RE: GUI as nice as character-based
Even though AFAIK the C# compiler itself is still available free. Yes, the VB.NET and the C# compiler are absolutely free. There is NOTHING that you can do with Visual Studio.NET that you can't do with the free download and notepad (or other). Actually, there are things you can do with the command line that can't be done in the VS IDE (multiple modules into single dll, I believe). The only thing that the VS IDE does is make you a bit more productive. Regards, Jim -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: GUI as nice as character-based
And will this next version of .NET run fine on Linux and Mac OS? Well, that is the question just about everyone would like answered. It seems that Microsoft is well aware of several projects (mono being the most popular) and is monitoring those developments at this point. I can't tell if they are assisting or resisting what is going on at this point, but, eventually, I think it WILL happen in some way. Regards, Jim -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: UniObjects
Have a look at the subkey property on the session object. You will need to alter this to be unique (after every 10 connections). HTH. Regards, Jim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Vezertzis Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 5:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: UniObjects We are having a UniObject dilemma and wanted to see if anyone has had a similar problem and/or resolution. When making a call into Universe, via UniObjects, we are seeing a session limit of 10 sessions. Obviously, this is the 10 spawn max on enterprise or ip-based Universe licenses. We were under the impression that when license 1 had spawned 10 sessions, then we would roll to license 2 and so forth, until we reached the max licenses available. Has anyone come across this problem? Thanks, Kevin -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: Unidata 6.0 upgrade from 5.7
Ken has defined the steps very well so there is no need to repeat them here. I will just chime in that this was almost too easy. I moved from 5.2.X to 6.0.8 in a very short time and without any problems. I just decided to upgrade one day when I was bored and then about an hour later done. Usually, the biggest issue you may face is if you forget to change absolute paths (if you load into something like /ud/udxx where xx is the version). You shouldn't really have any absolute paths to begin with, but, I'm never surprised to see them pop up (even after I get rid of them). Use PATHSUB to make these changes, but, be careful to not make a mistake. Regards, Jim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ken Wallis Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 8:09 PM Yeatrakas,James wrote: We are a Unix shop using Unidata 5.7. We are being asked to upgrade to 6.0 in our LIVE system without much advanced preparation. If there is anybody who can point to anything that we should be concerned or aware of, your input is highly desired. We are scheduled to do this on 4/24 so don't have much opportunity to react. Thanks in advance! -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
TOXML question
I am currently using '...TOXML ELEMENTS' and wonder if there is a way to suppress the .../... tags when there is no data in a multi-valued field. If this is possible, will it also remove the '...ASSOC-MV/...ASSOC-MV tags that surround the empty multi-valued fields? Thanks. Regards, Jim -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: On learning to swim (u2-users U2UG)
It seems that there is only one piece of the puzzle that is missing; the ability to not only receive e-mail from the various forums but also to reply to that e-mail by way of e-mail (as opposed to writing the reply from within a browser). If that one feature were implemented I believe quite a lot of the reluctance that has appeared in the past day or so would be obviated. While not a big issue, it would be nice to see the posters address as well. The on behalf of information is great, especially when there are certain posters that you like to either 'read' or 'delete' regardless of the topic. Regards, Jim -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: On learning to swim (u2-users U2UG)
Oops - it's there - it just didn't stand out at me. My apologies. I still prefer being able to easily see the address in the 'from' within Outlook, but this is ok. Regards, Jim While not a big issue, it would be nice to see the posters address as well. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: Question for Donald Kibbey
But doesn't .NET take up like a gazillion bytes of space? And doesn't integration require an object? I can't speak of the Pick Data Provider for .NET, however, the .NET framework itself doesn't take up a 'gazillion' bytes. The framework (free download) is between 21 24MB (depending on the framework version) as a single install file. Assume that once it loads onto the system it will take a bit more space but you are probably still less than 50-75MB. Keep in mind that the framework will be built into all new MS operating systems (starting with Windows 2003). I don't really know what you are after with the integration requiring an object. Can you be more specific? Regards, Jim -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: Question for Donald Kibbey
It would have been easier if you just asked me to reread the original post ;-) I think I know what Tony meant with his statement, but, it isn't appropriate for me to answer for him so I won't. Thanks for the English lesson - I think. Regards, Jim [snip] Integrate in this sense requires a with and then an object with which it integrates. In other words My software integrates well with SAP, not just My software integrates well. Unless of course you are a salesman who was merely told to repeat that line and hope no one calls you out on it. [snip] -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: Writing a RPC Service
[snip] A customer has asked how he could implement some stringent security on the 'unirpc' services. In particular, he wants to only allow certain 'Requests' (like the 'Subroutine' method, etc.) from any users out there writing UniVerse Objects front-ends. [snip] Overall, I think, like the others, that this isn't really a good idea. I don't have much time to think about this (therefore it is probably not going to work ;-) but what about trying to use permissions. Set all files (except what you absolutely need to gain access to the account) to not permit read/write/execute. In the subroutine, see if it's possible to 'su' to a user that does have the permission for file access. If this is possible, it now moves the security issue to another point, as this 'su' user is going to have the password available somewhere. And here is another crazy idea. Create an account with nothing in it (except what is minimally required). As part of your subroutines on the server, have them write out the file pointer (which is pointed to another account) to the VOC and then remove them when complete. You should keep the file pointer unique (so another process doesn't remove your pointer when it is done) and also keep it random (so that someone doesn't create a long process and then knowing the pointer, start operating on it). Of course, there is nothing to stop someone from opening the VOC from within UniObjects and writing their own pointer to the actual account/file so you would have to keep the actual filenames and real account path/name a secret. There are still ways to beat this so be careful. Finally, how about something to do with triggers (for writing anyway). Reject all writes unless they come from an acceptable routine. Again, these are not very good ideas, but, hey, it's Friday! Regards, Jim -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: UniData 6.0.b Clients - now on PE download site
Does anyone have a list of the new features or bug fixes for 6.0b? It seems that each individual product (UniDK, UniAdmin, etc.) each has its own version number so it doesn't really specify what has changed from 6.0. Thanks. Regards, Jim I had the current clients posted on the PE site to replace the original 6.0 clients. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
