I have just released the below software, which
represents a significant chunk of my life's work.
I'd especially like to thank Gerhard Postpischil
for enabling MVS/380 to do multiple ATL
getmains plus work on the C library, and Alica Okano
for getting PDOS to the point where it can run
some Windows
Hi Experts, Can you please shed some light on setting up H/W alerts on
Mainframes, We had a situation where one of the two DLM switch failed 2
weeks ago and before we plan a change to replace that, second one failed as
well resulting in DLM outage :(
Regards,
I love JCL (errrat least I don't hate it quite as much as you).
I guess I'm just used to it and its infrastructure, e.g. automatic SYSOUT
archiving (admittedly beyond the scope of JCL itself, but based on
JCL-specified SYSOUT to start with). Lots of other good options from you below
for
On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 22:10:12 -0500, Peter Bishop wrote:
>Thanks heaps.
>
Yaay! You're welcome.
>Firstly, the inline 'no op' which is handy but needs care.
>
Oops!
Other thoughts:
BPXWUNIX supports DD:STDIN, DD:STDOUT, and DD:STDERR, for the
cost of a trivial Rexx driver. Then you get true
Thanks heaps.
Firstly, the inline 'no op' which is handy but needs care.
STDPARM:
SH (
set -o verbose ;
set -o errexit ;
set -x ;
On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 20:31:39 -0500, Peter Bishop wrote:
>
>in case anyone wants it, after much trial and error I finally found this
>working example of a multi-line STDPARM shell script for BPXBATCH. I still
>haven't found a way to have #comment lines, which seem to generate syntax
>errors, but
Hi,
in case anyone wants it, after much trial and error I finally found this
working example of a multi-line STDPARM shell script for BPXBATCH. I still
haven't found a way to have #comment lines, which seem to generate syntax
errors, but if I accept that limitation, I am happy enough with
For most languages that is only true for some syntactic elements.
'x := -;'
'x := y;'
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Charles Mills
Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2019 11:38 AM
I would say that it always works, but that it is easy to get confused and
forget how you coded the procedure when writing the call. Comments don't cost
much.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
Your code doesn't do what he was apparently trying to do., due to the loop and
the RETURN.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin
There are two problems with that code. The first is that you have a WHEN
followed by two statements; you need to put them inside a DO/END pair. The
second is that you need to use == in order to distinguish '' from ' '.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
The first call passes '0' and the second call passes '0 100'; that may or may
not be what you want. If the routine actually expects two parameters, then you
must code 'call code 0, 100'.
As for error handling, REXX does not have a branch instruction. It does have
signal, which does some nasty
Not quite; 'CALL CODE 0 100' passes a single parameter.
'arg one two' is equivalent to 'parse upper arg one two', which in turn is
equivalent to
'parse upper value arg(1) one two'. Contrast this with 'CALL CODE 0, 100' and
'arg one, two'.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
Alas, SIGNAL does not behave like a goto, and it will bite you if you try to
use it as one. Using it for anything other than handling fatal errors is asking
for trouble. But it's not my dog.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
REXX does not have a goto statement. You will sometimes read that SIGNAL is a
goto; that's not only wrong but dangerous for those who believe it.
The EXIT statement can be used by an internal routine to terminate the entire
program containing it, but not the caller of that program. See also
On 2019-10-01 00:34, Jon Perryman wrote:
And you would be wrong.
On 2019-10-01 06:30, David Crayford wrote:
> And you could be wrong! And I think you are :)
Folks, I think we've reached the point of no return on this argument. I
see no evidence that anyone participating in this thread has
#ifdef __MVS__
#define OVERRIDE
#else
#define OVERRIDE override
#endif
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Jon Perryman
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2019 10:04 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Who
On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 05:04:22 +, Jon Perryman wrote:
> On Friday, September 27, 2019, 12:31:41 PM PDT, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>
>> I have no interest in arguing with the willfully ignorant.
>
>You shouldn't argue with that voice in your head. You keep making statements
>without any
In article
you wrote:
> I created a trace facility to intercept external interface calls (MQ, DB2,
> IMS, etc) and dynamic calls.
> For dynamic calls, I intercept the load request and replace the entry point
> address with an entry point address of my own program. I then save the
> original
Skip,
I have found that a lots of "English as a second language" folks speak better
English than the rest of us. I had to refresh my memory using the dictionary
when Radoslaw trotted out "anathematized". I *hate* it when people do that!
I stand in awe behind you. :-)
-Original
I stand in awe of the Polish guru who can both entertain and educate. Including
English vocabulary. No anathematization here.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of R.S.
Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2019 7:24 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject:
In most languages a coding error of
Foo [some syntactic element inadvertently omitted here] Bar
Is a syntax error. For example, in C, x = foo bar; /* supposed to be foo +
bar */
But in Rexx, Foo Bar is often syntactically correct and is equivalent to Foo
|| " " || Bar
One person's feature is
And what command is the non-admin user issuing to perform the delete?
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of retired mainframer
> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2019 5:37 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Tracing RACF?
>
> What is the status
Thanks RS. We write the data to logstream, so that's not an option. Per IBM,
I did a dynamic update to the HC, bumping the ABOVE parameter to something
greater than our planned change, and refreshed the check. It will revert to
standard check after the follow IPL, at which time it should
I created a trace facility to intercept external interface calls (MQ, DB2,
IMS, etc) and dynamic calls.
For dynamic calls, I intercept the load request and replace the entry point
address with an entry point address of my own program. I then save the
original entry point address to later branch
(I will be anathematized for the text below)
Simple solution:
stop HZSPROC
delete HZSDATA dataset
create it again using plain IEFBR14 or any other method - just empty PS
dataset
start HZSPROC
It works. No animal will be injured by deletion of the dataset. No
climate change will happen when
What is the status of the SETROPTS PROTECTALL option?
Is there any data set profile that covers the dataset?
Is there a global access checking table entry that covers the dataset?
Does the non-admin user have the OPERATIONS attribute?
Is there a DASDVOL profile that covers the non-SMS volume
Ok, I answered the first question. How to get it back, F HZSPROC,ADDNEW. But
how do I reset the history is still outstanding.
Thanks, Dave
_
Dave Jousma
AVP | Manager, Systems Engineering
Ok, This is one of those dumb moments...IPLed one of my tech systems last
night with a planned increase of ESQA. The associated health check popped
after the IPL CHECK(IBMVSM,VSM_CSA_CHANGE) because of the decrease in EPVT.
It's not clear to me how to reset the history for this
Back in the early 1990s Zortech (nee Zorland as Borland did a "cease and
desist" on them) sold a C compiler with a C++ preprocessor as an optional
extra.
I suspect that was quite common back then: C++ to C preprocessors.
However, the languages are indeed inherently divergent.
Those of us who
On 2019-10-01 12:34 PM, Jon Perryman wrote:
On Thursday, September 26, 2019, 09:19:02 PM PDT, David Crayford
wrote:
> On 2019-09-27 2:05 AM, Jon Perryman wrote:
I make the distinction. They are most certainly two separate languages
and evolving in very different directions.data
Joao: yes, I have tried that, but it really doesn't give the information
that I want - I can see the monitored user creating and deleting file, but
I don't see anything about the RACF profiles that were used.
Having said that, I have managed to move things along.
The situation I now have is that
32 matches
Mail list logo
