On Fri, 29 May 2009 20:58:21 -0400, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: >At 18:12 -0500 on 05/29/2009, Paul Gilmartin wrote about Re: SMP/E >packaging of maintence / products (was: FMID desc: > >>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. > >Store the flattened PDS files in a PDS as members and export that as >a Flat File. To recreate, you just Import the supplied Exported PDS, >use supplied JCL to create a PUT Tape by copying the members which is >then read into SMP/E as usual. > Your remark appears to be in response to my question about how SMP/E formerly worked. Am I to understand that SMP/E formerly accomplished Internet delivery using nested TSO TRANSMIT files (else how else "flattened"?), and subsequently abandoned that technique in favor of pax.Z? I hadn't been aware of that. Is it so?
I know that CBTTAPE.org delivers products in TSO TRANSMIT envelopes (sometimes nested?), but I know of no CBT product that's SMP/E installed. Is PDS compatible with RECFM=VBS (the IEBCOPY convention)? Will IEBCOPY unload to a PDS member, or will it get confused because the DSCB of both SYSUT1 and SYSUT2 says DSORG=PDS? -- 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
