×
The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.
Hi Jerry,
I've never heard of QP2BATCH. We have QShell (STRQSH/QSH) and PASE
(QP2TERM, QP2SHELL, amonst other things.)
What is the value of using QP2TERM? It gives you a pure PASE
environment that doesn't run any QShell commands. If you're developing
software that's intended to run on both AIX and IBM i, you might want to
be sure that you're only using the AIX versions of the tools.
Since v5r3, QShell has been able to run both QShell and PASE commands.
The QShell ones are native *PGM objects, designed/written for OS/400.
They are normal RPG, C, CL, etc program objects, that do their
"thinking" in EBCDIC. The PASE ones are compiled for AIX, and built
with AIX compilers. They "think" in ASCII. But, both can be run from
QShell.
IMHO, the QShell interface is better than QP2SHELL for running Unix
stuff from within a program (such as a CL program or RPG program)
because you have more control over error handling and command output.
Since they are separate products (QShell and PASE) there's always a
chance that a system will have one installed and not the other. So that
might also play into why you'd use one instead of the other one.
Does that help? I'm not really sure that I understand what you were
looking for...
On 2/28/2011 2:37 PM, Jerry Draper wrote:
What is the value of using QP2TERM vs QSH for both/either interactive/batch?
Jerry
midrange.com
