Yeah, I wonder if some ignorant person saw "description" and figured it was just a doc issue?
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Joel C. Ewing <[email protected]> wrote: > On 09/27/2012 07:45 AM, R.S. wrote: > >> (Hard words, but IMHO justfied) >> >> See APAR II13027. Submitted date: 2001-10-30 >> Product named CCCA contains an error. It not error in the code itself, >> it's error in SMP/E description of one of its elements. ABJ058 has wrong >> RMID. It blocks some PTFs to the product. >> >> I met this problem for the first time approx. in 2005. 7 years ago. >> Note that CCCA is part of Debug Tool. Debug Tool itself is being >> developed, new versions do come, while CCCA. >> >> I was really astonished and upset when I found 1 or 2 years later, that >> nothing changed - there still error in ABJ058 description. >> STILL NO CLUE IN PROGRAM DIRECTORY, STILL NO FIX! >> >> This year I installed z/OS 1.13, DT 12.1 - the newest versions available. >> Current for 2012. I used ServerPac, so everything was nicely integrated, >> service (PTFs) is included. >> NO IT'S NOT SO EASY. CCCA has still the error, so 8-years old PTFs to the >> product are NOT included. >> >> How many years will we fix this ridiculous mistake manually? >> >> Why there is even no clue about the need to do it? >> >> What would break if one of 100+ ServerPac jobs would fix the RMID for >> ABJ058? >> >> I consider SMP/E as unnecessarily and exceedigly complicated, but this >> case is exceptionally tits up. >> >> (time for my pills) >> > If the product is still being distributed that way, it should certainly be > corrected. If an informational APAR is the only place this is documented, > this would suggest that someone incorrectly treated this as only warranting > documentation, not repair. I would file another problem report and insist > they at least commit to fix it in the next version of ServerPac. > > This sounds like the kind of problem where the installation circumvention > would be trivial: a few lines of UCLIN to fix the RMID to the correct > value so the PTFs will apply; but one shouldn't have to do this manually > for each new ServerPac just because they haven't bothered to fix it in the > distribution. And, if IBM really expected the installation to do this > manually each time, at the very minimum that manual action should long ago > have been described as ACTION HOLD data on the PTFs that require it. You > shouldn't have to hunt down some ancient Informational APAR. If there is > some reason IBM "recommends" not applying the affected PTFs, that should be > handled by some means other retaining the element RMID mismatch. > > -- > Joel C. Ewing, Bentonville, AR [email protected] > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- zMan -- "I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
