On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:04:12 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:

>Don't *think* so. My (so to speak) program still works just fine.
> 
Of course.  Your program was marked AC(1) *solely* because it
needed to invoke IEBCOPY(O) in authorized state.  Now it invokes
IEBCOPY marked AC(0); loses authorization (which now doesn't
matter); and still works fine.
>Charles
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Gilmartin
>Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 10:53 AM
>
>On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 10:37:46 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
>
>>I am responsible for a vendor program that installs APF-authorized *solely* 
>>because it needs to call IEBCOPY.
>
>OTOH, a vendor with a program which:
>o Uses IEBCOPY
>o Must be AC(1) for reasons not related to IEBCOPY
>
>... is now impacted in that calling IEBCOPY causes his program to lose 
>authorization/ ABEND/whatever.
> 
(But that's not you; never was.)

-- gil

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to