Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!ox.com!umich!sharkey!fmsrl7!art-sy!news
From: chap@art-sy.detroit.mi.us (j chapman flack)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: help identifying a 4gl?
Message-ID: <9105251216.aa14030@art-sy.detroit.mi.us>
Date: 25 May 91 16:16:49 GMT
References: <88371@mbf.UUCP>
Reply-To: chap@art-sy.detroit.mi.us (j chapman flack)
Organization: Appropriate Roles for Technology
Lines: 28

Yow!

Janine, you must have made a *very* good impression to land a client who
had just been through an experience like that.  Congratulations.

The outfit that did the system--did they offer it as an off-the-shelf
package (_caveat emptor_) or did they develop it for the client?  I suppose
if it was clearly understood to be a package, with no source or modification
rights for the client, then I'd have to concede they were within their rights
to deliver it in a mystery language, undocumented, and encrypted, if they
really wanted to.  Otherwise, though, I'd see red.  Have they ever seen the
ACM or ICCP codes of conduct?

I don't recognize the 4GL, but my $0.02 on the encrypted menus:  instead of
hacking the menu system, just run it with process accounting on and check
the log to see what it ran.  If Xenix includes process accounting.

If Xenix doesn't include process accounting, you could take everything
obviously related to the menu system over to an SCO UNIX system and run it
with system-call auditing enabled--the log will contain failed exec()s for
anything it tried to run.

Good luck!
-- 
Chap Flack                         Their tanks will rust.  Our songs will last.
chap@art-sy.detroit.mi.us                                    -MIKHS 0EODWPAKHS

Nothing I say represents Appropriate Roles for Technology unless I say it does.