On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:28:23 -0500, Mark Zelden <m...@mzelden.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:24:54 -0400, Mark Brooks <mabr...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> The XCF signalling services are available in all sysplex
>>environments, including monoplex. The rationale that motivates the
>>defining of transport classes applies to them all.
>>
>I take back my rant from your component. :-)
>
But not for this component...
Again, this isn't new, but while playing in my monoplex I had a typo
and accidentally re-enabled the check below which goes back to my
original rant. I normally have this check set up with
"PARM('NOPLEX')" but a little coding effort on IBM's part
would keep me from having to do anything.
The component that wrote the check could have looked at the IPA for
PLEXCFG=MONOPLEX (which means sysplex file system sharing would
be impossible) or since they already knew I had SYSPLEX(NO)
in BPXPRMxx, why run the check with a parm of "SYSPLEX?
CHECK(IBMUSS,USS_FILESYS_CONFIG)
START TIME: 03/30/2012 12:29:35.511624
CHECK DATE: 20040217 CHECK SEVERITY: MEDIUM
CHECK PARM: SYSPLEX
BPXH003I z/OS UNIX System Services was initialized using OMVS=(xx),
where each 2-character item is a BPXPRMxx suffix.
* Medium Severity Exception *
BPXH002E There are inconsistent sysplex parameters. In BPXPRMxx,
SYSPLEX(NO) is being used, but the owner specified SYSPLEX
for the parameter of check USS_FILESYS_CONFIG in
HZSPRMxx.
--
Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS
mailto:m...@mzelden.com
Mark's MVS Utilities: http://www.mzelden.com/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: INFO IBM-MAIN
