On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Michael Donovan<dono...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Fair enough! It seemed to me as though the discussion had turned to more of > a concern over the amount of time needed to rework exits each time service > or a new release came out. Since there have not been changes made since > VM/ESA 2.2.0, I was curious as to why the perception existed that there was > a strong need to constantly rework user updates. If there is real function > missing, then by all means, continue the discussion. That's indeed amazing and I never checked that ;-) But even though you could take your updates along to the next release, you still need to log the update and build the exec, rebuild the INSTSEG. I think it is fair that people worry about the task before they start hacking IBM code. Shops where I worked had strict rules on what you do with local mods and what needs to be documented and managed for that. I don't recall "chances IBM changes it" was one of the factors in the decision of the local mod review board. Considering that SYSPROF is apparently so stable, the IBM response might also be to take it out of INSTSEG and tell folks "rather than invent dozens of exit points, go ahead and hack the code since we rarely change it... " -Rob
