The advertised virtue of RSU is that it represents a well-defined bundle of fixes that have been tested together in 'many' shops. The idea of tacking on an RSU label to some other fix after the bundle has shipped would seem to violate the definition and compromise its value. I think we agree that it ought not to happen.
. . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW robin...@sce.com -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of Kurt Quackenbush Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2019 5:55 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: RSUs On 5/29/2019 3:57 AM, Styles, Andy , ITS zPlatform Services wrote: >> Did you really get more PTFs assigned RSU1903 the second time? Or >> did you simply get more PTFs? Let me explain: > > I believe we received new PTFs - with RSU1903 being assigned to them at the > same time. That's the behaviour I'm querying - and I think you agree - once > IBM has announced RSU1903, there should have been no further PTFs with that > RSU, whether I specify RECOMMENDED or ALL. > >> For the IBM server, when you run RECEIVE ORDER with >> CONTENT(RECOMMENDED), you get back PTFs identified with a Recommended >> Service Update SOURCEID (RSUyymm) *AND* PTFs that resolve critical >> problems (HIPER or PE). PTFs get assigned RSUyynn only once a month, but >> HIPER and PE fixing PTFs can get assigned every day. > > I understand the HIPER/PE fixes, but they surely should not be assigned > RSU1903 after the publish date? Correct. >> However, if you saw any RSU1903 sourceids being assigned during the >> second RECEIVE ORDER, then perhaps the server's behavior requires >> further analysis. If this is the case, a PMR may be warranted, but >> you're going to have to provide proof, as in the SMP/E output for both jobs. > > Well, we're coming up to another RSU date in the next few days. I can attempt > to repeat this, and see what happens. Fair enough. It will be helpful to keep track of changes to your SMP/E environment between your two RECEIVE ORDER jobs, and please be sure to use the same RECEIVE ORDER command. For example, either use FORTGTZONES in both or not at all. My preference is not at all. Kurt Quackenbush -- IBM, SMP/E Development Chuck Norris never uses CHECK when he applies PTFs. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
