With that bit of knowledge, OBSERVER is new enough that I didn't even remember it was available, I can have my cake and eat it, too. Observer plus Class C SEND gives me the equivalent of SECUSER without the hassle.
Regards, Richard Schuh > -----Original Message----- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kris Buelens > Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 10:04 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: SECUSER > > The SET OBSERVER command is working the right way, i.e. it > won't take MSGs away from the *MSG IUCV handler. I tested > this the first day I had a VM system with SET OBSERVER. I > use it since then to debug SVMs that connect to *MSG(ALL). > > Can one use SET OBSERVER then without *any* side effect? No: > an OBSERVED user cannot have a SECUSER at the same time. > > > 2008/8/19 Alan Altmark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Tuesday, 08/19/2008 at 05:22 EDT, "Schuh, Richard" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > >> I have a service machine the runs with MSG set to IUCV. If I enter > >> the > > command > >> "SET SECUSER svcid *", messages are displayed on my console rather > >> than > > being > >> sent to the IUCV handler. The messages do not get displayed on the > > console if > >> I log on to the id; why should they be reflected to the SECUSER > >> console > > and not > >> the IUCV handler? Is the behavior documented anywhere? I > did not see > >> it > > under > >> either SET SECUSER or SET MSG IUCV. Looking at SCIF > doesn't seem too > >> productive, either. > > > > Ah, one of the Great Schisms. See the 3rd from the last > paragraph in > > the description of *MSG in the CP Programming Services book: > > > > "If a virtual machine has both a valid path to *MSG and a > functioning > > secondary user, incoming messages (except for SMSGs, which are not > > console > > messages) are directed to the secondary user instead of the > IUCV *MSG > > path to the primary user." > > > > You can't use SCIF to monitor the behavior of a user connected to > > *MSG. I don't recall if SET OBSERVER has the same effect or not. > > > > And in case you're confused, VM/SP and VM/XA handled this > differently. > > VM/SP handled this the Right and Proper Way. VM/XA did it the > > Horrible and Evil Way. I still hold a grudge. > > > > Alan Altmark > > z/VM Development > > IBM Endicott > > > > > > -- > Kris Buelens, > IBM Belgium, VM customer support >
