On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 1:17 AM, Roger Bolan <[email protected]> wrote: > > I know I'm catching up with an old thread, but I think this approach is REAL > SCARY. If I were a user with anything important on a temp disk and I lost > it because you forced a CP LOGOFF on me, I would be very upset. At the > very least, execute a logoff exec that will check for temp disks and do a > disconnect instead if there are any. > --Roger
But that was the question in the post. I assume it is for some specific purpose. You would not do that in a general user program. And if the OP actually meant to just terminate the REXX program, my code was inobscure enough to see where to do that. And many installations (including yours, IIRC) *do* have the policy to force idle users off the system after some time. Whether to save resources (always claimed that it would be more effective to force the busy users) or for security reasons or to simplify software management. One installation I worked frequently purged spool files to emphasize the fact that spool was not being backed up. Users learn (the hard way) that their environment is volatile. The number of time that I actually was forced off while typing the next command is statistically hard to explain... Or worse: we had the policy that users with no logon over some time were actually completely removed (including all backups etc). One chap was out on assignment for 6 months after he worked on his thesis for a few years... When SLA does not match the requirements, you can waste a lot of each others' time in the cat & mouse game. It would be too simple to accept owning a temporary disk as an excuse not to be forced off. Users come up with programs to consume weeny bit of resources to appear idle, service providers enhance their code to check in CMS NUCON for that program, smart users rename it to something else, etc. -Rob
