If it is not explicitly forbidden (and even then still) there will always be
people that try it.
Well anyway, this is why we discovered America though.
Kees.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Elardus Engelbrecht
Sent: 1
Al Sherkow wrote:
>Today, 12 April 2016, a new release of the JAVA version of SCRT, now 23.13.2
>came out. One of the fixes resolves this issue: "This mod-level release fixes
>an ABEND S02 when using multiple SMF datasets having different LRECLs."
I was "raised and trained" to have all my SMF d
Al Sherkow wrote:
>Do you have a lot of JAVA and WebSphere in your shop? ABO will
>be licensed based on those MSUs too.
Not always or even very often. For example, Solution Editions are outside
scope (unless they have EC3/4-compiled COBOL -- rare but possible), and so
are zIIP MSUs and non-peak MS
I was hasty in commenting about the requirement for PDSE optimized load
modules. The manual states this:
OUT
Specifies one output module, or a PDS(E) for multiple output modules when
wildcards are given in the mem_wc specifier of the IN option.
Guess I overlooked the parens. I allocated mine as
There are many changes in the format of the SMF records. However as others have
written SCRT does handle different z/OS releases properly.
Today, 12 April 2016, a new release of the JAVA version of SCRT, now 23.13.2
came out. One of the fixes resolves this issue: "This mod-level release fixes
I agree, the only instance that it had to be a PDSe was for the listing.
The other outputs talk about a "PDS(E)" and that implies to be either PDS or
PDSE.
Al Nims
University of Florida
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
O
On 4/12/2016 7:50 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:
failed to mention before that ABO wants a PDSE to hold optimized load modules
I don't think so.
At least, in the User's Guide at
http://www-03.ibm.com/software/products/en/z-compilers-optimizer
it mentions a PDSE for holding a listing, but I don'
Are you sure that a PDSe is a requirement? I am at IBMTechU in Atlanta, GA
right now and I was having dinner with my IBM reps and we happen to talk about
ABO. Two things mentioned were:
#1. It is for those who do not want to convert to COBOL V5 yet.
#2. Unlike COBOL V5, the binaries do not have
Shops really need to pay attention to the licensing of this product. It is an
IPLA product with a One time Charge to get started and then annual S&S
payments. It is licensed not just based on where you use the product to
optimize COBOL. From the announcement letter provided earlier (in the US
I use the chmount command:
chmount -w / (and the -r switch is used to turn the filesystem hosting the
named directory back to read-only)
By default this command is stored in usr/sbin, some sites moves it to /bin so
it's in the default path.
Ant.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe
Uh, ok shoulda known. Running a z9 here anyway, so neither is promising at this
time :)
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Jesse 1 Robinson
> Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 4:50 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Sub
Uh, failed to mention before that ABO wants a PDSE to hold optimized load
modules. Fortunately for us, no sharing issues. If PDSE is a major obstacle to
moving forward, then ABO does not skirt that problem.
.
.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler
We're haven't migrated anything yet, but will start "soon". We are not yet on
the required z/OS level (2.1 or 2.2), so we're starting with V5 for now.
> Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 19:01:13 -0400
> From: charl...@mcn.org
> Subject: Re: Automatic Binary Optimizer (ABO)
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>
Actually I was able to do it with built-in functions in ishell on the Mount
table screen. Probably issued the same commands. Thanks for helping.
.
.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-302-7535 O
Also those who have issues moving to PDS/E loadlibs for COBOL 5.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Charles Mills
> Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 4:01 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Automatic Binary
UMOUNT FILESYSTEM('OMVS.BOOTSTRP.ZOS21.ROOT.RSU1602') +
REMOUNT(RDWR) /* */
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Jesse 1 Robinson
> Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 4:14 PM
> To: IBM-M
Is this what you're looking for?
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1.bpxa500/tsoumo.htm
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 6:14 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson
wrote:
> We need to make a production USS ROOT R/W temporarily in order to define a
> new directory that will point to
We need to make a production USS ROOT R/W temporarily in order to define a new
directory that will point to a separate ZFS. Then back to read-only. I don't
remember how to do it. Help.
.
.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler
SHARE MVS Program Co-Ma
IBM is pitching to two audiences:
1. Don't have or are not sure have the current source code.
2. No time to test. IBM is touting reduced testing requirements. Opinions
may differ.
I am no expert but if I were going to migrate my COBOL environment I would
go to V6. I don't think V5 offers any adva
If you have and are using V5 (or 6) what is the point of using ABO? We don't
have any plans to get ABO. We're just going to use COBOL V5.
> Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:35:32 -0500
> From: bill.wood...@gmail.com
> Subject: Automatic Binary Optimizer (ABO)
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>
> Ach. No
SYSIN (or SYSTSIN) is not required to be 80 bytes...
Otherwise, just break each line at the desired location and place a
continuation character (usually a '+' or '-') at the end of the line.
HTH.
>snip>
Okay so the real answer is to specify FIX on the AUDIT command. But it also
says you can
Note: "In addition to the entitlements required for use of the Program on the
machine(s) on which the Program is deployed, Licensee must also obtain Value
Unit entitlements for the machine(s) on which the COBOL applications optimized
using the Program are deployed and executed."
--
http://www-
Okay so the real answer is to specify FIX on the AUDIT command. But it
also says you can use the output from the AUDIT command to do the FIX. I
still don't know how you would do that.
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Mark Pace wrote:
> Running an HSM AUDIT command
>
> AUDIT MEDIACONTROLS VOLU
Running an HSM AUDIT command
AUDIT MEDIACONTROLS VOLUMES(MP0001) ODS('MARPACE.ODS.FIXCDS')
In MARPACE.ODS.FIXCDS is the output of FIXCDS commands from the AUDIT.
What I can't figure out is how to use these FIXCDS commands. Many of them
are longer than 80 bytes long and have continuation. So I
Ach. Not even a typo, but a reado. Wishful thinking.
Compl-e-mentary, not compl-i-mentary.
I fell for the marketing. Sorry about that. Thanks Larre and Charles.
I did suggest a few months ago in an exchange with Jon Butler that anyone going
to V5 should suggest that they get the ABO for free :
I don't think so ...
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Bill Woodger
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 12:14 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Automatic Binary Optimizer (ABO)
I'm not, but I can't speak for IB
I'm not, but I can't speak for IBM. I don't think they are making a confusion.
I think it is offered for free, in some relationship license for a V5/V6
compiler.
On Tuesday, 12 April 2016 16:09:55 UTC+1, Larre Shiller wrote:
> ...are you confusing complementary with complimentary...?
>
> Larre
Has anyone heard one way or the other whether the IEFOPzz enhancement announced
for z/OS V2.2 will or won't be backported to V2.1? We just finished the
upgrade to V2.1 late last year and probably won't be upgrading again for a
while, but it would be really, really helpful to have that enhanceme
On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 22:20:16 +0800, David Crayford wrote:
>you still have to test all of your existing
>applications so you might as well re-compile them.
Except that recompiling with a different version of the compiler isn't
necessarily trivial.
--
Tom Marchant
--
...are you confusing complementary with complimentary...?
Larre
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Assuming you have the source code. And you're sure it's the correct current
source code.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of David Crayford
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:20 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subj
Just came across this:
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/blogs/invisiblethread/entry/Give_your_COBOL_applications_A_BOost_with_the_flip_of_a_switch?lang=en
New is that it is complimentary with V5 and V6, with an "out of the box setup",
which can help scheduling migrations whilst still
On 12/04/2016 10:13 PM, Bill Woodger wrote:
/Give_your_COBOL_applications_A_BOost_with_the_flip_of_a_switch?lang=en
New is that it is complimentary with V5 and V6, with an "out of the box setup", which can
help scheduling migrations whilst still obtaining benefit from the "new" hardware
instru
Hello,
This can be acomplised with Policy agent (PAGENT) and IPSec policy
configuration file. Temporary block of certain IPs with various criteria can be
done with ipsec unix command (Defense manager daemon task must be running).
First you have to enable IP security on your TCP/IP stack (IPSECUR
The thing is in the z/OS 2.2 What's new guide they explicitly discuss this.
The section is even titled HASPINDX removal.
HASPINDX removal
Description: The HASPINDX data set is no longer used. Previously, SDSF used it
to manage SYSLOG data sets that were created on z/OS systems prior to z/OS
V1
Kostas wrote:
>I am wondering if I can run my monthly SCRT report providing as input SMF
>records from two systems, one that is on z/OS v1.12 and the other is on z/OS
>v2.2. Is there any change in the format of SMF 70 or 89 from z/OS 1.12 to z/OS
>2.2?
What version of SCRT are you running?
A
Wouldn't it be easier and more accurate to expand the IFASMFR macro for each
record type under both systems and compare the resulting listing?
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of K
> Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 12:5
You should not have to worry about that. If IBM supports running 2.1 and 2.2,
the scrt reporting should also support this.
Kees.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of K
Sent: 12 April, 2016 9:58
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Dear listers
I am wondering if I can run my monthly SCRT report providing as input SMF
records from two systems, one that is on z/OS v1.12 and the other is on z/OS
v2.2. Is there any change in the format of SMF 70 or 89 from z/OS 1.12 to z/OS
2.2?
Kind regards
Kostas
-
39 matches
Mail list logo
