Mark Zelden wrote:
Are you confusing with 9840? 9490=3490 (36 trk); 4490=3480 (18trk).
Good description, but for the record I think you need to reach back to 4480 to
get 18 track.
4480 Cartridge Tape Subsystem
This is the StorageTek IBM 3480-compatible tape subsystem, using 18-track
format
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 15:09:25 -0600, Mike Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Zelden wrote:
Are you confusing with 9840? 9490=3490 (36 trk); 4490=3480 (18trk).
Good description, but for the record I think you need to reach back to 4480 to
get 18 track.
Typo - good catch. Also, for the
Mark Zelden wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:08:53 +0100, R.S.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
George Rodriguez wrote:
One of the problems that I have is that we have real 3490s that are not
part of the SILO. When I look at the esoterics, the SILO is configured
as DEVTYPE 9490 to make them different
PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brian Peterson
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 2:41 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: STK SILO DEVTYPE 9490
I agree with Roy Hewitt and Mark Zeldon.
Way back when, I was a user of the STK UIMs so that I could gen the
9490s
as device type 9490. But, after some z/OS
I must be missing something. You want an Esoteric called SILO to refer only
to devices 260-26F. Right?
Then, you'd do something like this:
Configuration ID . : PRODPLEXMerged Configuration
EDT.Esoteric . . . : 00.SILO VIO eligible . : No
I'm trying to do a z/OS v1.7 HCD IODF, but I'm coming back with the
following SEV E error:
CBDA268I No Control Unit Information Table found for 9490.
According to STK support there's a USERMOD that I need, but I can't seem
to explain to support that I need 4 object modules to apply the
George,
Yes you could define them as 9490, and as you have discovered you will
need to install various modules to install the HCD UIMs, as HCD does not
understand '9490'
However, there is little point in doing this as you can just as easily
define them with Control Unit 3490 and Device Type
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 12:17:39 -0500, George Rodriguez
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm trying to do a z/OS v1.7 HCD IODF, but I'm coming back with the
following SEV E error:
CBDA268I No Control Unit Information Table found for 9490.
According to STK support there's a USERMOD that I need, but I
I agree with Roy Hewitt and Mark Zeldon.
Way back when, I was a user of the STK UIMs so that I could gen the 9490s
as device type 9490. But, after some z/OS (or perhaps OS/390, it was some
time ago) change came along, and the STK UIMs didn't work correctly
anymore, I changed to using the
, 2006 2007
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brian Peterson
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 2:41 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: STK SILO DEVTYPE 9490
I agree with Roy Hewitt and Mark Zeldon.
Way back when, I was a user
@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: STK SILO DEVTYPE 9490
I agree with Roy Hewitt and Mark Zeldon.
Way back when, I was a user of the STK UIMs so that I could gen the
9490s
as device type 9490. But, after some z/OS (or perhaps OS/390, it was
some
time ago) change came along, and the STK UIMs didn't work
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 15:24:55 -0500, George Rodriguez
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem that I'm having is that we use the 9490s for the esoterics
as well. It has been this way for the longest time and I would hate to
be the one to change it and then the SILO no longer works.
You mean generic?
No problem - just define an esoteric called 9490. Here's what we've got
(ours happens to be called 949A):
Configuration ID . : PRODPLEXMerged Configuration
EDT.Esoteric . . . : 00.949A VIO eligible . : No
Palm Beach, FL. 33406-5869
Rated A by the Florida Department of Education 2005, 2006 2007
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brian Peterson
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 2:41 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: STK SILO
14 matches
Mail list logo
