A bit into this thread Gavin said:

> ....  I agree with the idea of requiring CREATOR access for
> changing filecodes.

After-the-fact "me too" (if ALTFILE is done at all (see below) )....

Then Steve (Mark changes mind and agrees):

> .... I say that the ALTFILE command should not be allowed to
> work on negative filecodes for anyone.

upon further reflection, ditto (ditto (ditto) ).

HP Jeff is persuaded:

> No one can alter the file code of a file that already has a negative
> file code.  No one can alter the file code to a negative (PRIV) value.


UTC Jeff pointed out:

> ....  Not true, given :STORE;$NULL;PURGE...

Maybe STORE should be "fixed" (backward compatibility: I know)
to require " ; FCODE= -401" before it will do STORE with PURGE
for a dataset....  he continued:

> ..... I will however concur with the other opinions presented that
> perhaps the effort is better spent elsewhere.

.... and then Stan comes up with the crux counterpoint:

> I'd rather have the effort put into doing something that we *can't*
> do today, rather than on something for which solutions already exist!

> This is simply and plainly an unmitigated waste of Jeff's precious
> time!
> You want a simple (and free) filecode changing utility?  Ok...go to
> http://www.allegro.com/software/   and search for "FILECODE".


I'm convinced.  I withdraw my previous "sounds reasonable to me"
and now support Stan's position...:   Elsewhere; on something that
we can't do today"....   actually, guess I should say that proposed
ALTFILE is not UNreasonble;  it's just that there are so many things
that are MORE reasonable...       :-)

Ken Sletten