Historically it is known as "IEBEYEBAL" -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Big Iron Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 11:25 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Problem fetching a program object (CSV031I)
It appears from OY61071 that a copy of the first four bytes on a page of module text is saved some place else and used as a check value. I think that even AMASPZAP will use the binder interface to update program objects. That might be a bit of a challenge to implement on another platform. Bill On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:59:26 -0600, McKown, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Knigge >> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:22 AM >> To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU >> Subject: Problem fetching a program object (CSV031I) >> >> >> All, >> >> I have a C-Program that is compiled to a DLL and stored in a >> PDSE, so it >> is stored as a "program object" (if I got all this stuff right). >> >> In my program I have some static areas (name it "eye cathers"), for >> example like this: >> >> static char *Foo = "123456\0MY_EYE_CATHER"; >> >> >> This way, the String "123456[null]MY_EYE_CATCHER" is >> contained within my >> program object. Now I create a XMIT-File from my program >> object and then >> I change some bytes in this generated XMIT. >> >> For example, I look for "MY_EYE_CATCHER" and I replace the >> "123456" in >> front of this eye-catcher to something different. Same length >> of course. >> >> >> Now when I restore the program object from this edited XMIT, I get an >> error fetching this DLL: >> >> CSV031I LIBRARY ACCESS FAILED FOR MODULE XYZ, RETURN CODE 20, REASON >> CODE 26130003, DDNAME STEPLIB >> >> >> I swear by my [whatever you like] that no other bytes than my >> "123456" >> are changed. why the hell can't this DLL noe be fetched anymore? Are >> there some "checksums" within the program object that are now >> not correct? >> >> >> The funny thing is, that this happens just on a few modules (I have >> around 20 that are going to be "patched" by this method), mostly >> everything goes well.... >> >> >> Any ideas? Or a better way to "patch" a module? >> >> >> Bye & thanks, >> Michael >> >> >> P.S.: If you wonder why I need to do this: We compile a product, >> generate a XMIT and if we ship it to a client we want to "patch" a >> client-id and date into all shipped modules - and using this >> method we >> can do this under windows/unix and don't need to >> recompile+relink under >> z/OS.... > >Found a similar hit on IBMLink. It refers to something called the PRDT >which has "check characters". > >OA09174 > ><quote> > >-- >John McKown >Senior Systems Programmer >HealthMarkets >Keeping the Promise of Affordable Coverage >Administrative Services Group >Information Technology > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
