OA39422: NEW FUNCTION - TLS V1.2 SUPPORT
in case anyone else is interested.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Brian France
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2014 1:26 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Does
Thanks, I got it..
Jose
On Nov 19, 2014, at 2:42 PM, George Young gmyo...@windstream.net wrote:
On 11/19/2014 2:21 AM, Jose Munoz wrote:
Dear all,
Who can send me electronic copy for 5785-BAZ JES/328X Print Facility
Program Description and Operators Manual , SH20-7174. I cannot find
When did it last exist? I have V1R10 docs here and I don't see it.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Peter Hunkeler
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2014 11:13 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Why is the System
We occasionally see this message:
IKJ56644I NO VALID TSO USERID, DEFAULT USER ATTRIBUTES USED
I cannot find a current instance of this message in my system, but basically it
means that the purported SAF userid is not defined to TSO--I guess either
installed security product or UADS. The
When did it last exist? I have V1R10 docs here and I don't see it.
I found one in the z/OS V1.1 bookshelf
--
Peter Hunkeler
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to
Until today, PL/1 does not support 64 bit (addressing mode), so this
discussion comes too early.
As already mentioned, the types that have explicit bit numbers like BIN
FIXED (15),
BIN FIXED (31) or BIN FIXED (63) - which exists already - and the
UNSIGNED variants,
as - for example - BIN FIXED
Gil mentioned the DATA SET SUMMARY section.
I presume his use involved the file system. For a data set, the lines in
that section would not come close to reaching column 84.
For example,
DDNAMECONCAT FILE IDENTIFICATION
LPALIB 01 SYS1.LPALIB
SYSOBJS 02 TESTUSER.OBJS
In
caajsdjifcetyukih8nywc22e9r5epqlvwdy1tm3uaiujsmk...@mail.gmail.com,
on 11/21/2014
at 02:37 PM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com said:
I think gil has more of a UNIX background. When you are used to
truly long lines, the z/OS use of 121 or 132 byte print lines can
be a real PITA.
So it WASN'T done just to annoy Gil? Darn!
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Peter Relson
Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 4:44 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Binder SYSPRINT wrap?
Gil mentioned
