RE: Ignore *SYSTEM state of objects?? Search 400 article.

Phil -

> As an aside, if you're in SST to do this frequently, it's much less time
> consuming to modify the SLIC module that actually does the checking of
> states/domains and 'turn' the checking off once and for all...

Is this a good thing to do? I would think that circumventing IBM's
security would be less than desireable.



On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 15:53:27 -0500, "Hall, Philip" <phall@xxxxxxxx> said:
> 
> OK, I've seen the 'tip'...(thanks to all who sent it)
> 
> Basically, if you've been subscribed to the MI list this has been covered
> many times, by many people - it's not 'new' news.
> 
> And Ken (I think it was Ken) posted that SST marks it as modified, and it
> will not restore on another system in that modified state - both are
> true.
> 
> However, if you didn't use SST do the modification (and a couple of other
> needed modifications), both of those statements are then false, unless
> (as I've stated a few times before, here & in the MI list) you are using
> the SECURITY system values correctly (esp. QFRCCVNRST and QALWOBJRST).
> 
> As an aside, if you're in SST to do this frequently, it's much less time
> consuming to modify the SLIC module that actually does the checking of
> states/domains and 'turn' the checking off once and for all...
> 
> --phil
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
> 
-- 
  
  michaelr_41@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Access your email from home and the web