There are historical reasons why the situation reported by "97" couldn't start with a "0". HOWEVER, if this is of importance to you, then submit a "request" via your IBM marketing team <G> and reference the existing SHARE requirement:
SSLNGC0413615 Optional (ISO 2002) "0x" file-status code for current "97" Theere is no (good?) reason that this shouldn't be getting a "0x" status code today. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... > On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 18:54:15 -0500, "pdc" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Lots of our programs call a CoBOL program designed to handle VSAM > files. Trouble is, when the VSAM return code doesn't start with '0', > it returns its own error message. That works, except IBM also has > the successful return code of '97'. > > Every once in a while the open failed, and the job would have to be > restarted. Not often enough that it was a priority to change this > and get user testing and approval of all of the programs that called > it though. > > Anybody know why IBM decided to do this? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
