andykay

Greetings.

 

We are currently using Unix to send Emails using mailx and uuencode.

 

Nothing in our coding has changed, for months, with the code that transmits/Emails via this code.

 

Last Monday, Sept 12th, we started getting complaints from customers that they were unable to open the attachment in the email.

 

Upon looking into it, we found that it is 'only' emails sent to Yahoo addresses that is having this issue...All other customers are able to open the attachments attached to the emails we send them.  This was confirmed by sending the exact same attachment to both my work address and my yahoo address...the work address was able to open the attachment, the Yahoo address was not able to open the attachment. 

 

Upon attempting to open the PDF attached to the Yahoo email, an error is displayed, stating: "Adobe Acrobat Reader DC could not open 'filename.pdf' because it is either not a supported file type or because the file has been damaged (for example, it was sent as an email attachment and wasn't correctly decoded)."

 

Upon downloading the 2 attachments to my local computer, there is a file size difference.  Upon opening the 'bad' pdf, it is just a single page long, whereas the 'good' pdf is many, many pages long.

 

Has anyone else that uses mailx&uuencode to send emails with attachments experienced any issues with Yahoo addresses since Monday, Sept 12th?

 

Cheers,

 

AK

Many years back, and many companies ago, I wrote some code that read a Supervisor Table and if your OPR_ID was in that table, you'd have Read/Write privileges to Word documents opened up using GUI WINDOWS ASYNC...If your OPR_ID was not found you only had READ ONLY privileges.

 

I'm not sure if I found the information on the RC, or on the NET, but if anyone has a link that would remind me of how that was done, I'd appreciate it.

 

Cheers,

 

AK

Greetings...


I'd like to create a table that would be read to create a HTML address line that would contain both Static and Variable variables.

I have the prefix of the HTML address taken care of, so I won't be typing that in the following examples.


For instance, if I were using an Address table, the end of the HTML line might look like the following:

h t t p://...rs:Format=pdf&rs:Command=Render&nameParam=Fred&addr1Param=123Main&cityParam=Dataville

<p dir="ltr">Red variables = Required portion of the address

Olive Variables = Both Static and Variable variables


For Instance, if I have a table that has 2 fields, PARAMETER & PARAMETER_VALUE, and I create a definition of the following:

PARAMETER....................PARAMETER_VALUE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
rs:Format pdf
rdCommand Render
nameParam NAME
addr1Param ADDR1
cityParam CITY

<p dir="ltr">What I envision doing is checking to see if the PARAMETER_VALUE (PV) is in the Variable Definition Table (VDT), and if not then use whatever entry is in the PV as a static portion of the address. If the value in the PV is in the VDT, then it is a Variable Name (VN) and I'd like to retrieve the value that is in the buffer for that VN.

Is this just wishful thinking, or is it possible to get SuperLayer to understand that it is not supposed to take the literal value "NAME", but instead retrieve the value of the NAME variable that is currently in the buffer if the value "NAME" is found in the VDT?


TIA,



AK

We all know that ProIV allows keyboard buffering, allowing you to enter in commands before the screen actually gets to the field.

Occasionally, when we're buffering ahead of the system, we'll get booted off of ProIV entirely, and an error saying Host Connection Closed...Has this happened to anyone else?

Our users are getting tired of getting booted out of the system, then finding out that upon returning to the transaction they were doing when they got booted out...ProIV has the records locked.

TIA,

AK

Does anyone know how ProIV has changed the way it locks files that &# @V22RCDLCK is suppose to enable/disable? We're experiencing record locks in updates that ran concurrently fine until we upgraded.

From ProIV Documentation:
When &# @V22RCDLCK is enabled, the newer method of record locking is disabled.


TIA,

AK