I've checked the 2020 September refresh.
On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 09:12:17 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>
>Does "conversion errors" mean "invalid octet sequences" in the source
>as well as characters valid in the source CCSID but having no equivalent
>in the target charact set. In the former case,
10:12 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FTP converting between UTF-8 and EBCDIC
On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 13:29:32 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>NFW; unless the documentation describes such bizarre behavior, it should *NOT*
>translate characters to SUB when there is a correct transla
.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2020 10:12 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FTP converting b
On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 13:29:32 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>NFW; unless the documentation describes such bizarre behavior, it should *NOT*
>translate characters to SUB when there is a correct translation. If you want
>to preserve the length then use a character set in which all characters are 8
://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Charles Mills
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 4:14 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FTP converting between UTF-8 and EBCDIC
If you tell FTP that the non-EBCDIC file
is not treating the file as UTF-8. It works fine when
>> we specify "site mbdataconn=(ibm-1140,utf-8) encoding=mbcs".
>>>
>>>
>>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on
>> behalf of Charles Mills
>>> Sent:
s
> > Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 2:14 PM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> > Subject: Re: FTP converting between UTF-8 and EBCDIC
> >
> > If you tell FTP that the non-EBCDIC file is UTF-8 then FTP *should*
> convert
> > accented characters and such to EBCDIC SUB
Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick
> Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 10:16 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: FTP converting between UTF-8 and EBCDIC
>
> The record is made up of multip
on behalf of
Charles Mills
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 2:14 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FTP converting between UTF-8 and EBCDIC
If you tell FTP that the non-EBCDIC file is UTF-8 then FTP *should* convert
accented characters and such to EBCDIC SUB (X'3F') rather than to two bytes.
Sh
Swarbrick
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 10:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FTP converting between UTF-8 and EBCDIC
The record is made up of multiple fixed-length fields. I guess the field in
question technically didn't overflow. But rather it "expanded" the field b
___
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2020 10:55 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FTP converting between UTF-8 and EBCDIC
On Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:26:12 +, Fr
On Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:26:12 +, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>Yes, it "overflowed" a fixed-length field. x'C3A1' in the source file was
>treated as two separate "ASCII" characters, x'C3' and x'A1'. Since those
>don't exist in the EBCDIC code page I am using they just get converted to two
dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2020 8:14 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FTP converting between UTF-8 and EBCDIC
On Mon, 16 Nov 2020 02:28:06 +, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>We don't use Unix for any of our production business applications. If we
On Mon, 16 Nov 2020 02:28:06 +, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>We don't use Unix for any of our production business applications. If we were
>"starting from scratch" I imagine we might choose to use Unix files for many
>things, but I can't see us going this direction now.
>
>This is an existing
___
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2020 4:15 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: FTP converting between UTF-8 and EBCDIC
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 22:44:05 +,
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 22:44:05 +, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>I couldn't find this actually stated anywhere, but it looks like if you want
>to use z/OS FTP to transmit a UTF-8 encoded file to (and I assume from) an
>EBCDIC codepage you have to use multi-byte encoding instead of single byte
I couldn't find this actually stated anywhere, but it looks like if you want to
use z/OS FTP to transmit a UTF-8 encoded file to (and I assume from) an EBCDIC
codepage you have to use multi-byte encoding instead of single byte encoding.
The z/OS file also has to be variable length, not fixed
17 matches
Mail list logo
