On Wed, 15 Jul 2009 22:33:38 -0700, Ed Gould <[email protected]> wrote:
>... >Pat:I am not sure I agree , but I think that most USS messages are at >best inscrutable. Since I'm one of those that "gets anal" over this use of USS, I'll object up front and you can not care starting now. More importantly, I'm not sure what messages you are referring to. The TCP/IP messages you mention below are standard MVS msgs, not Unix messages. (I agree that the Unix messages are indeed inscrutable.) >Take TCP as an example most of the messages I had to look up at the >time did not follow the IBM convention as to importance (W,I,E,C) and >then they didn't set the condition code to match the message. The "IBM convention as to importance (W,I,E,C)" does not apply to console messages. As far as I know this has always been the case. For console messages I believe W is for a Wait State message, E is for an eventual response needed, and I'm not sure the other 2 are used at all. To the extent that the convention you refer to exists at all, I think it is for SYSOUT messages like from compilers, etc. I'm hard pressed to think of TCP/IP messages associated with condition codes so I assume you mean other "USS" messages. But last I knew there were 4 volumes of TCP/IP messages; there are a lot of both good and bad messages. I can't comment on the other messages you are referring to because I don't know which they are. Pat O'Keefe ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
