No idea but that isn't within the scope of what we're doing now. Just trying to get it to STOP the bogus tagging!
-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2025 2:57 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: USS file tagging question On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 13:22:36 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote: >I'm trying to NOT have files that *are* EBCDIC tagged wrong, so FTP works. If >I FTP that "banana" file, I get untranslated EBCDIC. If I say TYPE E, I get an >error saying "Dude, that's ASCII, use ASCII". > >This manifested with Python scripts in our automation that did FTPs and got >errors saying "record too long" from larger files, presumably because it was >transferring as ASCII/binary and thus looking for linends that just aren't >there in the EBCDIC data. > Is it time to give up on EBCDIC? understand that ISVs (Rocket?) (Dovetail?) rely on compiling in Enhanced ASCII mode and autoconversion. How does tagging play with DSFS? I find scant mention of tags in the lone DSFS manual. Might tagging employ the Utility Fine System? Where's the DSFS User's guide? Is there a a way to implicitly tag Classic data sets? Spool data sets? Are they presumed 1047? 500? 037? -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
