At 10/14/2010 07:54 PM, Rick Fochtman wrote:
----------------------------<snip>----------------------------------------
For example, why do IDCAMS and IEBCOPY have to be authorized? The
IEBCOPY replacement doesn't have to be authorized. Would it be
worthwhile for both vendors and users to see what they can do to
reduce the amount of code that has to be authorized?
[snip]
Also, IIRC, IEBCOPY uses I/O appendages that require authorization,
since they are loaded from SYS1.SVCLIB.
When IEBCOPY was converted from MVT to MVS, the developers at the
time wanted to make it run "as fast as possible". Also, IEBCOPY might
have been a good vehicle for testing/experimenting with those
wonderful new interfaces.
Certainly, there is no technical reason in the world (at least I
don't know of one) why a functionally identical could not be written
that did not require authorization...
It's probably a matter of "It ain't broke, so for god's sake don't fix it!"
Dave Cole REPLY TO: dbc...@colesoft.com
ColeSoft Marketing WEB PAGE: http://www.colesoft.com
736 Fox Hollow Road VOICE: 540-456-8536
Afton, VA 22920 FAX: 540-456-6658
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
