HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Original_To:  BITNET%"notis-l@tcsvm"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 09:40:00 CDT
From:         STEFFERJ@VUCTRVAX.BITNET
Subject:      5.1 in production at Vandy

Just wanted to let everyone in NOTIS-L Land know that Vanderbilt
has finally joined the few who have 5.1 in production.  We are
not implementing LSER or Location-Based Catalogs until we have
time to stabilize everything in the basic system and monitor
response time without the new features.  We came up live Sunday
morning and have experienced a few problems.  The first was
getting the call number index to generate.  NOTIS said Purdue
had a similar problem and sent us a fix Monday morning.  We've
seen a lot of ABEND's and odd things in the OPAC but hope we
have a solution to that now.  All our "ON ORDER" things display
"IN THE PRE-ORDER PROCESS" in the OPAC.  NOTIS says none of the
other 5.1 sites have reported this, so you might want to double
check your catalogs and make sure you're getting the correct
message to the public.  Despite the few new problems, it's nice
to move a lot of my 5.0, 5.0.1, and 5.0.2 problems to the
"resolved" pile!  Contact me or Maryanne Vaughan for more
information on how it's going here.
_______________________________________________________________________________
/ Ramona Steffey Madewell              /               Bitnet:                /
/ Automation Project Librarian (LIB1)  /          STEFFERJ@VUCTRVAX           /
/ Vanderbilt University                /              Internet:               /
/ Library Systems                      /    stefferj@ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu    /
/ 419 21st Avenue South                /       Phone: (615) 322-7125          /
/ Nashville, TN  37240                 /         Fax: (615) 343-0394          /
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 16:31:56 EDT
From:         "Sara Bradley, UNA" <76507.2174@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Subject: ABEND L20R Opac - Mdas
Comments: To: NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.TULANE.EDU

To: >INTERNET:NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.TULANE.EDU

    I am in the process of installing MDAS, when
searching the Wilson index everything works fine.  When
I search our OPAC I am getting ABEND L20R program
LPC100P. I have called Notis, they have seen the
problem with sites running LMS 5.0.2, however, I am
running LMS 5.0.1.  I am currently getting a dump for
Notis.  Anyone have any suggestions?

Sara Bradley, Tech1                  Notis  5.0.1
University of North Alabama          CICS  1.7
205-760-4637                         GTO 3.0
CompuServe 76507,2174                MDAS - test
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Mon, 24 Aug 1992 21:00:26 EST
From:         Warren Van Wyck <WVW@UVMVM.BITNET>
Subject:      kwb search exhausting temp stor

      Someone did a search (like k=a) that exhausted temporary storage
      and hung up many transactions.
      What do you do to prevent this?

 Warren Van Wyck, TECH 1             |   Bellnet:  (802)656-8421
 University of Vermont               |   Universitas Viridis Montis (UVM)
     NOTIS specifics: LMS 5.0.2, NOTISearch, GTO 3.0
     Environment    : CICS 1.7 (BTAM) under VSE/SP 3.1 under VM/SP 5
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 11:55:42 CDT
From:         WEILAND@TWSUVM.BITNET
Subject:      Points for Enhancement surveys

I believe we are to assign 20 points for the LMS, 5 points for GTO, and 10
points for MDAS.  The MDAS points are split, 5 for Functional Enh. and another
5 for Database Enh.

Pages 1 and 2 of the LMS survey apply ONLY to the LMS, not GTO or MDAS.  So
when it says, under Assigning Points on p. 2 of LMS, *The total number of
points for the entire survey may not exceed 20.* it means the ENTIRE LMS
survey, NOT INCLUDING the GTO and MDAS surveys.

As for the "across modules" phrase, that refers to the modules of LMS, e.g.,
Acquisitions, Serials, Cataloging, Circulation, etc.  We are not to assign
some points for each module of LMS, but across LMS as a whole.

When read this way, the surveys make better sense and are consistent within
and among themselves.  There's still the problem of the due date, the mis-
referred-to pages, and the alleged "Priorities Overall" section.

Sue Weiland, LIB 1
Wichita State Univ.
weiland@twsuvm.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 15:08:30 -0500
From:         capital!taylor@UUNET.UU.NET
Comments: To: NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU

remote execution	[uucp job uunetCdlz4 (9/4-14:22:12)]
	rmail efry sdewey
exited with status 1


	===== stderr was =====
Usage: rmail username
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: library
X-pmrqc:      1
X-mailer:     Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R2).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 17:57:32 CST
From:         Beth Nicol <BNICOL@LIB.AUBURN.EDU>
Subject:      LGT700
Comments: To: notis-l@vm.tcs.tulane.edu

I just checked, and we are still running the 4.6 version here.  We
are also in the process of cutting over from 5.0.1 to 5.0.2 (if that
MHI regen will just finish up.....)



Beth Nicol                        ************************************
Automation Manager                * Cute Stuff in this box           *
Auburn University Libraries       *                                  *
BITNET:  bnicol@auducvax          *                                  *
INTERNET: bnicol@lib.auburn.edu   ************************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 09:40:04 EDT
From:         Irene Pelak <pelak@PILOT.NJIN.NET>
Subject:      Re:GTO-LGT700B

We are successfully using the 5.0.1 version of LGT700B.  We are a VSE site.
IRENE PELAK  TECH1  BERGEN COMMUNITY COLLEGE  201-447-9236
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 14:34:24 -0500
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was daviss@DAVIS.CUL.COLUMBIA.EDU
From:         Stephen Davis <daviss@CUNIXF.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject:      Light at the end of the Se-Lin tunnel?

Here's a tidbit I just learned from Gaylord.  When I asked them today what
they would be recommending as a printer model for mounting the Sel-Lin
contraption, now that IBM has discontinued the Quietwriter line, they said
they had a new product in the works that would:

	--work on any [tractor-feed, I assume] printer
	--be pin-fed
	--use the Gaylord Se-Lin label stock
	--use separately affixed plastic overlay

More they wouldn't say, except that it would probably be announced in a couple
of months.

Maybe we will finally be released from the yoke of the factory-engineered
platen!
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 12:22:44 -0500
From:         capital!efry@UUNET.UU.NET
Comments: To: NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU

remote execution	[uucp job uunetCJr54 (9/3-12:13:47)]
	rmail efry sdewey
exited with status 1


	===== stderr was =====
Usage: rmail username
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Slippery Rock University - Computer Center
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 19:06:57 EDT
From:         Fran Hensler <FJH@SRU.BITNET>
Subject:      Mail to NOTIS is undeliverable

I sent mail to notis@twain.notis.com in August.  It worked fine.
Today it doesn't work.  Here's what I get returned:

Received: from CUNYVM by CUNYVM.BITNET (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 3374; Wed,
 02 Sep 92 18:38:15 EDT
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 18:38:13 EDT
From: <SMTP@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
To: <FJH@SRU.BITNET>
Subject: Undeliverable Mail

CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU unable to deliver following mail to recipient(s):
    <notis@twain.notis.com>
CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU received negative reply:
550 <notis@twain.notis.com>... User unknown


Is this address still good?
/Fran

Francis J. Hensler, CDP                     BITNET: FJH@SRU
Software Support Specialist                 Phone: (412) 738-2033
Slippery Rock University Computer Center    PANET:     8-654-2033
Slippery Rock, PA  16057-1326  USA   "Yes, Virginia, there is a Slippery Rock"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 17:38:11 -0500
From:         capital!taylor@UUNET.UU.NET
Comments: To: NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU

remote execution	[uucp job uunetCQxh4 (9/3-17:49:39)]
	rmail efry sdewey
exited with status 1


	===== stderr was =====
Usage: rmail username
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: NOTIS-L@TCSVM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"NOTIS-L@TCSVM.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 07:34:00 -0500
From:         STEFFERJ@VUCTRVAX.BITNET
Subject:      Re: 690 field and MHI

Vanderbilt reported similar problems with the 69x fields back in March.
For example 710 fields displayed as 971 on the MHI.  We got a fix from
NOTIS and all is well now.
_______________________________________________________________________________
/ Ramona Steffey Madewell              /               Bitnet:                /
/ Automation Project Librarian (LIB1)  /          STEFFERJ@VUCTRVAX           /
/ Vanderbilt University                /              Internet:               /
/ Library Systems                      /    stefferj@ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu    /
/ 419 21st Avenue South                /       Phone: (615) 322-7125          /
/ Nashville, TN  37240                 /         Fax: (615) 343-0394          /
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 09:07:52 EDT
From:         "Eades, Barbara" <BEADES@WVNVM.BITNET>

SET NOTIS-L NOMAIL
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 15:03:00 EDT
From:         Ron Johnston <ADLB001@MVS.MCGILL.CA>
Subject:      apostrophe in keyword searching
Comments: To: Notis Discussion <NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.TULANE.EDU>

Good question, Bob Samson.  We did not consider the case of an
apostrophe used as a syntactic element of the search term.  I suspect
that the use of 'NEAR' would indeed not work as desired given the
change I advertised earlier today.  I'll let the list know once we
have had a change to bring up our test region and try it.

Ron Johnston, McGill University
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: University of Texas at Arlington
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 09:26:37 CDT
From:         Gina Gestautas <C231GNG@UTARLVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      LB610 U=0203 Solved

I would like to thank all the people that helped me out last week with
the text of the TSG problem refered to by the 0203 code.  It has been
a LONG weekend.. but we finally found the problem with our LIREQC file.

It turns out that we had 2 JD (Bill and Fine Billing requests) in our
file right next to each other that were the culprits.. We deleted them
and our processing finally finished this morning.  I will be looking into
why these records had problems.. but Dallas Community College seemed to
also have a similar problem with a few of THEIR JD records last week...
so we will be working together to try to figure out why each of our
sites had problems with JD records that supposedly should NOT bomb with
this code.

I would like to especially thank Sandy Newton and Adnan at DCCC and
my colleagues Barbara Baughman at UT Dallas and Michael Stephens at SMU
for all their suggestions and support.

Gina Gestautas                      C231GNG@UTARLVM1
University of Texas at Arlington    c231gng@utarlvm1.uta.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 14:23:31 -0500
From:         capital!taylor@UUNET.UU.NET
Comments: To: NOTIS-L@VM.TCS.Tulane.EDU

remote execution	[uucp job uunetCNWM4 (9/3-14:39:33)]
	rmail efry sdewey
exited with status 1


	===== stderr was =====
Usage: rmail username
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 10:13:13 EDT
From:         Irene Pelak <pelak@PILOT.NJIN.NET>
Subject:      Re:Technical Enhancements

I was surprised by the absence of what would have been my number 1 choice:
Avoid program abends from data exceptions.  Wherever possible identify the
offending record(s) and continue processing.

Did I miss something?  Has NOTIS agreed to make this a high priority item?
Have we given up on asking for this?
IRENE PELAK  TECH1  BERGEN COMMUNITY COLLEGE  201-447-9236
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 11:03:27 CDT
From:         "Gary L. Strawn" <GSTRAWN@NUACVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: LB360 "Error 16"

Your understanding of the extremely aracne (even cryptic) meaning of error
16 is correct: it is comparing the coding of two separate authority records.
My advice is: don't bother with error 16 unless you have nothing better to
do.

Gary L. Strawn
Authorities Librarian, etc., Northwestern University Libraries
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 08:50:27 CDT
From:         SMUIR@UA1VM.BITNET
Subject:      CHAT L: C & UNIX

I tried to look up the original copy of this article.  I could not find
an April 1 issue.  Is this cite really accurate?  Is this quote really true?

********************************
*  SCOTT P. MUIR               *
*  THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA   *
*  SMUIR@UA1VM                 *
*  SMUIR@UA1VM.UA.EDU          *
*  (205) 348-2299              *
********************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: notis-l@tcsvm.BITNET
X-VMS-To: NET%"notis-l@tcsvm"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 13:41:00 EDT
From:         Janet Woody <JWOODY@VCUVAX.BITNET>
Subject:      MDAS SIG at NUGM

Stuart Miller of NOTIS Systems has offered to have a NOTIS representative
speak at the MDAS SIG meeting at NUGM.  He would like to collect our
questions related to MDAS development in advance of NUGM.  If you have
questions concerning MDAS development, or even related to MDAS development,
such as the mysterious INFOBASE, please send them to me by Friday, September
11.  I will forward them to Stuart.

Thanks,
Janet Woody, MDAS SIG chair
Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries
jwoody@vcuvax
phone: 804/367-0032   FAX: 804-367-0151
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"notis-l@tcsvm"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 13:18:00 CDT
From:         VAUGHAN@VUCTRVAX.BITNET
Subject:      GTO - LGT700B

   We are getting ready to put 5.1 in production and cannot get
the current version of LGT700B to run. We're still running the
4.6 version in production because we can't get 5.0, 5.0.1, or
5.0.2 to work. We get a condition code 2, operation exception.
Has anyone else had this problem with any version since 4.6?
Is anyone using any of these versions successfully?
Thanks for your help,
Maryanne Vaughan
Vanderbilt University
VAUGHAN@VUCTRVAX
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Tue, 25 Aug 1992 09:02:59 -0500
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was daviss@DAVIS.CUL.COLUMBIA.EDU
From:         Stephen Davis <daviss@CUNIXF.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject:      Official Enhancement Surveys
Comments: cc: "NOTIS Systems Inc." <notis@twain.notis.com>

In reviewing the Official Enhancement Surveys [sic] I note the following:

1) Points.  The LMS ballot introduction says 20 points can be assigned "across
modules;" in fact we are even allowed to assign all 20 points to a single
proposed enhancement. The individual ballots, on the other hand, indicate that
points must be divided: 10 for LMS, 5 for MDAS, and 5 for GTO.  What should we
assume here?

2) Priorities Overall Section.  The LMS introduction mentions "Priorities
Overall" and "Other Products" section at the end of the tablulation pages.  Is
the "Priorities Overall" section missing?

3) Dates.  The cover memo says return by 9/23; the ballots say 9/16.  Shall we
be conservative and assume 9/16?

4) Page numbers.  The pages that we are asked to return--indicated in bold in
the introductions--don't match the page numbers of the ballot sheets.   We'll
stretch here and assume the ones to be returned to NSI are ballots themselves.

(Please excuse me if I'm missing something here; I haven't had coffee yet
today; perhaps what I see in front me is a mirage...)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 08:37:34 EDT
From:         "LEILA L. SMITH" <C0127@UNIVSCVM.BITNET>
Subject: Re: FYI: 2 new COBOL offerings in NOTISPRO (CHAT-L?)

Steven,

  Might help with circ. acct.  Having problems with the assembler program
as of testing 09/02/92 with multiple payments.  I may have tried to test
a situation that may not happen, but you never know.


                                        Leila Smith
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:16:46 EST
From:         Paul Asay <LIBASAY@INDST.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: GTO - LGT700B

Indiana State is also using the 4.6 version to run GTO reports.  We are
on 5.1, and have the same problem.

***-------------------------------------***
* Paul Asay   Indiana State University    *
|             Cunningham Memorial Library |
|             Terre Haute, IN 47809       |
| Bitnet: libasay@indst    (812-237-2598) |
* Internet: libasay@cml.indstate.edu      *
***-------------------------------------***
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 09:32:28 EDT
From:         Irene Pelak <pelak@PILOT.NJIN.NET>
Subject:      Circ Policy Questions

Question #1:  Any problem having a patron category ILLN and the circ policy
for that category also named ILLN?

Question #2:  Our library wishes to change from a two week to a four week
circulation for our main collection.  I can either change our WEK2 policy to
reflect a four week loan or I can create a new WEK4 policy and point all the
necessary circ situations to that as of the change date.  I will probably go
the second route because it is aesthetically upsetting to have a policy called
WEK2 really reflecting a four week loan.  I would like to know the pros and
cons associated with both methods.

Question #3:  There is some concern that the longer policy will not be
acceptable during our short summer sessions.  If the library decides they need
to change policy every summer, what are the pitfalls associated with doing
that?
IRENE PELAK  TECH1  BERGEN COMMUNITY COLLEGE  201-447-9236
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 17:10:00 -0500
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was daviss@DAVIS.CUL.COLUMBIA.EDU
From:         Stephen Davis <daviss@CUNIXF.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject:      [Stephen Davis: Points for Enhancement surveys]

Sue:  I would have thought the same thing, but p. 24 of the LMS enhancement
survey (i.e., the actual first page of the ballot) so clearly says "The total
points for the Survey is 10," and then threatens to disregard any points
assigned beyond 10.

I wonder how long NOTIS will let us speculate before it clarifies this
for us....?

/* ---------- "Points for Enhancement surveys" ---------- */

I believe we are to assign 20 points for the LMS, 5 points for GTO, and 10
points for MDAS.  The MDAS points are split, 5 for Functional Enh. and another
5 for Database Enh.

Pages 1 and 2 of the LMS survey apply ONLY to the LMS, not GTO or MDAS.  So
when it says, under Assigning Points on p. 2 of LMS, *The total number of
points for the entire survey may not exceed 20.* it means the ENTIRE LMS
survey, NOT INCLUDING the GTO and MDAS surveys.

As for the "across modules" phrase, that refers to the modules of LMS, e.g.,
Acquisitions, Serials, Cataloging, Circulation, etc.  We are not to assign
some points for each module of LMS, but across LMS as a whole.

When read this way, the surveys make better sense and are consistent within
and among themselves.  There's still the problem of the due date, the mis-
referred-to pages, and the alleged "Priorities Overall" section.

Sue Weiland, LIB 1
Wichita State Univ.
weiland@twsuvm.bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 13:59:46 EDT
From:         Lydia Pettis <LRP@CORNELLC.BITNET>
Subject:      MARC Holdings conversion problem...continuation lines

Cornell has recently completed our first test of the MHLD conversion
program. One problem that stood out is that VHLD records that were
continued on multiple lines (using the correct indented spacing for
the second and subsequent lines) did not convert correctly.

We were anticipating that a vhld statement that took up 5 vhld lines,
for instance, would translate into one tagged field in the new MHLD
format. Instead, each line translated to it's own tagged field.

Would those institutions that have done the MHLD conversion please
relate your experiences with continued lines? If you found something
that worked, we would like to know what it is!

Thanks.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*  Lydia Pettis                    PHONE:  (607) 255-9477   *
*  Programmer/Analyst              BITNET: LRP @ CORNELLC   *
*  501 Olin Library                                         *
*  Cornell University              FAX:    (607) 255-9346   *
*  Ithaca, NY  14850                                        *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Organization: Southeastern Louisiana University
X-Envelope-to: NOTIS-L@TCSVM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN"NOTIS-L@TCSVM.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.notis-l
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 14:20:00 CDT
From:         Kevin Calmes <TMIS1692@VEGA.SELU.EDU>
Subject:      VT3xx and 7171?

Seems like I heard/read/dreamed up the notion that a VT3xx/VT4xx terminal
profile for a 7171 is out there somewhere.  Has anyone else heard about this?
VT3xx emulation would allow us to use our VT terminals (The VT100 profile only
allows for four PF keys) in the NOTIS environment instead of the IBM31xx's.

Thanks,

Kevin

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
*  Kevin Calmes                           Internet: TMIS1692@SELU.EDU         *
*  Library Programmer - TECH1             IP#       147.174.1.5               *
*  Computing Services - MIS               Bitnet:   TMIS1692@SLU.BITNET       *
*  Southeastern Louisiana University      Voice:    (504) 549-3645            *
*  Box 409 SLU Station                    Fax:      (504) 549-5092            *
*  Hammond, LA  70402   USA               IBM 4361-M5  DOS/VSE/SP 3.1.2       *
*                                         CICS 1.7  NOTIS 4.6.1  GTO 3.0      *
*  "S'cuse me while I kiss the sky"       Location: 30.30.15N  90.27.40W      *
*                     Jimi Hendrix        Fishnet:  At the pond               *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU