I am also a small site, and I am shutting down within the year. Stopping
at z/OS 2.3. I am not sure what I'd have done if I had to do another z/OS
upgrade, usually every other release. It's clear that IBM plans to make z/OSMF
a requirement. And for zIIP-less shops, on small machines or
The only real problem I have with z/OSMF is the overhead. Several of the sites
I manage have very small z13s systems, without zIIPs or even multiple CPUs, so
the overhead is beyond what they can live with.
I doubt that z/OSMF will ever be the installation vehicle for z/OS, but it's
nice to
It's probably a bug in SORT.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Thomas David Rivers
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2021 3:15 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: No BPX-level interface for __passwd_applid? Was: Re: Code to verify
LOGON password
Kirk Wolf wrote:
/*
Check password for a userid.
Note: requires program-controlled environment
To build:
c99 -o checkpass checkpass.c i
extattr +p checkpass
*/
#define _POSIX_SOURCE
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
int main(int argc, char** argv) {
if
On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 19:39:41 +, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>
>From the z/OS Unix System Services Command Reference
>(https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSLTBW_2.4.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r4.bpxa500/bpxbatr.htm):
>
> * It must be a text file defined with read access only
>
So, must I have a
From the z/OS Unix System Services Command Reference
(https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSLTBW_2.4.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r4.bpxa500/bpxbatr.htm):
BPXBATCH supports a parameter string up to 32754 characters when called from a
TSO command environment. Also from both a batch and TSO
On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 18:22:09 +, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>For in-stream data sets: with the SH option, trailing blanks are not
>truncated. Records in in-stream data sets are concatenated with blanks as
>separator characters, and the string remaining after the SH token is passed as
>a single
For in-stream data sets: with the SH option, trailing blanks are not truncated.
Records in in-stream data sets are concatenated with blanks as separator
characters, and the string remaining after the SH token is passed as a single
argument to a /bin/sh -c command. For the PGM option, the string
> And that's the way IBM nowadays treats it's customers?
Customer? If you are a customer you would have gone thru proper channels of
opening a PMR and Level 2 would answer your questions. Please do that.
>Too bad I don't have the
> email address of Arvind Krishna, I would have loved to CC: this
> I'm sure others here have looked and looked and looked at code they wrote,
> absolutely sure that it was OK, only to be informed by a colleague, after
> he/she
> looked at it for about 42 milliseconds, that they missed out on another
> "Purloined Letter"...
Sometimes, 42 ms after I explain
On 2021-01-15 16:22, Sri h Kolusu wrote:
Please don't patronise me with high "coding standards", you banned
me from your
forum when I commented on the fact that you suggested using UNSPEC()
to look at
the internal representation of z/OS HEX FLOAT values in order top
print them in
a PL/I
On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 10:34:12 -0500, Kurt Quackenbush wrote:
>While z/OSMF is not strictly required for upgrading z/OS V2.3 to V2.4,
>it is highly recommended, specifically for the z/OS V2.4 Upgrade Workflow:
>
On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 10:12:52 -0500, Kurt Quackenbush wrote:
>On 1/14/2021 10:10 AM, Bill Giannelli wrote:
>> can anyone provide JCL to tar a USS directory?
>//PAX EXEC PGM=BPXBATCH
>//STDPARM DD *
>PGM /bin/pax -zvwf /u/user/paxfile.pax.Z
>/directory/to/be/paxed/
>/*
Must that second line
>
> Please don't patronise me with high "coding standards", you banned
> me from your
> forum when I commented on the fact that you suggested using UNSPEC()
> to look at
> the internal representation of z/OS HEX FLOAT values in order top
> print them in
> a PL/I program, and then deleted the
" However, IBM's plan is to eventually require z/OSMF for future software
installation. We have not yet announced when or for which product releases,
but it's certainly past time to start getting comfortable with z/OSMF in
general."
Hopefully well after I retire Unless it is made really
On 2021-01-15 11:50, Sri h Kolusu wrote:
So what's so special about 80? 9, 41 and 44 are unique in the entire set
of >sort control statements, and 80 also doesn't appear, yet replacing 44
by 80 >results in incorrect output.
I've gone over it again and again, but I'm totally clueless, unless
On 1/15/2021 10:00 AM, Bruce Lightsey wrote:
I am not one of the system programmers but have been tasked with getting this
answer for them (and to manage them). My systems guys like SMPe and
ServerPacks, etc but z/OSMF is “Alienware” to them – must I tell them to get
over it and go with the
No, it is not required. I upgraded from 2.2 to 2.4 6 months ago using a
serverpack.
Rex
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Bruce Lightsey
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2021 9:01 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [External] clarification please - is
The biggest thing is to the ZFS mounted that contains all the objects for the
zOS for the release in question.
Once you do that it takes a little customization and adding the STC’s
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 15, 2021, at 09:04, Richards, Robert B. (CTR)
>
z/OSMF is not required but downloading and using the workflows into z/OSMF,
which replaced the migration guide really helps with migration actions IMHO.
I was very hesitant to use z/OSMF and the workflow, I found it aided in my
migration
Carmen Vitullo
-Original Message-
On 1/14/2021 10:10 AM, Bill Giannelli wrote:
can anyone provide JCL to tar a USS directory?
//PAX EXEC PGM=BPXBATCH
//STDPARM DD *
PGM /bin/pax -zvwf /u/user/paxfile.pax.Z
/directory/to/be/paxed/
/*
//STDOUT DD SYSOUT=*
//STDERR DD SYSOUT=*
Kurt Quackenbush -- IBM, SMP/E Development
Yes, if they want the upgrade workflow. No, at this time the ServerPac is still
doable outside of z/OSMF.
z/OSMF is definitely the future. They've procrastinated long enough!
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Bruce Lightsey
Sent: Friday, January
I am not one of the system programmers but have been tasked with getting this
answer for them (and to manage them). My systems guys like SMPe and
ServerPacks, etc but z/OSMF is “Alienware” to them – must I tell them to get
over it and go with the workflow ?
Thanks
Bruce
Bruce Lightsey
On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 02:55:30 -0600, Jantje wrote:
>On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 09:00:21 -0600, Bill Giannelli wrote:
>
>>can anyone provide JCL to tar a USS directory?
>
Tar is obsolescent, largely replaced by pax with added features.
>IMHO, if you are going to do anything in Unix on mainframe, you
>So what's so special about 80? 9, 41 and 44 are unique in the entire set
of >sort control statements, and 80 also doesn't appear, yet replacing 44
by 80 >results in incorrect output.
>I've gone over it again and again, but I'm totally clueless, unless this
is >one of those bugs that nobody's
On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 17:55:39 +, Frank Swarbrick
wrote:
>I just accidentally did a DISPLAY UPON CONSOLE statement in a CICS program
I would recommend using E C WRITE OPEARTOR if you really need to talk through
the console.
Cheers,
Jantje.
On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 09:00:21 -0600, Bill Giannelli
wrote:
>can anyone provide JCL to tar a USS directory?
IMHO, if you are going to do anything in Unix on mainframe, you want to use
Co:Z from DovetailedTechnologies: https://www.dovetail.com/index.html
I am not affiliated in any way with
27 matches
Mail list logo
