Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-tgr!tgr!key%tetra@nosc.ARPA From: key%tetra@nosc.ARPA (Gerry Key) Newsgroups: net.micro.cpm Subject: dBASE II Question Message-ID: <512@brl-tgr.ARPA> Date: Thu, 8-Aug-85 13:45:20 EDT Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.512 Posted: Thu Aug 8 13:45:20 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 11-Aug-85 04:28:45 EDT Sender: news@brl-tgr.ARPA Lines: 33 I have a dBASE II question. First, the scenario. File X.dbf contains 100 records. File Y.dbf contains 0 records but has the same definition (i.e., STRUCTURE) as X.dbf. Someone inadvertently issues the command: . use Y . copy to X structure The result is that the 100 records in X.dbf are still there, but because it now has the definition of Y.dbf, X.dbf appears to con- tain 0 records. Any reference to a record number in X.dbf pro- duces an error because the definition thinks there are none. The question: is there any way to fake the definition of X.dbf into recognizing those 100 records? I tried doing an APPEND, thinking that when it updated the definition it would count in the 100 records that were there plus the dummy record I just ad- ded. Wrong. It now says I have 1 record in X.dbf instead of 0. --Gerry MILNET/ARPANET >-------------------- key@nosc.arpa akgua \ decvax \ dcdwest \ UUCP allegra -------------!sdcsvax!noscvax!key ucbvax / philabs/ ihnp4 /