Preventing users from deleting specific Print file output

[redvan]

We have users that generate reports from various menu driven functions. Due to the fact that they need to print some of these reports, we have menu options to display spooled files. However, if a user gets a program error, we've instructed them to always take the "D" option, if available. Unfortunately, if they've had a previous error and have produced a dump and then go looking for a report, they inadvertently print the dumps.

Is there a way to prevent a user from deleting or printing specific spooled files without creating a system wide mess?

Mike

[EmmanuelW1]

The QPPGMDMP printer file can be set to an output queue to which a printer is not attached.

Cheers,

Emmanuel

[Barbara Morris]

Instead of letting users see inquiry messages, you could monitor for exceptions and produce the dump yourself. That way, you could control what happens to the QPPGMDMP spool file. You could also do things like DSPJOBLOG OUTPUT(*PRINT) and DSPJOB OUTPUT(*PRINT) . And then you could show a nicer message to your user.

Definitely not a trivial change, but you could start with the programs that tend to get the most errors.

[redvan]

Instead of letting users see inquiry messages, you could monitor for exceptions and produce the dump yourself. That way, you could control what happens to the QPPGMDMP spool file. You could also do things like DSPJOBLOG OUTPUT(*PRINT) and DSPJOB OUTPUT(*PRINT) . And then you could show a nicer message to your user.

Definitely not a trivial change, but you could start with the programs that tend to get the most errors.

Barbara,
Thank you for your time. I'm sure you're a busy person.

I have monitoring for errors in all my CL's to handle errors and send status line messages to the user and handle the dumps but there always seems to be a error that slips through. IE: I globally monitor for all CPFxxxx errors but recently I got a CPDxxxx error so, a program message was displayed.

I use a template for all my programs so over the years as new issues arose, I added code to cover the new issue to hopefully avoid it happening again.

Also, some users produce spooled files and they need to print these. That's how I lost the dump and what prompted my posting.

However, I'm looking for a simple solution (if possible) like restricting all user authorities to the print file rather than update hundreds of programs. However, I do not know the ramifications of doing what I just suggested. I would really dislike losing a dump because of some unforeseen issue due to my authority change.

Michael