Join The Works program to have access to the most current content, and to be able to ask questions and get answers from Revelation staff and the Revelation community

At 17 MAY 2003 01:12:37PM Wilhelm Schmitt wrote:

We have an application "XYZ" for which we defined a volume MFS called TTS_MFS.

The configuration process is:

in file SYSPTRS record "ABC"

VOLUME

TTS_MFS RTP57

PJG\ABC

in the system monitor:

RUN ATTACH_TABLE "ABC"

RUN DEFINE_DATABASE "XYZ",1

Entering "XYZ" application in OInsight breaks with the following error:

SYS1000: Error loading program "TTS_MFS RTP57"

What could be wrong?

With the same problem as above, we eliminated RTP57 from the "ABC" record in the SYSPTRS file. When TTS_MFS is activated, we put this line of code:

if BFS=TTS_MFS" then BFS:=@svm:"RTP57" and opens the application without error.

This second step shouldn't be necessary.

Any suggestions are welcome

Regards

Wilhelm


At 17 MAY 2003 02:26PM Richard Hunt wrote:

We have an application "XYZ" for which we defined a volume MFS called TTS_MFS.

The configuration process is:

in file SYSPTRS record "ABC"

VOLUME

TTS_MFS RTP57

PJG\ABC

in the system monitor:

RUN ATTACH_TABLE "ABC"

RUN DEFINE_DATABASE "XYZ",1

Entering "XYZ" application in OInsight breaks with the following error:

SYS1000: Error loading program "TTS_MFS RTP57"

What could be wrong?

With the same problem as above, we eliminated RTP57 from the "ABC" record in the SYSPTRS file. When TTS_MFS is activated, we put this line of code:

if BFS=TTS_MFS" then BFS:=@svm:"RTP57" and opens the application without error.

This second step shouldn't be necessary.

Wilhelm,

I am no expert in "volume" mfs's. I do believe you are seperating the mfs's, in field 2, with @VM (ascii 253) and maybe they should be @SVM (ascii 252)???

I am guessing this since you have noted, "second step", that you force the "RTP57" during your "TTS_MFS" using a @SVM.


At 17 MAY 2003 03:08PM Wilhelm Schmitt wrote:

Richard,

We put a program, writing to SYSPTRS, ABC in both ways: @vm and @svm.

None of them worked, therefor we put the super-patch, modifying the BFS parameter.

(Hopefully, the system editor in OI7.0 allows you to see, what's behind the data and distinguish @vm, @svm etc.)

Regards

Wilhelm

View this thread on the Works forum...

  • third_party_content/community/commentary/forums_works/df46e902e4b62ede85256d29005e8a35.txt
  • Last modified: 2023/12/30 11:57
  • by 127.0.0.1