I meant what I said quite literally. I include BYPASS(HOLDSYS) at APPLY CHECK time. SMPE reports all the HOLDs very clearly. Just because they are 'bypassed' in APPLY CHECK does not mean they become invisible. Besides, many HOLD ACTIONs must be done *after* APPLY anyway, so bypassing them between APPLY CHECK and APPLY seems like an error-prone maneuver with minimal benefit. Far too much attention is lavished on getting a stellar return code you can write home about and not enough on full end-to-end consistency.
. . 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 Seymour J Metz Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2019 1:56 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: GIM40101E PTF already applied If you bypass actin holds after taking the required actions, then the APPLY will not be identical to the APPLY CHECK. that's normal. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of Jesse 1 Robinson <jesse1.robin...@sce.com> Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 7:00 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: GIM40101E PTF already applied I cannot see any reason for running a real APPLY that does not look exactly like the immediately preceding APPLY CHECK. Whatever you may learn from the CHECK should not alter your APPLY process. That's why CHECK exists. If you rerun CHECK to look exactly like the problematic APPLY, you will see squirrely messages there too. I always recommend to people some like this. APPLY [some set of selection criteria] CHECK ... APPLY [same set of selection criteria] /* CHECK */ In other words, just comment out the CHECK. Editing the APPLY in any other way is just begging for trouble. . . 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 Tom Marchant Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 2:46 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: GIM40101E PTF already applied On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 12:43:43 -0500, Elaine Beal wrote: >I am running an apply check and get messages because PTFs required as co or >pre-req are already applied. >do I have to individually exclude these ptf's? It looks like aypassapplycheck >is good only on accept. GIM40101E? That message doesn't say "already applied". It says: command PROCESSING FAILED FOR SYSMOD sysmod EVEN THOUGH IT WAS SPECIFIED ON THE SELECT OPERAND. sysmod IS NOT IN THE zonetype ZONE. Explanation: command an SMP/E command sysmod SYSMOD ID zonetype zone type The indicated SYSMOD was specified on the SELECT operand but the SYSMOD is not available for SMP/E to process. System Action: SYSMOD processing stops. -- Tom Marchant ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
