On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:34:49 -0500, John McKown wrote: >>> >>Yes, but IIRC for DSNTYPE=HFS, DSORG=PO. ?!?! Thus the absurd >>message. > >I agree. This sort of thing convinces me that the HFS implementation is >layered on top of PDS-E support, somehow. > According to the classic notion of DSORG, PDSE doesn't conform to DSORG=PO: it doesn't begin with a directory of 256-byte data blocks with member names as keys, etc. However since PDSE provides good compatibility with PDS at the API level, the designers did well for customers by using DSORG=PO and not obsoleting existing code that tests DSORG and operates accordingly, even though the cost was to introduce a new attribute, DSNTYPE.
Conversely, HFS has no progrmming compatibility with PDS or PDSE, better advised to use a new DSORG for HFS, and avoid confusion of the sort that precipitated this thread. What are the DSORG and DSNTYPE of a z/FS (aggregate)? -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
