> On 17 Jul 2024, at 05:09, Wayne Bickerdike
> <059234794979-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
> I still have my ZX-Spectrum.
Do you? The keyboard wore out on my Speccy years ago.
> When the micro drives were available, I bought
> two and the serial interface. The drives reduced th
Classification: Confidential
Refrain: The "new tools" bing supplied by IBM are neither as available,
reliable, or functional as those they replace.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Peter Sylvester
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2024 1:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTS
Classification: Confidential
I don't feel this is the fault of Windows; This is the fault of power-hungry
net-nannies who want to control everything (all in the name of protecting the
enterprise).
One size fits all, and everyone is too stupid to recognize a phishing email
when they see it.
A
Thank you kindly. That's helpful.
Regards,
Eric Verwijs
Chef d'équipe intérimaire,
RPC, SV et solutions de paiement - Direction générale de l'innovation,
information et technologie
Emploi et Développement social Canada / Gouvernement du Canada
frederick.verw...@hrsdc-rhdc
David asked:
*Do you? The keyboard wore out on my Speccy years ago.*
I did the keyboard upgrade that Sinclair pushed out. My old one had the
rubber keys but the replacement had a larger hard plastic case and hard
keys with engraved white characters. I still have the Centronics 779
interface, a mo
> I developed and documented some C string routines
> that I developed to make them MUCH faster and certainly safer. See
here:
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hd4Ld0iJ5r_wQ3jSRv-FTLi7QFl0pstq/view
Thanks.
C continues to get a bad rap. Nice to know at least one person is
addressing the re
Hi,
In z/OS V3.1, I issued (via SDSF) S AOPSTOP and it failed because AOPSTC
(taken from STDATA) has UID(1) and GID(24), and
/usr/lpp/Printsrv/bin/aopstop has its Permission Bits set to 750. The
file is owned bu UID(0) GID(1). This is expected.
On z/OS V2.5, however, AOPSTOP works (with the s
Andrew Rowley wrote, in part:
>You can't really blame Windows in this case.
>If you had a linklisted, APF authorized product that hooked into
>system functions and was remotely updateable by the vendor without a
>system restart, they could equally bring down all z/OS systems
>simultaneously.
Exact
I really think the Windows folks deserve CA-Aggravator on top of their SMP/E
Jerry Whitteridge
Sr Manager Managed Services
jerry.whitteri...@albertsons.com
480 578 7889
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Phil Smith III
Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2024 10:15 A
Hi David, When I resigned from your company, I created JCL's to setup AOP
symlinks from (/usr/lpp/Printsrv/bin and lib directories) and did videos
explaining the AOP initial setup and I think you might be missing the initial
AOP setup for z/OS v3r1 and it might be permissions issues as well.
G
Hi Jerry,
I actually liked CA-ACTIVATOR. The problem with CA's strategy was that
each product area supplied their own CA-90s code. For example, if ACF2
and CA-1 provided CA-90s modules, the results might change depending
upon the sequence of APPLYs.
When CA figured this out, CA-90s code was s
Dave
The key to Aggravator was understanding SMP/E enough that when things broke you
could go around in back of it and repair using standard SMP/E
I didn't object to it but it certainly gave me aggravation at times.
Jerry Whitteridge
Sr Manager Managed Services
jerry.whitteri...@albertsons.com
4
Hi Jerry,
I never faced an issue that caused to use SMP/e to fix (outside of
ACTIVATOR).
I also never faced issues like this with (OMEGAMON) CICAT or ParmGen.
Regards,
David
On 2024-07-22 13:39, Jerry Whitteridge wrote:
Dave
The key to Aggravator was understanding SMP/E enough that when thing
Paul Gilmartin wrote on 7/21/2024 10:07 AM:
But these things happen. I heard of a product that crashed
reproducibly at customer sites having 8 or more tape drives.
Who does that in a test lab!>
This comes down to a problem with making sufficient resources
available to developers and testers.
Hello
Good evening
Is it possible to share one RACF DB in a monoplex environment of 4 LPARS ?
Without using RRSF and making GRS for serialization across the 4 LPARS
Any experience or advise is much appreciated
Peter
--
For IBM
15 matches
Mail list logo
