On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Kris Buelens <[email protected]> wrote:
> I don't really agree with the recommendation to use RACF(BATCH as
> opposed to using RAC:
> - with RAC, one gets a returncode for the specific RACF command that
> was executed
> - RACF(BATCH gives one global returncode for all stacked commands.
> A REXX stage can also be written using RAC.
The BATCH is to avoid it to prompt when you did something unexpected.
My RACF REXX is short enough to include here. I see it even features a
secondary output for failed commands.
/* RACF REXX Issue RACF commands */
/* Author: Rob van der Heij, 21 Jul 2008 */
arg line /* Take 1st command */
signal on error
'streamstate all states'
parse var states . s1 . /* View stream 1 */
parse var s1 inp1 ':' out1 /* Pick both sides */
if wordpos(out1, '0 4 8') > 0 /* We have 2nd output */
then err = '\ rc: | *.output.1:'
else err = '\ rc: | cons' /* or the console */
do i = 1 + (line = '') /* Using the stack so can't */
if i > 1 then 'peekto line' /* do more than one at a time */
'callpipe (end \ name RACF.REXX:6)',
'\ var line',
'| append strliteral /END/ ',
'| o: fanout',
'| stack',
'\ o: ',
'| take last ',
'| spec ,RACF BATCH, ',
'| command ',
'| strnfind /RPI I/',
'| rc: strnfind /RPI E/',
'| *:',
err
if i > 1 then 'readto'
end
error: return rc * ( rc <> 12 )
