RE: 5798FAX vs V6R1 -- MIDRANGE-L

Good News Everybody!

The new search engine is LIVE!

Please report any problems to david (at) midrange.com.

Subject: RE: 5798FAX vs V6R1
From: smorrison@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 09:45:46 -0600
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

Thanks for the update Rob. Something else to watch for during our
upgreade.

Steve

Steven Morrison
Fidelity Express

rob@xxxxxxxxx
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
12/08/2008 10:07 PM
Please respond to
Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

To
Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc

Subject
RE: 5798FAX vs V6R1

So far - works fine.
I do have a pmr on why the failure of some objects on ANZOBJCVN.
I also have a discussion on why no object in QSYSV5R4M0 for the ability to

compile to a previous release.
I did offer a suggestion to come out with a v5r3 version. If for no other

reason than to compile everything to that release. And still provide
migration to V6R1 from release - 2.

Rob Berendt

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2026 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.