Re: CPF1241. Additional job completion data

[CRPence <CRPbottle@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 02 Nov 2012 07:42, rob@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> DSPOBJD OBJ(QCPFMSG) OBJTYPE(*MSGF) DETAIL(*SERVICE)
> doesn't log anything at
> Licensed program . . . . . . . . . . :   5770SS1    V7R1M0
> PTF number . . . . . . . . . . . . . :
> APAR ID  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :
>
> *BASIC shows this:
> Change date/time . . . . . . . . . . :   09/08/12  08:32:29
>
> Which just happens to be the date we put on a bunch of group PTFs
> and IPL'd.

  FWiW the message description itself has a date [and revision level of 
some sort]; i.e. the "Message level" as shown on DSPMSGD output.

> A search of PTF cover letters for QCPFMSG was fruitless also.

  Per the blank "PTF number" in the Service OIR data, no PTF included a 
replacement message file object; i.e. the *MSGF QCPFMSG was not shipped 
as an object, as part of any PTF.  Even so, the actual "objects" as part 
of a PTF are not documented [within the search-enabled APAR\PTF 
database], and thus not directly able to be searched.  If the object 
name is relevant beyond its inclusion as an object being replaced, one 
can only hope that the object name would appear as a token in the text 
of the APAR\PTF because the developer had decided that detail was 
worthwhile as a search\symptom keyword.

  Presumably the update was provided via a CHGMSGD request [performed 
in a PTF exit program], so the Message Identifier itself would be a 
better choice for searching.  Though as with many APAR\PTF, the most 
obvious and\or appropriate search [symptom] keywords are often not 
included :-(  Inhibits the ability to learn if there are equivalent 
secondary language PTFs or if the /user/ is expected to take some 
specific action against all secondary language versions of the message 
file and if for those already installed and\or those installed later.

> <<SNIP>>