From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Subject: Re: SUBMIT help please.
Date: 11 Jan 1993 10:49:49 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1993Jan10.224954.21329@npal.rn.com>, sbrant@npal.rn.com writes:
>		I know I have seen this here before, and I can not seem to
>		find the info wherever I have placed it, so I could find it
>		when I needed it.  ( you know how it goes!)
>
>		Anyway,  I have an EXE program that runs with no problem.
>		The program does not require any input from a user. It is simply
>		a special file processing program.  
>
>		When I start the .com file with the following commands, all works
>		well.
>
>		$ define/exec sys$input sys$command
>		$ run/error=nla0:/output=nla0: dua1:[data.sweep]scanit
>
>		Now the problem arises.  I want to SUBMIT this com procedure
>		so we can schedule the execution of the .exe program.
>
>		Submitting the com program causes a failure. Nothing works.

And, of course, the message given when the procedure fails couldn't possibly
tell you (or us) anything at all about the problem, right?  If the account
under which the procedure is running doesn't have CMEXEC as a default priv,
then the DEFINE command returns a success status, even though the logical name 
is only defined in SUPERVISOR MODE.  Depending on what your program does, this
may or may not be important.

>		If I remember correctly, I think I need to use the loginout
>		program to do this, but as I said, I can not find the info
>		on how to do this.

You don't remember correctly;  If you'd even come close to understanding the
discussion about such things, you'd've realized that in this case, running
LOGINOUT is probably irrelevent; you'd've at least understood that telling us
the error messages/status you got was indespensible in helping with your
problem.

>		Would someone please help?

Q: How many psychiatrists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Only one, but the light bulb has to really want to be changed.

Q: How many of the idiots posting to INFO-VAX/comp.os.vms does it take to ask an
   answerable question?
A: At least three to provide all the necessary information for us to help them;
   Unfortunately, they're providing the various parts of the information to
   allow us to answer at least three totally unrelated questions.


IF YOU WANT HELP, YOU'VE GOT TO GIVE US THE NECESSARY INFORMATION.  YOU HAVE
*NOT* DONE SO.

VMS, either in error messages from the utilities you invoked at the DCL level,
or in the information it offered to provide in response to the calls you made
in your program, undoubtedly told you a hell of a lot more than you're telling
us.  WHY THE HELL CAN'T YOU PASS THAT INFORMATION ON?  You're too stupid to
relay the error messages?  You're too damned stupid to check the status of
calls to RTLs or system services in your program?  You believe that computers
work by magic?  Which of the above?

Arthur C. Clarke was right.  He was simply mistaken in his (apparent) belief
that we would not, within his lifetime, see technology reach the point that
it is, to people like sbrant, indistinguishable from magic.

Definition for the day:
	Computer literate:  Able to play games on a computer, while still
		firmly believing that computers work by magic.
Proof of validity of definition:
	See sbrant's post.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms