On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 09:20:40 -0500, Paul Gilmartin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I don't know why JCL imposes a harsher limit. Just doing JCL's >thing, I guess. Likewise, I don't see why DYNALLOC imposes a >harsher limit, since I see in IEFZB4D0: > > S99TULNG DS XL2 LENGH OF 1ST (OR ONLY) PARAMETER > >which would easily accommodate a pathname lengh of 1023 characters. > >-- gil > Because JCL was there first on MVS. Changing it to be be more upsets all those things that depend on it being the way it is. DYNALLOC did not need to do more than the JCL did. z/OS UNIX did not magically change all of the non- z/OS UNIX world. Not that with enough time and effort it can not be changed, but it has not. And unless someone can come up with a real business case, not a I-would-like-to case, it will not happen any time soon. I have rexx code that finds all allocated dd control blocks, but that is after converter/interpreter. If SDSF can get it, there must be a control block path back to it. Easy is as smart as you are. I am not smart enough to follow JES control blocks, yet, so it would appear hard to me right now. Given time..... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
