>In what z/OS release(s) will those statements be corrected?
Books from old releases, whether supported releases or unsupported
releases, are typically not updated.
It is possible the update will show up in the 2.2 release; I would think
that it is unlikely to be made in any release earlier tha
Peter Relson wrote:
>Jim Mulder pointed out to me that the PROGxx documentation is incorrect in
>having failed to delete a relevant statement.
>What is there and correct (under "using the LPA statement")
>Use the LPA statement to specify:
>-- Modules that are to be added to the LPA at the end of
> Does this imply that program objects can never be in LPA, not merely
> that such objects can't be accessed until late in the IPL processing?
No. At least "no" based on the meaning of LPA. But perhaps you meant PLPA.
> Does that imply that soon COBOL programs will not be eligible for LPA?
No. Si
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 12:59:53 -0400, John Eells wrote:
..., but the reason why you can't use PDSEs early in IPL processing
(think "parmlib concatenation or LPA list") is more prosaic. Much of
the code needed to process PDSEs lives in LPA. Until CLPA is done, they
cannot b
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 12:59:53 -0400, John Eells wrote:
>
>..., but the reason why you can't use PDSEs early in IPL processing
>(think "parmlib concatenation or LPA list") is more prosaic. Much of
>the code needed to process PDSEs lives in LPA. Until CLPA is done, they
>cannot be opened.
>
Does thi
[Default] On 22 Sep 2016 09:59:39 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
ee...@us.ibm.com (John Eells) wrote:
>Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:
>> Just keep in mind that AFAIK opening a PDSE still requires SMS to be active.
>> That means that certain libraries opened very early in IPL must still be
>> standard
Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:
Just keep in mind that AFAIK opening a PDSE still requires SMS to be active.
That means that certain libraries opened very early in IPL must still be
standard PO.
I don't recall whether SMS must be active to open a PDSE (managed or
not), but the reason why you can't
Mobile
626-302-7535 Office
robin...@sce.com
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Elardus Engelbrecht
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 7:41 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: PDSE supported for product
Radoslaw Skorupka wrote:
>It was 25 years ago. Things changed.
Indeed.
>Nowadays the most popular way to destroy PDSE is to share it across sysplexes.
Or using undocumented or wrong system services to use them... If you do those
stunts across sysplexes, I'm running away.
>People who are re
W dniu 2016-09-22 o 15:36, Joel C. Ewing pisze:
On 09/22/2016 07:30 AM, Tom Marchant wrote:
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 13:48:42 +0200, R.S. wrote:
PDSEs were available long before z/OS brandname was born.
Executable code could be stored in PDSE starting with MVS 4.3 in 1992.
From the General Infor
On 09/22/2016 07:30 AM, Tom Marchant wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 13:48:42 +0200, R.S.
> wrote:
>
>> PDSEs were available long before z/OS brandname was born.
> Executable code could be stored in PDSE starting with MVS 4.3 in 1992.
> From the General Information manual:
>
>
> Additional MVS/ESA
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 13:48:42 +0200, R.S. wrote:
>PDSEs were available long before z/OS brandname was born.
Executable code could be stored in PDSE starting with MVS 4.3 in 1992.
From the General Information manual:
Additional MVS/ESA SP 4.3 support with DFSMS/MVS allows users to store and
load
W dniu 2016-09-22 o 13:43, Nathan Astle pisze:
Hello,
Are there any information starting from which version of z/OS, the Product
load modules datasets can be created as PDSE ?
1.1
PDSEs were available long before z/OS brandname was born.
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland
---
Treść tej wi
Hello,
Are there any information starting from which version of z/OS, the Product
load modules datasets can be created as PDSE ?
Nathan
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@li
14 matches
Mail list logo