Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On Tue, 15 May 2018 11:50:40 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote: > >>Would you submit or vote for an RFE that LOAD/LINK/ATTACH, BLDL, ... >>be made case-insensitive? > >Yes. > I won't vote for it, but please keep this list updated on how it plays out. -- gil

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

Perhaps unclear; I meant "not inspired" in the context of MS/PC-DOS, which sprang from QDOS. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Timothy Sipples

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

> Are you suggesting that there are codepoints that appear in multiple pages >but map differently If Gil is, then he's correct. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

Gil wrote: >OK. I'll try. Simplicity of specification. Simplicity of implementation. >Filenames are strings. Different strings should refer to different files. Categorical imperative there. Seems…circular. >Consistency. With Binder it's easy enough to create a load module: >

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

Seymour Metz wrote: >SCP was certainly inspired by CP/M, but m$ was not. I don't think that's a fair characterization. Microsoft was *deeply* "inspired" by CP/M, per the historical record. In fact, Microsoft was a CP/M licensee and sold CP/M as part of the Microsoft SoftCard for Apple II

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On Mon, 14 May 2018 16:50:41 -0400, Phil Smith III wrote: >The funny part is, find the most rabid Unix-head you know, and ask why it's >A Good Thing that filenames are case-sensitive. In my reasonably extensive >experience at playing this game (including 5 years at Linuxcare, with lots >of

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

​Two smart guys, two smart opinions, no doubt, on a moot point. I'd like to offer that English is not case-sensitive (to any degree comparable to computing use), for what that's worth (imho, a lot). Many language scripts have no such concept as "case" at all. You can argue that "John" and

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

> CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil? Both. The Devil is in the detail, and some of the details are diabolical. I'm one of those who spell Unix as Eunix, with malice aforethought, and who grumbles "When the only tool you have is a pipe, everything looks like a

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

The funny part is, find the most rabid Unix-head you know, and ask why it's A Good Thing that filenames are case-sensitive. In my reasonably extensive experience at playing this game (including 5 years at Linuxcare, with lots of victims), several things were always true: 1) They would assert

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

SCP was certainly inspired by CP/M, but m$ was not. Certainly there are things in PC/MS-DOS that are somewhat different from CP/M. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

As I recall, CP/M had PIP from the DEC world, which PC-DOS did not. Wasn't there also a change from ED to EDLIN? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Steve

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

QDOS was intended to be a clone of CP/M. PC-DOS had some significant differences form CP/M; I don't know whether that was true of QDOS. I vaguely recall that CP/M had PIP with DEC syntax. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From:

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On May 14, 2018, at 9:58 AM, Steve Thompson wrote: > >> 1. m$ started with QDOS, not CP/M > > I wish I still had the documents -- but a long story quite short: I was told > CP/M, and the very first copy of MS/DOS that I got, had the same commands and > lack of sub-folders

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On Mon, 14 May 2018 17:08:27 +0200, R.S. wrote: > >CP/M was very similar to any DOS version. The most important (IMHO) >exception was lack of directories. > Interesting. Earliest releases of Mac OS {which I never used) MFS similarly lacked directories. "Folder" membership was instead an

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

W dniu 2018-05-14 o 16:58, Steve Thompson pisze: On 05/13/2018 04:26 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote:   1. m$ started with QDOS, not CP/M I wish I still had the documents -- but a long story quite short: I was told CP/M, and the very first copy of MS/DOS that I got, had the same commands and lack

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On 05/13/2018 04:26 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote: 1. m$ started with QDOS, not CP/M I wish I still had the documents -- but a long story quite short: I was told CP/M, and the very first copy of MS/DOS that I got, had the same commands and lack of sub-folders that CP/M I had been using had.

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On Fri, 11 May 2018 10:46:20 -0400, Hobart Spitz wrote: >Second to that are the deficient string and file models: > > - There are separate techniques for processing text, on one hand, and > binary data on the other. (z/OS, z/VM have no such requirement.) > - Using the

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 3:36 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote: > I'm comfortablewith using Unix files. I'm not comfortable with packaging > for MVS components that seems done by people without a clue, but it's not > fair to blame that on the use of Unix. > ​I'm trying to figure out why

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 3:26 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote: > 1. m$ started with QDOS, not CP/M > ​Yes you are correct. I was under the impression that QDOS was "inspired" by CP/M-80. At least MS-DOS 1.0 seemed to be CP/M-ish to me. ​ > > 2. CP/M was influence by RT-11 > ​My

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

I'm comfortablewith using Unix files. I'm not comfortable with packaging for MVS components that seems done by people without a clue, but it's not fair to blame that on the use of Unix. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

1. m$ started with QDOS, not CP/M 2. CP/M was influence by RT-11 -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Steve Thompson Sent: Friday, May

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

Here you go John: DEAR BOSS, YOU MAY BE A LUDDITE. SINCERELY, JOHN MCKOWN Kirk Wolf Dovetailed Technologies http://dovetail.com PS> Seriously, it is fair to say that POSIX and zFS files need better support in z/OS. Take BPXBATCH for example (please :-) On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 8:03 AM, John

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On May 11, 2018, at 10:39 AM, John McKown wrote: > > I appreciate the response so far. I'm really getting the idea that people > are more "resigned" to UNIX as part of z/OS, rather than "enthusiastic" > about it. I don’t know that I’d describe myself as

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On Fri, 11 May 2018 11:47:08 -0400, Carmen Vitullo wrote: >Talking about strange dsn allocations, I worked as a contractor Y2K for state >Govmt, after updating TLSM to support OS/390 2.5 one of our agency's support >folks told me I broke TLMS because the dataset(s) they use to write to take

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

Talking about strange dsn allocations, I worked as a contractor Y2K for state Govmt, after updating TLSM to support OS/390 2.5 one of our agency's support folks told me I broke TLMS because the dataset(s) they use to write to take for DOL is, for example DSN='Sears Roebuck and Co',

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 10:19 AM, Paul Gilmartin < 000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > > > I hate EBCDIC! I wish IBM had provided just an EBCDIC kernel and let FOSS > supply the shell > and utilities. > ​NIH. I somewhat understand why IBM did this. First, IBM is very

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 9:06 AM, Charles Mills wrote: > Oh for gosh sakes! Every operating system is different. There is no > eleventh commandment "filenames shall be 44 uppercase characters" that UNIX > violated. Tell him a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On Fri, 11 May 2018 07:06:11 -0700, Charles Mills wrote: >Oh for gosh sakes! Every operating system is different. There is no eleventh >commandment "filenames shall be 44 uppercase characters" that UNIX violated. >Tell him a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. Or that the

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 9:48 AM, Steve Thompson wrote: > I've got an observation you and your boss probably won't like. > > Windows is based on CP/M (that is what Microsoft started with). Guess what > CP/M was based on. > ​Hum, I used CP/M on a z80 based system back in the

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

I've got an observation you and your boss probably won't like. Windows is based on CP/M (that is what Microsoft started with). Guess what CP/M was based on. Now, here we are 30+ years from M/S and Windows (~ 1983 for first release), and they have a lower RAS than does Linux which started

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

I think the real downside is cost of going to a new "platform", even tho it's still within z/OS. That means training, development/conversionj/implementation, testing, deployment, new operations procedures and training, maintenance, etc. Add in the general problem of rewriting any software in its

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

Oh for gosh sakes! Every operating system is different. There is no eleventh commandment "filenames shall be 44 uppercase characters" that UNIX violated. Tell him a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. Or that the inability to learn new things is a sign of old age. Or point

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 8:44 AM, Tony Thigpen wrote: > I don't believe that John said anything about the command line parameters. > He was talking about the file system only. As for the command line, the > only thing 'affected' would be the name of the command (including any >

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

I don't believe that John said anything about the command line parameters. He was talking about the file system only. As for the command line, the only thing 'affected' would be the name of the command (including any path). It could still be entered in lower-case, but he file system would find

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 8:29 AM, Mike Wawiorko < 014ab5cdfb21-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > Just get used to z/OS Unix (Posix?) being case sensitive. > ​I completely agree with you. But many people with a Windows background are going to be "upset". I don't know how difficult it

Re: CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

Just get used to z/OS Unix (Posix?) being case sensitive. Many command modifiers have entirely different meanings in either case: command -x v. command -X Mike Wawiorko   This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the addressee and may also be privileged or

CONTROVERSY! z/OS UNIX: is it an enhancement or a tool of the Devil?

OK, I bet I got your attention on that {grin}. But, seriously, I am wondering what the "person in the trenches" thinks about the increasing use of UNIX files and commands becoming more prevalent on z/OS. I am basically asking because my manager absolutely despises UNIX files. And hates the