One caveat. APF can be modified dynamically without updating PARMLIB. Not necessarily an error if it's the first try with a new application, although in practice it's a red flag.
. . J.O.Skip Robinson Southern California Edison Company Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 323-715-0595 Mobile 626-302-7535 Office [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Schwab Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2016 10:16 AM To: [email protected] Subject: (External):Re: Which STEPLIB concatenation is not authorized? OK. How about 2 REXX commands. The first REXX command reads SYS*.PARMLIB members, parses out the DSN and Vol/SMS ignoring syntax errors, and checks each DSN for APF authorization. The second REXX command read any JCL member, parses out the steplib DSNs and Volumes ignoring syntax errors, and checks each DSN for APR authorization. This would be useful for any site or product that has z/OS APF libraries. On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Clark Morris <[email protected]> wrote: > [Default] On 20 Nov 2016 08:47:04 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main > [email protected] (Charles Mills) wrote: > >>Thanks @Gil, I think you get where I am trying to go with this. >> >>It's not that I don't know how to use TESTAUTH or think TESTAUTH is >>giving me the wrong answer. But now what? We say "one or more of your >>datasets is apparently not authorized" and the customer says "WE TOLD >>YOU THEY ARE ALL AUTHORIZED!" Now what does the poor support tech do? >>Say "Issue a 'D PROG,APF' and check all the libraries -- it's not rocket >>surgery!" > > It seems like a generic module that chases the chains would be useful > to a number of vendors and even for Roll your own code. I know that I > was enraged on earlier versions with the JCL message symbol not > defined in procedure mess and justified the effort to go to MVS SP > 1.3.2 or 1.3.3 because that was the version.release.modification level > that had the change telling you which symbol wasn't defined in the > procedure. In this case chasing down errant libraries when the > installing groups isn't responsible for setting up APF authorization > can be interesting. > > Clark Morris >> >>Would YOU buy a product from a vendor that talked to you like that? >> >>Charles >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] >>On Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin >>Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2016 1:21 AM >>To: [email protected] >>Subject: Re: Which STEPLIB concatenation is not authorized? >> >>On 2016-11-19, at 15:32, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote: >>> >>> As complicated this may sound, APF can be determined/diagnosed by >>inspection with relative ease. It's not rocket surgery. >>> >>Perhaps. But it would be poor business practice for the OP to address >>his customer so tactlessly. IBM ought to help its customers to help >>their customers. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
