The bit that piqued my interest was the fact that the saved system is
defined as Class A (unrestricted) because there are no shared R/W areas t
o
otherwise pose security issues - and can therefore be IPLed by anybody -
NAMESAVE not needed. Each user effectively gets their own, 'Group of one'
.
It
On Friday, 09/10/2010 at 01:07 EDT, Tom Huegel wrote:
> Really ? Is there any doc about how to do this? Restrictions (other than
no
> SNA)?
See the GCS manual for references to "single user group". You can use the
GROUP exec to answer YES to the "Single user environment" question, or
specify
Looking a bit further ... SGROUP=YES on the CONFIG macro :-)
Tom,
SC24-6098 z/VM Group Control System.
Search for, 'Single User Group'. I've only skimmed it but it basically lo
oks
to me as if you just run RSCS in what would normally be the recovery
machine. Should simplify things a bit for those who only need GCS for RS
CS.
Really ? Is there any doc about how to do this? Restrictions (other than no
SNA)?
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 9:04 AM, Alan Altmark wrote:
> On Friday, 09/10/2010 at 11:25 EDT, Jeff Gribbin
> wrote:
> > Can anyone recall offhand when RSCS Version 2 (the first one to run
> under
> > GCS rather than s
Thanks, Alan.
That, 'standalone' tidbit is probably becoming more and more relevant as
the
proportion of non-VTAM z/VM's continues to increase. Thanks again!
Jeff
On Friday, 09/10/2010 at 11:25 EDT, Jeff Gribbin
wrote:
> Can anyone recall offhand when RSCS Version 2 (the first one to run
under
> GCS rather than standalone) first shipped?
>
> I'd offer a free beer at SCIDS to the first person to respond with a
> verifiable and correct answer, but I unders
Earliest possible is 1985 and VM/SP Release 4 (first ship of GCS) but I h
ave
a nagging feeling that it shipped later and we started out on VM/SP Rel 4
with RSCS V1.
For once, Mother's History didn't give me the answer ...
Not really important - for my needs, 'A Long Time Ago' will do - it's jus
I first installed it on or about December, 1989, VM/SP/HPO 5.0
Jeff Gribbin
Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System
09/10/2010 11:25 AM
Please respond to
The IBM z/VM Operating System
To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc
Subject
History Question (RSCS V2 Ship Date)
Can anyone recall
VM/SP 4? 1986?
On 9/10/10 11:25 AM, "Jeff Gribbin" wrote:
Can anyone recall offhand when RSCS Version 2 (the first one to run under
GCS rather than standalone) first shipped?
I'd offer a free beer at SCIDS to the first person to respond with a
verifiable and correct answer, but I understand t
Can anyone recall offhand when RSCS Version 2 (the first one to run under
GCS rather than standalone) first shipped?
I'd offer a free beer at SCIDS to the first person to respond with a
verifiable and correct answer, but I understand that such behaviour is
discouraged nowadays.
Again, TIA.
Jeff
Absolutely right, Alan. That's what I get for wading through my emails from the
top (most recent). I was composing a thread-closing post based on his reply
when I saw your note.
Sir Lynn does us amateur VM historians a great service with his encyclopedic
records and recall. Not to mention h
On Tuesday, 07/14/2009 at 12:12 EDT, Chip Davis wrote:
> Jeff, yours may be the earliest reference to "saved segments" so far. Is
the
> "named segment" you mention the same concept? That would push
implementation of
> the idea back into the CP/67 days.
I thought Sir Lynn's posts on the subject
Jeff, yours may be the earliest reference to "saved segments" so far. Is the
"named segment" you mention the same concept? That would push implementation of
the idea back into the CP/67 days.
-Chip-
On 7/13/09 20:15 Jeff Savit said:
I was porting
the CP/67 port of LISP/MTS to VM/370, and ne
Mike Walter said:
> Surely Sir Lynn would know off the top of his head, and have ALL the gory
> details in his astonishingly complete personal records.
I'm definitely no substitute for Sir Lynn, but I remember DCSS and DMKSNT in
VM/370 Release 3 PLC 8, which is where I started with VM.
In fact,
On Jul 12, 2009, at 12:36 PM, Rich Greenberg wrote:
On: Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 04:01:34PM +,Chip Davis Wrote:
I would think it would have been sometime in the early 70's, so I
guess
it might have been in the first release of VM/370, but I'm having
trouble
tracking it down.
Caution; goi
in his astonishingly complete personal records.
Mike Walter
Hewitt Associates.
(Sent from the wee keyboard on a Blackberry.)
- Original Message -
From: "Chip Davis" [c...@aresti.com]
Sent: 07/12/2009 04:01 PM GMT
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: VM history question
Oh,
On: Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 04:01:34PM +,Chip Davis Wrote:
> I would think it would have been sometime in the early 70's, so I guess
> it might have been in the first release of VM/370, but I'm having trouble
> tracking it down.
Caution; going on rusty memory here but ISTR that CP-67 had the a
Chip Davis wrote:
Oh, I vividly remember the joys of DMKSNT and managing DCSSes, and of
trying to squeeze everything below the 16Meg line yet above the
VMSIZE. It seemed that the very users who needed access to the most
packages also had to have the largest VMs.
Things are *MUCH* better now
Oh, I vividly remember the joys of DMKSNT and managing DCSSes, and of trying to
squeeze everything below the 16Meg line yet above the VMSIZE. It seemed that
the very users who needed access to the most packages also had to have the
largest VMs.
Things are *MUCH* better now that nearly everyth
P S wrote:
DCSS = DisContiguous *SAVED* Segment. They aren't necessarily shared.
Doh ! Of course ! thanks for the correction
--Ivan
On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 5:09 AM, Ivan Warren wrote:
> Chip Davis wrote:
>
>>
>> ... when shared segments were implemented in VM.
>>
>> It seems to me that it predated the VM/370 SEPP/BSEPP days when I started,
>> but there's been many a synapse lost since then.
>>
>> VM/370 R6 does have DCSS (Di
Chip Davis wrote:
... when shared segments were implemented in VM.
It seems to me that it predated the VM/370 SEPP/BSEPP days when I
started, but there's been many a synapse lost since then.
VM/370 R6 does have DCSS (DisContiguous Shared Segments IIRC) - Even
without SEPP or BSEPP.
But of
Though I'm not sure if it was
"On the eighteenth of April, in Seventy-Five"
I suspect that
"Hardly a man is now alive
Who remembers that famous day and year"
... when shared segments were implemented in VM.
It seems to me that it predated the VM/370 SEPP/BSEPP days when I started, but
there'
John McKown wrote:
> Just for my curiousity. Was CP-67 the first "virtualization engine" ever
> produced? Or did some other company have this type of ability before IBM
> did it?
cp40 predated cp67.
the science center really wanted a 360/50 to modify for virtual memory ... but
all of the spare 5
ton.edu/~melinda/
Regards,=20
Richard Schuh=20
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of McKown, John
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:21 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: History question.
Just for my curiousity. Was CP-67 the firs
On Jan 11, 2007, at 4:37 PM, David Boyes wrote:
Just for my curiousity. Was CP-67 the first "virtualization engine"
ever
produced? Or did some other company have this type of ability before
IBM
did it?
See Melinda Varian's "VM: Past Present and Future" paper for all the
gory details from t
On Jan 11, 2007, at 4:37 PM, David Boyes wrote:
Just for my curiousity. Was CP-67 the first "virtualization engine"
ever
produced? Or did some other company have this type of ability before
IBM
did it?
See Melinda Varian's "VM: Past Present and Future" paper for all the
gory details from t
> Just for my curiousity. Was CP-67 the first "virtualization engine"
ever
> produced? Or did some other company have this type of ability before
IBM
> did it?
See Melinda Varian's "VM: Past Present and Future" paper for all the
gory details from the IBM perspective.
There were efforts at DEC wi
ry 11, 2007 1:21 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: History question.
Just for my curiousity. Was CP-67 the first "virtualization engine" ever
produced? Or did some other company have this type of ability before IBM
did it?
--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping
Just for my curiousity. Was CP-67 the first "virtualization engine" ever
produced? Or did some other company have this type of ability before IBM
did it?
--
John McKown
Senior Systems Programmer
HealthMarkets
Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage
Administrative Services Group
Information Tech
: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20)
I know there is a version that groks 3490/3590; I don't think my module
has it. If you find it, let me know... 8-)
David Boyes
Sine Nomine Associates
> -Original Message-
> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> VM/370 R5, PLC ?? with SEPP and the IBM internal Kingston Common
system
> was
> my first VM system. Cut my teeth on it. Maybe that's why they look
so
> bad.
Well, they haven't been well stored, either. Two words: student
operators.
-- db
: Monday, July 17, 2006 1:46 PM
> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> Subject: TAPEMAP (was: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20)
>
> Do you have a version of TAPEMAP that understands 3480, 3490 and 3590
tap
> e
> drives? My copy still tells me all the internal stuff like CMS file
&g
My TAPEMAP MODULE, 3.066, with a date of 1994 and I don't know if that's an
actual date or not, at least reads 3480's. I have not had occasion to try
to read 3590's on it. I can't swear to the length numbers, but it seems to
understand the data as far as what kind of files it sees.
David is
Do you have a version of TAPEMAP that understands 3480, 3490 and 3590 tap
e
drives? My copy still tells me all the internal stuff like CMS file
information from VMFPLC2/TAPE dumps, but the length usage is broken.
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 13:20:36 -0400, David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w
rote:
> Snippe
VM/370 R5, PLC ?? with SEPP and the IBM internal Kingston Common system was
my first VM system. Cut my teeth on it. Maybe that's why they look so bad.
Jim
At 10:31 AM 7/17/2006, you wrote:
-- db
(who just set down the VM/370 R5 distribution tape on my desk. And VM/SP 1.0
source. And VM
> How could it not be in good shape? PUT 8602 is an even-numbered PUT
and
> all old-timers know that it's only odd-numbered PUTs that are bad.
8-) Seriously, though. Big chunks of the oxide are flaking off the
backing. One thing that's been very illustrative in this project --
magnetic tape doesn
t;The IBM z/VM Operating System"
07/17/2006 09:31 AM
Please respond to
"The IBM z/VM Operating System"
To
IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20
> No one ever listens to me. (sigh) The Sales Manual and Announcement
> archive
> No one ever listens to me. (sigh) The Sales Manual and Announcement
> archives are in the IBM Offering Information Tool.
> http://www.ibm.com/common/ssi/OIAccess.wss.
Tried some common queries; that source has been lobotomized as well. The RPQ
and announcements database is still fairly complet
It also shows up in a posting which says it was
replaced by 5668-806, here:
http://listserv.uark.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0101&L=vmesa-l&D=0&X=38FEBB2714A330E078&Y=shimonl%40iname.com&P=3573
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 12:42:14 EST
Reply-To: VM/ESA Discussions
Sender: VM/ESA Discussio
Apparently its:
5668-903FORTRAN VS Interactive Debug
See http://www.phd.au.edu/curriculum/facilities.html
Shimon
On 17 Jul 2006 at 9:23, David Boyes wrote:
>
> Anybody recognize this product? I found a maintenance tape for it
> while sorting through the Princeton tape archives, but sinc
On Monday, 07/17/2006 at 09:23 AST, David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Anybody recognize this product? I found a maintenance tape for it while
sorting
> through the Princetontape archives, but since the sales manual on
IBMlink was
> lobotomized, the older product info appears to have van
Dave,
I have that it is :
VS Fortran Interactive Debug (IAD)
wfm = 3/31/98 eos = 7/26/91
munson
-Original Message- From: David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Jul 17, 2006 9:23 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Ancient History question: 5668903A IAD20
Anybody rec
Good Morning, DB.
5668-903 is the VS FORTRAN Interactive Debug feature (IAD20 =
Interactive Debug, release 2.0).
DJ
David Boyes wrote:
Anybody recognize this product? I found a maintenance tape for it while
sorting through the Princeton tape archives, but since the sales manual
on IBMlink
Anybody recognize this product? I found a maintenance tape
for it while sorting through the Princeton
tape archives, but since the sales manual on IBMlink was lobotomized, the older
product info appears to have vanished.
Pointers or info about it appreciated.
(COT: I’d forgotten w
46 matches
Mail list logo
