> 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 >>>>> Adding a keyword to SMP/E commands that would assign a CC to a (list) of HOLDs could satisfy different tastes. The new keyword would be an override to the current SMP/E processing. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
