I'm going to pivot here. I'm putting my support behind putting BatchPipes
in the z/OS base (rather than just Pipes). If you agree, please
write/support such a requirement and/or educate your management to get
interested. BatchPipes includes BatchPipesWorks, a not so current, but
still highly
On Mon, 27 Sep 2021 07:26:51 -0500, Hobart Spitz wrote:
>I'm going to pivot here. I'm putting my support behind putting BatchPipes
>in the z/OS base (rather than just Pipes). If you agree, please
>write/support such a requirement and/or educate your management to get
>interested. BatchPipes
FYI, for anyone interested.
From: Brian Miller
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2021 10:55 AM
To: David Mingee
Subject: a Custom migration from CA scheduler to IBM workload scheduler on
z/OS
Hi David,
Hope you and the family have weathered theses strange times?
I received this
Hi
I was external trainer for IBM since 1989 on TWS z/OS and TWS Distributed
My catalog of training is
IWSD 9.50 user
IWSD 9.50 Administration
ZWS 9.50 user
ZWS 9.50 Administration
Delta ZWS/IWS Distributed
DWC for ZWS
And my second business is the migration of every scheduler to every
Gil wrote:
>On Mon, 27 Sep 2021 07:26:51 -0500, Hobart Spitz wrote:
>>I'm going to pivot here. I'm putting my support behind putting BatchPipes
>>in the z/OS base (rather than just Pipes). If you agree, please
>>write/support such a requirement and/or educate your management to get
>>interested.
Hi,
I am interested in acquiring information on the DASD Datasets, which were
updated recently and to understand the resources utilization.
Is there a Tool available in CBT or somewhere where I could use to provide me
report on each DASD dataset which were updated today for an example.
I am
Ed Jaffe wrote:
>It's not the oldest SHARE requirement by
>any means, but certainly a long-standing one with an indefensible
>rationale, that has withstood the test of time.
"indefensible"? "unimpeachable"? What did you mean?
I was wondering if anybody is routing any of their Tape tools reporting to
Splunk? Especially interested if you are doing this without using some other
third party software product.
Regards,
John Benik
This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or
proprietary
A friend writes:
In a conversation elsewhere I mentioned the oops between JCL using /* as end
of dataset and PL/I using /* */ for comment brackets - meaning that PL/I had
to start in column 2 to prevent a comment from being interpreted as JCL.
Oopsie. Does anyone remember which came first? There
PL/I uses column one for a carriage control while JCL requires a / in
column one, so this was never a problem
On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 10:09 PM Phil Smith III wrote:
>
> A friend writes:
>
> In a conversation elsewhere I mentioned the oops between JCL using /* as end
> of dataset and PL/I using
Adding a dummy first line because LISTSERV rejected this post because it
thought it was a command, not a message ...
//SYSIN DD DATA,DLM=xx solves the /* in column 1 problem.
PL/I supports specifiable margins, so PL/I source can start in column 1.
My earliest S/360 memories are from 1968, and
On Mon, 27 Sep 2021 15:42:35 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
.
>
>//SYSIN DD DATA,DLM=xx solves the /* in column 1 problem.
>
+1
In one case I resorted to an exhaustive search to find a digraph
not occurring in a NETDATA sysin. Ugh!
>PL/I supports specifiable margins, so PL/I source can start in
PL/I is free format. The default is 2 - 72, but there is a compiler option
to change that (SORMGIN).
Joe
On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 5:09 PM Phil Smith III wrote:
> A friend writes:
>
> In a conversation elsewhere I mentioned the oops between JCL using /* as
> end
> of dataset and PL/I using /* */
> column 1 is reserved for carriage control. That seems to conflate source
> code with SYSPRINT.
It does seem to, but in fact PL/I supports source listing formatting using ANSI
carriage control.
"The MARGINS option specifies which part of each compiler input record contains
PL/I statements,
- Original Message -
From: "Phil Smith III"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2021 8:08 AM
A friend writes:
In a conversation elsewhere I mentioned the oops between JCL using /* as end
of dataset and PL/I using /* */ for comment brackets - meaning that PL/I had
to start in column 2
From: "Joe Monk"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2021 8:36 AM
PL/I is free format. The default is 2 - 72,
IBM's catalogue procedure was set up for columns 2 to 72.
Sites could change that -- as ours did -- to read columns 1 to 80.
but there is a compiler option to change that (SORMGIN).
On 9/27/2021 1:39 PM, Phil Smith III wrote:
Ed Jaffe wrote:
It's not the oldest SHARE requirement by any means, but certainly a
long-standing one with an indefensible rationale, that has withstood the test
of time.
"indefensible"? "unimpeachable"? What did you mean?
I meant to say there
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Schwab"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2021 8:12 AM
PL/I uses column one for a carriage control while JCL requires a / in
column one, so this was never a problem
PL/I does not use card column 1 for carriage control.
That was an option that a
- Original Message -
From: "Charles Mills"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2021 11:19 AM
column 1 is reserved for carriage control. That seems to conflate source code
with SYSPRINT.
It does seem to, but in fact PL/I supports source listing formatting using ANSI
carriage
19 matches
Mail list logo
