That text may have made sense for OS/360 R1. It certainly didn't make sense in 1968.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Tony Harminc <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, February 21, 2025 1:08 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Mystery TCBOTC text in Data Areas External Message: Use Caution On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 at 12:58, Seymour J Metz <[email protected]> wrote: > In the text > 132 (84) ADDRESS 4 TCBOTC - ADDRESS OF THE TCB FOR THE TASK > (THE ORIGINATING TASK) THAT ATTACHED > THIS TASK. THIS FIELD IS ZERO IN THE > TCB FOR A SYSTEM TASK. > > what is a system task. The last sentence is patently false for any obvious > definition. > That text is over 50 years old, and I'd think the definition of system task was oriented toward pre-MVS notions of initiators and started tasks. Why is it still in the book? Presumably because it was copied from the ancient IKJTCB macro, and noone's had reason to update that. Tony H. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
