Re: The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-10 Thread Rob van der Heij
On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 7:37 PM, Imler, Steven J [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually, generally speaking the CA VM products do not require these messages to function. And, in fact it is standard practice at many shops who run VM:Operator to do exactly this ... remove the noise of ATTACH and

The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-09 Thread Ray Waters
We run z/VM 520 and use PROPST to filter messages to the OP1 console. We filter several commands including ATTACHED and DETACHED commands. I would like to filter other messages such as ATTACHED and DETACHED from going to the LOG FILE (LGYYMMDD XX) on Operator's 191 MDISK. In reading the CMS

Re: The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-09 Thread Kris Buelens
In PROP, logging is all or nothing. VM:Operator has a NOLOG option, I don't know about IBM Operations Manager. At the other hand: DASD isn't that expensive, incomplete log files make debugging less easy. Alternatively, you could postprocess the log file of the previous day and code a PIPE

Re: The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-09 Thread Huegel, Thomas
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: The Programmable Operator Facility In PROP, logging is all or nothing. VM:Operator has a NOLOG option, I don't know about IBM Operations Manager. At the other hand: DASD isn't that expensive, incomplete log files make debugging less easy. Alternatively, you

Re: The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-09 Thread Schuh, Richard
: The Programmable Operator Facility Personally I think ATTACH and DETACH (and others too i.e. DIAL) should have a NOMSG type option to just eliminate the message alltogether. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kris Buelens

Re: The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-09 Thread Ray Waters
Of Kris Buelens Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 11:00 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: The Programmable Operator Facility In PROP, logging is all or nothing. VM:Operator has a NOLOG option, I don't know about IBM Operations Manager. At the other hand: DASD isn't that expensive, incomplete

Re: The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-09 Thread Doug Breneman
: The Programmable Operator Facility Personally I think ATTACH

Re: The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-09 Thread Kris Buelens
. Ray -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kris Buelens Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 11:00 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: The Programmable Operator Facility In PROP, logging is all or nothing. VM:Operator has

Re: The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-09 Thread Gentry, Stephen
-Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Schuh, Richard Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 12:10 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: The Programmable Operator Facility Alan may have fits over giving such power to users at logon time

Re: The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-09 Thread Alan Altmark
On Wednesday, 07/09/2008 at 12:05 EDT, Huegel, Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Personally I think ATTACH and DETACH (and others too i.e. DIAL) should have a NOMSG type option to just eliminate the message alltogether. Bite your tongue and perish the thought. DIAL??? That is a class ANY

Re: The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-09 Thread Schuh, Richard
: The Programmable Operator Facility On Wednesday, 07/09/2008 at 12:05 EDT, Huegel, Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Personally I think ATTACH and DETACH (and others too i.e. DIAL) should have a NOMSG type option to just eliminate the message alltogether. Bite your tongue and perish the thought

Re: The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-09 Thread Imler, Steven J
z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gentry, Stephen Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 12:42 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: The Programmable Operator Facility Alan or Chuckie? I'm not 100% sure, so Steve Imler may have to chime in, but if your using

Re: The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-09 Thread Huegel, Thomas
: The Programmable Operator Facility On Wednesday, 07/09/2008 at 12:05 EDT, Huegel, Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Personally I think ATTACH and DETACH (and others too i.e. DIAL) should have a NOMSG type option to just eliminate the message alltogether. Bite your tongue and perish

Re: The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-09 Thread Tracy Dean
If you use IBM Operations Manager for z/VM, you can have your cake and ea t it, too. You can create rules to suppress specific messages from the console of one or more service machines, so when you view the console usi ng Operations Manager, the noise has been reduced. But the message will

Re: The Programmable Operator Facility

2008-07-09 Thread Berry van Sleeuwen
: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 12:30 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: The Programmable Operator Facility I told you that Alan would be upset by the notion. Regards, Richard Schuh -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf

Re: Operator Terminal and the Programmable Operator Facility

2008-06-03 Thread Hughes, Jim
:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Howard Rifkind Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 11:12 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Operator Terminal and the Programmable Operator Facility Thanks Bob, In the pipes command below, the 'SPECS w3 1' stage...can anyone tell me what the w3 1 means. I checke

Re: Operator Terminal and the Programmable Operator Facility

2008-06-03 Thread Howard Rifkind
System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Howard Rifkind Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 2:34 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Operator Terminal and the Programmable Operator Facility Using the POF (programmable operatior facility) I would like to user the same terminal address as the one

Re: Operator Terminal and the Programmable Operator Facility

2008-06-03 Thread Howard Rifkind
. From:The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Howard Rifkind Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 11:12 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Operator Terminal and the Programmable Operator Facility Thanks Bob, In the pipes command below, the 'SPECS w3 1' stage...can

Operator Terminal and the Programmable Operator Facility

2008-06-02 Thread Howard Rifkind
Using the POF (programmable operatior facility) I would like to user the same terminal address as the one the Operator came up on when the system was IPL'ed. I know I can do a CP disconnect after the Operator does a PROPST and then log on the OP1 user to the same terminal address as the

Re: Operator Terminal and the Programmable Operator Facility

2008-06-02 Thread Bob Bates
Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Howard Rifkind Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 2:34 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Operator Terminal and the Programmable Operator Facility Using the POF (programmable operatior facility) I would like to user the same terminal address

Re: Operator Terminal and the Programmable Operator Facility

2008-06-02 Thread Larry J Brown
System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU 06/02/2008 02:32 PM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Operator Terminal and the Programmable Operator Facility Using the POF (programmable operatior facility) I would like to user the same

Re: Operator Terminal and the Programmable Operator Facility

2008-06-02 Thread Greg Dyrda
You can set OP1 as your operator in the SYSTEM CONFIG file. Then have AUTOLOG1 XAUTOLOG OPERATOR. The profile exec on OPERATOR would look like the following. This would make operator the system operator, and if PROP is stopped, OP1 would become the system operator.