Re: "XYZZY"?

I hear a bunch of odd ways people pronounce our company name "Syzygy", a lot of them put an "R" in there at the middle and some have it start with a "Z", and some get more than 3 syllables out of it. It's always a lot of fun (when your really bored) to listen to people mangle the company name.

Re: I have

On 25/8/2023 2:05 am, Jon Perryman wrote: > On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 10:46:49 AM PDT, Steve Beaver wrote: I'm thinking that a small group of people write a SPC-for linux/unix. I'm guessing that SPC is Systems Programming C. He's referring to SPF/PC, an ISPF clone for Windows that

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 18:45:23 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote: > >Well, maybe; I didn't write this stuff but the guy who did was pretty sharp, >and couldn't figure out ways around the above. He also noted this: > Is he too sharp tobe wrong? >//****NOTE*** Some references to variable values are in

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

Hi Phil, Maybe the "***NOTE***" was written before the advent of the EXPORT Statement. Had the //SMPCNTL been written with "&" instead of "!...", the substitutions could be done via EXPORT, SET and SYMBOLS=JCLONLY. Here is a possible solution: // EXPORT SYMLIST=* // SET HLQ=SYSX // SET

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

Gil wrote: >I'm ignorant, or at best outdated. I haven't known of use of symbols by SMP/E. >But are there instances where the same would need to appear in >one instream data set where it should be evaluated and in another where it >must not, regardless of //name DD DATA,SYMBOLS=...? Cite

Re: "XYZZY"?

On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 17:21:39 -0400, Bob Bridges wrote: >It's only just now occurring to me to wonder: How should "XYZZY" be >pronounced? I've always said "KSIZZ-ee", but it occurs to me now that there >are other possibilities. > GIYF. -- gil

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 17:02:48 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote: > >>JCL SET? Where is its behavior inconsistent? > >It's not SET that's inconsistent, it's support for it in SMP/E. There are >places in SMP/E jobs that can't use symbols. So you can't just have a chunk at >the top that job where you

"XYZZY"?

It's only just now occurring to me to wonder: How should "XYZZY" be pronounced? I've always said "KSIZZ-ee", but it occurs to me now that there are other possibilities. --- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* The thing that most Europeans simply do not grasp is the size of

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

Hi Phil, I beg to differ. You can use SET at the top of every Job to set ALL variables (as my previous email said). Can you please give me an example of what you're saying. Another thing ... Do you remember IPOUPDTE? (It was a batch "editor" to change all of the HLQ from ABC to DEF. This

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

Gil wrote: >I introduced "symbols". Shmuel may have reintroduced it. Are we thinking of >the same >JCL SET? Where is its behavior inconsistent? It's not SET that's inconsistent, it's support for it in SMP/E. There are places in SMP/E jobs that can't use symbols. So you can't just have a

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

> Yes. As I wrote before, there's way too much "take this job and > find the 27 places that say XYZZY and change them to the right HLQ." instead > of "Run it with these variables set as follows". This makes creating and > documenting SMP/E installs a lot more work than they should need to be.

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

Hi Phil, You said: "... as literal is never valid in those places, ..." You've made an incorrect assumption. If the user codes: // EXPORT SYMLIST=* // SET HLQ=SYSX // EXEC PGM=IDCAMS //SYSIN DD *,SYMBOLS=JCLONLY  DEL This will work. Regards, David On 2023-08-24 15:35, Phil Smith III wrote:

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 15:35:13 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote: >Gil wrote: >>How much of the need for symbols might be satisfied nowadays by: >>o JCLLIB INCLUDE members containing numerous // SET statements? > >Sure.if // SET worked consistently. That's what I meant by "symbols", which >was

TS1170

FYI IBM released new tape drive. TS1170 with new media JF gives 50TB (150TB) per cart. A previously, the only form of mainframe (FICON) attachment is TS7700 aka VTS. AFAIK the speed is not increased - it is "only" 400MB/s -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz, Poland

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

That's it, thanks! DIS(WRITE) and make sure you have a backup of your PDS's, because they will be junk if the job fails. That's what I remember from the 1980's. On 8/24/2023 12:36 PM, David Spiegel wrote: Hi Tom, "... And what was that option so it didn't read/write each PDS directory

Re: RPMs for installs and Maint: [WAS SMP/E needed for installs?]

The list of OS and HW pairs ...     AIX-powerpc (or "ppc")     AIX-powerpc64 (or "ppc64")     CYGWIN-i386     CYGWIN-x86_64     Darwin-i386     Darwin-x86_64     Darwin-arm64     FreeBSD-i386     FreeBSD-amd64     HPUX-parisc     HPUX-ia64    

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

Hi Tom, "... And what was that option so it didn't read/write each PDS directory entry separately and take all day?  ..." DIS (Directories in Storage) Please see: GC28-0673-6 OS/VS System Modification Program (SMP) System Programmer's Guide (prycroft6.com.au)

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

Gil wrote: >How much of the need for symbols might be satisfied nowadays by: >o JCLLIB INCLUDE members containing numerous // SET statements? Sure.if // SET worked consistently. That's what I meant by "symbols", which was apparently unclear (I thought someone else had used that term, but am

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

Shmuel wrote, in part: >Symbols? Yes. As I wrote before, there's way too much "take this job and find the 27 places that say XYZZY and change them to the right HLQ." instead of "Run it with these variables set as follows". This makes creating and documenting SMP/E installs a lot more work than

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 14:57:53 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote: >I don't think SMP/E is evil, I think it's unfinished. As I wrote before, the >inconsistent support for symbols > How much of the need for symbols might be satisfied nowadays by: o JCLLIB INCLUDE members containing numerous // SET

Re: RPMs for installs and Maint: [WAS SMP/E needed for installs?]

This topic has gotten fun. RPM has an advantage over some installer methods that it includes the architecture (e.g., "x86_64" or "s390x"). Sadly, it does *not* include the operating system (e.g., "Linux" or "OS/390"). But, yeah, effective and widely used. Tools like YUM (for RedHat) and

Re: RPMs for installs and Maint: [WAS SMP/E needed for installs?]

YAST and SMP are very different animals, but they fit similar niches, for essentially the same reasons. One major difference is that there is no equivalent to RECEIVE; YAST and zypper install packages directly from the repositories. I assume that apt also fits that niche, but there's probably

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

Wow, you reminded me of SMP4, my first. Exclude lists! And what was that option so it didn't read/write each PDS directory entry separately and take all day? SMP/E was like a revolution. Great work by the designers. On 8/24/2023 12:05 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote: Symbols? SMP may not be

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

Symbols? SMP may not be perfect, but it's a lot better than what came before. SMP2, SMP3, SMP4 and SMP/E were each an improvement, and SMP/E has itself evolved significantly. Perfect? Of course not. But still essential. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

I don't think SMP/E is evil, I think it's unfinished. As I wrote before, the inconsistent support for symbols and the execrable error messages lead to tons of wasted time, frustration, and hatred. Yet the actual concepts and functioning are pretty cool-how often have you wanted to back off a

RPMs for installs and Maint: [WAS SMP/E needed for installs?]

With Linux distros there are a few maint systems. The one I am most familiar with is RPM. To me YAST (the Linux equivalent of SMP/E) handles upgrades and user changes (if you know how to do them, I don't because I'm a SU in Linux -- Stupid User). Each product/component has its own main

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 19:06:17 +0100, Colin Paice wrote: >... >Only if you need >additional< fixes before the next download - do you need >to do any SMP/E work. It would still be there if you need it. > This leads to personnel with little recent SMP/E practice performing emergency maintenance.

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 11:06:43 AM PDT, Colin Paice > wrote: > But this fix management would be done by IBM (or product owner).   I'm guessing that IBM is still on a 2 year release cycle and they still have a custom-built offering so you're not dealing with a lot of tapes and

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

ITSchak, But this fix management would be done by IBM (or product owner). We should be able to download the image which has been tested by IBM Consolidated Service Test in POK. Only if you need >additional< fixes before the next download - do you need to do any SMP/E work. It would still be there

Re: I have

> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 10:46:49 AM PDT, Steve Beaver wrote: > I'm thinking that a small group of people write a SPC-for linux/unix. I'm guessing that SPC is Systems Programming C. Unix currently doesn't need SPC because it doesn't have built-in robust features like z/OS. For

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

At Boole and Babbage, when I worked there in the early '90s, AutoOperator came on two tapes and you installed the first tape and it was ready to run. The second tape was the SMPE files (copied from the SMPE environment where the first tape was made). So the install of the first tape had

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 07:37:46 AM PDT, Colin Paice wrote: > I think we have to do something before all those with the knowledge and > experience retire! This is laughable because for the sysprog, the process can't be simpler. You were given a set of jobs to run and you changed

I have

I have had a happy because of the discussion if VI and emacs. I'm thinking that a small group of people write a SPC-for linux/unix. Now I will be the first to say I don't know C, C++, C .net or any of those languages But I sure can test the product as it begins ALPHA testing Steve

Re: Creating an SMP install tape

On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 10:07:13 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote: >>... >>Load modules and macros were in PDS form. It wasn't "difficult". > >Glad you found it thus. We found it tedious, with many un- or poorly >documented wrinkles, and the error messages are horrendous. While we've done >it for

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

Kurt, I think the power of SMP/E is not the initial install, but the fix management (ptf chain management). Actually many deliveries from IBM have SMP/E already populated and technically this is a kind of DSS dump (or can be). ITschak ITschak Mugzach *|** IronSphere Platform* *|* *Information

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

Yes, thanks for asking, we have thought about an alternative. And an alternative exists in z/OSMF Software Management and Portable Software Instances. In this form you can package, deliver, and install software whether it is SMP/E managed or not. If it is SMP/E managed, as much of the

Re: Updating IEEMB846

I placed a modified copy in a later library in the linklist. Then I renamed the version in SYS1.LINKLIB. LLA REFRESH was done. So I expected it to be found. But it behaved as if it did not find it. No SMF 32s were being logged at all. Lennie -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe

Re: Updating IEEMB846

it appears that if IEEMB846 is placed in a library other than SYS1.LINKLIB, then it is not found. That should not be a surprise. The module is LOADed. Normal search rules apply. SYS1.LINKLIB is the first data set in the LNKLST concatenation unless you have used the SYSLIB LINKLIB statement of

Re: Is SMP/E needed for installs?

Back in the "good old days" , there were alternative ways of shipping products and service. It was a nightmare, and SMP made things a lot more robust. Asking the z/OS community to abandon SMP is equivalent to asking the Linux community to abandon SCCS, CVS, svn and git. By all means look for

Is SMP/E needed for installs?

This week, I did my first SMP/E install since my previous one over 40 years ago! The process hasn't changed much. It took me about half a day to download the files and configure the jobs - making the same changes in several jobs. For people new to z/OS "installation" is hard to get into,

Re: Creating an SMP install tape

Wayne Bickerdike wrote: >I used to package a software product I maintained. It was a simple >template. We built the SMPE zones, defined the FMID and APPLY / ACCEPT. >Load modules and macros were in PDS form. It wasn't "difficult". Glad you found it thus. We found it tedious, with many un- or

Re: emacs (was: Re: Has anyone)

Whoosh! You're still missing the point that what matters is the other end of the connection, and whether the user-facing side can handle character events determines whether vi can respond to characters in (near) real time. SSH carries traffic for other protocols, e.g., SFTP. -- Shmuel

Re: emacs (was: Re: Has anyone)

I've compiled post-install scripts for ArcaOS and Linux that pull a lot from repositories; except for having to add a line to the scripts, I don't mentally distinguish "on the DVD" from "in the standard repositories." There's still stuff that isn't in the openSUSE LEAP repositories, but most of

IntelliJ Rexx plugin (Re: JAVA IDE

IntelliJ users may gain Rexx syntax highlighting and syntax checking if installing the ooRexxPlugin for IntelliJ which a former student created and has been maintaining since. It covers Rexx, ooRexx 5.0 and Executor. He was kind enough to add support for the mainframe Rexx programs characters