RE: qinter routing entry -- MIDRANGE-L

× 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.

I would remove it. Basically all the default QCMD does is;
Set the attn. program if one is specified
Call the initial program
Go to the initial menu

There's a slight bit more to it but it's that simple. I don't see any value
in that entry other than to mess with the program stack.

In this case the TFRCTL is really worthless.

--
Jim Oberholtzer
Chief Technical Architect
Agile Technology Architects

-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gqcy
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2014 2:06 PM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: qinter routing entry

in our QINTER subsystem, we have a entry:

seqnbr program library compare val
9999 PGMEVOKE QGPL *ANY

and that program does a RTVUSRPRF of INLPGM and INLPGMLIB and then does a:

TFRCTL &INLPGM.&INLPGMLIB

program and entries were created back in 1987, I am sure it was just
migrated from s/38....

is this process redundant?
if I would remove the routing entry, would the signon process and job
start process work the same?

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.