On Sat, 8 Nov 2025 11:34:47 -0500, Phil Smith III wrote: >It was interconnected, so (and I'm making up the syntax, where "nnnn" = real >tape drive address and "hash" and "userid" are presumably clear) > >MOUNT nnnn FOR userid 181 hash > >would fail if "hash" didn't match the tape number on the request. At that >point I don't think there is a "wrong" drive. > I was envisioning two mount requests appearing on the console (or are they serialized?) Operator grabs two reels; cross-mounts; replies with hashes matching volsers on wrong drives.
-- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
