AFAIK, IBM supplied microcode on cards only for the 360/25 and for the 7090 compatibility microcode on the 360/85 WCS. Most of the S/360 models either were hard wired or had microcode in ROS, while the S/370 models either had ROS or loaded microcode from 8" floppies.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Paul Gilmartin <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2018 2:15 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Software Delivery on Tape to be Discontinued On Thu, 29 Mar 2018 07:40:14 -0700, Phil Smith wrote: >Ah, remember the good old days: 9370 microcode updates-as several boxes of >floppies! > (I keep thinking about punched cards.) >It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I'm reminded of an early >manager who, when I asked whether something IBM wanted us to sign to give us >something we needed should be vetted by our lawyer, said "Don't bother. IBM's >lawyers can beat up our lawyers." This is going to be true of most, but not >all, of the companies involved here. So if one of the big ones puts its foot >down, IBM may have to blink, or at least consider blinking. >-- Are you suggesting that there may be extant contracts requiring IBM to provide continuing updates/corrective service on 3480 cartridges? On Thu, 29 Mar 2018 14:57:17 +0000, David Boyes wrote: >On 3/29/18, 6:00 AM, R.S." wrote: >> The formats like AWSTAPE add unnecessary level of complexity. Any media >> used should be treated a s bunch of files - just like electronic >> delivery or DVD delivery; and in fact tape delivery. > >FWIW, doing a quick Google search turned up file 477 on the CBT tape that >provides MVS utilities to manipulate AWSTAPE virtual tapes. >http://secure-web.cisco.com/1TodMDGF2pK0HPuZiEybixwkKcBK3B_qcQqrWRpvRFprK3tJVJItqULnFkUH9k9VuFm0WEptiO4fog2D0w8o2Mi7or1Ewzqn775-E3KsfZI7Muy8Ap1MB8esllRK7V5OQBJrEyQxNh61DxMPVCVTYVoT2dL0NInJIFVXwXHHOgfTnM7Nsts-PBK6j6AJczwg6Ciy_ZxYiHzyprIO0VEjQxzdwTo-DpcPAyFsQlAHdX-0W7prZ05rkwljJ-S4ZF7JyeVHiE1WoEUJ3Q563fXD_0QiIuNJrUOdoKmOZ-BkKEOnknedn5eLGLiJO9cBpPiyiF9mgHDjW_qVpWhRyUdDX4mMsuLFO3-B5j2DIbdtk9xNa_Tzpqkw37UCBklVcQuFpGhb2sgyDXZryp5RwXjIVXTzdGHgTbSR_ZDzG8kNLQzIQaH9ZRWTiy0aEKHJ9JxVV/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbttape.org%2Fawstape.htm > discusses it further. CMS Pipelines also has an AWSTAPE stage that does it. >So, any way you can get one simple sequential binary file to the system in >question is good enough once you get the service envelope via whatever means >you get it. > >I think we've gotten into a rathole about optical media -- there is *nothing* >in AWSTAPE that requires optical media; > ... A PTF, of course, can be just FB 80 EBCDIC "simple sequential binary file". Several years ago, my employer began delivering FUNCTIONs as pax archives of SMPNTS trees either on CD or via network. (My idea; I was delighted when John Eells at SHARE Denver said IBM was moving to something very similar.) A pax archive is "one simple sequential binary file". "pax -vr" is in base z/OS, as is SM/E RECEIVE FROMNTS; no need even to go to CBT tape and assemble a utility. The loudest complaint that reached me (but my employer protected me pretty well) was, "Why not TSO TRANSMIT format instead (too?)" I said, "Because." "Does IBM deliver any of its own products that way?" Alas, whining customer cited one (which was a from a recently acquired subsidiary). My employer decided I had higher priorities. -- 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
