SYMUPDTE has not existed for many years. There is IEASYMUP. If you are
using SYMUPDTE, I suggest that you change.
"Supported" is an interesting term. I might say that "supported" means
documented and that we will take an APAR if there is an error. I might say
that IEASYMUP meets both of those q
On Wed, 25 May 2011 11:27:36 -0500, Mark Zelden wrote:
>On Wed, 25 May 2011 09:29:17 -0500, Tom Marchant wrote:
>
>>
>>>But the source code is what is supplied in
>>>SYS1.SAMPLIB and not the object code - so at least you have that
>>>for documentation.
>>
>>SYS1.SAMPLIB(IEASYMUP) is object.
>>
>
>
>Lizette, Here's the info on the open Share requirement:
>
>Requirement#:SSMVSE10004
>
>Title:Allow symbols to be changed without an IPL
>
>Description:System symbols are invaluable in the efficient management of a
>system, and especially for the ability to easily manage a sysplex. However,
>th
Lizette, Here's the info on the open Share requirement:
Requirement#:SSMVSE10004
Title:Allow symbols to be changed without an IPL
Description:System symbols are invaluable in the efficient management of a
system, and especially for the ability to easily manage a sysplex. However,
the lack of a
On Wed, 25 May 2011 09:29:17 -0500, Tom Marchant
wrote:
>
>>But the source code is what is supplied in
>>SYS1.SAMPLIB and not the object code - so at least you have that
>>for documentation.
>
>SYS1.SAMPLIB(IEASYMUP) is object.
>
That was my point. I was referring to other programs in SYS1.SAMP
On Wed, 25 May 2011 07:59:32 -0500, Mark Zelden wrote:
>On Wed, 25 May 2011 08:21:02 -0400, Lizette Koehler wrote:
>
>>The combination of SYMUPDTE and DEF ALIAS SYMBOLICRELATE
>>could save a lot of IPL downtime.
Yes, it can. I have used it for that purpose in a production environment
with no p
> Mark Zelden Wrote:
> There are lot of sample programs that don't have much documentation, and
are "used
> at your own risk" because of certain caveats or they are used for special
situations.
> But the source code is what is supplied in SYS1.SAMPLIB and not the object
code - so
> at least you hav
On Wed, 25 May 2011 08:21:02 -0400, Lizette Koehler
wrote:
>I have (yes I am way behind on this) researching SYMUPDTE. And it has been
>around since 1999 and it is not well documented. I was just wondering why
>IBM has not made this official? The only manuals are SG24-5451, SG24-6818
>and SG24
ftware.com
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Lizette Koehler
Sent: 25 May 2011 13:21
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: SYMUPDTE Why is it not fully supported yet
I have (yes I am way behind on this) researching SYMUPDTE. And it has be
I have (yes I am way behind on this) researching SYMUPDTE. And it has been
around since 1999 and it is not well documented. I was just wondering why
IBM has not made this official? The only manuals are SG24-5451, SG24-6818
and SG24-7328. There is only a brief description of the RACF facility of
10 matches
Mail list logo
