In <55f30e5c.4000...@copper.net>, on 09/11/2015
at 01:24 PM, Steve Thompson said:
>What you looking for is "Writing an Exit for the SUBMIT Command".
>Then look for "Summary of using the bytes of word 5"
>After you do this, if you are familiar with C/I, could you say with
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 13:24:44 -0400, Steve Thompson wrote:
>>
>> If this affects ordinary TSO/E users, not just customizers, shouldn't it
>> also be mentioned in:
>> SUBMIT command
>> z/OS TSO/E Command Reference
>> SA32-0975-00
>>
>> I don't see it there. RCF time?
>>
>Chapter 34.
On 09/04/2015 02:18 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
Perhaps they read the manual? People are often telling each other to do that.
If you want users to restrict themselves to the SUBMIT command, you should
submit RFEs to:
o Relax the fixed-80 restriction imposed by SUBMIT but not by INTRDR.
o
I wonder if it would be worth while to write an alternate SUBMIT command
processor? But that's likely overkill since someone could easily create a
SUBMIT REXX program to do the same, but use the INTRDR, allocated using
BPXWDYN perhaps. The only minus is that this (REXX) would not invoke the
TSO
On Fri, 11 Sep 2015 07:40:48 -0500, John McKown wrote:
>I wonder if it would be worth while to write an alternate SUBMIT command
>processor? But that's likely overkill since someone could easily create a
>SUBMIT REXX program to do the same, but use the INTRDR, allocated using
>BPXWDYN perhaps.
On 09/11/2015 10:16 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
It seems that TSO SUBMIT *assumes* statements such as IF, ELSE, and ENDIF
as operator commands!! It does not assume that for DD, JOB, and EXEC
statements (z/OS TSO/E Customization V2R1 SA32-0976-00, p. 300).
Which chapter? (That's a thick manual
29, 2015 8:02 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Submit job without messages
On Aug 29, 2015, at 1:12 AM, Tim Hare wrote:
Did not see this caveat, and I had some big troubles from this, so I
have to mention this:
IF you allocate an INTRDR under TSO, you need to find a way to limit
how
On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 15:43:20 +, J O Skip Robinson wrote:
>Wow. I was bowled over by the 'left us' comment. We still specify it even in
>z/OS 2.1, but it seems indeed to have disappeared from the doc. Was that in
>1.7 with the JES2 redesign? If there is no longer a defined limit, why would
, September 04, 2015 7:41 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Submit job without messages
I believe RDINUM left us at the same time that internal reader processing left
the JES2 address space and moved to the address space of the requester.
Bob
On 8/29/2015 7:48 PM, J O Skip Robinson wrote
, September 04, 2015 7:41 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Submit job without messages
I believe RDINUM left us at the same time that internal reader processing left
the JES2 address space and moved to the address space of the requester.
Bob
On 8/29/2015 7:48 PM, J O Skip Robinson
Subject: Re: Submit job without messages
Yes, 1.7, the same one that caused me to redo several JES2 exits. I think we
both heard about that at the same Share session.
I can't imagine a system-wide limitation; I'd think address space limitations
would be either DYNAMNBR or TIOT size.
Bob
On 9
On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 00:15:07 -0500, Tim Hare wrote:
>Yes - exactly - we had a talk with the hogsters, but that after-the-fact
>action really doesn't calm down managers who are freaking out because work
>can't be submitted while it's happening. We ended up, I think, ensuring that
>the maximum
Yes - exactly - we had a talk with the hogsters, but that after-the-fact
action really doesn't calm down managers who are freaking out because work
can't be submitted while it's happening. We ended up, I think, ensuring that
the maximum number of internal readers was greater than the maximum
Did not see this caveat, and I had some big troubles from this, so I have to
mention this:
IF you allocate an INTRDR under TSO, you need to find a way to limit how many
concurrent users use it. Unless things have changed since I retired, internal
readers are _not_ an unlimited resource,
On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 01:12:46 -0500, Tim Hare wrote:
Did not see this caveat, and I had some big troubles from this, so I have to
mention this:
IF you allocate an INTRDR under TSO, you need to find a way to limit how many
concurrent users use it. Unless things have changed since I retired,
On Aug 29, 2015, at 1:12 AM, Tim Hare wrote:
Did not see this caveat, and I had some big troubles from this, so
I have to mention this:
IF you allocate an INTRDR under TSO, you need to find a way to
limit how many concurrent users use it. Unless things have changed
since I retired,
Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Ed Gould
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2015 8:02 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Submit job without messages
On Aug 29, 2015, at 1:12 AM, Tim Hare wrote:
Did not see this caveat, and I had some big troubles from this, so I
[mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Bill Ashton
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 7:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Submit job without messages
Hello...I am working on a Rexx program for users, and as part of the
process, I want to submit a JCL member right away when the program
I need help on this. (I said I was naive.)
On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 15:40:09 +0200, Steve Coalbran wrote:
SAYMSG: PROCEDURE
PARSE ARG zedsmsg,lm
zedlmsg =
/* Break lm at the first paragraph mark. Since lm appears to be
no further used, anything after the paragraph mark is discarded.
Why?
-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 2015-07-28 15:00
Subject:Re: Submit job without messages
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 14:26:48 +0200, Steve Coalbran wrote:
CALL OUTTRAP M.
ADDRESS TSO SUBMIT
Correction!!!
Last line of ABEXIT: should be:
EXIT cc /**/
corrected below also:
From: Steve Coalbran/Sweden/IBM@IBMSE
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 2015-07-28 15:36
Subject:Re: Submit job without messages
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN
Hi Gil comments inline preceded by ''
From: Paul Gilmartin 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 2015-07-28 16:26
Subject:Re: Submit job without messages
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
I need
a general purpose version offline to you directly if you
send me your email to me at work on coal...@se.ibm.com.
/Steve
From: Paul Gilmartin 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 2015-07-28 17:34
Subject:Message handling (was: Submit job
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Bill Ashton
Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2015 4:53 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Submit job without messages
Itschak and Dave, thanks for the direction to Msg(off) - it works
(LISTSERV appears to have mangled your nice section marks and
required blanks.)
On 2015-07-28, at 08:41, Steve Coalbran wrote:
/* Break lm at the first paragraph mark. Since lm appears to be
no further used, anything after the paragraph mark is discarded.
Why? */
PARSE VALUE
You're right Lizette - should be under TSO-REXX or even ISPF-L ?
/Steve
From: Lizette Koehler stars...@mindspring.com
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 2015-07-28 16:55
Subject:Re: Submit job without messages
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Submit job without messages
Hello...I am working on a Rexx program for users, and as part of the process, I
want to submit a JCL member right away when the program starts.
There are no edits or changes needed, so I just issue a TSO SUBMIT
command.
However
have an ISPF message instead, eg;
'setmsg msg(twsul011)'
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Bill Ashton
Sent: 28 July 2015 12:27
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Submit job without messages
Hello...I am
000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 2015-07-28 14:08
Subject:Re: Submit job without messages
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
On 2015-07-28, at 05:29, Hardee, Chuck wrote:
I am not aware
Hello...I am working on a Rexx program for users, and as part of the
process, I want to submit a JCL member right away when the program starts.
There are no edits or changes needed, so I just issue a TSO SUBMIT
command.
However, the users are annoyed with the ...SUBMITTED message and the
Msgmode = msg('OFF') will do the work.
Best.
ITschak
בתאריך 28 ביול 2015 14:27, Bill Ashton bill00ash...@gmail.com כתב:
Hello...I am working on a Rexx program for users, and as part of the
process, I want to submit a JCL member right away when the program starts.
There are no edits or
On 2015-07-28, at 05:29, Hardee, Chuck wrote:
I am not aware of an option for the TSO SUBMIT command to suppress the
message, but could your REXX allocate an internal reader and write the JCL to
it then close it?
I like the INTRDR option or its IEBGENER variant, particularly because
it
On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 14:26:48 +0200, Steve Coalbran wrote:
CALL OUTTRAP M.
ADDRESS TSO SUBMIT jcljob /* jcljob is tso format dataset name of a
single JCL job */
CALL OUTTRAP OFF
PARSE VAR m.1 jobname ( jobid ) qsub .
IF( qsubSUBMITTED )THEN SIGNAL SUBMITERROR
Then you can do what you will
Hi all + bcc: Gil
Cross-Posted to TSO-REXX and ISPF-L
Here I imbed and attach the GP code for the message/abend subroutines I
use.
The attach *should* get to Gil (fingers-crossed/hålla-tummarna!) but
historically it won't get through the Notes/LISTSERV SWAT-border-patrols!
34 matches
Mail list logo