Our Common Services team delivers IBM Stub programs with their products and we use LOADONLY to store them in Endevor and obtain the loadmodule FROM Endevor into our PTF Packaging system. Using LOADONLY is an integral part of the process and we couldn't deliver the stubs without it.
The support of LOADONLY is present and as long as the input loadlib is not corrupted in any way (IEBCOPY or ISPF 3.3 Copy can sometimes Pack or Unpack the modules) the Footprint analyzer in Endevor will provide the AMBLIST report and store it in Endevor.
The processor can populate an Endevor controlled library using BSTCOPY and help maintain the outputs.
I've not heard anything about LOADONLY not being supported.
It is very useful and alive!
Bernie Beriau
------------------------------
Endevor Administrator
CA Technologies/Broadcom
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 02-21-2020 10:10 AM
From: Karen Turner
Subject: NO SOURCE Loads under Endevor
Hi Ron,
The one question I don't see being asked are these PDS or PDS/e Loadlibs? I haven't played with "loadonly"s in ages but to my recollection Endevor is calling AMBLIST under the covers for these types. Have you run an AMBLIST outside endevor to compare it's results with Endevor's Results?
KT
Original Message:
Sent: 02-19-2020 01:51 PM
From: Ronald O'Loughlin
Subject: NO SOURCE Loads under Endevor
Putting no source loads under Endevor. I did this before 2010. But now I am being told its no longer supported. On can add a load under a basic type and get basic load info but I find the CSECT information to be inconsistent between load members/elements. Some shows the expected dates of each csect, then all csects are the same date even though i know that the primary program was compiled on a different date. Thoughts.
------------------------------
Endevor Admin Ronald OLoughlin
SSA
------------------------------