Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of David Crayford
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 6:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: IBM C/C++ Productivity Tools for OS/390
I looked into the product a few years ago and it wasn't available via
partnerworld. It's mostly
The current (V1R13) LE Concepts Guide refers to the IBM C/C++ Productivity
Tools for OS/390 product. Is that really the current name of the product
(OS/390)? It's Windows-based? Does anyone have any idea of the pricing? (I
don't have an IBM salesperson in my hip pocket.)
Thanks,
Charles
I do not know if that is the name of the product, but several things in C/C++
for z/OS report themselves as OS/390. And that is what many of the open source
products expect for z/OS.
Lloyd
- Original Message
From: Charles Mills charl...@mcn.org
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Sent: Fri
++ Productivity
Tools for OS/390 product. Is that really the current name of the product
(OS/390)? It's Windows-based? Does anyone have any idea of the pricing? (I
don't have an IBM salesperson in my hip pocket.)
Thanks,
Charles
++ Productivity Tools for OS/390
I looked into the product a few years ago and it wasn't available via
partnerworld. It's mostly been deprecated by RDz. I was mostly interested in
the profiler.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff
You can use the DS/6xxx under OS/390 (back to 2.7), but you cannot use some of
the DS/6xxx features. You also MUST use system Z hardware (i.e. z-series), you
cannot use a 9672 (or anything older than a z/800).
We ran fine with a customer converting on a z/800 with OS/390 2.7 who converted
W dniu 2011-09-15 10:26, Brian Westerman wrote:
[...] you cannot use a 9672 (or anything older than a z/800).
[...] we were told that it wouldn't work, we never really got a chance to test it. I
do believe that it probably would not have worked on the 9672 though.
Well... The above is not a
as 2105 is been
used today.
Any positive or negative comentary will be wellcome.
I heard (only heard) about serious problems, when oold systems without
PTFs were trying to use DS family dasd. I may apply OS/390 2.9 or
not. I would set up DS6800 as 3990 CU (not 21xx) just to be more
compatible
as 2105 is been
used today.
Any positive or negative comentary will be wellcome.
Thanks
Carlos Bodra
Carlos,
According to the DS6800 Interoperability matrix, the lowest level
operating system supported by the device is z/OS V1R4. It's unlikely
that OS/390 V2R9 has the appropriate device
Hello List Gurus.
We are in process of migrate from an ancient IBM 2105-F20 with 1TB of
legacy mainframe data to a IBM 1750-522 (DS6800). Both subsystems has
volumes defined as 3390-3 and no software features (flashcopy, pprc
etc..) used in
Shark and will neither in DS6800.
My question is,
I'd give IBM a call.
According to what you've said, around 1995 they upgraded to OS/390 V1R3,
with a plan to discontinue the mainframe around 1997. Yet after 13 years,
they're still on the mainframe, and still have yet another 2 year plan to
get off the mainframe.
I think it's an understatement
Let me get all the questions answered in one email.
What are the customer's plans to update from OS/390 V1R3? None they
upgrade to OS/390 1.3 in the mid 90's and had plans to be off the
Mainframe in a couple of years. There are no plans to upgrade OS/390.
Still trying to get off the mainframe
Mason
[1] I'm unclear about exactly when TCP/IP for MVS and VTAM combined to
form z/OS Communications Server. It may have followed OS/390 V1R3. It
actually doesn't change any of what I am proposing.
[2] http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/z/os/zos/bkserv/r1pdf/#osasf
[3] This should be or according
As a follow-up question (similar to another), what is it you're trying to
connect (and to what)? MQ on OS/390 to MQ somewhere else, to pick an
example? As you've discovered, 3270 access doesn't require SNA protocol
support. Perhaps the other connectivity(ies) you're trying to achieve do
not either
-0500, Michael Saraco michael.sar...@baer-
CONSULTING.COM wrote:
It is OS/390 1.3 and the OSA card has only one port OSA card that supports
Ethernet and Token Ring.
We have a 3745 we want to get rid of. It has a total of 6 printers and
terminals that are still SNA. We have DLSw router in front
software in your
partner node with which I anyhow could probably manage to help you.
This has nothing to do with TN3270 which is another way to handle SNA over
IP, specifically a TN3270 TCP commotion concatenated to an SNA session
both supporting the 3270 data steam.
The OS/390 1.3 is a bit
It is OS/390 1.3 and the OSA card has only one port OSA card that supports
Ethernet and Token Ring.
We have a 3745 we want to get rid of. It has a total of 6 printers and
terminals that are still SNA. We have DLSw router in front of the 3745. We
are trying to get rid of the 3745 and just
What are the customer's plans to update from OS/390 V1R3? That information
could be quite helpful in advising on short-term connectivity with a
longer-term view. (Hopefully to avoid reworking the connectivity, in other
words.)
- - - - -
Timothy Sipples
Resident Architect (Based in Singapore)
STG
Is IBM cobol for OS/390 VM v1r2 is still supported under regular support
terms? If so, is there any drop from support date?
ITschak
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists
(Longpela Expertise Logo)
Longpela Expertise - System z Mainframe Consultants
Read new expert Mainframe articles every quarter in our LongEx Mainframe
Quarterly http://www.longpelaexpertise.com.au/ezine
Itschak Mugzach wrote:
Is IBM cobol for OS/390 VM v1r2 is still supported under regular
Mainframe
Quarterly http://www.longpelaexpertise.com.au/ezine
Itschak Mugzach wrote:
Is IBM cobol for OS/390 VM v1r2 is still supported under regular
support
terms? If so, is there any drop from support date?
ITschak
Itschak Mugzach wrote:
Is IBM cobol for OS/390 VM v1r2 is still supported under regular support
terms? If so, is there any drop from support date?
ITschak
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions
** Already cross-posted to IBMVM **
Hello all,
am trying to run (believe it or not) an OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3
(0703) on a CP (z990).
The usual CP Directory statements are in place, memory is 1G.
I am getting as far as the first reply request, see below:
===
IEA371I SYS1.PARMLIB
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:50:29 +0100 J. Cassidy s...@jdcassidy.net wrote:
:am trying to run (believe it or not) an OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3
:(0703) on a CP (z990).
:The usual CP Directory statements are in place, memory is 1G.
:I am getting as far as the first reply request, see below
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:50:29 +0100, J. Cassidy s...@jdcassidy.net wrote:
** Already cross-posted to IBMVM **
Hello all,
am trying to run (believe it or not) an OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3
(0703) on a CP (z990).
The usual CP Directory statements are in place, memory is 1G.
I am getting
Mark,
we actually tried CP TRACE statement to let an OS/390 2.4 start under Z/VM
5.3 on a Z9 CPU, and
it runs Provided that (as per our experience):
1 - you don't define more than ONE CP to the virtual machine;
2 - you don't assign more than 512MB of central storage to the virtual
machine
Thank you Mark.
It works...
Regards,
John
= On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:50:29 +0100, J. Cassidy s...@jdcassidy.net wrote:
=
=** Already cross-posted to IBMVM **
=
=
=Hello all,
=
=am trying to run (believe it or not) an OS/390 2.4 guest under z/VM 5.3
=(0703) on a CP (z990).
=
=The usual CP
Paolo Cacciari wrote:
Mark,
we actually tried CP TRACE statement to let an OS/390 2.4 start under Z/VM
5.3 on a Z9 CPU, and
it runs Provided that (as per our experience):
1 - you don't define more than ONE CP to the virtual machine;
2 - you don't assign more than 512MB of central storage
Can you provide details please? Paolo wrote just prior to your post that
it worked for only one CP and less no more that .5G of memory.
I'm trying to remember back to OS/390 2.4 and even a single z990 engine is
much faster than the 9672 machines my clients were using back then and
half a gig
.
Believe it or not there are still people running old stuff like this out
there.
Again, thank you all.
Regards,
JC
= Can you provide details please? Paolo wrote just prior to your post that
= it worked for only one CP and less no more that .5G of memory.
=
= I'm trying to remember back to OS/390
John, there is at least one serious financial implication when running all
(or any part of) OS/390, so please be aware of this. Please note that, as
always here, I do not speak in an official capacity for IBM.
One of the (very few!) requirements for enjoying (or continuing to enjoy)
any sub
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: OS/390
Eric Bielefeld wrote:
Thanks Roger. Phil doesn't look anything like I thought he would.
He looks a little like Roy Kinnear, playing the role of Algernon,
Professor Foot's assistant, in Help! (1965) :-D
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International
In a message dated 7/1/2009 8:54:21 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
david.jou...@53.com writes:
You know, it would be fun to have a who's who website with photo's.
I'm sure none of us look like people imagine.
Have to balance jollies index vs security risk/exposure.
**Dell
On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 10:14 -0400, Ed Finnell wrote:
You know, it would be fun to have a who's who website with photo's.
I'm sure none of us look like people imagine.
The linux-390 folks have something like that:
http://linuxvm.org/community/index.html
--
David Andrews
A. Duda and
Wow, what a motley crew! Do we all look like that now??
MA
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 10:43 AM, David Andrews d...@lists.duda.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 10:14 -0400, Ed Finnell wrote:
You know, it would be fun to have a who's who website with photo's.
I'm sure none of us look like people
: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 10:29 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: OS/390
Wow, what a motley crew! Do we all look like that now??
MA
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 10:43 AM, David Andrews d...@lists.duda.com
wrote:
On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 10:14 -0400, Ed Finnell wrote:
You know, it would be fun
The machine capacities vary. The Multiprise 2000 (2003-xxx) was available
in several different capacities, ranging from roughly 3 to just shy of 170
MIPS. The Model 116 (2003-116) specifically is approximately 38 MIPS and
exactly 6 MSUs (and Group 38).
- - - - -
Timothy Sipples
IBM Consulting
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:32:07 +0900, Timothy Sipples e99...@jp.ibm.com wrote:
OS/390 V1 is licensed software, and it is licensed to a specific machine.
If the original poster wants to move OS/390 to another machine, he must
seek IBM's permission. Permission will likely be granted for IBM,
Fujitsu
On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 06:07 -0500, Roger Bowler wrote:
Thanks, Timothy. That's about the clearest statement I've seen so far from
IBM. May we take this as official IBM policy?
I guess your statement must be based upon some sort of official documents or
other information that you have access
I assume you mean Phil Payne. Does anyone know what happened to him? I
assume from some of his last posts that he was getting out of mainframes. I
always enjoyed Phil's wit and aserbic comments.
Eric
Eric Bielefeld
Sr. Systems Programmer
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
414-475-7434
- Original
Hi Eric,
I see Phil regularly.
He no longer operates in the mainframe arena. I believe it was something to
do with money or more precisely the lack of it.
He still fixes Audi's which keeps him reasonably busy, but on the IT front
he specialises in optimizing WEB sites, and is one of a small
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:32:07 +0900, Timothy Sipples e99...@jp.ibm.com wrote:
Sorry, it is not technically possible to move to newer hardware and
continue running OS/390 1.3. :-(
Have to take issue with you there, Timothy!
There are plenty of modern machines that *can* run OS/390. Here's just
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:24:05 -0400, Eric Bielefeld eric-ibmm...@wi.rr.com
wrote:
I assume you mean Phil Payne. Does anyone know what happened to him? I
assume from some of his last posts that he was getting out of mainframes. I
always enjoyed Phil's wit and aserbic comments.
Eric,
You can
, 2009 4:37 PM
Subject: Re: OS/390
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:24:05 -0400, Eric Bielefeld
eric-ibmm...@wi.rr.com
wrote:
I assume you mean Phil Payne. Does anyone know what happened to him? I
assume from some of his last posts that he was getting out of mainframes.
I
always enjoyed Phil's wit
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:51:52 -0400, Eric Bielefeld eric-ibmm...@wi.rr.com
wrote:
Thanks Roger. Phil doesn't look anything like I thought he would.
Here's another one:
http://www.legsreunited.org.uk/reunion/reunionpics/lastlegs/fr-jds/slides/2005-12-041.html
to
complicated, and overpriced. But 1/20th of the current revenue? I think we
would all be taking in each other's wash to find work. They could not stay in
the business. My .02, for what its worth.
--Dave Day
There are plenty of modern machines that *can* run OS/390. Here's just one
: OS/390
Roger,
If IBM's current mainframe revenue stream was to dwindle to one
twentieth of its current, how long do you think we would continue to see
the improvements we have seen in both harware and software in recent
years? Just to maintain current revenue, they would have to increase
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:32:07 +0900, Timothy Sipples e99...@jp.ibm.com wrote:
Just for fun, let's assume that the company had migrated to z/OS V1 five
years ago. They would have saved $711,420 on the base operating system
charge by now. That would have purchased some very nice hardware plus many
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:12:59 -0500, Dave Day wrote:
Roger, If IBM's current mainframe revenue stream was to dwindle to one
twentieth of its current, how long do you think we would continue to see the
improvements we have seen in both harware and software in recent years?
Just to maintain current
on hardware such as Roger mentioned
would not equate to IBM getting 5% of their current revenue. For one thing,
small machines such as this would not suffice for large shops.
For another, the software charges for running OS/390 on the machine that the
OP is currently running are, based upon Timothy's
Eric Bielefeld wrote:
Thanks Roger. Phil doesn't look anything like I thought he would.
He looks a little like Roy Kinnear, playing the role of Algernon,
Professor Foot's assistant, in Help! (1965) :-D
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
5200 W Century Blvd, Suite 800
Los
Subject: Re: OS/390
snip
The Multiprise 2000 Model 116 (2003-116) was introduced in September,
1996.
It is a one-way machine rated at 6 MSUs (Group 38) and about 38 MIPS.
Assuming that machine configuration currently provides sufficient
capacity,
the most appropriate replacement models probably
Discussion List Subject
ibm-m...@bama.ua Re: OS/390
.edu
Just out of curiosity, is the 38 MIPS figure a recent adjustment?
From August 2008 to April 2009, IBM Japan has consistently told us the figure
was 26 MIPS.
Misleading Indicator of Processor Speed.
The MIPS rating depends on the workload, and the current implementation of the
(hardware
Brian Westerman writes:
I think you might be able to run it under z/VM, you certainly
can run it under Hercules. If you get a fast enough PC, you
can probably beat the MIPS of what your running it on now;)
OS/390 V1 is licensed software, and it is licensed to a specific machine.
If the original
I think you might be able to run it under z/VM, you certainly can run it
under Hercules. If you get a fast enough PC, you can probably beat the MIPS
of what your running it on now;)
What is the purpose of the question? Is it just a gee, I wonder, or is
there a real need to give it a go? I have
The company currently has a 2003-116 and IBM will be dropping maintenance
12/31/2009. They want to go to newer hardware (z890/z990) but does not want to
upgrade their software, I repeat, does not want to upgrade their software. They
want to stay on OS/390 1.3 until they migrate off to an ERP
Of Billy R. Bingham
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 8:20 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: OS/390
The company currently has a 2003-116 and IBM will be dropping
maintenance 12/31/2009. They want to go to newer hardware (z890/z990)
but does not want to upgrade their software, I repeat, does not want
:
The company currently has a 2003-116 and IBM will be dropping maintenance
12/31/2009. They want to go to newer hardware (z890/z990) but does not want
to upgrade their software, I repeat, does not want to upgrade their
software. They want to stay on OS/390 1.3 until they migrate off to an ERP
to upgrade their
software. They want to stay on OS/390 1.3 until they migrate off to an ERP
package.
Billy
Have you looked at the FLEX-ES option. That should run any version I
believe and because it runs on pc technology, the hardware will be available
for some other use when the mainframe
/z990) but does not want
to upgrade their software, I repeat, does not want to upgrade their
software. They want to stay on OS/390 1.3 until they migrate off to an ERP
package.
Billy
Have you looked at the FLEX-ES option. That should run any version I
believe and because it runs on pc
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Mark Zelden mark.zel...@zurichna.comwrote:
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 14:26:10 +0100, Jim McAlpine jim.mcalp...@gmail.com
wrote:
Have you looked at the FLEX-ES option. That should run any version I
believe and because it runs on pc technology, the hardware
Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
To
IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
cc
Subject
Re: OS/390
I think you might be able to run it under z/VM, you certainly can run it
under Hercules. If you get a fast enough PC, you can probably beat the
MIPS
of what your running it on now;)
What is the purpose
Hello all,
Just subscribed to ibm-main so go easy :)
Does anyone know if OS/390 1.3 will run on a z Series box. Either in an LPAR or
under VM.
Thanks,
Billy
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:16:34 -0500, Billy R. Bingham
billy.bingham...@suddenlink.net wrote:
Hello all,
Just subscribed to ibm-main so go easy :)
Does anyone know if OS/390 1.3 will run on a z Series box. Either in an
LPAR or under VM.
zSeries, yes. System z, no. z900/z800 - Yes. z990/z890
For the record, IBM never supported OS/390 1.3 on the z900 model. The
earliest OS/390 release supported on the z900 was 2.6. On the z800 the
earliest was 2.8.
Perhaps it would be a good idea if the original poster described what he is
trying to do. We might have some alternative ideas for solving
Is anyone out there running OS/390 V2R10 native (without zVM) on a z9BC
processor? With/without compatibility/exploitation ptf's?
Robert Rankin
MVS Systems Programmer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
503-823-6913 ; 503-984-1384(mobile)
1120 SW 5th Ave
Room 450
Portland, Oregon 97204
Hi,
First please forgive me to ask question regarding so outdated OS.
I have a problem that we found the resolver in OS/390 2.10 resolve hostname
to two IP address, one of them is never defined.
FQN=: SDMF1
host_alias:
host_addr: 171.17.0.3
host_addr: 3.211.230.193
Our hostname is SDMF1, first
in OS/390 2.10 resolve hostname
to two IP address, one of them is never defined.
FQN=: SDMF1
host_alias:
host_addr: 171.17.0.3
host_addr: 3.211.230.193
Our hostname is SDMF1, first IP is defined by us, second one is unknown.
My question is:
How can I know where is it defined?
How can we turn
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rankin, Bob
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 12:57 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: OS/390 V2R4 on Z9
Our production environment is running OS390 V2R4 (9708 PUT). My
management wants
I think that I might have mentioned this before but I have successfully
(several times) migrated 2.8 and 2.9 system to a Z9. Admittedly, we didn't
leave the client there for very long, (less than a week) while we moved them
to z/OS, but it ran okay.
Brian Westerman
Our production environment is running OS390 V2R4 (9708 PUT). My management
wants to purchase a Z9 to replace our aging Multiprise 2003-125 and move our
existing OS to run on the Z9. While we know that OS390 V2R4 has not been
certified to run on the Z9, my management thinks it possible that it
On what factual basis does your management think that this will work?
IBM had compatibility FMID's back in the early zOS releases that would
enable them to run on a zxxx processor. There never was an equalvilent
for OS/390 releases of the operating system.
I would bet against it, but I don't have
Mark Jacobs wrote:
On what factual basis does your management think that this will work?
IBM had compatibility FMID's back in the early zOS releases that would
enable them to run on a zxxx processor. There never was an equalvilent
for OS/390 releases of the operating system.
The fact is OS/390
We are currently running a production OS390 V2R10 on a z9 BC.
BUT, we have to do any HCD changes from a z/OS 1.4 lpar with the z990
compatibility ptfs installed.
I do not know about V2R4.
Silvio
On Mon, 1 Oct 2007 10:56:34 -0700, Rankin, Bob
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Our production environment
We attempted to run a soon to be eliminated OS/390 2.6 system on a
z/890 a while back. The system did IPL, but once more than a few users
got on, performance was terrible. We moved them back to the Amdahl that
came off lease until we could upgrade it to OS/390 2.10 (then
supported
You are running a production environment on an operating system which has not
been supported for a number of years? Is your application environment (CICS,
DB2, what have you) similarly in an unsupported state? I hope, for your sake,
that some application doesn't come along which breaks this
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU wrote on 10/01/2007
01:56:34 PM:
Our production environment is running OS390 V2R4 (9708 PUT). My
management
wants to purchase a Z9 to replace our aging Multiprise 2003-125 and move
our
existing OS to run on the Z9. While we know that OS390
differences, perhaps
V2R4 may not encounter them, I don't know.
Has anyone done this?
Does anyone know what will happen if we attempt to do this?
Search the archives for [(Mulder) and (purge)] and you should find this:
z890, z990, and z9 machines have a 2-level TLB. Nothing
lower than OS/390
I can only speak for OS/390 2.9 and 2.10 on the Z9 as being able to run, I
have never tried an older version, mostly because we have not had a client
with an older version move to a Z9 (at least not with my help).
I think that there are better ways to accomplish what you need though, I
could
Thanks all for the help.
John was correct. The new master catalog will be created using OS390 1.4
and not used by it - only in zOS 1.7 and higher.
There is no chance that any co-existence of toleration maintenance is
available. Any suggestions on what to do with the user catalogs. My
thought
Does anyone on the list know if I can create a new catalog under OS390 2.4
and use that new catalog in z/OS V1R7 or V1R8 with no problem. I know I
won't be able to use a V1R7 catalog on the old OS390 but what about the
other way??
I need to upgrade a client's system
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Baron
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 1:57 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: OS/390 Catalog in z/OS V1R7
Does anyone on the list know if I can create a new catalog
under OS390
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 14:05:12 -0500, McKown, John
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone on the list know if I can create a new catalog
under OS390 2.4
and use that new catalog in z/OS V1R7 or V1R8 with no
problem. I know I
won't be able to use a V1R7 catalog on the old OS390 but what
about
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Zelden
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 2:24 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: OS/390 Catalog in z/OS V1R7
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 14:05:12 -0500, McKown, John
[EMAIL PROTECTED
: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Zelden
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 12:24 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: OS/390 Catalog in z/OS V1R7
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 14:05:12 -0500, McKown, John
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone on the list know if I
On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 14:32:53 -0500, McKown, John
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There has been code in the past that changed the
catalog/catindex once it
was opened under the higher level. When this was the case
(and ESA V4 dot
something may have been one of those versions that changed it)
need to upgrade a client's system
As the others have said, can't see a problem with it.
So long as it ain't shared. Build it, get it across, get it offline to
OS/390 - and keep it that way.
If you have updates to the original, manually apply same to the new
catalog - from the z/OS system.
Alastair
I have been asked to provide this. Will a SMP LIST FEATURE against the
global zone produce a reliable list? Thank all.
Have a Nice Day !
Bob Pelletier
Connecticut Student Loan Foundation
Rocky Hill, Ct.
--
For IBM-MAIN
In a message dated 4/19/2007 8:53:12 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
global zone produce a reliable list? Thank all.
If you can still find the CPPCSAMP EXEC for the Server/PAC install it will
list the inventory with FMID and Product Number?
I'll look for it. I usually save everything. Thanks.
Bob
-Original Message-
From: Ed Finnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 9:58 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: list of software that comprises our version of OS/390
In a message dated 4/19/2007 8:53
In a message dated 4/19/2007 9:00:59 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'll look for it. I usually save everything. Thanks.
Bob
It's all bundled together in the IKJACCNT PROC that ships. Should be able to
just do %CPPCSAMP from ISPF option 6(TSO).
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 09:52:42 -0400, Robert Pelletier wrote:
I have been asked to provide this. Will a SMP LIST FEATURE against the
global zone produce a reliable list? Thank all.
I like the Planning and Migration Assistant, SMP/E Option 6. Have a look at
the Products Installed report.
--
Tom
In
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
on 02/09/2007
at 10:12 AM, Schwarz, Barry A [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I don't need to restart the thread on the virtues of keeping current
and using supported hardware and software. I have a very
conservative/non-adventurous/reluctant customer.
They may be more
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 4:55 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Running OS/390 on z9 BC
No. System z still IPLs in ESA/390 mode. A SIGP instruction
must
Timothy Sipples wrote:
Theoretically would it be technically possible to run a second level (or
even third level, if necessary) instance of backlevel VM, then OS/390 1.3
within that, matching up the version combinations according to the
published lists?
We used to do exactly that! We ran
(z890). (this is not
an
April fool joke)
Putting aside the issue of lack of support for such an old release, I
seem to recall that
nothing older than OS/390 R10 will run on zSeries.
Anybody have any positive comments on this?
Is there a way to run MVS/SP under some supported
Jim Mulder wrote:
z890, z990, and z9 machines have a 2-level TLB. Nothing
lower than OS/390 2.10 will run reliably on a machine with a 2-level
TLB because lower releases than 2.10 do not do some of the necessary
TLB purges. I have heard some speculation that you might be able to
get around
SAPR, and other *official* IBM statement don't tell you true about technical possibilities.
Look at z/900 and z/800 machines. For z/800 the oldest supported MVS system was OS/390 2.9, not because earlier versions were unable to run - simply because V2R9 was the oldest *supported* version
Theoretically would it be technically possible to run a second level (or
even third level, if necessary) instance of backlevel VM, then OS/390 1.3
within that, matching up the version combinations according to the
published lists?
Totally unsupported, of course. IMHO do it only if you absolutely
1 - 100 of 237 matches
Mail list logo
