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 /