On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 07:08:52 -0500, Tom Marchant wrote:
>
>I believe you can specify LEPARM(STD). Not sure if that will eliminate the
>message.
>
I don't see STD (or STANDARD) in:
SA23-2276-01 SMP/E for z/OS Reference
I do see:
5. The LEPARM values of DCBS, LET, LIST, XCAL, and XREF are recognized by
SMP/E, but are not saved. Specifying them on the ++MOD MCS does not
cause them to be passed to the link-edit utility.
Grrr. WTF!? LET is one of my favorites because MODs in DLIBS are routinely
linked with unresolved externals. But my other favorite, OL, appears to be
supported.
Yet I wonder who benefits from the GIM24701W message? Surely not the end
customer, who can hardly be expected to edit the ++MOD MCS to suppress the
message. And it seems not to affect MOD elements copied from a RELFILE to a
DLIB. The developer? Only regression testing can identify omitted or incorrect
Binder options.
Am I overlooking the ACCEPT-before-APPLY path? I've never used that.
Hmmm... The syntax seems to indicate that all attributes are optional. Does
that imply that "LEPARM()" is permitted?
The message ought to be Informative, not Warning. Or something such as
"ACCEPT VERBOSE(NO)" should be provided.
-- gil
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
