Transferring from V4R5 to V6
we need to transfer all the lib's,obj's, everthing from v4 to v6 now?
Software/Hardware used:
FTP
which is the best method to do it? i'm expecting guidence through FTP method?
Software/Hardware used:
FTP
ASKED:
August 25, 2011 9:51 AM
UPDATED:
March 31, 2012 5:44 PM
Approved Answer - Chosen by Rajasekhar15 (Question Asker)
1. Create a *SAVF (what ever you want to call it)
2. SAVLIB xxx *SAVF (the above *SAVF you just created)
3. FTP it to the target box
4. On the target box do RSTLIB xxx *SAVF
*
I do not remember if you need to create the *SAVF on the target box and use (Replace on the FTP command.
Depending on how much you have to do, repeat this process for each library or write a program to do it.
You can also create a new library and your *SAVFs in it, then SAV that LIB and FTP a single time
Other Answers:
Is sounds like you are moving to a different machine.
The fastest way would be to save the libraries to tape and restore them on the targat system.
Is that option available for you?
To see other answers submitted to the Answer Wiki: View Answer History.
no charlie we dont have tape option here, that’s why i asking for FTP option….thanks in advance
To FTP a savefile between two AS/400s, it’s not necessary to create the savefile first on the target system as long as NAMEFMT 1 is used. After opening a connection and logging on, the command sequence might look like:
Savefiles are always transferred in binary mode, so the {bin} command is necessary. Switching to NAMEFMT 1 with the {na 1} command lets the target system recognize the .SAVF file extension. Then {put mysavefile.savf} is understood by the target system as a special kind of file — a savefile.
The automatic handling of a savefile also eliminates the use of {(REPLACE}, so be aware that there will be no warning if a savefile is overwritten.
If the default is set for NAMEFMT 1 or if previous commands have already caused NAMEFMT 1 to be enabled, then it’s not necessary to ask for it. However, I always ask explicitly for a NAMEFMT setting.
Tom
If the two systems can communicate via FTP, then it could be feasible to use ObjectConnect. I haven’t seen it used between systems separated by that many releases, though. Also, APPN configuration would need to be done enough for at least those two systems to communicate through it.
Using ObjectConnect would mostly eliminate creating and populating savefiles on either side. Depending on space restrictions, that might be useful. It could also cut a significant amount of network time (perhaps especially if multiple libraries were processed concurrently).
Tom