× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.


  • Subject: Re: CHGPF Question
  • From: DAsmussen@xxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 21 Sep 1997 23:31:27 -0400 (EDT)

In a message dated 97-09-20 07:26:20 EDT, you write:

> So do I, although not quite as vehemently as you. I wasn't recommending
>  it, just clarifying the point.
>  
>  >>  Actually I'm all in favour of it. It doesn't do anything you couldn't
do
>  >>  before, and it doesn't work instantaneously. It's not "on the fly" in
>  >>  that sense. It just makes a complex process simpler and less error
>  >>  prone. I can't see that's such a bad thing.
>  >
>  >How so?  I'd appreciate the "particulars"...
>  
>  The process of moving the old physical file, moving the old logicals,
>  creating the new physical, copying the data, creating the new logicals,
>  deleting the old logicals, and deleting the old physical (that's how I
>  do it, anyway) is complex and I know it's one that's caused problems for
>  people in the past. OK, I have the process automated, but the routine is
>  a tricky one to write. CHGPF does it all for you in one command.
>  
>  I don't think the point of the new abilities of CHGPF is to encourage
>  people to use LVLCHK(*NO). It's just an option that was always there on
>  CRTPF and CHGPF. I occasionally use LVLCHK(*NO), but I only use it to
>  speed things up when I'm programming and the effects of what I'm doing
>  is strictly localised.
>  
>  BTW people who insist on using LVLCHK(*NO) with the CHGPF command should
>  take care. It only applies to the physical. The level checking of any
>  dependent logicals remains the same. You will need to track down any
>  dependent logicals whose format level ID will have changed and set them
>  to LVLCHK(*NO) using the CHGLF command.

I know that I sound like I'm whining at this point (and perhaps I am), but
WHAT IS THE BIG DEAL with compiling all programs that access a given file???

Regards,

Dean Asmussen
Enterprise Systems Consulting, Inc.
Fuquay-Varina, NC  USA
E-Mail:  DAsmussen@AOL.COM

"We are what we repeatedly do.  Excellence, then, is not an act, but a
habit." -- Aristotle
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MAJORDOMO@midrange.com
|    and specify 'unsubscribe MIDRANGE-L' in the body of your message.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.