On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 12:21:23 -0500, Kirk Wolf wrote: >The OP is having a JCL problem, not a BPXBATCH or pax problem. > >Of course, BPXBATCH is a nearly brain-dead when it comes to running the >z/OS Unix shell in batch. >- How hard would it have been to support //STDIN DD * ? > There's a separately priced product, AOPBATCH, that does that. It might be reasonable that IBM doesn't let a bundled product compete with a priced product.
>- Why doesn't it start the shell with local spawn rather than a separate >address space? > And why does BPXBATSL have authorization entanglements? >See: http://www.dovetail.com/products/cozbatch.html for a free sane >solution, ie: > >//UNPAXDIR EXEC PGM=*COZBATCH* >//STDIN DD * >cd /u/maint/ca/pax >pax -rvf productpaxfile.pax.Z >//STDOUT DD SYSOUT=* >//STDERR DD SYSOUT=* >// > Y'know that price of COZBATCH is wrong in the view of some enterprises. But I understand Dovetailed is willing to make accommodations for that. >On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:07 PM, Grinsell, Don wrote: > >> If that pans out then it seems that one solution would be to create a >> simple shell script containing the relevant commands and execute that from >> the batch job. >> If it still fits within 100 characters, the easiest thing to do is to build the PATH from JCL symbols. Otherwise, wait for 2.1. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
