> Barbara, keep in mind that the SAMPLIB IKJTSO reflects a "vanilla" system.
> Any Program Products may instruct you to update IKJTSO.
I know. But an ADCD system *is* a vanilla system. Supposedly. There certainly
isn't any non-IBM product running on ours (other than our own, which does not
requ
Barbara:
There are *some* commands (IDCAMS) that may still need APF. My
distant memories it was something to do with del usercatalog or some
such unusual IDCAMS command.
Wish my memory is sharper here though.
Ed
On Sep 12, 2013, at 6:13 AM, nitz-...@gmx.net wrote:
I am curious why sometim
, CISSP
LA Systems
z/OS Systems Support
Phone: 703.295.1926
steve_con...@ao.uscourts.gov
From: "nitz-...@gmx.net"
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 09/12/2013 09:21 AM
Subject: Re: TSO Delete in IKJTSOxx
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> >I&#x
On 9/12/2013 9:21 AM, nitz-...@gmx.net wrote:
I've run into this in the past when deleting GDG bases from ISPF 3.4. I get an
authorization failed message, and putting DELETE in IKJTSO00 and a PARMLIB
UPDATE(00) fixes it.
Interesting. This is new for me or I forgot about it. :-)
I found thi
: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of nitz-...@gmx.net
Sent: 12 September 2013 14:21
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: TSO Delete in IKJTSOxx
> >I've run into this in the past when deleting GDG bases from ISPF 3.4. I get
> >an aut
> >I've run into this in the past when deleting GDG bases from ISPF 3.4. I get
> >an authorization failed message, and putting DELETE in IKJTSO00 and a
> >PARMLIB UPDATE(00) fixes it.
>
> Interesting. This is new for me or I forgot about it. :-)
I found this interesting, too, so I went and tri
Thomas Conley wrote:
>I've run into this in the past when deleting GDG bases from ISPF 3.4. I get
>an authorization failed message, and putting DELETE in IKJTSO00 and a PARMLIB
>UPDATE(00) fixes it.
Interesting. This is new for me or I forgot about it. :-)
Could you be kind to say what that m
On 9/12/2013 3:43 AM, Lindy Mayfield wrote:
I am curious why sometimes I see DEL/DELETE as an authorized command in
IKJTSOxx and sometimes not. I don't see it in my CPAC install, but I've seen
it pop up in other systems. The reason I ask is because sometimes I want to
use /bin/tso to do a DE
>I am curious why sometimes I see DEL/DELETE as an authorized command in
>IKJTSOxx and sometimes not.
Being a development shop we have everything under the sun in IKJTSOxx, but not
DEL.
Bob Shannon
Rocket Software
--
For IBM-M
In <45fcfbbb8bc8eb4a9dfedc6fa2cc7fdf60e7e...@sdkmbx01.emea.sas.com>,
on 09/12/2013
at 07:43 AM, Lindy Mayfield said:
>I am curious why sometimes I see DEL/DELETE as an authorized command
>in IKJTSOxx and sometimes not.
Presumably because some shops have added it in order to use DELETE
facilit
> >I am curious why sometimes I see DEL/DELETE as an authorized command in
> >IKJTSOxx and sometimes not.
The current (1.13) SYS1.SAMPLIB(IKJTSO00) does not contain del or delete in the
AUTHCMD section (anymore). If it is still found in a productive IKJTSOxx
member, my guess is that that is 'hy
Lindy Mayfield wrote:
>I am curious why sometimes I see DEL/DELETE as an authorized command in
>IKJTSOxx and sometimes not.
Probably carried over from disused (?) CSECTS like IKJEFTE2, IKJEFTE8,
IKJEFTAP, and IKJEFTNS?
>I don't see it in my CPAC install, but I've seen it pop up in other syste
I am curious why sometimes I see DEL/DELETE as an authorized command in
IKJTSOxx and sometimes not. I don't see it in my CPAC install, but I've seen
it pop up in other systems. The reason I ask is because sometimes I want to
use /bin/tso to do a DELETE, but it fails. Of course the solution is
13 matches
Mail list logo
