RE: Protection for spool files?

["Walden Leverich" <walden@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

While I agree that the AS/400's spool management is light years ahead of
UN*X's I disagree that this is because of the way spool files are stored.
Making spool files rows in a table makes little sense. If IBM would simply
(I know it's not simple) make a spool file an object we could set
authorities anyway we want to. Also, as objects save/restore would come by
definition. (Hmmmmm... looking at the number of save spool file programs I
have written for clients maybe I don't want this ;-)

-Walden

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mcsnet!midrange.com!midrange-l-owner@Mcs.Net
> [mailto:mcsnet!midrange.com!midrange-l-owner@Mcs.Net]On Behalf Of Jeff
> Carey
> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 1998 2:37 PM
> To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> Subject: Re: Protection for spool files?
>
<snip>
>
> That's because spool files are not objects at all, but made up of
> records in physical files in library QSPL.  If you think of it that way,
> then it makes a little more sense - you can't grant authority to one
> record and not another.
>
> While this may seem cumbersome, think of how much better the AS/400
> handles spooled output than other systems.  Try reprinting a report
> starting at page 153 in Unix (is there a product that can do this?  I
> know a few years ago my former company couldn't find one - and it
> certainly isn't part of the OS!)
<snip>

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---