Maybe because 6R1 to 7.3 is not a supported upgrade and some of the software
they have will not go to V7R2?
I understand the sentiment, and to some extent agree but not all
organizations are as progressive as Group Dekko in terms of keeping up with
the latest OS versions. In fact to get to V7R3 I think you have some
constraints as well, some of which are entirely out of your control.
Clearly there is a plan to update and I'll be supportive of that.
--
Jim Oberholtzer
Agile Technology Architects
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rob
Berendt
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 6:22 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Upgrading to 7.1 Was: Error RNQ0202 HSSFR4 HSSF_GETSH
<snip>
stuck on 6.1 for a few more weeks (hopefully) I'm patiently waiting for 7.1
before I go on. I think it will make a difference at 7.1.
</snip>
People, when you post a comment that says you're upgrading to an OS level
like 7.1, which IBM has already stated will no longer get any new TR's, can
you please post why you're not going to something current like 7.2 or 7.3?
A simple "... as it's the last level supported on our model xyz" will
suffice.
Granted, we reserve the right to flame the vendor if you reply "... as our
vendor is not ready for anything higher".
And if you've already explained it to the list don't assume we remember.
This helps save some of us a lot of time. Remember that post further down
the list that we're delayed in getting to may be yours.
Rob Berendt
--
IBM Certified System Administrator - IBM i 6.1 Group Dekko Dept 1600 Mail
to: 2505 Dekko Drive
Garrett, IN 46738
Ship to: Dock 108
6928N 400E
Kendallville, IN 46755
http://www.dekko.com
From: broehmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 05/09/2016 06:13 PM
Subject: Re: Error RNQ0202 HSSFR4 HSSF_GETSH
Sent by: "MIDRANGE-L" <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Agreed. I just think that it might be better to review
a post for perceived impact. Sometimes posts can
come off "differently" depending on how one phrases
an answer.
For what it's worth, I downloaded PYTHON27 and started
poking into what it can do for me. I was surprised
at how capable it will be. However, since my system is
stuck on 6.1 for a few more weeks (hopefully) I'm
patiently waiting for 7.1 before I go on. I think it will
make a difference at 7.1.
Your posts are arguably the only reason I began to
look at PYTHON. I remain intrigued and will definitely
pursue it. So I certainly appreciate your effort to push those areas
simply because you know the worth and I don't.
Bill
From: John Yeung <gallium.arsenide@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 05/09/2016 04:50 PM
Subject: Re: Error RNQ0202 HSSFR4 HSSF_GETSH
Sent by: "MIDRANGE-L" <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 4:49 PM, <broehmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm somewhat surprised that this thread has taken on
somewhat of a p**ssing contest. Or am I wrong.
I don't think you're wrong, exactly. I wouldn't go as far as
characterizing it that way, but I can see how you would.
The original OP was wanting to find a solution to
I'm sure, what appeared to him, was a relatively simple problem.
Instead the "list" has offered up more than the OP is
probably wanting to get into and from what I'm guessing
he's probably left for the safety of anonymity.
The list *was* directly addressing OP's question. The whole
back-and-forth to find out more about the OP's configuration is
evidence of that.
At some point, when someone asks a question and the ensuing "help"
goes on long enough, other people notice that there is a danger of
getting stuck in the weeds, and suggest maybe taking a step back. At
that point, some people may suggest *considering* another path. You
can call it "more than what they wanted to get into". Others would say
it's a way to stop banging your head against the wall and
*potentially* make better progress.
I am very guilty of trying to shoehorn Python into conversations. But
I am careful to wait until it looks like there's a real chance that
starting over with a new approach might be a more productive way to
go. Most of the time, OP does eventually solve the problem in a way
that lets them continue on their originally intended path. But
occasionally they don't, or there may be lurkers who are in a
situation where they are open to pathways other than what OP has
presented.
Now, because Python doesn't get a lot of exposure on the i, and
because I feel that there's no point in bringing it up without
presenting its potential advantages, my posts may come across to some
folks as marketing hype. And understandably, some folks react a bit
negatively to that.
I apologize for any role I had in instigating pissiness, but I'm not
trying to put down anything or anyone, nor do I mean to be a Python
shill. I am just trying to help, in my way. I am a very satisfied
Python user, and I genuinely think that some folks will benefit by
trying it.
To label someone as not worthy by reason of inability
or current system state isn't fair("we can't worry about those guys").
I don't think that's what Mark meant when he said that. If you
cherry-pick comments like that, you can paint whatever picture you
like. Looking at Mark's broader sentiment, I think he was just trying
to guard against overenthusiasm. Y'know, prevent people from seeing my
suggestion as "come try Python, it'll cure all your woes".
So, just as I think sometimes you have to try another path to make
better progress, Mark is essentially saying "hey, sometimes the other
path has its own problems that you have to watch out for, and in the
end switching your approach may not be as productive as toughing it
out on your current path". I don't think you have to attribute any
more negativity than that to either Mark's or my posts.
John Y.
midrange.com
