Re: OK - a really stupid question.
>>> On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 10:21 AM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "McKown, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, I know this will be a stupid question. But I will ask anyway > because I have no fear (or was that no sense?). A zAAP engine is used by > z/OS to run Java code. The only reason for such an engine was because of > the CPU demands of Java and the fact that adding the required CPU power > using a general purpose engine would drive up the other software costs. > That is, a zAAP engine is a marketing ploy to "sell" Java (an maybe some > other Java-dependant software such as WAS). It is not a solution to a > technical problem with Java on z/OS. Therefore, there is no need/reason > for Linux on System z to ever support a zAAP (or zIIP or other specialty > engine which is "marketing" oriented). True? Understand that _all_ the specialty engines are "marketing" driven. There's no technical problem being solved by an IFL, either. They're all intended to make "new workloads" more attractive on System z hardware. The IFL was first, which caused a bit of an uproar in the z/OS customer base, so the zIIPs and zAAPs weren't far behind. One thing about the zIIPs to keep in mind is that only up to 40% of "eligible" DB2 workload can be offloaded. You'd need more than a couple CPs worth of DB2 workload to be eligible to fully utilize one. That's not the case on an IFL, and as Robert pointed out, if there is a lull in the incoming DB2 work, that capacity can be used by z/VM or other guests. Now, if the version of DB2 that is available for Linux would only be upgraded to have all the features and functionality of the z/OS version, it would be much easier to move workload from standard CPs to IFLs. Which, perhaps, is the reason why that hasn't happened so far. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: java install question
Also, here's a trick to get the 586 version uninstalled. Do rpm -qp j2re-1_4_2_14-linux-i586.rpm which will tell you the package name (I bet it's j2re). They rpm -e . -Brad On Tue, 2007-05-22 at 13:07 -0500, Jones, Russell wrote: > You need to install the IBM Linux version on the jdk for s/390. You can > find it here. > http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/java/jdk/ > > You will be required to set up an account on the web site before you can > download the jdk. > > Russ > > -Original Message- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of LJ > Mace > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 12:47 PM > To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: java install question > > We have run into what some seem to think is a Java > problem, so we were asked to upgrade. Currently we are > running: > rpm -qa |grep sun > java-1_4_2-sun-plugin-1.4.2.11-1.1 > java-1_4_2-sun-1.4.2.11-1.1 > > So I went to the download site and downloaded : > j2re-1_4_2_14-linux-i586.rpm > > I followed the directions to install it from: > www.java.com/en/download/help/linux_install.xml#install > > Made a change to my java.conf file,amoung other > things, and then tried the app. It still fails, so I > do another rpm -qa |grep sun fully expecting to see > the java...14 version,but it still shows the > old(above) display. I then rebooted but that didn't > help. I thought maybe some here could help. > thanks > Mace > > > > > > Be a PS3 game guru. > Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! > Games. > http://videogames.yahoo.com/platform?platform=120121 > > -- > For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or > visit > http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 > > -- > For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit > http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- Brad Hinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Technical Account Manager Red Hat, Inc. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: Fw: [LINUX-390] Wiki
>>> On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 11:50 AM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Warren Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I tried to install dokuwiki as per one suggestion but it would not install. I > had no availabe controls so all I could do was delete it by hand. Now any php > file I try to load brings up html from I don't know where that has no > content. This occurred from the start of the failed install. wow. Do you know > how to fix this mess I've made for myself? I didn't see anyone answer this, so I'll try. Look under /etc/httpd/ for any recently modified files. Look to see if the DocumentRoot directive is pointing someplace "odd." On most systems these days, the default is /srv/www/htdocs. Also look for any Include directives to see what else might be getting pulled in. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: OK - a really stupid question.
On Tuesday, 05/22/2007 at 09:21 EST, "McKown, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, I know this will be a stupid question. But I will ask anyway > because I have no fear (or was that no sense?). A zAAP engine is used by > z/OS to run Java code. The only reason for such an engine was because of > the CPU demands of Java and the fact that adding the required CPU power > using a general purpose engine would drive up the other software costs. > That is, a zAAP engine is a marketing ploy to "sell" Java (an maybe some > other Java-dependant software such as WAS). It is not a solution to a > technical problem with Java on z/OS. Therefore, there is no need/reason > for Linux on System z to ever support a zAAP (or zIIP or other specialty > engine which is "marketing" oriented). True? Since more and more new technology is written in Java, and z/OS customers continue to want new technology, a way was needed to deliver it without breaking the bank (yours, not ours). You get more capacity for only the price of the engine. You are right - it was a technical solution to a non-technical problem. We wanted to avoid (a) rewriting every Java application in C (massively increasing the development costs and time-to-market) (b) finding IBMers beaten and bleeding in an alley, having just come to collect on the latest monthly software bill > OK, why the stupid question? I am hoping (perhaps in vain) that > eventually we may get a zAAP to do Java work on z/OS and to get back my > IFL (lost during our z9BC upgrade due to "lack of interest") for > possible Linux on System z work. Our current management incarnation is > very open towards Linux. But they still act like Linux only runs on > Intel. Well, it beats the previous "Windows is the solution to every > problem!" attitude of the previous management group. Then your management doesn't have a problem for System z to solve. They are happy with IT expense levels for personnel, cooling, electricity, real estate, property taxes on servers (if applicable), and license costs (to name a few) as they are. They are also happy with development costs of new apps and the time it takes to deliver new apps. If it ain't broke, why fix it? Other organizations have "hit the wall" on some of these areas, or want to lower overall year-to-year IT spending. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: VM 5.2 and SLES 9 SP3
Its all logs when linux boots and rebooting. ipl Booting default (ipl)... Linux version 2.6.5-7.244-s390x ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 3.3.3 (SuSE Linux )) #1 SMP Mon Dec 12 18:32:25 UTC 2005 We are running under VM (64 bit mode) On node 0 totalpages: 262144 DMA zone: 262144 pages, LIFO batch:31 Normal zone: 0 pages, LIFO batch:1 HighMem zone: 0 pages, LIFO batch:1 Built 1 zonelists Kernel command line: dasd=82a9 root=/dev/dasda1 VMPOFF=LOGOFF VMHALT=LOGOFF selnux=0 TERM=dumb elevator=cfq BOOT_IMAGE=0 PID hash table entries: 4096 (order 12: 65536 bytes) CKRM Initialization .. Initializing ClassType .. Initializing ClassType CKRM Initialization done Dentry cache hash table entries: 262144 (order: 9, 2097152 bytes) Inode-cache hash table entries: 131072 (order: 8, 1048576 bytes) Memory: 1019136k/1048576k available (3456k kernel code, 0k reserved, 1075k data, 116k init) Security Scaffold v1.0.0 initialized SELinux:Disabled at boot. Mount-cache hash table entries: 256 (order: 0, 4096 bytes) Detected 1 CPU's Boot cpu address0 cpu 0 phys_idx=0 vers=FF ident=022AED machine=2096 unused=8000 Brought up 1 CPUs checking if image is initramfs...it isn't (no cpio magic); looks like an initrd Freeing initrd memory: 1493k freed khelper: max 64 concurrent processes debug: Initialization complete resid is -1 name is io CKRM .. create res clsobj for resouce class par= NET: Registered protocol family 16 VFS: Disk quotas dquot_6.5.1 Initializing Cryptographic API RAMDISK driver initialized: 16 RAM disks of 32768K size 1024 blocksize loop: loaded (max 8 devices) md: md driver 0.90.0 MAX_MD_DEVS=256, MD_SB_DISKS=27 Channel measurement facility using extended format (autodetected) NET: Registered protocol family 2 IP: routing cache hash table of 4096 buckets, 64Kbytes TCP established hash table entries: 131072 (order: 9, 3145728 bytes) TCP bind hash table entries: 65536 (order: 8, 1048576 bytes) TCP: Hash tables configured (established 131072 bind 65536) NET: Registered protocol family 1 resid is -1 name is cpu CKRM .. create res clsobj for resouce class par= init_ckrm_sched_res , resid= 5 md: Autodetecting RAID arrays. md: autorun ... md: ... autorun DONE. RAMDISK: Compressed image found at block 0 VFS: Mounted root (ext2 filesystem). Starting udev Creating devices Loading kernel/drivers/s390/block/dasd_mod.ko dasd=82a9 Loading kernel/drivers/s390/block/dasd_eckd_mod.ko dasd(eckd): 0.0.82a9: 3390/0A(CU:3990/01) Cyl:3339 Head:15 Sec:224 Using cfq io scheduler dasd(eckd): 0.0.82a9: (4kB blks): 2404080kB at 48kB/trk compatible disk layout dasda:VOL1/0X2119: dasda1 Waiting for device /dev/dasda1 to appear: . ok rootfs:major=94 minor=1 devn=24065 rootfs: /sys/block/dasda/dasda1 major=94 minor=1 devn=24065 EXT2-fs warning (device dasda1): ext2_fill_super: mounting ext3 filesystem as ext2 VFS: Mounted root (ext2 filesystem) readonly. Trying to move old root to /initrd ... /initrd does not exist. Ignored. Unmounting old root Trying to free ramdisk memory ... okay Freeing unused kernel memory: 116k freed INIT: version 2.85 booting System Boot Control: Running /etc/init.d/boot Mounting /proc filesystem..done Mounting sysfs on /sys..done Mounting /dev/pts..done Boot logging started on /dev/ttyS0(/dev/console) at Wed May 23 10:59:51 2007 Mounting shared memory FS on /dev/shm..done Activating swap-devices in /etc/fstab... [1A..doneChecking root file system... fsck 1.38 (30-Jun-2005) [/sbin/fsck.ext3 (1) -- /dev/shm/root] fsck.ext3 -a /dev/shm/root /dev/shm/root: clean, 46323/300960 files, 400702/600996 blocks [1A..doneHotplug is already active(disable withNOHOTPLUG=1 at the boot prompt)..done md: Autodetecting RAID arrays. md: autorun ... md: ... autorun DONE. Activating device mapper... device-mapper: Allocated new minor_bits array for 1024 devices device-mapper: 4.4.0-ioctl (2005-01-12) initialised: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Creating /dev/mapper/control character device with major:10 minor:63. ..done Scanning for LVM volume groups... Reading all physical volumes.This may take a while... No volume groups found Activating LVM volume groups... No volume groups found ..done Checking file systems... fsck 1.38 (30-Jun-2005) Checking all file systems. [1A..doneSetting up..done Mounting local file systems... proc on /proc type proc (rw) sysfs on /sys type sysfs (rw) tmpfs on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw) devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,mode=0620,gid=5) nothing was mounted [1A..doneSetting up the system clock..done Loading required kernel modules [1A..doneActivating remaining swap-devices in /etc/fstab... [1A..doneRestore device permissions..done Creating /var/log/boot.msg [1A..doneSetting up timezone data..done Setting scheduling timeslices ..unused Setting up hostname 'lnxpb'..done Setting up loopback interface lo loIP address: 127.0.0.1/8 ..done Enabling syn flood protection..done Disabling IP forwarding..done
Re: VM 5.2 and SLES 9 SP3
If you have just upgraded to VM 5.2, check for a messsage along the lines of "Error 'E00A'X adding IP address'. If you are getting this message, then that is the problem. (Recognize the voice of experience in this?) Fortunately, there's a PTF you can apply. See APAR VM64162. (PTF UM32042, I think.) Jon -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Adam Gill Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 3:11 AM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: VM 5.2 and SLES 9 SP3 Hi, uname -a Linux lnxpb 2.6.5-7.244-s390x #1 SMP Mon Dec 12 18:32:25 UTC 2005 s390x s390x s390x GNU/Linux dmesg after ipl Linux version 2.6.5-7.244-s390x ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 3.3.3 (SuSE Linux)) #1 SMP Mon Dec 12 18:32:25 UTC 2005 We are running under VM (64 bit mode) On node 0 totalpages: 262144 DMA zone: 262144 pages, LIFO batch:31 Normal zone: 0 pages, LIFO batch:1 HighMem zone: 0 pages, LIFO batch:1 Built 1 zonelists Kernel command line: dasd=82a9 root=/dev/dasda1 VMPOFF=LOGOFF VMHALT=LOGOFF selinux=0 TERM=dumb elevator=cfq BOOT_IMAGE=0 PID hash table entries: 4096 (order 12: 65536 bytes) CKRM Initialization .. Initializing ClassType .. Initializing ClassType CKRM Initialization done Dentry cache hash table entries: 262144 (order: 9, 2097152 bytes) Inode-cache hash table entries: 131072 (order: 8, 1048576 bytes) Memory: 1019136k/1048576k available (3456k kernel code, 0k reserved, 1075k data, 116k init) Calibrating delay loop... 2772.17 BogoMIPS Calibrating delay loop... 2831.15 BogoMIPS Calibrating delay loop... 2837.70 BogoMIPS Security Scaffold v1.0.0 initialized SELinux: Disabled at boot. Mount-cache hash table entries: 256 (order: 0, 4096 bytes) Detected 1 CPU's Boot cpu address 0 cpu 0 phys_idx=0 vers=FF ident=022AED machine=2096 unused=8000 Brought up 1 CPUs checking if image is initramfs...it isn't (no cpio magic); looks like an initrd Freeing initrd memory: 1493k freed khelper: max 64 concurrent processes debug: Initialization complete resid is -1 name is io CKRM .. create res clsobj for resouce class par= NET: Registered protocol family 16 VFS: Disk quotas dquot_6.5.1 Initializing Cryptographic API RAMDISK driver initialized: 16 RAM disks of 32768K size 1024 blocksize loop: loaded (max 8 devices) md: md driver 0.90.0 MAX_MD_DEVS=256, MD_SB_DISKS=27 Channel measurement facility using extended format (autodetected) NET: Registered protocol family 2 IP: routing cache hash table of 4096 buckets, 64Kbytes TCP established hash table entries: 131072 (order: 9, 3145728 bytes) TCP bind hash table entries: 65536 (order: 8, 1048576 bytes) TCP: Hash tables configured (established 131072 bind 65536) NET: Registered protocol family 1 resid is -1 name is cpu CKRM .. create res clsobj for resouce class par= init_ckrm_sched_res , resid= 5 md: Autodetecting RAID arrays. md: autorun ... md: ... autorun DONE. RAMDISK: Compressed image found at block 0 VFS: Mounted root (ext2 filesystem). dasd(eckd): 0.0.82a9: 3390/0A(CU:3990/01) Cyl:3339 Head:15 Sec:224 Using cfq io scheduler dasd(eckd): 0.0.82a9: (4kB blks): 2404080kB at 48kB/trk compatible disk layout dasda:VOL1/ 0X2119: dasda1 EXT2-fs warning (device dasda1): ext2_fill_super: mounting ext3 filesystem as ext2 VFS: Mounted root (ext2 filesystem) readonly. Trying to move old root to /initrd ... /initrd does not exist. Ignored. Unmounting old root Trying to free ramdisk memory ... okay Freeing unused kernel memory: 116k freed md: Autodetecting RAID arrays. md: autorun ... md: ... autorun DONE. device-mapper: Allocated new minor_bits array for 1024 devices device-mapper: 4.4.0-ioctl (2005-01-12) initialised: [EMAIL PROTECTED] qdio: loading QDIO base support version 2 ($Revision: 1.79.2.9 $/$Revision: 1.57 $/$Revision: 1.23.2.2 $) qeth: loading qeth S/390 OSA-Express driver ($Revision: 1.77.2.60 $/$Revision: 1.98.2.28 $/$Revision: 1.27.2.9 $/$Revision: 1.8.2.2 $/$Revision: 1.7.2.3 $/$Revision: 1.5.2.6 $/$Revision: 1.19.2.17 $ :IPv6 :VLAN) qeth: Device 0.0.0720/0.0.0721/0.0.0722 is a Guest LAN QDIO card (level: V522) with link type GuestLAN QDIO (portname: PORTFE00) qeth: Hardware IP fragmentation not supported on eth0 qeth: Inbound source address not supported on eth0 qeth: VLAN enabled qeth: Multicast enabled qeth: IPV6 enabled qeth: Broadcast enabled qeth: Using SW checksumming on eth0. qeth: Outbound TSO not supported on eth0 NET: Registered protocol family 10 IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling driver SCSI subsystem initialized st: Version 20040318, fixed bufsize 32768, s/g segs 256 eth0: no IPv6 routers present dmesg after reboot Linux version 2.6.5-7.244-s390x ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 3.3.3 (SuSE Linux)) #1 SMP Mon Dec 12 18:32:25 UTC 2005 We are running under VM (64 bit mode) On node 0 totalpages: 262144 DMA zone: 262144 pages, LIFO batch:31 Normal zone: 0 pages, LIFO batch:1 HighMem zone: 0 pages, LIFO batch:1 Built 1 zonelists Kernel command
Re: Changing OSA portname.
>>> On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 7:05 AM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gary Detro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is from a SuSE 9 system. Here are the files that have the portname: > > /etc/sysconfig/hardware/scripts/chandev-to-hwcfg.sh > /etc/sysconfig/hardware/scripts/hwup-qeth > /etc/sysconfig/SuSEfirewall2 While those files do have the string "portname" in them, they don't contain any information about what value should be used for the portname on an OSA. If there is a value already set, and in use by the system, the path I talked about in YaST should get you there. For those of you that might be interested in how to find which files have a certain string in them: find /etc -type f -print0 | xargs -0 grep -il stringtofind Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: CUPS printing help
>>> On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 1:58 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jones, Russell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am running Slack/390 10.1 in an LPAR. I am trying to use CUPS to set > up a network printer. I commented out the following lines in the > cupsd.conf file that restrict remote CUPS admin and require > authentication. That probably wasn't a good idea. If you don't want to send root's password over the network, then uncomment this in /etc/cups/cupsd.conf SystemGroup sys Then add a user, say cupsadmin, with sys as their primary group. > Order deny,allow > Deny from all > Allow from 127.0.0.1 > > AuthType Basic > AuthClass System Put all these statements back in. Change the "Allow from 127.0.0.1" to "Allow from xx.xx.xx.xx/24" or whatever subnet you want to accept logins from. Restart cupsd. Login as cupsadmin to do any administration work. > I am now able to get to the main admin page at myip:631/admin, but none > of the images on the page are being displayed. I can get to the "add new > printer" and "add new classes" pages, but when I attempt to access the > "manage printers" and "manage classes" pages, I get an http 403 > forbidden error. Look in /var/log/cups/access_log and /var/log/cups/error_log. See what exactly is getting the 403 error. Check the permissions on those directories and files. If they're not 755, they probably should be. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: CUPS printing help
Mark Post wrote: > That probably wasn't a good idea. If you don't want to send root's password > over the network, then uncomment this in /etc/cups/cupsd.conf > SystemGroup sys > > Then add a user, say cupsadmin, with sys as their primary group. > I also have another suggestion once you restore those lines to the config file: Tunnel the web interface over ssh. On your local machine: ssh -L :localhost:631 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Where is port number over 1024. Now, to connect to the web administrative interface, point your browser to: http://127.0.0.1: Again, substitute your decided port number. What this does is tunnel your web traffic to the remote cups server over ssh... so it's encrypted (good idea) and so CUPS sees it as coming from it's own localhost, thus letting you in. AND you don't have to change any configuration files from the default for this to work. *Darb -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: OK - a really stupid question.
Linux on 390 Port wrote on 05/23/2007 11:40:26 AM: > >>> On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 10:21 AM, in message > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "McKown, > John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes, I know this will be a stupid question. But I will ask anyway > > because I have no fear (or was that no sense?). A zAAP engine is used by > > z/OS to run Java code. The only reason for such an engine was because of > > the CPU demands of Java and the fact that adding the required CPU power > > using a general purpose engine would drive up the other software costs. > > That is, a zAAP engine is a marketing ploy to "sell" Java (an maybe some > > other Java-dependant software such as WAS). It is not a solution to a > > technical problem with Java on z/OS. Therefore, there is no need/reason > > for Linux on System z to ever support a zAAP (or zIIP or other specialty > > engine which is "marketing" oriented). True? > > Understand that _all_ the specialty engines are "marketing" driven. > There's no technical problem being solved by an IFL, either. > They're all intended to make "new workloads" more attractive on > System z hardware. The IFL was first, which caused a bit of an > uproar in the z/OS customer base, so the zIIPs and zAAPs weren't far behind. > > One thing about the zIIPs to keep in mind is that only up to 40% of > "eligible" DB2 workload can be offloaded. You'd need more than a > couple CPs worth of DB2 workload to be eligible to fully utilize > one. That's not the case on an IFL, and as Robert pointed out, if > there is a lull in the incoming DB2 work, that capacity can be used > by z/VM or other guests. > > Now, if the version of DB2 that is available for Linux would only be > upgraded to have all the features and functionality of the z/OS > version, it would be much easier to move workload from standard CPs > to IFLs. Which, perhaps, is the reason why that hasn't happened so far. > > > Mark Post > While the zIIPS and zAAPS and IFL's may be all ideas brought forth by marketing, the fact is, they exist. I know that there are folks out there that would love to see a zAAP processor be available to deal with Java within WebSphere, without having to incur any z/VM and/or Linux processor license charges. WebSphere in a large scale environment is exceptionally resource hungry in both memory and cycles. I personally feel it would be cost effective over the life of a z/series processor to toss a couple zAAPS into the z/VM & Linux on z/Series mix and not have to pay additional z/VM charges and Linux license charges as those processors would be dedicated only to Java processing. I would think that would help sell WebSphere for Linux on z/Series, not harm it. As far as a Linux full fledged DB2 is concerned, I can say that if the Linux DB2 were feature set identical to the z/OS version we would have converted it to Linux already. That does not help IBM in the software licensing department, however. -J -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: CUPS printing help
I put the mentioned lines back in the cupsd.conf file and I changed the Allow from 127.0.0.1 line to the ip of my pc. I uncommented the SystemGroup sys line and created a cupsadmin user with sys as his primary group. Then I restarted cups. Now I am prompted to logon when I try to access the cups admin web interface (I was not before.) I can logon with cupsadmin, but the images are still not displayed and I can't access the manage printers page. The /var/log/cups/access_log is full of messages like this: 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:11:50 -0500] "GET /images/left.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:11:50 -0500] "GET /images/right.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:11:50 -0500] "GET /images/add-class.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:11:50 -0500] "GET /images/manage-classes.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:11:50 -0500] "GET /images/manage-jobs.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:11:50 -0500] "GET /images/add-printer.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:11:50 -0500] "GET /images/manage-printers.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:12:03 -0500] "GET /printers/ HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:12:06 -0500] "GET /cups.css HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:12:06 -0500] "GET /images/navbar.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:12:06 -0500] "GET /images/left.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:12:07 -0500] "GET /images/right.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:12:07 -0500] "GET /images/add-class.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:12:07 -0500] "GET /images/manage-classes.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:12:07 -0500] "GET /images/manage-jobs.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:12:07 -0500] "GET /images/add-printer.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 10.5.8.76 - cupsadmin [23/May/2007:14:12:07 -0500] "GET /images/manage-printers.gif HTTP/1.1" 403 0 I changed the permissions on /usr/doc/cups-1.1.23/ to 755, and restarted cups, but it did not seem to make a difference. Do I need to alter the permissions on some other file system? Russ -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Post Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 1:09 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: CUPS printing help >>> On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 1:58 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> , "Jones, Russell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am running Slack/390 10.1 in an LPAR. I am trying to use CUPS to set > up a network printer. I commented out the following lines in the > cupsd.conf file that restrict remote CUPS admin and require > authentication. That probably wasn't a good idea. If you don't want to send root's password over the network, then uncomment this in /etc/cups/cupsd.conf SystemGroup sys Then add a user, say cupsadmin, with sys as their primary group. > Order deny,allow > Deny from all > Allow from 127.0.0.1 > > AuthType Basic > AuthClass System Put all these statements back in. Change the "Allow from 127.0.0.1" to "Allow from xx.xx.xx.xx/24" or whatever subnet you want to accept logins from. Restart cupsd. Login as cupsadmin to do any administration work. > I am now able to get to the main admin page at myip:631/admin, but none > of the images on the page are being displayed. I can get to the "add new > printer" and "add new classes" pages, but when I attempt to access the > "manage printers" and "manage classes" pages, I get an http 403 > forbidden error. Look in /var/log/cups/access_log and /var/log/cups/error_log. See what exactly is getting the 403 error. Check the permissions on those directories and files. If they're not 755, they probably should be. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: OK - a really stupid question.
>>> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 3:09 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, James Melin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Linux on 390 Port wrote on 05/23/2007 11:40:26 AM: -snip- > I personally feel it would be cost effective over > the life of a z/series processor to toss a couple zAAPS into the z/VM & Linux > on z/Series mix and not have to pay additional z/VM charges and Linux > license charges as those processors would be dedicated only to Java > processing. I would think that would help sell WebSphere for Linux on > z/Series, > not harm it. Do you really think that moving enough WebSphere workload from z/OS to Linux, turning off a CP and turning on an IFL would be more expensive than leaving things as they are? Somehow I doubt that, but I don't have any prices to verify the gut feeling. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: CUPS printing help
>>> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 3:36 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jones, Russell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -snip- > I changed the permissions on /usr/doc/cups-1.1.23/ to 755, and restarted > cups, but it did not seem to make a difference. Do I need to alter the > permissions on some other file system? What about the /usr/doc/cups-1.1.23/images/ directory permissions? Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: OK - a really stupid question.
> -Original Message- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Mark Post > Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 2:43 PM > To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: OK - a really stupid question. > > > >>> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 3:09 PM, in message > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > hennepin.mn.us>, > James Melin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Linux on 390 Port wrote on > 05/23/2007 11:40:26 AM: > -snip- > > I personally feel it would be cost effective over > > the life of a z/series processor to toss a couple zAAPS > into the z/VM & Linux > > on z/Series mix and not have to pay additional z/VM charges > and Linux > > license charges as those processors would be dedicated only to Java > > processing. I would think that would help sell WebSphere > for Linux on > > z/Series, > > not harm it. > > Do you really think that moving enough WebSphere workload > from z/OS to Linux, turning off a CP and turning on an IFL > would be more expensive than leaving things as they are? > Somehow I doubt that, but I don't have any prices to verify > the gut feeling. > > > Mark Post > I think that what he is saying is that it would be cheaper to use a zAAP for Java support on z/Linux and z/VM than to get another IFL and put it into the pool when all it is really needed for is Java programs. z/Linux and z/VM are licensed by number of CPs/IFLs and he is assuming that a zAAP under z/Linux would not increase his software cost. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing it. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: CUPS printing help
I did a recursive chmod on all files and subdirectories in /usr/doc/cups-1.1.23/ so the content of the images directory is 755 also. Russ -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Post Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 2:44 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: CUPS printing help >>> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 3:36 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> , "Jones, Russell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -snip- > I changed the permissions on /usr/doc/cups-1.1.23/ to 755, and restarted > cups, but it did not seem to make a difference. Do I need to alter the > permissions on some other file system? What about the /usr/doc/cups-1.1.23/images/ directory permissions? Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: OK - a really stupid question.
>>> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 3:49 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "McKown, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -snip- > I think that what he is saying is that it would be cheaper to use a zAAP > for Java support on z/Linux and z/VM than to get another IFL and put it > into the pool when all it is really needed for is Java programs. z/Linux > and z/VM are licensed by number of CPs/IFLs and he is assuming that a > zAAP under z/Linux would not increase his software cost. I understand that. My point is that just using IFLs is (most probably) less expensive than what's going on today. Getting IBM to make zAAPs available on Linux is highly unlikely (although I won't say impossible). They've already made huge cost reductions available as is. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: OK - a really stupid question.
> -Original Message- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Mark Post > Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 3:07 PM > To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: OK - a really stupid question. > > > >>> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 3:49 PM, in message > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > om>, "McKown, > John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -snip- > > I think that what he is saying is that it would be cheaper > to use a zAAP > > for Java support on z/Linux and z/VM than to get another > IFL and put it > > into the pool when all it is really needed for is Java > programs. z/Linux > > and z/VM are licensed by number of CPs/IFLs and he is > assuming that a > > zAAP under z/Linux would not increase his software cost. > > I understand that. My point is that just using IFLs is (most > probably) less expensive than what's going on today. Getting > IBM to make zAAPs available on Linux is highly unlikely > (although I won't say impossible). They've already made huge > cost reductions available as is. > > > Mark Post > Ah. And I hadn't thought about it much, but it would be likely that enabling the zAAP would require a change to z/Linux dispatching as it did to z/OS as well as a modified JVM. Modifying the JVM might be OK. But to modify the z/Linux dispatcher would likely put out "too much" information about how the zAAP is enabled. Right now, that information is rather restricted so that some "hot shot" would not be as likely to try to "fake out" the z/OS dispatcher to get his own non-Java code to run on a zAAP. Of course, this later is just speculation on my part. -- John McKown Senior Systems Programmer HealthMarkets Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage Administrative Services Group Information Technology The information contained in this e-mail message may be privileged and/or confidential. It is for intended addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited and could, in certain circumstances, be a criminal offense. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply and delete this message without copying or disclosing it. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: OK - a really stupid question.
For those customers that are not running WebSphere on z/OS but entirely on Linux for z/Series and need additional capacity to support WebSphere related Java overhead that yes, over a 5 year recovery you win if you don't have to pay z/VM IFL processor license charges and Novell/Redhat/your service vendor processor license charges. If you've managed to browbeat WebSphere into running on z/OS (Well OK, WebSphere 5 was a bear I dunno about 6) then no I don't think its worth the expense to shuffle the cards to move the workload. Just as a zAAP processor helps in the z/OS land from having to pay every vendor you have more money cuz WAS is being a glutton, to a lesser degree, it would help in the z/VM & WebSphere on Linux world. Enough so to make it worth marketing? Dunno. It could however make the decision to add processor capacity less painful than adding IFL's and incurring higher z/VM and Linux vendor maintenance charges. It would make the capacity cheaper to buy as a zAAP than as an IFL by that amount. I don't know what the savings would be, but I would have to think that it would reduce the 5 year cost of engines plus software license charges over that of IFL's. The caveat of course is having enough JAVA workload in the first place since a zaap under z/VM would serve the same function - execute java code. -J Mark Post <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: Linux on 390 Port To LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU cc 05/23/2007 02:42 PM Subject Re: OK - a really stupid question. Please respond to Linux on 390 Port >>> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 3:09 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, James Melin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Linux on 390 Port wrote on 05/23/2007 11:40:26 AM: -snip- > I personally feel it would be cost effective over > the life of a z/series processor to toss a couple zAAPS into the z/VM & Linux > on z/Series mix and not have to pay additional z/VM charges and Linux > license charges as those processors would be dedicated only to Java > processing. I would think that would help sell WebSphere for Linux on > z/Series, > not harm it. Do you really think that moving enough WebSphere workload from z/OS to Linux, turning off a CP and turning on an IFL would be more expensive than leaving things as they are? Somehow I doubt that, but I don't have any prices to verify the gut feeling. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
what is the granularity of itimer
Does anyone know what the granularity of itimer is on a z900 (RHEL 4u3)? Dennis Roach United Space Alliance 600 Gemini Avenue Mail Code USH-4A3L Houston, Texas 77058 Voice: (281) 282-2975 Page:(713) 736-8275 Fax: (281) 282-3583 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] All opinions expressed by me are mine and may not agree with my employer or any person, company, or thing, living or dead, on or near this or any other planet, moon, asteroid, or other spatial object, natural or manufactured, since the beginning of time. -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: OK - a really stupid question.
Here is another consideration for this discussion: Until recently, deploying WAS on z/OS was very cost prohibitive, especially with the OTC and S&S costs. However, with the zNALC pricing announcement providing LPAR pricing, the playing field changed. Now you can create and control a WAS-only lpar and how many MSUs you want it to consume. z/OS, its features and some other charges for that lpar possibly drop to single digits (in the thousands of $$$ and are separate from normal z/OS WLC charges). Of course, some good reasons for this setup could assume your backstore (DB2) is on the same platform, zAAPs can be available and other synergies can be achieved (high availability, GDPS, etc.). What is nice about z/Linux and ZNALC is that you now have application, business and infrastructural *choices* that won't break the bank based strictly on processor license cost issues we all have observed on Unix platforms and full capacity-based IPLA product charges under z/OS. Bob Richards -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of McKown, John Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 4:15 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: OK - a really stupid question. > -Original Message- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Mark Post > Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 3:07 PM > To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: OK - a really stupid question. > > > >>> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 3:49 PM, in message > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > om>, "McKown, > John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -snip- > > I think that what he is saying is that it would be cheaper > to use a zAAP > > for Java support on z/Linux and z/VM than to get another > IFL and put it > > into the pool when all it is really needed for is Java > programs. z/Linux > > and z/VM are licensed by number of CPs/IFLs and he is > assuming that a > > zAAP under z/Linux would not increase his software cost. > > I understand that. My point is that just using IFLs is (most > probably) less expensive than what's going on today. Getting > IBM to make zAAPs available on Linux is highly unlikely > (although I won't say impossible). They've already made huge > cost reductions available as is. > > > Mark Post > Ah. And I hadn't thought about it much, but it would be likely that enabling the zAAP would require a change to z/Linux dispatching as it did to z/OS as well as a modified JVM. Modifying the JVM might be OK. But to modify the z/Linux dispatcher would likely put out "too much" information about how the zAAP is enabled. Right now, that information is rather restricted so that some "hot shot" would not be as likely to try to "fake out" the z/OS dispatcher to get his own non-Java code to run on a zAAP. Of course, this later is just speculation on my part. -- John McKown LEGAL DISCLAIMER The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual 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 action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. SunTrust and Seeing beyond money are federally registered service marks of SunTrust Banks, Inc. [ST:XCL] -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Fw: [LINUX-390] Fw: [LINUX-390] Wiki
BTW, for a reasonably useful trick (I hate having to figure some things out) I tend to (as root): ln -s /srv/www/htdocs /HTML so that I *know* the root of the default web content. This has been useful since I've had to cope with multiple OSes where their document root has varied. I first saw this kind of trick as being useful for tape drives-- another thing that varied from system-to-system (i.e. Plexus vs Concurrent vs HPUX vs Solaris vs Xenix vs NCR vs... you get the picture) where, by policy, we'd symlink /dev/tape and /dev/ntape to the appropriate device on a system. Of course it is far too easy to go over-board with this, so finding a "good balance" is not always immediately obvious to the eye; It is just that I don't want to have to go down to the cellar... with a torch... and look in the bottom drawer of a locked filing cabinet stuck into a disused lavatory for the files I need. (sighs) Anyway, for the directory paths that vary from system-to-system that I tend to have to find and manipulate, this trick has been helpful to me so that I don't have to shift quite so many gears jumping from AIX/Apache to AIX/Loathed Domino to Linux/Apache or wherever. Just a thought. Of course it also makes the "Stupid SSH Tricks" to transfer the contents of a web tree from one machine to the other a little bit simpler, too. John R. Campbell, Speaker to Machines (GNUrd), Stand-Up Philosopher Phone: (813) 356-5322 (t/l 697) Adsumo ergo raptus sum MacOS X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows. Red Hat Certified Engineer (#803004680310286) IBM Certified: IBM AIX 4.3 System Administration, System Support -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: CUPS printing help
>>> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 3:51 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jones, Russell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I did a recursive chmod on all files and subdirectories in > /usr/doc/cups-1.1.23/ so the content of the images directory is 755 > also. Make sure you have these two ymbolic links v /usr/share/doc lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 6 2004-08-22 15:01 /usr/share/doc -> ../doc/ v /usr/doc/cups lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 11 2005-01-27 15:49 /usr/doc/cups -> cups-1.1.23/ If those are in place, send me the output from strace -f -F -p # where is the PID of cupsd. After that has started, click on the link that is giving you problems. Once the output has stopped, enter a control-c to get out. Send me the output and I'll take a look. Mark Post -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: OK - a really stupid question.
I guess I missed reading about zNALC. Does it also apply to z/VM? I.E. can I put my traditional VM (not LINUX NOT IFL) on 1 engine on my 54-way and pay for 1 engine instead of all of them? Marcy Cortes "This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation." -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richards.Bob Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 2:06 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] OK - a really stupid question. Here is another consideration for this discussion: Until recently, deploying WAS on z/OS was very cost prohibitive, especially with the OTC and S&S costs. However, with the zNALC pricing announcement providing LPAR pricing, the playing field changed. Now you can create and control a WAS-only lpar and how many MSUs you want it to consume. z/OS, its features and some other charges for that lpar possibly drop to single digits (in the thousands of $$$ and are separate from normal z/OS WLC charges). Of course, some good reasons for this setup could assume your backstore (DB2) is on the same platform, zAAPs can be available and other synergies can be achieved (high availability, GDPS, etc.). What is nice about z/Linux and ZNALC is that you now have application, business and infrastructural *choices* that won't break the bank based strictly on processor license cost issues we all have observed on Unix platforms and full capacity-based IPLA product charges under z/OS. Bob Richards -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of McKown, John Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 4:15 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: OK - a really stupid question. > -Original Message- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Mark Post > Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 3:07 PM > To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU > Subject: Re: OK - a really stupid question. > > > >>> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 3:49 PM, in message > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > om>, "McKown, > John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -snip- > > I think that what he is saying is that it would be cheaper > to use a zAAP > > for Java support on z/Linux and z/VM than to get another > IFL and put it > > into the pool when all it is really needed for is Java > programs. z/Linux > > and z/VM are licensed by number of CPs/IFLs and he is > assuming that a > > zAAP under z/Linux would not increase his software cost. > > I understand that. My point is that just using IFLs is (most > probably) less expensive than what's going on today. Getting IBM to > make zAAPs available on Linux is highly unlikely (although I won't say > impossible). They've already made huge cost reductions available as > is. > > > Mark Post > Ah. And I hadn't thought about it much, but it would be likely that enabling the zAAP would require a change to z/Linux dispatching as it did to z/OS as well as a modified JVM. Modifying the JVM might be OK. But to modify the z/Linux dispatcher would likely put out "too much" information about how the zAAP is enabled. Right now, that information is rather restricted so that some "hot shot" would not be as likely to try to "fake out" the z/OS dispatcher to get his own non-Java code to run on a zAAP. Of course, this later is just speculation on my part. -- John McKown LEGAL DISCLAIMER The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual 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 action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. SunTrust and Seeing beyond money are federally registered service marks of SunTrust Banks, Inc. [ST:XCL] -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: OK - a really stupid question.
No, only z/OS-based software is eligible. Plus apps like WAS, SAP, Seibel, etc. are necessary to get the zNALC pricing approval. Bob Richards -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcy Cortes Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 6:06 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: OK - a really stupid question. I guess I missed reading about zNALC. Does it also apply to z/VM? I.E. can I put my traditional VM (not LINUX NOT IFL) on 1 engine on my 54-way and pay for 1 engine instead of all of them? Marcy Cortes "This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation." -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richards.Bob Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 2:06 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] OK - a really stupid question. Here is another consideration for this discussion: Until recently, deploying WAS on z/OS was very cost prohibitive, especially with the OTC and S&S costs. However, with the zNALC pricing announcement providing LPAR pricing, the playing field changed. Now you can create and control a WAS-only lpar and how many MSUs you want it to consume. z/OS, its features and some other charges for that lpar possibly drop to single digits (in the thousands of $$$ and are separate from normal z/OS WLC charges). Of course, some good reasons for this setup could assume your backstore (DB2) is on the same platform, zAAPs can be available and other synergies can be achieved (high availability, GDPS, etc.). What is nice about z/Linux and ZNALC is that you now have application, business and infrastructural *choices* that won't break the bank based strictly on processor license cost issues we all have observed on Unix platforms and full capacity-based IPLA product charges under z/OS. Bob Richards LEGAL DISCLAIMER The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual 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 action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. SunTrust and Seeing beyond money are federally registered service marks of SunTrust Banks, Inc. [ST:XCL] -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
Re: OK - a really stupid question.
Phooey. Thanks for the info though. Marcy Cortes "This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation." -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richards.Bob Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 3:18 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] OK - a really stupid question. No, only z/OS-based software is eligible. Plus apps like WAS, SAP, Seibel, etc. are necessary to get the zNALC pricing approval. Bob Richards -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marcy Cortes Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 6:06 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: OK - a really stupid question. I guess I missed reading about zNALC. Does it also apply to z/VM? I.E. can I put my traditional VM (not LINUX NOT IFL) on 1 engine on my 54-way and pay for 1 engine instead of all of them? Marcy Cortes "This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose, or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation." -Original Message- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richards.Bob Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 2:06 PM To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU Subject: Re: [LINUX-390] OK - a really stupid question. Here is another consideration for this discussion: Until recently, deploying WAS on z/OS was very cost prohibitive, especially with the OTC and S&S costs. However, with the zNALC pricing announcement providing LPAR pricing, the playing field changed. Now you can create and control a WAS-only lpar and how many MSUs you want it to consume. z/OS, its features and some other charges for that lpar possibly drop to single digits (in the thousands of $$$ and are separate from normal z/OS WLC charges). Of course, some good reasons for this setup could assume your backstore (DB2) is on the same platform, zAAPs can be available and other synergies can be achieved (high availability, GDPS, etc.). What is nice about z/Linux and ZNALC is that you now have application, business and infrastructural *choices* that won't break the bank based strictly on processor license cost issues we all have observed on Unix platforms and full capacity-based IPLA product charges under z/OS. Bob Richards LEGAL DISCLAIMER The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual 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 action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. SunTrust and Seeing beyond money are federally registered service marks of SunTrust Banks, Inc. [ST:XCL] -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: java install question
LJ Mace wrote: We have run into what some seem to think is a Java problem, so we were asked to upgrade. Currently we are running: rpm -qa |grep sun java-1_4_2-sun-plugin-1.4.2.11-1.1 java-1_4_2-sun-1.4.2.11-1.1 So I went to the download site and downloaded : j2re-1_4_2_14-linux-i586.rpm java -version and java -fullversion (not all do the latter). -- Cheers John -- spambait [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please do not reply off-list -- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
