Regarding your quarrel about "mainly": It is likely nothing will be changed. There are many possible uses and there is no value in guessing at them in order to try to list them. And if one were to change to "only" then your analogous approach would be to quibble about that because it is incorrect by being incomplete.
<snip> Breaking an existing authorized program in that fashion could be a buffer overrun leading to escalation of privilige; an integrity threat that I'd consider an incompatibility. </snip> That's exactly why I wrote what I wrote about LONGPARM being incompatible if allowed without specification, but not allowing LONGPARM for an authorized program unless the directory entry indicated it was OK. <snip> Historically, unauthorized programs could be invoked by LINK/ATTACH (I've done so, constructively.) </snip> You can "invoke" anything you want. Whether it will work properly depends on the program. The program's documentation (or lack thereof) is your guide. If their doc says that you are to use EXEC PGM=xx and you choose to use LINK or ATTACH, then maybe it will work, maybe it won't, but if it doesn't (or if it seems to but has subtle problems that you might not even notice aside from error cases), that's on you. Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
