On Wed, 2 Oct 2019 10:45:39 -0500, Kirk Wolf wrote: >BPXBATCH still sucks IMO. It only sucks a bit less than it used to suck. >It is probably the most to blame for slow uptake of z/OS Unix. >Thankfully, there are much better alternatives. Some even work the way >that you would expect to be able to run z/OS Unix programs / the shell in >batch. > AOPBATCH at least allows instream DD STDIN. IBM is unlikely to add that capability because that would enhance a bundled program to compete with a separately charged program.
(I've heard a rumor that AOPBATCH is distributed with base z/OS, but can't be used legally without a license.) Would a SYSEXEC wrapper for BPXWUNIX be useful? What additional features should it have beyond those of BPXBATCH? -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
