Dave,
I guess we will have to disagree on what holds can be bypassed.
There are examples that IBM tells you in the hold why to do that its
OK to bypass. Usually IME: action or others they tell you that you
must do this ie link it outside of SMPE with special parms. Granted
its not often but that is why its important to do as IBM instructs.
SYSGEN (you wont see that now days) was another one that there was
something special you had to do after applying the PTF.
I know when I used to do SMP work by bypass was always on 2 lines.
Yes I checked every PTF that was on the hold report to see anything I
might need to do after those PTF's went on with an apply.
A LONG time ago I was putting on a CBPDO there were 13000 PTF's going
on and the hold list (IIRC 150 were held) was well researched. In
fact IBM had not shipped all the PTF's on the tape and I finally got
to do a full apply of those 13000 PTF's and it seemed to take forever
(12+ hours).
In summary I think its OK to bypass *SOME* hold errors of course not
all.
Ed
On Sep 5, 2014, at 2:03 AM, Gibney, Dave wrote:
You should never (unless told by IBM who probably never will)
BYPASS error holds. They have the hold because they are in error.
The error could be minor or it could crash your entire system.
Use EXCLUDE of the PTF with the error if you wish to get a
successful APPLY. INMO. you shouldn't be APPLY without having
achieved a successful APLYCHECK run, but other here just run and
let the PTFs with error holds fail.
But, either way, intentionally putting broken software on your
system is not a good practice.
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Mainframe Mainframe
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 11:07 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: RSU APPLY ISSUE GIM23911E
I was getting errors while doing apply check for these HOLDERROR,
so, I
used by pass to move ahead for apply.Is there any issues you see in
this.
Do you suggest to change acceptable value for CEEPLPKA or any other
clue.
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Lizette Koehler
<[email protected]>
wrote:
There were two things in the job run I was able to see. Let me know
if this might be part of the issue
First - should you code BYPASS(HOLDS(...) HOLDE(...) )?? I always
thought you should let HOLDERROR alone unless you have a fixing PTF
from IBM.
Though I could be wrong.
BYPASS(HOLDSYS(DOC,IPL,RESTART,ACTION,ENH,DEP,AO,MSGSKEL,MULTSYS,
DYNACT,EC,DB2BIND,EXIT,DELETE,DDDEF)
HOLDERROR(AA45207,AA45706,AA45113,AA44153,AA45166,AA44844,AA45744))
Second
IEW2322I 1220 923 NAME CEEPLPKA(R) MAX
ACCEPTABLE RC=00
IEW2454W 9203 SYMBOL CEEARLU UNRESOLVED. NO AUTOCALL (NCAL)
SPECIFIED.
IEW2454W 9203 SYMBOL CEEBLLST UNRESOLVED. NO AUTOCALL (NCAL)
SPECIFIED.
IEW2454W 9203 SYMBOL STRFTIME UNRESOLVED. NO AUTOCALL (NCAL)
SPECIFIED.
IEW2454W 9203 SYMBOL LOCALECO UNRESOLVED. NO AUTOCALL (NCAL)
SPECIFIED.
I think the fact that CEEPLPKA sets max cc as 0 is the issue for
UI18451
Let me know if I am closer to the resolution.
Lizette
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 9:46 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: RSU APPLY ISSUE GIM23911E
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 21:55:32 +0530, Mainframe Mainframe wrote:
I see some more warning message before this error message like ...
GIM23913W LINK-EDIT PROCESSING FOR SYSMOD UA72482 WAS
SUCCESSFUL FOR
MODULE
CBRICMMN IN LMOD CBRINIT0 IN THE LPALIB LIBRARY. THE
RETURN CODE
WAS 04. DATE 14.247 - TIME 02:35:21 - SEQUENCE
NUMBER
000087
SYSPRINT FILE SMP00040.
...
That's from SMPOUT, not Binder SYSPRINT. Are you viewing your
output
with
SDSF? If so, open the job with "?" rather than "S" and go directly
to
SMP00040 (I
believe (E)JES has a similar feature, perhaps different syntax).
Try
"FIND
p'IEW====W'" (IIRC correctly the ISPF syntax -- help!?)
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 9:44 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2014 21:13:31 +0530, Mainframe Mainframe wrote:
Hello Rob,
In my case LKED entry in SMPE is set to 04.
Binder SYSPRINT (perhaps in your case SMP00030) should tell you:
Oops! I meant SMP00040.
o The maximum RC specified on the NAME statement (IIRC, SMP/E
converts that to a comment).
o The actual return code from the bind operation (look near the
bottom).
o Message codes, nnnn, of Warning severity. Search backward for
IEWnnnnW.
--gil
--------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
