Marna Walle's excellent Share document - Upgrading to z/OS 3.1 part 2 of 2
Technical Actions - details control block field changes and which exits or
usermods may be affected
Couple of examples:
In my case, JES2 exit 2 and 52 needs some attention
Upgrading from 2.3 to 2.4 (as I remember), a JES2 control block got split and
reassembly of the existing usermod failed - would it have worked just copying
to the new release? We didn't take the chance
During maintenance of the running z/OS version, we always review ACTION holds
(as well as others), and reviewing the PTF shows what is affected and we avoid
a lot of problems and catch reassembly requirements
Yes, existing code may work with the next release, it may fail, or it may not
fail but give the wrong results
In summary, we always reassemble, and test for maintenance and for z/OS upgrades
Labor use is always the issue - do more work before rollout and possibly avoid
problems, or less investigation before and whack problems as they arise
Since the OS demands stability as the base for everything else, we spend the
labor before rollout
My 1 centavos worth
David
On Monday, April 21, 2025 at 08:03:37 AM EDT, Radoslaw Skorupka
<00000471ebeac275-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
I can be wrong, but I think it is not exactly true.
Yes, USERMOD is good thing, no doubt.
However I think the usermod flags your exit whenever any of the
components are being modified - but modification need not mean
reassembly requirement. In other words, some false positives are possible.
Of course, as I said, reassembly is quite simple, simpler than analysis.
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland
W dniu 21.04.2025 o 13:02, Lennie Bradshaw pisze:
> When I was doing systems programming work of this type, we always installed
> the exits using USERMOD statements in SMPE. Then if any exit needed
> re-assembly it would be done automatically by SMPE.
> It takes a little work to understand the process, but it pays off in the
> longer run.
>
> Lennie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List<IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of
> Radoslaw Skorupka
> Sent: 21 April 2025 10:37
> To:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Exits reassembly
>
> W dniu 21.04.2025 o 10:14, Peter pisze:
>> Hello
>>
>> Apology for the dummy question
>>
>> How do we know if a particular exit needs a reassembly before
>> migrating to a newer zos version?
>>
>> I have seen some exits work by just copying over without reassembly.
>>
>> Any thoughts or advise based on your experience
> It's not dummy question.
> However there is no requirement to *always* reassembly an exit when migrating
> to newer z/OS version.
> However:
> 1. Why do we reassemble? Because exit uses macros and structures which are
> likely (but not always) may change.
> 2. Instead of detailed analysis which it is simply easier to reassemble.
> 3. It is not only system upgrade. It can be some PTF as well, which causes
> the need to reassemble. IMHO much less likely.
> 4. There are exits for some applications, in that case the need for
> reassemble would be different. It can be because system change or product
> change. Or both.
>
> My €0.02
>
> --
> Radoslaw Skorupka
> Lodz, Poland
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
