Yes, the z/OS scp is BAD. Grant seemed to think that scp on other platforms was also not-good. That's what I was asking about.
In article <[email protected]> you wrote: > IBM???s OpenSSL impl??mentation ???attempted??? to fix transfers via scp by > treating all files like they were character and does a code conversion from > 1047 to 8859 or some such nonsense. > Scp will not work without some calestentics that are just plain frustrating > but Z makes sure it will be consistently frustrating for 50 years so there is > that :) Don???t expect a fix. > Use sftp using binary transfer and your life will be better (not perfect, > there are code pages 1047, 37, ??? > Matt Hogstrom > [email protected] > +1-919-656-0564 > PGP Key: 0x90ECB270 > ???It may be cognitive, but, it ain???t intuitive." > ??? Hogstrom > > On May 3, 2019, at 4:13 PM, Don Poitras <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > In article > > <[email protected]> you > > wrote: > >> On 5/3/19 1:00 PM, Don Poitras wrote: > >>> z/OS scp is BAD. There's no way to tell it to do binary without doing > >>> something like Paul's piping conniptions. > >> Many will tell you that scp itself is not-good and that you should use > >> sftp instead. > >> Perhaps z/OS's scp is worse than scp by itself. > >> -- > >> Grant. . . . > >> unix || die > > > > Well, no one told me till today. :) Seriously, what's wrong with scp? > > The problem with sftp is that it's interactive. I can write scripts where > > I call scp over and over with a syntax that is simple and intuitive. > > Everywhere _but_ z/OS, it is the most useful way I know to transfer > > files. -- Don Poitras - SAS Development - SAS Institute Inc. - SAS Campus Drive [email protected] (919) 531-5637 Cary, NC 27513 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
