On 20-May-2014 10:10 -0500, Steinmetz, Paul wrote:
If a PTF is superseded, is there an issue if on one LPAR it states
Perm Applied instead of Superseded.
I am very confident my recollection, and thus my portrayal in the
remainder of my reply, is accurate with regard to an explanation of the
described situation [and I am confident that someone will correct me if
I am wrong]:
With the same superseding PTF applied, whether a superseded PTF has
the status "Permanently applied" or "Superseded", both LPARs have the
same PTF level. If a different PTF level betwixt is "an issue", then
there is a /potential/ issue [for a mismatch to arise] *only if* the
supersede is not permanently applied.
SI50997 was superseded by SI52200.
So for reference: "the supersede" is SI52200 and "the superseded PTF"
SI52200 Permanently applied
Because the supersede is perm-applied, the status of the superseded
PTF is moot; i.e. there is no ability to lose the changes provided by
the superseded PTF due to Remove PTF (RMVPTF) activity, because a
perm-applied PTF can not be removed. On this LPAR-A, the status of
SI50997 is moot, except to infer something historically about the chain
of PTF apply activity.
If the supersede had been temp-applied, then the removal of the
supersede would lose the changes from both PTFs because the status
"Superseded" implies the PTF SI50997 was never applied; i.e. the
existence of the fix [provided by that PTF number] is
logical\logically-present [as part of the supersede], not
physical\physically-present by that name. If the PTF SI50997 had been
applied [anytime prior to its supersede], then the application of PTF
SI52200 would have required PTF SI50997 to be permanently applied during
the Load PTF (LODPTF) processing; i.e. the status of PTF SI50997 would
have shown perm-applied.
SI52200 Temporarily applied
SI50997 Permanently applied ???????
Because the supersede is temp-applied, the status of the superseded
PTF as perm-applied is relevant; i.e. there is no ability to lose the
changes provided by the superseded PTF, due to Remove PTF (RMVPTF)
activity, because only the supersede can be removed.
Of course per the supersede being only temp-applied, the potential
exists that the LPAR-B can become down-level compared to LPAR-A, but
only back to the prior PTF level [of the superseded PTF that was