Kurt, For a HOLD ERROR that prevents other PTFs going on, I am good with an RC04. An RC08 or higher, to me means that there is something terribly wrong with the SMP/E Process. So I would probably Panic. However, I always review an RC04 and higher and look at the CAUSER Report to see what might be the issue.
To me a HOLD ERROR with RC04 would be a reasonable expectation. It would just mean that something could not go on. For a condition code higher than 4 would mean a severe error occurred (space, corrupted PTF, etc...) and needs to be checked. I do not see a need for a hold error to fall in that category. Lizette > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Kurt Quackenbush > Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 6:51 AM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: Re: PTF error clarification > > > Is a return code of 4 more appropriate for PTFs not applied because of > > error hold? > > This is an interesting idea, which I'm curious to hear opinions on. If doing > a mass APPLY (not using the SELECT operand), and PTFs are stopped because of a > PE (ERROR HOLD), either directly or in a requisite chain that is stuck because > of a PE, what RC should be used to identify this condition? RC=8? 4? 0? > Other ideas? > > Kurt Quackenbush -- IBM, SMP/E Development > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
