Item Subject: Year 2000
     I know I'm a little behind on my mail but...
     Since I'm looking at expanding ADSM to MVS 5.0 I'll toss this question
     out... (and I haven't looked into mvs 5.0 yet..)  I take it all the
     exits you are talking about are standard IBM exits... (not user) Did
     you notice any / are there any changes in standard tape labels in MVS
     5.0, last MVS I worked under the tape labels (I think or was it in the
     smf records?... somewhere in maintaining our homebrew TLS) the years
     were 2 digit but had the century indicator.... I would figure that
     even using just the 2 digit option would still handle 2000+ under mvs
     due to the century indicators (that I used to see under mvs)
     Anyway, just thoughts... I'll keep watching to see if more info pops
     up...
     later
          Dwight



______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Year 2000
Author:  ADSM-L at unix,sh/dd.RFC-822=ADSM-L\@VM\.MARIST\.EDU
Date:    5/22/96 11:06 AM


We have not conducted formal year 2000 tests on ADSM.  However, all
of our internal representations and interfaces can handle 2000 without
any problems.  One potential problem we're aware of is on the ADSM/MVS
server.  It is actually a problem with MVS, not ADSM.  The standard
MVS tape exit which ADSM uses, uses only 2 characters for the year...this will
be a problem.  On the ADSM side, you can specify whether to use 2 characters
or 4 when taking the exit...so ADSM really is already enabled.  But this
is the only year 2000 problem we are aware of associated with adsm.

P.S. ADSM will have a problem way out in the future with some internal
representations...but I think the year is like 2157.

...greg tevis