>That's not true in our case. We share the IODF between two sysplexes, it is
>cataloged in a user catalog that is connected to the master catalogs of all
>systems in both sysplexes.
For the purpose of the IPL, the IODF does not need to be cataloged at all. You
designate the IODF volume via its
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 20:54:22 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
>The examples you give are all software.
Indeed.
Let's hope people think about the included software when they're buying
hardware. History doesn't inspire confidence.
Then again, when bodies supposedly mandated to protect natio
A bit ahead of schedule, the IBM MASS and ATLAS libraries for z/OS are now
available for download as part of the XL C/C++ for z/OS update:
http://www.ibm.com/systems/z/os/zos/tools/downloads
Look for the "XL C/C++ V2R1M1 web deliverable with z13 support for z/OS 2.1
" link. The latest (as I write
In <0269152064501693.wa.ibmmaintpg.com...@listserv.ua.edu>, on
02/17/2015
at 05:52 PM, Shane Ginnane said:
>Ain't just software.
The examples you give are all software.
>compromised home routers.
The bug was in the router software, not in the router hardware.
Likewise for all the others you
In <54e3bc96.10...@comcast.net>, on 02/17/2015
at 04:11 PM, "Larry K. Slaten" said:
>Trying to figure out what utility IEHLIST, AMBLIST, or EQALMA
>etc. shows the REUSE() attribute for each member being included
>in executable.
None; the attribute is carried globally in the user data of th
In ,
on 02/17/2015
at 02:27 PM, "Staller, Allan" said:
>Each sysplex will need its own copy of the IODF for IPL purposes.
Since when? That has never been a requirement.
Of course, you don't want a long term RESERVE from another system on
the IODF volume, but that's a separate issue.
--
You made me look -
http://www.amazon.com/Minder-Wink-App-Enabled-Smart-Tray/dp/B00GN92KQ4
I can't believe it :)
But I do somewhat agree with the shipping culture. I've created some
small applications myself for various people, and if you initially ask
them "What do you want?", they can't tell
Ain't just software.
The "internet of things" is underway, and the same "ship it and be damned"
attitude prevails. Especially re (absence of) security.
The Christmas Playstation and X-Box attack was launched from compromised home
routers. Behind those same routers is now an array of {un,in}-secu
Hi,
Where can I contact You off list, I may be able to suggest a site.
-- Original Message --
From: Ze'ev Atlas <004b34e7c98a-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: need access to mainframe
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 03:29:39 +
Could anybody give
Trying to figure out what utility IEHLIST, AMBLIST, or EQALMA etc.
shows the REUSE() attribute for each member being included in
executable. I'm ending up with NOREUS,NORENT,NOREFR and I know that the
COBOL compiler is passing along RENT, some other included item is
causing the whole package
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 23:04:17 +, J O Skip Robinson
wrote:
>Ah yes, the addendum must explain it. We have never coded ALLOWCMD(Y). Is that
>the whole difference?
Yes.And while I mentioned z/OS 1.13, we skipped 1.12 due to a data center
move
and the function was added to z/OS 1.12 also.
Seems that UI24300 did not ship an updated SRC member (just the MOD member) for
IGYCDOPT, so the resolution was to specify both PTFs in the PRE of the USERMOD.
-jc-
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Chase, John
>
> Hi, All,
>
> On z/OS 1.13 I t
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Chase, John wrote:
> Sounds a lot like "Agile". :-)
>
I like how Joe Celko (SQL expert) defined "Agile Programming": "Code
first, design later!"
>
> But then Steve Jobs made a fortune building things people didn't know they
> wanted. :-)
>
> -jc-
>
> -
Sounds a lot like "Agile". :-)
But then Steve Jobs made a fortune building things people didn't know they
wanted. :-)
-jc-
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of John McKown
>
> Too good not to pass to this group.
>
> Preach it, Brother!
>
>
>
On Feb 17, 2015, at 8:12 AM, Phil Smith III wrote:
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
They say is has been accepted as a clarification. They've not
provided details in response to a followup request.)
Hey, at least you got that much—I opened a SEV2 against a math
function in C
that was returning
Too good not to pass to this group.
Preach it, Brother!
...
Quickly getting something in front of the people that will actually use it
is a great idea. It means you waste less time building something they don’t
actually want. But I look around the industry today and I get worried.
Don’t get me w
A more pointed question.. do you need to share the usercat between plexes?
REPRO/MERGECAT or one of the Catalog vendors can split the USERCAT. Seems
like you would need a pretty good reason to attempt to continue to share.
Dave's right.. there are items in your share list that are not eligible fo
Only if this volume is not under GDPS hiperswap. If it is, all reserves must be
converted.
Kees.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Doug Henry
Sent: 17 February, 2015 16:24
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Paral
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 14:26:14 +, Staller, Allan
wrote:
<- There is some User Catalogs that are being shared between the Development
and Production environment
That's not true in our case. We share the IODF between two sysplexes, it is
cataloged in a user catalog that is connected to the master catalogs of all
systems in both sysplexes. We have a couple very limited use catalogs for that
kind of system resource - SMPE zones for example. Of course, t
Each sysplex will need its own copy of the IODF for IPL purposes.
We are in the process of cleaning up all the shared User catalogs and volumes
so that no data is shared. We plan however to share the IODF among the
different SYSPLEX environments.
We will create seperate CF Development LPARs a
- There is some User Catalogs that are being shared between the Development and
Production environment
You cannot share catalogs across a sysplex boundary! This will cause bad things
to happen. BTDTGTTS!.
I presume (not using it) that ECS and RLS have the same limitation.
In general, shari
Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>They say is has been accepted as a clarification. They've not
>provided details in response to a followup request.)
Hey, at least you got that muchI opened a SEV2 against a math function in C
that was returning incorrout on true 64-bit values (i.e., values where the
t
Hi,
We are in the process of cleaning up all the shared User catalogs and volumes
so that no data is shared. We plan however to share the IODF among the
different SYSPLEX environments.
We will create seperate CF Development LPARs and share it using WEIGHTs with
the Production CF LPARs.
Regar
>>You are also going to lose the ability to share these as well:
In fact, don't try to share anything. Build a large wall between the sysplexes,
which can only be crossed by an FTP or similar application.
>Lastly, you don’t mention it, but your comments lead me to believe that you
>might be exp
>>You are also going to lose the ability to share these as well:
- ECS
- GRS
- WLM
- ZFS
- There is a number of volumes that is shared between the Development and
Production environment
>> The caveat on this is that you can't reliably share these outside of GRS.
>> Many do it to allow "sysprog
Problem has been resolved . This issue was with SYSLOGD demon . system
working fine.
Thanks for help.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Mainframe Mainframe <
mainframe1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> While IPL of z/OS 1.11 system , I am getting below issue related
> to ETCINIT.
>
> BPX
Hello,
While IPL of z/OS 1.11 system , I am getting below issue related
to ETCINIT.
BPXI027I THE ETCINIT JOB ENDED IN ERROR, EXIT STATUS 1000
BPXI004I OMVS INITIALIZATION COMPLETE
10 Timeout /usr/sbin/init timed out waiting for the shell to finish
executing the initialization scrip
Good morning,
Currently, the Production Parallel Sysplex environment consist of all the
Development and Production LPARs, which is distributed across 2 mainframes.
Each mainframe contains a Production Coupling Facility(CF) LPAR.
We will remove the Development LPARs from the Production Sysplex
29 matches
Mail list logo
