It is not a performance or ressource problem but a cost problem.
Our 4 CPU's are more or less sleeping during the night. This cpu ressource is almost
"free".
On the other hand, the price of running our batch applications (cobol) on z/OS is very
high and difficult to reduce.
Portability is als
Hi,
Are there any RPMs available for Tomcat or do I have to get the
source and build from scratch?
Thanks.
Lucius, Leland wrote:
Well, I reckon that is true. But, there are sufficient examples available
to get it to work. A lot of tracing under VM really helped out too. (Did I
mention that VM is AWESOME?)
Don't know, but go figure: I'm pretty sure there is a lot more where the VM
trace came from ;-)
Oswaldo,
Look in /etc/chandev.conf. If the device numbers are in there, I believe
that is the only file you'll need to change.
Mark Post
-Original Message-
From: Oswaldo Ferreira de Matos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 3:14 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: chang
Sorry,
Maybe I was not clear,
Today I´m using an OSA card in chipd a8 (address 0x836,0x837), now I would
like to change to
another OSA card in chipd 04 (address 0x806,0x807), and my IOCP/HCD is ok.
I´m in LPAR mode.
thanks
Oswaldo Ferreira de Matos
On Monday, 03/10/2003 at 06:50 GMT, Jan Jaeger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> #CP uppercasing the response on VINPUT is inconsistent with real
machine
> behaviour. What I would prefer, is a TERM MODE SYSCONS setting in VM.
This
> such that operation under VM using the syscons interface becomes more
A while ago I posted a problem with SLES8 YaST2 Online Update.
The fix became available from SuSE today. It works!
Greetings;
I get this error if the system has been "idle" for awhile.
In this case it was about 10hr 02min. I had 4 logons through
ssh but they were not doing anything.
I am running the 2.4.19 kernel w/timer patch.
That is kernel-image-2.4.19-s390 from debian.org
with no other patches applied.
I
rpm -qi k_timer will show you the info page for your installed k_timer
kernel.
rpm -qpi k_timer-20020708.rpm will show you the info page for the rpm
you're trying to install.
If the release numbers and build dates match, then you have the right
kernel installed.
You may want to install it anyway
Hello from Gregg C Levine
For Xedit, on Linux, you might try THE, depending on which
distribution you've got, it should be there. And yes, it's open
source.
As for a cheat sheet, you've got me there.
---
Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Hi all, i have installed Redhat 7.2 as a vm guest, it comes with kernel
2.4.9, so i've downloaded the following:
binutils-2.12.90.0.15
gcc-3.2
glibc-2.2.5
modutils-2.4.7
linux-2.4.19
and the following patches:
binutils-2.12.90.0.15-s390-may2002.tar.gz
glibc-2.2.5-s390-1-may2002.tar.gz
glibc-2.2.5-
> We have great sucess with java on zLinux at the moment and
> after the migration of several application servers, the next
> step would be to migrate batch applications (cobol).
> The idea would be to use java to replace cobol. This way we
> would have only one language and we could use our IFL's
#CP uppercasing the response on VINPUT is inconsistent with real machine
behaviour. What I would prefer, is a TERM MODE SYSCONS setting in VM. This
such that operation under VM using the syscons interface becomes more
acceptable, and removes the need to dual-path code (ie support VM console)
when
Al,
The "uname -r" command should tell you what kernel you're running:
~ > uname -r
2.4.19-SMP
I believe SuSE carries the names over into the string in the kernel that
uname winds up printing. The string that I show from the
k_timer-20020521.rpm file is:
2.4.7-timer-SMP
Mark Post
-Original
That is defined in your IOCDS or the VM directory for the Linux guest, if
under VM. It is not defined by Linux itself. Linux must agree with the
IOCDS. The IOCDS is normally maintained by HCD (hardware configuration
dialog) under z/OS. I don't know what it is maintained with in z/VM. Linux
cannot m
> 1. Is there an xedit for Linux? You get bonus points if it
> is open source.
THE (The Hessling Editor) plus some macros can be forced to "look like"
XEDIT. It is NOT XEDIT, or SPF either.
> 2. Is there some sort of "Xedit for dummies" or "Xedit for
> the vi user"?
> Is there a one page cheat
Thanks Jay, I think we will go with the 0301. I have been trying to install
the k_timer-20020708.rpm and I get
k_timer-2.4.7-24 is already installed from rpm package manager. How can I
check if this is truely the kernel image I am running, and if I am already
working with this version of k_timer, h
> the guest lan is created defining it to vm, then i must
> define the nics,
> and couple them to the linux clients, and then configure it
> just like if
> the guest lan would be the hub or switch, and the nics are standard
> ehternet cards right?
Right. Think of it as a LAN segment connected dire
XEDIT is a combination full-screen and command-line editor
yet without mode switching. There is no "insert mode" in the
VI sense. (There *are* two insert modes: one on your 3270 terminal
or emulator, and another for entering lots of lines of text
that is more properly called inPUT mode.)
U
Hi,
I would like to change may OSA address (device number and CHIPD), What are
the files that will need to change ?
I´m using SUSE 2.4.7
Thanks.
Oswaldo Matos
On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 12:39:39PM -0500, Alex deVries wrote:
> I have two xedit questions. Two.
Only two?
> 1. Is there an xedit for Linux? You get bonus points if it is open source.
There's THE (The Hessling Editor). It's GPL'ed and available from
http://hessling-editor.sourceforge.net/
On Monday, 03/10/2003 at 11:19 CST, Alex Leyva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> the guest lan is created defining it to vm, then i must define the nics,
> and couple them to the linux clients, and then configure it just like if
> the guest lan would be the hub or switch, and the nics are standard
> eht
-Original Message-
I have two xedit questions.
1. Is there an xedit for Linux? You get bonus points if it is open source.
> Yes and Yes. It's called the (The Hessling Editor). It even uses Regina
for its macro language.
2. Is there some sort of "Xedit for dummies" or "Xedit for the vi us
> It's possible as the same interface used to get the LOADPARM can be used to
> send/receive info to the HMC. Something that I'm not clear on is what
Right. And VM traps that call too.
> happens under VM when a guest attempts to write to the HMC. Does it get
> intercepted and rerouted to the
I have two xedit questions. Two.
1. Is there an xedit for Linux? You get bonus points if it is open source.
2. Is there some sort of "Xedit for dummies" or "Xedit for the vi user"?
Is there a one page cheat sheet?
- Alex
What I had in mind was to hand off the handling of LOADPARM to
the kernel parm string processing: append a "loadparm=" token
to the parm string, with or without the VM IPL PARM appendage.
(That is, PARM (VM only) and LOADPARM (VM also) would
operate independently of each other.)
This does sev
the guest lan is created defining it to vm, then i must define the nics,
and couple them to the linux clients, and then configure it just like if
the guest lan would be the hub or switch, and the nics are standard
ehternet cards right?
what speed can the nic reach?
and, what about firewall inside
On Monday, 03/10/2003 at 11:14 CST, "Lucius, Leland"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's possible as the same interface used to get the LOADPARM can be used
to
> send/receive info to the HMC. Something that I'm not clear on is what
> happens under VM when a guest attempts to write to the HMC. Does
>
> Why not implement this somewhat like lilo does this. One
> could simply put
> out a prompt on the hmc, and if no response is given within a
> certain amount
> of time then simply continue (as lilo does).
>
It's possible as the same interface used to get the LOADPARM can be used to
send/receive
The guest LAN vs hipersockets decision also should be based on whether
you need media-level broadcast support or not. Hipersockets doesn't do
that. Get away from the point-to-point (ie IUCV and CTC) links as
quickly as you can.
Design it like you would a LAN connected to a WAN extension. The same
>
> I find the entire zipl.conf thing very unpleasant in how it
> handles overrides
> of the values in the config file. Would you want to rewrite
> all these entries
> each time you update one kernel, or what? I suppose there is
> an advantage if
> you make sure that all entries are still pointing
No, the version is 2.4.7.
$> rpm -qip k_deflt.rpm
Name: k_deflt Relocations: (not relocateable)
Version : 2.4.7 Vendor: SuSE GmbH,
Nuernberg, Germany
Release : 22Build Date: Wed Oct 17 11:33:10
2001
Instal
Alejandro,
You definitely want to use a GuestLAN. It makes your life a _lot_ simpler.
Mark Post
-Original Message-
From: Alex Leyva [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 11:04 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Network topology for linux farm
Hi all, we are in the plan
> I found a link to the SuSe files that I think I need to get started...
>
> ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/s390/sles7-beta/31-bit/cd1/
>
> 1) Can I download these and use them (w/o support) for free?
You can download them, but they are missing several critical fixes that
you need for things like gu
> It's nit-picking. z/OS.e requires a specific LPAR configuration - IMO
> that makes four CPU types.
Phil:
Sorry, but there is ONE type of CPU. You can buy these from IBM as
standard/traditional, IFL or ICF. One or more is also configured as a
System Assist Processor (SAP) which is "no-charge".
To expand on #1, the last time I looked, the "final beta" had the 2.2 kernel, not
2.4.7. We've had problems with packages developed and tested on the 2.2 version, when
run on the 2.4 GA system.
> -Original Message-
> From: Post, Mark K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, March 10,
Mike,
1) Yes. Understand that the files represent their final beta code, and not
GA code.
2) You don't need a CD image to boot Linux/390. Since you're talking about
IPLing from the HMC, this sounds like an LPAR installation. You might want
to take a look at Rob van der Heij's method of writing
Hi all, we are in the planning stage for consolidate some of our linux
servers into our z800, specifically we will start with our dns and mail
server, but we still cant find what topology we will use, the basic idea
we have is to use a linux guest with the osa DEDICATEd to it, and on the
other side
On Mon, 10 Mar 2003 15:53:40 +0100, Herve Bonvin wrote:
>The idea would be to use java to replace cobol. This way we would have only
>one language and we could use our IFL's during the night.
>Has someone tested the use of java for batch applications ?
I did look into it while I was with BEA - per
More newbie questions...
I found a link to the SuSe files that I think I need to get started...
ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/s390/sles7-beta/31-bit/cd1/
1) Can I download these and use them (w/o support) for free?
2) If so, how can I burn a CD to load from our HMC? (I can't load via FTP)
Tha
> > No, three: IFL, CF, and standard. z/OS and z/OS.e have the
> > same standard
> > CPU requirement.
>
> OK, I'm confused now. I agree on the CPU types, but wasn't z/OS.e
> supposed to be runnable on IFLs? Or is it just licensing magic to keep
> the cost of z/OS based products from eating any p
>OK, I'm confused now. I agree on the CPU types, but wasn't z/OS.e
>supposed to be runnable on IFLs? Or is it just licensing magic to keep
>the cost of z/OS based products from eating any prayer of a TCO
>improvement?
z/OS.e is meant to keep licensing costs low. It will only run on general purpos
On Monday, 03/10/2003 at 10:16 EST, David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> OK, I'm confused now. I agree on the CPU types, but wasn't z/OS.e
> supposed to be runnable on IFLs? Or is it just licensing magic to keep
> the cost of z/OS based products from eating any prayer of a TCO
> improvement?
> No, three: IFL, CF, and standard. z/OS and z/OS.e have the
> same standard
> CPU requirement.
OK, I'm confused now. I agree on the CPU types, but wasn't z/OS.e
supposed to be runnable on IFLs? Or is it just licensing magic to keep
the cost of z/OS based products from eating any prayer of a TC
> Also note that the lead attorney for SCO (David Boies) has a rather
> formidable reputation. I wouldn't underestimate him.
>
> --henry schaffer
And it would significantly impact my ability to get upgrades on airlines
if people were less nice to Mr. Boies. I get mistaken for him all the
time a
> We want to install LINUX on our G5 in LPAR mode.
I'll make the comment that this should be a temporary measure at best
and move on. You will not want to run this way in production.
> 1) What LINUX distribution is the most popular for the S390?
> Advantages/disadvantages?
SuSE has had a sign
On Sunday, 03/09/2003 at 10:25 CST, Chris Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> hello all,
>
> we are trying to get a vm lpar to communicate with an mvs lpar by
> routing the traffic across an OSA (we aren't at a high enough level of
> z/OS to use hipersockets). The vm to mvs communication is workin
Hi all,
We have great sucess with java on zLinux at the moment and after the migration of
several application servers, the next step would be to migrate batch applications
(cobol).
The idea would be to use java to replace cobol. This way we would have only one
language and we could use our IFL
For a moment there I thought you were talking about CA. :)
> -Original Message-
> From: John Ford [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 9:43 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: SCO FILES LAWSUIT AGAINST IBM
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Linux on 3
"The press release didn't make it clear ..."
Not just the press release. Quite a few briefings failed to mention that fact that
mainframe
legacy stuff was being run as well. Several journals seem to have been fooled.
--
Phil Payne
http://www.isham-research.com
+44 7785 302 803
+49 173
Why not implement this somewhat like lilo does this. One could simply put
out a prompt on the hmc, and if no response is given within a certain amount
of time then simply continue (as lilo does).
Jan Jaeger
From: "Lucius, Leland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Linux on 390 Port <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The press release didn't make it clear that we obtained the z900 as a
replacement for our (wheezing) 9672 G3 processor. At order time, we
added the IFL in anticipation of z/VM and Linux. Writers license, I
suppose.
On Monday 10 March 2003 08:36, you wrote:
> >> Anyone else find it a stretch o
>> Anyone else find it a stretch of credibility that the 1000th z900 and
>> the 1000th z800 both went to Linux-only shops?
> Not quite. We got the 1000th z900. We run z/OS in support of 9
> production CICS regions, thousands of batch programs, and, oh yes, z/VM
> and Linux.
http://www-916.ibm.c
Not quite. We got the 1000th z900. We run z/OS in support of 9
production CICS regions, thousands of batch programs, and, oh yes, z/VM
and Linux.
On Saturday 08 March 2003 04:06, you wrote:
> Anyone else find it a stretch of credibility that the 1000th z900 and
> the 1000th z800 both went to
> This phenomenon appears to be caused by some interaction between the
> delivery of I/O interrupts and timer interrupts when running under
> VM (or LPAR with shared CPUs, for that matter). We haven't quite
> understood this whole issue yet, unfortunately. (Maybe Martin knows
> more details ...)
Lucius, Leland wrote:
That might be too short though as it wouldn't be easy to remember. Then I
thought, use the full 8 characters of the zipl.conf section name, but that
seemd like a waste. So, you're suggestion of 4 might very well be a good
middle of the road.
From the way other operating sy
56 matches
Mail list logo
