At 9/14/2006 05:00 AM, BDissen wrote:
On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 04:32:28 -0400 David Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>At 9/13/2006 07:36 PM, SMetz wrote:
:>>On 09/13/2006 at 02:13 PM, David Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
:>>>Because our maintenance is cumulative, not incremental.
:>>> - That means that all prior maintenance has to be removed
:>>> before the new maintenance file can be successfully
:>>> APPLY'd.
:>>No it doesn't. There may be something in your packaging that forces
:>>it, but it's not the mere fact of being a levelset.
:>I'm sorry, Shmuel, but your assertion, "No it doesn't" is a bit like
:>asserting that two plus two does not equal four. I think I've
:>explained quite adequately in my prior posts why my above statement
:>is true. I think you're going to have to put a bit more effort into
:>justifying your contradiction before I'd be willing to take you
seriously here.
Assuming that you do it as a FUNCTION, you REWORK it and then "simply" update
the SUP list and specify RMIDs/UNIDs on any changed element.
You then should be able to REJECT, RECEIVE and APPLY REDO.
I do not understand why you need to do a RESTORE as part of the process.
To get the VERs to work. (Although it's been pointed out to me that
it is not necessary to have VERs. I'll have to think about that.)
Dave Cole REPLY TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cole Software WEB PAGE: http://www.colesoft.com
736 Fox Hollow Road VOICE: 540-456-8536
Afton, VA 22920 FAX: 540-456-6658
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
