----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 11:39:49 on 98/10/01 GMT (by GBCADH00 at ELINK Subject: Fortran H Extended (5734-F03) running into Year 2000 Ref: Append at 16:16:43 on 98/09/30 GMT (by JCLINTON at BOSTON) We run FO2 and LM1. I did a little checking a year ago and we will be doing some more now we have our Y2K LPAR into 2000. It is not a business critical system. I was specifically checking to see if it would cope with the extra information returned from the TIME SVC (the century flag byte). This was OK. What promped me to is the need for a PL/I fix to cope with this flag byte. This append was created on the External IBMLink system by Nick Hands-Clarke (GBFPLNHC at IBMMAIL.COM) FPLO (+44-1306 740123 ext 3121) ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 17:58:19 on 98/10/02 GMT (by ARNASON at HQVMIC Subject: SIM2000/VSAM for OS/390 This is a product from DPE & Associates which intercepts access requests to KSDS datasets in a VSAM record management exit. It can therefore present requests for sequential access in true ascending order (year 20xx dates after the year 19xx dates) even if the date data field in the key does not have century info. Does anyone out there have any experience with this product? Calvin Arnason ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 20:31:49 on 98/10/02 GMT (by JCLINTON at BOSTO Subject: Fortran H Extended (5734-F03) running into Year 2000 Ref: Append at 11:39:49 on 98/10/01 GMT (by GBCADH00 at ELINK) Nick, Thanks for your input. Basic info from Fortran forum is that like many "older time languages" Fortran has no date manipulation inherent within it other than to get the date from the system. And your input indicates it can function in that capacity going forward (2 digit YY, but that can be windowed). It is likely the compiler listings and object decks will not show 20xx, but that is acceptable for this client as these do not effect execution of their code. Jackie Clinton BOSTON(JCLINTON) IBM Global Services IBMMAIL(USIBM6NN) Consulting & Systems Integration 8/362-2855 (617) 895-2855 ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 20:37:23 on 98/10/02 GMT (by JCLINTON at BOSTO Subject: Guide to setting up a Y2K LPAR Ref: Append at 13:35:17 on 98/09/26 GMT (by 83200470 at EHONE) This presentation seems highly popular. May I have a copy also? If it is available in post-script form could it be sent to this internet id : Jclinton@nefn.com? Otherwise send to node and id given below. Thanks. Regards, Jackie Clinton BOSTON(JCLINTON) IBM Global Services Consulting & Systems Integration 8/362-2855 (617) 895-2855 ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 21:00:56 on 98/10/02 GMT (by V2TE4JG at FSHVM1 Subject: ASSEMBLER - TICTOC - Y2K Hello - I am trying to used TICTOC with an ASSEMBLER module. The module was assembled with ASMA90 and linked with IEWL. If I use TICTOC with a 1999 date I get expected results. When I try a date in 2000 (any combination of digits), the program abends with an 0C7 - a PACK followed by a CVB. The returned number from TICTOC cannot be converted. Has anyone successfully used TICTOC in with an ASSEMBLER module? Is there any special link involved like the one required by PL/I? Any takers? Thank you. Jill C. Gilbert (914) 892-0408 CPM Programming Support - IBM Fishkill V2TE4JG at FSHVM1 ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 00:58:24 on 98/10/06 GMT (by RWATSON at IPNET) Subject: ASSEMBLER - TICTOC - Y2K Ref: Append at 21:00:56 on 98/10/02 GMT (by V2TE4JG at FSHVM1) From: Rob It doesn't look like a TICTOC thing, so much as an MVS/OS390 thing. A change was made to the MVS TIME macro that returns the date to include a century digit (nybble). It now has the form x'0cyydddF', whereas before it was x'00yydddF', with a 'c' nybble of 0 for 19xx years, and 1 for 20xx years. This was the change that the PL/I IBMBJDTA routine was changed to allow for, which requires the relink you refer to. Maybe the extra digit is confusing your module. It's apparently described in manual GC28-1154 (according to the PL/I PTF referred to), but probably in others as well. If your module isn't using the TIME macro, there might have been similar changes for whatever it is using, probably described in the same manual. Rob Watson AP y2k Technical Architect, IBM internal account Oz ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 01:24:06 on 98/10/06 GMT (by HACK at YKTVMV) < Subject: ASSEMBLER - TICTOC - Y2K Ref: Append at 00:58:24 on 98/10/06 GMT (by RWATSON at IPNET) <10761> > change was made to the MVS TIME macro that returns the date to include a Yes indeed, over 15 years ago! Basically 0cyy represents the years since 1900 (the epoch of the S/370 TOD), so it's nice and regular, and can be used with decimal arithmetic (e.g. to add 1900 in order to obtain a 4-digit year). So this in itself cannot cause trouble. Where trouble may come from is when somebody expects 0c to be 00, and uses it for some other purpose. The definition may be old, but its effect becomes visible only for dates beyond 1999. Michel. ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 08:29:21 on 98/10/06 GMT (by AS103033 at ELINK Subject: ASSEMBLER - TICTOC - Y2K Ref: Append at 01:24:06 on 98/10/06 GMT (by HACK at YKTVMV) >Where trouble may come from is when somebody expects 0c to be 00, >and uses it for some other purpose. The definition may be old, but >its effect becomes visible only for dates beyond 1999. You might be tempted to say this is what happens when a "reserved" field finally gets used. That is not what happened here though. The output of of the TIME macro (SVC) was originally very clearly documented as date returned in R1 as 00YYDDDF, so it is not surprising that there may be programs that "expect" the high order byte to be zero. Another append mentions a problem in PL/I library routine IBMBJDTA. This is an example of the kind of problems caused. Because of the "unexpected" 0C in the high order byte, the unfixed IBMBJDTA produces incorrect output. It still returns a valid (two digit) year, but it gets the day and month wrong, such as day 99 of month 14. The out-of-range values can produce various program checks. Andy Wood This append was created on the External IBMLink system by Westpac Banking Corp ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 16:00:12 on 98/10/07 GMT (by V2TE4JG at FSHVM1 Subject: ASSEMBLER - TICTOC - Y2K Ref: Append at 08:29:21 on 98/10/06 GMT (by AS103033 at ELINK) <10763> :o) Problem Solved - The System DATE macro being used, only included the 2 previous years, the current year and next year. A Y2K date will not be introduced until December of this year when the macro is updated. A "sandbox" macro with Y2K dates was sent to us for testing. The program I am testing gives the expected results using TICTOC with a Y2K date. Thank you all for your input. Jill C. Gilbert ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 07:22:39 on 98/10/08 GMT (by GBCESQ01 at ELINK Subject: Simulate 2000 and Natural 232 Is anybody using a product called Simulate 2000 in a Natural 232 environment running under CICS410? If so have you had any problems? (I have also posted this question on the General Technical Question Forum). This append was created on the External IBMLink system by Ian Booth, Controller, Nissan European Data Centre, Sunderland, Tyne & Wear, England Tel ++44 191 4189309 ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 10:42:12 on 98/10/09 GMT (by GBOAKR00 at ELINK Subject: IMSPARS and Y2K Ref: Append at 13:51:20 on 98/08/17 GMT (by E092684 at EHONE) Yes I did - If I recall correctly I did find some cosmetic issues but in essence I could get it to work. This append was created on the External IBMLink system by Shawn Grinter Millenium Systems, UK Tel: +44 171 821 6346 Fax: +44 171 976 5769 ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 15:53:47 on 98/10/12 GMT (by CREMA at STLVM1) Subject: Guide to setting up a Y2K LPAR Please send me a copy of the Guide to either my notes id crema@us.ibm.com or VM id. Thanks Alice Alice Crema IBM COBOL Family ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 11:39:01 on 98/10/13 GMT (by SACCOS12 at ELINK Subject: Clock & Y2k Hello, We curentely created an LPAR in our production CMOS processor which will be used for Y2K testing. We are planning to advance the clock in two different scenarios: 1. Datesource setup will be used. The IMAGE profile will be customized to participate in the sysplex test datesource group and then use "Change LPAR Sysplex test Datesource" of the support element to setup the new date & time. The question here, Do I still need to setup the CPC to NO for "Enable for Time Sync." and turn off scheduled operation as mentioned in the time management book??? 2. The second scenario, the Y2K LPAR will be IPLed using the ETR after shutting down all other production LPARs. After the test, the ETR clock will be backwarded. Is there any kind of risk doing this? Thanks in advance for your responses. This append was created on the External IBMLink system by Amira AlKhnaizi, System Programmer, Saudi ARAMCO internet id (KHUNAIAR@aramco.com.sa) ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 01:23:01 on 98/10/15 GMT (by AS103767 at ELINK Subject: Clock & Y2k Ref: Append at 11:39:01 on 98/10/13 GMT (by SACCOS12 at ELINK) I suggest you read "S/390 9672 Processor Y2K presentation" by Ken Treowell. Your IBM rep. should be able to assist you with a copy. Good luck. This append was created on the External IBMLink system by Kamran Sedghi - Coles Myer LTD, Melbourne, Australia Tel: 61 3 9483 7361 Fax: 61 3 9483 7381 email:kamran.sedghi@colesmyer.com.au ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 04:30:43 on 98/10/19 GMT (by SACCOS12 at ELINK Subject: Clock & Y2k Ref: Append at 01:23:01 on 98/10/15 GMT (by AS103767 at ELINK) I had a copy of the presentation foils. The way I understand it that I have to do a hardware isolation even if I choose the Datesource way for setting up the clock. Is that right... Thanks This append was created on the External IBMLink system by Amira AlKhnaizi, System Programmer, Saudi ARAMCO internet id (KHUNAIAR@aramco.com.sa) ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 16:08:19 on 98/10/23 GMT (by RONWEISS at MUNIV Subject: TFM2000 Where can I find information on the TFM2000 methodology? Ron Weiss EDM/PDM Service Group, Germany ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 18:35:42 on 98/10/28 GMT (by COSEN at STLVM27) Subject: Y2K Product readiness by FMID Is there anywhere I can check out product Y2K readiness via product FMID?? This would be EXTREMELY helpful info! Either that or does anyone know where I can find a cross reference list of FMIDs and product numbers? Thanks! Debbi Cosentino Santa Teresa Lab OS/390 System Support ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 13:27:39 on 98/10/29 GMT (by EDARNOLD at GDLVM Subject: Y2K Product readiness by FMID Ref: Append at 18:35:42 on 98/10/28 GMT (by COSEN at STLVM27) Debbi - don't know if this is what you're looking for but try: http://service.software.ibm.com/390holddata.html It has HOLDDATA you can load into SMP/E to get Y2K PTF info or if I read your append correctly if nothing else you could search the HOLDDATA manually if you had to. Ed Arnold OS/390 Systems Support Endicott NY ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 16:52:37 on 98/10/29 GMT (by EELLS at KGNVMC) Subject: Y2K Product readiness by FMID Ref: Append at 13:27:39 on 98/10/29 GMT (by EDARNOLD at GDLVM7) Ed's is far and away the easiest and fastest way to get data for the OS/390 (and MVS) platforms. I highly recommend it. After receiving the HOLDDATA, run REPORT ERRSYSMODS to find out what Y2K (and HIPER, and PE) APARs are outstanding on *your* system. Sorting the report output will give you any of those lists you want. John Eells ----- YEAR2000 CFORUM appended at 20:00:11 on 98/10/30 GMT (by MACASTRO at SPOVM Subject: Y2K Partition - Share of devices and channels Hello, We are aware that the devices should NOT be shared between a Y2K partition and production partitions. But, what about the channels? Could they be shared? I could not see any problem in sharing that, and it could be easier to share devices when the Y2K partition became a normal TEST partition, probably after year 2000. Thanks in advance! Marcio A. Castro - IBM Brasil macastro@br.ibm.com Marcio A Castro/Brazil/IBM@IBMBR