Hi, All,
One newly-available PTF for LE, UI18450, fixes APAR PM99349, but a search for
PM99349 on IBMLink fails with a not found error. Am I to ass.u.me that
it's a security / integrity APAR and just apply the PTF?
TIA,
-jc-
Yes it is a security/integrity APAR. If you subscribe to the Security Portal
you can review it.
Description: This issue may pertain to users of Language Environment for z/OS
with FMID HLE7770, HLE7780 and HLE7790.
Dennis
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Dennis Trojak
Yes it is a security/integrity APAR. If you subscribe to the Security Portal
you can review it.
Description: This issue may pertain to users of Language Environment for z/OS
with FMID HLE7770,
Perhaps the first one needs to be formatted;
//FORMATEXEC PGM=IFASMFDP
//SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=*
//DDIN DD DSN=SYS1.MAN1,DISP=SHR
//SYSINDD *
INDD(DDIN,OPTIONS(CLEAR))
Thanks,
Tim Deller
In
8e4663db4b0d43518fbb6345aa417...@dm2pr08mb720.namprd08.prod.outlook.com,
on 07/30/2014
at 09:44 PM, John Norgauer jcnorga...@ucdavis.edu said:
But when I get data with no line numbers, my commands are not
working.
What gives you that idea? Read the manual more carefully.
,EDIT,
f STC
In bay169-w48af89a0b757bae9eec2dea3...@phx.gbl, on 07/30/2014
at 06:40 PM, J R jayare...@hotmail.com said:
Read all about EDIT here:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/ikj2l200.pdf
That's missing an explanation of the current line pointer, although
the explanation of FIND has enough
In
cafo-8tqmacfzyybbspfp6sic9ug3hs+awhh4w3qbagfejtq...@mail.gmail.com,
on 07/30/2014
at 07:00 PM, zMan zedgarhoo...@gmail.com said:
1) the OP's difficulty with the website is Bad and could be fixed
relatively easily
Certainly it's bad, but you can't do only one thing and I'm not
convinced
In 76a0e.704d9458.410ad...@aol.com, on 07/30/2014
at 06:57 PM, Ed Finnell
000248cce9f3-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu said:
Some still use IEBUPTDT for change control.
I doubt that, although some may still use IEBUPDTE or even IEBUPDAT.
Me, I prefer IEBUPDTX.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.)
In 6487334105557425.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu, on
07/30/2014
at 06:40 PM, Paul Gilmartin
000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu said:
That is one of the dumbest, most hostile behaviors I have ever seen
in an editor (but TSO edit isn't unique here). If I do a find and
get
In 0e4601cfacb3$1eb278d0$5c176a70$@mcn.org, on 07/31/2014
at 07:32 AM, Charles Mills charl...@mcn.org said:
I think the attacks are a good illustration of the it's OUR club --
you stay out of it attitude.
Nonsense. I can't think of a single poster here who wants small
companies or
Tim Deller wrote:
Perhaps the first one needs to be formatted;
//FORMATEXEC PGM=IFASMFDP
//SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=*
//DDIN DD DSN=SYS1.MAN1,DISP=SHR
//SYSINDD *
INDD(DDIN,OPTIONS(CLEAR))
Good suggestion. That above
Check the CI sizes
Shane ...
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
The way I understand the documentation coding a LIBRARIES(...) MEMBERS(
will automatically make the member from the that library LLA managed
I start S LLA,SUB=MSTR,LLA=01 where the lla parmlib member is CSVLLA01 I am
also assuming that the library has to be somewhere in the search order
(Resending to the list server, as I responded via NNTP accidentally.
Sorry for the double post!)
All information about security and integrity problems is available only
to customers who agree to keep it confidential, and available only
through the security portal. We'd love to have you sign
MichealButz wrote:
The way I understand the documentation coding a LIBRARIES(...) MEMBERS( will
automatically make the member from the that library LLA managed
I start S LLA,SUB=MSTR,LLA=01 where the lla parmlib member is CSVLLA01 I am
also assuming that the library has to be somewhere in the
Now who's confused? Where did Charles even suggest that anyone here wanted
small companies or unaffiliated students to stay out? He asked whether the
company orientation was off-putting. And got attacked for it.
Hint: If there's a perceived problem, there's a problem. Charles and I
aren't the
Avoid the need for an interpreter:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=1538572616366298fref=nf
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO
Anybody else having long delay times on SMP/E RECEIVE ORDER? I have a job for
one PTF that's been waiting 30 minutes so far:
GIM693ISMP/E HAS BEEN WAITING 15 MINUTES FOR ORDER ORDn. SMP/E WILL
WAIT A MAXIMUM OF 120 MINUTES.
GIM693ISMP/E HAS BEEN WAITING 30 MINUTES FOR ORDER
John,
I have had three orders today, the last at 10:25am. No GIM693I issues.
Bob
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Chase, John
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2014 12:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: RECEIVE ORDER
Does the dataset have to be in the linklst for LLA to manage it ?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Elardus Engelbrecht
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2014 11:11 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: LLA question
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Richards, Robert B.
John,
I have had three orders today, the last at 10:25am. No GIM693I issues.
Likewise, an earlier order took all of three minutes. Current job just posted
the 75-minute wait message.
-jc-
I am running a holddata receive - I have gotten GIM693I at the 15 and 30 minute
marks - so yes - the OP is not the only one
Chris hoelscher
Technology Architect | Database Infrastructure Services
Technology Solution Services
123 East Main Street |Louisville, KY 40202
choelsc...@humana.com
On Thu, 31 Jul 2014 18:56:09 -0400, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
on 07/30/2014 at 06:40 PM, Paul Gilmartin said:
That is one of the dumbest, most hostile behaviors I have ever seen
in an editor (but TSO edit isn't unique here). If I do a find and
get no hits (very possibly because I
I'm the OP, and that RECEIVE ORDER job timed out at 120 minutes. I
resubmitted, and the new job just wrote the 60-minute wait message.
-jc-
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Chris Hoelscher
Sent: Friday,
I have been having the issue with GIM6931I and timeouts intermittently for the
past couple weeks. I have a daily scheduled job that receives holddata and
critical PTFs with steps for z/OS, CICS, IMS, etc. Usually most of the steps
work with only one that times out, and not the same step every
HI,
I was under the assumption that the following would enable CSVLLIIX1 for a
module
1) Defining the library and module in CSVLLA01
2) Starting LLA with the following syntax S LLA,SUB=MSTR,LLA=01
3) Defining with the exit with the following in my program
We dump and clear, so we wouldn't hit condition of residual data in production.
I am going to fix our testplex, to avoid this condition.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 1, 2014, at 9:54 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht
elardus.engelbre...@sita.co.za wrote:
Tim Deller wrote:
Perhaps the first one
Yep. Got bite by this
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:22 AM, Shane Ginnane ibm-m...@tpg.com.au wrote:
Check the CI sizes
Shane ...
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send
No.
The default with no CSVLLAxx member is to manage only the LNKLST
libraries. A CSVLLAxx member is required if you wish to also manage any
cataloged libraries that are not in LNKLST.
Any non-LNKLST specified libraries are dynamically allocated. If some
job step has one of those
29 matches
Mail list logo
