| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name
 | Date | Lines | 
|---|
| 3402.1 | Gotta start the mail sub-system first! | BOOZER::MARTIN::BELL | Martin Bell, NETCC, Birmingham UK | Mon Oct 18 1993 08:48 | 5 | 
|  | Its a guess, 'cos i don't have a v2.3 handy, but you probably also
need to initialise MAIL itself. Take a look at the named data on
the EMC form for a MAIL INITIALIZE command.
mb
 | 
| 3402.3 | Upgrade to 3.0 "problem" has been solved. | GIDDAY::SETHI | Holland 2-England 0,Andrew wasn't there | Mon Oct 18 1993 23:44 | 12 | 
|  |     Hi Andre',
    
    >Do you have other suggestions ??
    
    Tried the exact lines of code that you have in the base note under
    ALL-IN-1 version 3.0 and had no problems.  I guess since 2.3 is
    supported on a best effort bases that means ..... please upgrade to 3.0
    as whatever problem 2.3 had it certainly has been addressed in 3.0.
    
    Regards,
    
    Sunil
 | 
| 3402.6 | >> 2.3 restriction << | ECFA01::ANDRE |  | Tue Oct 19 1993 12:51 | 13 | 
|  | I checked before the NICKNAMES file, and it's all right, the same with
UAPASSWRD.DAT.
    
Unfortunately I cannot upgrade ALL-IN-1 in my customer.
    
In my country we have the portuguese version (but with a lot of customizations)
of this product until version 2.3. But since 3.0 we're using BRAZILIAN version.
    
The migration is a very complex procedure , and we're making a lot of tests
before doing it on the customers. So, I can't do it at this moment.
    
Do you think that I can tell that it's a restriction of the version? I mean,
the "system access violation"...
 | 
| 3402.7 | I'm sure I've heard this before... | IOSG::PYE | Graham - ALL-IN-1 Sorcerer's Apprentice | Tue Oct 19 1993 18:46 | 6 | 
|  |     I have a feeling I've heard about this before. You might like to look
    in this and the previous versions of this notesfile.
    
    Graham
    
    PS Please take care to spell ALL-IN-1 correctly. Thanks.
 | 
| 3402.8 | Init the stack | LEMAN::UELTSCHI | Isabelle necessary on a bicycle ? | Thu Oct 21 1993 14:33 | 26 | 
|  | 	Last chance,...
	Try to init the stack with the function MAIL PUSH
	(optionally MAIL PUSH oa$curmess).
	$allin1/noinit/user=x
	oa$init_initialize
	mail initialize
	MAIL PUSH
          .
	  .
	  .
	MAIL POP
	exit
	It doesn't create an access violation with version 3.0 if you omit
	this function (as reported in reply .3), but it does with v2.3
	Hope it will solve the problem.
	Bernard U. 
	
	
 | 
| 3402.9 | << system access violation again >> | ECFA01::ANDRE |  | Tue Oct 26 1993 17:48 | 9 | 
|  |     
    	It didn't work .
    
    	Same problem again , even when I use the MAIL PUSH (POP) command .
    
    	
    		thanks ,
    
    			Andre'
 | 
| 3402.10 | Time to look for the workaround | FORTY2::ASH | Mail Interchange Group, Reading | Wed Oct 27 1993 09:32 | 15 | 
|  | Well, no matter what's wrong here, you won't get a fix, so you have to 
identify exactly what's causing the problem and then see if there's a useable 
workround.
So, what exactly causes the ACCVIO? have you tried:
	not putting in the personwhodoesntexist
	putting it in before the ME?
	not putting in ME
	using a partial address before the personwhodoesntexist e.g. ANDR
	using CC instead of TO?
	etc etc
grahame
 | 
| 3402.11 | Still looks like NICKNAMES.DAT to me | OASS::PCMIKE::lamberson_m |  | Wed Oct 27 1993 12:16 | 8 | 
|  | Andre',
You say you checked the NICKNAMES.DAT file. Did you just verify it existed or 
did you also make sure that it was an "indexed" file, not sequential? Which 
account did you check NICKNAMES.DAT in? Which account are you trying to run 
this script from? An "ACCESS VIOLATION" when entering an invalid username is 
normally an indication that the NICKNAMES.DAT file does not exist or is 
sequential rather than indexed.
 | 
| 3402.12 | << still haven't found what I'm looking for >> | ECFA01::ANDRE |  | Wed Oct 27 1993 13:58 | 19 | 
|  |     
    	Ok , let's continue .
    
    	YEs , I looked at NICKNAMES.DAT and it's there and still indexed .
    
    	I tried the sugestions from .10 and I have the access violation
    
    with the MAIL TO and MAIL CC .
    
    	Doing a partial recognition doesn't change the problem .
    
    	I did the procedure using the Manager's account , and with a user's
    
    account too .
    
    
    			thanks  ,
    
    				Andre'
 | 
| 3402.13 | NETWORK.dat is involved | LEMAN::UELTSCHI | Isabelle necessary on a bicycle ? | Mon Nov 01 1993 10:35 | 12 | 
|  | Did you check the file [allin1.data_share]NETWORK.DAT , do you have one
in the site directory?... is it an indexed file?...
If you have enough privilege (need CMKRNL), you can setup the watch
functionality to see the file causing the access violation.
	$ set watch file/class=(all,nodump)
        $ allin1
        $ set watch file/class=none
Bernard U. 
 | 
| 3402.14 | << last file accessed >> | VAXRIO::ANDRE |  | Thu Nov 04 1993 14:03 | 13 | 
|  |     
    Bernard ,
    
    	I checked the NETWORK.DAT , and it's all right . (directory and 
    organization).
    
    	Using the SET WATCH , the last file accessed before the "system
    access violation" was the PENDING.DAT .
    
    		thanks ,
    
    
    			Andre'
 |