Re: Tabulating Machines (was "... z114")

An IBM 407 control board was the largest of that on any of the plug board machines I ever used, probably at least 24" x 24" (columns numbered 1 -80 and rows numbered A - BL).   A Google search for "407 plug board" will find several pictures (but not all for 407s).  One picture shows that the

Re: Pricing for a single-user copy of PCOMM?

Thanks Mike, but BTDT. I've been a Vista TN3270+ user for quite a while, as Tom B. can testify. My goal here is to explore the IBM offering as an educational experience. Tom's Vista TN3270+ Just Works (tm) as many of us already know. Peter -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe

Re: my new z114

Tom Brennan wrote: >z114 2818-M05-A01 485F7 >26 MIPS, 3 MSU >40 GB >18 ports FICON 8S SX >8 ports OSA 3-2P 1000BASE-T >STP >CPACF >1 HMC Tower >2 Power cables - 14ft 200V 30A 3Ph Line Just to highlight a few things in this list, assuming it checks out: 1. 40GB of memory is quite good! The z114

Re: my new z114

Maybe Sparkler filters has their 402 manual? http://ibm-1401.info/402.html On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 7:22 PM Seymour J Metz wrote: > > ObTeratology There were 1-digit adders that you cascaded with board wiring. > The 407 was not Turing complete, but it did have (very) limited conditional >

Re: Pricing for a single-user copy of PCOMM?

Tom Brennans Vista is highly recommended. On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 5:03 PM Farley, Peter x23353 <031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > I've been roaming around the IBM websites looking for a published price for a > single-user copy of IBM Personal Communications, but I have

Re: Tabulating Machines (was "... z114")

> the 407 used relays Could be. I never really worked on a tab machine. I used them to "80-80" duplicate a card deck, or to print or interpret a card deck. Shops had boards lying around permanently wired for those tasks. "Interpreting" cards consisted of printing across the top whatever was

Re: Tabulating Machines (was "... z114")

On Sun, 29 May 2022 17:11:33 -0700, Charles Mills wrote: >I have never programmed a Tab machine but here is what I know. > >The addition and so forth was purely mechanical. Anyone remember old-fashioned >mechanical adding machines? Picture a wheel with ten cogs on it numbered 0 >through 9.

Re: Tabulating Machines (was "... z114")

I've used a mechanical Marchant calculator, but the 407 used relays. The boards for tabulators were a lot heavier than the boards for other EAMs, e.g., interpreters. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe

Re: my new z114

ObTeratology There were 1-digit adders that you cascaded with board wiring. The 407 was not Turing complete, but it did have (very) limited conditional logic. I was hoping that bitsavers had a copy of the 407 manual, but I couldn't find it. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz

Re: Tabulating Machines (was "... z114")

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/computinghistory/plugboard.html I get a lot of good images by Googling . Here's one with the holes labeled: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/computinghistory/402-board.jpg Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List

Re: my new z114

There were covers for the boards that allowed room for several inches of wiring. For those who never saw the Tinkertoys®,, the concept of having to wire each column instead of field start and length may seem strange; it seemed normal at the time. OTOH, I would never want to go back to any of

Tabulating Machines (was "... z114")

I have never programmed a Tab machine but here is what I know. The addition and so forth was purely mechanical. Anyone remember old-fashioned mechanical adding machines? Picture a wheel with ten cogs on it numbered 0 through 9. Let's say it is indicating 5. If you turn it three clicks it is now

Re: my new z114

That's wiring that IBM provides, and if a customer monkeyed with it that would void the warranty. The board under discussion for the 407 is the customers' responsibility and most shops wired multiple boards for different purposes, e.g., 80-80 listing, specific reports. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.)

Re: Pricing for a single-user copy of PCOMM?

Having just done a bit more exploration of IBM websites, I came to realize it would also be useful to be able to obtain a copy of the full IBM Host Access Client Package, which includes the Host on Demand component. When I got to the IBM page for that product, the "Pricing" button led nowhere,

Re: my new z114

On all of my machines, and likely most of the machines IBM made, there is an interlock that prevents changing the patchboard in any way. There is a complex hinge arrangement that closes the door before any connections are made, basically. Sure, a Sawzall would solve that, but that is not provided

Pricing for a single-user copy of PCOMM?

I've been roaming around the IBM websites looking for a published price for a single-user copy of IBM Personal Communications, but I have not been able to find anything resembling that information. Does anyone have a link or information on where one can find that pricing (assuming it even

Re: my new z114

The "boards" were maybe 1 inch thick, with holes in them. You put an overlay over the board (depending on what you were programming) and inserted wires between the holes based on the overlays. My father programmed these things for a bank on Long Island NY. The wires were of various lengths

Re: my new z114

"In the accounting machine, what did the actual addition and printing operations?" The 6400 took up 90 sq ft. Yes, it was really 10 feet by 9 feet. The electronics to do arithmetic, etc were all on what IBM called SMS cards. Basically, discrete electronics, pre-integrated circuit/SLT. The

Re: my new z114

The plug board history discussion here has been fascinating. Although I have always been interested in vintage computers, I have never done much research into the plug board type equipment. One of the biggest things I have always wondered about when it comes to the plug boards was where the

Re: my new z114

On 5/29/22 12:26 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote: You could theoretically add wires without removing the board. I've never seen it done and I suspect that it's not safe. I'm now getting the impression that the wires were sort of latched into the board and the plugboard tool was used to unlatch wires

Re: How to force use of a single unix process to all bpxbatch calls?

Generally, a process started inside OMVS will run in a BPXAS initiator. On the MVS side, these are weird, in that they temporarily change their name to something like the program running (e.g. INETD8), but unlike batch initiators, there is no separate JES2 jobid for the client process. If you do

Re: my new z114

The 407 boards are interchangeable among machines with the same features. The interface is pins. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Grant Taylor

Re: my new z114

You could theoretically add wires without removing the board. I've never seen it done and I suspect that it's not safe. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of

Re: my new z114

"I've never seen a picture of one of those wire boards being worked on and always assumed you did the work while it was in the machine. " Ummm ... not possible. To reprogram a board, you had to take a special IBM tool and push the wire up thru the bottom of the board! Kinda hard to do when the

Re: my new z114

On 5/29/22 12:00 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote: ObBentPins FWIW, I've never seen anybody re-plugging a board without first removing it. I've read about the boards being interchangeable before. I never knew what sort of connector / interface would be used between the board and the rest of the

Re: my new z114

ObBentPins FWIW, I've never seen anybody re-plugging a board without first removing it. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Tom Brennan

Re: How to force use of a single unix process to all bpxbatch calls?

On Sun, 29 May 2022 11:49:44 -0500, Joe Monk wrote: >Looks like maybe he wants _BPX_SHAREAS=REUSE > Is REUSE new? I had to look it up: . (REUSE is the same as YES.) Why should there be both‽ Just to

Re: my new z114

Enzo mentioned he has a couple of ESCON cards, so he's still in the running. Great pic of your dad - I've never seen a picture of one of those wire boards being worked on and always assumed you did the work while it was in the machine. On a table looks a whole lot easier. On 5/29/2022 7:42

Re: How to force use of a single unix process to all bpxbatch calls?

Looks like maybe he wants _BPX_SHAREAS=REUSE Joe On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 11:24 AM Paul Gilmartin < 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > On Sun, 29 May 2022 14:50:50 +, Seymour J Metz wrote: > > >_ç there are some restrictions. > > > Many. I believe BPXBATCH

Re: How to force use of a single unix process to all bpxbatch calls?

On Sun, 29 May 2022 14:50:50 +, Seymour J Metz wrote: >_ç there are some restrictions. > Many. I believe BPXBATCH unconditionally creates a new address space but sets _BPX_SHAREAS there. BPXBATSL spawns locally but is privileged. BPXWUNIX? COZBATCH? BPX1SPN? Stack multiple commands

Re: How to force use of a single unix process to all bpxbatch calls?

_BPX_SHAREAS; there are some restrictions. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Itschak Mugzach [0305158ad67d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu] Sent:

Re: my new z114

The XA changes made the interface more complicating, but also removed the need to manage multiple paths. From the perspective of an OS developer, the net effect is to make it simpler. For a training project you would stick to single path unshared devices and wind up with the interface

Re: my new z114

Harry: To try and squelch a bit of misinformation here since the Internet never forgets, Funsoft was *not* spun off from IBM. It was founded independently and the software and hardware engineering roots were definitely not IBM. Enzo can contact me concerning a FLEXCUB. No need if his z114 has

Re: How to force use of a single unix process to all bpxbatch calls?

Set the bpxwunix environment variable _BPX_SHAREAS=MUST And you should be good to go Lionel B Dyck < Sent from my iPad Pro 10.5 Website: www.lbdsoftware.com "Worry more about your character than your reputation. Character is what you are, reputation merely what others think you are." - John

Re: How to force use of a single unix process to all bpxbatch calls?

Sure. How to? בתאריך יום א׳, 29 במאי 2022 ב-16:24 מאת Seymour J Metz : > You can't reuse the process, but you can request sharing of the address > space in which the process runs. Is that good enough? > > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > >

Re: my new z114

I never worked at the bare metal level...but I thought one of the major reasons they reworked the I/O subsystem in XA was to simplify doing I/O. You don't' have to deal with statues of the channel and the control unit and the device; just do an SSCH and off you go. On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 9:17 AM

Re: my new z114

I realize that SIO no longer exists in zArch; in fact, it never existed in XA or ESA. That's why I asked about S/370 LPARs. For S/370, learning on bare metal is more viable, but I believe that for a beginner ESA or Z on bare metal might be more traumatic than first learning on z/OS or CMS. --

Re: my new z114

Seymour, Just like all z boxes these days, the z114 only runs in LPAR mode. There is no way to defin\e an LPAR on a z114 for any machine type earlier than ESA/390. Remember, z114 is a post z10 box. Plus, SIO and its brethren do not exist in z/Arch. :) They were eliminated from the instruction

Re: my new z114

In S/370 mode, you use that Start I/O (SIO) instruction and the only architected data you need to worry about are the Channel Address Word (CAW), channel Command Words (CCWs) and Channel Status Word (CSW). In XA, ESA and Z modes you need to deal with several other data, e.g., the

Re: my new z114

Enzo, Your problem may be that IBM no longer has the tools to generate Licensing for this machine. Joe On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 8:03 AM Enzo D'Amato wrote: > Thanks for the website information, this was a fascinating read. Either > way, I am going to see what I can do about getting the

Re: How to force use of a single unix process to all bpxbatch calls?

You can't reuse the process, but you can request sharing of the address space in which the process runs. Is that good enough? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on

Re: data set deletion problem

Yitschak wrote: The dataset deleted was not in the link list. The op copied a complete dasd without renaming the datasets and was unable to regrade the copy because the same dataset name was enqueued by lla. The OP had written Due to a bad ACS, some data sets were picked up by SMS and

Re: my new z114

Thanks for the website information, this was a fascinating read. Either way, I am going to see what I can do about getting the additional CP and engines. I am quite happy about having the additional memory however, as usually find myself running lots of different semi-idle tasks and OSes.

How to force use of a single unix process to all bpxbatch calls?

I am running a program that calls BPXBATCH several times. Each call creates another task (STC) that runs the command. I want to use the same time used to create a new stc every call and that the unix task will remain active the entire job life. Is this possible? ITschak ITschak Mugzach *|**

Re: my new z114

Joe is correct that an ESA/390 lpar is the lowest option supported on the z114. I can run software up to z/OS 2.2, which came out in 2015. While this is old, I am not sure that it is quite bit savers old yet. I believe that manuals for this software version are still on the public internet (it

Re: my new z114

The lowest level LPAR supported on z114 is ESA/390. https://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg247954.pdf Joe On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 4:10 AM Seymour J Metz wrote: > Does the Z114 support an S/370 LPAR, or does he need to deal with S/370-XA > or ESA? There is a significant jump in

Re: my new z114

When you ask IBM about licensing software old enough to run on that box, you might want to ask them whether it is possible to obtain softcopy manuals and training materials at the same levels. Also, you may be able to find a lot of the relevant manuals at the bitsaves web site. -- Shmuel

Re: my new z114

IMHO learning bare metal will only be easier if the Z114 supports an S/370 LPA; if he can only run in XA or ESA mode then it has more complexity. IAC, it might be desirable to check with local colleges to see whether there are projects for which he could get college credit. -- Shmuel (Seymour

Re: my new z114

A cross assembler should work fine, as long as it supports the right object formats. Is the ZZSA source on the CBT tape? ICKDSF (and the old OS/360 utilities) can initialize a DASD volume from a single object deck. I know of nothing that can initialize with multiple csects. You can IPL from

Re: zFS compress failure

ObEvenParanoidsHaveRealEnemies I recommend staging through a directory that persists across IPL. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Steve Smith

Re: my new z114

I believe that there would be technical issues simulating a DASD controller on S/390 or Z. It's much easier if you can install software on both ends. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List

Re: my new z114

Does the Z114 support an S/370 LPAR, or does he need to deal with S/370-XA or ESA? There is a significant jump in complexity from 370 to XA; not so much from XA to ESA/390. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe

Re: my new z114

I concur with those who have urged you involve a licensed electrician. Professional HVAC assistance may be advisable, especially if you have an MG set in the garage for backup power. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM

VPS/LRS upgrade

Hello Group Cross posted Has anyone performed LRS/VPS upgrade from 2.1.1 to 2.1.2 ? This is the first time I am going to do the upgrade for this product. I would like to understand your experience or best practices Do you normally reassemble the EXITS are just copy over it as it is ? Anyone