Just adding to the solution.. alternatively try out the below snippet which
will save all job logs from spool with cics8* as prefix.
/*REXX*/
ISFTRACE="ON"
SMFID=MVSVAR('SYSNAME')
RC=ISFCALLS("ON")
ISFPREFIX="CICS8*"
ADDRESS SDSF("ISFEXEC ST")
DO I = 1 TO JNAME.0
HLQ=CICS8
RCX=RIGHT(RETCODE.I,5)
S
Is this related to the device setting in ISPF SETTINGS?
Some 3270 devices (early ones) did not support the 7 colours we know and expect
these days.
Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw
https://rsclweb.com
‘Dance like no one is watching. Encrypt like everyone is.’
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainfram
Wanted to update everyone that responded to the resolution.
So after installing the 2 new CA's and new Client certificates in RACF.
I normally use Firefox or Edge as my browsers and neither worked, but never
used Chrome.
I tried Chrome and Poof, got a secured HTTPS connection, That lead me down
On Thu, 19 Aug 2021 23:16:24 -0400, Tom Conley
wrote:
>
>Dana,
>
>In addition to "Allow edit highlighting", check the option "Default
>Editor to have Highlighting Enabled". I'm guessing that is not checked.
This was the problem. Turns out I was not looking at the correct keyword file,
I went
On 8/20/2021 9:08 AM, Dana Mitchell wrote:
On Thu, 19 Aug 2021 23:16:24 -0400, Tom Conley
wrote:
Dana,
In addition to "Allow edit highlighting", check the option "Default
Editor to have Highlighting Enabled". I'm guessing that is not checked.
This was the problem. Turns out I was not loo
Tons of great info generated Tom, thank you
Carmen
On 8/20/2021 8:15 AM, Tom Conley wrote:
On 8/20/2021 9:08 AM, Dana Mitchell wrote:
On Thu, 19 Aug 2021 23:16:24 -0400, Tom Conley
wrote:
Dana,
In addition to "Allow edit highlighting", check the option "Default
Editor to have Highlighting
On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 09:15:28 -0400, Tom Conley
wrote:
>
>A better way to determine the ISPF options in effect is to use ISPVCALL.
> Enter TSO ISPVCALL, then enter it again. You'll see a trace dataset
>full of a lot of goodies, including all the ISPF options.
>
>Regards,
>Tom Conley
I was looki
Good to know.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Mario Bezzi
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2021 11:29 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL and LE version question
As far as I know all the interactions
>One of my fellow sysprogs has asked me to get an answer to the follow quest=
>ion:
>
>Will a load module compiled with COBOL v6.3 and linked with LE v2.4 on z/OS=
> 2.4 operate on z/OS v2.3 with LE v2.3 runtime libraries?
>
>I will, however, also ask the slightly inverse question: Will a load mod
Hi Team
Please unsubscribe my ID
Regards,
M.Jeeva
Mainframe-CICS
IBM Global Technology Services
+91-9663399584 Mobile
jemur...@in.ibm.com
IBM Services
In Support of
kyndryl
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff /
As it says in every email - you have to do it yourself
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Jerry Whitteridge
jerry.whitteri...@
On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 10:11:14 -0700, Tom Ross wrote:
>...
>LE is both upward and downward compatible as long as the z/OS levels are
>in service. There are some restrictions, ...
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Forward compatibility or upward compatibility is a design characteris
I cross posted the following to the TCP/IP group, but got no response. Thought
I would try here to see if I get any answers. Thanks:
I am trying to avoid setting up TCP/IP Sysplex Distributor to accomplish a
certain task. But if it is the only way possible then I will do it. I have a
CPU that
Classification: Confidential
Dynamic VIPA (DVIPA) should do the trick. DVIPA provides an alternate
connection to the application in the event of failure.
Sysplex Distributor is more of a load balancing function.
Both combined should cover almost any scenario. SysDist may be overkill for
your
Thanks. In originally looking at DVIPA I got the impression I still needed the
Sysplex WLM to pass the IP to the correct TCP stack for processing. But I
guess I don't for just doing an application failure. I think this will be
acceptable to the user. Thanks
-Original Message-
From: IBM
Have a look at the moddvipa utility for fairly simple management:
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=scenario-using-moddvipa-utility
I just happened to work with it for the first time today in a sandbox
environment, where I learned that issuing "create" on a second LPAR will
take ownership
Golly. Is that so?
On 18/08/2021 09:46, Seymour J Metz wrote:
> Aftermarket books generally get things wrong; that's why I prefer to use the
> reference manuals as tutorials. BTW, can you spot what else is wrong with
> that passage?
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~
17 matches
Mail list logo
