[This note has been sent to the following InterNet address(es):
HP3000-L @ UTCVM.UTC.EDU
it has also been sent to the following JP Morgan address(es) :
      To : SSWPROD.OAS @ TRSSW
]
 
 
 
Jeff Vance <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
 
>I have made a change to the Express II release of 5.0 (this is the
>1st express release after the final 5.0 push and is planned to be
>available in April):  command files will have to be ASCII to be
>executed.  Today a binary command file can be executed.  The other
>conditions still apply: eof >0 and file code in [0..1023].
>
>Will the ASCII requirement break any applications, jobs, scripts, etc.??
<stuff deleted>
 
Larry Boyd wrote :
>It seems that any attempt to solve this "problem" will cause at least some-
>one problems.  This solution maybe what is the best for all, however, I
>believe there will be several who will find command files failing because
>they are binary.
>
>I have an additionally suggestion.  What if HP selected a filecode that
>would define command files?  If the file is ASCII it would still work, and
>if the file is binary, the code could be checked.
 
>The primary reason for the suggestion is that I've always thought that
>command files and UDCs should have filecodes.  It makes it very easy to
>look at files with listf or MPEX and "see" if they are UDCs or command
>files.
<stuff deleted>
 
Call me old fashioned, but I cannot see why anyone would want to use a binary
command file.
 Can anyone take half a minute to enlighten me ? I also agree with Larry Boyd
that a dedicated
 filecode for these types of files would be very desirable.
 
John Dunlop ([log in to unmask])