Re: Z10 and ICSF

2008-05-11 Thread Magen Margalit
The strange thing is that that: 1. The same csfprmxx worked ok on the Z9 2. While trying to solve the problem we deleted the domains on all LPARS except the production one and allowd only domain 0 for this LPAR and still after activate we got the S0C4. Magen

Cleanup a unconnected Coupling Facility

2008-05-11 Thread Cwi Jeret
We migrated our 2094 to 2097 . We prepared A new CFRM policy containing the new 2097 definition on the two CF lpars, CF2 and CF3. Now, after the migration we have CF3 defined on 2097 with active structures, but CF2 has still definitions of the old structures and remained pending with its 2094

Re: Cleanup a unconnected Coupling Facility

2008-05-11 Thread Knutson, Sam
Contact IBM support. OK if you have to proceed without direct advice from IBM an excellent session given at SHARE in Orlando might help 2876 - Successful Installation or Upgrade of a Coupling Facility (CF) Speakers: Mark Brooks (IBM Corporation) In this session, the speaker will describe

Re: Server Pac Download Errors

2008-05-11 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Sun, 11 May 2008 00:27:42 +, Linda Mooney wrote: I found that I also needed unpacking room, the SMPWKDIR, also a HFS file, at minimum the same size as the SMPNTS, but better to allow more. ... When it broke on space, just followed the directions and restarted. I did not need to start

Mainframe programming vs the Web

2008-05-11 Thread David Alcock
Ever since the Web came along I've been annoyed by those web sites that won't accept spaces or dashes like for credit cards and phone numbers. I know that even ancient mainframe COBOL has support for removing them with one command. I see that it's just pure laziness as I suspected all along:

Re: Mainframe programming vs the Web

2008-05-11 Thread Binyamin Dissen
On Sun, 11 May 2008 14:25:53 -0700 David Alcock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: :Ever since the Web came along I've been annoyed by those web :sites that won't accept spaces or dashes like for credit cards :and phone numbers. I know that even ancient mainframe COBOL has :support for removing them with

Re: Mainframe programming vs the Web

2008-05-11 Thread McKown, John
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Alcock Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 4:26 PM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Mainframe programming vs the Web Ever since the Web came along I've been annoyed by those web sites

Re: Mainframe programming vs the Web

2008-05-11 Thread Len Rugen
Yes Sonny, back in the old days, we scanned CICS screens backwards, changing invalid fields red, setting the valid fields to askip and putting the cursor in invalid fields. When the edit was done, the cursor would be in the first field the user needed to fix. I hate web pages that say

Re: Antwort: Re: Healthcheck System logger

2008-05-11 Thread Knutson, Sam
ADDREPLACE POLICY STMT(LOGR1) UPDATE CHECK(IBMIXGLOGR,*) PARM('TIME(MON/DAY/YR4 HR:MIN:SEC)') REASON('allow to discard LOGR checks by recycle of Health Checker') DATE(20080511

Re: Mainframe programming vs the Web

2008-05-11 Thread John McKown
On Sun, 11 May 2008, Len Rugen wrote: Yes Sonny, back in the old days, we scanned CICS screens backwards, changing invalid fields red, setting the valid fields to askip and putting the cursor in invalid fields. When the edit was done, the cursor would be in the first field the user needed

Re: Mainframe programming vs the Web

2008-05-11 Thread Ted MacNEIL
I know that I use the Firefox extention to stop Javascript on most sites. I don't think that MS's Internet Explorer has anything like that You can stop JAVAScript on current versions of IE. - Too busy driving to stop for gas!

Re: Mainframe programming vs the Web

2008-05-11 Thread John McKown
On Mon, 12 May 2008, [utf-8] Ted MacNEIL wrote: I know that I use the Firefox extention to stop Javascript on most sites. I don't think that MS's Internet Explorer has anything like that You can stop JAVAScript on current versions of IE. - by individual site? Or only globally? Firefox

Re: Mainframe programming vs the Web

2008-05-11 Thread Ted MacNEIL
You can stop JAVAScript on current versions of IE. - by individual site? Or only globally? Firefox allows by site. I honestly don't know. I've shut it down completely. - Too busy driving to stop for gas! -- For IBM-MAIN

Re: Mainframe programming vs the Web

2008-05-11 Thread John McKown
On Mon, 12 May 2008, [utf-8] Ted MacNEIL wrote: You can stop JAVAScript on current versions of IE. - by individual site? Or only globally? Firefox allows by site. I honestly don't know. I've shut it down completely. - Wise choice. However, AJAX has some nice capabilities. I'm

Re: Mainframe programming vs the Web

2008-05-11 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Mon, 12 May 2008 01:01:51 +, Ted MacNEIL wrote: You can stop JAVAScript on current versions of IE. by individual site? Or only globally? Firefox allows by site. I honestly don't know. I've shut it down completely. How do you deal with IBMLink? (And, less important, Google maps and

Re: Mainframe programming vs the Web

2008-05-11 Thread Steve Comstock
John McKown wrote: On Mon, 12 May 2008, [utf-8] Ted MacNEIL wrote: You can stop JAVAScript on current versions of IE. - by individual site? Or only globally? Firefox allows by site. I honestly don't know. I've shut it down completely. - Wise choice. However, AJAX has some nice

Re: Mainframe programming vs the Web

2008-05-11 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Sun, 11 May 2008 20:52:44 -0600, Steve Comstock wrote: John McKown wrote: (1) for learning and (2) to prove it could be done with z/OS. So many PC Weenies preen with pride thinking that z/OS cannot do anything new and nifty. Wrong. Wrong indeed. Good on you. But note how many dinos preen

Re: Mainframe programming vs the Web

2008-05-11 Thread Robert A. Rosenberg
At 19:16 -0500 on 05/11/2008, John McKown wrote about Re: Mainframe programming vs the Web: I think that this sort of think would be possible using AJAX. But AJAX requires that Javascript be enabled in the user's browser. And many don't like that due to the possibility of decreased security. I

Re: Cleanup a unconnected Coupling Facility

2008-05-11 Thread Cwi Jeret
In our case, of course the CF phisically does NOT exist because the Machine Type has changed. On the other hand I don't want to SETXCF FORCE,STR,STRNAME=xxx because the Structures are active in production and are located on the alternative CF's ... Cwi Jeret .