IN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SMP/E packaging question
On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 18:52:40 +, Way, Richard wrote:
>Sorry, correction of my clarification (not that anyone probably much
>cares that much anymore, but I do want to be accurate) - delete "open source"
>from the sentence
>
>Rich Way
>
>-Original Message-
>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
>Behalf Of Way, Richard
>Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2016 11:05 AM
>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>Subject: Re: SMP/E packaging question
>
>Sorry for the l
ist [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Way, Richard
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2016 11:05 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SMP/E packaging question
Sorry for the lack of response - I was out of the office for a couple of days.
Apparently it's a long story, predating m
bject: Re: SMP/E packaging question
Subject:
SMP/E packaging question
From:
"Way, Richard"
Reply-To:
IBM Mainframe Discussion List
eply
I need to provide SMP service to an existing released product to fix the binder
control cards (only) due to some miss
hange. "Sub-optimal", I
know.
Thanks
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Tom Marchant
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 12:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SMP/E packaging question
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016
Subject:
SMP/E packaging question
From:
"Way, Richard"
Reply-To:
IBM Mainframe Discussion List
eply
I need to provide SMP service to an existing released product to fix the binder
control cards (only) due to some missing load module ALIASes. Can someo
Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 3:43 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SMP/E packaging question
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 18:38:37 +, Way, Richard wrote:
>Or am I misunderstanding it even more basical
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 18:38:37 +, Way, Richard wrote:
>Or am I misunderstanding it even more basically, and my example will work, but
>with FILES(1)? In other words, does the file count specifically exclude the
>JCLIN? Or does it only exclude the JCLIN when the JCLIN is inline as opposed
>to
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 13:51:28 -0500, Tom Marchant
wrote:
>On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 18:36:13 +, Way, Richard wrote:
>
>>I should have mentioned that we have customers run a separate link job anyway
>>after the RECEIVE/APPLY/ACCEPT.
>
>Why?
What I mean is, do you run an SMP/E LINK LMODS or LINK MO
On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 18:36:13 +, Way, Richard wrote:
>I should have mentioned that we have customers run a separate link job anyway
>after the RECEIVE/APPLY/ACCEPT.
Why?
>I thought we could do something like this:
>
>++PTF(xx) FILES(0)
>++VER (Z038) FMID()
>++JCLIN R
Way
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Way, Richard
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 11:36 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SMP/E packaging question
Thanks, Bob. I should have mentioned that we have customers run a
ang.
Rich Way
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Longabaugh, Robert E
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 11:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: SMP/E packaging question
To get SMP/E to relink the load module, which wo
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Way, Richard
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 12:49 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: SMP/E packaging question
I need to provide SMP service to an existing released product to fix the binder
control cards (only) due to some missing load module ALIASes. Can someone
I need to provide SMP service to an existing released product to fix the binder
control cards (only) due to some missing load module ALIASes. Can someone
assist with identifying the steps we'd follow to accomplish this, please? I
know what changes I want to make to the binder control cards, but
14 matches
Mail list logo
