Shane, I agree completely about keeping it simple. To my mind, having the root associated with each resvol mounted at a mountpoint that matches the resvol significantly reduces the possibility for error when there are multiple target zones that require service. For the root, Automount makes it simple. Unfortunately, other products are packaged to go into their own HFSes to be mounted at /usr/lpp/something. They are expected to be mounted at <ServicePrefix>/usr/lpp/something when service is applied.
Just last week, we needed to apply service to a z/OS 1.4 target and a z/OS 1.6 target. A mixup in the HFS mounts could have been a Very Bad Thing. Thanks for your thoughts. Tom Marchant --- Shane Ginnane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tom, I've been half watching this thread - given my general antipathy to > the Unix impimentation on z/OS. > Maybe we are too simply setup here, but I don't see your issue. > > We have a target zone per resvol (set; res plus extension). When we > clone, > we mount the new root at /service. > Maint is APPLY'd, and /service unmounted. The duration of the mount is > as > limited as we can reasonably manage. > > All maint is done by one team, again one target (resvol) and within a > known > timeframe as we go through a published roll-out cycle. > > No clashes, no concerns. > KISS. > > Shane .. > > Tom wrote on 18/08/2005 04:16:52 AM: > > > The Unix System Services Planning manual has only limited references > to > > mounting the HFS that is to be used by SMP/E at /service and changing > the > > DDDEFS. It doesn't give any suggestions as to how to manage multiple > > target zones and ensure that the correct HFS is mounted at /service. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
