On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 22:30:45 -0500 Bill Klein wmkl...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
:I would check with any vendor as to whether this is still true (that they
:can't handle LE dumps). Current software should work with LE and should not
:need non-normal dumps. If your vendor requires something else, then
Does LE dump all user storage, or does it try to be 'intelligent' and only
dump storage that it determines should be in use?
My guess is that it tries to be intelligent and only dump what belongs to the
abending LE enclave (usually the abending tcb). Don't know about storage in
different keys.
In this day and age, vendors who don't understand LE are (thankfully) few
and far between. I won't say they don't exist, but I think they are the
exception and not the rule. For those who are have a problem with LE, I
suggest that you consider this in your next contract renewal with that
vendor.
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 06:31:56 + Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca wrote:
:In this day and age, vendors who don't understand LE are (thankfully) few
:and far between. I won't say they don't exist, but I think they are the
:exception and not the rule. For those who are have a problem with LE, I
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Bill Klein
Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2009 10:31 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Fw: Language Environment runtime options and system dumps
I would check with any vendor as to whether
I would check with any vendor as to whether this is still true (that they
can't handle LE dumps). Current software should work with LE and should not
need non-normal dumps. If your vendor requires something else, then ask
THEM what LE options they expect to be in effect when the dump in THEIR
This is from the LE Debugging Guide, which seems pretty clear to me -
*TRAP(ON,NOSPIE)* *TERMTHDACT(UAIMM)* TRAP(ON,NOSPIE) TERMTHDACT(UAIMM)
generates a system dump of the user address space of the original abend or
program interrupt prior to the Language Environment condition manager
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Bill Klein wmkl...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Jim,
Has anyone asked (yet) WHY you want this? I know that in IBM-MAIN,
historically people (often systems programmers) don't like debugging
tools that get in the way of original dump information. However,
depending
I apologize for not keeping up with this thread. If the intent is to use
IPCS to debug an LE SVC Dump, then you need to use VERBX LEDATA and get hold
of the DSA and one other control block.
The LE DSA will point you to the regs at time of abend. I think you always
get the U40xx abend out of LE.
Jim McAlpine wrote:
This is from the LE Debugging Guide, which seems pretty clear to me -
*TRAP(ON,NOSPIE)* *TERMTHDACT(UAIMM)* TRAP(ON,NOSPIE) TERMTHDACT(UAIMM)
generates a system dump of the user address space of the original abend or
program interrupt prior to the Language Environment
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Steve Comstock st...@trainersfriend.comwrote:
Jim McAlpine wrote:
This is from the LE Debugging Guide, which seems pretty clear to me -
*TRAP(ON,NOSPIE)* *TERMTHDACT(UAIMM)* TRAP(ON,NOSPIE) TERMTHDACT(UAIMM)
generates a system dump of the user address
My 2 cent:
Short recap of RTM and E/SPIE:
LE works best with TRAP(ON,SPIE). That means it is allowed to set an E/SPIE
routine that masks program checks.
An LE-enabled program suffers a PICx that is covered by an E/SPIE. Program
check (I believe) FLIH checks for an ESPIE to be set for that
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 08:25:34 +0200 Barbara Nitz nitz-...@gmx.net wrote:
:Short recap of RTM and E/SPIE:
:LE works best with TRAP(ON,SPIE). That means it is allowed to set an E/SPIE
routine that masks program checks.
:An LE-enabled program suffers a PICx that is covered by an E/SPIE. Program
I thought I have been able to use SLIP to trap an abend before LE messed with
it.
Is it true that ESPIE will block a SLIP C=0Cx?
As far as I know, it depends on which x's the ESPIE has masked. The
interruptions parm on the ESPIE set lets you specify all or selected x's. And
then it depends on
Bill Klein says:
sometimes, using the user friendly debugging tools
at hand can make the need for a system dump of the original abend
unnecessary.
Tell that to vendor support teams. . .
Cheers,,,Steve
Steve Conway
Lead Systems Programmer
Information Systems Services Division
Computer Network
On Mon, Jun 15th, 2009 at 6:51 PM, Barbara Nitz wrote:
But if I'm wrong, someone will chime in.
Sounds like a challenge - anyone want to step up to the plate ?.
I tried debating dumps with Barb once ...
Shane ...
--
For
On 14 Jun 2009 23:28:18 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
My 2 cent:
Short recap of RTM and E/SPIE:
LE works best with TRAP(ON,SPIE). That means it is allowed to set an E/SPIE
routine that masks program checks.
An LE-enabled program suffers a PICx that is covered by an E/SPIE.
On 13 Jun 2009 12:43:43 -0700, wmkl...@ix.netcom.com (Bill Klein)
wrote:
For COBOL only applications, for example, using SSRANGE (compile and
run-time) often finds the cause of S0C4 ABENDs and does so in a manner that
the application programmer can find the cause quickly and easily. Of
course,
Clark Morris pisze:
[...]
Virtually all LE dumps are User 4039 and in the descriptive
information in the dump up where they give the registers, they show
the original abend code. It's a long time since I had to use the LE
dump but I remember that and that I got the COBOL file areas nicely.
On 13 Jun 2009 09:52:54 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
Clark Morris pisze:
[...]
Virtually all LE dumps are User 4039 and in the descriptive
information in the dump up where they give the registers, they show
the original abend code. It's a long time since I had to use the LE
Jim,
Has anyone asked (yet) WHY you want this? I know that in IBM-MAIN,
historically people (often systems programmers) don't like debugging
tools that get in the way of original dump information. However,
depending on what is causing the S0C4, it is possible that more - not less -
LE
On Sat, 13 Jun 2009 15:52:16 -0300 Clark Morris cfmpub...@ns.sympatico.ca
wrote:
:On 13 Jun 2009 09:52:54 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
:Clark Morris pisze:
:[...]
: Virtually all LE dumps are User 4039 and in the descriptive
: information in the dump up where they give the
Is there any combination of LE runtime options that will give a system dump
of the original abend and an LE message.
Jim McAlpine
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to
Jim McAlpine wrote:
Is there any combination of LE runtime options that will give a system dump
of the original abend and an LE message.
Jim McAlpine
From our course Using LE Services in z/OS:
runtime parameter TER (which is short for TERMTHDACT)
takes one of these options:
TRACE — message
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Steve Comstock st...@trainersfriend.comwrote:
From our course Using LE Services in z/OS:
runtime parameter TER (which is short for TERMTHDACT)
takes one of these options:
TRACE — message to SYSOUT; abbreviated CEEDUMP
QUIET — no messages; no dumps
MSG
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Jim McAlpine jim.mcalp...@gmail.comwrote:
I've tried the UA* options you mention above but the dump gets taked after
LE condition handling which means you get a U4039 abend which isn't much
use. Gonna try with UAIMM but that doesn't get you the LE message
IBM has a Share presentation called 'Diagnosing Application problems Under
Language Environment' that has what you need.
This is an old version available on IBM's website
http://tinyurl.com/n4f38t
If you have access to the Share handouts a newer one is available here
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 3:53 PM, David Waldman david.p.wald...@lmco.comwrote:
IBM has a Share presentation called 'Diagnosing Application problems Under
Language Environment' that has what you need.
This is an old version available on IBM's website
http://tinyurl.com/n4f38t
If you have
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On
Behalf Of Jim McAlpine
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 10:05 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: Language Environment runtime options and system dumps
SNIPPAGE
Interesting, but it doesn't really help
Have you considered setting up a SLIP TRAP ?
Gain financial freedom! Click here for Financial Advice.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/BLSrjpTIlfhJh7Bc22IIw9mvkscA792rk8ozKjdRNafi9SUOGqcUCof0dby/
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 4:17 PM, esst...@juno.com esst...@juno.com wrote:
Have you considered setting up a SLIP TRAP ?
It looks like I'm gonna have to. However I still don't understand why I'm
getting a U4039 abend when the manual
Jim McAlpine wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 4:17 PM, esst...@juno.com esst...@juno.com wrote:
Have you considered setting up a SLIP TRAP ?
It looks like I'm gonna have to. However I still don't understand why I'm
getting a U4039
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Steve Comstock st...@trainersfriend.comwrote:
Hmmm. Do you have a SYSUDUMP, SYSMDUMP or (God forbid) SYSABEND
DD statements in the job step? Do you have some dump-intercepting
program in place (AbendAid, DumpMaster, etc.)? I always turn all
those off for our
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Steve Comstock
Jim McAlpine wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 4:17 PM, esst...@juno.com esst...@juno.com
wrote:
Have you considered setting up a SLIP TRAP ?
On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 15:23:39 +0100, Jim McAlpine jim.mcalp...@gmail.com
wrote:
Is there any combination of LE runtime options that will give a system dump
of the original abend and an LE message.
Jim McAlpine
--
For IBM-MAIN
Ramiro Camposagrado wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 15:23:39 +0100, Jim McAlpine jim.mcalp...@gmail.com
wrote:
Is there any combination of LE runtime options that will give a system dump
of the original abend and an LE message.
Jim McAlpine
Using TRAP(OFF,NOSPIE) should give you the
Also, if you use any variation of TRAP(OFF), don't expect COBOL programs to
always confirm to the documented behavior - when unusual things happen.
Don Poitras sas...@sas.com wrote in message
news:4a32a3dd.5...@sas.com...
Ramiro Camposagrado wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 15:23:39 +0100, Jim
On 12 Jun 2009 08:07:50 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 3:53 PM, David Waldman david.p.wald...@lmco.comwrote:
IBM has a Share presentation called 'Diagnosing Application problems Under
Language Environment' that has what you need.
This is an old version
38 matches
Mail list logo
