On Sat, 4 Nov 2023 07:19:49 -0500, Bruce Hewson <bruce_hew...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>HI, > >APARs for me are OAxxxxx or PHxxxxx - these are the entries describing a >problem, and may be associates as Error Holds to existing PTFs. > >Before a PTF is issued, the vendor may issue a ++APAR for you to test. A >++APAR fix is not fully tested. > >++APAR names aill be AAxxxxx, BAxxxxx etc for each new iteration of a fix for >APAR OAxxxxx. > >So depending on how many attempts have been made to get the corrective fix for >the problem described in APAR OAxxxxx >you can see one or more iterations of the ++APARs. > >The eventual PTF will SUPERCEDE all ++APARs that had been built during testing >of the fix for the APAR problem. > >When searching, say via Google, use the APAR number only, e.g. OAxxxxx > >This is how I was introduced to ++APAR naming conventions. > Exactly... I was going through the thread to see if someone explained this correctly and found your post. The APAR number is different than what is seen in a ++APAR fix and then eventually in ++PTF. fix. Not many people seem to understand this - at least people I have worked with. I also work with people that don't relationship between the APAR number and the ++PTF that is show for "REL" when looking at IBMLINK or seeing what is in the public domain from an APAR search in google. Regards, Mark -- Mark Zelden - Zelden Consulting Services - z/OS, OS/390 and MVS ITIL v3 Foundation Certified mailto:m...@mzelden.com Mark's MVS Utilities: http://www.mzelden.com/mvsutil.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
