Re: VTAM question (***)
- From: deborah.mitchell@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Debbie Mitchell)
- Date: 21 May 2007 10:19:58 -0700
On Mon, 21 May 2007 17:11:41 +0200, Chris Mason <chrismason@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I can't say I'd ever performed this sort of research but isn't the need to
regenerate - including reassembly - customized tables one of the sorts of
issues covered by the documentation a systems programmer goes through when
planning a new release?
As it turns out, the version of ISTINCLM in use here is not IBM's default.
It was customized long before my tenure here and not documented. I will
need to do some checking with other people here to see what they remember
about the reason it was customized as well as what changes were made. Since
no one is really complaining (at least not very loudly) about it, it won't
be a priority. And, since posting my original question, I have noticed that
the behavior is not consistent -- which leads me to believe that it is,
indeed, related to changing screen sizes.
Thank you all for your help.
Debbie Mitchell
Utica National Insurance Group
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to listserv@xxxxxxxxxxx with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: VTAM question (***)
- From: Chris Mason
- RE: VTAM question (***)
- From: Neubert, Kevin , DIS
- Re: VTAM question (***)
- Prev by Date: Re: calling ISPLINK from COBOL
- Next by Date: Re: calling ISPLINK from COBOL
- Previous by thread: Re: VTAM question (***)
- Next by thread: RE: VTAM question (***)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
