On Mon, 31 Mar 2014 23:14:09 -0600, Paul Gilmartin wrote: >If, as HLASM appears to do, there is a unique CSECT that is updated >by each PTF, then each PTF PREreqs its immediate predecessor, etc., >inductively. The graph of service is unbranched; you don't have the >Chinese menu smorgasbord of service, and the PTF level is definitive. >(But customers may be constrained to fix bugs not directly impacting >them. Sure makes problem analysis easier for Tech Support.)
It also means that a PE on one PTF prevents all subsequent PTFs from being applied until the PE is resolved. Maybe that's ok for HLASM. Maybe it would be ok for C/C++. Certainly it would not be ok for z/OS. "PTF level" is a simplistic way of looking at what maintenance is applied. IMO, it is so simplistic as to be worthless. That doesn't stop vendors from asking what the "PTF Level" is of their product. A module has a PTF level. In most cases, a product does not. It seems HLASM is an exception. Perhaps there are others, but I don't know of any. Even "PUT Level" or "RSU Level" is, IMO, too imprecise to be useful, because it depends upon the level of the HOLDDATA when the maintenance is applied. -- Tom Marchant ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
