Left out the key info!
Rexx does some storage isolation, I believe, between the environments, so that
we have seen the authorized command complete successfully - all variables
created - but on return to the exec, the storage for the variables is
duplicated/moved to another subpool to allow
Correct, although I'm not sure whether TSO/E supports setting REXX
variables from an authorized program.
You can set rexx variables from an authorized TSO command. For example, the
rmm tso commands all do that.
However, one of the difficulties we had was when those commands were issued
from a
In m3obsuwa9v@garlic.com, on 02/19/2012
at 08:42 PM, Anne Lynn Wheeler l...@garlic.com said:
folklore is that *IX (and numerous *IX work-alikes) came from
simplification of MULTICS.
That's why I spell it EUnix, but they're really fundamentally
different. Multics was built around the
In 0fcef8d8-ed56-4e67-97b4-34a32d5b6...@yahoo.com, on 02/19/2012
at 11:05 PM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com said:
Yep I agree with both of you, I learned assembler first
I learned assembler[1] first, but that didn't prevent me from picking
up new languages freely. I don't feel any
In
caarmm9rvfaxfahsfog3rkhf2dg76g3-a+yweortbeszhcxo...@mail.gmail.com,
on 02/17/2012
at 02:37 PM, Tony Harminc t...@harminc.net said:
I very much doubt that a TMP can be invoked other than as the single
job step task in an address space; certainly not if you want to run
authorized commands or
In 1df4bbf1-548f-4b79-a0be-42d0d5cd7...@yahoo.com, on 02/17/2012
at 11:10 PM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com said:
Really ? The command line vs a GUILinux terminal session and cms
virtually look alike except for the commands..
Well, yes, the CMS command line and the Linux command line
In 45fcfbbb8bc8eb4a9dfedc6fa2cc7fdf1cb...@sdkmbx03.emea.sas.com, on
02/18/2012
at 04:06 AM, Lindy Mayfield lindy.mayfi...@sas.com said:
Based on my notes about this from previous posts, an entry in
Ikjtsoxx would allow a Rexx program to call an authorized TSO
program, then if necessary it can
Shmuel,
As you well know everyone has their opinion, ou have yours and I have mine, I
work VM internals and other for ad very long time. I also learn things pretty
fast, so maybe my perspective is i see a lot of similarities in various opsys.
Fwiw,
Regards,
Sent from my iPad
Scott Ford
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote:
In 1329430553.61141.yahoomail...@web164510.mail.gq1.yahoo.com, on
02/16/2012
at 02:15 PM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com said:
I loved VM/CMS and like Linux really well, close my eyes they are
Learning curves are not culture-free; they are specific to a person
and his or her experience. What you find easy and congenial I may
find difficult and disagreeable.
It is possible to teach able people abstractions that make learning a
new instance of some class of formalisms, statement-level
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 2:14 PM, John Gilmore
johnwgilmore0...@gmail.com wrote:
Learning curves are not culture-free; they are specific to a person
and his or her experience. What you find easy and congenial I may
find difficult and disagreeable.
It is possible to teach able people
I agree guys, the GUI definitely a larger learning curve for me .. I learn
things pretty easy.
But I consider I was fortunate had a boss in VM made us learn the commands
first then the clists.
Really helped, but my background before was ops and VSE Sysprog under VM...so
to me
LINUX was not a
On 2/19/2012 5:38 PM, zMan wrote:
Point taken. But vastly dissimilar environments are pretty likely to
have greater learning curves than moderately similar ones, nu?
Not necessarily. Sometimes it's the similarities that trip you up.
Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT
Amen to that,been there done that too
Sent from my iPad
Scott Ford
Senior Systems Engineer
www.identityforge.com
On Feb 19, 2012, at 6:20 PM, Gerhard Postpischil gerh...@valley.net wrote:
On 2/19/2012 5:38 PM, zMan wrote:
Point taken. But vastly dissimilar environments are pretty likely to
zedgarhoo...@gmail.com (zMan) writes:
Then you've forgotten the learning curve:
CMS - *IX: minimal
CMS - TSO: moderate
CMS - GUI: Large
folklore is that *IX (and numerous *IX work-alikes) came from
simplification of MULTICS.
some of the CTSS people went to the 5th flr of 545 tech sq and
In
cafo-8tqahnyv9djcutvzg0hrdhj3yezdfslze6by-rwx+yv...@mail.gmail.com,
on 02/19/2012
at 01:55 PM, zMan zedgarhoo...@gmail.com said:
Then you've forgotten the learning curve:
No. Other than Unix services, none of the PC software has an easy
learning curve for mainframe users.
EXEC- bash
On Sun, 2012-02-19 at 17:14 -0500, John Gilmore wrote:
Learning curves are not culture-free; they are specific to a person
and his or her experience. What you find easy and congenial I may
find difficult and disagreeable.
It is possible to teach able people abstractions that make learning a
Yep I agree with both of you, I learned assembler first
Sent from my iPad
Scott Ford
Senior Systems Engineer
www.identityforge.com
On Feb 19, 2012, at 9:40 PM, John McKown joa...@swbell.net wrote:
On Sun, 2012-02-19 at 17:14 -0500, John Gilmore wrote:
Learning curves are not culture-free;
Company.SM
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 6:55 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:40:40 -0600, Chris Craddock wrote
On 16 February 2012 19:32, Walt Farrell wfarr...@us.ibm.com wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 14:42:01 -0700, Steve Comstock st...@trainersfriend.com
wrote:
OK, just being a little crazy, what about EXEC PGM=MYASMPGM
which does some stuff and then does XCTL to the TMP? Would
that work?
The last
In a6b9336cdb62bb46b9f8708e686a7ea00e924b3...@nrhmms8p02.uicnrh.dom,
on 02/16/2012
at 04:14 PM, McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com said:
CMS and XEDIT can easily bury TSO/ISPF.
While I would love to see an XEDIT port to TSO, ISPF/PDF EDIT does
have a few nice features that XEDIT is
In 3403779024688147.wa.paulgboulderaim@bama.ua.edu, on
02/16/2012
at 06:54 PM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com said:
Ah, for something like the DIAL command in VM!
Be carefull what you ask for; you might get it, along with operators
who don't grasp the distinctions among RESET,
In
cakxahquoz0tu-yf5i6x4bih7fyavz3_gvkjjtbiguug_pbi...@mail.gmail.com,
on 02/16/2012
at 03:40 PM, Chris Craddock crashlu...@gmail.com said:
Yes, exactly right on both counts. Don't forget that TSO is older
than dirt
It's not as old as CMS, which some of you like. For that matter, EUnix
is
In 1329428012.66311.yahoomail...@web164507.mail.gq1.yahoo.com, on
02/16/2012
at 01:33 PM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com said:
but no normal program, even if APF authorized can invoke the TMP.
It wants to run as the job step task, and that's difficult.
In what way is it difficult? What do
In 1329430553.61141.yahoomail...@web164510.mail.gq1.yahoo.com, on
02/16/2012
at 02:15 PM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com said:
I loved VM/CMS and like Linux really well, close my eyes they are
kissing cousins
?
I don't see any point of similarity. Not the API, not the file system,
not
Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 8:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
Do i create an entry in ikjtso00 for the STC program
No.
Do I create an entry in ikjtso00 for the clist name
Really ? The command line vs a GUILinux terminal session and cms virtually
look alike except for the commands..
Sent from my iPad
Scott Ford
Senior Systems Engineer
www.identityforge.com
On Feb 17, 2012, at 2:16 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote:
In
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 11:15:55 -0800, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
Walt,
First , thanks for responding..
Let me explain:
The STC is in LE Cobol..4.2
I want to call IKJEFTSR ...to call a rexx clist that will perform authorized
functions , i.e.; alloc, free
Alloc and free
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 14:11:14 -0600, McKown, John
john.mck...@healthmarkets.com wrote:
Is this even possible? here:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/ikj4b780/23.4.3.2
quote
Table 122 shows the reason codes that are found in parameter 5 if IKJEFTSR
completes with a
: Re: Authorized functions
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 14:11:14 -0600, McKown, John
john.mck...@healthmarkets.com wrote:
Is this even possible? here:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/ikj4b780/23.4.3.2
quote
Table 122 shows the reason codes that are found in parameter 5
In 132955.66876.yahoomail...@web164511.mail.gq1.yahoo.com, on
02/15/2012
at 11:15 AM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com said:
I want to call IKJEFTSR ...to call a rexx clist that will perform
authorized functions , i.e.; alloc, free
Those aren't authorized functions, unless you need
In a6b9336cdb62bb46b9f8708e686a7ea00e924b3...@nrhmms8p02.uicnrh.dom,
on 02/15/2012
at 02:55 PM, McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com said:
//STC EXEC PGM=IKJEFT01,
// REGION=0M,PARM='%REXXCMD'
//SYSTSPRT DD SYSOUT=*
//SYSTSIN DD DUMMY
//SYSEXEC DD
In 9c2b672b-1bb5-4a16-a2ba-560eaf26c...@yahoo.com, on 02/15/2012
at 01:34 PM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com said:
long running STC program is linked ac(1)
It must come from an APF-authorized concatenation for that to take
effect.
Do i create an entry in ikjtso00
On 16 February 2012 13:31, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
Walt:
Are we saying Cobol cant invoke TMP ?? If so, where do i find an example
I'm not Walt, of course. But as far as I know, no one can invoke the
TMP. Well, not quite true, obviously, but no normal program, even if
APF
...@harminc.net
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 4:31 PM
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
On 16 February 2012 13:31, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
Walt:
Are we saying Cobol cant invoke TMP ?? If so, where do i find an example
I'm not Walt, of course. But as far as I
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
Tony,
I dont want to knock IBM but for us developers this is UGLY ...
Maybe the problem is they never intended for it to be called that way ...
Yes, exactly right on both counts. Don't forget that TSO is older than
On 2/16/2012 2:31 PM, Tony Harminc wrote:
On 16 February 2012 13:31, Scott Fordscott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
Walt:
Are we saying Cobol cant invoke TMP ?? If so, where do i find an example
I'm not Walt, of course. But as far as I know, no one can invoke the
TMP. Well, not quite true,
Steve:
I have tried this and it works well enough to be part of our product...
Cobol - calls 'irxjcl' - linkmvs pgmname - performs authorized functions
( in this case RACF )
Works well and is fast...I was hoping to short my development time on another
product we support..
I will probably
4:40 PM
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
Tony,
I dont want to knock IBM but for us developers this is UGLY ...
Maybe the problem is they never intended for it to be called that way ...
Yes, exactly right on both
Insurance Company.SM
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Scott Ford
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 3:34 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
Tony,
I dont want to knock IBM but for us
: Authorized functions
TSO is archaic and was, IMO, not well designed. Well, it possibly was back in
MVT days. But it has not advanced with the times along with the rest of z/OS.
And it depends on why you want to use TSO in a batch program. I would guess it
is just so that you don't have to re-invent
@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Scott Ford
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 3:54 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
Amen brother Chris, I am converted...lol...I am an ex-Vmer,
CMS was so much easier at times..
Scott J Ford
Software Engineer
http://www.identityforge.com
, 2012 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
CMS and XEDIT can easily bury TSO/ISPF. The only thing better is Linux/gvim
ducking.
--
John McKown
Systems Engineer IV
IT
Administrative Services Group
HealthMarkets®
9151 Boulevard 26 . N. Richland Hills . TX 76010
(817) 255-3225 phone
5:11 PM
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
TSO is archaic and was, IMO, not well designed. Well, it possibly was back in
MVT days. But it has not advanced with the times along with the rest of z/OS.
And it depends on why you want to use TSO in a batch program. I would guess it
is just so
] On Behalf Of Scott Ford
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 4:22 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
Sometimes I wonder if IBM took the 'blue pill or the red
pill'...from the Matrix...lol
Scott J Ford
Software Engineer
http://www.identityforge.com
: Thursday, February 16, 2012 5:23 PM
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
I never saw any of those movies, so the meaning is unknown to me.
John McKown
Systems Engineer IV
IT
Administrative Services Group
HealthMarkets®
9151 Boulevard 26 . N. Richland Hills . TX 76010
(817) 255-3225
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 10:31:50 -0800, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
Walt:
Are we saying Cobol cant invoke TMP ?? If so, where do i find an example
No, but nothing stops you from structuring your STC so it invokes the TMP, and
the TMP invokes your Cobol program. Then it can use
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 14:42:01 -0700, Steve Comstock st...@trainersfriend.com
wrote:
OK, just being a little crazy, what about EXEC PGM=MYASMPGM
which does some stuff and then does XCTL to the TMP? Would
that work?
The last time I tried it (28+ years ago before I joined IBM) it was possible to
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:40:40 -0600, Chris Craddock wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Scott Ford wrote:
I dont want to knock IBM but for us developers this is UGLY ...
Maybe the problem is they never intended for it to be called that way ...
Yes, exactly right on both counts. Don't
All,
I understand that authorized programs have been talked about before, buti don't
understand and I want to make sure I do before I start a design ..
What I want Long running STC
... Invoke a rexx clist performing alloc, calls to a program
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 13:34:01 -0500, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
All,
I understand that authorized programs have been talked about before, buti
don't understand and I want to make sure I do before I start a design ..
What I want Long running STC
...
Walt,
First , thanks for responding..
Let me explain:
The STC is in LE Cobol..4.2
I want to call IKJEFTSR ...to call a rexx clist that will perform authorized
functions , i.e.; alloc, free
The call is below:
IDENTIFICATION DIVISION
[mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Scott Ford
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 1:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
Walt,
First , thanks for responding..
Let me explain:
The STC is in LE Cobol..4.2
I want to call IKJEFTSR ...to call a rexx clist
From: McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
Is this even possible? here:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/ikj4b780
2:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
John:
So is this saying you can only do limited rexx functions from
an application program
In our case, i need to allocate a sysin and sysprint and
execute a vendor's program the output queues into sysprint.
My
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 2:55 PM, McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com
wrote:
If you really want do this this: run an APF authorized TSO command from a
COBOL program, even one which is linked AC=1. Well, you'll need to cheat
horribly. One way to cheat is to run your COBOL program under
Maybe it's just the biggot'd Assembler flake within but wouldn't this
be much simpler with the COBOL program simply calling an DYNALLOC
routine in Assembler... no authorization needed at all for this.
On 2/15/12, Chris Craddock crashlu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 2:55 PM,
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Chris Craddock
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 2:59 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 2:55 PM, McKown, John
john.mck
:: -Original Message-
:: From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On
:: Behalf Of Scott Ford
:: Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 11:16 AM
:: To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
:: Subject: Re: Authorized functions
::
:: Walt,
::
:: First , thanks for responding..
::
:: Let
Yep, a Security program like RACF ...
Scott J Ford
Software Engineer
http://www.identityforge.com
From: retired mainframer retired-mainfra...@q.com
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 4:12 PM
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 14:59:29 -0600, Chris Craddock wrote:
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 2:55 PM, McKown, John wrote:
If you really want do this this: run an APF authorized TSO command from a
COBOL program, even one which is linked AC=1. Well, you'll need to cheat
horribly. One way to cheat is to
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:09:50 -0500, Joe Aulph wrote:
Maybe it's just the biggot'd Assembler flake within but wouldn't this
be much simpler with the COBOL program simply calling an DYNALLOC
routine in Assembler... no authorization needed at all for this.
I had wondered about that, from when the
] On Behalf Of
Scott Ford
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2012 9:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Authorized functions
Walt,
First , thanks for responding..
Let me explain:
The STC is in LE Cobol..4.2
I want to call IKJEFTSR ...to call a rexx clist that will perform authorized
functions
63 matches
Mail list logo
