Bob, I don't have the original question (other than what's repeated below) so based strictly on what's below, DFDSS uses a similar criterion for determining dataset filter lists for dump, copy, restore operations. That's just one example of a non-security-package where this type of logic is used.
Rex -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of Bob Bridges Sent: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 9:01 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Rexx generic compare You say "not RACF or other security packages", but how is this useful ~except~ in the context of a security package? I'm pressing the point because the three mainframe packages (RACF, ACF2 and Top Secret) all handle this matter differently, so the logic that works for RACF isn't quite the same as how TSS does it. --- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* A dozen, a gross, and a score Plus three times the square root of four Divided by seven Plus five times eleven Is one cubed plus forty pairs more. */ -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of Itschak Mugzach Sent: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 01:13 That's the idea. Not RACF or other security packages, but yes. I was looking for the same logic. --- On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 11:57 PM Bob Bridges <robhbrid...@gmail.com> wrote: > You're talking RACF, here? I once wrote a REXX that determines > whether a DSN matches a RACF-style resource name with wild characters, > but here you're asking how to figure out which of two such wildcard > strings is the BEST match. I've never done that. > > But IIRC RACF has pretty simple rules for determining the closest match. > Longest string? Not quite that simple. Longest before the first > wildcard character? Hold on while I look... Yeah, that's closer: > > "In general, given two profiles that match a data set, you can find > the more specific one by comparing the profile names from left to > right. Where they differ, a non-generic character is more specific > than a generic character. In comparing generics, a % is more specific > than an *, and an * is more specific than **. Another way to determine > the most specific profile is with the SEARCH command, as there are > some rare exceptions to the general rule. SEARCH always lists the > profiles in the order of the most specific to the least specific." > > > --- On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 15:45:50 +0300, ITschak Mugzach wrote: > > >....I am trying to figure out what is a better fit for a generic > > >mask. Assume I have SYS1.PARMLIB.OLD and I am looking into two > > >strings: SYS1.PARM** and SYS1.PARM*.OLD. Is there a way to > > >identify which is better covers SYS1.PARMLIB.OLD (the second one, > > >of course) (using Rexx? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
