I can help a bit with the first question but not the other two. We have an
ancient and venerable JES2 EXIT 6 that writes messages to JESYSMSG only. It
uses the IFGRPL macro (AMODGEN). I did not write this part of the code, but I
could send you a sample if you'd like. It's based on PUT with the p
On 2016-10-26, at 09:22, Pew, Curtis G wrote:
> On Oct 26, 2016, at 9:17 AM, Charles Mills wrote:
>>
>> Sounds like this is slightly bleeding edge. I think I will try to sync my
>> "code management" processes (C versus HLASM) a little more closely together
>> but continue to keep HLASM source
Hello All,
With regards to the following, I'm not sure I follow what this is about.
Does this mean that the volume stacking that happens due to back-to-back
VOL=REF=* usage will just fail in v2r2?
I hope the "we issue a VERIFY" is how the function is internally handled, and
not something that's
On Oct 26, 2016, at 9:17 AM, Charles Mills wrote:
>
> Sounds like this is slightly bleeding edge. I think I will try to sync my
> "code management" processes (C versus HLASM) a little more closely together
> but continue to keep HLASM source and object in a PDSE.
I’ll just throw out what I do.
Thanks, @John and @Gil.
Sounds like this is slightly bleeding edge. I think I will try to sync my "code
management" processes (C versus HLASM) a little more closely together but
continue to keep HLASM source and object in a PDSE.
Too bad, frankly. I wish there were more embrace of HFS by "tradi
On 10/25/2016 7:08 PM, Phil Smith wrote:
So if the SMPMCS contains: ++FUNCTION(VVSH710) FILES(2) RFDSNPFX(VSH)
REWORK(2016166)
Then if RFPREFIX(BANANA) were added to the RECEIVE command in the
provided JCL, it would look for BANANA.VSH.VVSH710.F1 and
BANANA.VSH.VVSH710.F2 instead of VSH.VVSH710
I feel that our system trace is a bit small, especially since we moved to z13.
We currently have set them to 15M (per processor).
What do others use?
--
Peter Hunkeler
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instr
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
> Yeah, I know, there's an assembler listserve and this isn't it. I'm not on
> it and I think most of its members are also here. This IS a mainframe
> question ...
>
> Yeah, I could test the basic issues but I am wondering if anyone is doing
>
