Re: Basic FTP question

2009-10-03 Thread Hodge, Robert L
Only if someone opened a bug report to the Filezilla project. And it is only a problem when FTP'ing to minidisks. It is not an issue when FTP'ing to SFS. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of P S Sent: Friday, October 02, 200

Re: Basic FTP question

2009-10-03 Thread Hodge, Robert L
Ann, I believe the other postings have answered your question; i.e. a forward slash "/" in front of the userid and/or filepool name. I'm using Filezilla 3.2.6.1. It seems to support SFS far better than any of the older Filezilla levels. With "listformat unix" in the VM FTP server, you are able t

Re: Basic FTP question

2009-10-03 Thread Cal
It would be /userid.disk With FileZilla being graphic I put /fisherc.192 in the Remote site: box to put transfer files to and from my 192 disk. /fisherc.rdr also works but of course it does not display any files. For shared file system it would be /filepool:directory Also it looks like z/VM suppo

Re: Basic FTP question

2009-10-03 Thread Kris Buelens
I'd say CD /MIKE.191 FTP does not consider Mindisks as being part of a directory tree (otherwise you'd be able to issue CD /MIKE then CD 191 etc. but, CD /MIKE is nonsense for minidisks). 2009/10/3 Michael Coffin > Example please. > > Are you saying, for example, CD /MIKE.191 or CD MIKE./191? >

Re: Basic FTP question

2009-10-03 Thread Michael Coffin
Example please. Are you saying, for example, CD /MIKE.191 or CD MIKE./191? -Mike -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:ib...@listserv.uark.edu] On Behalf Of Cal Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 9:31 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Basic FTP question F

Roger Lunsford is out of the office.

2009-10-03 Thread Roger Lunsford
I will be out of the office starting 10/03/2009 and will not return until 10/12/2009. I will respond to your message when I return. Please contact my manager Nick Pianella (429-5343) if you need assistance before my return. Or other Level2 folks in my department.

Re: Poor 3584/3592 performance.

2009-10-03 Thread Rob van der Heij
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Frank M. Ramaekers wrote: > We have two z9 systems attached attached to a 3584 library. > > System 1 - z/VM 5.4 with (7 z/VSE 4+ guests) > System 2 - z/OS 1.9 > > System 1        Test 1  - z/VM DDR              Avg. 25MB/s >                Test 2  - z/VSE FASTCOPY