Auto-Coder. The later may have been a programming facility? Larry Scollard University of Tennessee, Knoxville -- Jim Bohnsack Cornell University (972) 596-6377 home/office (972) 342-5823 cell jab...@cornell.edu
Re: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question
Hello Dave Craig, We complained very loud when the discontinuation announcement came out. IBM knows how we feel. The results were the same then as they are now. So now on that end, I would suggest z/VSE Connectors, z/VSE Redirector, and a host of other z/VSE connectivity solutions. Ed Martin Aultman Health Foundation 330-363-5050 ext 35050 -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of David L. Craig Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 8:37 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:29:47PM -0400, Alan Altmark wrote: With all due respect, Sir Alan, and with no intention of shooting the messenger, this does not appear to be a solution for CMS VSAM-dependent products that we currently use. This policy has the potential to complicate, if not completely derail, a proposed upgrade to a 2098-F01 of the shop I am supporting that has been VM and VSE for decades. And here I've been bragging on IBM to the Microsofties. I know-- it's just business. What's one entry-level z10? Or two? -- May the LORD God bless you exceedingly abundantly! Dave Craig - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'So the universe is not quite as you thought it was. You'd better rearrange your beliefs, then. Because you certainly can't rearrange the universe.' --from _Nightfall_ by Asimov/Silverberg
Re: SCSI Devices
Some SCSI disk devices can not be made to appear as EDEV 9336 DASD to CP; the IBM XIV storage system begin one of them. Linux guests can use it with no problems, but CP can not. Just something to keep in mind Have a good one. DJ - Original Message - From: Rick Troth r...@casita.net To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: SCSI Devices Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 18:56:21 -0400 VM supports SCSI disk now, but not SCSI tape. SCSI is SAN (FCP). The cards are FICON cards with FCP personality. In FCP mode, they act more like OSA cards. You can attach one or more (usually more) FCP subchannels to a guest. Maybe the guest will know what to do with them! But CP can use them too, so you can use one or more FCP subchannels to define an EDEV (emulated device) making a SAN-land disk look like a 9336 to VM. But no tape. -- R; On Wed, 20 May 2009, Schuh, Richard wrote: I just was asked by one of our h/w guys if I knew how he should define a SCSI tape device in the IOCP. Of course the answer was that there were no SCSI devices supported on VM the last time I had anything to do with IOCPs (some 20 years ago). If someone would either post a sample or e-mail one to me, I would appreciate it. Thanks, Richard Schuh
Re: Multiple MAINT type users... how?
On 5/21/09 3:46 AM, Fred Schmidt fred.schm...@nt.gov.au wrote: What do you recommend as a solution to allow more than one person to fulfil the role of making changes to z/VM system configuration files such as SYSTEM CONFIG Use CMS EXECUPDT on the file, and generate it from the updates. This also gets you elegant change control. You'll have to work out some kind of serialization, but as long as you are consistent about using updates and installing the file from the generated version, then you should be fine. and USER DIRECT? You can use the same approach as above, but you're better off just buying DIRMAINT. It's cheap and nasty, but it does the job admirably. -- db
Eliminating screen-scraping
Hi. As a proof of concept I've thrown a client/server app together using HLLA PI and screen-scraping. The concept having been successfully proved I'd now like to rip out that interface and replace it with something that stands some chance of being reliable. The question is what? My app, after logging in to VM, needs to be able to DEF STOR, mount tapes , and IPL a non-CMS system. Via the terminal emulator I can do all that an d get the responses from it all. Is there any other interface I could use to perform those types of comman ds (TCP/IP REXEC maybe?), that would leave the VM system up and reconnectabl e if the connection dropped? Failing that, I remember from my misspent youth that we used to connect t o VM via TTY type devices. These strike me as potentially much easier to interface with than a 3270 session. Is that support, or support for some other line-mode type connection, still present in VM? Any suggestions welcome. i
Re: Eliminating screen-scraping
CA's VM:Operator has 'session' facility to automate a 3270 session using Rexx; From the client side you just have to login to a VM userid and execute an EXEC that runs the VM:operator stuff. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Ian S. Worthington Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 1:42 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Eliminating screen-scraping Hi. As a proof of concept I've thrown a client/server app together using HLLAPI and screen-scraping. The concept having been successfully proved I'd now like to rip out that interface and replace it with something that stands some chance of being reliable. The question is what? My app, after logging in to VM, needs to be able to DEF STOR, mount tapes, and IPL a non-CMS system. Via the terminal emulator I can do all that and get the responses from it all. Is there any other interface I could use to perform those types of commands (TCP/IP REXEC maybe?), that would leave the VM system up and reconnectable if the connection dropped? Failing that, I remember from my misspent youth that we used to connect to VM via TTY type devices. These strike me as potentially much easier to interface with than a 3270 session. Is that support, or support for some other line-mode type connection, still present in VM? Any suggestions welcome. i This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system.
Re: Eliminating screen-scraping
Ian, If you have VM:Operator, you could use the dialog facility. Dennis A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week.. -- General George S. Patton -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Ian S. Worthington Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 10:42 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: [IBMVM] Eliminating screen-scraping Hi. As a proof of concept I've thrown a client/server app together using HLLA PI and screen-scraping. The concept having been successfully proved I'd now like to rip out that interface and replace it with something that stands some chance of being reliable. The question is what? My app, after logging in to VM, needs to be able to DEF STOR, mount tapes , and IPL a non-CMS system. Via the terminal emulator I can do all that an d get the responses from it all. Is there any other interface I could use to perform those types of comman ds (TCP/IP REXEC maybe?), that would leave the VM system up and reconnectabl e if the connection dropped? Failing that, I remember from my misspent youth that we used to connect t o VM via TTY type devices. These strike me as potentially much easier to interface with than a 3270 session. Is that support, or support for some other line-mode type connection, still present in VM? Any suggestions welcome. i
Re: Eliminating screen-scraping
If there is really no fullscreen involved.. you could accomplish the same thing by having another CMS user issue SEND commands to the user you're trying to manipulate (and use SET SECUSER to capture output, via WAKEUP (IUCVMSG programatically )/ Would that work? Scott On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Ian S. Worthington ianworthing...@usa.net wrote: Hi. As a proof of concept I've thrown a client/server app together using HLLAPI and screen-scraping. The concept having been successfully proved I'd now like to rip out that interface and replace it with something that stands some chance of being reliable. The question is what? My app, after logging in to VM, needs to be able to DEF STOR, mount tapes, and IPL a non-CMS system. Via the terminal emulator I can do all that and get the responses from it all. Is there any other interface I could use to perform those types of commands (TCP/IP REXEC maybe?), that would leave the VM system up and reconnectable if the connection dropped? Failing that, I remember from my misspent youth that we used to connect to VM via TTY type devices. These strike me as potentially much easier to interface with than a 3270 session. Is that support, or support for some other line-mode type connection, still present in VM? Any suggestions welcome. i
Re: Eliminating screen-scraping
-Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Ian S. Worthington Sent: 21 May 2009 18:42 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Eliminating screen-scraping Hi. As a proof of concept I've thrown a client/server app together using HLLA PI and screen-scraping. The concept having been successfully proved I'd now like to rip out that interface and replace it with something that stands some chance of being reliable. The question is what? My app, after logging in to VM, needs to be able to DEF STOR, mount tapes , and IPL a non-CMS system. Via the terminal emulator I can do all that an d get the responses from it all. Is there any other interface I could use to perform those types of comman ds (TCP/IP REXEC maybe?), that would leave the VM system up and reconnectabl e if the connection dropped? Depends on how complex it is. Are the commands pre-cooked or do you need to vary the tapes you attach and the amount of storage you define. Does you non VM so expect a 3270 console or a line mode device. You could perhaps use a CMS exec to set the machine up and then IPL you non-cms OS Failing that, I remember from my misspent youth that we used to connect t o VM via TTY type devices. These strike me as potentially much easier to interface with than a 3270 session. Is that support, or support for some other line-mode type connection, still present in VM? Line mode TELNET still seems to work on the system I have access too. However screen scraping apps in TELNET can be just as tricky. Any suggestions welcome. Sounds like PROP or SECUSER might be usefull... Dave i
VMSES/E questions
Hi, Can we get a little help from a VMSES/E expert with some trivia questions we have about working with PSP buckets? 1) A PSP bucket can have a PTF EXCLUDE LIST. (I am working with 0901RSU, which in this case the list is empty.) When we order a PSP bucket for a particular RSU, if there are any PTFs in the EXCLUDE list, is there somewhere we have to manually enter those PTFs so VMSES/E will exclude them? Or is there a file, or files, automagically included in the SERVLINK envelope that has that list? I recall having to manually do something with an EXCLUDE list in years past, however, that may have been in the days before VMSES/E. 2) If we should have to manually build an exclude list, do we simply use VMFSIM SRVDEP and the procedure in 4.3.8.2 Building an EXCLUDE List Containing All Dependents of a PTF of the VMSES book? 3) When we order a PSP bucket on IBMLINK using Preventive Service Planning, it gives you the choice of order PTFs in the subset include list and order all PTFs (including PTFs for closed APARs) referenced in the subset. Is there a particular advantage to using either of these? What is recommended? I used order all for 0901RSU. Thanks. Hal Schmitigal VM Systems Management, Nortel Account h...@nortel.com
Re: Eliminating screen-scraping
If it's on the same system, check and see if you can find a copy of RXLDEV. That gives you REXX functions to handle CP logical devices, which makes writing stuff like this a lot easier. Failing that, you can also use line-mode TELNET connections as TTY devices. That gives you a virtual 3215 as the virtual machine console. CMS has no problems running this way, and you can issue any command that doesn't require fullscreen access (certainly all the stuff you want to do that you listed). A simple expect script on your linux box could do it. RXSOCKET (included with VM TCPIP) would give you a way to do TCP functions in REXX easily.
Re: Eliminating screen-scraping
Not sure about this at all, but perhaps CHUG from the download page.. From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of David Boyes Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 2:12 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Eliminating screen-scraping If it's on the same system, check and see if you can find a copy of RXLDEV. That gives you REXX functions to handle CP logical devices, which makes writing stuff like this a lot easier. Failing that, you can also use line-mode TELNET connections as TTY devices. That gives you a virtual 3215 as the virtual machine console. CMS has no problems running this way, and you can issue any command that doesn't require fullscreen access (certainly all the stuff you want to do that you listed). A simple expect script on your linux box could do it. RXSOCKET (included with VM TCPIP) would give you a way to do TCP functions in REXX easily.
Re: VMSES/E questions
On 5/21/09 2:24 PM, Hal Schmitigal h...@nortel.com wrote: I don't know if I qualify as SES Expert but here's what I do/know: 1) A PSP bucket can have a PTF EXCLUDE LIST. (I am working with 0901RSU, which in this case the list is empty.) When we order a PSP bucket for a particular RSU, if there are any PTFs in the EXCLUDE list, is there somewhere we have to manually enter those PTFs so VMSES/E will exclude them? Or is there a file, or files, automagically included in the SERVLINK envelope that has that list? I recall having to manually do something with an EXCLUDE list in years past, however, that may have been in the days before VMSES/E. AFAIK, the bucket tape should come with any problem PTFs already excluded, or the necessary magic to do it. I don't remember any case in the last 5 years where I had to manually exclude a PTF that came as part of an IBM service package. 3) When we order a PSP bucket on IBMLINK using Preventive Service Planning, it gives you the choice of order PTFs in the subset include list and order all PTFs (including PTFs for closed APARs) referenced in the subset. Is there a particular advantage to using either of these? What is recommended? I used order all for 0901RSU. I just order all. The envelope is bigger, but bits are cheap and easily recycled, and SES will sort out what it wants/needs. Random thought for IBMers: you know, a SES packaging workshop would be a really cool session at a conference. It'd be really neat if someone would walk through how to actually package something as an installable tool that could show up in the software inventory, etc. I'd really like to deliver some of our open source tools in that format.
Initializing 3590 tapes?
Hi all, I feel a little dumb.. It's so long since I used a tape, and even longer since I created a tape, I think I'm missing something... Is there a way to initialize a brand new 3590 tape on VM? Everything I've tried (TAPE WTM, DDR, etc.) gives me: DMSTIO2139I VDEV 181 SENSE gives ERA/RAC= C0; cartridge may not be valid for I/O and the return code means: X'C0' Logical WRITE protection exception The MVS, sorry z/OS guys run IEHINITT on the same batch of tapes in the same drives and they can use them. So I know the tapes and the drives match... They tell me I need to initialize them, but I'll be darned if I can find anything in the VM manuals. And I really don't want this small set of VM tapes in the z/OS libraries... What am I missing? Lee -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
Re: Minidisk layout map
From: Karl Kingston karlkings...@ongov.net Does anybody have anything where you can create a graphic layout of a DASD volume at the minidisk level? Mike Walter wrote: Not graphical, but are you aware of the IBM-supplied commands: DISKMAP and DIRMAP From: Karl Kingston karlkings...@ongov.net Yup.. I'm aware of them. Just looking for something different. Personally, I would take the output from DISKMAP and import it into a spreadsheet, a few minutes of spreadsheet magic would get you a nifty chart. And- you could set it up as a macro if you wanted to get all dynamic about it.
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
Have you flicked the switch on the cartridge to write enable it? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: May 21, 2009 15:50 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Initializing 3590 tapes? Hi all, I feel a little dumb.. It's so long since I used a tape, and even longer since I created a tape, I think I'm missing something... Is there a way to initialize a brand new 3590 tape on VM? Everything I've tried (TAPE WTM, DDR, etc.) gives me: DMSTIO2139I VDEV 181 SENSE gives ERA/RAC= C0; cartridge may not be valid for I/O and the return code means: X'C0' Logical WRITE protection exception The MVS, sorry z/OS guys run IEHINITT on the same batch of tapes in the same drives and they can use them. So I know the tapes and the drives match... They tell me I need to initialize them, but I'll be darned if I can find anything in the VM manuals. And I really don't want this small set of VM tapes in the z/OS libraries... What am I missing? Lee -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review retransmission dissemination or other use of or taking any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient or delegate is strictly prohibited. If you received this in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. The integrity and security of this message cannot be guaranteed on the Internet. The sender accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail or for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of information provided. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. This disclaimer is property of the TTC and must not be altered or circumvented in any manner.
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
Is it possible the tape is defined as shared and you are getting it r/o when you attach it? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 2:50 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Initializing 3590 tapes? Hi all, I feel a little dumb.. It's so long since I used a tape, and even longer since I created a tape, I think I'm missing something... Is there a way to initialize a brand new 3590 tape on VM? Everything I've tried (TAPE WTM, DDR, etc.) gives me: DMSTIO2139I VDEV 181 SENSE gives ERA/RAC= C0; cartridge may not be valid for I/O and the return code means: X'C0' Logical WRITE protection exception The MVS, sorry z/OS guys run IEHINITT on the same batch of tapes in the same drives and they can use them. So I know the tapes and the drives match... They tell me I need to initialize them, but I'll be darned if I can find anything in the VM manuals. And I really don't want this small set of VM tapes in the z/OS libraries... What am I missing? Lee -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
Yes, they are write enabled... One of the first things I double checked... Lee peter.w...@ttc.ca wrote: Have you flicked the switch on the cartridge to write enable it? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: May 21, 2009 15:50 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Initializing 3590 tapes? Hi all, I feel a little dumb.. It's so long since I used a tape, and even longer since I created a tape, I think I'm missing something... Is there a way to initialize a brand new 3590 tape on VM? Everything I've tried (TAPE WTM, DDR, etc.) gives me: DMSTIO2139I VDEV 181 SENSE gives ERA/RAC= C0; cartridge may not be valid for I/O and the return code means: X'C0' Logical WRITE protection exception The MVS, sorry z/OS guys run IEHINITT on the same batch of tapes in the same drives and they can use them. So I know the tapes and the drives match... They tell me I need to initialize them, but I'll be darned if I can find anything in the VM manuals. And I really don't want this small set of VM tapes in the z/OS libraries... What am I missing? Lee -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
CP tells me it's r/w... q v 181 TAPE 0181 ON DEV 05E1 3590 R/W SUBCHANNEL = 004C Lee Huegel, Thomas wrote: Is it possible the tape is defined as shared and you are getting it r/o when you attach it? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 2:50 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Initializing 3590 tapes? Hi all, I feel a little dumb.. It's so long since I used a tape, and even longer since I created a tape, I think I'm missing something... Is there a way to initialize a brand new 3590 tape on VM? Everything I've tried (TAPE WTM, DDR, etc.) gives me: DMSTIO2139I VDEV 181 SENSE gives ERA/RAC= C0; cartridge may not be valid for I/O and the return code means: X'C0' Logical WRITE protection exception The MVS, sorry z/OS guys run IEHINITT on the same batch of tapes in the same drives and they can use them. So I know the tapes and the drives match... They tell me I need to initialize them, but I'll be darned if I can find anything in the VM manuals. And I really don't want this small set of VM tapes in the z/OS libraries... What am I missing? Lee -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
Use ... TAPE WVOL1 ... to re-initialize the tapes. JR (Steven) Imler CA +1-703-708-3479 steven.im...@ca.com -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 03:56 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Initializing 3590 tapes? Yes, they are write enabled... One of the first things I double checked... Lee peter.w...@ttc.ca wrote: Have you flicked the switch on the cartridge to write enable it? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: May 21, 2009 15:50 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Initializing 3590 tapes? Hi all, I feel a little dumb.. It's so long since I used a tape, and even longer since I created a tape, I think I'm missing something... Is there a way to initialize a brand new 3590 tape on VM? Everything I've tried (TAPE WTM, DDR, etc.) gives me: DMSTIO2139I VDEV 181 SENSE gives ERA/RAC= C0; cartridge may not be valid for I/O and the return code means: X'C0' Logical WRITE protection exception The MVS, sorry z/OS guys run IEHINITT on the same batch of tapes in the same drives and they can use them. So I know the tapes and the drives match... They tell me I need to initialize them, but I'll be darned if I can find anything in the VM manuals. And I really don't want this small set of VM tapes in the z/OS libraries... What am I missing? Lee -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
Same error... Even TAPE WVOL1 (3590C Lee Imler, Steven J wrote: Use ... TAPE WVOL1 ... to re-initialize the tapes. JR (Steven) Imler CA +1-703-708-3479 steven.im...@ca.com -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 03:56 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Initializing 3590 tapes? Yes, they are write enabled... One of the first things I double checked... Lee peter.w...@ttc.ca wrote: Have you flicked the switch on the cartridge to write enable it? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: May 21, 2009 15:50 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Initializing 3590 tapes? Hi all, I feel a little dumb.. It's so long since I used a tape, and even longer since I created a tape, I think I'm missing something... Is there a way to initialize a brand new 3590 tape on VM? Everything I've tried (TAPE WTM, DDR, etc.) gives me: DMSTIO2139I VDEV 181 SENSE gives ERA/RAC= C0; cartridge may not be valid for I/O and the return code means: X'C0' Logical WRITE protection exception The MVS, sorry z/OS guys run IEHINITT on the same batch of tapes in the same drives and they can use them. So I know the tapes and the drives match... They tell me I need to initialize them, but I'll be darned if I can find anything in the VM manuals. And I really don't want this small set of VM tapes in the z/OS libraries... What am I missing? Lee -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
If the drive is shared between VM and MVS, is it possible that someone forgot to vary it off (or whatever they do) from MIM? We had a case where the tape unit had been varied off from z/OS, but the appropriate action had not been done to take it away from MIM. This left it unusable by VM until it had been varied back on to z/OS, had the MIM thing done, and then varied off from z/OS. Regards, Richard Schuh -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Imler, Steven J Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 1:02 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Initializing 3590 tapes? Use ... TAPE WVOL1 ... to re-initialize the tapes. JR (Steven) Imler CA +1-703-708-3479 steven.im...@ca.com -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 03:56 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Initializing 3590 tapes? Yes, they are write enabled... One of the first things I double checked... Lee peter.w...@ttc.ca wrote: Have you flicked the switch on the cartridge to write enable it? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: May 21, 2009 15:50 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Initializing 3590 tapes? Hi all, I feel a little dumb.. It's so long since I used a tape, and even longer since I created a tape, I think I'm missing something... Is there a way to initialize a brand new 3590 tape on VM? Everything I've tried (TAPE WTM, DDR, etc.) gives me: DMSTIO2139I VDEV 181 SENSE gives ERA/RAC= C0; cartridge may not be valid for I/O and the return code means: X'C0' Logical WRITE protection exception The MVS, sorry z/OS guys run IEHINITT on the same batch of tapes in the same drives and they can use them. So I know the tapes and the drives match... They tell me I need to initialize them, but I'll be darned if I can find anything in the VM manuals. And I really don't want this small set of VM tapes in the z/OS libraries... What am I missing? Lee -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
Try TAPE MODESET (3590C TAPE WVOL1 (TAP1 TAPE REW (TAP1 On 5/21/09 4:12 PM, Lee Stewart lstewart.dsgr...@attglobal.net wrote: Same error... Even TAPE WVOL1 (3590C Lee Imler, Steven J wrote: Use ... TAPE WVOL1 ... to re-initialize the tapes. JR (Steven) Imler CA +1-703-708-3479 steven.im...@ca.com -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 03:56 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Initializing 3590 tapes? Yes, they are write enabled... One of the first things I double checked... Lee peter.w...@ttc.ca wrote: Have you flicked the switch on the cartridge to write enable it? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: May 21, 2009 15:50 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Initializing 3590 tapes? Hi all, I feel a little dumb.. It's so long since I used a tape, and even longer since I created a tape, I think I'm missing something... Is there a way to initialize a brand new 3590 tape on VM? Everything I've tried (TAPE WTM, DDR, etc.) gives me: DMSTIO2139I VDEV 181 SENSE gives ERA/RAC= C0; cartridge may not be valid for I/O and the return code means: X'C0' Logical WRITE protection exception The MVS, sorry z/OS guys run IEHINITT on the same batch of tapes in the same drives and they can use them. So I know the tapes and the drives match... They tell me I need to initialize them, but I'll be darned if I can find anything in the VM manuals. And I really don't want this small set of VM tapes in the z/OS libraries... What am I missing? Lee -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
The TAPE WVOL1 gives me the same error... I just took one of the z/OS tapes that they have inited (IEHINITT) and I was able to write to it fine... (Of course now they have to reinint it ;-) Lee David Boyes wrote: Try TAPE MODESET (3590C TAPE WVOL1 (TAP1 TAPE REW (TAP1 On 5/21/09 4:12 PM, Lee Stewart lstewart.dsgr...@attglobal.net wrote: Same error... Even TAPE WVOL1 (3590C Lee Imler, Steven J wrote: Use ... TAPE WVOL1 ... to re-initialize the tapes. JR (Steven) Imler CA +1-703-708-3479 steven.im...@ca.com -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 03:56 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Initializing 3590 tapes? Yes, they are write enabled... One of the first things I double checked... Lee peter.w...@ttc.ca wrote: Have you flicked the switch on the cartridge to write enable it? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: May 21, 2009 15:50 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Initializing 3590 tapes? Hi all, I feel a little dumb.. It's so long since I used a tape, and even longer since I created a tape, I think I'm missing something... Is there a way to initialize a brand new 3590 tape on VM? Everything I've tried (TAPE WTM, DDR, etc.) gives me: DMSTIO2139I VDEV 181 SENSE gives ERA/RAC= C0; cartridge may not be valid for I/O and the return code means: X'C0' Logical WRITE protection exception The MVS, sorry z/OS guys run IEHINITT on the same batch of tapes in the same drives and they can use them. So I know the tapes and the drives match... They tell me I need to initialize them, but I'll be darned if I can find anything in the VM manuals. And I really don't want this small set of VM tapes in the z/OS libraries... What am I missing? Lee -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
Perchance was this 3590C tape degaussed? I seem to remember earlier (years ago) posts about 3590's becoming expensive paperweights on VM systems when they were degaussed and there was no neighboring, friendly z/OS system nearby to re-init them. Mike Walter Hewitt Associates Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates. The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. All messages sent to and from this e-mail address may be monitored as permitted by applicable law and regulations to ensure compliance with our internal policies and to protect our business. E-mails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by e-mail.
FW: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question - PJBR
-Original Message- From: Carlos Martinez [mailto:carl...@solracz.com] Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 4:24 PM To: 'The IBM z/VM Operating System' Subject: RE: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question - PJBR If there really is a need to access a VSAM file from VM/CMS does it really have to be VSAM? Since VM is such a flexible OS there are many solutions to this requirement one might: 1 USE VSAM REPRO to move records from a VSAM file to a Sequential disk file in a fixed block format and Use the MOVE FILE from a CMS USER ID after LINKING TO the vse machine that contains the SD copied file. CP LINK VSEUSER CUU CUUU MR CP ACC CUU Z SET DOS ON DLBL the file Assgn the file Listds Z (EXTENT to look at the file and make sure it is there MOVEFILE now pipe away OR --- I may. . . SPOOL my VSE PUNCH to a CMS USER ID with a profile that has WAKEUP (RDR RECEIVE FN FT FM ( I am sure you know how to FIFO this info) Then use VMFTP (if it is still around) to FTP it another platform So. . . is VM/VSAM still really necessary? Yes there was a VSAMIO MODULE I used a long time ago by Sidney software which I still have in 3420 mode. (VMFPLC2) It was really a useful tool but I always found a better way around it cause that is what I am paid for. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Tony Thigpen Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 4:24 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question - PJBR There have been changes to VSE VSAM that makes sharing files 'iffy' at best. If someone is just using VSAM under VM for VM files, there should be no problem continuing to use it. If someone is using it to access VSE VSAM files, then they need to seriously look at other options. Some of the new large data set stuff on VSE is not computable with the VM code and I expect it to get much worse at each new VSE release. Tony Thigpen -Original Message - From: Wakser, David Sent: 05/20/2009 06:15 AM Raul: VSAM support under VM was removed a couple of years ago, and the product can no longer be ordered. However, I have it from a couple of sources that it seems to work fine under z/VM 5.4, so you should be able to use the VSE/SAM 6.1 tape. David Wakser -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of jose raul baron Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 4:29 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question - PJBR Hi, list. We are currently considering to migrate from z/VM 4.4 to z/VM 5.4 but we have an issue: We still have critical applications that use VSE/VSAM 6.1 and the questions are: - Does VSAM still exist in z/VM 5.4 ? - Is it perhaps included in the z/VM 5.4 code (e.g. as TCPIP) ? - If not, is there any workaround way to keep on using our VSAM applications (e.g. installing the VSAM 6.1 tape we received with z/VM 4.4) ? Thanks in advance, Raul Barón Dpto. Sistemas CALCULO S.A. Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, including any attachment to it, may contain material that is confidential, proprietary, privileged and/or Protected Health Information, within the meaning of the regulations under the Health Insurance Portability Accountability Act as amended. If it is not clear that you are the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this transmittal in error, and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, including any attachment to it, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete it from your system. Thank you.
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
Shame on you. All you had to do was TAPE FSF 1 to avoid clobbering the headers. :-) Regards, Richard Schuh -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 1:37 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Initializing 3590 tapes? The TAPE WVOL1 gives me the same error... I just took one of the z/OS tapes that they have inited (IEHINITT) and I was able to write to it fine... (Of course now they have to reinint it ;-) Lee David Boyes wrote: Try TAPE MODESET (3590C TAPE WVOL1 (TAP1 TAPE REW (TAP1 On 5/21/09 4:12 PM, Lee Stewart lstewart.dsgr...@attglobal.net wrote: Same error... Even TAPE WVOL1 (3590C Lee Imler, Steven J wrote: Use ... TAPE WVOL1 ... to re-initialize the tapes. JR (Steven) Imler CA +1-703-708-3479 steven.im...@ca.com -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 03:56 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Initializing 3590 tapes? Yes, they are write enabled... One of the first things I double checked... Lee peter.w...@ttc.ca wrote: Have you flicked the switch on the cartridge to write enable it? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: May 21, 2009 15:50 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Initializing 3590 tapes? Hi all, I feel a little dumb.. It's so long since I used a tape, and even longer since I created a tape, I think I'm missing something... Is there a way to initialize a brand new 3590 tape on VM? Everything I've tried (TAPE WTM, DDR, etc.) gives me: DMSTIO2139I VDEV 181 SENSE gives ERA/RAC= C0; cartridge may not be valid for I/O and the return code means: X'C0' Logical WRITE protection exception The MVS, sorry z/OS guys run IEHINITT on the same batch of tapes in the same drives and they can use them. So I know the tapes and the drives match... They tell me I need to initialize them, but I'll be darned if I can find anything in the VM manuals. And I really don't want this small set of VM tapes in the z/OS libraries... What am I missing? Lee -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
That sure is strange.. Do you have any other program that will init a tape? ie DITTO or access to IEHINITT from CMS or .. mmm but you already said DDR can't write to it.. mmm -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 3:37 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Initializing 3590 tapes? The TAPE WVOL1 gives me the same error... I just took one of the z/OS tapes that they have inited (IEHINITT) and I was able to write to it fine... (Of course now they have to reinint it ;-) Lee David Boyes wrote: Try TAPE MODESET (3590C TAPE WVOL1 (TAP1 TAPE REW (TAP1 On 5/21/09 4:12 PM, Lee Stewart lstewart.dsgr...@attglobal.net wrote: Same error... Even TAPE WVOL1 (3590C Lee Imler, Steven J wrote: Use ... TAPE WVOL1 ... to re-initialize the tapes. JR (Steven) Imler CA +1-703-708-3479 steven.im...@ca.com -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 03:56 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Initializing 3590 tapes? Yes, they are write enabled... One of the first things I double checked... Lee peter.w...@ttc.ca wrote: Have you flicked the switch on the cartridge to write enable it? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: May 21, 2009 15:50 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Initializing 3590 tapes? Hi all, I feel a little dumb.. It's so long since I used a tape, and even longer since I created a tape, I think I'm missing something... Is there a way to initialize a brand new 3590 tape on VM? Everything I've tried (TAPE WTM, DDR, etc.) gives me: DMSTIO2139I VDEV 181 SENSE gives ERA/RAC= C0; cartridge may not be valid for I/O and the return code means: X'C0' Logical WRITE protection exception The MVS, sorry z/OS guys run IEHINITT on the same batch of tapes in the same drives and they can use them. So I know the tapes and the drives match... They tell me I need to initialize them, but I'll be darned if I can find anything in the VM manuals. And I really don't want this small set of VM tapes in the z/OS libraries... What am I missing? Lee -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
LDAP, RACF Password Envelopes
I am having difficulty with the password envelope portion of the LDAP RACF configuration. I have created my keyring, created my certificates, exported certificates... but when I attempt to test it by changing the OPERATNS user's password (which should cause the password to be enveloped, I get the following error in LDAPSRV's console: IRRC130I SYSTEM SSL FUNCTION '2'X RETURNED ERROR CODE '3353009'X DURING OPERATION NUMBER '4'X WHILE PROCESSING THE PASSWORD ENVELOPE FOR USER OPERATNS. The possible cause, according to IBM, is The key database or the stash file is not found. When I look at the BFS directory, I can see the files, but I have to wonder if the permissions are correct: Directory = '/' User IDGroup Name Permissions Type Path name component ldapsrvDEFAULT rwx r-- --- D'gdbm' ldapsrvDEFAULT rwx r-- --- D'ldbm' ldapsrvDEFAULT rwx r-- --- D'schema' tcpmaint DEFAULT rw- --- --- F'IRR.PWENV.KEYRING' tcpmaint DEFAULT rw- --- --- F'IRR.PWENV.KEYRING.rdb' tcpmaint DEFAULT rw- --- --- F'IRR.PWENV.KEYRING.sth' tcpmaint DEFAULT rw- r-- r-- F'LDAPssl_VM5.b64' It looks to me as though only TCPMAINT is able to read write to the keyring files. Anyone have any ideas? Thanks, Dave
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
Not degaussed (that I know of), but supposedly brand new... Lee Mike Walter wrote: Perchance was this 3590C tape degaussed? I seem to remember earlier (years ago) posts about 3590's becoming expensive paperweights on VM systems when they were degaussed and there was no neighboring, friendly z/OS system nearby to re-init them. Mike Walter Hewitt Associates Any opinions expressed herein are mine alone and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of Hewitt Associates. The information contained in this e-mail and any accompanying documents may contain information that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message, including any attachments. Any dissemination, distribution or other use of the contents of this message by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. All messages sent to and from this e-mail address may be monitored as permitted by applicable law and regulations to ensure compliance with our internal policies and to protect our business. E-mails are not secure and cannot be guaranteed to be error free as they can be intercepted, amended, lost or destroyed, or contain viruses. You are deemed to have accepted these risks if you communicate with us by e-mail. -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
DDR, Ditto, TAPE WTM or DUMP, FIDEF/MOVEFILE, all fail the same... I'm having a (unhappy)z/OS guy init them, then he'll remove them from the z/OS library so it doesn't go nuts when it tried to find a non-existant tape... Lee Huegel, Thomas wrote: That sure is strange.. Do you have any other program that will init a tape? ie DITTO or access to IEHINITT from CMS or .. mmm but you already said DDR can't write to it.. mmm -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 3:37 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Initializing 3590 tapes? The TAPE WVOL1 gives me the same error... I just took one of the z/OS tapes that they have inited (IEHINITT) and I was able to write to it fine... (Of course now they have to reinint it ;-) Lee David Boyes wrote: Try TAPE MODESET (3590C TAPE WVOL1 (TAP1 TAPE REW (TAP1 On 5/21/09 4:12 PM, Lee Stewart lstewart.dsgr...@attglobal.net wrote: Same error... Even TAPE WVOL1 (3590C Lee Imler, Steven J wrote: Use ... TAPE WVOL1 ... to re-initialize the tapes. JR (Steven) Imler CA +1-703-708-3479 steven.im...@ca.com -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 03:56 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Initializing 3590 tapes? Yes, they are write enabled... One of the first things I double checked... Lee peter.w...@ttc.ca wrote: Have you flicked the switch on the cartridge to write enable it? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: May 21, 2009 15:50 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Initializing 3590 tapes? Hi all, I feel a little dumb.. It's so long since I used a tape, and even longer since I created a tape, I think I'm missing something... Is there a way to initialize a brand new 3590 tape on VM? Everything I've tried (TAPE WTM, DDR, etc.) gives me: DMSTIO2139I VDEV 181 SENSE gives ERA/RAC= C0; cartridge may not be valid for I/O and the return code means: X'C0' Logical WRITE protection exception The MVS, sorry z/OS guys run IEHINITT on the same batch of tapes in the same drives and they can use them. So I know the tapes and the drives match... They tell me I need to initialize them, but I'll be darned if I can find anything in the VM manuals. And I really don't want this small set of VM tapes in the z/OS libraries... What am I missing? Lee -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
Any chance this tape drive is shared with z/OS and still varied on to z/OS? The fact that you can't write to it, even though CP thinks you can makes me wonder... Scott On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Lee Stewart lstewart.dsgr...@attglobal.net wrote: DDR, Ditto, TAPE WTM or DUMP, FIDEF/MOVEFILE, all fail the same... I'm having a (unhappy)z/OS guy init them, then he'll remove them from the z/OS library so it doesn't go nuts when it tried to find a non-existant tape... Lee Huegel, Thomas wrote: That sure is strange.. Do you have any other program that will init a tape? ie DITTO or access to IEHINITT from CMS or .. mmm but you already said DDR can't write to it.. mmm -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 3:37 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Initializing 3590 tapes? The TAPE WVOL1 gives me the same error... I just took one of the z/OS tapes that they have inited (IEHINITT) and I was able to write to it fine... (Of course now they have to reinint it ;-) Lee David Boyes wrote: Try TAPE MODESET (3590C TAPE WVOL1 (TAP1 TAPE REW (TAP1 On 5/21/09 4:12 PM, Lee Stewart lstewart.dsgr...@attglobal.net wrote: Same error... Even TAPE WVOL1 (3590C Lee Imler, Steven J wrote: Use ... TAPE WVOL1 ... to re-initialize the tapes. JR (Steven) Imler CA +1-703-708-3479 steven.im...@ca.com -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 03:56 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Initializing 3590 tapes? Yes, they are write enabled... One of the first things I double checked... Lee peter.w...@ttc.ca wrote: Have you flicked the switch on the cartridge to write enable it? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Lee Stewart Sent: May 21, 2009 15:50 To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Initializing 3590 tapes? Hi all, I feel a little dumb.. It's so long since I used a tape, and even longer since I created a tape, I think I'm missing something... Is there a way to initialize a brand new 3590 tape on VM? Everything I've tried (TAPE WTM, DDR, etc.) gives me: DMSTIO2139I VDEV 181 SENSE gives ERA/RAC= C0; cartridge may not be valid for I/O and the return code means: X'C0' Logical WRITE protection exception The MVS, sorry z/OS guys run IEHINITT on the same batch of tapes in the same drives and they can use them. So I know the tapes and the drives match... They tell me I need to initialize them, but I'll be darned if I can find anything in the VM manuals. And I really don't want this small set of VM tapes in the z/OS libraries... What am I missing? Lee -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
On: Thu, May 21, 2009 at 02:36:49PM -0600,Lee Stewart Wrote: The TAPE WVOL1 gives me the same error... I just took one of the z/OS tapes that they have inited (IEHINITT) and I was able to write to it fine... (Of course now they have to reinint it Lee, Have the Z/OS folks run IEHINITT on your tapes, then redo with WVOL1. -- Rich Greenberg N Ft Myers, FL, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 239 543 1353 Eastern time. N6LRT I speak for myself my dogs only.VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val, Red, Shasta Casey (RIP), Red Zero, Siberians Owner:Chinook-L Retired at the beach Asst Owner:Sibernet-L
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
Well - yeah - but that's not really solving the problem.. you shouldn't need z/OS to initiliaze tapes. I mean - this 'is' the z/VM list ;-) Scott On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Rich Greenberg ric...@panix.com wrote: On: Thu, May 21, 2009 at 02:36:49PM -0600,Lee Stewart Wrote: The TAPE WVOL1 gives me the same error... I just took one of the z/OS tapes that they have inited (IEHINITT) and I was able to write to it fine... (Of course now they have to reinint it Lee, Have the Z/OS folks run IEHINITT on your tapes, then redo with WVOL1. -- Rich Greenberg N Ft Myers, FL, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 239 543 1353 Eastern time. N6LRT I speak for myself my dogs only.VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val, Red, Shasta Casey (RIP), Red Zero, Siberians Owner:Chinook-L Retired at the beach Asst Owner:Sibernet-L
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
It does appear that if you have either brand new or degaussed 3590 tapes, you need an extra priced feature to initialize them.. Which feature? Why z/OS of course... Sigh... Thanks for all the advice/suggestions... Lee Scott Rohling wrote: Well - yeah - but that's not really solving the problem.. you shouldn't need z/OS to initiliaze tapes. I mean - this 'is' the z/VM list ;-) Scott On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Rich Greenberg ric...@panix.com mailto:ric...@panix.com wrote: On: Thu, May 21, 2009 at 02:36:49PM -0600,Lee Stewart Wrote: The TAPE WVOL1 gives me the same error... I just took one of the z/OS tapes that they have inited (IEHINITT) and I was able to write to it fine... (Of course now they have to reinint it Lee, Have the Z/OS folks run IEHINITT on your tapes, then redo with WVOL1. -- Rich Greenberg N Ft Myers, FL, USA richgr atsign panix.com http://panix.com + 1 239 543 1353 Eastern time. N6LRT I speak for myself my dogs only.VM'er since CP-67 Canines:Val, Red, Shasta Casey (RIP), Red Zero, Siberians Owner:Chinook-L Retired at the beach Asst Owner:Sibernet-L -- Lee Stewart, Senior SE Sirius Computer Solutions Phone: (303) 996-7122 Email: lee.stew...@siriuscom.com Web: www.siriuscom.com
Re: z/VM 5.4 VSAM question - PJBR
On 5/21/09 4:33 PM, Carlos Martinez carl...@solracz.com wrote: If there really is a need to access a VSAM file from VM/CMS does it really have to be VSAM? If you need to do random access to the file, then yes, you need VSAM. Your method works fine IF you only need sequential access to the file AND you can make a copy and work with the copy. Not always the case. The only way around that problem is to do what Alan suggested; write a replacement library that can use the hooks provided and work with either the CMS filesystem, or the new VSE/VSAM interface either directly or via the VSE connectors (probably the best option). It'd be a great IBM product -- we could call it... Hmm, maybe CMS VSAM? On the other hand, since IBM has said they aren't going to release any of the modern language compilers for CMS other than C/C++ (which they need to maintain CP these days), I think that says a lot about the future for CMS application development and the fate of any commercial product that would attempt the development of such a VSAM replacement. At least we're finally free of AMSERV. 8-) -- db
Re: Initializing 3590 tapes?
On Thursday, 05/21/2009 at 05:09 EDT, Lee Stewart lstewart.dsgr...@attglobal.net wrote: Not degaussed (that I know of), but supposedly brand new... New tapes can be initialized or not. If ordering from IBM or an IBM-authorized dealer, you order 3599-xxx. Whether the tape are initialized depends on the value of xxx. If IEHINITT will initialize the tape, but TAPE WVOL1 isn't, then open a PMR against CMS. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
