In <[email protected]>, on 02/09/2013
at 02:22 PM, Scott Ford <[email protected]> said:
>I agree. The IBM developer who's on this listserv gave me the code
>for IDCAMs and saved me a lot of effort. The other program I tested
>in our z/os 1.12 environment and works with a ddname last override
>which was a big surprise. My problem is I have a customer who tried
>this and it S0C4-11 .
The use of the second parameter as a ddname list goes back to OS/360,
but it is a convention rather than a defined OS interface. In general,
I expect anything documented as a language processor, service aid or
utility to support a ddname list, but I know of exceptions. For those
IBM programs supporting a ddname list, the exact layout depends on the
program in question.
As for the S0C4-11, I suspect that it is a combination of running
unauthorized[1] and IDCAMS not testing a return code from MODESET.
[1] Some, but not all, AMS commands require AC(1)
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2 <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
