With all respect to Mark and Alan, David is correct. RSH is the only consistent "supported" means of automation between CMS (or TSO) and Linux.
I put a lot of effort into cobbling up other tools to automate Linux-to-CMS, but in-house hacks are held in low esteem where vendor venues are more valued. (RSH is supported by IBM ... and by the distributors. Security be blowed!) I wish I had thought of using RSH in those scenarios, but I was blinded by righteous ideals: "it's not secure". -- Rick; <>< On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 14:52, David Boyes <[email protected]> wrote: >> Is there something wrong with the rsh-server package on the installation >> media? (Other than the total lack of security Alan mentioned.) I'm in total >> agreement with Alan by the way. You really _don't_ want to be using rsh or >> rlogin or rexec on _any_ system, whether it's "all inside the box" or not. >> Really bad idea. > > Unless you want/need to trigger some action on Linux from CMS and don't have > a SSH client, in which case, you don't have much choice. > > -- db > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit > http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For more information on Linux on System z, visit > http://wiki.linuxvm.org/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
