I'm surprised as well that ZAPs--which I thought overwrote blocks in place--would lead to x37 problems. But I would rather comment on a problem behind the stated problem: delivering vendor-supplied fixes as ZAPs rather than CSECT replacements.
My view as a customer is that 'permanent' product maintenance ought to be delivered in ++MOD format. ZAPs should be relegated strictly to APAR fixes: emergency workarounds that alleviate pain in the short term while a module revision is being developed and packaged. IBM, for example, almost never ships a ++ZAP in a PTF. Other vendors do so for reasons that are equally mysterious and suspect. I say 'suspect' because I fear that the motive is to create an follow-your-taste smorgasbord of 'fixes' that the customer can choose to install or not depending on...well, on what? How can a fix be optional? If there's a problem, it needs a fix. If there's not a problem, then something else may be in order. A usermod maybe. But not a PTF. The power of this platform lies in good measure on a single path to glory. IBM doesn't have to preach righteousness and hope for spirit to move us. SMP/E enforces the straight and narrow. In order to install PTF C you must first (or concurrently) install PTFs A and B. Violating this stricture is a serious transgression. Consequently every customer with PTF C is running in a known environment. The customer can expect a certain result, and if there's a problem, IBM can diagnose and test in a duplicate environment. That consistency benefits everybody. So, as interested as I am in an informed answer to the ZAP question, I'm far more interested in urging vendors to deliver PTFs that install serially. In other words, successive element updates that lead everyone in the same direction at the same pace. I don't trust ZAPs to fulfill that hope. . . JO.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 626-302-7535 Office 323-715-0595 Mobile [EMAIL PROTECTED] IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> wrote on 01/31/2006 04:35:05 PM: > Lately I was testing a service installation containing > ++ZAP MCS and receiving inexplicable verify failures. > I also noticed multiple COMPRESSes to recover from > SE37-04 ABENDs. I started with the problem I knew how > to solve, and increased the load library allocations. > To my surprise, the ZAP verify problem vanished. > <snip> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
