The UNIX command "dig" can easily be run in a TSO REXX program using BPXWUNIX. That interface can easily trap the "line mode" output which normally goes to stdout and stderr into REXX stem variables. I do it all the time to run UNIX commands in TSO. Most of these types of commands are "utility" commands and the output is just plain old lines like would print on an old style teletype. No reason why such lines cannnot be trapped and then displayed via SAY. If you don't trap stdout from bpxwunix(), the stdout and stderr line mode just come back to the TSO user like a line mode TSO command (such as LISTDS). You can't run "vi" this way <shudder>. But "dig" should be simple.
-- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * [email protected] * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin > Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 9:00 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: TSO/E NSLOOKUP and DIG deprecation > > On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 05:46:43 -0500, John McKown wrote: > > >Oh, agreed! But I'm pragmatic. If IBM is going to eliminate the TSO > >version, it is at least good to know that there is a work > around. Like > >many of my wishes for a native UNIX version of TSO commands. To which > >many TSO oriented people say: "Just use the TSO version and > don't worry > >about it.". So I'll reverse it on "dig". Just use the UNIX > version and > >don't worry about it. <grin> > > > >On Sun, 2011-08-14 at 10:46 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: > >> > >> >Just asking: Could a TSO user use OSHELL to run those > UNIX commands? > >> >Would such use require that the user have an OMVS segment? > >> > >> Yes to both. But it would be cleaner to have the native > TSO commands > >> we have today. > >> > Would a front end to the UNIX command, perhaps in Rexx, be feasible? > I fear not because the terminal I/O models of TSO and UNIX are > so incompatible. > > -- gil > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
