Look in the docs under wrap utility. There is no unwrap utility.
Jim
--
Replace part of the email address: kennedy-down_with_spammers_at_attbi.com
with family. Remove the negative part, keep the minus sign. You can figure
it out.
"Thomas T" <T_at_T> wrote in message news:3e971c11$1_at_rutgers.edu...
> "Ed Prochak" <edprochak_at_adelphia.net> wrote in message
> news:3E9712D6.7060803_at_adelphia.net...
> > Thomas T wrote:
> > > Just starting to experiment with packages... and was looking at the
few
> > > Oracle packages in my Oracle 8.1.7 test server. Are the package
bodies
> > > encrypted? I can see the Package Spec for DBMS_ALERT, but when I
click
> on
> > > the Package Body for DBMS_ALERT, it seems to be encrypted?
> > >
> > > I'm guessing encryption because if I look at the HTP package spec and
> body,
> > > I can see all the procedures and functions.
> > >
> > > Were they encrypted using the DBMS_OBFUSCATION_TOOLKIT? If so, can I
> > > decrypt them back to see what's in there?
> > >
> > > Or are these not encrypted, but compiled, and I won't be able to see
my
> own
> > > source code? I'd hate to define a package spec and package body, and
> then
> > > not be able to look at the code for my procedures. Seems strange that
> most
> > > of these built-in packages have hidden bodies, and the rest are
visible.
> I
> > > tried a web search, but either nobody's asked this question yet, or I
> can't
> > > find the proper phrase to search for.
> > >
> > > I think it's about time I go pick up the Oracle 9i PL/SQL Programming
> book;
> > > hopefully it's more advanced then the PL/SQL v2.2 book I have (written
> in
> > > 1995 for Oracle 7)! The book only has 16 pages of coverage. Or, is
> there
> > > another book that explains more of the PL/SQL and package details...
> like,
> > > maybe a book designed for the OCP exams? (There's nothing I hate more
> than
> > > buying a book, only to find out that I know half of it, and of the
other
> > > half, 1/3 contains topics that I'd never use.)
> > >
> > > One more question; can I migrate existing procedures into a package?
Or
> do
> > > I just copy the code into a new package body, and then delete the
> original
> > > stand-alone procedure?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > -Thomas
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Any PL/SQL code that you compile will be viewable in the user-source
> table.
> >
> > And I've thought that the ORACLE manuals were the best resource. You can
> view
> > them online.
> >
> > Your procedure for migrating procedures into a package seems fine. Just
be
> > aware that to invoke the procedure in the package will require the
package
> > name. so any procedures that you migrate, will require modifying
> procedures
> > and/or programs that invoke those procedures.
> >
> > IOW, the old
> > myprocedure(*)
> > will become
> > mynewpackage.myprocedure(*)
> > Calling code changes required accordingly.
> >
> > HTH
> > --
> > Ed Prochak
> > running http://www.faqs.org/faqs/running-faq/
> > netiquette http://www.psg.com/emily.html
> > --
> > "Two roads diverged in a wood and I
> > I took the one less travelled by
> > and that has made all the difference."
> > robert frost
> >
>
> Ed, thanks for the info! I know about the online manuals, but I prefer
> paper... guess it's because way back when, there was no internet or
cdroms,
> and software came with big books instead of a big empty box, and CocaCola
> Classic was just "Coca Cola", and I had three dual-density floppy drives
on
> my 8088, one with a "utilties" 5 1/4 that held ANSI.SYS and LIST.EXE and
> BASICA.COM and ... oh, for the old days... where are those 360K disks,
> anyway? [nostalgia mode off] But if they're the best, I guess I'll give
it
> a go. Maybe I'll just find the chapters I need, and send 'em to the high
> speed laser. Is the "Oracle 9i PL/SQL Programming" book any good, or just
> an absolute beginner's guide (how to use conversion functions, how to use
> if/else/endif, etc)?
>
> Glad to hear I'll still be able to view my PL/SQL statements. What's the
> deal then, with the "encoded" package bodies? How did they get that way?
>
> Luckily I'd be doing this to developed-today procedures, so I don't have
to
> change any existing code for the new package naming.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Thomas
>
>
Received on Fri Apr 11 2003 - 16:58:49 CDT
