Tom Longfellow wrote:
>1. Do you really log in to your peripherals that much for it to be an
>issue? Is this a case of 'We have LDAP, everything must use it'?
>2. What is wrong with a small self contained local authentication
>method? No one will stumble across YOU while they are hacking
>you
Please Ignore my previous Response. You already tried to increase the region.
Kolusu
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>> the set_callback routine returns a 0 but my diagnostic function is not
>> called. In the GSK trace I see INFO read_tls13_certificate(): Diagnostic
>> callback routine will not be called.
Charles,
Did you see this ?
If an out-of-storage condition is encountered during the
gsk_secure_socket_
I am not sure if a Crypto Services System SSL question belongs on IBM-MAIN
or on RACF-L, so I am taking the shotgun approach and posting both places.
I am trying to use the new-in-V2R5 certificate callback diagnostic function
in System SSL
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.5.0?topic=reference-gsk-
Paul, do you feel so jealous of the manual writers that you have to claim that
perfectly clear text is unclear?
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin <042bfe9c879d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2
They dismissed the original lawsuit without prejudice. Which means they reserve
the right to refile, often with new claims or dropped claims. Both being true
in this case.
The basic claim, that the mainframe is old technology and therefore can’t be
part of “new” technology, the cloud, is ridicul
>
Shmuel, do you feel so jealous and threatened by Ed's basic competency that you
>must pounce three times in 12 minutes when an opportunity arises?
There you go again. Are you projecting?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From:
Or maybe when the article said "similar" they were referring to this:
"The new complaint expands upon the one filed last year while also
omitting previous allegations that the supposed securities fraud
allocated revenue for the purpose of maximizing executive bonus
compensation."
On 1/26/202
Pretty clear.
Due to the way complex securities litigation works, the firm representing the
largest group of investors – Ironworkers Local 580 Joint Fund – took over the
handling of the case, then in September, 2022, moved to have the case
voluntarily dismissed without prejudice [PDF], meaning
Then I wonder why they used the word "similar" in the article and not
"same".
On 1/26/2023 12:31 PM, Bill Johnson wrote:
Same lawsuit refiled. Did you read the entire article?
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
On Thursday, January 26, 2023, 3:19 PM, zMan wrote:
IBM top brass accused again o
W dniu 25.01.2023 o 23:35, Sri h Kolusu pisze:
Depending on the field 23,2 we have word ALTER/READ in the report.
However the field contain other values, let's say X'1101' which should be
translated to C'CHANGE'... but this record type implies slightly different
format. For X'1101' I should us
Same lawsuit refiled. Did you read the entire article?
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
On Thursday, January 26, 2023, 3:19 PM, zMan wrote:
IBM top brass accused again of using mainframes to prop up Watson, cloud
sales
https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/18/ibm_sued_securities_fraud/
What h
Can you go to OMVS and run " ls -la
/MVS1/var/zosmf/configuration/configuration_planned.cfg " ? This sounds like a
permission issue between the user IZUSVR trying to write to that file and
whichever user owns that file.
For example in my home directory for a file called test.txt
# ls -la test
IBM top brass accused again of using mainframes to prop up Watson, cloud
sales
https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/18/ibm_sued_securities_fraud/
What has happened to the IBM we knew and loved?!
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signof
starting with z/OS 2.2 IIRC the all the data files for z/OSMF were moved
from /var/ to /global/zosmf/...
when upgrading, performing maint, the root filesystem needs to be
mounted rdwr -
I found this out 2 times so far and I don't think that's documented but
the address space needs to write t
Cross Posted to Main and RACF
I am miles out of my depth and have NO IDEA how to get past this one.
$HASP373 IZUSVR1 STARTED
ICH408I USER(IZUSVR ) GROUP(IZUADMIN) NAME(-ZOSMF STARTED TASK ) 408
/MVS1/var/zosmf/configuration/configuration_planned.cfg
CL(DIRACC ) FID(D6E2F5C3C1E301D
On 1/26/2023 10:02 AM, Tom Marchant wrote:
Better, he could add SMRTDATA to the hold, similar to the following, taken from
the latest IBM enhanced holddata:
++HOLD(UJ09069) FMID(HBB77C0) REASON(CA64026) ERROR DATE(23018)
COMMENT(SMRTDATA(FIX(UJ09743) CHGDT(230118))) CLASS(PE).
We do specify
On 1/26/2023 10:02 AM, Tom Marchant wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 11:19:52 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
But is there a way to undo a ++RELEASE that has been issued erroneously?
Of course there is. Another HOLD. The HOLDDATA is processed sequentially. The
RELEASE will remove the HOLDDATA entry a
I understand thank you
> On Jan 26, 2023, at 12:56 PM, Peter Relson wrote:
>
> Joe,
>
> Your next step is to produce the smallest possible program that demonstrates
> the problem (without using anything local to your shop) and share it. Have no
> generalities, no statements of "it does this
On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 11:19:52 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 14:32:47 +, Kurt J. Quackenbush wrote:
>>
>>Just to confirm what has already been mentioned, you're using ++RELEASE
>>incorrectly. The fixing PTF will resolve the ++HOLD, so there is no need to
>>generate a ++RE
Joe,
Your next step is to produce the smallest possible program that demonstrates
the problem (without using anything local to your shop) and share it. Have no
generalities, no statements of "it does this".
The easier it is for the readers to see exactly what you did and possibly
reproduce the
On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 14:32:47 +, Kurt J. Quackenbush wrote:
>
>Just to confirm what has already been mentioned, you're using ++RELEASE
>incorrectly. The fixing PTF will resolve the ++HOLD, so there is no need to
>generate a ++RELEASE. IBM only uses ++RELEASE in cases when a PE or HIPER has
I have been generally watching the topic on having your tape and dasd external
unit authorizations under outside control and have at least 2 cents to add to
the conversation.
1. Do you really log in to your peripherals that much for it to be an issue?
Is this a case of 'We have LDAP, everyt
On 1/26/2023 6:32 AM, Kurt J. Quackenbush wrote:
Once the APAR was validated in the field and ready for PTF creation, a
++RELEASE(fmid) ERROR FMID(fmid) REASON(aparnum) statement was added to the
HOLDDATA.
Just to confirm what has already been mentioned, you're using ++RELEASE
incorrectly. T
> Once the APAR was validated in the field and ready for PTF creation, a
> ++RELEASE(fmid) ERROR FMID(fmid) REASON(aparnum) statement was added to the
> HOLDDATA.
Just to confirm what has already been mentioned, you're using ++RELEASE
incorrectly. The fixing PTF will resolve the ++HOLD, so the
> Has anyone ever retrofitted their current SMPe environment into zOSMF?
Can you be more specific what you mean by that?
Kurt Quackenbush
IBM | z/OS SMP/E and z/OSMF Software Management | ku...@us.ibm.com
Chuck Norris never uses CHECK when he applies PTFs.
--
Ed,
I think you're using the ++RELEASE incorrectly. The ++RELEASE isn't to tell us
the fixing PTF is available, it's to say "this APAR is no longer needed".
AFAIK, you simply SUP the APAR within the corresponding PTF and SMP/E handles
the hold.
Rex
-Original Message-
From: IBM Main
> After receiving the latest HOLDDATA but *not* the fixing APAR or PTF
> into the GLOBAL zone, I issued a REPORT ERRSYSMODS command and was
> dismayed to see the PTF in error (PE) no longer appears on the EXCEPTION
> SYSMOD REPORT.
That's exactly what I would expect after a ++ RELEASE. The correct
> Once the APAR was validated in the field and ready for PTF creation,
> a ++RELEASE(fmid) ERROR FMID(fmid) REASON(aparnum)
> statement was added to the HOLDDATA.
Please tell me you're joking!
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
Fro
C /superfluous/dangerous/
ObJacquesClouseau But it's not my dog
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin [042bfe9c879d-dmarc-requ...@listserv.
On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 22:04:39 -0800, Ed Jaffe wrote:
>...
>One of our products had a bug in the base that was fixed by an APAR for
>which we added a ++HOLD(fmid) ERROR FMID(fmid) REASON(aparnum) statement
>to our HOLDDATA. Once the APAR was validated in the field and ready for
>PTF creation, a +
31 matches
Mail list logo
