That should be simple enough and should work without a hitch on 5.2 (or any release). Are you really really sure that the RTABLE is not catching the message somewhere else? Can you copy your RTABLE entry and post it? I would sort of expect it to look like:
|...+....1....+....2....+....3....+....4....+....5....+....6....+....7.. /PUT / 1 4 STEVE HALEXEC _______________________________________ James Vincent Systems Engineering Consultant Nationwide Services Co., Technology Solutions Mainframe, z/VM and z/Linux Support One Nationwide Plaza 3-20-13 Columbus OH 43215-2220 U.S.A Voice: (614) 249-5547 Fax: (614) 677-7681 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The IBM z/VM Operating System <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> wrote on 08/03/2006 09:34:24 AM: > IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > > > Thanks for the responses to far. We definitely use MSG. > I need to elaborate. > I have an EXEC that runs on my userid, lets call that user STEVE > The PropOp userid is HAL <g> > The EXEC I run on STEVE basically edits what is typed in and if the data > typed in meets the req'd criteria, it repackages the input, adds a > few pieces (key words) > and then does a CP MSG HAL <repackaged input>. > HAL is sitting there waiting for something to come his way. The specific > char string will kick off an EXEC based on definitions in the RTABLE. > The first thing that EXEC (on HAL) does is to display a message that > it is starting (time stamp, etc.) > I never see this message. > . . . even more detail . . . > The command I issue from STEVE to HAL is > MSG HAL PUT <file name> <file type> <and then some more key > words for the EXEC on HAL> > This entire string is never longer than 95 characters. The length > can from vary from 80 chars to 95 chars. > PUT is the keyword in the RTABLE. When the file name is 7 chars or > less it works fine, when file name is 8, it > appears to never get to HAL. The problem is I don't know if it's > getting to HAL and the RTABLE is ignoring it > or if it plain doesn't get to HAL. > As mentioned earlier, this all worked in VM 4.3 but has appeared > to quite working in VM 5.2 > > Thanks, > Steve G.
