RE: Immediate PTF -- What's the point? -- MIDRANGE-L

Tom,

The way I read it, it was more of warning that was worded poorly but I
knew what it meant.  It takes an IPL to apply no matter how it is done,
immediate or delayed.  It was worded poorly at best.

Here's a good one for you.  I am getting ready to take our Model 270 up
to V5R2.  I downloaded the PTF's so that I could build an Image Catalog
for the install of V5R2.  In the cover letter for 5722SS1 SI03120, which
gives the instructions for building and using the image catalog at V5R1,
has a paragraph that is so circular it is not funny.  On page 6, the
first paragraph under the -- RESTRICTIONS -- section it says:

"This PTF supports only the preparation and upgrade to V5R2M0 and
subsequent supported upgrade paths from V5R1M0.  PTF and Licensed
Program installation are not supported in V5R1M0.  If you have PTF or
Licensed Program images you can load these images in the image catalog
being used for the upgrade."

So, can I load the PTF CUME as an image in the catalog or not?  The
above paragraph tells me I can't but yet I can in the same paragraph!
That's right up there with "This Page Intentionally Left Blank."  :-)

Just for grins, does anyone know if the CUME Package can be loaded and
applied from the Image Catalog while still at V5R1 and apply it once
V5R2 is installed?

Regards,

Mike Shaw   



-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tom Liotta
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 3:22 PM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Immediate PTF -- What's the point?

midrange-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>   7. Re: Immediate PTF -- What's the point? (rob)
>
>While a ptf may be applied immediately often there will be some action 
>required.  Sometimes the action is drastic enough that you might as
well 
>IPL.  Sample actions may include:
<snip>

When there's actually an "action" to perform, I have no problem. But in
this specific case, the _only_ action needed was to IPL. I just can't
see where this is in any significant way different from a PTF that's
applied as delayed but before the IPL. I'd have preferred this PTF to be
designated as 'Delayed' right at the start.


>Technically, it makes IBM look good if they can reduce the number of
PTF's 
>that require an IPL to apply.

I'm feeling as if this is _THE_ answer.

When I remember the relief back at around R1.2 and R2.1 when cumes and
pre-reqs started to come together (back before "V"ersion had much
meaning), I always feel nervous when things seem to be slipping
backwards.


Tom Liotta

-- 
-- 
Tom Liotta
The PowerTech Group, Inc.
19426 68th Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Phone  253-872-7788 x313
Fax    253-872-7904
http://www.powertechgroup.com


__________________________________________________________________
Try AOL and get 1045 hours FREE for 45 days!
http://free.aol.com/tryaolfree/index.adp?375380

Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 for FREE! Download Now!
http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455
_______________________________________________
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.