Re: rsync anyone?

Pax Directory to dataset on lpar 1, unpax data set to Directory on lpar 2. Add whatever transmission method in between. I resisted pax for a long time.. But it always works for me. I have had some unpleasant surprises using techniques from *nix that don't always do what I think they should on

Re: rsync anyone?

On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 21:11:49 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: > >>a predominantly ASCII world. > >I wish! The real world is a morass of different code pages, not always >declared in MIME header fields. > And, irritatingly, when SMTP, either on z/OS or z/VM converts incoming messages from

Re: BPXBATCH "SH ...; su; pax ..." does not do what you think it does (was: rsync anyone?)

On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 16:01:15 +0100, Peter Hunkeler wrote: > >To run commands in a "su" shell environment, you have to write all the >commands into a UNIX file first, and then call "su" by redirecting stdin to >that UNIX file. > >echo "id" > /tmp/sucommandfile >su < /tmp/sucommandfile > >This

Re: BPXBATCH "SH ...; su; pax ..." does not do what you think it does (was: rsync anyone?)

.; su; pax ..." does not do what you think it does (was: rsync anyone?) On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Peter Hunkeler <p...@gmx.ch> wrote: > ​ > > To run commands in a "su" shell environment, you have to write all the > commands into a UNIX file first, and

Re: BPXBATCH "SH ...; su; pax ..." does not do what you think it does (was: rsync anyone?)

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Peter Hunkeler wrote: > ​ > > To run commands in a "su" shell environment, you have to write all the > commands into a UNIX file first, and then call "su" by redirecting stdin to > that UNIX file. > > > echo "id" > /tmp/sucommandfile > su <

Re: BPXBATCH "SH ...; su; pax ..." does not do what you think it does (was: rsync anyone?)

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Chris Hoelscher wrote: > does not do what you think it does ... > > or, in the words of Inigo Montoya .. > > you keep using that command. I do not think it means what you think it > means ... > ​What am I missing on that. I'm always

Re: BPXBATCH "SH ...; su; pax ..." does not do what you think it does (was: rsync anyone?)

In <29b16432403d6c45a9bee5f0302d191779ba2...@vss-exchmb1.sfg.corp.LOCAL>, on 12/29/2015 at 06:24 PM, "Pommier, Rex" said: >The only thing you're missing on Chris' response was the movie >reference. Movie? The book came first. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz,

Re: BPXBATCH "SH ...; su; pax ..." does not do what you think it does (was: rsync anyone?)

Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of John McKown Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2015 11:26 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: BPXBATCH "SH ...; su; pax ..." does not do what you think it does (was: rsync

Re: BPXBATCH "SH ...; su; pax ..." does not do what you think it does (was: rsync anyone?)

age- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Peter Hunkeler > Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2015 11:34 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: [Bulk] AW: Re: BPXBATCH "SH ...; su; pax ..." does not do what you think

AW: Re: BPXBATCH "SH ...; su; pax ..." does not do what you think it does (was: rsync anyone?)

>>echo "id" > /tmp/sucommandfile >>su < /tmp/sucommandfile >> >>This will show uid=0, because it is the sub shell (uid=0), which is reading >>from /tmp/sucommandfile as if it >was stdin, and execute the commands found >>therein. >> >Did this work for you on z/OS? Looking for alternatives on a

Re: rsync anyone?

> Q). Does anyone have a better way to move a directory that has files and > subdirectories to a different LPAR? Or do you just keep installing the same > code for each instance? Not sure it is a better way, but when I migrated to 2.1, I converted all ZFSs back to HFSs since I find them

Re: rsync anyone?

In <20151229094330.0b444324d33c5248eb75a...@gmx.net>, on 12/29/2015 at 09:43 AM, nitz-ibm said: >One problem may have been that IBMUSER (who owned most of the >files since they were installed under IBMUSER) on the originating >system had a uid of 2 (not 0!). And that was

BPXBATCH "SH ...; su; pax ..." does not do what you think it does (was: rsync anyone?)

> sh cd /u/zfs;su;pax -rwvCMX -p eW . /u/hfs This does not do what you think it does. The pax command will run under the initial uid and not with uid=o as you might hope. I recently explained this on the RACF-L list as follows: Starting in the initial shell process, most (shell) commands

Re: rsync anyone?

In <5189899169969403.wa.paulgboulderaim@listserv.ua.edu>, on 12/28/2015 at 05:22 PM, Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> said: >a predominantly ASCII world. I wish! The real world is a morass of different code pages, not always declared in MIME header fields.

Re: EXTERNAL: Re: rsync anyone?

I ported rsync-2.5.5 a few years ago: Below and attached is the diff from the original rsync-2.5.5.tar.gz. I also created /usr/local/bin/rsync.sh since we put rsync in a non-standard location:

Re: rsync anyone?

List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Hansen, Dave L - Eagan, MN Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 10:58 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: rsync anyone? Hi, I have been working with IBM to identify how to move a USS directory that has files and subdirectories to a different

rsync anyone?

Hi, I have been working with IBM to identify how to move a USS directory that has files and subdirectories to a different LPAR. They said Ported Tools and the scp command. However, OpenSSH has had security issues IIRC. The other thing they mentioned was to port rsync over to z/OS. I also

Re: OpenSSH has had bugs in the news. (Was rsync anyone?)

ing/ > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Kirk Wolf > Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 1:10 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: rsync anyone? > > > > > ... However,

Re: rsync anyone?

On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 14:08:37 -0600, Kirk Wolf wrote: > >I'm not sure if an ssh invocation of pax like this works in all cases. >Certainly z/OS to non-z/OS it would not work since, by default, ssh exec >sessions are translated EBCDIC/ASCII and vice versa in the z/OS OpenSSH >implementations. I

AW: rsync anyone?

L - Eagan, MN Gesendet: Montag, 28. Dezember 2015 18:58 An: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Betreff: rsync anyone? Hi, I have been working with IBM to identify how to move a USS directory that has files and subdirectories to a different LPAR. They said Ported Tools and the scp command. However, OpenS

OpenSSH has had bugs in the news. (Was rsync anyone?)

Subject: Re: rsync anyone? > > ... However, OpenSSH has had security issues IIRC. ... What security issues are those? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.

Re: rsync anyone?

On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 18:12:05 +, Skeldum, William wrote: >The pax command is a good choice because it can copy all files, directories, >and symbolic links in a directory using a single command without overlaying >any existing files. For example: >cd /Service/ZOS113/var >pax -rvwk -pe *

Re: rsync anyone?

then I'm sure Dave would desire a better solution. Bill -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 12:35 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: rsync anyone? On Mon, 28 Dec 2015 18

Re: rsync anyone?

> > ... However, OpenSSH has had security issues IIRC. ... What security issues are those? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO