RE: Add libraries to QSYSLIBL or QUSRLIBL

Carel,

Thanks for the reply; I considered that but the tools are interrelated.  So
it is quite possible that one tool will call the other with will call the
third.  Also, I don't know that I can assume that each tool is using only
the command interface of the other tools.  

Also cause for concern is the fact that the production libraries aren't
carried into a submitted batch job and it is likely that these tools will be
used in batch together.

Lastly, I don't know that I even like the idea of copying 15 commands into
QGPL ;-)  Plus one of the tools has a menu interface, would I have to copy
that too?

The idea of creating duplicate commands in QGPL bothers me.  Is it really
considered a good idea?

Charles


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carel Teijgeler [mailto:coteijgeler@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 3:50 PM
> To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Add libraries to QSYSLIBL or QUSRLIBL
> 
> 
> Charles,
> 
> In stead of adding the libraries to a library list, copy the 
> commands of those tools (if there are any) to QGPL and 
> reference the "product library" parameter on the command to 
> the original library.
> 
> In that case you use the product library slot in the job's 
> library list (maximum 2). Beware, those libraries are not 
> "transferred" to a batch job when submitting such a job.
> 
> Unless you want to use all three utilities in one programme at once.
> 
> Just a thought.
> 
> Regards,
> Carel Teijgeler.
> 
> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
> 
> On 28-1-04 at 13:55 CWilt@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> >We've recently purchased a set of tools that should prove 
> useful for all users. FYI: the tools are for 
> converting/emailing spool files.
> >
> >My initial thought was that since the tools were for all 
> users, we should simply add the (3) libraries to the QUSRLIBL 
> system value.
> >
> >But there is a minor concern about going over the 25 library 
> limit for the user library list.  (Yes, I'm aware that this 
> can be increased >but that's another can o'worms ;-)
> >
> >So I started thinking about adding them instead to the QSYSLIBL. 
> >Currently, our QSYSLIBL is still using the default IBM 
> provided QSYS, QSYS2, QHLPSYS, and QUSRSYS.
> >
> >But I'm wondering how appropriate that would be.  Are there 
> any gotcha's if I do this?
> >
> >Thinking about this led me to wonder if there are any 
> guidelines for what belongs in QSYSLIBL vs. QUSRLIBL.  
> >
> >At my last position, I added a "Company's system library" to 
> the QSYSLIBL. It had some modified versions of IBM QSYS 
> objects for >the most part.  So it made sense to put it in 
> the QSYSLIBL.  But I'm curious as to what you all put in there.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion 
> (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>