Folks, Does anybody have any guidelines for making a product SMP/E installable ??.
Yes, I've been thru the manuals but what I don't find are recommendations and or 'gotchas' ... Any advice and or direction would be appreciated. Kind Regards. Jim -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Ed Gould Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:50 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: SMP/E vs. NON SMPE Installs (Was BLKSIZE=3120) Lizette: Well said. In the past 40+ years I have done all types of installs. SMPE in the end simplifies installation. I have frequently rejected a product just because that it is not installed via SMPE. I have seen everything from an IEBCOPY to quite complicated installation procedures. Yes it can be cumbersome to install via SMPE but every sysprog that I have worked with (except some well lets say amateur types) have generally liked SMPE(for I&M) It is far easier to figure out levels of products with SMPE IMO. I have seen OEM's supply fixes with zaps (and use IDRDATA rather than SMPE) and when all is said and done the level of the product was almost always up in the air and made problem determination less straight forwardas IDRdata is not in a dump. Ed On Jul 22, 2013, at 3:46 PM, Lizette Koehler wrote: > Just taking this to a new thread > > Personally I prefer SMP/E installs. It provides the following > > Ease of installation > Ease of verifying Maint Levels > Ease of upgrades or phase outs. > > When I have NON SMP/E installs they tend to be just simple IEBCOPY > from here to here. > > Then it is up to me to ensure a way to validate what is in > production, what is in test, what maintenance levels are available. > > There have been some NON SMP/E install products that have done a good > job with the three points. But I have to make sure it is documented, > my team mates can find (or use) my documentation and that the process > is bullet proof. If it cannot pass the Lizette Test for > bullet-proofness, then I really do not want the product in my shop. > > At one of my previous lives, I was supporting an OEM product that was > NON-SMP/E installed. It was a nightmare. They process was a bare > bones TSO XMIT install. But I had no way to very if I had the current > version of software or not. It took many iterations before I found a > naming convention that would at least look like it could identify what > version of the product I was running in sand box and everywhere else. > > I think if you have one or two LPARs it is not so bad. But when you > are looking at 5 or more LPARs or more than one PLEX to maintain > software on, the SMP/E is a big benefit. > > > But, if you have a solid process that covers my concerns, I may not > gripe too much over a non-SMP/E install. > > Lizette > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM- > m...@listserv.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Duffy Nightingale > Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 1:04 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: BLKSIZE=3120 > > Interesting. Thanks much! > > Duffy Nightingale > Sound Software Printing, Inc. > www.soundsoftware.us > du...@soundsoftware.us > Phone: 360.385.3456 > Fax: 973.201.8921 > > The information in this e-mail, and any attachment therein is > confidential and for use by the addressee only. If you are not the > intended recipient, please return the e-mail to the sender and > delete it from your computer. Although Sound Software Printing, > Inc. attempts to sweep e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does > not guarantee that either are virus-free and accepts no liability > for any damage sustained as a result of viruses. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM- > m...@listserv.ua.edu] On Behalf Of John McKown > Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 1:01 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: BLKSIZE=3120 > > I, personally, as a z/OS system programmer tend to like SMP/E. IBM > has made installation simple via ShopzSeries. I put in my order. I > eventually get an email saying it is ready. I log on to get the > download information that I need and run a single SMP/E job which > downloads and sets it up (RECEIVE), ready to customize and install. > CA is similar, but we haven't gone to using MSM yet (don't know why). > > But the other 2 sysprogs here tend to prefer to get XMIT type > files, perhaps packaged in a "zip" file. One simply prefers XMIT > format, but will work with the CA stuff, which is downloaded to a > UNIX subdirectory when he is forced to (compressed PAX format). The > second really despises anything other than "simple XMIT". But, > then, he really dislikes z/OS UNIX. > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Duffy Nightingale > <du...@soundsoftware.us>wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I see another developer on here. And we send our product out using >> TSO XMIT. Which gives rise to a question. I saw some techie state >> that he would not install a product unless he could use SMP/E. Is >> this something us developers should explore or is it a big >> headache that is not worth it? >> >> Thanks, >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
