Debra –
Of course. Thank you for your efforts.
Charles
From: Debra A Quick [mailto:dqu...@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2010 8:27 AM
To: Charles Mills
Cc: r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl; IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: RE: DD TERM=TS,SYSOUT=*
Hi Charles,
Thank you for your
On 09/02/2010 08:13 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
> In <4c7fff76.4000...@bremultibank.com.pl>, on 09/02/2010
>at 09:48 PM, "R.S." said:
>
>> More functionality is usually better.
>
> FSVO functionality. Adding options without thinking them through
> usually makes things worse.
>
Gosh
In
<1559058428-1283449765-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-17762363...@bda026.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>,
on 09/02/2010
at 05:49 PM, Ted MacNEIL said:
>Unfortunately, IBM manuals are (generally) written by people who have
>English as a first language and understand nuances and multiple
>
In <4c7fff76.4000...@bremultibank.com.pl>, on 09/02/2010
at 09:48 PM, "R.S." said:
>More functionality is usually better.
FSVO functionality. Adding options without thinking them through
usually makes things worse.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <
In , on 09/02/2010
at 10:15 AM, Etienne Thijsse said:
>That sounds suspiciously similar to the quoted text from the JCL
>book... Maybe the key is that the background job must still run under
>TSO? Is that possible?
No. The key is that the quote from the JCL book is wrong.
--
Shmuel (
In , on 09/02/2010
at 08:28 AM, Etienne Thijsse said:
>Then I guess my JCL book is wrong; it says "Coding TERM=TS on a
>//SYSOUT DD statement sends the output data set back to the terminal
>if it was submitted from a terminal." in the section about the
>SUBMIT TSO statement.
A good rule of
In , on 09/02/2010
at 04:01 AM, Etienne Thijsse said:
>I have read that I can have a batch job write to the screen by coding
> TERM=TS on the DD statement, like this:
>//TERM DD TERM=TS,SYSOUT=*
It isn't true. Where did you read it? Are you sure that you correctly
parap
>You are confusing "subsystem" and "address space type". Under normal
>circumstances, TSUs also run under JES2 or JES3.
Yes, of course.
But, there is a definite sub-system called TSO, just as there is one called STC
(Started Task Control).
They all require JES, but they are separate sub-syst
would not be pretty.
> Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 21:48:06 +0200
> From: r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl
> Subject: Re: DD TERM=TS,SYSOUT=*
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
>
> W dniu 2010-09-02 19:54, Ted MacNEIL pisze:
> >> Would be nice to have(i.e TERM=TS from a batch j
normal
circumstances, TSUs also run under JES2 or JES3.
TERM=TS is effective in a time sharing address space, i.e. one with a TSB which
represents a terminal.
> Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 17:59:32 +
> From: eamacn...@yahoo.ca
> Subject: Re: DD TERM=TS,SYSOUT=*
> To: IBM-MAIN
>> A dunsel is still a dunsel.
>Thank you for expressing your minds using words out of dictionary
I'm allowed to use words that are common usage in my native tongue, aren't I?
Of course, only Star Trek fans would get the reference.
>There would be many applications for such feature. >Some batch
W dniu 2010-09-02 22:01, Ted MacNEIL pisze:
Isn't it obvious?
If it were obvious, would I ask why?
Unfortunately yes. My opinion on that: You ask me, I answer.
More functionality is usually better.
A dunsel is still a dunsel.
Thank you for expressing your minds using words out of dict
On Thu, 2 Sep 2010 21:48:06 +0200, R.S. wrote:
>W dniu 2010-09-02 19:54, Ted MacNEIL pisze:
>>> Would be nice to have(i.e TERM=TS from a batch job)
>>
>>
>> Why?
>Isn't it obvious?
>More functionality is usually better. If you don't like it, then just
>don't use it.
>
Isn't each of us uncomf
>Isn't it obvious?
If it were obvious, would I ask why?
>More functionality is usually better.
A dunsel is still a dunsel.
>If you don't like it, then just
don't use it.
I never said I didn't like it!
I simply asked why.
I can see no use for the function, at the moment.
I wouldn't mind knowi
W dniu 2010-09-02 19:54, Ted MacNEIL pisze:
Would be nice to have(i.e TERM=TS from a batch job)
Why?
Isn't it obvious?
More functionality is usually better. If you don't like it, then just
don't use it.
Wouldn't that violate so many integrity rules?
Well, it is non-existent feature,
> Would be nice to have(i.e TERM=TS from a batch job)
Why?
Wouldn't that violate so many integrity rules?
There is always the SEnd command.
-
I'm a SuperHero with neither powers, nor motivation!
Kimota!
--
For IBM-MAIN su
nframe Discussion List
> [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Etienne Thijsse
> Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 8:29 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: Re: DD TERM=TS,SYSOUT=*
>
> Thanks, John,
>
> Then I guess my JCL book is wrong; it says "Coding TERM=TS on
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of R.S.
> Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 8:51 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: Re: DD TERM=TS,SYSOUT=*
>
> Etienne Thijsse pisze:
> > Thanks,
>the way I read the
statement from the JCL book, it says something totally different, and seemingly
totally wrong...
There's submitting and there's submitting.
Submit a job to get it to execute under JES2/3.
Submit text/commands, under TSO, and the output comes back to the terminal.
TERM=TS o
>Maybe the key is that the background job must still run under TSO? Is that
possible?
While you can run the TMP in the background, by definition, batch is
non-interactive, and runs under the JES (2 or 3) sub-system.
TERM=TS is for interactive work, under the TSO sub-system.
So, in short, it is
ated as though SYSOUT=* were
>coded. For an output data set in a foreground job, TERM=TS
>specifies that the data set is to be sent to the TSO/E userid.
>
>
>
>The JCL Reference does include this:
>
>
> 12.65.5 Examples of the TERM Parameter
> Example 1
>
>//DD1
1
//DD1 DD TERM=TS
In a foreground job submitted from a TSO/E userid, this DD
statement defines a data set coming from or going to the TSO/E userid.
Example 2
//DD1 DD TERM=TS,SYSOUT=*
In a background or batch job, the system ignores TERM=TS and
recognizes a sysout
background, provide a DD statement as follows:
>
> //DD1 DD TERM=TS,SYSOUT=A
>
>In this example the output device is defined as a terminal under TSO/E
>processing, and as the SYSOUT device during batch processing. For a
>complete description of the TERM=TS parameter
ore, if you want a job to run in either the foreground
>or the background, provide a DD statement as follows:
>
> //DD1 DD TERM=TS,SYSOUT=A
>
>In this example the output device is defined as a terminal under TSO/E
>processing, and as the SYSOUT device during batch processing. F
Charles,
This book is not an IBM manual, its an old book called "System 390 JCL" 4th
edition from 1998.
Thanks,
Etienne
>I am told that manual comments should go to mhvr...@us.ibm.com so that's
>where I am forwarding this post.
>
>Charles
>
Would be nice to have(i.e TERM=TS from a batch job)
On 9/2/2010 4:40 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Thu, 2 Sep 2010 15:51:03 +0200, R.S. wrote:
Etienne Thijsse pisze:
Thanks, John,
Then I guess my JCL book is wrong; it says "Coding TERM=TS on a //SYSOUT
DD statement sends the output data
On Thu, 2 Sep 2010 15:51:03 +0200, R.S. wrote:
>Etienne Thijsse pisze:
>> Thanks, John,
>>
>> Then I guess my JCL book is wrong; it says "Coding TERM=TS on a //SYSOUT
>> DD statement sends the output data set back to the terminal if it was
>> submitted from a terminal." in the section about the SU
-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: DD TERM=TS,SYSOUT=*
Yes, I believe that John is right, as I said.
Maybe some "word analyzing" would be in order, because the way I read the
statement from the JCL book, it says something totally different, and
seemingly totally wrong...
Thanks,
Etienne
On
ou want a job to run in either the foreground
or the background, provide a DD statement as follows:
//DD1 DD TERM=TS,SYSOUT=A
In this example the output device is defined as a terminal under TSO/E
processing, and as the SYSOUT device during
Yes, I believe that John is right, as I said.
Maybe some "word analyzing" would be in order, because the way I read the
statement from the JCL book, it says something totally different, and
seemingly totally wrong...
Thanks,
Etienne
On Thu, 2 Sep 2010 15:51:03 +0200, R.S.
wrote:
>Etienne Th
Etienne Thijsse pisze:
Thanks, John,
Then I guess my JCL book is wrong; it says "Coding TERM=TS on a //SYSOUT
DD statement sends the output data set back to the terminal if it was
submitted from a terminal." in the section about the SUBMIT TSO statement.
I don't want to analyze the "wording"
0500, John McKown
wrote:
>On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 04:01 -0500, Etienne Thijsse wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have read that I can have a batch job write to the screen by coding
>> TERM=TS on the DD statement, like this:
>>
>> //TERM DD TERM=TS,SYSOUT=*
>>
>
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 04:01 -0500, Etienne Thijsse wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have read that I can have a batch job write to the screen by coding
> TERM=TS on the DD statement, like this:
>
> //TERM DD TERM=TS,SYSOUT=*
>
> But I am not seeing anything being written o
Hi,
I have read that I can have a batch job write to the screen by coding
TERM=TS on the DD statement, like this:
//TERM DD TERM=TS,SYSOUT=*
But I am not seeing anything being written on the screen; the output still ends
up as an entry in SDSF... Should I do something else to have it
34 matches
Mail list logo
