Re: Cume/Groups

[Bryan Dietz <bdietz400@xxxxxxxxx>]

My "worry" about perm applying non-57xx999 PTFs is defective PTFs, or 
PTFs that change behavior.

If you need to remove it, the latter, you are hosed.  For defective PTfs 
you need to wait for fixing PTF.

Certainly you would not load and immediately perm apply PTFs, so your 
risk might be low(er).  But i think it is still there.

Bryan


Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis wrote on 3/28/2023 2:16 PM:
> CLEARLY it is the 999 PTFs that would cause issues with the link loader 
> or cause issues that can clobber the system, and thus require a reload.
>
> So restricting the perm apply to 999 PTFs (LIC) only is not a bad idea.
>
> Not sure why IBM would recommend NOT to perm apply the other PTFs - OS 
> and LPPs but we can assume they know better!
>
>      - DrF
>
> On 3/28/2023 3:05 PM, Michael Mayer wrote:
> > I have a recent IBM Case about this and they say and I quote them:
> > “When applying CUME’s / Group’s, the only PTF’s that we recommend 
> > should be applied
> > *PERM is the 5770999 LIC MF’s.
> >
> >
> > Respectfully,
> > Michael Mayer
> > IBM i on Power System Admin
> > ERMCO-ECI
> > 2225 Industrial Rd
> > Dyersburg, Tennessee 38024
> > Office and OnCall: 731.676.4318
> > Cell: 518.641.8906
> > Email: michael.mayer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:michael.mayer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > https://www.ermco-eci.com<https://www.ermco-eci.com/>
> > IBM i Personal Blog: 
> > https://ibmireference.blogspot.com<https://ibmireference.blogspot.com/>
> > “Success is not final. Failure is not fatal. It is the courage to 
> > continue that counts”.