I will be out of the office starting 11/26/2002 and will not return until
12/03/2002.
In case of emergency, contact J.Michael Strom.
Craig/All,
Presently in your same boat, haven't found anything (heck, I'd even settle
for 1.1.8!!). If someone does, I'd appreciate an informative post :-)
In fact, I'm having troubles finding any s390x-specific binaries out there
at all ... need a base-mode 64-bit machine; but the concept of an
Hello Listers,
We are currently running an evaluation project on our z/800 using the ThinkBlue
64-bit distribution running in a native LPAR and now we need to install Java. We have
downloaded the IBMJava2-SDK-1.4 RPM (also tried the 1.3) and have found that they
won't install because they are
Try Linux-390 List. IBM sales rep know only what means money to him!
Eventually he will sell to you a zSeries machine, when a G5 could solve
your problem
Linas Vepstas wrote:
Hi,
The correct thing to do would be to talk to
1) the good folks on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list.
2) Your I
David,
You seem to presume: 1) the costs of a PWD-offered solution are predominately
attributable
to the cost of the selected mainframe virtual machine, and 2) there is no reason for
IBM's
management to prefer one solution over another, and 3) that the solutions are
exchangable.
My belief is
On Tue, 2002-11-26 at 23:16, David Boyes wrote:
> Does the introduction of the LSB and the informal certification scripts
> for LSB 1.x compliance address this at all? I'm thinking that if the
> application is written to be LSB x.y compliant, then it should work and
> be supportable on other LSB x.
> I am installing a new linux lpar using redhat 7.2 Enigma with 2.4.9-38
> kernel. The system successfully IPL's
> but I cannot load the lcs driver. After the IPL I try to activate eth0
> and I see message "no lcs capable cards found".
> When I try "insmod lcs" or "insmod -f /lib/modules./lcs
Not entirely we think:
LSB does help in the the layout for scripts, like /usr/local/xxx for
sendmail and /etc/init.d etc, but the two main distros we certify Rh adv
srv and SuSE SLES both seemingly will have differences in the near future
in respects to libs, SLES will be taking an approach with N
> Most ISVs IMHO need to protect themselves somewhat on Linux
> because it is
> a platform that can have any level of changes applied at the end-user
> level. Meaning, we know what Solaris level or NT level works
> through QA
> processes, but what if somebody calls me and says I am
> running SuSE S
Hello from Gregg C Levine
It seems while doing some pre-transmission processing on one of my
messages, Outlook decided to send the message, anyway. So, folks those
two messages coming at you, are indeed different. I needed to change one
person's name to exactly how he spells it, from rather the nor
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Jon R. Doyle wrote:
> We do certifiy through normal QA process SuSE SLES, RH Adv Srv for example
> on Intel systems, and SuSE SLES on zSeries, this is the commercial
> products, and I mention this because the thread started about Oracle from
> what I read. Oracle has several l
Hello from Gregg C Levine
Did I suggest that you were wrong? No. I don't do that. I only suggested
something. It turns out that John Doyle, (Who I think I've met.),
responded to my comment, and sort of, backed me up. So, unless you've
done things, that the company, or I, don't want to know about, I
Hello from Gregg C Levine
It seems I've gone and done it again. Fast work, Jon Doyle, on putting
that together.
---
Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Use the Force, Luk
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Gregg C Levine wrote:
> Hello from Gregg C Levine
> Something else we need to consider here. Why would each distributor
> actually distribute the freely available version of say, sendmail, and
> not insist on certification for it? John, if it wasn't certified then,
> it sure a
We do certifiy through normal QA process SuSE SLES, RH Adv Srv for example
on Intel systems, and SuSE SLES on zSeries, this is the commercial
products, and I mention this because the thread started about Oracle from
what I read. Oracle has several levels from what I remember, one called
Validation
Hello from Gregg C Levine
Something else we need to consider here. Why would each distributor
actually distribute the freely available version of say, sendmail, and
not insist on certification for it? John, if it wasn't certified then,
it sure as taxes is now.
---
Gregg C Levine [EM
John Ford wrote:
> > ('>
> > //\
> > v_/_
>
> Dave,
>
> Hadn't seen this before... I'll always have a softspot for character-cell
> graphics.
Here's another:
L I N U X .~.
The Choice /V\
of a GNU /( )\
Generation ^^-^^
Credits go to Ralf G. R. Bergs, Aachen, Germany.
--
Ho
Hi,
The correct thing to do would be to talk to
1) the good folks on the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list.
2) Your IBM Sales Rep.
--linas
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 06:32:47PM -0800, carey chin was heard to remark:
>
> --- carey chin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > --- carey chin <[EMAIL PROTEC
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Dave Jousma wrote:
> Thanks all for the responses. For us, this is a chicken and egg thing.
> We are just testing the waters, so to speak, so we are not ready to
> call any vendor(s) to see if they will play in the 390 environment.
> You have answered my question, though. Th
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Dave Jousma wrote:
> Rich,
>
> Thanks for the response. You didn't answer my question however.
>
> The question was, if a vendor app says it is certified to run on SuSe
> linux, can it run on SuSe linux on any of the supported SuSe
> Linux platforms? For example, for INFORM
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 09:49:20 -0500, David Boyes
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> David, I disagree with your characterization that IBM's certified
>mainframe development
>> platform costs a "goodly sum a pop". The guy asking the question is the
>VP Engineering
>> of Sendmail.com, and if his company
Below is a URL pointing to a Gartner blurb on what may next in processors:
http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/main/0,14179,2898075,00.html
It talks about the the number of CPUs going above 16 and the use of
multiple MCMs to help z/OS.
I know that z/VM supports 64 virtual machines but
On Tuesday 26 November 2002 11:04 am, you wrote:
Duh! I clearly misread the message... :(
>
> AM:
> > When one downloads an .ISO file from SuSE's FTP site in preparation for
> > building a Linux on S/390 image, is the next step inevitably to burn a
> > CD-ROM from the ISO image? I know at some p
The files are in suse/images on CD 1. vmrdr.ikr, parmfile and initrd. They
will need to be transferred to VM as 80 byte fixed length files. The
parmfile in ASCII, the others in binary. When your done you should be able
to punch them, in the order above, into the RDR and IPL it.
There is a desc
If the ISO files are on a Linux pc they can be mounted in loop-back mode
and then you can cd to the mount point to find the files to upload.
Otherwise you'll need to burn the ISOs to a CD first.
hth
Lionel B. Dyck, Systems Softwa
Because the fixes are for the "stream" that uses gcc 2.95.3, and not gcc
3.2?
Mark Post
-Original Message-
From: Ferguson, Neale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 11:38 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: August 2001 Stream
Why is the latest drop on developerwork
Please see the "What's New" page at:
http://www10.software.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/linux390/whatsnew.shtml
for a change summary of the 2002-11-25 additions and changes to the
Linux for S/390 and zSeries DeveloperWorks-pages.
"August 2001 stream"
- Please refer to the "August 2001 str
Download them to a Linux PC. Issue: mount /cdrom -o
loop,ro
This will mount the ISO image so that its contents are found in /cdrom. You
can then FTP from there or whatever you want.
-Original Message-
When one downloads an .ISO file from SuSE's FTP site in preparation for
building a Linu
Nick,
You can burn them to a CD. If you are running Linux/Intel, then you could
also do a "loopback mount" of them to access their contents directly.
--
John McKown
Senior Technical Specialist
UICI Insurance Center
Applications & Solutions Team
+1.817.255.3225
> -Original Message-
> From
When one downloads an .ISO file from SuSE's FTP site in preparation for
building a Linux on S/390 image, is the next step inevitably to burn a
CD-ROM from the ISO image? I know at some point I'll ship three files to
VM so I can punch them to the RDR, but I'm drawing a blank on how to
extract them f
Why is the latest drop on developerworks (2002-11-25) referred to as the
"August 2001" stream?
As it's done in multiple places I'm wondering if it's more than just a typo.
Thanks all for the responses. For us, this is a chicken and egg thing.
We are just testing the waters, so to speak, so we are not ready to
call any vendor(s) to see if they will play in the 390 environment.
You have answered my question, though. The 3rd party app must
specify z/series or S390 as
Thank you to everyone. This will probably be enough
John Summerfield
cc:
Sent by: Linux on 390 Subject: Re: Data transfer between
z/VM systems
Port
<[EMA
> This question is causing alot of confusion for us. We are
> getting ready
> to
> put up SuSe linux, and also want to put up a couple of relevent
> applications
> to actually do a pilot test. When an vendor application says it is
> certified
> to run on SuSe(or Redhat) distribution, does that me
Werner,
Look in /usr/src/linux/Documentation/devices.txt. '58 block' is "Reserved
for logical volume manager." You've basically run into a restriction
imposed by silo, zilo, and zipl. All the files that are used to define an
"IPL set" (for lack of a better term) _must_ reside on the same physic
Dave,
In the particular instance you're referencing, Informix, unless IBM shows a
version that runs on Linux/390, then they have only ported it to Intel
Linux. They don't have a version for Linux/390 (that they'll ship to you),
yet. They most likely will, just not yet.
In general, suppliers lis
- Original Message -
From: "Dave O'Neill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: eServer Magazine
blah blah
> ('>
> //\
> v_/_
Dave,
Hadn't seen this before... I'll always have a softspot for character-cell
graphics.
-jcf
> David, I disagree with your characterization that IBM's certified
mainframe development
> platform costs a "goodly sum a pop". The guy asking the question is the
VP Engineering
> of Sendmail.com, and if his company produces offerings for zSeries, which
I believe they
> do, then they are eligibl
You are basically looking at instruction set incompatibility. Presumably,
INFORMIX ships binary distributions of their product so you 1 ) Don't have
to compile anything and 2) Can't compile or change their source code. This
effectively locks you into the INTEL environment unless and until a vendor
I wouldn't take that for granted. If it doesn't specifically mention Linux
for S/390, ask the vendor (or see if Jim responds).
On Tuesday 26 November 2002 08:26 am, you wrote:
> Rich,
>
> Thanks for the response. You didn't answer my question however.
>
> The question was, if a vendor app says i
The general answer is "No". Being certified on SLES8 for Intel doesn't mean
it's there for s390.
-Original Message-
Rich,
Thanks for the response. You didn't answer my question however.
The question was, if a vendor app says it is certified to run on SuSe
linux, can it run on SuSe linu
Or is this another black-eye for the mainframe(like Unix
System Services was from a pure UNIX perspective) where
it's not quite ready for prime-time, and is just different enough that
there
are not enough apps available yet.
I think Linux is progressing much faster than USS did in its infancy.
T
Java aside, applications written to run on Linux are source code compatible, not
binary compatible. In the case of most commercial programs, where source code is
generally not available to customers, you depend on the source code owner to compile
and test their code for each new Linux platform.
Rich,
Thanks for the response. You didn't answer my question however.
The question was, if a vendor app says it is certified to run on SuSe
linux, can it run on SuSe linux on any of the supported SuSe
Linux platforms? For example, for INFORMIX, there is now a version
that is LINUX ready. But
There are lots of examples of customers using DB2 on Linux for S/390. Feel
free to contact me for more information.
One of the largest motivating factors involved in getting vendors to port
their code to Linux for S/390 is customers. Jim Elliott can certainly tell
you if and when, but if it isn'
Thanks, Jim (and the other that responded). I've subscribed!
Bob
-Original Message-
From: Jim Elliott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 6:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: eServer Magazine
> I probably missed it, but is there a URL for thi
z/VM 4.3
We are seeing VERY long startup times for WAS on out LINUX images
It has been suggested that simple tuning would fix it
It may be we just lack poke, but does anyone see anything obvious for us to
try?
Here are the results of simple startup diagnostic commands
ind queues exp
VB
All,
I'm about ready to put up our first linux lpar, and have another question
or two.
This question is causing alot of confusion for us. We are getting ready
to
put up SuSe linux, and also want to put up a couple of relevent
applications
to actually do a pilot test. When an vendor applicat
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Daniel Jarboe wrote:
> Thanks a lot for the help, the only diff is a histfilesize in
> .bash_profile, and echo -n worked fine for me :(. Also, nothing
> suspicious in rpm -qa --last, I will look for that thread though,
> thanks.
I had in mind that you might have imported sof
Thanks a lot for the help, the only diff is a histfilesize in
.bash_profile, and echo -n worked fine for me :(. Also, nothing
suspicious in rpm -qa --last, I will look for that thread though,
thanks.
~ Daniel
-Original Message-
From: John Summerfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Mond
On the mainframe, you have change and reference bits for each page.
This permits sophisticated real storage management algorithms not possible
on the typical minicomputer architecture which do not provide a
reference bit.
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTEC
At 08:14 26-11-02 +0800, John Summerfield wrote:
If you prefer security, remove those packages and use opnessh instead.
ssh provides the functions of rsh with (at least) equal convenience and
much better security.
Generally speaking this is obviously true, but depending on your
environment thin
Mark,
> I think your guess is correct. I'm curious as to why you want to make your
> root file system an LVM volume, though. Do you really think you'll need to
> expand it that much, instead of just adding additional file systems on
> various mount points?
>
to be honest, I just wanted to try out
53 matches
Mail list logo
