Re: QSH script throws MCH3601

John McKee wrote:

Quoting CRPence:

John McKee wrote:

<<SNIP>>

So, what does "Cover Letter Only" mean? All I see in the help
is only the cover letter has been received. Since Service
Director reported the problem, why just cover letters?

<<SNIP>> There is also the option of ordering only a cover
letter irrespective of the existence of a PTF save file with
any given PTF identifier. That would seem unlikely, unless that
/problem/ recognized that the superseding PTF is already
applied, so no save file was required, yet since the details
about any preventive or corrective fix are specific to the one
PTF identifier; i.e. the text is in its cover letter.

After closer examination, SI27729 was a cover letter only. The other two were applied. Finally found how to deal with SI27729. Just delete it and then send for it. I did, loaded and applied. Problem solved.

Any speculation as to why a PTF would only have a cover letter on
the system when actual code was involved?

Other than the alluded scenario whereby if a superseded PTF existed either in *service [save file], loaded, or applied such that downloading the old code would be redundant, I am not sure why only the cover letter would have been downloaded. The latter two cases seem not to have been the case, because then either removing [apparently it was deleted instead, since not applied] or applying the PTF would have failed [requiring the supersede to be dealt with first]. I can suggest only to review the history log and WRKPRB details for the first PTF ordering activity [in response to FFDC] where only the cover letter was [ordered &] delivered. Note there may be duplicate problem entries. The job associated with the PTF messages logged to the history can be reviewed for all history messages it effected, using the JOB() parameter for the DSPLOG, and the job activity can be reviewed further if the joblog still exists. If the command strings are audited then they would appear in the audit journal.

I doubt, but it may be possible, that a race condition between two concurrent problem determination requests had both thinking the other was getting the PTF so somehow only the cover letter came across. Unlikely not only because secondary incidents should be duplicates of the primary which should be the only one to retrieve the PTFs, but that I do not expect the cover letters would be ordered separately except as originally alluded. Given concurrent orders of the same PTF, I would expect one to fail completely and the other to succeed. Again, the history would show PTF activity for around the time the orders were made; search the PTF message ranges for some prior to review that activity as well, and the joblog of the job(s) that did the work.

Regards, Chuck