|
> > I think this is something you're just going to have to get over. > Yes, probably. Unless he wants to actually get down to the level of writing some way to transfer it from system to system. In other words, this is something that IBM expressly doesn't support. > > It's the same thing as using a VB 6 feature and then complaining because > VB 5 can't compile it. Keep in mind that when you compile *PRV on V5R1 > you are actually compiling with the V4R5 compiler. > No, it's not the same thing at all. He's not trying to COMPILE it to a *PRV release, he's trying to SAVOBJ to a *PRV release. So, that would be the same thing as compiling a VB6 program on WinXP and expecting it to install and run on Win2000. Which DOES WORK. In fact, you can run a VB6 program on Win95! If there are APIs which aren't available on Win95, the installer program will install them when it installs the program. However, that's not the way things were intended to work on OS/400. In some ways that's good, in other ways it's frustrating, but that's what IBM decided to do, so you're right: He'll have to either get over it or use a different OS.
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.