I am having difficulty understanding your end point.

You want to ship a load module by using IEBCOPY UNLOAD and then transmit the
flat file to a remote system where I presume you would like to reload and
execute.

Not a clue as to why you need DEB access or what issue is causing you
difficulty.

Or why you are shipping UNLOAD rather than XMIT or TERSE format which are -
FIXED - and  pretty well defined and have open tools.

On Sat, 15 Jun 2024 06:34:45 -0500 Paul Edwards
<[email protected]> wrote:

:>I wish to create "executables" by running iewl, doing an iebcopy
:>unload, and then doing the equivalent of ftp with option rdw to
:>create a simple flat/sequential file that is self-contained.
:>
:>(rightly or wrongly, this is my design goal)
:>
:>And I want to use the MVS 3.8J version of the tools and then have
:>upward compatibility from MVS 3.8J to z/OS.
:>
:>That much is already working for any testing I have done to date.
:>
:>I now wish to replace all of the 2-3 IBM tools nominally used in the
:>above process with a third party tool. Specifically this one (pdld):
:>
:>https://sourceforge.net/p/pdos/gitcode/ci/master/tree/pdld/src/mainframe.c
:>
:>and noting that it is already working to an extent.
:>
:>However, page 333 of Appendix B of DFSMSdfp Utilities, SC26-7414-05
:>available here:
:>
:>https://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/epubs/pdf/dgt2u140.pdf
:>
:>says:
:>
:>8 16 Structure Last 16 bytes of basic section of the Data Extent Block (DEB) 
for
:>the original data set. 1
:>24 256 Structure First 16 extent descriptions from the original DEB. 1
:>
:>1. These fields are highly device dependent and are required to translate 
absolute DASD addresses (MBBCCHHR) in
:>the member data records to relative addresses (TTR). The DEB control block is 
documented in z/OS DFSMSdfp
:>Advanced Services. DEVTAB information is documented inDFP System Data 
Administration.
:>
:>
:>And that's the problem - device-dependent.
:>
:>I wish to use blocksize 6144 as a "universal blocksize for load modules"
:>(I would like it to work on 3350 and 3390 at least, but ideally everything).
:>
:>So I would like to try to abstract this.
:>
:>I don't care if it is inefficient loading because I lose the 3390-optimized
:>CCHHR values. But I do need it to work on 3390.
:>
:>I was wondering whether I could/should use "VIO" as an abstract device
:>type to make coding more straightforward.
:>
:>It's also possible that I'm misunderstanding something.
:>
:>Any direction please?
:>
:>Note that the current code is C90-compliant and will run on either
:>ASCII or EBCDIC environments to produce a (nominally) valid
:>IEBCOPY unload on an EBCDIC environment.
:>
:>Also note that it currently takes in only object decks, but I am
:>thinking of getting it to accept IEBCOPY unloaded object code
:>PDSes and/or unloaded NCAL libraries with aliases for external
:>references and/or S390 ELF object code and/or S/390 ELF
:>libraries (EBCDIC versions using a custom binutils) and/or
:>CMS libraries (so far I haven't been able to read CMS libraries
:>as a simple sequential file though - it stops reading at the first
:>member so I may have to do a TYPE (HEX and create something
:>conceptually similar to an IEBCOPY unload).
:>
:>Thanks. Paul.
:>
:>----------------------------------------------------------------------
:>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
:>send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
Binyamin Dissen <[email protected]>
http://www.dissensoftware.com

Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill - Israel

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to