Re: Data Center Index for SE Texas?

> On Aug 29, 2017, at 11:28 PM, Edward Finnell > <000248cce9f3-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > Just curious if anybody's keeping score? > > https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/finance/news/waffle-houses-hurricane-response- > team-prepares-disaster-184844452.html > > Another useful

Re: IBM to finally drop JES3

> On Aug 29, 2017, at 11:36 PM, Edward Finnell > <000248cce9f3-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > They were on it back in the eighties as Uni JES. Think it's badge 464. > Summa cum JES-"get it up once, keep it up forever". Bob Shannon reported the > politics and ambitions were too

AW: EZAFTPKS from Started task

>I have been testing out a started task under TESTAUTH (it does APF authorized command). I'm curious. How can you test out "a started task under TESTAUTH" (or TEST)? I know only how to test programs in my TSO session using these commands. -- Peter Hunkeler

Re: IBM to finally drop JES3

They were on it back in the eighties as Uni JES. Think it's badge 464. Summa cum JES-"get it up once, keep it up forever". Bob Shannon reported the politics and ambitions were too orthogonal and was dropped early nineties. In a message dated 8/29/2017 10:54:20 P.M. Central Daylight Time,

Data Center Index for SE Texas?

Just curious if anybody's keeping score? https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/finance/news/waffle-houses-hurricane-response- team-prepares-disaster-184844452.html Another useful index would for the ..edu's -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe

Re: IBM to finally drop JES3

> On Aug 29, 2017, at 8:21 PM, Edward Gould wrote: > > According to Watson blog post, > Some other statements of direction (SOD) include: stabilization of DFS/SMB > because NFS is the strategic file sharing protocol; last release to provide > national language

Re: The BIGGEST Z Machine - Sandia National Laboratories' Z machine,

> On Aug 29, 2017, at 8:49 PM, Paul Gilmartin > <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > On 2017-08-29, at 17:29, Edward Gould wrote: > >>

Re: IBM to finally drop JES3

Were you at SHARE? SHARE is "on it." They are working on a statement of position to IBM. Have an opinion? Write to Harry dot Williams (a) marist dot edu Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Edward Gould Sent:

Re: The BIGGEST Z Machine - Sandia National Laboratories' Z machine,

Not even a computer just a big Tesla coil. In a message dated 8/29/2017 8:49:31 P.M. Central Daylight Time, 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu writes: But I think it's a different "Z". -- For IBM-MAIN

Re: The BIGGEST Z Machine - Sandia National Laboratories' Z machine,

On 2017-08-29, at 17:29, Edward Gould wrote: >

IBM to finally drop JES3

According to Watson blog post, Some other statements of direction (SOD) include: stabilization of DFS/SMB because NFS is the strategic file sharing protocol; last release to provide national language translation in languages other than Japanese; last release to support user keys for system

Re: EZAFTPKS from Started task

This is an S0C1 a end. Debug it from the CEEDUMP or SYSUDUMP. On Aug 29, 2017 17:13, "Joseph Reichman" wrote: > hI > > > > I have been testing out a started task under TESTAUTH (it does APF > authorized command). In addition it uses EZAFTPKS to download a file to >

Re: EZAFTPKS from Started task

That's not an ABEND. It's an informational message. The following is informal -- don't take it to the bank: That message says that a conventional "MVS" program was doing UNIX stuff and ended without cleaning up the UNIX environment. In my experience it is usually an additional symptom of some

Re: EZAFTPKS from Started task

FTP is an OMVS command. You must have a RACF OMVS segment to use any OMVS commands. On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Joseph Reichman wrote: > hI > > > > I have been testing out a started task under TESTAUTH (it does APF > authorized command). In addition it uses EZAFTPKS

The BIGGEST Z Machine - Sandia National Laboratories' Z machine,

Re: Looking for mainframe shops Lexington/Cincinnati

> On Aug 29, 2017, at 8:15 AM, Allan Staller wrote: > > WKRP? > > I was easting Thanksgiving dinner when I saw that episode. I laughed so hard the food came flying out of my mouth. I don’t think I have ever laughed that hard. Ed

Re: ATTACH EXTR=exit and saving registers (save _all_ registers?)

Tom Marchant wrote: On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 15:59:53 -0400, Thomas David Rivers wrote: The doc seems ambiguous to me; which leads me down this path of doing funky save-area machinations to ensure that all registers are saved - not just the "normal" ones. STM 14,12,12(13) hardly

Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

Agreed. An easier approach by far would be to have my recovery routine retry to a routine that issued a distinct user ABEND in AMODE 31, perhaps first copying the SDWA to some storage that could subsequently be displayed. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List

Re: Message IRX0006I running an edit macro CLIST

Ah yes, that makes sense. I did not realise that ISPEXEC SELECT PGM(J00YCKAL) PARM(JLRCL) actually processed the dataset being edited. So ISREDIT MACRO is required in that case.   Cheers, CP   On 29/08/2017 17:54, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: > I have no stake in defending the JEM CLIST, but AFAIK

Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

On 2017-08-29 17:44, Bernd Oppolzer wrote: Would the following approach help? From C/C++, you call an ASSEMBLER submodule, which ATTACHes a subtask and waits for its completion. The subtask does all the 64 bit AMODE switching (and return), and establishes an ESTAE exit (or other technique)

Re: ATTACH EXTR=exit and saving registers (save _all_ registers?)

Using BAKR on entry frees up the provided save area for other uses. ...chris. -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Tom Marchant Sent: August-29-17 1:29 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: ATTACH EXTR=exit and

EZAFTPKS from Started task

hI I have been testing out a started task under TESTAUTH (it does APF authorized command). In addition it uses EZAFTPKS to download a file to windows, this works fine under TEST When I know try to run the code I get the following abend BPXP018I THREAD 1FD85002, IN PROCESS

Re: Unix-question

On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 12:14:27 -0500, John McKown wrote: >On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 11:37 AM, scott Ford wrote: > >> I was reading through IBM Unix services manuals and have a pipe question.. >> If I as a STC ..issue a Unix command after a PIPE was established and >> retrieve output of the >>

Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

Would the following approach help? From C/C++, you call an ASSEMBLER submodule, which ATTACHes a subtask and waits for its completion. The subtask does all the 64 bit AMODE switching (and return), and establishes an ESTAE exit (or other technique) to handle errors that occur inside the

Re: ATTACH EXTR=exit and saving registers (save _all_ registers?)

On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 15:59:53 -0400, Thomas David Rivers wrote: >The doc seems ambiguous to me; which leads me down this path >of doing funky save-area machinations to ensure that all registers >are saved - not just the "normal" ones. STM 14,12,12(13) hardly constitutes "doing funky save-area

ABEND 737-04 when creating and writing to multivolume data sets - non-SMS only?

I've been working through some issues on a system that uses non-SMS datasets, which mostly works the way I expected. But I have noticed that something that odd works on SMS managed datasets and volumes fails without SMS. For example: //GENER EXEC PGM=IEBGENER //SYSUT1DD

Re: ATTACH EXTR=exit and saving registers (save _all_ registers?)

Steve Smith wrote: The doc isn't "wrong", it's just a bit overstated. It's a good idea to follow normal linkage conventions (well normal from 1970) and they're encouraging that. This is an ancient facility, and for all I know it may have been a more vital requirement in the past. Also, I

Re: extended GDG implementation

Pommier, Rex wrote: Hello list, I have what are probably simple questions regarding the relaxation of the 255 generation GDG limit. We are running z/OS 2.2 so are eligible for the relaxation. I know I need to make a change to the IGGCATx member to activate the capability and I need to add

Re: extended GDG implementation

On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 19:10:07 +, Pommier, Rex wrote: >2. Once it is active, can I use an IDCAMS ALTER to change between the old >limit and an extended one? I am positive the >answer to this is "no, it can >only be done at GDG definition time" but am hoping. >3.

Re: SMFLIMxx parameter

REGIONABOVE controls 31-bit addressable storage. You cannot address more than 2G with only 31 bits. MEMLIMIT controls 64-bit addressable virtual storage. It has nothing to do with the amount of real memory you have installed. Jim Mulder z/OS Diagnosis, Design, Development, Test IBM Corp.

Re: extended GDG implementation

I can't answer (1) or (2) but you should check out CBTTape File 951 from Nick Light - it has a tool called GDGP that will help 'migrate' from existing GDG's to the new extended GDG. Be careful using it with SMS managed datasets but for tape it should be fine as it will uncatalog, delete the GDG

Re: extended GDG implementation

Rex, See my >> comments below. _ Dave Jousma Manager Mainframe Engineering, Assistant Vice President david.jou...@53.com 1830 East Paris, Grand Rapids, MI  49546 MD RSCB2H p 616.653.8429 f 616.653.2717 -Original Message-

extended GDG implementation

Hello list, I have what are probably simple questions regarding the relaxation of the 255 generation GDG limit. We are running z/OS 2.2 so are eligible for the relaxation. I know I need to make a change to the IGGCATx member to activate the capability and I need to add EXT to the GDG

Re: Unix-question

http://tldp.org/LDP/lpg/node11.html examples using C -- Artificial Intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity - Unknown On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 12:51 PM, scott Ford wrote: > So my question is where do I find a example of a pipe call and retrieve > ...this would help

Re: SMFLIMxx parameter

Hi Anne, I just tested your SMFLIM parms and they were successful on my sandbox 2.2 system with my SMFPRM00 MEMLIMIT(6G) REGION JOBNAME(*) SUBSYS(STC,JES2) REGIONABOVE(NOLIMIT) REGIONBELOW(NOLIMIT) SYSRESVBELOW(512K) SYSRESVABOVE(100M) MEMLIMIT(10P) T SMFLIM=00 IEE536I SMFLIM VALUE 00

Re: SMFLIMxx parameter

Greedy aren't you . Chris Hoelscher Technology Architect, Database Infrastructure Services Technology Solution Services 123 East Main Street Louisville, KY 40202 Humana.com (502) 476-2538 or 407-7266 -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List

Re: ATTACH EXTR=exit and saving registers (save _all_ registers?)

On 8/29/2017 6:07 AM, Steve Smith wrote: Beyond that, I've no idea what you're planning on doing, but ETXRs aren't normally suitable for doing much. I was astonished to learn recently that ETXR routines are entered in problem state even if the ATTACHX is issued by a supervisor state caller.

Re: Unix-question

So my question is where do I find a example of a pipe call and retrieve ...this would help me On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 1:45 PM scott Ford wrote: > Gil, > Can u talk off list ? > > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 12:57 PM Paul Gilmartin < >

Re: Unix-question

Gil, Can u talk off list ? On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 12:57 PM Paul Gilmartin < 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > On 2017-08-29, at 10:37, scott Ford wrote: > > > > I was reading through IBM Unix services manuals and have a pipe > question.. > > If I as a STC ..issue a Unix

Re: Unix-question

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 11:37 AM, scott Ford wrote: > Guys/Gals: > > I was reading through IBM Unix services manuals and have a pipe question.. > If I as a STC ..issue a Unix command after a PIPE was established and > retrieve output of the > command, i *think* the answer is

Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

> Just compile and link the C code as 64-bit. That is a HUGE "just." This is tens of thousands of lines of C++ code, many called library routines, and many linked-in atomic assembler functions. Not a small "just" at all. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List

Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

On some further review, a separate "AMODE 64 ESTAE" won't do anything for me (unless I am missing something). My existing ESTAE is working fine. The issue at hand is "how do I get C/C++ to trigger a Signal routine." For you assembler folks, a Signal routine is roughly equivalent to a retry

Re: SMFLIMxx parameter

Hum, I've not tried using SMFLIM yet, now you have me wanting to play around myself, maybe the 2G limit in SMFPRM is a gotya :) sorry I can't be more help, take care Anne Carmen - Original Message - From: "Anne Adams (DTI)" To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Re: Unix-question

On 2017-08-29, at 10:37, scott Ford wrote: > > I was reading through IBM Unix services manuals and have a pipe question.. > If I as a STC ..issue a Unix command after a PIPE was established and > retrieve output of the > command, i *think* the answer is "yes". If so in a Single Thread STC would >

Re: Message IRX0006I running an edit macro CLIST

I have no stake in defending the JEM CLIST, but AFAIK 'ISREDIT MACRO' is required in order to run it from the command line with just 'jem'. For better or for worse, that's how people use the product. You're in edit on a JCL member. Before submitting, you execute JEM to increase your chances of

Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

Answering anyway, even if *I'm* neither you or me :-): FRR is generally only appropriate when you have no other choice. But I've recently implemented an ARR, which is purportedly a higher-performing alternative to ESTAE[X]. The IEAARR macro invokes the protected routine, so it replaces your

Unix-question

Guys/Gals: I was reading through IBM Unix services manuals and have a pipe question.. If I as a STC ..issue a Unix command after a PIPE was established and retrieve output of the command, i *think* the answer is "yes". If so in a Single Thread STC would the STC wait for the response ?? or does it

Re: SMFLIMxx parameter

Hey Carmen! Yep, and things still don't work. However, if I change REGIONABOVE to 2G (or whatever I have in SMFPRMxx) then It works just fine ... except for the fact that the region size is only 2G ... and I want it all. Anne R. Adams, CISSP DTI, Systems Engineering Sr. Mainframe Services

Re: SMFLIMxx parameter

Hi Anne, tell Everyone I said YO! all the example I've seen show REGION JOBNAME(*) SUBSYS(JES*,STC) REGIONABOVE(NOLIMIT) REGIONBELOW(NOLIMIT) SYSRESVABOVE(50M) SYSRESVBELOW(512K) looks like the error is pointing to the SYSRESVBELOW posssibly did you try reversing the order and try

AW: Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

some years ago I Had to call a openssl library from Pl/1. the Openssl library was compiled using XPlink (31 Bit). it worked in the End. the only Problem was that there Had to be a Interface Module doing a dynamic fetch on the XPlink object, because static linkage was Not possible. And Posix

Re: SMFLIMxx parameter

Hey Steve - Here's how we set up SMFLIMxx REGION JOBNAME(*) SUBSYS(STC,JES2) REGIONABOVE(NOLIMIT) REGIONBELOW(NOLIMIT) SYSRESVBELOW(512K) SYSRESVABOVE(100M) MEMLIMIT(10P) If we left SMFPRMxx MEMLIMIT(2G) then the maximum region size remained, 2G.

Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Don Poitras wrote: > But you _can_ address data above the bar in "pure" C. Just compile and link > the C code as 64-bit. > ​I've no experience, but from what I've read, this is "CPU costly" in that the 31 bit C is running in a "normal"

Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

But you _can_ address data above the bar in "pure" C. Just compile and link the C code as 64-bit. In article <007a01d320d9$fd9133a0$f8b39ae0$@mcn.org> you wrote: > So far as I have seen, the documentation does not consider nor address the > situation I have. It considers all-64-bit C with

Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 08:13:33 -0700, Charles Mills wrote: >z/OS 2.12? I missed that too. I am really falling behind here. ROFL. I meant z/OS 1.12. Thanks for pointing out my error. -- Tom Marchant > >-Original Message- >From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List

Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

So far as I have seen, the documentation does not consider nor address the situation I have. It considers all-64-bit C with all-64-bit assembler, or all-31-bit C with all-31-bit assembler. I have 31-bit assembler with a few 64-bit instructions, one of which happened to S0C4. I suppose one (or IBM)

Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

z/OS 2.12? I missed that too. I am really falling behind here. Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Tom Marchant Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 7:32 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++

Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

@Peter, thanks as always. I had not noticed SPIEOVERRIDE. It would be a better approach than "remember to turn off SPIE in LE." There's not many AMODE 64 instructions -- basically load up a 64-bit pointer and move the data below the bar. I wonder if perhaps FRR would be appropriate. (Not a

Re: Looking for mainframe shops Lexington/Cincinnati

“As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.” -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Allan Staller Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 8:16 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Looking for mainframe shops

Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 08:50:42 -0400, Peter Relson wrote: >The ESTAEX SPIEOVERRIDE keyword ... That's a new one on me. Thanks, Peter! Looks like it was introduced with z/OS 2.12. Requires APF authorization though -- Tom Marchant

Re: IBM 650 wrote fiction?

Paul Gilmartin wrote: On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 06:51:34 -0500, John McKown wrote: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/29/ibm_1960s_story_writing_software/ This could explain Game of Thrones. -- Jack J. Woehr # Science is more than a body of knowledge. It's a way of www.well.com/~jax #

Re: ATTACH EXTR=exit and saving registers (save _all_ registers?)

The doc isn't "wrong", it's just a bit overstated. It's a good idea to follow normal linkage conventions (well normal from 1970) and they're encouraging that. This is an ancient facility, and for all I know it may have been a more vital requirement in the past. Also, I have no insider's

Re: ATTACH EXTR=exit and saving registers (save _all_ registers?)

Steve Smith wrote: You'll have to spell it as ETXR, and if by "offset" you mean offset from 0, then sure. You can do what you want with the registers. The ETXR runs under an IRB on the mother task, so I'm not sure why any of them need to be saved. Beyond that, I've no idea what you're

Re: IBM 650 wrote fiction?

On Tue, 29 Aug 2017 06:51:34 -0500, John McKown wrote: >http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/29/ibm_1960s_story_writing_software/ > And a couple decades later: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racter -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN

Re: Looking for mainframe shops Lexington/Cincinnati

WKRP? ::DISCLAIMER:: The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only. E-mail

Re: ATTACH EXTR=exit and saving registers (save _all_ registers?)

You'll have to spell it as ETXR, and if by "offset" you mean offset from 0, then sure. You can do what you want with the registers. The ETXR runs under an IRB on the mother task, so I'm not sure why any of them need to be saved. Beyond that, I've no idea what you're planning on doing, but ETXRs

Re: ATTACH EXTR=exit and saving registers (save _all_ registers?)

As I believe that it gets control via SYNCH(X), you really do not need to save or restore any registers. Just exit by branching to the address that was contained in R14 when entered. It would be a bit of an integrity exposure for the task termination routine to trust your registers. On Tue, 29

Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

I do not pretend to know the answer to the initial question, but when Charles mentioned updating the SDWA, that seems really problematic to me. I tried a simple experiment: -- Mainline sets 2 ESTAEXs -- Mainline blows up -- Newest ESTAEX routine gets control and updates the "AMODE 64" bit in

Re: Looking for mainframe shops Lexington/Cincinnati

I asked some IBM coworkers of mine who are located in Lexington. Here's what they had to say: "One person thought of the University of Kentucky here in Lexington. Also, in Central Kentucky, I know of NTT Data (Frankfort), Booz Allen (Radcliff), and Humana (Louisville). Louisville/Cincinnati

IBM 650 wrote fiction?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/29/ibm_1960s_story_writing_software/ -- Caution! The OP is an hyperpolysyllabicsesquipedalianist and this email may cause stress to those with hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia. Maranatha! <>< John McKown

Re: ISFPRMxx question

Thanks Rob -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Rob Scott Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 2:16 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: ISFPRMxx question Gadi, If you take a look at the ISFPRM01 member in the SISFJCL

Re: ISFPRMxx question

Gadi, If you take a look at the ISFPRM01 member in the SISFJCL dataset, this contains FLD and FLDENT statements for all supplied displays. Note that for all new displays, SDSF only supports a single FLDLIST (i.e. there is not an alternate field list that can be invoked using the "?" primary

Re: Linking module in SMP/E with ++JCL

I used to have an IGGPRE exit. Here are the relevant parts of mine. //SMPPTFIN DD DATA,DLM=ZZ ++USERMOD(MSMS001) . ++VER(Z038) FMID(HDZ1C10). ++SRC(IGGPRE00) DISTLIB(AOSD0) . IGGPRE00 CSECT IGGPRE00 AMODE 31

ATTACH EXTR=exit and saving registers (save _all_ registers?)

When you specify the EXTR= parameter on an ATTACH, you are indicating the offset of an exit to asynchoronously receive control when the sub-task ends. This exit is invoked as many are, in that a 72-byte save area is addressed by R13 for saving/restoring the registers. The documentation even

ISFPRMxx question

Hi, We are in the process of customizing a brand new z/OS v2.2 system. The ISFPRMxx member that came with the Server Pac has FLD and FLDENT statements for the DA Display. Is there a way to generate these statements for other displays, so we can customize them? Yes, I know the list of fields is

Re: How to require all secure FTP except to one subnet?

Suspect you are missing this from your FTP(S) server's FTP.DATA file TLSMECHANISM ATTLS It is easy to force security for the z/OS FTPS server as you are in control and can code the likes of : SECURE_FTP REQUIRED TLSMECHANISM ATTLS SECURE_CTRLCONN PRIVATE SECURE_DATACONN PRIVATE The big

Re: SPF Panels for TCP/IP (was HSM Query command) - EZANS RFE

It is a purely symbolic point at which IBM might realise that keeping it as 'uncommitted candidate' rather than meeting the RFE is becoming embarrassing. I'm sure you all knew what I meant. Mike Wawiorko  -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List

Re: Linking module in SMP/E with ++JCL

On Mon, 28 Aug 2017 16:32:57 -0500 Fred Kaptein wrote: :>Sorry, there is a period in the ++USERMOD statement. :>++USERMOD (LM2TBT0). :>There are no error messages, the USERMOD is RECEIVED and APPLIED successfully. However, it does not link. :>SYSMOD STATUS REPORT FOR

AW: Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

>If I had nothing better to do I would open an RFE on that. Even assuming AMODE >31, how can LE assume that the high halves of the registers are of no >debugging value? 64-bit register arithmetic -- or even using the high halves >of registers as a temporary holding area -- is a valid technique

AW: Re: Can AMODE 31 C/C++ get a signal on a S0C1/4 in AMODE 64 assembler?

>I believe that with AMODE 31 this should be possible (establishing another ESTAE routine, when LE is active), because IIRC this is what I did when calling C and PL/1 routines from APL ... Is it possible? Yes. Is it supported by LE? No. Read my comment on Charle's previous thread. -- Peter