n List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Farley, Peter x23353
Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2022 1:46 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?
Why not checksum (or otherwise securely hash) the memory images of the
module after each one to be co
On Wed, 4 May 2022 13:28:29 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
>. ...
>It appears that depending on the order that PTFs were applied, the CSECTs
>are in a different order in the load module, and so two programs that are
>utterly functionally equivalent would have different checksums.
>
I had one
with overlay modules and RMODE
SPLIT modules . . . Never mind, dumb idea.
Peter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Charles Mills
Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2022 4:28 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?
ut
it sounds unusual to me.)
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Charles Mills
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2022 8:57 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?
I apologiz
lf Of Seymour J Metz
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2022 5:23 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?
If you do a COPY then the records, and hence the hash, should be identical.
It's COPYMOD that reblocks.
I don't know of any utility that will compare onl
: Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?
A load module consists of some txt records, where the entry points and
external variables are deifined, then a short record followed by a
block of binary instruction in a multiple of 1K. During copy /
compress / restore of a module, the binary ma
SERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
> Paul Gilmartin [000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 6:54 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?
>
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 15:30:29 -0700, Charles Mills
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin [000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 6:54 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?
On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 15:30:29 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
>
>Specifically
ybercrime, just "are these two programs the same?"
>
>Charles
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
>Behalf Of Tony Harminc
>Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 6:19 PM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subje
Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Tony Harminc
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 6:19 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?
On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 at 19:32, Charles Mills wrote:
>
> FSUMF437 ICSF is required but not
On 2022-04-27 03:39 AM, Colin Paice wrote:
try md5
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=descriptions-md5-calculate-check-md5-cryptographic-hashes
md5 was added to z/OS at the same time as sha256 (z/OS 2.4 June 2020),
and has a dependency on ICSF (described in the doc). The OP has
try md5
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?topic=descriptions-md5-calculate-check-md5-cryptographic-hashes
To print the hash of an MVS data set:
md5 "//'SYS2.LOADLIB(XYZMOD)"
On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 at 23:30, Charles Mills wrote:
> Is there any z/OS utility that will give a hash of a
o:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Gord Tomlin
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 3:59 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?
On 2022-04-26 18:30 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
Is there any z/OS utility that will give a hash of a (traditional,
old-fa
On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 at 19:32, Charles Mills wrote:
>
> FSUMF437 ICSF is required but not available.
>
> :-(
Dallas?
Works on this zPDT under VM. And even better, gives the same answer as
on Gord's system! So either we both have the correct IEFBR14 or we
both have the same corrupted/infected
FSUMF437 ICSF is required but not available.
:-(
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Gord Tomlin
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 3:59 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Checksum of "legacy" l
That should do it!
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Gord Tomlin
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 3:59 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Checksum of "legacy" load module?
On 2022-04-2
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Charles Mills
Sent: 26 April 2022 23:30
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Checksum of "legacy" load module?
Is there any z/OS utility that will give a hash of a (traditional,
old-fashioned) load modul
On 2022-04-26 18:30 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
Is there any z/OS utility that will give a hash of a (traditional,
old-fashioned) load module in a PDS?
Specifically what I am trying to do is answer the question "is load module X
in PDS Y.Z on box A binary equal to load module X in PDS Y.Z on box
On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 15:30:29 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
>
>Specifically what I am trying to do is answer the question "is load module X
>in PDS Y.Z on box A binary equal to load module X in PDS Y.Z on box B?"
>without copying and comparing. I suspect the BLKSIZEs are the same so that
>may make
Is there any z/OS utility that will give a hash of a (traditional,
old-fashioned) load module in a PDS?
Specifically what I am trying to do is answer the question "is load module X
in PDS Y.Z on box A binary equal to load module X in PDS Y.Z on box B?"
without copying and comparing. I suspect the
20 matches
Mail list logo
