> I believe not. If that were the case, it would have the final value, XYZZY,
> in all steps
Ah. I was too hasty.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 2:43 PM
To: IB
Many thanks for this. Could be very useful, especially the demonstration of
the use of the FUNCTION-POINTER type.
Peter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of David S.
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 6:03 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LI
[I realize this thread is kind of old, but I have yet to find a better
COBOL solution anywhere else so I thought I'd post it. This was originally
posted to the
"Mainframe (COBOL, etc) Experts" LinkedIn Group, which I manage for group
owner Vikas Kumar, see http://linkd.in/1S4BarK ]
Here's a COBOL
I can confirm this behavior on V2.1, and I find it counter-intuitive as well.
Moving the SYSUT1 DD * and their input lines to the place where there are
actual PROC executions does not change the behavior, the formulation below
gives the same results as the first example.
Something's wrong for s
On Fri, 6 Nov 2015 14:31:21 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
>Hmmm. JCL processing versus run-time? When does the SET V2= happen? When JES
>reads the job in? I suspect so. Or when it runs?
>
BTW, that was on z/OS 2.1. The result was the same on 2.2.
But if I add a following step referencing &V2 in
I WISH!
Although I know someone who has one :P
-Connor K
On 11/6/2015 5:46 PM, William Donzelli wrote:
Barf.
3290 or bust.
--
Will
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Mike Schwab wrote:
3174? If it has a Token Ring connector you could connect a Apple ][
with a token ring card as a master cons
Barf.
3290 or bust.
--
Will
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Mike Schwab wrote:
> 3174? If it has a Token Ring connector you could connect a Apple ][
> with a token ring card as a master console.
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Connor Krukosky
> wrote:
>> On 11/6/2015 3:10 PM, Richard Pini
On Fri, 6 Nov 2015 14:31:21 -0800, Charles Mills wrote:
>Hmmm. JCL processing versus run-time? When does the SET V2= happen? When JES
>reads the job in? I suspect so.
>
I believe not. If that were the case, it would have the final value, XYZZY, in
all steps.
>Or when it runs?
>
In fact, this e
3174? If it has a Token Ring connector you could connect a Apple ][
with a token ring card as a master console.
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Connor Krukosky
wrote:
> On 11/6/2015 3:10 PM, Richard Pinion wrote:
>>
>> Did you buy DASD to go with it?
>>
> I bought a SCSI SAN box, which should be
Hmmm. JCL processing versus run-time? When does the SET V2= happen? When JES
reads the job in? I suspect so. Or when it runs?
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 2:17
In the job fragment:
//*
// EXPORT SYMLIST=*
//P PROC
//GEN EXEC PGM=IEBGENER
//SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=(,)
//SYSIN DD DUMMY
//SYSUT2DD SYSOUT=(,)
//SYSUT1DD *,SYMBOLS=JCLONLY
GENER step;
with V2=&V2..
//P PEND
//*
// SET V2=WOMBAT *
Single, 18, in college, VERY TOLERANT PARENTS!
-Connor K
On 11/6/2015 4:48 PM, Grinsell, Don wrote:
Wow! I assume you are either single or married to the most wonderful woman.
Good luck.
--
Donald Grinsell
State of Montana
406-444-2983
dgrins...@mt.gov
"We want a few mad people now. See
Or his mom still loves him and he lives in her basement. :-) :-)
Of course, putting it in the basement was a good idea, expectantly
around February. No need to turn on the oil heater while it's running. :-)
Tony Thigpen
Grinsell, Don wrote on 11/06/2015 04:48 PM:
Wow! I assume you are eithe
Wow! I assume you are either single or married to the most wonderful woman.
Good luck.
--
Donald Grinsell
State of Montana
406-444-2983
dgrins...@mt.gov
"We want a few mad people now. See where the sane ones have landed us!"
~ George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)
> -Original Message-
>
Outstanding … very cool
> On Nov 6, 2015, at 3:05 PM, Connor Krukosky wrote:
>
> Mine is a model 320.
> I wouldn't mind getting a larger system but the problem is if I can't just
> trade say the PU Book and the SE's to do this then I would like to NOT have
> to go through the trouble of removi
Mine is a model 320.
I wouldn't mind getting a larger system but the problem is if I can't
just trade say the PU Book and the SE's to do this then I would like to
NOT have to go through the trouble of removing the WHOLE thing from the
basement again and putting another one back into the basemen
What model is it?
I have a big one that I would trade for a 110 (the smallest model).
Tony Thigpen
Connor Krukosky wrote on 11/06/2015 02:55 PM:
Hi I'm new to the list, was pointed here by someone because I need some
help using the HMC on the z890 to get an LPAR setup to boot via FTP.
I bought
Never mind. I don't want to admit to how stupid I've been on this
particular install.
The first install for a test system went well. This install, which will
eventually be the production system, not so much.
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Mark Pace wrote:
> I'm confused with an error I get d
On 11/6/2015 3:10 PM, Richard Pinion wrote:
Did you buy DASD to go with it?
I bought a SCSI SAN box, which should be fine over FCP for linux which I
plan to run since z/OS requires FICON storage which is expensive and
getting a z/OS license going to be impossible.
Also as of now I would like t
This is so cool. Maybe try starting with something like ZZSA? I never
tried, but I heard that can be IPL'd from DVD in the HMC.
Leonardo Vaz wrote:
Really nice indeed! I don't think you can IPL z/OS via FTP though. I guess you
want to run linux?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainfram
You could IPL a stand-alone utility such as Innovation
Data Processing's FDR stand-alone restore. But do you
have DASD to restore to, and tape drives to restore
from?
--- leonardo@cn.ca wrote:
From: Leonardo Vaz
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: I just bought an
Really nice indeed! I don't think you can IPL z/OS via FTP though. I guess you
want to run linux?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Steve Beaver
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 3:15 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subjec
Which OS do you want to run on it?
Steve
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Richard Pinion
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 12:11 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: I just bought an IBM z890
Did you buy DASD to g
Very cool man. Wish I could help you but I'm a software guy. Pretty sure you
will find your answers.
Good luck!
Duffy
Duffy Nightingale
> On Nov 6, 2015, at 11:55 AM, Connor Krukosky
> wrote:
>
> Hi I'm new to the list, was pointed here by someone because I need some help
> using the H
Did you buy DASD to go with it?
--- conn...@connorsdomain.com wrote:
From: Connor Krukosky
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: I just bought an IBM z890
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 14:55:28 -0500
Hi I'm new to the list, was pointed here by someone because I need some
he
Hi I'm new to the list, was pointed here by someone because I need some
help using the HMC on the z890 to get an LPAR setup to boot via FTP.
I bought this machine for $237 :)
It wasn't fun to get into the basement but its here now.
http://imgur.com/a/5uWit
I have gotten it to power on and 'power-
We're jumping from 1.13 to 2.2 at the moment. I've just restored the dasd from
the order. It doesn't look like it will be too big a change, but one surprise
has been the enormous increase in space required. For example, all of the USS
zfs/hfs files no longer fit on a single 3390-9 any longer. I
I'm confused with an error I get during setup of PFA.
Job HBB7790M runs some scripts to setup PFA. But I'm getting a failure
because it can not find a file IBMUSER.PFA.TEMP and I can not find where
that file gets created in the first place.
--
The postings on this site are my own and don’t ne
Thanks I understand that in the beginning SRB were quick and dirty however now
they have become more robust
If you can maybe guide me to the control blocks associated with them the same
way TCB is associated with a task
I am thinking of WEQ WUQ and SSRB
Thanks so much
Sent from my iPhone
>
On Fri, 6 Nov 2015 09:09:57 -0800, Steve Beaver wrote:
>Generally was a group we all move on the odd-number releases. Does anyone
>have An opinion as to moving from 1.13 to 2.2 or is that too big a jump?
As Lucas wrote, it isn't too big a jump. After all, it is "only" two releases.
However, wi
> Generally was a group we all move on the odd-number releases. Does anyone
> have An opinion as to moving from 1.13 to 2.2 or is that too big a jump?
From 1.13 to 2.1 you had consecutive odd releases. I would be inclined to
install 2.2. Looking forward, since the releases are every two years
It's not a too big jump, it's a normal supported/documented upgrade path:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/e0z3m110.pdf
---
*Lucas Rosalen*
Emails: rosalen.lu...@gmai
Generally was a group we all move on the odd-number releases. Does anyone
have An opinion as to moving from 1.13 to 2.2 or is that too big a jump?
Thanks
Steve
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instruction
Go to http://www.syncsort.com/en/Products/Mainframe/ZPSaverSuite and see what
we can do on z/IIP engines. In a nutshell, we can offload about 90% of our
normal TCB workload to a z/IIP engine, your mileage may vary depending on a
number of things, but we can do an awful lot. This has been a mul
The name of the program is ESCHATON, and irrespective of the number or value of
parameters passed, always returns 42.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with
On 6 Nov 2015 08:11:52 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
>SRB's were not meant for general application code. Also, I hope nobody builds
>a quick and dirty SRB routine. Those should be carefully constructed and
>tested.
>If by quick and dirty you mean short lived, then yes, that was th
SRB's were not meant for general application code. Also, I hope nobody builds
a quick and dirty SRB routine. Those should be carefully constructed and
tested.
If by quick and dirty you mean short lived, then yes, that was their original
use case. Some SRB routines today are much more robust a
On Fri, 6 Nov 2015 06:10:57 -0600, Bill Godfrey wrote:
>
>Try setting LC_COLLATE=S370 or SAA
>
Looks good experimenting from shell command line:
user@OS/390.24.00: locale
LANG=C
LC_CTYPE="C"
LC_COLLATE="C"
LC_TIME="C"
LC_NUMERIC="C"
LC_MONETARY="C"
LC_MESSAGES="C"
LC_SYNTAX="C"
LC_TOD="C"
LC_ALL=
On 5 Nov 2015 16:07:26 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
>KEY 0 is not required by an SRB. See IEAMSCHD documentation. Supervisor
>state is required.
For application code, isn't this an integrity exposure?
Clark Morris
>
>On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 3:48 PM, michelbutz wrote:
>
>> I would
Bill,
Including" LC_COLLATE=S370" resolved the problem.
Thanks for your insight.
John P. Baker
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Bill Godfrey
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 7:11 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2015 23:13:34 -0500, John P. Baker wrote:
>Kirk,
>
>The following example illustrates what I am trying to do --
>
>Call BPXWUNIX "sort -k 3 -k 4 -k 1 -k 2", table_in., table_out., messages_out.
>;
>
>In the above example, "table_in." in a stem variable containing the rows to be
>so
Much to my regret I've seen the discussion on topic "RE-IPL for the Daylight to
Standard time conversion?" too late, and was unable to read all posts on the
issue, so bear with me if it turns out that someone else has already mentioned
an excellent publication I'm mentioning now:
SG24-2070 -
>The problem that I am experiencing is that the data is being sorted using the
>ASCII collating sequence (i.e., numerics precede alphabetics).
I understand the UNIX sort shell command always sorts according to the
*collating sequence* defined in the current locale. Is't not ASCII and it's not
43 matches
Mail list logo
