Re: Permission to redistribute LE
Yes. I will speak from memory and I do not speak for IBM of course, so take all of this as you wish. Back in the bad old days, before about 2018, large software companies generally shipped products as object code and did the final link/bind at the customer site, thereby avoiding shipping any IBM code. Small software companies often shipped linked load modules that included IBM licensed code because ... well, obviously that is what made sense and IBM didn't seem to mind. (Big software companies had legal departments that didn't accept that kind of logic.) A man at IBM named John Eels set out to rationalize and change that. (I am sure many others were involved and someone else may actually have initiated the effort.) I had a very small part in assisting John with identifying code that made sense for IBM to allow software vendors to link into products and ship. John worked with IBM product owners and IBM legal to get the situation largely to the state that you see it today, with a comprehensive "okay to link and ship" list all collected in one place or a small number of places. It was a years-long effort, and one of the last things John Eels worked on before he retired. (An earlier project of John's -- I believe he was the father or at least the mid-life babysitter of the ADCD -- back when it really was a CD.) Charles On Sat, 21 Oct 2023 10:09:26 +0100, Andrew Wilkinson wrote: >Dear List, > >"z/OS Licensed Program Specifications" includes a section permitting you >to redistribute modules from CEE.SCEELKED (among many other libraries) >which have been included your programs. > >This is not a surprise as I had always believed this to be allowed. What >is a surprise is that this permission first appears in z/OS Licensed >Program Specifications with z/OS 2.3 in September 2017. Prior to that, >permission was (and still is) in the notices at the end of "LE Vendor >Interfaces". > >My research also uncovered a change in the IMS Licensed Program >Specifications at around the same time. I couldn't find the CICS >Licensed Program Specifications, so I gave up looking for a pattern. > >Does anyone know why it changed? Is there some legal reason? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
AMODE was: Why do all entry points have to be in the same class?
On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 21:54:48 -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote: >Long ago, I had a similar question about AMODE. > Alas, AMODE applied to an entire CSECT, not to individual ENTRY points. It sounds like you don't understand AMODE. I don't think that AMODE 24 in assembler does anything more useful than tell the binder the program must be linked AMODE 24 (not 31/64). Mixed AMODE load modules is a bad thing and very rarely needed. IBM specifically excludes load module attributes for ALIAS names because it is more complex and requires extra coding. Why should IBM encourage people to write AMODE 24 code when the goal is to eliminate it as much as possible? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Does z/VM have a product/tool which can send backup to the Cloud ?
On Sat, 21 Oct 2023 08:17:43 +0300, Arye Shemer wrote: >we thought about this solution (TS7700), but customer requirements > are: solution must be software in the z/VM environment (no z/OS or other > guests), Out of curiosity, what software is missing from z/VM that is a showstopper? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Permission to redistribute LE
Actually, DFHELII - The EXEC CICS interface stub is. https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.5.0?topic=cics-link-edit-considerations-under I hope this helps, mario -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Permission to redistribute LE
No CICS programs are linked into object modules. They are all calls to programs residing in the CICS regions. On Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 4:09 AM Andrew Wilkinson <04f504c2b946-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > Dear List, > > "z/OS Licensed Program Specifications" includes a section permitting you > to redistribute modules from CEE.SCEELKED (among many other libraries) > which have been included your programs. > > This is not a surprise as I had always believed this to be allowed. What > is a surprise is that this permission first appears in z/OS Licensed > Program Specifications with z/OS 2.3 in September 2017. Prior to that, > permission was (and still is) in the notices at the end of "LE Vendor > Interfaces". > > My research also uncovered a change in the IMS Licensed Program > Specifications at around the same time. I couldn't find the CICS > Licensed Program Specifications, so I gave up looking for a pattern. > > Does anyone know why it changed? Is there some legal reason? > > If you haven't guessed by now, I don't really care about any of this, > but Legal are on my case (pun intended) and I am at a dead end. I've a > feeling that the people on this List have long memories and might be > able to help. > > A t D h V a A n N k C s E, > > Andrew > Andrew Wilkinson > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Permission to redistribute LE
Dear List, "z/OS Licensed Program Specifications" includes a section permitting you to redistribute modules from CEE.SCEELKED (among many other libraries) which have been included your programs. This is not a surprise as I had always believed this to be allowed. What is a surprise is that this permission first appears in z/OS Licensed Program Specifications with z/OS 2.3 in September 2017. Prior to that, permission was (and still is) in the notices at the end of "LE Vendor Interfaces". My research also uncovered a change in the IMS Licensed Program Specifications at around the same time. I couldn't find the CICS Licensed Program Specifications, so I gave up looking for a pattern. Does anyone know why it changed? Is there some legal reason? If you haven't guessed by now, I don't really care about any of this, but Legal are on my case (pun intended) and I am at a dead end. I've a feeling that the people on this List have long memories and might be able to help. A t D h V a A n N k C s E, Andrew Andrew Wilkinson -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
