I think I saw a comment to the effect that the error in the PTF that needed to be excluded related to the rc=4, but I could be wrong.
Actually, I don't know how far this system has "evolved/mutated" since the Serverpac install. I an stongly inclined to recommending a do over starting with a fresh order/install of a new Serverpac :) > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Pommier, Rex > Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 9:51 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: RSU APPLY ISSUE GIM23911E > > I've been watching this exchange from a distance. Are we now confusing 2 > issues here? We have the original problem of CEEPLPKA and the secondary > one of his running apply jobs bypassing holderrors without knowing what he > was bypassing. > > The OP has gotten an apply check to run with RC=0 after removing the > BYPASS(HOLDERROR) by eliminating the PTFs that were held by the error. > This doesn't do anything about the original problem of the apply returning > RC=4 on CEEPLPKA on the actual apply. Unless the OP eliminated additional > PTFs from the apply (one at least of which would need to be installing a fix > into CEEPLPKA), he will still have the issue with language environment. > > Unless I missed a part of the conversation, I believe he still needs to find > out > how to get the load module flags set correctly. > > Rex > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Gibney, Dave > Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 11:28 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: RSU APPLY ISSUE GIM23911E > > This is exactly how you resolve this issue. Don't deliberately put broken > software on your system. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM- > [email protected]] > > On Behalf Of Mainframe Mainframe > > Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 7:28 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: RSU APPLY ISSUE GIM23911E > > > > Thanks all for reply. Now to resolve this issue, I tried running below > > more steps. > > > > 1) I run APPLY CHECK Job without HOLDERROR included in it. Job failed > > with RC 08 > > > > GIM69168E ** HFSCOPY PROCESSING TO THE SIZUFSC LIBRARY FAILED FOR > HFS > > IZUGNAAC > > IN SYSMOD UI16044. THE RETURN CODE (12) EXCEEDED THE > > ALLOWABLE > > VALUE. DATE 14.247 - TIME 23:39:39 - SEQUENCE NUMBER > > 000025. > > GIM30216I APPLY PROCESSING FAILED FOR SYSMOD UI16044. SYSTEM > UTILITY > > PROCESSING FAILED FOR AN ELEMENT IN UI16044. > > GIM30219E ** APPLY PROCESSING FAILED FOR SYSMOD UI18572. > PROCESSING > > FAILED FOR > > SYSMOD UI16044, WHICH WAS SPECIFIED ON THE ++VER PRE > > OPERAND. > > GIM30221E ** APPLY PROCESSING FAILED FOR SYSMOD UI16025. > PROCESSING > > FAILED FOR > > SYSMOD UI16044, WHICH WAS SPECIFIED ON THE ++VER REQ > > OPERAND. > > GIM30221E ** APPLY PROCESSING FAILED FOR SYSMOD UI16026. > PROCESSING > > FAILED FOR > > SYSMOD UI16044, WHICH WAS SPECIFIED ON THE ++VER REQ > > OPERAND. > > GIM30221E ** APPLY PROCESSING FAILED FOR SYSMOD UI16027. > PROCESSING > > FAILED FOR > > SYSMOD UI16044, WHICH WAS SPECIFIED ON THE ++VER REQ > > OPERAND. > > GIM30221E ** APPLY PROCESSING FAILED FOR SYSMOD UI16028. > PROCESSING > > FAILED FOR > > SYSMOD UI16044, WHICH WAS SPECIFIED ON THE ++VER REQ > > OPERAND. > > GIM30221E ** APPLY PROCESSING FAILED FOR SYSMOD UI16029. > PROCESSING > > FAILED FOR > > SYSMOD UI16044, WHICH WAS SPECIFIED ON THE ++VER REQ > > OPERAND. > > GIM30221E ** APPLY PROCESSING FAILED FOR SYSMOD UI16030. > PROCESSING > > FAILED FOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > . . . . . > > . . > > Then I tried looking at UI16044 PTF in SMPPTS and this is basically > > for z/OSMF and we are not using this product.So, I tried EXCLUDING and > > run Job again. This time it failed with > > > > GIM30204E ** APPLY PROCESSING FAILED FOR SYSMOD UI18572. > REQUIRED > > SYSMODS WERE > > EXCLUDED. > > GIM35905I PREREQUISITE SYSMOD UI16044 WAS EXCLUDED. > > > > And UI18572 also belongs to z/OS MF. So, I EXCLUDED this as well from > > APLLY CHeck Job and run with RC00. > > > > Is it good way to bypass the issue, I am facing or Do I have to solve > > it now before moving forward. > > > > Suggestion Please. > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Tom Marchant < 0000000a2a8c2020- > dmarc- > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 5 Sep 2014 06:56:17 -0700, Lizette Koehler wrote: > > > > > > >Do not change the CEEPLPKA. IBM sets that and probably requires it > > to > > > >be > > > a 0 max cc. > > > > > > > >So, try the apply without the BYPASS HOLDERROR and see if it works. > > > > > > We don't know the state of his system. Those APARs are likely not > > > for LE, but for some other component. His APPLY failed, but we don't > > > know what was done when he ran the APPLY with BYPASS (HOLDERROR). > > > The > > > PTF(S) with the error holds may or may not have been applied. > > > > > > At this point, I wouldn't trust his system. > > > > > > -- > > > Tom Marchant > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > - > > - > > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > > > email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send > > email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to > [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from > disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is > not > the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this > message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any > disclosure, distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in > reliance on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have > received > this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this > message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or > hard copy format. Thank you. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to > [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
