Re: OT - Bash Vunerability

2014-09-27 Thread Tomasz Rola
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 03:27:06PM -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote: [...] > This is Bobby Tables all over again: > > http://xkcd.com/327/ > > It relies on a bash extension which, however useful, violates POSIX by > restricting the value space of environment variables. The Wikipedia > example, sl

Re: COBOL 5 compile options

2014-09-27 Thread John Gilmore
I feel a little like a Zoroastrian intruding into a discussion among Thomist theologians about whether the archangels in moving from Samarra to Novara pass through the intervening space, but the whole notion of imposing decimal-picture constraints upon binary arithmetic strikes me as absurd. Now t

Re: COBOL 5 compile options

2014-09-27 Thread Steve Comstock
On 9/27/2014 5:58 AM, John Gilmore wrote: I feel a little like a Zoroastrian intruding into a discussion among Thomist theologians about whether the archangels in moving from Samarra to Novara pass through the intervening space, but the whole notion of imposing decimal-picture constraints upon bi

Re: Dump Defaults (Was: SLIP IF Trap?)

2014-09-27 Thread Shane Ginnane
On Fri, 26 Sep 2014 07:41:13 -0400, Peter Relson wrote: >I can tell you the intent. Each allocation of above-2G storage fits into >one of 5 "should I include it in the dump?" categories -- >- like region (default for private) >- like LSQA >- like CSA (default for common) >- like SQA >- do not dump

Re: COBOL 5 compile options

2014-09-27 Thread John Gilmore
As my culture hero Justice Holmes noted long ago, it is important to think things and not just words. I am aware that the keyword-argument value TRUNC (OPT) has been available for some time. The code generated by the new compiler when it is specified is, however, significantly different from and

Re: zOS 1.13 – CPU latent demand

2014-09-27 Thread Joel C. Ewing
On 09/27/2014 01:36 AM, Shane Ginnane wrote: > As a distraction from the shellshock sideshow, > > On Fri, 26 Sep 2014 15:54:05 +, Gary Snider wrote: > >> I am trying to understand how to utilize the RMF CPU report so that I can >> evaluate utilization of our CP and latent demand. > Tread with

Re: COBOL 5 compile options

2014-09-27 Thread Ed Finnell
I thought it was earlier. What was the one with the 9672's and trunc(bin) hiccup? Think we missed un upgrade along the way. Lot's of FUD on workloads and direction. Guess Cheryl pointed out that the LSRP's contained no Indexed by Cobol pgms for the midrange 9672's In a message dated 9

Re: FTP Question

2014-09-27 Thread Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
In <54236565.90...@aim.com>, on 09/24/2014 at 06:44 PM, Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> said: >Shmuel has an incorrigible bad habit of >trimming to where the citation is unidentifiable. You have a bad habit of denmanding citations of things that are not relevant

Re: FTP Question

2014-09-27 Thread Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
In <2874406462216786.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu>, on 09/25/2014 at 11:15 AM, Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> said: >There's *no* character that can't be converted from IBM-1047 to >UTF-8. While s

Re: FTP Question

2014-09-27 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 21:32:33 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: > >>There's *no* character that can't be converted from IBM-1047 to >>UTF-8. > >While shows >translations for all code points, > shows

Re: FTP Question

2014-09-27 Thread Charles Mills
I have a product that uses IBM Unicode Services to translate from 1047 to UTF-8. When (due to an error or confused input) it translates non-printable 1047 data, I know that Unicode Services reports that it could not convert all of the characters. Well, two quibbly points: - As Bill Clinton never