On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 11:54:32 -0400, Scott Ford wrote: >The individual csect idea is good when products are written in Assembler of >course. I wonder about products in C and C++ or COBOL. My initial question >was about packaging our COBOL based product with Assembler based >subroutines into a SMP/E package for delivery to the customer. My idea to >make the customers install easier and ad void as many errors as possible, >thus eliminating support calls. Everyone's input is great ...but is my >thinking incorrect here ?. > Shmuel and Ed have both argued for graular as opposed to monolithic installation and service.
I agree with you that HLLs complicate the situation. The collection of CSECT names for a given source ensemble may be unpredictable, especially when a prelinker is involved. You're well advised to use the CSECT() operand on the ++MOD command. Lacking it, RESTORE is problematic. But one vendor I know delivers identically named CSECTs (admittedly with identical content) in differently named ++MOD elements. Ugh! APPLY works fine; RESTORE could corrupt the product. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
