Re: Get CHKLNK, CHKPFM, FNDSTR, etc programming utilities

[Scott Klement <klemscot@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Thanks Mark!  I loaded that toolkit.  It appears someone else has already
> done the check for IFS object existence.  Unfortunately, this command would
> not help us since we NEED to have the object generic.

What do you mean by "have the object generic?"  Generic in what way?  And
how is that different from what you've already got?


> These files are FTP'd by customers and I check for files starting with
> certain characters to know which ones to process.  I have a special
> command called FTPIFS to FTP IFS files from one system to another (copy,
> move, get/put, directory, generic, whatever).  I then use CHKLNK to make
> sure the IFS objects got there before deleting them on the remote
> system.

If you're doing this in a program, why not use access() API?  Unless you
get a "failed" error on the FTP, why would they not exist?


> Some interesting programs in that toolkit.  Sorry, but I was
> hoping for some turbo-powered enhancements to the base utilities.  I
> knew of some other links to free tools but some of those started
> charging now.  Why should I have to reinvent the wheel every time I need
> to do something that IBM doesn't support?

You don't have to reinvent the wheel.  You can purchase existing packages,
or find open source packages...


> If someone else has already done that, it would save us time.

And if YOU did them, and added it to the iSeries toolkit or some other
Open Source project, you'd save other people time.   The problem with Open
Source is that people seem to think that it involves other people doing
work for them for free.   In order for it to make sense, it has to be a
two-way street!  Not only do people give you their work for free, but you must
also give them yours.   Otherwise, all you've got is one generous
developer.


> Now, I will ask the ultimate question.  How much further could we go if
> IBM open-sourced their utilities?  At least in the basic utilties.
> CHKOBJ is how old and there is still not a generic option?  Is no one
> else bothered by this?

IBM is not going to open-source their utilities.  They sell these
utilities for money.  They were developed under a commercial license for a
commercial operating system.   I think we can safely rule out any chance
of them making them open source.