FYI, here's a table that compares features of BPXBATCH, BPXBATSL, AOPBATCH (and COZBATCH).
https://dovetail.com/products/cozbatch.html Kirk Wolf Dovetailed Technologies http://dovetail.com On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 7:20 PM, Paul Gilmartin < [email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 17:16:36 -0500, Mark Zelden wrote: > > >On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 18:02:25 +0000, Frank Swarbrick < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > >>What was the first release that allowed BPXBATCH to (finally) write to > SYSOUT? I wasn't > >> aware of it, but indeed it does now work (z/OS 2.2)! > > > >z/OS 1.8 or z/OS 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7 with the fix for APAR OA11699 allowed > MVS > >files (including SYSOUT) to be used for STDOUT / STDERR / STDPARM. > > > ITYM for STDPARM SYSIN, not SYSOUT. > > And BPXBATCH STDIN is still required to be a UNIX file. AOPBATCH has no > such restriction. Its understandable that BPXBATCH is not upgraded. IBM > may have a business case for not making a base facility (BPXBATCH) compete > with a separately-priced (I think) facility (AOPBATCH). > > ... BPXBATCH STDIN is still required to be a UNIX file. BPXWUNIX has no > such restriction. (use the DD: form rather than the STEM. form.) It's > wonderful! I've allocated stdin to a pipe and stdout and stderr to SYSOUT. > Then with a long-running program feeding stdin I can "BOT &02" (tail) > either stdout or stderr (alas, not both) with SDSF. Well done, BPXWUNIX! > Less well SDSF. > > -- gil > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
