Re: Service programs and QSRVSRC

Scott,

It may be that our usage and environments are different, so for you the automatic sig generation provides nothing.

Normally, when I create/release a *SRVPGM I don't use *PRV blocks. In the rare case I need it, it's a deliberate decision. Therefore, if I were to use a hardcoded sig and I rebuilt the *SRVPGM with a new export sequence, but neglected to manually change the sig, I would probably be getting some unexpected results.

These are "gotcha" errors that may or may not be found in testing, since an already tested part of the code might not get re-tested. Since there was a resequenced/inserted/deleted export list, it won't work properly. Of course, I think it's a really bad idea, for this reason, to do that.

The bottom line is, if you are using *PRV as a matter of course for all past versions, then a system generated sig probably won't do much for you. But the way I usually use them, it's useful. I experimented with a manual sig a while back and got bitten with the program finding the wrong export when the sig was accidentally not changed for the new version. An automatically generated sig would have caused an error to be thrown right away when the program got activated during testing.

It's not much, but given the loose/poor implementation it's better than nothing.

-mark


At 10/13/09 01:11 AM, you wrote:

M. Lazarus wrote:
> I don't think that many people like the way that service program
> signatures have been implemented, but specifying your own removes
> what little protection it does give. It's way too easy to overlook
> changing the signature when a service program is regenerated.

Why aren't you answering my question? WHAT protection does the system
provide you? HOW are you recommending that I code my SRVPGM that will
solve this problem?

Are you suggesting using STRPGMEXP PGMLVL(*CURRENT) with no *PRV blocks?
Is that the method you recommend? Or what method do you recommend?