On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Brian Peterson < [email protected]> wrote:
> I'm thinking that had the packaging been originally designed using the > ++MOD > entry's CSECT parameter, removing a CSECT from a ++MOD would have been > straightforward. > > Given the packaging you've described - a reasonable way to structure the > module - the solution is likely to be something like this: > > ++PTF(newptf) . > ++VER (some value). > ++DELETE(FOO) SYSLIB(name) . > ++JCLIN . > (new structure for load module FOO) > ++MOD(FOO) . /*presumably FOO is a CSECT in lmod FOO */ > object deck for current version of FOO > ++MOD(FRED). > object deck for current version of FRED > > Brian's right. If you DON'T want the old element references don't creep back in, then you have to ++DELETE the element and also provide it with new JCLIN so the system knows how to build it correctly. It isn't rocket science but there are an amazing number of packaging tools out there that don't understand SMP/E arcana. -- This email might be from the artist formerly known as CC (or not) You be the judge. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
