I meant what I said quite literally. I include BYPASS(HOLDSYS) at APPLY CHECK 
time. SMPE reports all the HOLDs very clearly. Just because they are 'bypassed' 
in APPLY CHECK does not mean they become invisible. Besides, many HOLD ACTIONs 
must be done *after* APPLY anyway, so bypassing them between APPLY CHECK and 
APPLY seems like an error-prone maneuver with minimal benefit. Far too much 
attention is lavished on getting a stellar return code you can write home about 
and not enough on full end-to-end consistency. 

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler 
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
[email protected]

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of 
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2019 1:56 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: (External):Re: GIM40101E PTF already applied

If you bypass actin holds after taking the required actions, then the APPLY 
will not be identical to the APPLY CHECK. that's normal.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3

________________________________________
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of 
Jesse 1 Robinson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 7:00 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: GIM40101E PTF already applied

I cannot see any reason for running a real APPLY that does not look exactly 
like the immediately preceding APPLY CHECK. Whatever you may learn from the 
CHECK should not alter your APPLY process. That's why CHECK exists. If you 
rerun CHECK to look exactly like the problematic APPLY, you will see squirrely 
messages there too.

I always recommend to people some like this.

   APPLY [some set of selection criteria]       CHECK
   ...
   APPLY [same set of selection criteria]  /* CHECK */

In other words, just comment out the CHECK. Editing the APPLY in any other way 
is just begging for trouble.

.
.
J.O.Skip Robinson
Southern California Edison Company
Electric Dragon Team Paddler
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
[email protected]

-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Tom 
Marchant
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 2:46 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: (External):Re: GIM40101E PTF already applied

On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 12:43:43 -0500, Elaine Beal wrote:

>I am running an apply check and get messages because PTFs required as co or 
>pre-req are already applied.
>do I have to individually exclude these ptf's? It looks like aypassapplycheck 
>is good only on accept.

GIM40101E? That message doesn't say "already applied". It says:

command PROCESSING FAILED FOR SYSMOD sysmod EVEN THOUGH IT WAS SPECIFIED ON THE 
SELECT OPERAND. sysmod IS NOT IN THE zonetype ZONE.

Explanation:

command   an SMP/E command
sysmod    SYSMOD ID
zonetype  zone type

The indicated SYSMOD was specified on the SELECT operand but the SYSMOD is not 
available for SMP/E to process.

System Action:  SYSMOD processing stops.

--
Tom Marchant


----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to