RE: 24x80 size issue

["Carl Galgano" <cgalgano2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Rob:
I helped Anthony with the upgrade.  We did a save a restore of *ALLUSR.  We
also brought over the cfg, profiles, etc.  I have not been there to see
exactly what is going on with his thin clients, but it appears to the that
the terminal type that they are auto configing as does not support 24x132.
I am stumped as well.
cjg

Carl J. Galgano
EDI Consulting Services, Inc.
550 Kennesaw Avenue, Suite 800
Marietta, GA  30060
(770) 422-2995 - voice
(419) 730-8212 - fax
mailto:cgalgano@ediconsulting.com
http://www.ediconsulting.com
AS400 EDI, Networking, E-Commerce and Communications Consulting and
Implementation 
http://www.icecreamovernight.com
Premium Ice Cream Brands shipped Overnight

"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know" - rw

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@midrange.com
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@midrange.com] On Behalf Of rob@dekko.com
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 1:21 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: 24x80 size issue


How was the upgrade done?  Was the actual 600 physically upgraded to a 
170?  Or did you copy a few libraries, etc over to a new 170?

Rob Berendt
-- 
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary 
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." 
Benjamin Franklin 




"Anthony Hardy" <mis@jdcc.edu>
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@midrange.com
01/13/2003 12:44 PM
Please respond to Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
 
        To:     <midrange-l@midrange.com>
        cc: 
        Fax to: 
        Subject:        24x80 size issue


Quick question:

Had a model 600 - upgraded to a 170, all sysvals the same, OS/400 stayed 
at 5r1.

I have some thin clients that worked fine pre-upgrade, but now, post 
upgrade, I get an error concerning the "clients" ability to show 
fields/data outside of the 24x80 workspace.  Extended display error.  The 
third party vendor tells me they haven't seen this in  a LONG time (not 
since some VERY old terminals were in use) and that all newer terminals 
should be able to handle the way things are NOW. 

Our existing dumb terminals (3477FGs over twin-ax) handle everything just 
fine, as do our CE sessions.  I'm stumped b/c the thin clients DID work 
just fine before the change in AS400s and I am too much of a novice to be 
able to tell what is happening.  I have manually created devices to see if 
that is the problem - no.  Autocreate - no. 


Secondly . . and I'm certain this is tied into the same issue, deals with 
printing.  I setup a session on the thin clients for printing, manually 
create the printer (with model type, etc) and everything was working 
great.  We changed systems and now I get what looks like about four lines 
of ascii column and row "headers" boxing in the correct printout.  The 
thin client setup did not change . .and I am stumped.

Any ideas?

Thanks!

Anthony Hardy
Director of MIS
_______________________________________________
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing 
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.


_______________________________________________
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com To subscribe, unsubscribe,
or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.