I think that 97% compatible is GROSSLY underestimated. Although this may
not have always been true, but today, there are ALMOST no cases where the
BEHAVIOR is different.
I suppose that if you are
A) still using ISAM
or
B) TCAM
Or
C) other very old software, you might have a problem
HOWEVER< as long as you are running under z/OS, then you really, REALLY, do
not want the OS/VS COBOL run-time (either concatenated before or after LE).
If your OS/VS COBOL programs were link-edited with NORES, then you don't
need ANY run-time library for them (and what you do have won't make any
difference).
Can you actually give some reason TODAY not to use LE as the run-time for
all non-NORES OS/VS COBOL programs - or are you just saying that your
remember or heard that there USED to be a problem?
I can imagine in some VERY peculiar cases IBM allowing (selling) you the
chance to move the compiler to a new machine; I can't imagine IBM doing
ANYTHING to allow you to use the old OS/VS COBOL (or even VS COBOL II)
run-time libraries. And I am not just saying you wouldn't be supported, I
am saying that trying to move them to new machines would NOT be something
that IBM would "knowingly" tolerate.
"Charles Mills" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > AND OF COURSE, as far a RUN-TIME goes, if you have z/OS, then you
already
> > have the OS/VS COBOL run-time support. (It's part of LE).
>
> Well, now you're getting to the heart of the actual issue. (This is not
just
> an academic question.) LE support for the older COBOLs is 99% compatible
--
> which is to say, NOT compatible. Specifically, LE requires some moderately
> sophisticated analysis and possibly the re-linking (or more) of older
COBOL
> programs. Now you may say that's an easy conversion, but if a customer has
> no budget allocated to the task, it's a showstopper. (We don't argue with
> customers.)
>
> So, if a customer had non-LE-compatible OS/VS COBOL programs and wanted to
> install a second box, would IBM license the 5740-LM1 runtime? ("Why don't
> you ask IBM?" IBM speaks with many voices. There is no asking IBM; one can
> only ask individuals AT IBM.)
>
> We have ordered old programs successfully in the past. Does anyone know if
> there has been a recent change of policy? We're getting a new answer to an
> old question.
>
> (And yes, we successfully installed with SMP4.)
>
> Charles
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Of Bill Klein
> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 2:45 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: General question on licensing "obsolete" IBM products
>
> I don't know what IBM would do with a "PRPQ" type request for a NEW order
> for the OS/VS COBOL compiler, but I don't think it would receive a "warm"
> welcome. (Do you remember how to install a product with SMP4? OS/VS
COBOL
> was never delivered with SMP/E support)
>
> As far as a shop getting a new (larger) machine, my guess (and I am not
> certain of this) is that one could "move" the existing compiler from one
to
> the other without IBM crying too loudly.
>
> AND OF COURSE, as far a RUN-TIME goes, if you have z/OS, then you already
> have the OS/VS COBOL run-time support. (It's part of LE).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
