[Default] On 17 Jul 2017 00:21:14 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main [email protected] (Robin Atwood) wrote:
>Thanks for the pointer. But I suppose I should build at ARCH(5) which is the >lowest common denominator to deal >with any other customers who refuse to upgrade! If your product assumes user connection to the Internet, is safe to from a company liability point of view to distribute and support it for running on unsupported systems. Clark Morris > >Robin > >-----Original Message----- >From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On >Behalf Of Timothy Sipples >Sent: 16 July 2017 12:14 >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: LE strikes again > >Robin Atwood wrote: >>I had sent the customer a version of the product compiled with XL/C at >>ARCH(7) but that was not low enough! It looks like ARCH(5) is necessary. > >Not quite. On a z890 (or z990) machine ARCH(6) or lower is necessary. ARCH >(5) or lower is necessary on z800 and z900 machines. > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >---------------------------- >Timothy Sipples >IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM z Systems, AP/GCG/MEA >E-Mail: [email protected] > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
