> The START command has been around a LOT longer than the STOP command Really? Could be; I was a programmer, not a console operator, but that surprises me.
I find evidence of a P command (at least for devices) going back to MVT here: http://www.neurotica.com/wiki/TechInfo:OS:IBM_Mainframes:OS/360_Installation #Starting_the_OS.2F360_MVT_system Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rich Greenberg Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 5:11 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Historical question regarding the stop command In article <[email protected]> you write: >I'm sure this has been asked and answered somewhere in the dusty >archives of this list, but I honestly couldn't figure out a way to >formulate a search for it that would return mostly useful >information.... > >Does anyone know the historical/technical reason for some products, (at >our shop CA-Datacom and possibly SAS SHARe) requiring you to START a >task, to STOP their started task? I know it's ridiculous of me but it >drives me nuts to have to start something when I want to stop something >else. > >I've written code of my own which handles the STOP and MODIFY commands, >so I know that it's not extremely difficult; it's pretty well >documented in the manuals too if I recall. I wrote the code years ago, >so it's not like the ability just became available, either. > >So - anyone know why this particular technique is used? Is there some >technical reason for it? Tim et al, This is a pure WAG: The START command has been around a LOT longer than the STOP command, so if A is running and you can't say STOP A, then you START B, B starts running, locates A, taps A on the shoulder, A recognizes this tap and ends, B ends normally. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
