December, 2006 6:40 PM
Subject: Re: S80A loading CEEMENU3
In a message dated 12/20/2006 10:03:54 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Chris may have misunderstood the purpose of Ed's post (I sure couldn't
figure it out) and taken offense where none was intended
: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, 19 December, 2006 9:32 PM
Subject: Re: S80A loading CEEMENU3
FWIW, here's a quote from the Health Checker User's Guide:
If your component or product brings the system down with it, (GRS or
RACF,
for example), you do not need to do any
: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, 19 December, 2006 7:00 PM
Subject: Re: S80A loading CEEMENU3
In a message dated 12/19/2006 10:08:52 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Appealing to the use of USS in redbooks doesn't count - although I guess
it
ought
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 15:38, Bill Klein wrote:
Like USS the letters LE are now not supposed to be used in official
IBM documents. I know that the dox people have accepted RCF's on it
whenever I still find it (where Language Environment is supposed to be
used.
Like USS, once can find
On Wed, 20 Dec 2006 11:28:26 +0100, Chris Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Ed
I cannot see what you are intending to prove here.
It seems Ed made the simple mistake of searching for Unix rather
than USS.
I took the trouble to
check your first reference and it is a large (343 items) hit list
In a message dated 12/20/2006 9:49:40 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Frankly, Chris, I find your post and your condescending attitude
to be offensive. It is highly critical and adds nothing. The
above comment is, IMHO, completely out of line. Ed was simply
And you thought this comment was called for?
Chris may have misunderstood the purpose of Ed's post (I sure couldn't
figure it out) and taken offense where none was intended, but was this
sarcasm helpful?
Greg
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Tom
In a message dated 12/20/2006 10:03:54 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Chris may have misunderstood the purpose of Ed's post (I sure couldn't
figure it out) and taken offense where none was intended, but was this
sarcasm helpful?
Seems like only a few weeks ago
Shmuel Metz , Seymour J. wrote:
In
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
on 12/12/2006
at 12:31 PM, Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Why not? IBM does.
IBM has posted, *ON THIS LIST*, that USS is *not* a correct
abbreviation for Unix System Services. Individual IBM employees may
have misused the term,
In a message dated 12/19/2006 7:59:27 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
approved as a short name for z/OS UNIX System Services. (It
wasn't because nobody tried.) Believe me, I'd love to have to do
less typing!
Yazbut the formal rules and the common usage don't
]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, 19 December, 2006 2:57 PM
Subject: Re: S80A loading CEEMENU3
Shmuel Metz , Seymour J. wrote:
In
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
isx.prod.on.blackberry,
on 12/12/2006
at 12:31 PM, Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Why not? IBM
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Yazbut the formal rules and the common usage don't bear much resemblance.
The Open Edition developers seem to have adopted USS in their tags and sigs and
appears in the title of many of their Redbooks.
PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Sent: Tuesday, 19 December, 2006 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: S80A loading CEEMENU3
In a message dated 12/19/2006 7:59:27 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
approved as a short name for z/OS UNIX System
-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: S80A loading CEEMENU3
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Yazbut the formal rules and the common usage don't bear much resemblance.
The Open Edition developers seem to have adopted USS in their tags and
sigs and
appears in the title of many of their Redbooks.
http
In a message dated 12/19/2006 10:08:52 A.M. Central Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Appealing to the use of USS in redbooks doesn't count - although I guess it
ought to. ITSO employs editors who are supposed to check that the party
line is observed. If USS is used extensively in
Like USS the letters LE are now not supposed to be used in official IBM
documents. I know that the dox people have accepted RCF's on it whenever
I still find it (where Language Environment is supposed to be used.
Like USS, once can find LE in macros and other software (and probably
Red Books)
FWIW, here's a quote from the Health Checker User's Guide:
If your component or product brings the system down with it, (GRS or RACF,
for example), you do not need to do any deletion or check clean up. However,
if your product or component does occasionally come up and down (USS, for
example)
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 14:38:02 -0600, Bill Klein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Like USS the letters LE are now not supposed to be used in official
IBM documents. I know that the dox people have accepted RCF's on it
whenever I still find it (where Language Environment is supposed to be
used.
...
At
, 2006 5:13 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: IBM and official names (was: S80A loading CEEMENU3
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 14:38:02 -0600, Bill Klein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Like USS the letters LE are now not supposed to be used in official
IBM documents. I know that the dox people have
Patrick O'Keefe wrote:
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006 14:38:02 -0600, Bill Klein [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Like USS the letters LE are now not supposed to be used in official
IBM documents. I know that the dox people have accepted RCF's on it
whenever I still find it (where Language Environment is
In
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
on 12/12/2006
at 12:31 PM, Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Why not? IBM does.
IBM has posted, *ON THIS LIST*, that USS is *not* a correct
abbreviation for Unix System Services. Individual IBM employees may
have misused the term, just as individual IBM employees may
Subject: Re: S80A loading CEEMENU3
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 12:31:31 +, Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
yes I know I shouldn't call it USS
Why not? IBM does.
There is only one (pedantic) individual that claims that.
Thank you, but I don't think I'm the only one
Because UNIX
I thought the original official acronym for UNIX System Services was OMVS.
:-)
This thread is obviously off-course, and not to negate anything Chris said,
but if you search the APAR database, you will find hundreds of hits for USS
which do not mean Unformatted System Services. So, IBM may indeed
, in the other case, TN3270E.
Chris Mason
- Original Message -
From: Greg Shirey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Sent: Friday, 15 December, 2006 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: S80A loading CEEMENU3
I thought the original official acronym for UNIX System
I'm afraid I got carried away with my
approach to pointing out the exclusivity of the VTAM USS.
IBM has re-used TLA's before:
PCB -- Programme Control Block
PCB -- Printed Circuit Board
When in doubt.
PANIC!!
--
For
We have recently upgraded from z/OS 1.4 to 1.7.
When attempting to rebuild the Book Server catalog, I get these symptoms
from the USS[1] task, so the catalog never gets fully rebuilt
IEW4000I FETCH FOR MODULE CEEMENU3 FROM DDNAME -LNKLST- FAILED BECAUSE
INSUFFICIENT STORAGE WAS AVAILABLE.
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von
Beesley, Paul
Gesendet: Dienstag, 12. Dezember 2006 13:26
An: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Betreff: S80A loading CEEMENU3
We have recently upgraded from z/OS 1.4 to 1.7.
When attempting to rebuild the Book Server catalog, I get these symptoms from
the USS[1] task
: S80A loading CEEMENU3
We have recently upgraded from z/OS 1.4 to 1.7.
When attempting to rebuild the Book Server catalog, I get these symptoms
from the USS[1] task, so the catalog never gets fully rebuilt
IEW4000I FETCH FOR MODULE CEEMENU3 FROM DDNAME -LNKLST- FAILED BECAUSE
INSUFFICIENT STORAGE
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 12:31:31 +, Ted MacNEIL [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
yes I know I shouldn't call it USS
Why not? IBM does.
There is only one (pedantic) individual that claims that.
Thank you, but I don't think I'm the only one
Because UNIX is a trade-mark, IBM came up with UNIX
and the process now works ok
Regards
Paul
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Volkmar Langer
Sent: 12 December 2006 12:32
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: AW: S80A loading CEEMENU3
Hi Paul,
I'm not really shure, but there are two
By the way - If you are not comfortable with giving EVERY user that much
storage, you can have the MAXASSSIZE set for individual userids via RACF
or TOP SECRET.
Jon L. Veilleux
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(860) 636-2683
-
This e-mail may contain confidential or
Because UNIX is a trade-mark, IBM came up with UNIX System Services (USS)
for short.
An interesting hypothesis
Before, during, and after my tenure at IBM, that's what I was told by IBM
support teams.
When in doubt.
PANIC!!
:[SPAM] RE: S80A loading CEEMENU3
Have you checked your MAXASSSIZE setting in BPXPRMxx?
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Sam,
From the z/OS V1R6.0 MVS Initialization and Tuning Reference:
Note: The IEFUSI user exit can modify the region size of an address
space. Users are strongly discouraged from altering the region size of
address spaces in the OMVS subsystem category.
Per your clip, IEFUSI should be bypassed
On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 10:07:17 -0600, Sam Bass [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you have an IEFUSI exit that checks for REGION=0M, and then changes that
to a limit, then MAXASSIZE will be set to that hard limit.
From the z/OS V1R6.0 MVS Initialization and Tuning Reference:
Note: The IEFUSI user exit
35 matches
Mail list logo
