CA mainframe install software
Mark H. Young
Back in the day when CA (Computer Associates) would send you some of their
mainframe software, they also included their own homegrown installation
software to use. Anyone remember the name of it? As I recall, it was really
bad and almost no one ever used it. They only made jokes about how bad it
was.
Do I sound way too out there or just insane?
THANX and TTFN,
Mark
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to list...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Field, Alan C.
Aggrivater
Ken Porowski
Tried it once, didn't work so I just did it the 'old school' way.
IIRC it was from the Product Integration Group and was known somewhat
formally as PIGWARE. They even had a newsletter called the PIG PEN.
-----Original Message-----
Mark H. Young
Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 2:59 PM
To: IBM-...@bama.ua.edu
Subject: [IBM-MAIN] CA mainframe install software
David Andrews
> Anyone remember the name of it? [...] only made jokes
No doubt you'll stir up many people who remember CA-Aggravator (um,
"Activator").
Jerry Whitteridge
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> [mailto:IBM-...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Mark H. Young
> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 11:59 AM
> To: IBM-...@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: CA mainframe install software
>
"Email Firewall" made the following annotations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Warning:
All e-mail sent to this address will be received by the corporate e-mail system, and is subject to archival and review by someone other than the recipient. This e-mail may contain proprietary information and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s). If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient(s), you are notified that you have received this message in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately.
==============================================================================
Jim Chappell
Daimler Trucks North America LLC
James (Jim) Chappell
503 745-7841(desk)
503 349-5603(cell)
work e-mail: james.c...@daimler.com
home e-mail: jameslc...@aol.com
If you are not the intended addressee, please inform us immediately that you have received this e-mail in error, and delete it. We thank you for your cooperation.
Eric Bielefeld
--
Eric Bielefeld
Systems Programmer
IBM MVS Technical Services
Dubuque, Iowa
563-845-4363
Mark H. Young
I'm wondering if Activator was the basis for CA-Mainframe 2.0 ??
Just heard about CA-Mainframe 2.0 from my boss, so I know nothing at this
point so far.
TTFN,
Mark
Chris Hoelscher
positive things about Activator as far base as the early 1990s ...)
Chris Hoelscher
Senior IDMS & DB2 Database Administrator
Humana Inc
502-476-2538
choel...@humana.com
you only need to test the programs that you want to work correctly
I'm wondering if Activator was the basis for CA-Mainframe 2.0 ??
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain CONFIDENTIAL material. If you receive this material/information in error, please contact the sender and delete or destroy the material/information.
Ken Porowski
I think they even mentioned that it was totally new in their
presentation on it.
CA-MSM (Mainframe Software Manager?) is probably much more like the
SERVERPAC dialogs with integrated SHOPZ capability. I haven't heard
anything bad about it yet but I haven't tried it yet either.
-----Original Message-----
Mark H. Young
Thank you all for the CA-Activator (Aggrivator) responses.
Chase, John
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [On Behalf Of Eric Bielefeld
>
> A long time ago, I set up Activator. I never had any problems with it - it seemed to work fine.
You must have read *all* the obstructions. :-)
-jc-
McKown, John
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 2:38 PM
> To: IBM-...@bama.ua.edu
> Subject: Re: CA mainframe install software
>
> I doubt it.
>
> I think they even mentioned that it was totally new in their
> presentation on it.
>
> CA-MSM (Mainframe Software Manager?) is probably much more like the
> SERVERPAC dialogs with integrated SHOPZ capability. I haven't heard
> anything bad about it yet but I haven't tried it yet either.
>
Does it still require a direct Internet connection between the user's mainframe and the CA server? That is a "drop dead" for us. To use ShopzSeries, I must use DownloadDirector on my Linux desktop to get the data to it. I then use NFS to get the data to the mainframe.
--
John McKown
Systems Engineer IV
IT
Administrative Services Group
HealthMarkets(r)
9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010
(817) 255-3225 phone * (817)-961-6183 cell
john....@healthmarkets.com * www.HealthMarkets.com
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM
Fletcher, Kevin
Does it still require a direct Internet connection between the user's
mainframe and the CA server? That is a "drop dead" for us. To use
ShopzSeries, I must use DownloadDirector on my Linux desktop to get the
data to it. I then use NFS to get the data to the mainframe.
--
John McKown
Systems Engineer IV
IT
</snip>
John,
One of the pre-reqs is to connect to the CA FTP Server, for CA software.
The door appears to be open to install other ISV products (SMPE) also,
still playing with it and learning UNIX and the GUI are a lot of fun.
Sort of annoys the windows people we have a MF based server with a GUI
interface. The perks with this job never end :-)
Thanks,
Kevin Fletcher (317) 817-3545
Transition Coordinator
z/OS, DB2, AS400 support
Conseco, LLC
Mark Zelden
<John....@HEALTHMARKETS.COM> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
>> [mailto:IBM-...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Ken Porowski
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 2:38 PM
>> To: IBM-...@bama.ua.edu
>> Subject: Re: CA mainframe install software
>>
>> I doubt it.
>>
>> I think they even mentioned that it was totally new in their
>> presentation on it.
>>
>> CA-MSM (Mainframe Software Manager?) is probably much more like the
>> SERVERPAC dialogs with integrated SHOPZ capability.
Not really.
>> I haven't heard
>> anything bad about it yet but I haven't tried it yet either.
>>
>
>Does it still require a direct Internet connection between the user's
mainframe and the CA server? That is a "drop dead" for us. To use
ShopzSeries, I must use DownloadDirector on my Linux desktop to get the data
to it. I then use NFS to get the data to the mainframe.
>
Yes.
For those who haven't seen it in action, I thought the demo during the keynote
from Scott Fagen was on the web (SHARE web site?). Or there is info
on CA's web site.
Mark
--
Mark Zelden
Sr. Software and Systems Architect - z/OS Team Lead
Zurich North America / Farmers Insurance Group - ZFUS G-ITO
mailto:mark....@zurichna.com
z/OS Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html
Norman Hollander
designed to help experienced and new folks coming to the platform
for acquiring, installing, maintaining, and ultimately deploying and
configuring mainframe software. It is included with Common Services,
so no new costs for the customer. The MSM UI is a very inutitive
task oriented solution that simplifies the entire process and therefore
saves time. You should ask your account team for a presentation and
demo. Or better yet, try it on your own sandbox. It runs completely on
z/OS, so need for additional servers.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Porowski [mailto:Ken.Po...@CIT.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2009 03:38 PM
To: IBM-...@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: CA mainframe install software
I doubt it. I think they even mentioned that it was totally new in their presentation on it. CA-MSM (Mainframe Software Manager?) is probably much more like the SERVERPAC dialogs with integrated SHOPZ capability. I haven't heard anything bad about it yet but I haven't tried it yet either. -----Original Message----- Mark H. Young Thank you all for the CA-Activator (Aggrivator) responses. I'm wondering if Activator was the basis for CA-Mainframe 2.0 ?? Just heard about CA-Mainframe 2.0 from my boss, so I know nothing at this point so far. TTFN, Mark ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to list...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Paul Gilmartin
>
>Does it still require a direct Internet connection between the user's mainframe and the CA server? That is a "drop dead" for us. To use ShopzSeries, I must use DownloadDirector on my Linux desktop to get the data to it. I then use NFS to get the data to the mainframe.
>
on one's desktop, on could use that desktop as the SERVER for
RECEIVE FROMNETWORK. If one can run an NFS server, one could
likewise use localhost as the SERVER for RECEIVE FROMNETWORK
(although RECEIVE FROMNTS is shorter in that case). Perhaps
Scott Fagen will comment on whether MSM is compatible with
such a configuration.
I believe MSM attempts to put us a few steps closer to "The
Great SMPPTS in the Sky".
-- gil
Paul Gilmartin
>
>Does it still require a direct Internet connection between the user's mainframe and the CA server? That is a "drop dead" for us. To use ShopzSeries, I must use DownloadDirector on my Linux desktop to get the data to it. I then use NFS to get the data to the mainframe.
>
this list on Dec. 1.
Michael Schmutzok
Michael Schmutzok
Sr Systems Programmer
Shands HealthCare
(352) 265-0680 x85465
>>> Eric Bielefeld <eric-i...@WI.RR.COM> 12/8/2009 3:18 PM >>>
Scott Fagen
<John....@HEALTHMARKETS.COM> wrote:
>Does it still require a direct Internet connection between the user's
mainframe and the CA server?
On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 16:19:22 -0500, Fletcher, Kevin
<KEVIN_F...@CONSECO.COM> wrote:
>One of the pre-reqs is to connect to the CA FTP Server, for CA software.
While MSM is far more useful if you allow it to connect to support.ca.com
over the internet, there's nothing that prevents you from downloading the
packages (base install and/or PTFs) in some other way, uploading them to the
mainframe, and then inserting them into MSM manually.
Scott Fagen
Chief Architect
CA Mainframe Products
Paul Gilmartin
>
>>One of the pre-reqs is to connect to the CA FTP Server, for CA software.
>
>While MSM is far more useful if you allow it to connect to support.ca.com
>over the internet, there's nothing that prevents you from downloading the
>packages (base install and/or PTFs) in some other way, uploading them to the
>mainframe, and then inserting them into MSM manually.
>
that the server is "localhost" and omit the "inserting ...
manually" operation?
-- gil
Shmuel Metz , Seymour J.
at 01:59 PM, "Mark H. Young" <Mark....@FAIRFAXCOUNTY.GOV> said:
>Back in the day when CA (Computer Associates) would send you some of
>their mainframe software, they also included their own homegrown
>installation software to use. Anyone remember the name of it? As I
>recall, it was really bad and almost no one ever used it. They only
>made jokes about how bad it was.
Even CA employees were advising against aggravator.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
Scott Fagen
>Once they're uploaded to the mainframe, why can't one tell MSM
>that the server is "localhost" and omit the "inserting ...
>manually" operation?
Because the information that tells CA MSM what the package is and where to
insert the package is not within the package, it is on support online.
Scott Fagen
Chief Architect
CA Mainframe Products
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Gilmartin
>On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 17:53:31 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>
>>Once they're uploaded to the mainframe, why can't one tell MSM
>>that the server is "localhost" and omit the "inserting ...
>>manually" operation?
>
>Because the information that tells CA MSM what the package is and where to
>insert the package is not within the package, it is on support online.
>
Bummer. Sounds like an area for a potential enhancement.
Particularly, "where to insert the package" sounds like
something the customer would like to control.
What are the implications for a fourth-party ISV who'd like
to piggyback on MSM. Is "support online" a web service that
such an ISV would need to provide? Is it even configurable
within the end customer's MSM profile?
-- gil
Joel C. Ewing
> In <LISTSERV%20091208135...@BAMA.UA.EDU>, on 12/08/2009
> at 01:59 PM, "Mark H. Young" <Mark....@FAIRFAXCOUNTY.GOV> said:
>
>> Back in the day when CA (Computer Associates) would send you some of
>> their mainframe software, they also included their own homegrown
>> installation software to use. Anyone remember the name of it? As I
>> recall, it was really bad and almost no one ever used it. They only
>> made jokes about how bad it was.
>
> Even CA employees were advising against aggravator.
>
My main objection to the old installation software was not whether it
did or did not work, but a strong aversion to the concept of each vendor
developing and expecting their customers to deal with their own unique
proprietary interface into SMP/E, rather than just finding ways to fit
their installation procedures into universally available existing ISPF
SMP/E dialogs. It may have seemed "cool" to CA support people who only
dealt with CA's conventions, but for customer sysprogs dealing with many
other vendors, "uniqueness" is not appreciated.
Also, when there are local installation standards on maintenance, one
has to first decipher what vendor front-ends are doing well enough to
understand whether they are in compliance with local standards or
whether you must modify or suppress some of what they attempt to do.
--
Joel C. Ewing, Fort Smith, AR jREMOVEc...@acm.org
Schwarz, Barry A
-----Original Message-----
> In <LISTSERV%20091208135...@BAMA.UA.EDU>, on 12/08/2009
> at 01:59 PM, "Mark H. Young" <Mark....@FAIRFAXCOUNTY.GOV> said:
>
>> Back in the day when CA (Computer Associates) would send you some of
>> their mainframe software, they also included their own homegrown
>> installation software to use. Anyone remember the name of it? As I
>> recall, it was really bad and almost no one ever used it. They only
>> made jokes about how bad it was.
>
> Even CA employees were advising against aggravator.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Gilmartin
>It was called CA-Activator.
>
By whom?
-- gil
Schwarz, Barry A
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2009 2:58 PM
To: IBM-...@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: CA mainframe install software
On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 11:18:51 -0800, Schwarz, Barry A wrote:
>It was called CA-Activator.
>
By whom?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
P S
barry.a...@boeing.com> wrote:
> By the people who published the user manual for it. Was there some part of
> the question I responded to that was unclear? Did your system strip the
> question off? (It showed up in my copy of the message so I know the
> listserve didn't delete it.)
>
Well, given that the question was answered multiple times two weeks ago, I'm
guessing that Paul was replying tongue-in-cheek. Why DID you waste the
bandwidth, anyway? Just wondering...
Chase, John
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
>
> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 11:18:51 -0800, Schwarz, Barry A wrote:
>
> >It was called CA-Activator.
> >
> By whom?
CA, for one.
-jc-
Greg Shirey
in this thread I would judge a more egregious waste of bandwidth.
My two cents,
Greg Shirey
Ben E. Keith Co.
Rick Fochtman
Rick
-----------------------------------------------------------------
P S
> Don't you mean "CA Aggravator" ??? :-)
>
<montypython>
"Wait, haven't we done this?"
"Oh, yes, sorry."
</montypython>
Shmuel Metz , Seymour J.
<B282BE35B5A4494894D4E...@XCH-NW-17V.nw.nos.boeing.com>,
on 12/21/2009
at 11:18 AM, "Schwarz, Barry A" <barry.a...@BOEING.COM> said:
>It was called CA-Activator.
Google for "Haddock's Eyes". Its *name* was "CA-Activator"; it was called
aggrevator and possibly other names less polite.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------