Wim,
My choice, like Bart's and Robert's, would be to ADD a node. Normally, all common parts would be ins SYS$COMMON:[...], and only very little in SYS$SPECIFIC:[...]
And the nice part of this: exactly THOSE things that ARE the machine-specific items that (may) need to be adapted.
I DO have some reservations about your mentionong node names in .COM files. If those are common, then it is my sentiment that your environment was not build for flexibility. But, no use crying over spilled milk.
If you still have sufficient time, maybe that can be still addressed, but it will not be simple. (although: nearly always you can cheat your way around by LogicalNames. That WILL generate potential confusion for a successor, if that would come to pass).
In my view, the best part of the - add node - test node - start using new node in production - remove old node - scenario, is that you continue to have your full production environment.
If the worst comes to pass, all that will be lost is your effort, but not your operational environment.
As always, MY views are not necessarily the way YOU need to look at this, but WE have good experiences with the above ways.
YMMV
Proost.
Have one on me.
jpe
Don't rust yours pelled jacker to fine doll missed aches.
