Re: Processes after CRTSRVPGM

["M. Lazarus" <mlazarus@xxxxxxxx>]

Simon,

 You're technically correct, of course, but since I've needed to 
track down an elusive bug due to someone forgetting to change the 
named signature, I've decided to go back to letting the system assign 
the signature.

 Since the compilation and last source change date can be retrieved 
from the object itself, I don't see a major advantage in putting the 
version in the signature.

 -mark

At 2/13/08 04:01 PM, you wrote:

> On 14/02/2008, at 6:57 AM, M. Lazarus wrote:
>
> >   That method tells the system that you are managing the
> > signatures.  This is almost the equivalent of setting LVLCHK(*NO) on
> > your files.  It gets rid of the error message, but also disables the
> > error checking!
>
> Only if you never change the signature. You can still get signature
> protection if YOU specify a new signature. For example:
>
> STRPGMEXP PGMLVL(*CURRENT) SIGNATURE('USEFUL_TOOLS_310)
> STRPGMEXP PGMLVL(*PRV) SIGNATURE('USEFUL_TOOLS_240)
> STRPGMEXP PGMLVL(*PRV) SIGNATURE('USEFUL_TOOLS_230)
> STRPGMEXP PGMLVL(*PRV) SIGNATURE('USEFUL_TOOLS_220)
> STRPGMEXP PGMLVL(*PRV) SIGNATURE('USEFUL_TOOLS_210)
> STRPGMEXP PGMLVL(*PRV) SIGNATURE('USEFUL_TOOLS_110)
>
> This has the advantage of 'meaningful' signatures AND the so-called
> level check.
>
> Regards,
> Simon Coulter.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>     FlyByNight Software         OS/400, i5/OS Technical Specialists
>
>     http://www.flybynight.com.au/
>     Phone: +61 2 6657 8251   Mobile: +61 0411 091 400        /"\
>     Fax:   +61 2 6657 8251                                   \ /
>                                                               X
>                   ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML E-Mail  / \