Wasn't IBM going to, at one point, wrap something around SMP/E so that it essentially ran "under the covers" and the user had a *much* simpler interface (so to speak)??
-- All the best, Scott T. Harder On 5/29/09, Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 29 May 2009 16:00:47 -0700, Howard Rifkind wrote: >> >>I also find this a pain in the a__. Is it still IBM's purpose to 'Make >> this more difficult so we will understand it' You took something that >> worked real well and messed it up. >> > Err... How did the earlier "something" work "real well" for > Internet delivery? PTFs, perhaps, but not FUNCTIONs with > Relative Files. > >>How about two procedures, one for the z/OS-z/VM and one for HFS/OMVS/UNIX >> fixes??? >> > Yukk! You would have the z/OS customer deal with two procedures, > since z/OS sooner or later involves HFS/OMVS/UNIX fixes? That's > two PITAs. > > However, since everything going into SMP/E, even for the > HFS/OMVS/UNIX fixes funnels through SMPPTFIN or RELFILEs, > both of which are Classic data sets, a single procedure could > work for both. > > Likewise, the current procedure works for both. There's > little cause to change it. > > -- 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
