Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

). Regards, Alan Watthey -Original Message- From: Peter Hunkeler [mailto:p...@gmx.ch] Sent: 20 December 2017 7:09 pm Subject: AW: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist >Since it is a PDSE dataset it will always have an active connection and so will not be able to perform >automatic compr

Re: SYS1.LINKLIB and APF (Was: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist)

PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: SYS1.LINKLIB and APF (Was: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist) No. Unless SYS1.LINKLIB is also explicitly in the APF list, it won't be APF authorized when STEPLIB/JOBLIB'd. For the step to be authorized, all entries in STEPLIB/JOBLIB need

AW: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

>Since it is a PDSE dataset it will always have an active connection and so >will not be able to perform >automatic compression. >Thus it will get full. Compress PDSE's? This is the (single, maybe) advantage of PDSEs: There is no need to compress. -- Peter Hunkeler

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

- Original Message - From: "Carmen Vitullo" <cvitu...@hughes.net> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 8:15:14 AM Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist ok, so along the lines of COBOL 6.2 we're getting prepared to install and test, we

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 8:15 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist ok, so along the lines of COBOL 6.2 we're getting prepared to install and test, we found an LE PTF required for 6.2, so on to IBMLINK and ordered all pre reqs PE fixes, superseding

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

- Original Message - From: "Bruce Hewson" <bruce_hew...@hotmail.com> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 9:43:28 PM Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist Hi, So Production Control will manage the promotion of modules to the linklisted d

Re: SYS1.LINKLIB and APF (Was: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist)

>No. Unless SYS1.LINKLIB is also explicitly in the APF list, it won't be APF >authorized when STEPLIB/JOBLIB'd. For the step to be authorized, all entries >in STEPLIB/JOBLIB need to be explicitly authorized. SYS1.LINKLIB and SYS1.SVCLIB are automatically added to the APF list at IPL. You

Re: SYS1.LINKLIB and APF (Was: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist)

M-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Lizette Koehler > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 3:47 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: SYS1.LINKLIB and APF (Was: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist) > > @Skip > > Taking this discussion a little sideways. > > I seem to re

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

Hi, So Production Control will manage the promotion of modules to the linklisted datasets. Since it is a PDSE dataset it will always have an active connection and so will not be able to perform automatic compression. Thus it will get full. The same Production Control group would be

SYS1.LINKLIB and APF (Was: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist)

r 19, 2017 3:36 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist > > A linklist data set need not be authorized. If you specify LNKAUTH=APFTAB in > IEASYSxx, then an application library would be authorized only if you created > an APF entry for

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

On 20/12/2017 9:35 AM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: The exposure that my ancient Audit department focused on was devious code that could be slipped into production in some random library being STEPLIBed to in an individual job. Code like the legendary (fairytale?) case of diverting fractions of a

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

...@sce.com -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Lizette Koehler Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 11:12 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist So, my opinion Once a dataset

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

; From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On >> Behalf Of R.S. >> Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 6:08 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist >> >> What is the risk of putting COBOL-compi

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Lizette Koehler Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 2:12 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist So, my opinion Once a dataset is in the linkst - depending on how it is controlled - someone

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

marc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 2:59 PM To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 12:12:07 -0700, Lizette Koehler wrote: >Once a dataset is in the linkst - depending on how it is controlled - someone >co

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist To clarify my post about putting a consolidated application library in LINKLIST. Audit did not 'force' us, they 'pressed' us. Difference is that Audit exhortations can be resisted if you don't mind going on the defensive all

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

On Tue, 19 Dec 2017 12:12:07 -0700, Lizette Koehler wrote: >Once a dataset is in the linkst - depending on how it is controlled - someone >could put other code in there that is not system friendly. > >So I have dataset, MYHLQ.USER.LOADLIB in the linklist. > >Now it is apf authorized. Maybe yes,

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

.S. > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 6:08 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist > > What is the risk of putting COBOL-compiled code into LINKLIST? > Let's assume LNKAUTH=LNKLST. > Such code will not perform any authorized instructions. I

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

What is the risk of putting COBOL-compiled code into LINKLIST? Let's assume LNKAUTH=LNKLST. Such code will not perform any authorized instructions. It can be called from another AC=1 code, but the problem is the module, not the COBOL code called. What I'm missing? -- Radoslaw Skorupka Lodz,

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

):Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist I see your points, for me, it's never been in a habit of upgrading any target lib's that are linklisted, did that once with some older XX products (PDS) that didn't act well after trying dynamically refreshing LLA and the linklist, so I've built my linklist lib's

Are levels of control one reason for cloud movement was Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

n z/OS. Our PARMLIB datasets are protected, so I >cannot look to see if we use it or not. > >Peter > >-Original Message- >From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On >Behalf Of Jesse 1 Robinson >Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 4:02 PM

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Seymour J Metz Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 9:54 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist "He jests at scars that never felt a

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Seymour J Metz Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 9:54 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist "He jests at scars that never felt a wound."

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

most times. Carmen Vitullo - Original Message - From: "Jerry Whitteridge" <jerry.whitteri...@ibm.com> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 12:21:55 PM Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist The issue with PDSE in the linklist is rel

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

...@ibm.com Cell: 602 527 4871 < Note New Phone Number IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> wrote on 12/18/2017 11:17:01 AM: > From: Seymour J Metz <sme...@gmu.edu> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Date: 12/18/2017 11:17 AM > Subject: Re:

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

List <IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu> on behalf of Carmen Vitullo <cvitu...@hughes.net> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 1:15 PM To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist Hum , I know COBOL object modules 5+ need to be PDS/E, but I've never knew about the linklist

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

r...@broadridge.com> Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 1:26 AM To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist Some folks have probably been burned by the abuse of user libraries in the LINKLIST and so preach fire and brimstone against it. To others it is just "business

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 12:20 AM, Peter Hunkeler wrote: > > If an auditor "pressed", then (if not also insisting on LNKAUTH=APFTAB), > that auditor most likely was wrong. > > > IMHO, those auditors were wrong. Full stop. Auditors should investigate, > document, and suggest. Auditors

AW: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

> If an auditor "pressed", then (if not also insisting on LNKAUTH=APFTAB), that auditor most likely was wrong. IMHO, those auditors were wrong. Full stop. Auditors should investigate, document, and suggest. Auditors should never be allowed to force something. -- Peter Hunkeler

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

se1.robin...@sce.com> Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2017 12:37 PM To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist At a previous shop, auditors pressed us to include the main (consolidated) application load library in LINKLIST. Their argument was that LINKLIST was a known comm

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

auditors pressed us to include the main (consolidated) application load library in LINKLIST. Their argument was that LINKLIST was a known commodity I've been told that "user libraries" like this should never be in the linklist. when we migrated from VSE to z/OS in 2010 I was almost burned as

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

, 2017 10:27 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist Some folks have probably been burned by the abuse of user libraries in the LINKLIST and so preach fire and brimstone against it. To others it is just "business as usual" because they have not e

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

DU Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist I dunno... when we migrated from VSE to z/OS in 2010 I was almost burned as a heretic for suggesting that user application libraries be placed in the linklist... From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LI

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

x23353 <peter.far...@broadridge.com> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 2:00 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist Re: #3, that is not necessarily true. Depends heavily on the shop-standard STEPLIB rules (use or don't use production "user library" in

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

on List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 1:32 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist EXTERNAL: This email originated from outside of Broadridge. Do not click any links or open any attachments unless you trust

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist [USAA Confidential]

ERV.UA.EDU Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 12:25:47 PM Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist [USAA Confidential] I have plenty of PDSE datasets in my linklist with no issues including the ones you have listed below. The challenge comes with datasets used very early in the IPL (like

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

that "user libraries" like this should never be in the linklist. From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of Jake Anderson <justmainfra...@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 5:50 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist [USAA Confidential]

-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Carmen Vitullo Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 12:15 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist Hum , I know COBOL object modules 5+ need to be PDS/E

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

etc am I taking unnecessary chances? Carmen Vitullo - Original Message - From: "Lizette Koehler" <stars...@mindspring.com> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 11:47:57 AM Subject: Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist As you will find out. A

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

it after the SMSPDSx STC is up Lizette > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Jake Anderson > Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 5:51 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist >

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

M-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Jake Anderson > Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 5:51 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist > > Hi > > A general question > > Do you still cobol load module in linklist post

Re: Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

Cobol 5+ objects must be in PDSE. Some early IPL functions can't list a PDSE. Only restriction. On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 6:50 AM, Jake Anderson wrote: > Hi > > A general question > > Do you still cobol load module in linklist post upgrade to 6.2 ? > > Regards > Jake >

Cobol upgrade 6.2 linklist

Hi A general question Do you still cobol load module in linklist post upgrade to 6.2 ? Regards Jake -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: