On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 23:14:44 -0700, Ed Gould <ps2...@yahoo.com> wrote: <snip>
>Well I was wrong *BUT* not totally. It seems as though that the glorious folks at CA didn't want to really play the SMP/e rules. >It came out after the following 5 (or so years) that indeed CA didn't want to put in all the prereq on the SMP/e statements. This caused major gnashing of teeth for many many sysprogs. CA's "brilliant" people well will tell everyone to specify BYPASS(ID) on the apply (rather than fixing it). For many products, that was true. >For 5 years CA got ripped regularly for not following the SMPe rules. >So instead of simply following the simple rules they have gone off on another >tangent and re-invented a CA install product. Which will take 5 years of getting >people trained in it and then you will the question asked again why doesn't CA >use SMP/e . <snip> MSM is just a GUI / front end for installing products via SMP/E. Even if you never look at using MSM, the CA client base is all benefiting from the work that is going into making all their products MSM compatible. That means "SMP/E installable and proper pre-reqs for maintenance". MSM "downloads" the same packages from CA's web site and processes them (GIMUNZIP) the same way you would if you did a "manual install". Just a whole heck of lot quicker. Mark -- Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS mailto:mzel...@flash.net Mark's MVS Utilities: http://home.flash.net/~mzelden/mvsutil.html Systems Programming expert at http://expertanswercenter.techtarget.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
