f



RE: COBOL source code to create usersnames using SETUAI #2

Martin wrote:

> I think my first hurdle is to create VMS usernames up to 32 characters
> long - using $setuai service. Its been a long time since I cut cobol
> code (cobol is the only compiler we have) and was wondering is some
> kind soul out there could throw me some code where they have done
> this before. 

While the UAF field for USERNAME is, in fact 32 characters, there are many
places within the VMS code that allow for only 12 characters.  For example,
AUTHORIZE will not allow you to add a username larger that 12 characters.  I
do believe there are JIB fields that contain the username and only allow for
12 characters.
-- 
Brian Tillman

0
tillmabg (9)
4/6/2004 2:26:10 PM
comp.os.vms 21904 articles. 1 followers. Post Follow

1 Replies
316 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 47

Brian Tillman wrote:

> Martin wrote:

>>I think my first hurdle is to create VMS usernames up to 32 characters
>>long - using $setuai service. Its been a long time since I cut cobol
>>code (cobol is the only compiler we have) and was wondering is some
>>kind soul out there could throw me some code where they have done
>>this before. 

> While the UAF field for USERNAME is, in fact 32 characters, there are many
> places within the VMS code that allow for only 12 characters.  For example,
> AUTHORIZE will not allow you to add a username larger that 12 characters.  I
> do believe there are JIB fields that contain the username and only allow for
> 12 characters.

Around the VMS 4.x days I had account where usernames were supposed to
match our last name.  Mine is 14 letters.  After a few tries I finally
got a working account.  Even though it was 12, I could type 14.

At some point later, maybe around VMS 5.0, that stopped working.

Then I believe the system manager tried to put 14 letters,
but it never worked right.   It seems like some things worked
and some didn't.

On the first try for my account the directory name didn't agree with
the directory my account was set up for.  If I remember right, it had 
only nine letters, but somehow the wrong nine in the first try.

-- glen

0
gah (12851)
4/7/2004 8:42:38 AM
Reply: