T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
1053.1 | | SIOG::T_REDMOND | Thoughts of an Idle Mind | Wed Jul 15 1992 12:52 | 4 |
| Certain forms? Not all forms? Is everything in CM (for V2.4) owned by
OA$PRVAPP or are there some other file ownerships around?
Tony
|
1053.2 | What are these 'newly selected' forms? | CESARE::EIJS | All in 1 Piece | Wed Jul 15 1992 13:29 | 16 |
|
Hi Chaim,
Are these forms:
- New created forms in CM?
- Forms in Base (ADE) which are being copied to Development area?
- Customized Base forms available in the Development area?
All come down to the ownership/protection/ACL on the form libraries,
and (as Tony indicated) the ownership of the files in the Development
area.
Ciao,
Simon
|
1053.3 | OA$DATA_SHARE:CM$FORM$LIBS.DAT W:RWE ... | TAV02::CHAIM | Semper ubi Sub ubi ..... | Wed Jul 15 1992 14:08 | 22 |
| O.K. after very extensive investigation using TRACE with me on the phone and
the programmer at her terminal I got it.
First we used DCL trace and realized the ACC VIO was during execution of the DO
script oa$lib:cm_lock_libs.com.
Next using SCRIPT trace we fouund out the command directly causing the ACC VIO
was DATA_FILE OPEN/READ/WRITE CM$LOCK CM$FORM$LIBS.
Then we tried this command interactively and got an insufficient privelege or
protection violation trying to open oa$data_share:cm$form$libs.dat.
This file had W:RE - changed it to W:RWE and everything seems to work fine.
I still cannot understand:
1. Why the protection was changed during the upgrade.
2. Why BYPASS wasn't enough - only SYSPRV was enough.
Thanks,
Cb.
|
1053.4 | Some background | SIOG::T_REDMOND | Thoughts of an Idle Mind | Wed Jul 15 1992 14:47 | 20 |
| The upgrade to V2.4 adds some new records to CM$FORM$LIBS to use for
the V2.4 locking mechanism. I don't know why BYPASS wasn't enough,
ALL-IN-1 was being careful again, I expect.
Note that the script has a small error in the distributed version
(V2.4). Immediately after the line
DATA_FILE OPEN/READ/WRITE CM$LOCK CM$FORM$LIBS
there's a line
DATA_FILE LOCK/ON
which should be
DATA_FILE LOCK/ON CM$LOCK
I mention this purely in the interest of trivial pursuit.
Tony
|
1053.5 | Protection <-> DATA_FILE command | CESARE::EIJS | All in 1 Piece | Wed Jul 15 1992 16:03 | 12 |
|
Chaim,
I don't have a V2.3 system at hand, but if someone has, please
check the protection mask for OA$DATA:CM_FORM_LIBS.DAT?
I wonder if the protection changed from V2.3 to V2.4. I thought it had
to do with the DATA_FILE xxx commands introduced in V2.4.
Ciao,
Simon
|
1053.6 | Digital Press EY-H952E-DP | WARNUT::RICE | A human resource | Thu Jul 16 1992 12:02 | 9 |
| Re .4
>> I mention this purely in the interest of trivial pursuit.
Also mentioned on page 340 of that excellent book "ALL-IN-1 - A Technical
Odyssey" by the inimitable Tony Redmond.
:-)
Stevie.
|