I recall recent versions of JES2 required changes to a couple of exits, or changing exit numbers. Definitely need multiple source libraries for these changes.
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Mark Zelden <[email protected]> wrote: > I never responded / commented on Andrew's post, but since you brought the > subject up > again I will. > > I always use DDDEFs unless some products install / maintenance procedures > don't include > adding DDDEFs and the vendor supplies an SMP/E PROC or JCL with all the DDs > in them > instead. Even then I may add the DDDEFs depending on how many target and > dlibs there > are. > > In my original post the example was from a product that contains JES2 exits > and is > of course very sensitive to the the JES2 level and /or IBM maintenance to > JES2. The > exits are installed in the product as a usermod and you re-apply the usermod > to > force reassembly after JES2 maintenance is applied. Since multiple levels of > the > OS are being maintained I "APPLY REDO" pointing to a copy of the SMP/E > controlled loadlib using the proper level of the JES2 macro library. It > makes little > sense (at least to me) to run one apply, change the dddef, then run another > apply for > each JES2 level. It's much easier to keep two copies of the JCL with the > SYSLIB > override in JCL pointing to the correct macro library where I can see it. > There is > no "correct" DDDEF when I'm maintaining two different OS / JES2 levels. > > I actually have several products that I have to deal with this way while > maintaining > multiple OS / JES2 levels. > > Regards, > > Mark > -- > Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS > ITIL v3 Foundation Certified > mailto:[email protected] > Mark's MVS Utilities: http://www.mzelden.com/mvsutil.html > Systems Programming expert at http://search390.techtarget.com/ateExperts/ > > > > On Mon, 9 May 2016 19:23:20 -0500, Edward Gould <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>I will take a contrary due here. >>I never did trust SMPE with DDDEFS I always coded the JCL and I always know >>what libraries were being used/updated. Its too easy to make mistakes with >>DDEF’s (IMO). JCL is easy and straight forward in my opinion. Especially when >>you have too many fingers in the pipes (i.e. trainee’s but I have seen >>seniors screw up as well. >> >>Ed >> >>> On May 5, 2016, at 6:16 PM, Andrew Rowley <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> On 6/05/2016 8:11, Mark Zelden wrote: >>>> 1) There is a DDDEF called AAAA. It points to a DSN defined with DISP=SHR >>>> (no volser / unit). >>>> 2) The SYSLIB concatenation includes DDNAME AAAA (last in the >>>> concatenation, I didn't >>>> test a different order). >>>> 3) At execution time DD AAAA is overridden in the JCL to point to a >>>> different VOLSER than >>>> the cataloged version. >>>> 4) The data set used in the SYSLIB concatenation is the cataloged version, >>>> not the override. >>> >>> I think it is the behaviour I would expect. >>> I think the SYSLIB concatenation includes DDDEFs which specify datasets, >>> not DDNAMEs. >>> >>> Overriding SMP/E DDDEFs via JCL always seemed to me like it was a bad thing >>> to do... I always felt that the SMP/E zones should contain all the >>> definitions for the installation. Overriding DDs seemed like a recipe for >>> an inconsistent installation if e.g. some people did the override and >>> others didn't, or if some overrides became out of date. >>> >>> -- >>> Andrew Rowley >>> Black Hill Software >>> +61 413 302 386 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
