On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 23:19:38 +0000, Farley, Peter x23353 wrote: > >Once you start using git (or for that matter any of the *ix-based source >repository utilities) for mainframe source maintenance, you stop using >IEBUPDTE (or any other sequence-number-based source update process) and start >using the "patch" utility. The input to "patch" is the output from "diff" >(when properly configured with options, as is done inside of git and other >source repository utilities). > The input to IEBUPDTE is the output from "SuperC" (when properly configured with options). The glaring restriction of IEBUPDTE is that it chokes on an apparent IEBUPTDE command appearing as a data line, as might happen in a JCL member invoking an IEBUPDTE step.
And Fixed-80. >The "diff" and "patch" utilities could care less what is on each line. They >just compare lines and try to find the maximal number of non-differences (sets >of matching lines) between the minimal number of difference lines. It's an >art, but it mostly works. > SuperC appears to use a similar algorithm. >Any kind of sequence numbering in the source lines defeats "diff" entirely and >everything after an insert looks like it changed. > Only if you are so foolish as to configure your editor to renumber in each session. >So if you plan to move to git or one of its predecessors, plan to eliminate >all sequence numbering in the source when you first move it into the >repository. > Or don't renumber. I once wrote a utility using SuperC and IEBUPDTE to repair carelessly modified sequence numbers. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
