On Thu, 11 Dec 2025 21:54:02 +0100, Radoslaw Skorupka <[email protected]> wrote:
>Different size: 3FF0 vs DB0. If you only want to get this installed without going thru the diag, I suggest you apply each PTF separately. This how IBM most likely installed them as they worked on this product. The most obvious cause is SMP/e not generating the correct binder REPLACE statement for each CSECT within a ++MOD. To understand the problem, link a single csect object by using 2 INCLUDEs for that object and specify option LIST=ALL to see all binder messages. Repeat this but with a REPLACE csect-name before the second INCLUDE and notice the difference. >Different set of modules inside - quite obvious. Notice that V2 ignored ++MOD from the FMID. V1 linked from the FMID and then later from the PTF. If REPLACE was inserted correctly, then they would be the same. To diagnose this problem, pick 1 csect that is different in V1 and V2 (not orphaned / missing in V2). In SMP/e, look at the MOD for that CSECT (e.g. BAZGPSAC). This csect should be missing from the MOD if this is the REPLACE problem. If not, then something else is causing this problem. >IEW2646W 4B07 ESD RMODE(24) CONFLICTS WITH USER-SPECIFIED RMODE(ANY) FOR >SECTION BAZGPSOP CLASS B_TEXT. >IEW2651W 511C ESD AMODE 24 CONFLICTS WITH USER-SPECIFIED AMODE 31 FOR >ENTRY POINT BAZGPSAC. I suspect the FMID was pe'd. >IEW2454W 9203 SYMBOL BAZCHCK UNRESOLVED. NO AUTOCALL (NCAL) SPECIFIED. >IEW2454W 9203 SYMBOL BAZGPSTE UNRESOLVED. NO AUTOCALL (NCAL) SPECIFIED. >IEW2454W 9203 SYMBOL BAZGPSEF UNRESOLVED. NO AUTOCALL (NCAL) SPECIFIED. We don't know if V1 has these error messages because you don't show the V1 apply for UW95965. Maybe these would have been resolved if the FMID had been installed first but we simply don't know. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
