[U2] RE: U2 Users Digest V1 #573

Sometime this afternoon. Hey... 112.8 Kilos today.. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: U2 Users Digest V1 #573 U2 Users DigestThursday, March 17 2005Volume 01 : Number 573 In this issue:

SV: [U2] RE: U2 Users Digest V1 #573

THANKS FOR POSTING THE DIGEST TO ALL ON THE LIST :-))) please try to reduce the postings when making a reply :-) -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Christopher Edwards Sendt: 17. marts 2005 10:21 Til: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Emne: [U2]

RE: [U2] [OT] Financial fraud (was the thread: Epicor)

Allen, This is a fantastic story. I am warning IT folks about just such a scenario ALL THE TIME. I've found that in these SOX audits the IT folk seem to think along two (deadly) lines. First, they tend to be just tell me what you want / give me a list (e.g. don't make me think) and secondly

RE: [U2]: Epicor

What if I make a change to the code in the system according to what the CFO wants and then I get implicated as being an accomplice to fraud. Can I pull my college credits where I failed accounting as being my defense? Is it getting to the point where every change to the system requires a call to

RE: [U2] UniObjects and LDAP user authentication.

Gordon, I didn't read your first posting. So this email may not make a sense. Sorry. We just converted UNIX traditional authentication method to use Active Directory. As you may know, AD is Microsoft's LDAP solution. Our current production UNIX platforms are: OS: HP-UX 11.11 64-bit UniData

RE: [U2] Financial Fraud

Jeff, That one is easy. Requests for mods to the software must be documented and their justification is part of the request. Every SOX auditor I've come across has made this mandate. So in IT we have a methodology where we are responding to written requests that have been through authorization

Re: [U2]: Epicor

Is it getting to the point where every change to the system requires a call to a lawyer to check to see if it is ok? Yes ! or atleast it seems that way here. We've gone from complete freedom to no changes without the appropriate documentation and approval overnight. All changes must be user

Re: [U2] UniObjects and LDAP user authentication.

Craig, You are correct, UniDebugger does use a telnet session. But if it also utilizes UniObjects to read in the program you want to work on. I can connect using my login and password for the telnet session but when I try to open a program to edit with UniObjects is when I get the error. I

RE: [U2] UD: ODBC/OleDB access to selected records in a file

Funny you should mention it. We just started experimenting with XML yesterday. CR comes with an ODBC driver for XML files. UD's LISTTOXML seems to work as advertised. Many details remain to be investigated, but it looks promising so far. Jim --- John Jenkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I

Re: [U2] [OT] Financial fraud (was the thread: Epicor)

Comments embedded in the message below. Susan Joslyn wrote: Allen, This is a fantastic story. I am warning IT folks about just such a scenario ALL THE TIME. I've found that in these SOX audits the IT folk seem to think along two (deadly) lines. First, they tend to be just tell me what you want

Re: [U2]: Epicor

Let's move this to U2-Community. You may subscribe to U2-Community, send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]. Place the following line by itself in the body of the mail: subscribe u2-community More info:

RE: [U2] [OT] Financial fraud (was the thread: Epicor)

Hi Susan, I see we are on the same page on this one! :-) Hey, I hope you're wearing green. It's Saint Patrick's day!!! http://www.st-patricks-day.com/index.asp Allen (wearing his lucky green pants) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of

RE: [U2] UD: ODBC/OleDB access to selected records in a file

Jim Bullock wrote: Funny you should mention it. We just started experimenting with XML yesterday. CR comes with an ODBC driver for XML files. UD's LISTTOXML seems to work as advertised. Many details remain to be investigated, but it looks promising so far. If LIST...TOXML

[U2] Multiprocessor IBM server

Universe 9.6.2.5 IBM H50 server with 4 CPU's AIX 4.3.3 Does anyone know how I can tell that this server is running multiple CPU's? In addition, how does Universe handle multiple CPU's? I know that there's been discussion about multi-threading in universe, but at a more basic level, shouldn't

Re: [U2] UDT dynamic files

If you're adding a lot of records to the archives at once and it was undersized, you're going to pay a hit while the system resizes on the fly. If you're dramatically increasing the record count, it would be better to resize before copying. Just as it's better to turn off indexing when

RE: [U2] [UV] make sure pgm exists before calling it.

!EXISTS (or similar) was definitely there in PI, I also thought it was around in UV but I seem to remember looking for it a while back and also drawing a blank Piers --- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/

Re: [U2]: Epicor

Again this message does not say *how* to move the discussion to u2-community. Can not we have a standard message that describes how to do this? I feel like a broken record. Will -Original Message- From: Moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Sent: Thu, 17 Mar 2005

Re: [U2] Financial Fraud

In order to post TO the u2-community list, put [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the To: field Will -Original Message- From: Moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Sent: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:24:24 -0500 Subject: Re: [U2] Financial Fraud Let's move this to U2-Community. You

RE: [U2] [UV] make sure pgm exists before calling it. (Unclassified)

Nearly right! I think it's ITS.THERE = @FALSE CALL !EXIST(SUBRNAME, ITS.THERE) IF ITS.THERE THEN CALL @SUBRNAME( arg1, arg2, . . . ) etc. END ELSE * It doesn't exist END -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stevenson, Charles

RE: [U2] [UV] make sure pgm exists before calling it.

As others have pointed out the routine is !EXIST - look in APP.PROGS, the code is there. All it does is open GLOBAL.CATDIR and attempts to read a record keyed on the subroutine.name. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stevenson, Charles Sent:

RE: [U2] [UV] make sure pgm exists before calling it. (Unclassified)

Thanks, Mike. Now I remember why I forgot about it. I'm in Pick-flavor and this thing seems to just check to see if the routine is in uv/catdir. We have pick-style cataloguing. I was thinking !EXIST() would resolve the question following the same rules as CALL does for finding a subroutine: