So it appears the app that's calling the EXEC as an exit is doing some magic
of its own, I guess, since it works without the IRXJCL hack. And I didn't
post the example because it's called as an exit and thus it didn't seem
relevant (although if I had, y'all would have surely seen the dumb error
Anyone ever gotten inline Rexx to work from JCL? I have a program that
invokes a Rexx exit, but the exit is so simple that it seems like I should
be able to just do a //SYSEXEC DD * and go from there. Alas, I get:
IRX0110I The REXX exec cannot be interpreted.
IRX0112I The REXX exec cannot be
as a test that I realized my error. (And no, Rexx doesn't have to be
PO.)
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Phil Smith III
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 1:51 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Inline Rexx in JCL?
Anyone ever
And you don't even need the leading /* REXX */ on the Rexx, which avoids
some hassles with EOD.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN
Pearce, Colin E wrote:
UserKey 9 can write into CICSKey 8? that cannot be correct as all DFH
modules would be up for overwriting. Where would integrity be?
Key 9 is the Open key, in that any transaction running in any other key can
write into Key 9, but NOT the other way round.
S0C4 will
We solved this. Our calling sequence is somewhat complex: our processing is
going to block, so we need to get off the QR. So we have a two-level call:
the user transaction calls our first-level program, which does an EXEC CICS
LINK to the second-level program, which is defined OPENAPI and
CICS uses a hardware facility called Storage Protection Override to allow
key 9 to store into key 8 (but not vice versa). This is enabled on CICS
startup via a parm in the SIT.
How can an APF-authorized program enable this same facility for itself?
Can't seem to find a macro or equivalent.
I wrote:
CICS uses a hardware facility called Storage Protection Override to allow
key 9 to store into key 8 (but not vice versa). This is enabled on CICS
startup via a parm in the SIT.
How can an APF-authorized program enable this same facility for itself?
Can't seem to find a macro or
Farley, Peter wrote, in part:
There is no version of XEDIT available in any form (or wasn't the last time
I checked, anyway). XEDIT only came with VM/SP2 and up, I believe.
VM/SP Release 1. Not that it matters, but the gods of historical correctness
must be appeased!
...phsiii
Stephen Powell wrote:
Yes, I remember that. But there was a full-screen 3270 editor similar to
XEDIT available with VM/370 release 6 called EDGAR. I think it was
an add-on product. I don't think it was part of VM/370.
Yes, Edgar was an add-on product. It was somewhat similar to XEDIT in a lot
Tom Conley wrote:
Supposably the 9-digit number out the backdoor was the safeguard against
discovering the backdoor. I'm just glad that the way he found the data was
real, and not Jacob whispering into Linus's ear. It is a cool use of
analytics, and a verification that just because I'm paranoid
Carl Edgren wrote about a certificate error on IBMLink and busted links on
IBM sites.
A colleague was once at a meeting of fairly high-level IBMers, one of whom
owned IBMLink. She asked, So, what do you think of the IBMLink interface?
and he said, It looks like each screen was designed by a
The new series Person of Interest revolves around a shadowy tech geek who
recruits an ex-CIA, ex-Army Ranger to solve crimes. See, the geek built the
machine for the US government to perform analytics against all the
surveillance data being collected. Only problem is, the machine *also* finds
So I'm confused. We don't really know what it stands for?
.phsiii
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the
DanD wrote:
I hope you weren't intentionally insulting a nation during your pissing
match.
Oh, no, my humblest apologies -- of course you might quite reasonably read
it that way. I grew up there, so was thinking of color/colour center/centre
etc., not intending to insult anyone!
...phsiii
Stephen Y Odo wrote:
I know I'm coming in kinda late to this ... my apologies ... i don't read
this list as often as I'd like ...
but ... I thought the OS was still MVS ... and z/OS was a package that
included MVS and a bunch of components (DFSMShsm, RACF, etc.) ...
Now that's an interesting
Ted MacNeil wrote:
I never said that!
Hence, nonsequitor!
Or worse: strawman.
OK, so what were you suggesting? That's how I interpreted what you said. I
asked you to elucidate; I never said that really doesn't do so. I'd really
*like* to grok what you're saying. As I noted, what I wrote was meant
Ted MacNeil wrote:
I said MVS.
You said Model-T vs Taurus as a misrepresentation of what I said: what's
the difference?
If that's not a strawman, what is it?
It's an analogy. Read up on it. Take a basic logic course.
PS: a few others have pointed out that MVS is still an essential component
of
Anyone read this? I have PC kids I work with who are likely to read it,
wonder what others thought. I read the pages Amazon would let me preview,
and it didn't seem horrible, though it loses points for being published in
2008 and calling System z zSeries. But who knows, he may have been working
on
Ted MacNeil wrote, re zSeries vs. System z:
What's wrong with that?
I still call it MVS!
Ok, but it's not MVS any more. Do you drive a Model T? Is your desktop a
486? Do you run Windows 95?
Sure, it's a nit. I freely admit that. But System z implies functionality
that zSeries does not,
Ted MacNeil wrote:
Look at a lot of the manuals from IBM!
MVS is in the title.
OK, that intrigued me, so I looked at the 1.12 z/OS library
(http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/z/os/zos/bkserv/r12pdf/).
Out of 384 books, 73 have MVS in the title. However, of those, only 11
don't *also* have z/OS --
Steve Gentry wrote:
Phil, what's your concern with it being called a zSeries?
I thought IBM labeled it as such.
The z900, z800, z990, and z890 were zSeries machines. With the advent of the
z9 in 2005, the zSeries name was retired, and the z9, z10, and zEnterprise
are System z machines instead.
The most current information that's come out of Birmingham is in this
article:
www.mainframezone.com/it-management/windows-and-other-x86-operating-systems-
on-system-z
Since then Mantissa have gone dark, not sure what's up.
--
.phsiii
Chuck Arney wrote:
It's okay Phil. You're a VM guy at heart, learning his way around on
z/OS. We understand. The problem is that most of the people on this
list have been maintaining large MVS systems for a long time, and they
believe that people asking questions here have the same experience.
I have a Started Task with the following output DDs:
//SYSOUT DD SYSOUT=*
//SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=*
//VSHDEBUG DD SYSOUT=*
The task also dynamically allocates a log file as SYS1.
When it's running, I can see the output in all four of them. When I end the
Started Task, the
Walt Farrell wrote:
Actually, the OP stated nothing about the other DDs; he addressed only
VSHDEBUG and SYS0001, so we don't know what happened (if anything) to the
others.
Logically we know they must be gone, too, and logically we know that SYS0001
was allocated with a different sysout class
I asked:
When I'm looking at a queue in SDSF, what does it mean when a job
output is highlighted? It seems almost random, but I'm sure it isn't!
Roger Bolan replied:
I see this on output queues when the job is selected for an active printer.
Is that what you mean?
And Gibney, Dave added:
When I'm looking at a queue in SDSF, what does it mean when a job output is
highlighted? It seems almost random, but I'm sure it isn't!
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to
David Boyes wrote:
Princeton is kicking alumni and retirees off their mail and www servers,
so all of Melinda Varian's classic papers and CMS Pipes stuff is moving to
a new location.
http://web.me.com/melinda.varian/
The old page at princeton.edu/~melinda http://princeton.edu/%7Emelinda
Rick Fochtman wrote:
I'll give you another oxymoron: journalistic integrity
Today, it's becoming rarer and rarer and I suspect will die out completely in
our lifetimes. :-(
Now, now. Lumping all journalists in one boat is as unfair as putting all
computers into the same category.
Some of us
Alan wrote:
Effective September 16th, after nearly 28 years in VM Development, I am
moving to a new role as a member of IBM Lab Services and Training. There
I will be part of the team that helps you, our clients, successfully bring
Linux to System z, both from a traditional consolidation
Jan MOEYERSONS wrote:
Have you measured the performance boost the OPTIMIZE compiler option
brings you? Is it still worth it trying to do better in assembler?
No such option in the compiler we're using, and the operations are large
multi-precision arithmetic. All the code we've seen generated
Steve Comstock wrote:
You don't need LE to use 64-bit integer arithmetic. Just use
standard linkage conventions between C and Assembler. You can
run in 31-bit mode and use 64-bit arithmetic no problem.
OK, but the LE conventions for saving/restoring the 64-bit registers must be
followed (it
We have a largish batch LE C application that runs in POSIX mode. For
performance optimization, we're rewriting a couple of routines in assembler. So
far so good.
Here's the kicker: the application is 31-bit, but needs to use 64-bit registers
(for large integer math). We're having a devil of a
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 11:00 PM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
That is the manual. Cool, thanks. Looks like my issue is 750
'Incorrect command received'.
Yes, it basically means a bad 3270 data stream. Get a datastream trace and take
it apart (no, that won't be fun if you haven't done it before,
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com wrote:
o May it run in an IFL?
Sure.
o How does TCO compare for equivalent performance? I recognize this
has a tangible component, hardware and software licenses, and the
intangible, administration, subject
As the author of the article, I'll note that:
- It is indeed z/VM only. z/OS was never mentioned.
- Perhaps the old z/VOS name confused folks, was read as z/OS. Not
the same.
- The name is now z86VM anyway.
John McKown wrote:
Why not just have an actual Xeon on
That is, the z/OS TCP/IP stack from CA? If so, do you use anything that relies
on IBM System SSL with it? I'm trying to verify that this works -- I can't
believe it doesn't (if it didn't, things like WebSphere would be shut out of
using TCPAccess, which I would think would have killed the
Lattice of coincidence department, occurrence #2,438,817: I just received a
copy of a VERY infrequent newsletter that talks about a new 'datacenter'
systems stack'. It includes IBM - 10 layers (all except Virtualization and
Applications).
I pointed out to the author that IBM does do
Ok, I'm confused. I posted with the Re: intact and it created a new thread in
GMail. Now I'm sending this without the Re: and we'll see where it ends up.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote:
Well, I've used both patterns and associative ranges on mainframes, and
they're conceptually very similar.
Indeed. Regular expressions are sure powerful, but the XEDIT paradigm is
different, much less
...you find yourself driving behind an Infiniti G37, and think, If they ever
do a microcar, they should call it a B37...
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
rather I loathe XEDIT's behavior of always scrolling to put the search target
I believe you mean the fact that if the search target is on the screen, the
screen still moves to make the target the current line.
A very long time ago (like, 25+ years), back at UofW, I wrote
Scott T. Harder wrote:
I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but does this mean that all someone needs
is your product and knowledge of the id used, in order to generate the
key(s) to decrypt data encrypted with that id???
I am probably missing something here, but it sounds like there is something
Phil Smith III
p...@voltage.com
Voltage Security, Inc.
www.voltage.com
(703) 476-4511 (home office)
(703) 568-6662 (cell)
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu
Hal Merritt wrote:
I am beginning to think that the silence of major players is meaningful.
I can report one horror story: pay close attention to your key manangment
process. The whole process to include entry, change, and propagation to a
recovery site. That whole sand box looks to be very
2010/3/15 Gerhard Postpischil gerh...@valley.net wrote:
I have mixed feelings about that. When maintaining software, that's great, but
as a stockholder I can't wonder how much money IBM loses due to that policy. I
expect that it sends lawyers after bigger violators, and ignores the really
tiny
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Timothy Sipples timothy.sipp...@us.ibm.com
wrote:
(Other) Steve: the smallest Multiprise 3000, model 7030-H30, was rated at
approximately 60 MIPS and 11 MSUs. It did not offer sub-capacity IBM
software licensing. GOLC was available but not zNALC nor
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:18 AM, Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca wrote:
Timothy Sipples recently posted that it was incorrect.
He is the first IBM'r to say something about these 'plans'.
Until I hear it from an official IBM source, it is a rumour.
Or a rumor, in the US :-)
Count me firmly in the
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Lindy Mayfield lindy.mayfi...@ssf.sas.com
wrote:
This has been a very interesting thread for me. If I remember correctly from
the time I saw the z/10 with plexiglass outsides and a hardware guy there to
explain what was what, and one of the things he told me
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 6:21 PM, George Henke gahe...@gmail.com wrote:
However, it still begs the question, why have LPARs at all, because
separate Security DBs *can* be configured in separate Virtual Machines
Even with VM, there are cases where the complete isolation of LPARs is useful
for
Well, we seem to have totally hijacked this thread, so I'll chime in:
UofWaterloo used Wylbur heavily for a long time. When explaining to someone how
to do something that involves using an editor to make a change, I still find
myself adding nolist occasionally, as in, OK, you need to change x
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 11:02 AM, Bruno Sugliani oldti...@wanadoo.fr wrote:
The main reason a lot of customers moved from this platform to weaker ones
is often because they did not need z/OS stability in the first place and
could save money by moving on other OS'es .
This aspect is
Answer from a knowledgeable IBMer:
The answer is yes, the z9 and z10 processors will go into low power mode
when not in use. On z9 this is on a chip basis, on z10 this is on a core basis
(so the effect is better). For z this effectively means those chips/cores
which are not characterized (i.e.
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 8:19 AM, McKown, John john.mck...@healthmarkets.com
wrote:
More likely effect: IBM discontinues the speciality engines entirely. And OEM
vendors start basing their software prices on both CP and speciality engines
in the box instead of just on the CPs. IMO, the entire
Steve Comstock wrote:
For years now I've configured my mail client to not
accept HTML emails. The common wisdom, as I percieved
it anyway, has been that HTML emails and various
kinds of attachements (esp. Word documents) were prime
paths for viruses to attack your system.
...going on at
http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=gid=2196066discussionID=6103815sik=1253410529718trk=ug_qa_qgoback=.anh_2196066.ana_2196066_1253410529718_3_1
about mainframe jobs and staffing.
...phsiii
On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Joseph H Winterton jose...@us.ibm.com wrote:
As an early day hacker in college, me and a few buddies took a card and
punched every hole out, then reproduced that card till we had a few
decks, then put one deck in the keypunch machine to reproduce, another
The following is typical output found in the SYSMSG produced by a batch job on
our z/OS 1.9 system:
-STEPNAME PROCSTEPRC EXCP CONNTCBSRB CLOCK SERV
-NNN1SW 00 2326 1195 200.44.00 .9 3094K
-NNN1HW 00 2316 1069.64.00
Thompson, Steve wrote:
The Friday Dumb Question:
Since I don't know your environment, and since other questions have been
asked here at work which ignored the obvious (everyone wants the weekend
to get started...), here is the dumb question:
How many CPUs available and how many TCBs in the
Ted MacNEIL wrote:
I have never trusted that exit/run-time report.
When I want to check out CPU times for jobs, I always go for the
appropriate SMF records (usually TYPE30 -- Job/Step Accounting:
depending on sub-type).
Do you have the appropriate tools to analyse SMF records?
Not really -- or
management by magazine.
On the other hand, blind, fan-boy mainframe idolatry is just childish: ignoring
the competition and hoping it will go away doesn't work. We tried that in the
90s, remember?
--
...phsiii
Phil Smith III
I just got a notice about IP address changes for:
download3.boulder.ibm.com Old Address: 207.25.253.76 - New IP Address:
170.225.15.76
lindsey.boulder.ibm.com Old Address: 207.25.253.70 - New IP Address:
170.225.15.70
inetsd01.boulder.ibm.com Old Address: 207.25.253.62 -
Ted MacNEIL eamacn...@yahoo.ca scrawled:
This was discussed, here, almost a month ago.
Where were you?
It's not new.
No kidding -- that's why I appended to the existing thread. But assuming that
you can read my note in between being snarky, you'll note that:
- it's not mentioning testcase
- I
Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WTF? Why couldn't they use a more modern drive with the 7-track feature?
I had that thought. My guess was that (as is always the case with stories about
which I have domain knowledge) the real story is that they couldn't find one
*in Australia*. Or
Paul Gilmartin wrote, re running Rexx programs on Windows without a leading
indicator of the language:
How does the system recognize that it's Rexx and not some other language?
Excellent question. Because (a) it has a file extension associated with
rexx.exe, or (b) because you said rexx fn.
Thomas Kern wrote, re guest migration:
I thought the early prototype of this was the Single-System-Image code
written at University of Waterloo back in the early 1980's.
Now why would you think that? Just because Romney wrote both of them... ;-)
The SSI SWITCH command was a lot of fun. It moved
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Lindy Mayfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Excellent read.
Two questions came to mind. I tried to think of another mainframe
besides IBM's. Only Sperry and Unisys came to mind. I had to look in
wikipedia to see if they still exist. I think so.
Of course, it
ZoooS Takes OpenOffice.org, Other Desktop Apps to Web
http://www.infoworld.com/article/08/09/05/ZoooS_takes_OpenOfficeorg_other_desktop_apps_to_Web_1.html
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send
Mark Post wrote, re z/VM running on IFLs:
Actually, no it wouldn't from day one. That's why VIF was initially released.
Once z/VM 4 was announced to run on IFLs, VIF was retired. Still, for
people that were intensely interested in VM and Linux at the time, yes it was
clear, especially if you
Clark Morris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Below is how Agent version 4 handled the e-mail when converting it to
text. It showed up in a similar manner only with proportional fonts
in my inbox. I am responding to the list because this may be useful
information on email in general.
If you want
Vernooy, C.P. - SPLXM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the problem is (and was then) that the folks wanting to make an
reservation switch to another airline that could sell them a ticket.
That would be the problem today; back in 1989 when SABRE (to the best of my
knowledge) was the main airline
Matthew Stitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I remember an article in Computer World around the early 1990's about
American Airlines getting wrecked by the volume initialization joke. It
was not a joke, but lack of finger checking that cause several disks of
DB2 data, etc to be initialized instead of a
Tom Marchant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Didn't I read somewhere that the P6 uses the same decimal floating point unit?
Dunno if/where you read it, but it does. The z10 and p6 share a lot of DNA
(silicon)...some (not IBM) say they share 100%.
...phsiii
Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, it's common discourtesy to cc them, unless you know that they want two
copies.
I guess this is yet another netiquette issue that has no objective answer. I
could cite multiple cases of lists I'm on where it's considered courtesy, but
you
Scott Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Phil,
I learned VM and CICS by reading IBM's source code..no issue here, made me a
Better sysprog...
Absolutely; I've made a career out of source-level CP and CMS mods and fixes.
In no way was I intending to disparage the use of source -- rather, I was
Ed Gould [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Apparently Phil has a problem with a misconfigured email client and
the reply went to him rather than the group. I have since reshipped
the reply to the group.
Ed:
Nothing misconfigured here: I explicitly CCed you, and you replied to the CC,
not to the list
Ed Gould [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can I ask an innocent(?) question here.. LINUX is it documented like
MVS or something like early 360 (YES 360) manuals ?
I do not have access to any of them to see.
Linux is Open Source, and as such is documented to whatever standard someone
felt like. This
Tom Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been running VM more off than on since PLC 5 and I'm certain that the
behavior that I
referenced WAS in VM... at some point. But if you Lynn Wheeler say it isn't
there now,
I'll believe you (unless/until I can prove you wrong, of course).
But I
Ed Finnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The best doc I saw was the 3270AT book in late 80's.
That's what I recall from my days supporting an emulator. We had one copy of
that book, kept under careful guard (not for secrecy, just to make sure it
didn't wander off into a pile in someone's office,
Matthew Stitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To me (and IBM) they are (B)usiness and (E)nterprise class machines.
Uh...ok. And the difference between a 'business' and an 'enterprise' is? I
remember when 'enterprise' was the new word for a business. That really
doesn't help.
The arcana of IBM
Ron Hawkins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've used Tom Brennan's Vista on 24K dial up from Nanning in China to our MF
in Santa Clara. It was OK as long as I didn't try and connect to e-mail at
the same time.
And more than one of us have used terminal emulation over 300baud or even
110baud lines, back in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote, re all/wombat/|/xyzzy/:
Almost correct. You have one surplus word, the and.
The All string all/wombat/|/xyzzy/ asks for wombat OR xxzzy
If you want wombat AND xxzzy, feed it all/wombat//xyzzy/.
No, all/wombat|xyzzy/ will, as Chris wrote, find all lines with wombat
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007 18:59:36 -0500, Arthur T. wrote:
Most of what I know of XEDIT is from my use of
KEDIT. Doesn't XEDIT have the MORE command?
Apologies if this has been answered 27 times already (I get the list digested):
No, MORE is not part of what's provided with XEDIT. As others have
(Cross-posted to IBM-VM and IBM-MAIN)
A buddy asked me:
At a previous employer, someone had an article, poster or something (I know -
real specific - it was 15+ years ago) that tried to put the time for computer
events into perspective. It started with the quickest instruction (RR) having a
Tony Harminc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does a copy of PL/S from IBM exist anywhere in the public domain?
Not a chance. There was a version made available to ISVs for a brief period
in the 1990s, but not before or after.
And as usual, Tony's right. The PWD program let vendors have a copy of PL/X
This was bouncing for some reason, resending for Gabe...
-Original Message-
From: Gabe Goldberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 11:28 AM
To: IBM-MAIN automatic digest system
Subject: [Fwd: IBM introduces mainframe gas gauge]
IBM introduces mainframe gas gauge
O'Brien, David W. (NIH/CIT) [C] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, Consultant which puts you in amongst those who would benefit if all
IT work were outsourced.
It may not be my business but it helps to know which side of the
economic argument you're on.
From my perspective we in the developed world are
Steve Comstock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thought about it. A few years ago I visited Hursley, England, and
spoke with the IBM'er in charge of training for Asia. He told me
that ed centers there generally charge $25 per student day and
make a profit. I can't afford to work that cheap, I'm afraid.
Minimum
Tom Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
You could also find the answers to your questions in the z/OS Principles of
Operation, Chapter 3 (Storage).
That's the z/Architecture PofOp -- z/OS is not a hardware architecture, and is
not the only System z OS, despite repeated IBMers' insistence to
...hot off the presses, no announcement even on Princeton's site yet.
...phsiii
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the
Veilleux, Jon L [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote, re RFC 2646:
Is there any chance of getting this in clear English? Easy to follow
examples, etc?
Unless you're about to implement an email client, this RFC isn't relevant to
you -- it's largely focused on formatting stuff so other mail clients can
http://searchdatacenter.techtarget.com/qna/0,289202,sid80_gci1265623,00.html?track=NL-576ad=598271asrc=EM_NLT_1860635uid=5437138
I'm just the messenger, put down the gun...
...phsiii
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff /
Bruce Hewson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To Timothy, but not just Timothy :-)
I read the digest.
And I find that in one of your posts in the digest copy it has been
reformatted.
Indeed Intel has not widely deployed SOI, though their primary objectio=
n is
cost and not value. (Patent royalties?)
Shane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As Tom said, customers generally don't like having to junk their
investments every couple of years.
I know this isn't what you meant, but nobody has noted (or I missed it!) that,
unlike X86 boxes, you actually *don't* junk your investment -- you don't have
to
Chris Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Phil Smith - who initiated, albeit unwittingly, this fresh eruption - claims
rather oddly for a denizen of IBM-MAIN - that he is not a z/OS person.
One could, if one were so inclined, venture to suggest that anyone who thinks
that IBM Mainframe implies z/OS
More from my correspondent; I'm just the messenger, don't flame me...
Re VAX vs. IBM:
I was a central, low level member of the 4300 series. I also led the
engineering side of the fight against the VAX. We never approached the
installed base of the VAX machines. Never.
Re RISC vs. 68K:
I forwarded the thread to a friend who was there at the time; here's his
response.
...phsiii
=
Cool! Thanks.
My own addition would be in the category of what might be called business
history. By the 1980s IBM was struggling in the mini and super-mini business.
IBM had 5 hardware
Chris Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I generally let the incorrect use of USS go by - *if* there's no risk of
confusion with the correct use.
snippage
This is fun, and enlightening. Ah, I looked up the pedantry thread in my
Deleted Items; I didn't read it at the time because it was talking
Clem Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pray tell, what is the real difference between the Unix Sub System or
OMVS (or whatever you want to call it!!). and VM running Z/OS (without
USS) and z/Linux?
That raises an interesting thought -- Linux for z/OS could mean a z/Linux
[yeah, yeah, I'm not an
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
