gerh...@valley.net (Gerhard Postpischil) writes:
It simulates anything from a S/370 to a modern machine. However,
modern software requires a license and the chance of getting that are
essentially nil (unless you're working for IBM?). The web has various
sites that provide downloads for legal
On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 22:20:13 -0500, Rich Smrcina rsmrc...@wi.rr.com wrote:
z/VM has a component called Open Extensions. If it were allowed to grow
up it could have become a very cool Unix-like subsystem for z/VM.
Development pretty much stagnated when Linux became available.
OpenExtensions (tm)
Yes, UTS is still marketed. Here you go:
http://www.utsglobal.com/Main_SS.html
OpenSolaris is a bit complicated. Solaris is UNIX(TM). OpenSolaris is the
open source version of Solaris, but I don't think Sun has submitted
OpenSolaris (per se) for UNIX certification. Wikipedia sort of punts and
In of8c44d58d.a73e85ef-on49257608.001a4f5a-49257608.001b5...@us.ibm.com,
on 08/04/2009
at 01:58 PM, Timothy Sipples timothy.sipp...@us.ibm.com said:
Moreover, for the record, there are 3 UNIXes currently available for
System z machines: z/OS, UTS, and OpenSolaris for System z..
Doesn't z/VM
In 4a77ff7d.1010...@bremultibank.com.pl, on 08/04/2009
at 11:29 AM, R.S. r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl said:
1. What about Linux? Doesn't it belong to unix family?
Neither *bsd nor Linux are Unix, although they are Unix-like.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO
In 053f2631ec9c584883847c8b4970a228048a9...@josqems1.jsq.bsg.ad.adp.com,
on 08/03/2009
at 03:20 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 peter.far...@broadridge.com said:
First my condolences about being on the beach. Second, in addition to
the other responses you have gotten, I thought I would emphasize
Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
Doesn't z/VM include a Unix subsystem?
z/VM has a component called Open Extensions. If it were allowed to grow
up it could have become a very cool Unix-like subsystem for z/VM.
Development pretty much stagnated when Linux became available. It is
Timothy Sipples pisze:
[...]
Moreover, for the record, there are 3 UNIXes currently available for System
z machines: z/OS, UTS, and OpenSolaris for System z..
1. What about Linux? Doesn't it belong to unix family?
2. AFAIK UTS is no longer on the market. So, you can omit UTS as you did
with
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Timothy Sipples
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 11:59 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Hercules; more information requested.
snip
Moreover, for the record, there are 3
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of R.S.
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 4:30 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Hercules; more information requested.
Timothy Sipples pisze:
[...]
Moreover, for the record
McKown, John pisze:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of R.S.
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 4:30 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Hercules; more information requested.
Timothy Sipples pisze:
[...]
Moreover
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net (Shmuel Metz , Seymour J.) writes:
Except for TSO. Also, SVS dropped some features of OS/360 MVT, e.g., GJP,
RJE, and reimplimented others, e.g., loading transient SVC routines.
at various times, there were various degrees about killing off both
cp67 and vm370
On 8/4/2009 at 9:36 AM, R.S. r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl wrote:
McKown, John pisze:
-snip-
z/OS is not branded.
If z/OS UNIX System Services wasn't certified, IBM would not be allowed to use
UNIX in the name. That's the reason why MVS/OE was called that to begin
with. The name was
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Post
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:10 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Hercules; more information requested.
On 8/4/2009 at 9:36 AM, R.S.
r.skoru
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:09:35 -0600, Mark Post wrote:
On 8/4/2009 at 9:36 AM, R.S. wrote:
z/OS is not branded.
If z/OS UNIX System Services wasn't certified, IBM would not be
allowed to use UNIX in the name. That's the reason why MVS/OE
was called that to begin with. The name was changed
Many people date UNIX's origins to Multics. Development of both Multics
and MVT started in 1964, so they are contemporaries of one another by that
reasonable measure.
But... does anybody really care? Seriously? :-)
- - - - -
Timothy Sipples
IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect
Based in
Binyamin Dissen pisze:
Are there problems with bar constraints for - code? 1GB+ modules?
Just curious.
Today ? No.
However think about i.e. CICS address space with MANY modules, tomorrow.
BTW: I don't know IMS, however I heard IMS loves CSA. A lot of CSA.
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland
BTW: I don't know IMS, however I heard IMS loves CSA. A lot of CSA.
ECSA since V3.
And, only if you are using Fast Path.
-
Too busy driving to stop for gas!
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Gerhard Postpischil
Howard Rifkind wrote:
[ snip ]
Being that I’m still on the beach I’d like to know where I
can find out more about Hercules and install it on my home
PC.
Try www.hercules-390.org, also
Chase, John wrote:
OTOH, the older software arguably has the best documentation there is --
source code!
It's mixed blessing. We are missing source for some components,
other components are at the 3.7 level, with no PTF source, and
most of it is horrible PL/S output, with little internal
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 1:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Hercules; more information requested.
On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 13:33:55 -0400, Gerhard
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Timothy Sipples
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 2:58 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Hercules; more information requested.
Many people date UNIX's origins to Multics
timothy.sipp...@us.ibm.com (Timothy Sipples) writes:
Many people date UNIX's origins to Multics. Development of both Multics
and MVT started in 1964, so they are contemporaries of one another by that
reasonable measure.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009k.html#52 Hercules; more information
l...@garlic.com (Anne Lynn Wheeler) writes:
a couple recent posts in a.f.c. ng ... in a fairly active thread
(thread even includes post by one of the people that originated
unix)
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009k.html#52 Hercules; more information requested.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn
On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 00:20:21 +0300, Binyamin Dissen wrote:
IBM should have no problem moving disabled routines (or those that do not
references pageable storage) above the bar.
True, but how many are there and how big are they? Disabled routines tend
to be small. So, while the effort to move
://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009k.html#52 Hercules; more information requested
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009k.html#55 Hercules; more information requested
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009k.html#56 Hercules; more information requested
i periodically comment that UNIX and CP67 have common heritage back to
CTSS
Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Tom Marchant
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 9:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Hercules; more information requested.
On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 00:20:21 +0300, Binyamin Dissen wrote:
IBM should have no problem moving disabled routines
-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
McKown, John
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 8:08 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Hercules; more information requested.
Of course, I'm being the pendant again. And just to let people know, I really
__LIKE__ Linux
: +1.508.341.1715
Email: bi...@mainstar.com
Web: www.rocketsoftware.com
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Tom Marchant
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 9:15 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Hercules; more information requested
---snip--
No, but it's hard to call z/OS modern while it's hobbling along
with the equivalent of the model T engine. Too much legacy baggage.
Retain RM=31 and RM=24 for code requiring it, but also provide
RM=64 for newer code. I believe
On Mon, 3 Aug 2009 10:43:29 -0500, Rick Fochtman rfocht...@ync.net wrote:
... One way to greatly relieve
it would be to allow (part of) LPA and JPA to reside above-the-bar.
That may happen yet, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it. There
would have to be major modifications the most
I hope you received enough decent information before your thread got
hijacked without even the courtesy of a subject change.
-Original Message-
From: Howard Rifkind
Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 6:47 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Hercules; more information requested.
Greetings
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Howard Rifkind
Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 9:47 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Hercules; more information requested.
Greetings all,
Please forgive the cross post
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Bill Fairchildbi...@mainstar.com wrote:
Not trying to be pendantic, but I think the word is pedant. :-)
True, but pe(n)dants are used to being hung...
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff /
John McKown writes:
Obviously z/OS is more advanced than UNIX. Why? Because z/OS
contains UNIX (and is so branded, officially, by X/Open). So,
if one thing contains another thing as a proper subset, then,
the supersetting thing must be superior to the thing which it
is a superset. Right? grin.
On Monday 03 August 2009, P S wrote:
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Bill Fairchildbi...@mainstar.com
wrote:
Not trying to be pendantic, but I think the word is pedant. :-)
True, but pe(n)dants are used to being hung...
[ groan! ]
--
Bob Woodside
Woodsway Consulting, Inc.
In 4a74725a.3010...@valley.net, on 08/01/2009
at 12:50 PM, Gerhard Postpischil gerh...@valley.net said:
Not being a *nix user, I don't consider it modern software.
If you define modernity in terms of the prototype release, then *ix is
more modern than z/OS. If you define it by the current
In m3ocqzqm2u@garlic.com, on 08/01/2009
at 05:08 PM, Anne Lynn Wheeler l...@garlic.com said:
1) initial transition from mvt to svs wasn't bad because basically it
attempted to simulate a 16mbyte real machine (with single 16mbyte virtual
address sapce.
Except for TSO. Also, SVS dropped
Greetings all,
Please forgive the cross post with the z/VM list.
I’ve just read through the posts on Hercules (z/VM list).
I’ve heard about it but don’t know much about this software.
Does it run on a PC in Windows, Linux…what?
Is Hercules a shell for z/VM and/or z/OS and if so where does one
Howard Rifkind wrote:
I’ve just read through the posts on Hercules (z/VM list).
I’ve heard about it but don’t know much about this software.
Does it run on a PC in Windows, Linux…what?
Yes.
Is Hercules a shell for z/VM and/or z/OS and if so where does
one get legal copies of both?
It
On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 10:32:50 -0400, Gerhard Postpischil wrote:
It simulates anything from a S/370 to a modern machine. However,
modern software requires a license and the chance of getting
Except Linux for z/Series.
that are essentially nil (unless you're working for IBM?). The
web has various
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
modern software requires a license and the chance of getting
Except Linux for z/Series.
Not being a *nix user, I don't consider it modern software.
Usable on modern machines, but . g
I understand work is under way to provide 31-bit support in MVS 3.8.
The
On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 12:50:34 -0400, Gerhard Postpischil wrote:
Except Linux for z/Series.
Not being a *nix user, I don't consider it modern software.
Usable on modern machines, but . g
What criteria? Linux for z/Series has full 64-bit support;
z/OS hasn't.
-- gil
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
What criteria? Linux for z/Series has full 64-bit support;
z/OS hasn't.
And putting a jet engine in your model T makes it a modern car? g
Gerhard Postpischil
Bradford, VT
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe /
On 8/1/2009 at 1:33 PM, Gerhard Postpischil gerh...@valley.net wrote:
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
What criteria? Linux for z/Series has full 64-bit support;
z/OS hasn't.
And putting a jet engine in your model T makes it a modern car? g
I would say so, yes. Back to reality, as opposed to very
On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 13:33:55 -0400, Gerhard Postpischil wrote:
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
What criteria? Linux for z/Series has full 64-bit support;
z/OS hasn't.
And putting a jet engine in your model T makes it a modern car? g
No, but it's hard to call z/OS modern while it's hobbling along
with
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
... I believe users are already feeling the
below-the-bar storage constraint. One way to greatly relieve
it would be to allow (part of) LPA and JPA to reside above-the-bar.
I wonder if IBM has thought of that?
--
Edward E Jaffe
Phoenix Software International, Inc
paulgboul...@aim.com (Paul Gilmartin) writes:
No, but it's hard to call z/OS modern while it's hobbling along
with the equivalent of the model T engine. Too much legacy baggage.
Retain RM=31 and RM=24 for code requiring it, but also provide
RM=64 for newer code. I believe users are already
On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 13:31:55 -0500 Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote:
:On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 13:33:55 -0400, Gerhard Postpischil wrote:
:Paul Gilmartin wrote:
: What criteria? Linux for z/Series has full 64-bit support;
: z/OS hasn't.
:And putting a jet engine in your model T makes it a
49 matches
Mail list logo
