PE Error ---- RC8 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Kurt Quackenbush <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 7:50 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: PTF error clarification
> Is a return code of 4 more appropriate for PTFs not applied because of > error hold? This is an interesting idea, which I'm curious to hear opinions on. If doing a mass APPLY (not using the SELECT operand), and PTFs are stopped because of a PE (ERROR HOLD), either directly or in a requisite chain that is stuck because of a PE, what RC should be used to identify this condition? RC=8? 4? 0? Other ideas? Kurt Quackenbush -- IBM, SMP/E Development ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
