Re: LIC Upgrade

[CRPence <CRPbottle@xxxxxxxxx>]

  That documentation section title clearly suggests that it is for 
replacing *both* LIC & OS.... So then should anyone be surprised 
that the documentation actually matches what the section title 
claims to document?  Given there exists documentation for performing 
install A & install B in succession does not necessarily imply that 
neither A nor B are supported as standalone installs.  I know in 
fact that over the same VRM they are and need to be, and the 
instructions at the link are for same VR#; i.e. same V(ersion-level) 
and R(elease-level) irrespective of M(odification-level).  In my 
experience the steps in the manual for LIC install could be followed 
through to the last step, then from the "IPL or Install the System" 
panel, instead of choosing any /install/ option, choose 3="Use DST" 
to power down & restart the system because IIRC the option 
1="Perform an IPL" gives an error saying "already IPLed" or some 
nonsense.  Then applying the cumulative to the same as what was 
applied on the M0 [M-level zero] should bring the OS up to the same 
level as it was before; that is because the cumulative contains 
every PTF that is part of the [prior "resave" level] OS on media 
that would otherwise be installed using the instructions.

  That Pete makes no mention of replacing the LPPs is 
circumstantial evidence that not all of the the documented steps are 
mandatory.  So if any one part of the installation instructions can 
be omitted, then what of the other steps can be omitted?  In fact 
there is a direct contradiction in what Pete suggests, to the 
referenced doc link in the quoted message; i.e. that doc suggests 
for "most upgrades, continue with Replacing the licensed programs," 
but that when "replacing software of the same version and release" 
which applies to the change of modification-level only, "do not 
replace any other licensed programs" and instead to "Complete the 
tasks in Checklist: Completing the replacement of the same i5/OS 
release."  In those instructions, the QGPL, QUSRSYS, and OPTION(01) 
Extended Base support would *not* be included, but Pete suggests 
those too need to be reinstalled.  So what really is correct?

  I am still waiting to hear what was meant by the system\install 
"insists" that the OS also be installed.  There was never any 
explanation given as to why [from what I recall as] the original 
system design, would have been vitiated by this apparent [but not 
clarified with a System Reference Code, or otherwise, as] 
requirement whereby one is /forced/ to install the OS, QGPL, 
QUSRSYS, & XTND, beyond just the LIC [and PTFs] as I expect.

Regards, Chuck

rob@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> They ARE documented in such a way. There's a whole subsection in
> the Infocenter titled "Replacing Licensed Internal Code and i5/OS
> of the same version and release". For 6.1.1 it's at
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/iseries/v6r1m0/topic/rzahc/upgradesameversion.htm
> I think I've really been harping on doing it this way the last
> week or so.
> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=upgradesameversion.htm+site%3Amidrange.com
>
> "Mark S. Waterbury" wrote:
> > Thanks for the clarifications.
> >
> > A true "Slip the LIC" should only replace 57xx-999 (the SLIC 
> > kernel), and not have to "touch" anything else.
> >
> > But, what you are saying is that you cannot really use the old 
> > "Slip the LIC" technique to upgrade from 540 to 545 or 610 to
> > 611, because those upgrades actually require updating more than
> > just the SLIC kernel (57xx-999) apparently. :-o
> >
> > If this is true, then those upgrades (from V5R4M0 to V5R4M5 or 
> > V6R1M0 to V6R1M1) should be documented in such a way as to
> > avoid any confusion, so that people do not think they can "just
> > slip the LIC" to do those upgrades.