On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) < [email protected]> wrote:
> In > <CAAJSdjh-Oh==ZxzZ=ZgZowG=708CPtcHZoxmy3p3Lz2za1=j...@mail.gmail.com>, > on 12/09/2015 > at 11:48 AM, John McKown <[email protected]> said: > > > OK, I've managed to confuse myself. You want the ENQ for SYSDSN > >to include the volser if and only if the DSORG is a PDS, otherwise > >to omit it? > > No; the queestion is whether the original code was a design flaw, not > whether it is feasible to correct it today, and ISPF, not Allocation. > That's where I went sidewise. Thanks for the enlightenment. I totally agree with you that SPFEDIT should have included the volser in the case of a PDS. I would _guess_ it is a design flaw due to the ISPF person thinking (as I was) about how SYSDSN was done and deciding to be similar. It might even had been a good decision for non-PDS data sets as well. rname==volser||dsn||member (where member=8C' ' if non-PDS?) -- Schrodinger's backup: The condition of any backup is unknown until a restore is attempted. Yoda of Borg, we are. Futile, resistance is, yes. Assimilated, you will be. He's about as useful as a wax frying pan. 10 to the 12th power microphones = 1 Megaphone Maranatha! <>< John McKown ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
