RE: MATAGPAT strange behavior?

The technical issue is way over my head.  I personally have no involvement
this "deep" in the MI to worry about it (yet).

I'm glad that Paul from IBM has publically indicated that this has been
confirmed as a bug.  This is a good practice.

Is it just me, or does anyone else find it silly that, although the "owner"
of this has confirmed the bug, that the customer (Gene) must still go
through the APAR rigamarole (sp?).  So, if Gene or any other customer fails
to open an APAR on this, will it forever go unfixed?  Are IBM'ers not
allowed to squeal on themselves?

Also, this is just a curiosity question, and perhaps there's a valid
technical reason, but why can't this be fixed in V5R1?  Isn't V5R1 still
supported?  Is MATAGPAT buggy in any of the supported V4 releases?

- Dan Bale
(I am *NOT* "Dale"
http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/200105/msg00281.html )
SAMSA, Inc.
989-790-0507
DBale@SAMSA.com <mailto:DBale@SAMSA.com>
  Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur.
  (Whatever is said in Latin seems profound.)

-----Original Message-----
From: mi400-admin@midrange.com [mailto:mi400-admin@midrange.com]On
Behalf Of Paul Godtland
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 3:03 PM
To: mi400@midrange.com
Subject: Re: [MI400] MATAGPAT strange behavior?

The person who owns this instruction implementation confirms that you have
detected a bug, apparently introduced in v5r1. Please feel free to open an
APAR. In this case the problem would get fixed in the next release anyway.
However, a report on a general mailing list doesn't guarantee an official
response, as I'm sure you can understand.

Thanks for asking about this problem.

Paul Godtland
plg@us.ibm.com; t/l 553-7103; Rochester, MN; 030-2, A412