In <[email protected]>, on 01/26/2011
at 07:53 PM, john gilmore <[email protected]> said:
>Tom Marchant's recent post says that my earlier post was incorrect.
>It was not. His post that is the one that was incorrect,
>gratuitously and provocatively.
It's ironic that you should write that, given what you wrote below.
>The requirements for callers of ENQ are:
Not the same as they were in 1965.
>Things have been so in substance since I wrote my first ENQ in 1965,
They say that the mind is the second thing to go.
>Mr Marchant would have done well to consult this manual
Which manual? One for z/OS or one for OS/360? There was no MVS in
1965.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
