Bill, I think I've discovered how to make the VOC entry override the UD verb.
I am running UD PE 7.1 on Windows 2000 Server and I have set ECLTYPE = P and BASICTYPE = "P" in the UDNTSPOOLER account. I started with a program called LISTPTR in the BP file. UD has a verb called LISTPTR. After I compiled BP LISTPTR and ran LISTPTR I got the UD version of LISTPTR. The VOC for LISTPTR was NULL but there was an entry in the BP file for a record = "_LISTPTR" which I presume is the compiled code for LISTPTR. After I deleted the UD verb for LISTPTR from the VOC and ran LISTPTR I still got the UD version of LISTPTR. After I CATALOGed BP LISTPTR and ran LISTPTR I got the UD version of LISTPTR. There was no change in the VOC or the BP file and there was no entry for LISTPTR in the local CTLG file. Note that this CATALOG with no option is the default, and therefore the *global*, catalog option. After I CATALOGed BP LISTPTR with the LOCAL option, the entry for LISTPTR in the VOC was: 1. C 2. C:\IBM\ud71\localaccountname\CTLG\programname (which was LISTPTR) 3. BP\LISTPTR I ran LISTPTR and got the *new* program to run, not the UD verb. After I CATALOGEd BP LISTPTR with the DIRECT option, the entry for LISTPTR in the VOC was: 1. C 2. BP\_LISTPTR I ran LISTPTR and also got the *new* version of the program to run, not the UD verb. So, I've concluded that compiling and cataloging the program with either the LOCAL or the DIRECT option will override the UD verb, if you've deleted the UD verb from the VOC prior to cataloging the program. I think I prefer using the DIRECT option because theprogram does not have to be re-cataloged when you recompile the program. I then addressed the issue of running the program in other accounts. The CATALOG command with no options catalogs the program globally, but the globally cataloged version of the program that ran was the UD verb version, not my new program version. So, I entered a catalog pointer in the VOC of the demo account to the cataloged record of the new program in the application account (UDNTSPOOLER)" AE VOC LISTPTR 1. C 2. D:\IBM\ud71\UDNTSPOOLER\BP\_LISTPTR LISTPTR in the demo account ran the *new* version of the program in the BP file in the UDNTSPOOLER account. I then changed and recompiled the program in the UDNTSPOOLER account but did not recatalog it, and it ran the recompiled program in the demo account. I then modified the LISTPTR record in the VOC of the demo account to provide a relative path to the cataloged program as follows and it also ran the *new* version of the program from the demo account: AE VOC LISTPTR 1. C 2. /IBM/ud71/UDNTSPOOLER/BP/_LISTPTR You may not change your approach to solving this problem, but here is an alternative approach if you want to play with it. Thanks again for your help and that of all the other who provided suggestions in getting me to the point where I could begin to play with and discover this approach. Please let me know if there are any hidden risks in this strategy. Rgds, Dave Dave Taylor President Sysmark Information Systems, Inc. 49 Aspen Way Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 800-SYSMARK (800-797-6275) (O) 310-544-1974 (C) 310-561-5200 (P) 800-339-1497 (F) 310-377-3550 Your Source for Integrated EDI Translation and DataSync Integration www.sysmarkinfo.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Haskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 3:24 PM Subject: RE: [U2] [UD] Executing save-list > Bruce: > > So, I'm guessing you're validating that the SAVE-LIST and SAVE.LIST (and > probably SAVELIST) are all ignoring the local (VOC) file. I misstated, in > my original mail, when I said the modified "SAVE-LIST" works from TCL > because it doesn't; only the "SL" synonym works properly. > > Do you have any idea how to override this restrictive handling of verbs, and > make the VOC the primary source for the verbs I identify? > > As always, thanks. > > Bill > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Nichol > > Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 11:06 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [U2] [UD] Executing save-list > > > > Goo'day, Bill... > > > > At 16:52 28/03/06 -0800, you wrote: > > > > >I was following some suggestions to track saved lists and > > >did the following: > > > > > >1) Created a "SAVE-LIST" (VOC) entry that looks like: > > > SAVE-LIST > > > 001 V > > > 002 U2.LISTINFO > > > > > >2) Wrote a program "U2.LISTINFO" that updates a (LISTINFO) > > > file with information then does an "EXECUTE \SAVE.LIST \ > > > : LISTNAME". > > > > > >When I "EXECUTE \SAVE-LIST \ : LISTNAME" from a BASIC program > > >the program "U2.LISTINFO" isn't called. It's as though there > > >is a global "SAVE-LIST" command that is used instead of the > > >local one. Is this true? Any ideas how I can overcome this? > > >(ECLTYPE P) > > > > > > If UD is anything like UV, SAVE-LIST is exactly the same as > > SAVE.LIST, 'cos part of the comaptibility with Pick is that > > a dot or a dash for TCL verbs are the same.... > > > > Regards, > > > > Bruce Nichol > > Talon Computer Services > > ALBURY NSW 2640 > > Australia > > > > http://www.taloncs.com.au > > > > Tel: +61 (0)411149636 > > Fax: +61 (0)260232119 > > > > If it ain't broke, fix it till it is! > ------- > u2-users mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
