And even then the command objects are normal command objects with two differences. 1) Service data at offset x31 shows V4R4M0 instead of V5R1M0 (on a V5R1 machine) 2) The SEPT entry for the command processing program is missing so normal object resolution would be used to find the CPP if you could call it. The second difference surprises me since I didn't think the SEPT could change between releases since SEPT entry numbers are hardcoded in programs so why bother blanking them out? -Walden ------------ Walden H Leverich III President Tech Software (516)627-3800 x11 WaldenL@TechSoftInc.com http://www.TechSoftInc.com -----Original Message----- From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 09:47 To: email@example.com Subject: RE: Modify SYSVAL QSYSLIBL (Walden) Frank, I agree with Walden, but please look closely. There is nothing different about the *PRV libraries. The difference is in the command objects that they contain, which cannot be executed. As a user community, we could ask IBM for an attribute in the *LIB object that prevents them from being in QSYSLIBL or QUSRLIBL, but I think that is too much to ask for, and IBM has bigger fish to fry. As I indicated yesterday, I spoke with a developer in Rochester, and as he said, someone has to take some responsibility! Al Al Barsa, Jr. Barsa Consulting Group, LLC 400>390 914-251-1234 914-251-9406 fax http://www.barsaconsulting.com http://www.taatool.com Frank.Kolmann@revlo n.com To: firstname.lastname@example.org Sent by: cc: midrange-l-admin@mi Subject: RE: Modify SYSVAL QSYSLIBL (Walden) drange.com 12/17/01 10:06 PM Please respond to midrange-l >From: "Walden H. Leverich" <WaldenL@TechSoftInc.com> > >There is nothing "special" about the *PRV libraries, they are normal >everyday libraries from an object point of view. The change you're >suggesting would require a change to every piece of the system that >deals with library lists and since we just had one of those at V5R1 I >don't think >you'll find Rochester too egger to make another such change anytime >soon. > >-Walden I beg to differ. Try running a command out of a *PRV lib. If the system has the info to prevent commands being executed then it has the info to prevent the *PRV lib being added to the LibL. Is there not a check presently to validate that a library in fact exists, then how hard is it to put in a check to ensure the library is of the right type. Frank Kolmann _______________________________________________ This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l or email: MIDRANGE-Lemail@example.com Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l. _______________________________________________ This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options, visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l or email: MIDRANGE-Lfirstname.lastname@example.org Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.