Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

> On Jun 25, 2018, at 4:52 AM, Sean Gleann wrote: > > is would be greatly appreciated > Sean: Look at the CBTTAPE.ORG there is at least one program that offload the the entire PDS into a sequestion format and you can easily insert ./ replace and ./ seq cards daily it

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

Wayne: No,. I hadn't seen your response until I went looking for it after you mentioned it. For some reason, Outlook appears to be delivering my mail extremely slowly, AND only letting some mail through. When I go to gmail, I can see all the messages. Thanks for your code - I shall give it a try

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

The sequence numbers are removed in a separate step. ie CHANGE ALL P'=' ' ' 73 80 If you have ./ in cc1-2 do a CHANGE ALL on any that are not IEBUPDTE directives. Perhaps change ./ to .#. I use a combination of a program that updates member by member using an EDIT macro, that would be the final

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 13:23:23 +1000, Wayne Bickerdike wrote: >Not sure if Sean received my off-list REXX code. Here it is. No need for >IEBPTPCH, just run against the PDS and it builds a sequential file with ./ >headers. >... > ROUT.1 = "./ ADD LEVEL=00,SOURCE=0,NAME="MEMBER > "EXECIO

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

hat most Eunix sites have that are not required for > > certification, and IBM has not done well by them. > > > > > > -- > > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > > > > > > F

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

cussion List on behalf > of Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> > Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 4:45 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu > Subject: Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again? > > On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 19:58:08 +, Seymour J Metz wrote: &g

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 4:45 PM To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Subject: Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again? On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 19:58:08 +, Seymour J Metz wrote: >Well,

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 19:58:08 +, Seymour J Metz wrote: >Well, youngster, Eunix certainly has egregious faults, but it also has its >good points. Alas, IBM took a minimalist approach to porting it to MVS. > I understand CMS integrates OpenExtensions and CMS commands more closely on the

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 4:37 PM To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Subject: Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again? On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 19:11:03 +, Sey

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 19:11:03 +, Seymour J Metz wrote: >> What could be done in a script that couldn't be done by typing individual >> commands at the command line? > >The fact remains that you chose to invoke aa script rather than typing >individual lines at the command line. BTW, I can

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

@listserv.ua.edu Subject: Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again? Thanks, Elardus I was originally using "TRACE I" and getting flooded with information - I see that your "TRACE ALL" is a far better option. Here's an excerpt from the output log (attempted 'edits' of 2 members): 22 *-

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Subject: Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again? To John McKown: I sense your frustration, sir. The fact is that I have a great deal of difficulty dealing with anything unix-y. When I get anywhere close to USS stuff, co-workers here have described the outcome as being similar

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

Whoosh! -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Steve Smith Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 11:41 AM To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Subject: Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again? Really? I'm

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

tserv.ua.edu Subject: Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again? On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 11:34:48 -0400, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote: >On 06/26/18 08:23, John McKown wrote: > >> All this can be done from a UNIX shell, > >No, a shell script invoked from the shell. > What could be done

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

Communication is tougher than it looks. My previous reply was to Shmuel, not John M. My comment was about the false dichotomy of Unix & scripts vs. TSO & REXX. It's kinda funny, isn't it? sas On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 12:20 PM, John McKown wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:41 AM Steve Smith

Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

8 1:04 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again? On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 12:01:32 +0100, Sean Gleann wrote: >Wayne - yes, I'd be very interested, please. > >I've been plugging away at Lionel Dyck's suggestion of a REXX calling a >REXX, so far

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 12:01:32 +0100, Sean Gleann wrote: >Wayne - yes, I'd be very interested, please. > >I've been plugging away at Lionel Dyck's suggestion of a REXX calling a >REXX, so far with a notable lack of success (I keep getting a RC(-3), so >I*think* I'm doing something wrong with the

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 11:34:48 -0400, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote: >On 06/26/18 08:23, John McKown wrote: > >> All this can be done from a UNIX shell, > >No, a shell script invoked from the shell. > What could be done in a script that couldn't be done by typing individual commands at the

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 18:44:54 +1000, Wayne Bickerdike wrote: >I use a PDSTOSAM REXX program. It writes all the members to a flat file >with a ./ ADD IEBUPDTE header at the start of each member. > What happens if one of your members has "./" in columns 1-2? It might even be JCL to run an IEBUPDTE

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:41 AM Steve Smith wrote: > Really? I'm almost convinced this is a joke. > ​That was certainly my intent for my portion of the thread. I guess I really am not communicating well today. ​ I will hereby apologize for interjecting a silly message amongst serious ones.

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

Really? I'm almost convinced this is a joke. sas On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 11:34 AM, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote: > On 06/26/18 08:23, John McKown wrote: > > > All this can be done from a UNIX shell, > > No, a shell script invoked from the shell. > > > thus _proving_ that the UNIX shell is

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

On 06/26/18 08:23, John McKown wrote: > All this can be done from a UNIX shell, No, a shell script invoked from the shell. > thus _proving_ that the UNIX shell is more powerful than the standard > TSO environment. No, REXX is part of the standard TSO environment. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.)

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

John McKown wrote: >> I sense your frustration, sir. >​Oh, I didn't mean to come across as frustrated. I was just wanting to throw a >"spit ball" into the discussion {grin}. I was going with the PERL motto: >TMTOWTDI (Tim Toady) -- There is More Than One Way To Do It. Since all the >other,

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 8:03 AM Sean Gleann wrote: > To John McKown: > > I sense your frustration, sir. > ​Oh, I didn't mean to come across as frustrated. I was just wanting to throw a "spit ball" into the discussion {grin}. I was going with the PERL motto: TMTOWTDI (Tim Toady) -- There is More

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

To John McKown: I sense your frustration, sir. The fact is that I have a great deal of difficulty dealing with anything unix-y. When I get anywhere close to USS stuff, co-workers here have described the outcome as being similar to throwing a crucifix at a vampire - I tend the 'fizz' a lot. :)

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

Thanks, Elardus I was originally using "TRACE I" and getting flooded with information - I see that your "TRACE ALL" is a far better option. Here's an excerpt from the output log (attempted 'edits' of 2 members): 22 *-* DO J = I+1 TO LM.0 23 *-* PARSE VALUE LM.J WITH MEM EXTRA 24 *-* ADDRESS

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:23 PM Mike Schwab wrote: > Which is why we suggested C ALL P'.' ' ' 73 80. > Change All characters to blanks in columns 73 to 80. > ​PMJI,​ ​I have fought and fought with myself to stay quiet​, but my silliness factor is off the wall today. So I will reply with the

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

Sean Gleann wrote: >I've been plugging away at Lionel Dyck's suggestion of a REXX calling a REXX, >so far with a notable lack of success (I keep getting a RC(-3), so I*think* >I'm doing something wrong with the environment) Please post the command just before that RC(-3) and the full message(s)

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

Wayne - yes, I'd be very interested, please. I've been plugging away at Lionel Dyck's suggestion of a REXX calling a REXX, so far with a notable lack of success (I keep getting a RC(-3), so I*think* I'm doing something wrong with the environment) Regards Sean On 26 June 2018 at 09:44, Wayne

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

I use a PDSTOSAM REXX program. It writes all the members to a flat file with a ./ ADD IEBUPDTE header at the start of each member. Use ISPF edit against the entire file and add the updated members back. As previously stated "C ALL P'=' ' ' 73 80" will remove any sequence numbers. If

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

Which of course, only works if NUM is off. If unnum doesn't always work, I don't think there's a general 1-line solution. Renum works on any member, so I can't see much room for a sensible reason for unnum to be so delicate about it. sas On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 6:23 PM, Mike Schwab wrote: >

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

Which is why we suggested C ALL P'.' ' ' 73 80. Change All characters to blanks in columns 73 to 80. On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 4:47 PM Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:35:24 -0700, retired mainframer wrote: > > >Possibly because > >

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

On Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:35:24 -0700, retired mainframer wrote: >Possibly because > 1 - If some lines don't have numbers, the member is technically not >numbered. > 2 - A member that is not numbered can have real data in 73-80. > 3 - Blanking out real data with the unnum command is

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

check before issuing the renum command. > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf > Of Paul Gilmartin > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2018 2:13 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again? > > On 2018-06-25, at 12:

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

On 2018-06-25, at 12:07:00, Mike Schwab wrote: > Unnum doesn't work if all lines don't have numbers. So you have to > renum then unnum. > Can anyone think of a reason for this? Cui bono? -- gil -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe /

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

IBM Mainframe Discussion List wrote on > 06/25/2018 10:36:08 AM: > > > From: Sri h Kolusu > > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > > Date: 06/25/2018 10:36 AM > > Subject: Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again? > > Sent by: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > > > >

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

Safeway Account 602 527 4871 Mobile jerry.whitteri...@ibm.com IBM Services IBM Mainframe Discussion List wrote on 06/25/2018 10:36:08 AM: > From: Sri h Kolusu > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Date: 06/25/2018 10:36 AM > Subject: Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again? > Sent by: IBM

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

Sean, ICEGENER can only handle 1 member at a time. As others have pointed out you can use a macro to update the line numbers. If your shop has file-manger then you can use the following JCL //STEP0100 EXEC PGM=FILEMGR //SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=* //PDS DD DISP=SHR,DSN=Your input pds with line

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

to the rescue again? I'm wondering if someone can point me in the right direction with a problem that I've had handed to me... I have a PDS of a reasonable number of FB80 members (>100). Some of the members have sequence numbers in character positions 73-80, some don't and some are 'partia

Re: [EXTERNAL] AW: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

, 2018 7:34 AM To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] AW: ICEGENER to the rescue again? Another approach is to run an exec that uses listd to get all the members and then invoke ispf edit with a macro for each member - that macro could then do a REN,UNNUM, and then SAVE and END, which

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

PDSEDIT can do this real quick, do a BOUNDS 73 80 and C '0' ' ', etc., and supply the list of members. Use PARM='TEST' until satisfied with expected result, then change to NOTEST. http://gsf-soft.com/Products/PDSEDIT.html IBM suggests the FILE MANAGER FIND/CHANGE utility.

Re: [EXTERNAL] AW: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

-- Lionel B. Dyck (Contractor) < Mainframe Systems Programmer - RavenTek Solution Partners -Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Peter Hunkeler Sent: Monday, June 25, 2018 6:13 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subje

Re: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

Sean Gleann wrote: >I have a PDS of a reasonable number of FB80 members (>100). Some of the >members have sequence numbers in character positions 73-80, some don't and >some are 'partially' numbered, with gaps in the sequencing, depending on who >last updated the specific member. >I want to

Re: AW: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

o:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Peter Hunkeler Sent: Monday, June 25, 2018 7:16 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: AW: ICEGENER to the rescue again? > I'm fairly certain that ICEGENER would be able to do this, but have > not yet found an example that comes anywhere c

AW: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

> I'm fairly certain that ICEGENER would be able to do this, but have not yet found an example that comes anywhere close, that I can then adapt to my requirements. It's IEBGENER not ICEGENER which you probably mean. The latter does 1:1 copies of sequential data sets only. -- ßph

AW: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

Please excuse the bad formatting. Trying Again. Are you familiar with REXX? If so, here is how you could do this: In a REXX:- LISTDS to get a list of the members in the PDS.- ALLOCATE an new PDS for the changed members.- FREE the output dsn. - In a loop for each member: -- ALLOCATE the input

AW: ICEGENER to the rescue again?

Are you familiar with REXX? If so, here is how you could do this: In a REXX:- LISTDS to get a list of the members in the PDS.- ALLOCATE an new PDS for the changed members.- FREE the output dsn. - In a loop for each member: -- ALLOCATE the input dsn(member_nn)-- EXECIO to read the member into

ICEGENER to the rescue again?

I'm wondering if someone can point me in the right direction with a problem that I've had handed to me... I have a PDS of a reasonable number of FB80 members (>100). Some of the members have sequence numbers in character positions 73-80, some don't and some are 'partially' numbered, with gaps in