>Mount point is dynamic, not static. Its more analogous to volser than to device address.
Again, you discuss the shortcoming of a specific system while I have a broad view. Implementation would have to take things like volser, mount points or whatever and hide them once and for all from the user >>Once such a thing is implemented, all you need to do is mention the >>file name or alias, regardless of where in the system or file system >>you are. >When I ask for 'SYS1.LINKLIB', which of my 20 SYS1.LINKLIB data sets do I get? There would always be the need to disambiguate. That need would either be answered either automatically by the system examining the context, or, and I've mentioned it, one may add hints to lead the system to the one file he or she needs. The example given by Shmuel is z/OS specific and if the user is sophisticated enough to need a specific SYS1.LINKLIB, he or she would probably be sophisticated enough to provide hinting information. Otherwise, whatever the system chooses is probably the correct one. >>For people who are not techno-geeks this is much simpler than >>anything available today. >In what way is it simpler than the catalog and directory structures that currently exist? The ordinary user does not need to worry about creating user catalogs or about mounting file systems on empty directories. It's all transparrent to him. That's correct and that's where I took the idea from. That concept needs improvements which many in this conversation had alluded to. Another great idea from the z/OS that deserve implementation in that context (i.e. Central System Catalog) is the famous GDG. Whenever I explain the concept to my Unix friends they agree that such a brilliant idea should have been implemented in Unix as well. ZA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
