That is a stumper. Not much in our DB on it. I am *guessing* that an
FOPEN for 'execute' access may return FSERR 2 if there is some conflict.

1. Could you post the octal values being passed for foptions and
aoptions?
2. Are you sure that the first FOPEN succeeded? (you checked the
condition
   code is CCE and not just returns fileno=0).
3. Did your call to FCHECK succeed? (check that cond-code :-)

Russ Smith wrote:
>
> Good afternoon listers,
>
> I have been given a program to debug which is returning a file error 2 (Illegal capability) from its FOPEN procedure on only one of two files being opened by the function.  The function (a generic open procedure) is passed the name of the file to open, and a series of options (file attributes, access options, record lengths for build, etc).  Two calls to the function (with parameters identical except for file name) are made back to back.  The first is successful.  The second fails with a file error 2 (illegal capability).
>
> The job running the program creates both files, local to the execution group.  The program is in another group/account with (R,L,X:ANY;W,A,S:AC) access and (BA,IA,PM,MR,DS,PH) capability.  The execution group/account have identical setups.  The userid which created the program has comparable capabilities to the execution userid (differing only that the execution user has also CV and UV, i.e. greater capability).
>
> I have used LINKEDIT to check the program's capabilities, which do not exceed its group or those of the execution group.  There is no ACD on either file.  I am stumped.  Under what conditions does FOPEN return this error?  Any help would be appreciated.  The archives showed a similar problem last year by someone who received this message as a LOAD error, pero I cannot find any other reference to this coming from *within* a program that is up and running.
>
> Thanks,
> Rs~
>
> Russ Smith, Systems Consultant
> Problem Solved, Vacaville, CA
> r s m i t h @ c u - h e l p . c o m
> h p 3 k - l @ e - 3 0 0 0 . n e t