On Sat, 4 Feb 2006 14:24:45 -0500, Arthur T. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I do suspect that implementing UNDO would be *very* > tricky. PREs and SUPs would be a problem, especially as > any mod with a PRE for the mod you're UNDOing would also > have to be UNDOne. Finding the "before" data and getting > it properly linked/bound/copied would be another > hurdle. Despite that, it would be a very handy tool, and > would probably be used much more than RESTORE if it were > available. > This is an unusual instance in which I find the design of VM/CMS VMFMERGE preferable to SMP/E. VMFMERGE has no analogue of a distribution library, nor any operation analogous to ACCEPT. Instead it maintains renamed elements in a "DELTA" library, analogous to the SMPPTS; and current level elements in a "MERGE" library, analogous to SMP/E's target libraries. The VMFRESTORE operation merely copies elements at the correct older level from the DELTA library (PTS) to the MERGE library (target). On the whole, SMP/E is better, but it shouldn't say, "NIH!" to superior features of VMFMERGE.
-- gil -- StorageTek INFORMATION made POWERFUL ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
