PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: insane request: force load module to RMODE(24) AMODE(24)
Why would anybody want to run in AMODE(24) in this day and age?
As anybody told the programmer to get into the new millenium?
--
For IBM-MAIN
On 17 Jun 2008 09:39:50 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:21 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: insane request: force load module
If this is really old code, what difference does it make if it runs in
AMODE(24). I'm sure code that old wouldn't take up enough storage cause any
problems.
Who said anything about storage problems?
I sure didn't.
I would be more concerned about addressability.
-
Too busy driving to stop for
- Original Message -
From: Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 10:11 AM
Subject: Re: insane request: force load module to RMODE(24) AMODE(24)
If this is really old code, what difference does it make if it runs
We have a problem. We have a very old CICS application which is written
in HLASM and OS/VS COBOL 2.4. We want to convert the COBOL to Enterprise
COBOL. We have having many problems due mainly to lack of knowledge
about the code base. The programmer doing this is convinced that a/the
major problem
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 08:52:32 -0500, McKown, John wrote:
... The programmer doing this is convinced that a/the
major problem is that Enterprise COBOL links as AMODE(31). He wants to
force the load module to AMODE(24). The only way that I can see to do
this is via the AMODE(24) parm in the Binder.
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
McKown, John
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 9:53 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: insane request: force load module to RMODE(24) AMODE(24)
We have a problem. We have a very old CICS application which is written
in HLASM and OS/VS COBOL 2.4. We want to convert the COBOL
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Marchant
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 9:02 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: insane request: force load module to RMODE(24) AMODE(24)
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 08:52:32 -0500
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 09:21:25 -0500, McKown, John wrote:
I guess that we may need to do this. But it is going to be a nightmare!
All the source is in Endevor controlled libraries. The load library in
the DFHRPL is Endevor controlled. Linking into this environment outside
of Endevor is another
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Marchant
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 9:46 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: insane request: force load module to RMODE(24) AMODE(24)
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 09:21:25 -0500
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of McKown, John
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 9:53 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: insane request: force load module to RMODE(24) AMODE(24)
Snipped
Any ideas about another way to do
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of McKown, John
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 8:53 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: insane request: force load module to RMODE(24) AMODE(24)
SNIP
Any ideas about another way to do this which
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 9:52 AM, McKown, John
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SNIP
P.S. I am not as convinced as the programmer that the problems he is
encountering are due to the AMODE. But he is insistant and has the
political backing to force the issue. The only way to prove otherwise to
allow him
[snip]
Who is your Endeavor administrator? That person (the one who controls
the Endeavor processes) may be more help here. In the shop
where I used
it the Endeavor admins were in the system assurance/operations control
area.
HTH
Peter
We do have a lady who is, as we affectionately
time between
compiles
- Original Message
From: McKown, John [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 9:52:32 AM
Subject: insane request: force load module to RMODE(24) AMODE(24)
We have a problem. We have a very old CICS application which is written
-snip
We have a problem. We have a very old CICS application which is written
in HLASM and OS/VS COBOL 2.4. We want to convert the COBOL to Enterprise
COBOL. We have having many problems due mainly to lack of knowledge
about the code base.
John McKown of the IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
wrote on 06/17/2008 08:52:32 AM:
We have a problem. We have a very old CICS application which is written
in HLASM and OS/VS COBOL 2.4. We want to convert the COBOL to Enterprise
COBOL. We have having many problems due mainly
... The programmer doing this is convinced that a/the
major problem is that Enterprise COBOL links as AMODE(31). He wants to
force the load module to AMODE(24).
Why would anybody want to run in AMODE(24) in this day and age?
As anybody told the programmer to get into the new millenium?
-
Too
PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:21:21
To:IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: insane request: force load module to RMODE(24) AMODE(24)
... The programmer doing this is convinced that a/the
major problem is that Enterprise COBOL links as AMODE(31). He wants to
force the load module to AMODE
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:21 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: insane request: force load module to RMODE(24) AMODE(24)
... The programmer doing
There is ABSOLUTELY no way that you will get an Enterprise COBOL CICS
program to work if it is marked as AMODE(24). All the IGY and CEE
routines that it will need to run will have problems. You could get an
RMODE program, but that isn't what you are asking for.
If the programmer wants to force
If it was originally compiled with DYNAM, it wouldn't work with CICS any
way. It must already be NODYNAM.
NODYNAM doesn't force AMDOE(24) unless an AMDOE(24) program is statically
linked-in.
John P Kalinich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
John McKown of the IBM
On 17 Jun 2008 09:29:32 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ted MacNEIL) wrote:
Why would anybody want to run in AMODE(24) in this day and age?
As anybody told the programmer to get into the new millenium?
We have some assembly language programs that are called to connect
with cash machines that use
We have some assembly language programs that are called to connect
with cash machines that use AMODE(24). A consultant spent a couple
of months trying to get around that limitation, but management said it
wasn't worth fixing.
Short term it may not be worth it but over the long run it would save
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:16:36 -0400, Veilleux, Jon L wrote:
... What are they going to do if this stops working down the road?
Hire a super expensive consultant to try to fix it, if they can find
one, that is.
Sure, they can fine one, depending on what you mean by super expensive.
There are a
On 17 Jun 2008 12:17:29 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Veilleux, Jon L)
wrote:
Short term it may not be worth it but over the long run it would save a
lot of headaches and money. Mangement has a bad tendency to only see as
far as the next quarter and misses opportunities to resolve longer term
I just wanted to CORRECT the erroneous statement that I made below.
If an Enterprise COBOL program is statically link-edited with an AMODE(24)
program, it will of course be marked as AMODE(24) - and will work that
way.
It still is NOT what I would recommend in this situation, but I did want to
27 matches
Mail list logo
