×
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.
If I remember correctly, the problem with QSH was that the version of find doesn't have all the parameters that Justin needed. The pase version does.
Kevin Bucknum
Senior Programmer Analyst
MEDDATA/MEDTRON
Tel: 985-893-2550
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Scott Klement
Sent: Monday, January 8, 2018 12:09 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: QP2SHELL output
I agree with Bryan... you should use QSH. I'm not aware of anything that wouldn't work that way (aside from people who do not understand Unix shells getting confused by stuff like PATH, etc.)
QSH not only works better from CL programs, but also works in situations where QP2SHELL fails due to the fact that (without you doing extra coding, anyway) QP2SHELL tries to use the ILE stdin/stdout/stderr, which can sometimes cause problems.
Also, Kevin Bucknum's suggestion of using the shell redirect should work. I can't see any reason it wouldn't -- again, aside from you not understanding how to call it properly.
If you really can't use QShell, then consider using a tool like UnixCmd.
I realize that it's an extra program to download/install, but it is free, and gives you a lot more control.
On 1/8/2018 12:01 PM, Bryan Dietz wrote:
I'm curious what is in the PASE script that cannot be done from QSH?
Bryan
Justin Taylor wrote on 1/8/2018 10:06 AM:
Mine is a PASE script, not QSH. QSH won't run my script properly.
Thanks
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
midrange.com
