COBOL for utility program under Linux.

Whoo boy - did I just walk into a minefield. Advice on how to extract
myself with all body parts attached very welcome...

I walked into a shop a few weeks ago that of all things, has some
Alpha VMS machines still running. In fact, they have been running for
three years without an IPL or even an administrator login - ever since
they previous system admin got up on a high horse and left. Imagine
that...

I contracted to go into the VMS systems and write some small interface
programs to put a bit of the data up on the web. This is usually
trivially easy under VMS, especially since the VMS COBOL compiler
works great for CGI. (It's a very good compiler indeed. Perfect target
for a little utility program written in COBOL.

But, my client just called up and told me they really want to run the
software on two or three different platforms. VMS, Linux, and iSeries
to be exact.

COBOL runs on all three, so that should not be a big issue, but
wowzers... MicroFocus COBOL is now apparently $22,000 ($22K!) PER
SERVER. That kind of zaps the idea of putting it under Linux, unless
there is a much less expensive COBOL compiler for Linux...

A $22K utility program is not exactly what I had in mind... nor for
that matter, what the customer had in mind. I would love to pull a
rabbit out of my hat on this one, but I am totally stumped. It looks
like MicroFocus has eaten up Relia and AcuCobol as well...

Any suggestions?



-Pauil

Pete Dashwood wrote:
>> Whoo boy - did I just walk into a minefield. Advice on how to extract
>> myself with all body parts attached very welcome...
>>
>> I walked into a shop a few weeks ago that of all things, has some
>> Alpha VMS machines still running. In fact, they have been running for
>> three years without an IPL or even an administrator login - ever
>> since they previous system admin got up on a high horse and left.
>> Imagine that...
>>
>> I contracted to go into the VMS systems and write some small
>> interface programs to put a bit of the data up on the web. This is
>> usually trivially easy under VMS, especially since the VMS COBOL
>> compiler works great for CGI. (It's a very good compiler indeed.
>> Perfect target for a little utility program written in COBOL.
>>
>> But, my client just called up and told me they really want to run the
>> software on two or three different platforms. VMS, Linux, and iSeries
>> to be exact.
>>
>> COBOL runs on all three, so that should not be a big issue, but
>> wowzers... MicroFocus COBOL is now apparently $22,000 ($22K!) PER
>> SERVER. That kind of zaps the idea of putting it under Linux, unless
>> there is a much less expensive COBOL compiler for Linux...
>>
>> A $22K utility program is not exactly what I had in mind... nor for
>> that matter, what the customer had in mind. I would love to pull a
>> rabbit out of my hat on this one, but I am totally stumped. It looks
>> like MicroFocus has eaten up Relia and AcuCobol as well...
>>
>> Any suggestions?
>>
>>

I think what Pete meant to say was that Fijutsu has a version that runs
under Linux.

But why? Linux represents less than 1% of the desktop market.

Linux DOES represent about 85% of the decibel level, so maybe that's what
the client is hearing.

Sorry for previous blank post...finger trouble.

More interspersed below...

"PR" <paul.raulerson@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7b5615b6-00d2-4a0b-8b8d-3c2bd3d44963@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> Whoo boy - did I just walk into a minefield. Advice on how to extract
> myself with all body parts attached very welcome...
>
> I walked into a shop a few weeks ago that of all things, has some
> Alpha VMS machines still running. In fact, they have been running for
> three years without an IPL or even an administrator login - ever since
> they previous system admin got up on a high horse and left. Imagine
> that...
>
> I contracted to go into the VMS systems and write some small interface
> programs to put a bit of the data up on the web. This is usually
> trivially easy under VMS, especially since the VMS COBOL compiler
> works great for CGI. (It's a very good compiler indeed. Perfect target
> for a little utility program written in COBOL.

Now, can we be clear here? Are you writing some server side CGI or are you
writing a desktop utility?

If it is CGI it is very easy to use a free COBOL compiler with a free
runtime (like Fujitsu which can be downloaded from their site:
www.adtools.com)


CGI really only needs ACCEPT and DISPLAY, although later versions of Fujitsu
(5.0 and above, if I remember correctly...) provide a full Web development
environment for COBOL server side code. The full support is excellent and I
have written both CGI and ISAPI code in it.

>
> But, my client just called up and told me they really want to run the
> software on two or three different platforms. VMS, Linux, and iSeries
> to be exact.

Are these all web servers or do they want a desktop utility?

>
> COBOL runs on all three, so that should not be a big issue, but
> wowzers... MicroFocus COBOL is now apparently $22,000 ($22K!) PER
> SERVER. That kind of zaps the idea of putting it under Linux, unless
> there is a much less expensive COBOL compiler for Linux...

Yes, it is definitely overpriced and then you pay a runtime fee as well...
There is a limited marketplace, mainly comprised of people with a COBOL
mindset who are stuck with a large Legacy investment and no idea what to do
about it. You can't blame MF for squeezing it.

>
> A $22K utility program is not exactly what I had in mind... nor for
> that matter, what the customer had in mind. I would love to pull a
> rabbit out of my hat on this one, but I am totally stumped. It looks
> like MicroFocus has eaten up Relia and AcuCobol as well...
>

You could always use a language other than COBOL.

Write your utility as a Java servlet or a server side script using Python,
Ruby, PHP or similar. C# will run under .NET or Mono on all of the platforms
you describe. Web server code is one of the jobs that COBOL is NOT ideally
suited for.

Paying $22,000 for something, when there are better tools available for
free, is simply a no-brainer.


> Any suggestions?
>
Yes.

Don't use COBOL.

Pete.
--
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."

On Aug 25, 6:16*pm, "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> Pete Dashwood wrote:
> >> Whoo boy - did I just walk into a minefield. Advice on how to extract
> >> myself with all body parts attached very welcome...
>
> >> I walked into a shop a few weeks ago that of all things, has some
> >> Alpha VMS machines still running. In fact, they have been running for
> >> three years without an IPL or even an administrator login - ever
> >> since they previous system admin got up on a high horse and left.
> >> Imagine that...
>
> >> I contracted to go into the VMS systems and write some small
> >> interface programs to put a bit of the data up on the web. This is
> >> usually trivially easy under VMS, especially since the VMS COBOL
> >> compiler works great for CGI. (It's a very good compiler indeed.
> >> Perfect target for a little utility program written in COBOL.
>
> >> But, my client just called up and told me they really want to run the
> >> software on two or three different platforms. VMS, Linux, and iSeries
> >> to be exact.
>
> >> COBOL runs on all three, so that should not be a big issue, but
> >> wowzers... MicroFocus COBOL is now apparently $22,000 ($22K!) PER
> >> SERVER. *That kind of zaps the idea of putting it under Linux, unless
> >> there is a much less expensive COBOL compiler for Linux...
>
> >> A $22K utility program is not exactly what I had in mind... nor for
> >> that matter, what the customer had in mind. I would love to pull a
> >> rabbit out of my hat on this one, but I am totally stumped. It looks
> >> like MicroFocus has eaten up Relia and AcuCobol as well...
>
> >> Any suggestions?
>
> I think what Pete meant to say was that Fijutsu has a version that runs
> under Linux.
>
> But why? Linux represents less than 1% of the desktop market.
>
> Linux DOES represent about 85% of the decibel level, so maybe that's what
> the client is hearing.


I tend to avoid the "desktop market" and just put all the interfaces
on the web these days. Simpler, and people really like it. Except of
course, for really high speed data entry screens. I use Windows or
green-screens for those.


I'm really talking about the server side.
-Paul

On Aug 26, 11:16*am, "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> Pete Dashwood wrote:
> >> Whoo boy - did I just walk into a minefield. Advice on how to extract
> >> myself with all body parts attached very welcome...
>
> >> I walked into a shop a few weeks ago that of all things, has some
> >> Alpha VMS machines still running. In fact, they have been running for
> >> three years without an IPL or even an administrator login - ever
> >> since they previous system admin got up on a high horse and left.
> >> Imagine that...
>
> >> I contracted to go into the VMS systems and write some small
> >> interface programs to put a bit of the data up on the web. This is
> >> usually trivially easy under VMS, especially since the VMS COBOL
> >> compiler works great for CGI. (It's a very good compiler indeed.
> >> Perfect target for a little utility program written in COBOL.
>
> >> But, my client just called up and told me they really want to run the
> >> software on two or three different platforms. VMS, Linux, and iSeries
> >> to be exact.
>
> >> COBOL runs on all three, so that should not be a big issue, but
> >> wowzers... MicroFocus COBOL is now apparently $22,000 ($22K!) PER
> >> SERVER. *That kind of zaps the idea of putting it under Linux, unless
> >> there is a much less expensive COBOL compiler for Linux...
>
> >> A $22K utility program is not exactly what I had in mind... nor for
> >> that matter, what the customer had in mind. I would love to pull a
> >> rabbit out of my hat on this one, but I am totally stumped. It looks
> >> like MicroFocus has eaten up Relia and AcuCobol as well...
>
> >> Any suggestions?
>
> I think what Pete meant to say was that Fijutsu has a version that runs
> under Linux.

That is correct. Fujitsu has released a new version 7.3 for Linux
recently too.

> But why? Linux represents less than 1% of the desktop market.

Given that he is discussing web servers and Linux is running the
majority of all web sites (see Netcraft) then how many are using a
Linux desktop is irrelevant.

Of course the _actual_ number of Linux desktops is quite unknown, it
is not like there many 'sales' figures. Many who bought Vista machines
seem to be shifting to Ubuntu, or at least those who can't get XP
install disks.

> Linux DOES represent about 85% of the decibel level, so maybe that's what
> the client is hearing.

On Aug 26, 11:28*am, "Pete Dashwood"
<dashw...@removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote:
> Sorry for previous blank post...finger trouble.
>
> More interspersed below...
>
> "PR" <paul.rauler...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:7b5615b6-00d2-4a0b-8b8d-3c2bd3d44963@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Whoo boy - did I just walk into a minefield. Advice on how to extract
> > myself with all body parts attached very welcome...
>
> > I walked into a shop a few weeks ago that of all things, has some
> > Alpha VMS machines still running. In fact, they have been running for
> > three years without an IPL or even an administrator login - ever since
> > they previous system admin got up on a high horse and left. Imagine
> > that...
>
> > I contracted to go into the VMS systems and write some small interface
> > programs to put a bit of the data up on the web. This is usually
> > trivially easy under VMS, especially since the VMS COBOL compiler
> > works great for CGI. (It's a very good compiler indeed. Perfect target
> > for a little utility program written in COBOL.
>
> Now, can we be clear here? Are you writing some server side CGI or are you
> writing a desktop utility?
>
> If it is CGI it is very easy to use a free COBOL compiler with a free
> runtime (like Fujitsu which can be downloaded from their site:www.adtools..com)

Version 3 is a) Windows only (and probably not Vista so for the 7 year
old XP or earlier), b) free for students, c) not suitable for
production code.


> CGI really only needs ACCEPT and DISPLAY, although later versions of Fujitsu
> (5.0 and above, if I remember correctly...) provide a full Web development
> environment for COBOL server side code. The full support is excellent andI
> have written both CGI and ISAPI code in it.
>
>
>
> > But, my client just called up and told me they really want to run the
> > software on two or three different platforms. VMS, Linux, and iSeries
> > to be exact.
>
> Are these all web servers or do they want a desktop utility?

I am not sure that VMS or iSeries are useful as desktop computers.

> > COBOL runs on all three, so that should not be a big issue, but
> > wowzers... MicroFocus COBOL is now apparently $22,000 ($22K!) PER
> > SERVER. *That kind of zaps the idea of putting it under Linux, unless
> > there is a much less expensive COBOL compiler for Linux...
>
> Yes, it is definitely overpriced and then you pay a runtime fee as well....
> There is a limited marketplace, mainly comprised of people with a COBOL
> mindset who are stuck with a large Legacy investment and no idea what to do
> about it. You can't blame MF for squeezing it.
>
>
>
> > A $22K utility program is not exactly what I had in mind... nor for
> > that matter, what the customer had in mind. I would love to pull a
> > rabbit out of my hat on this one, but I am totally stumped. It looks
> > like MicroFocus has eaten up Relia and AcuCobol as well...
>
> You could always use a language other than COBOL.
>
> Write your utility as a Java servlet or a server side script using Python,
> Ruby, PHP or similar. C# will run under .NET or Mono on all of the platforms
> you describe.

When was Mono ported to VMS or iSeries ?


> Web server code is one of the jobs that COBOL is NOT ideally
> suited for.

Cobol is fine for web servers. As good as it is for all other types of
applications. Just ensure that the presentation is separated from the
logic (ie use templating).


> Paying $22,000 for something, when there are better tools available for
> free, is simply a no-brainer.
>
> > Any suggestions?
>
> Yes.
>
> Don't use COBOL.
>
> Pete.
> --
> "I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."

I do NOT know the prices of various COBOLs and COBOL run-times for "server-side"
applications. However, besides the Fujitsu suggestions that others have made,
what you want reminds me of the PerCOBOL type environment. As I say, I don't
know what they would charge for a server or ISeries environment, but you might
want to look at the information at:

http://www.legacyj.com/lgcyj_perc1.html

--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
"PR" <paul.raulerson@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7b5615b6-00d2-4a0b-8b8d-3c2bd3d44963@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> Whoo boy - did I just walk into a minefield. Advice on how to extract
> myself with all body parts attached very welcome...
>
> I walked into a shop a few weeks ago that of all things, has some
> Alpha VMS machines still running. In fact, they have been running for
> three years without an IPL or even an administrator login - ever since
> they previous system admin got up on a high horse and left. Imagine
> that...
>
> I contracted to go into the VMS systems and write some small interface
> programs to put a bit of the data up on the web. This is usually
> trivially easy under VMS, especially since the VMS COBOL compiler
> works great for CGI. (It's a very good compiler indeed. Perfect target
> for a little utility program written in COBOL.
>
> But, my client just called up and told me they really want to run the
> software on two or three different platforms. VMS, Linux, and iSeries
> to be exact.
>
> COBOL runs on all three, so that should not be a big issue, but
> wowzers... MicroFocus COBOL is now apparently $22,000 ($22K!) PER
> SERVER. That kind of zaps the idea of putting it under Linux, unless
> there is a much less expensive COBOL compiler for Linux...
>
> A $22K utility program is not exactly what I had in mind... nor for
> that matter, what the customer had in mind. I would love to pull a
> rabbit out of my hat on this one, but I am totally stumped. It looks
> like MicroFocus has eaten up Relia and AcuCobol as well...
>
> Any suggestions?
>
>
>
> -Pauil
>

"Richard" <riplin@azonic.co.nz> wrote in message
news:ee72723b-2d10-4566-a9bc-c32544612532@b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 26, 11:28 am, "Pete Dashwood"
<dashw...@removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote:
> Sorry for previous blank post...finger trouble.
>
> More interspersed below...
>
> "PR" <paul.rauler...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:7b5615b6-00d2-4a0b-8b8d-3c2bd3d44963@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Whoo boy - did I just walk into a minefield. Advice on how to extract
> > myself with all body parts attached very welcome...
>
> > I walked into a shop a few weeks ago that of all things, has some
> > Alpha VMS machines still running. In fact, they have been running for
> > three years without an IPL or even an administrator login - ever since
> > they previous system admin got up on a high horse and left. Imagine
> > that...
>
> > I contracted to go into the VMS systems and write some small interface
> > programs to put a bit of the data up on the web. This is usually
> > trivially easy under VMS, especially since the VMS COBOL compiler
> > works great for CGI. (It's a very good compiler indeed. Perfect target
> > for a little utility program written in COBOL.
>
> Now, can we be clear here? Are you writing some server side CGI or are you
> writing a desktop utility?
>
> If it is CGI it is very easy to use a free COBOL compiler with a free
> runtime (like Fujitsu which can be downloaded from their
> site:www.adtools.com)

Version 3 is a) Windows only (and probably not Vista so for the 7 year
old XP or earlier), b) free for students, c) not suitable for
production code.


> CGI really only needs ACCEPT and DISPLAY, although later versions of
> Fujitsu
> (5.0 and above, if I remember correctly...) provide a full Web development
> environment for COBOL server side code. The full support is excellent and
> I
> have written both CGI and ISAPI code in it.
>
>
>
> > But, my client just called up and told me they really want to run the
> > software on two or three different platforms. VMS, Linux, and iSeries
> > to be exact.
>
> Are these all web servers or do they want a desktop utility?

>I am not sure that VMS or iSeries are useful as desktop computers.

I have written "desktop" applications for both...

> > COBOL runs on all three, so that should not be a big issue, but
> > wowzers... MicroFocus COBOL is now apparently $22,000 ($22K!) PER
> > SERVER. That kind of zaps the idea of putting it under Linux, unless
> > there is a much less expensive COBOL compiler for Linux...
>
> Yes, it is definitely overpriced and then you pay a runtime fee as well...
> There is a limited marketplace, mainly comprised of people with a COBOL
> mindset who are stuck with a large Legacy investment and no idea what to
> do
> about it. You can't blame MF for squeezing it.
>
>
>
> > A $22K utility program is not exactly what I had in mind... nor for
> > that matter, what the customer had in mind. I would love to pull a
> > rabbit out of my hat on this one, but I am totally stumped. It looks
> > like MicroFocus has eaten up Relia and AcuCobol as well...
>
> You could always use a language other than COBOL.
>
> Write your utility as a Java servlet or a server side script using Python,
> Ruby, PHP or similar. C# will run under .NET or Mono on all of the
> platforms
> you describe.

>When was Mono ported to VMS or iSeries ?

"Mono" is an Open Source initiative. We have port(ing)ed it to OpenVMS
8.3 on Alpha and Integrity to try and justify our existence (nothing better
to
do...*literally*)."

See: http://www.archivum.info/comp.os.vms.../msg01123.html

Do try and keep up, Richard... :-)

> Web server code is one of the jobs that COBOL is NOT ideally
> suited for.

Cobol is fine for web servers. As good as it is for all other types of
applications.

Nonsense! COBOL is good for COBOL applications. There are other tools MUCH
better suited for other applications, AND much cheaper. To recommend COBOL
over these tools is simply irresponsible.

> Just ensure that the presentation is separated from the
lo>gic (ie use templating).

Good advice no matter which tool you end up using...


> Paying $22,000 for something, when there are better tools available for
> free, is simply a no-brainer.
>
> > Any suggestions?
>
> Yes.
>
> Don't use COBOL.
>
> Pete.
> --
> "I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."

"Pete Dashwood" <dashwood@removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote in message
news:6hi9jfFmcpcdU1@mid.individual.net...
> "Richard" <riplin@azonic.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:ee72723b-2d10-4566-a9bc-c32544612532@b38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 26, 11:28 am, "Pete Dashwood"
> <dashw...@removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote:
>>
>> If it is CGI it is very easy to use a free COBOL compiler with a free
>> runtime (like Fujitsu which can be downloaded from their
>> site:www.adtools.com)
>
> Version 3 is a) Windows only (and probably not Vista so for the 7 year
> old XP or earlier), b) free for students, c) not suitable for
> production code.
>
>
>> CGI really only needs ACCEPT and DISPLAY, although later versions of
>> Fujitsu
>> (5.0 and above, if I remember correctly...) provide a full Web
>> development
>> environment for COBOL server side code. The full support is excellent and


CGI really only needs ACCEPT and DISPLAY 'UPON COMMAND LINE'

CGI generally is reading from or writing to STDIN and STDOUT. (on unix,
'stdin' and 'stdout')

Surely there is another way to use standard handles with COBOL other than
DISPLAY/ACCEPT. (READ and WRITE come to mind) .

I don't know squat about ISAPI.

MCM

"Richard" <riplin@azonic.co.nz> wrote in message
news:bb8d6efd-d7e6-4435-8801-6ff9a62b6fc0@a2g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 26, 11:16 am, "HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> Pete Dashwood wrote:
> >> Whoo boy - did I just walk into a minefield. Advice on how to extract
> >> myself with all body parts attached very welcome...
>
> >> I walked into a shop a few weeks ago that of all things, has some
> >> Alpha VMS machines still running. In fact, they have been running for
> >> three years without an IPL or even an administrator login - ever
> >> since they previous system admin got up on a high horse and left.
> >> Imagine that...
>
> >> I contracted to go into the VMS systems and write some small
> >> interface programs to put a bit of the data up on the web. This is
> >> usually trivially easy under VMS, especially since the VMS COBOL
> >> compiler works great for CGI. (It's a very good compiler indeed.
> >> Perfect target for a little utility program written in COBOL.
>
> >> But, my client just called up and told me they really want to run the
> >> software on two or three different platforms. VMS, Linux, and iSeries
> >> to be exact.
>
> >> COBOL runs on all three, so that should not be a big issue, but
> >> wowzers... MicroFocus COBOL is now apparently $22,000 ($22K!) PER
> >> SERVER. That kind of zaps the idea of putting it under Linux, unless
> >> there is a much less expensive COBOL compiler for Linux...
>
> >> A $22K utility program is not exactly what I had in mind... nor for
> >> that matter, what the customer had in mind. I would love to pull a
> >> rabbit out of my hat on this one, but I am totally stumped. It looks
> >> like MicroFocus has eaten up Relia and AcuCobol as well...
>
> >> Any suggestions?
>
> I think what Pete meant to say was that Fijutsu has a version that runs
> under Linux.

Yes, they do. But it isn't free.

>That is correct. Fujitsu has released a new version 7.3 for Linux
re>cently too.

> But why? Linux represents less than 1% of the desktop market.

>Given that he is discussing web servers and Linux is running the
>majority of all web sites (see Netcraft) then how many are using a
>Linux desktop is irrelevant.

I went and had a look at the Netcraft figures, (on your recommendation).

It certainly doesn't claim Linux is running most web servers.

See: http://survey.netcraft.com/Reports/200805/

and... http://survey.netcraft.com/Reports/200805/

This shows that Apache is the top Web Server followed by IIS. While many
Apache sites ARE hosted from Linux, it is not true that ALL of them are...

Notice that Netcraft (your source...) make NO mention whatsoever of Linux...
(To be fair, they don't mention Windows either, but we know that ALL of the
50 odd million IIS sites are Windows based...)

>Of course the _actual_ number of Linux desktops is quite unknown, it
>is not like there many 'sales' figures. Many who bought Vista machines
>seem to be shifting to Ubuntu, or at least those who can't get XP
>install disks.

I know NOBODY who is "unable to get XP install disks" or download XP from
either a P2P source or discounted OEM vendors like:
http://www.softwarevending.com/info-...47631211117395

Certainly some people are moving to Ubuntu... I might do so myself :-) but
it won't be until after release of Windows 7 (and then only if Win 7 proves
to be a disaster; I would hope that the Vista fiasco will be learned
from...)... XP is an excellent OS.

Pete.
--
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."