|
Don't forget that (unless it changed in V7) a UPDPGM will not cause the embedded "what used" information to be updated. So if the in-house tool depends on that data to determine what needs to be recompiled then UPDPGM is not a good idea.
On 2012-06-27, at 5:43 PM, midrange-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Jon ParisI think it should be easy to at least change the tool to do UPDPGM ifI know of no scenarios where this would not work.
the pgm exists already instead of crtpgm. I'll try and test that. Are
you sure that would work in all circumstances?
As for changing to srvpgm, that's what I was worried about : all thoseSounds reasonable to me.
files that stay open, global and static variables,... It looks like
we'd have to go through every job to make sure that the difference in
behaviour of the new programs does not have any effect. Should we
start by eliminating the use of the dftactgrp while still using
binding by copy?
www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 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.