On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 23:05:11 -0600, Ed Gould wrote: > >... so IBM screwed themselves because they refused to maintain IEBUPDTE. > We're in unusual agreement here. Needs:
o VB(S) capability. o Unnumbered record capability. o No restriction on record content (data (not only) control) records should be allowed to begin with "./", e.g.) >Point the finger squarely at IBM. > When I first encountered (I)SPF, panel definitions were VB. Shortly after, they switched toFB. Blame SMP/E and IEBUPDTE. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
