Jeff-- listf,access looks really good. A few lingering thoughts... Is this functionality going to be added to :LISTF, :LISTFILE or both? If only one, I'd prefer :LISTFILE. Both is OK too. Regarding sort order, file open vs. JSNo: are you considering making both options available? If so, with what request syntax? If not, I assume you want opinions on which is better - I vote for JSNo order for easy reading, although there are some situations where it might be useful to see some clues about who got to the file first. I'd like to suggest two small changes which are mostly cosmetic but will also make parsing easier. Change: >#S12345 JOBNAME8,USER5678.ACCT5678 -lock- LDEV: 12345 >#S40 FRED,MGR.PAYROLL,PUB -lock- REM: clientmpe.cup.hp.com >#J15 JSPOOL,RSPOOL.SYS,RSPOOL SPID: O7654321 To: >#S12345 JOBNAME8,USER5678.ACCT5678 -lock- LDEV: 12345 >#S40 FRED,MGR.PAYROLL,PUB -lock- REM: clientmpe.cup.hp.com >#J15 JSPOOL,RSPOOL.SYS,RSPOOL SPID: #O7654321 Note that REM: is now colon-aligned with LDEV: and SPID:, and the associated data starts in the same column. It might also be a good idea to add the # before the Onnn for SPID's, to make them more easily distinguishable from node names without looking at the label (is # a valid character at the start of a DNS name?). About the -lock- flag-- I confess I'm somewhat ignorant about locking levels, types, rules, etc., but the main thing I want this flag to help me do is isolate the single culprit that is causing other processes to 'hang' waiting for a file. In cases where more than one process has some sort of lock on a file is there an easy way, like exclusive vs. shared, to distinguish who the real 'bad guy' is? If so, I'd recommend that the accessor be flagged differently, perhaps -LOCK- instead of -lock-. Related to the lock issue, there are some times when it's not easy for me to know *which* file is being fought over. Might there be a way to request a :LISTFILE,ACCESS for only those files that are actually being accessed? Something along the lines of... :LISTFILE @[log in to unmask]@;seleq=[ACCESSED=TRUE];format=ACCESS ...well, there I go blue-skying again. I could probably draw up a whole suite of additions I'd like to the seleq structure. Thanks again, Jeff, for your hard work on this project and your continued responsiveness to user input. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Diercks -------- mail: [log in to unmask] Programmer/Analyst /|| | talk: [log in to unmask] Computing Services /_|| | WWW : http://rowlf.csv.anderson.edu/ Anderson University / ||__| tel : (317)641-4305 Anderson, IN 46012 -------- fax : (317)641-3851 o________________________________________________________ ___ _\_, \=`==^==> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^