Kurt,

As long as it is non-zero, I do not particularly care except for the legacy 
understanding of what the various codes normally mean. 

I do tend to recognize a RC=8 as something more critical to investigate, but as 
a practical matter, I review anything non-zero.

Bob

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf 
Of Kurt Quackenbush
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 8:51 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

Reply via email to