The result when running TSO TEST in batch under an 8 char userid is shown below.
//BATCH EXEC PGM=IKJEFT01
//SYSTSPRT DD SYSOUT=*
//SYSTSIN DD *
TEST *(IEBGENER)
L 10.%%+4%+b4%+108% x L(17)
END
The first 7 bytes will be PSCBUSER.
All bytes are blank (x'40') and the length value at the
Let me try to conclude this thread as it has drifted apart from the original
question to the question whether an 8 char (MVS) userid can become valid TSO
user (which it *cannot*).
My interest was to find out why some TSO commands can be used in a *batch* job
while others (which?) cannot when
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 21:16:14 +0200, Peter Hunkeler wrote:
Let me try to conclude this thread as it has drifted apart from the original
question to the question whether an 8 char (MVS) userid can become valid TSO
user (which it *cannot*).
My interest was to find out why some TSO commands can be
Could you run it and share the results?
Will do.
--
Peter
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
No, I don't think there is a way to define a valid 8 character TSO userid. ...
Yep, understand that. But that wasn't the question. The question is why some
(most?) TSO commands are working fine under an 8 char userid, whereas some like
CONSOLE obviously don't.
It's mostly my own curiosity
What do you consider an 8 character TSO ID?
I never talked about an 8 character TSO ID, did I? I always wrote (or meant
to write) 8 character userid. And by userid I mean a userid as understood
by MVS, and this has always been allowed to be 8 characters in length. (I'm
sure someone will
