Talk:Support programs for OS/360 and successors

message: I removed IEFBR15 from this page yesterday.  Despite its name, it isn't an IBM utility program, any more than the ISPF PDS-compression hack that was generally known as "IKJJB007" was part of TSO.  Somebody just named it that way.  Tcb restored it today, saying "IEFBR15 is utility program. It doesn't shipped by IBM but it can be compiled and used on IBM mainframe system."  By that logic, every assembler program ever written is a utility program, but as any old-time sysprog can tell you, there was a specific list (which reminds me, I need to add IEHDASDR and the others).
This article is about the MVS utility programs - it's called IBM mainframe utility programs and it starts "IBM Mainframe Utility Programs are supplied with IBM mainframe operating systems such as MVS to carry out various tasks associated with datasets etc." - and IEFBR15 isn't one of them.  So I've removed the IEFBR15 entry again, and it should stay gone.  It still has it's own page, at (of course!) IEFBR15.  RossPatterson 01:01, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  IEFBR15 

message: Deleted.  Wikipedia is not a tutorial board.T-bonham (talk) 00:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of SORT/MERGE utility (in JCL) 

message: I added a divider before the linker & COBOL compiler sections, to clarify that these are not utilities supplied with the OS.  I called them "support programs"; not sure if that is the best wording.  Any suggestions?
Also, I made a few changes in those items:
*Clarified that the linker works with an object deck from any language, not just COBOL.
*Clarified that this is just the current COBOL compiler, there have been many others over the years.  
T-bonham 02:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  updates 

message: The title of this article is too general for its topic; there have been several unrelated IBM mainframes and on the current product line there are several unrelated operating systems. I propose changing the title to MVS utility programs and service aids. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 20:24, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  There was more than on IBM mainframe and there's more than one IBM mainframe operating system 

message: The description of IEBIMAGE confused special cases with general traits. Load modules are not images, although images can be stored in load modules. IEBEDIT supports more than the 3800, and it generates more types of images than just bit maps. See  for details. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 18:02, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  IEBIMAGE 

message: The line containing INREC and OUTREC may have been a disrupted edit rather than deliberate vandalism. Those two statements define remappings of the sort input and output, and the author may have intended describing them. If that is the case, would it have been TMI had he added a complete description? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 21:16, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possibly not vandalism 

message: I have long wondered about the three-letter prefixes used by (almost) all of these utilities.  The set of folklore and urban-legend explanations that I've heard since the 1970s is large and self-contradictory.  If anyone could add a section documenting the origin(s) of IEB, IEF, IEH, etc. -- with reasonably-authoritative references, please! -- that would be appreciated.  206.205.52.162 (talk) 01:22, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The OS/360 Messages and Codes manual, and equivalents for OS/VS and later replacements, included a table of prefixes. There were some arcane rules as to how IBM assigned them, but IBM did not always follow its own rules, e.g., the prefix IBM. Even if it is not TMI, the description of prefixes would belong in OS/360 and successors‎, not here. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 15:05, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prefix origin(s) 

message: There seems to be some confusion in this article and in MVS about what DFSMS is. DFSMS started as a program product to replace Data Facility Product (DFP), and as such its DFSMSdfp component includes all of the utility programs that had been in DFP, as well as most of the access methods. The support for managed storage is a small part of DFSMS; in fact, until you configure and activate SMS DFSMS runs in a non-SMS mode essentially the same as its predecessors. Even when SMS is active, particular datasets can be non-SMS, and utilities like IEHMOVE can be used just as they were in OS/360. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 15:21, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  DFSMS 

message: Should the article discuss IBM service aids, e,g,, AMASPZAP? While they are documented in a separate manual, they are as much utility programs as the programs documented in Utilities, and have a better claim to the title than the binder, compilers and the link editor. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 20:10, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Chatul, as you say, in IBMspeak they aren't utilities, and I guess this article is of fairly restricted interest (ah, the memories it brings back). So can argue it either way. But we're a general encyclopedia, and as superzap doesn't seem to be covered elsewhere, yes, perhaps redirect IBM mainframe service aids here and expand the article scope. Good idea. Andrewa (talk) 03:41, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Service aids? 

message: Added in 2008 diff this tag seems to refer to an issue since resolved, so in accordance with Help:Maintenance template removal#When to remove I'm removing it. Andrewa (talk) 03:34, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rem unreferenced tag  

message: The title IBM mainframe utility programs, does not accurately reflect the contents, for several reasons.
#The programs listed apply only to OS/360 and successors, not to, e.g., DOS/360 and successors, Transaction Processing Facility, VM (operating system).
#The article includes programs that IBM does not classify as utilities while omitting such important programs as AMASPZAP, LOADER and SMP/E. 
Before adding a  template, I'd like to solicit suggestions for a more accurate title. Possibly Support programs for OS/360 through MVS? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 20:52, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Appropriate name? 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
*Support, Your argument makes sense.Peter Flass (talk) 03:23, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: To start with, I believe that Assemblers should be a subsection of Compilers. That said, OS/360 came with the following compilers
;ALGOL
:ALGOL F
;IETASM
:Assembler E, 360S-AS-036
;IEUASM
:Assembler F, 360S-AS-037
;IEPCBL00 
:COBOL E,360S-CO-503
;IEQCBL00 
:COBOL F, 360S-CB-524
;IKFCBL00 
:COBOL U
:IBM OS Full American National Standard COBOL Versions 1 and 2
;IEJFAAA0 
:FORTRAN E, 360S-FO-092 
;IEYFORT  
:FORTRAN G, 360S-FO-520 
;IEKAAOO 
:FORTRAN H, 360S-FO-500 
;IEMAA
:PL/I F, 360S-NL-6l
;IESRPG 
:Report Program Generator (RPG), 360S-RG-038
OS/VS replaces Assembler E and F with Assembler XF and drops all other compilers in favor of separately ordered program products.
;;5734-AS1 
:Assembler H
;5734-CBl
:IBM OS Full American National Standard COBOL Version 3
;5734-CB2
:IBM OS Full American National Standard COBOL Version 4
;5734-FO1 
:CODE AND GO FORTRAN
;5734-FO2 
:FORTRAN IV (G1)
;5734-FO3 
:FORTRAN IV (H EXTENDED)
;5734-PL1
:PL/I Optimizing Compiler
The 5734-xxx program products could run on OS/360 but the 5740-xxx products required OS/VD or VM. All of these have been replaced by more recent program products, e.g., Assembler H Version 2, HLASM, VSFORTRAN, Enterprise compilers. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 21:38, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compiler and assembler sections