VMS732_UPDATE V20.0 doesnt install release notes

[Jan van den Boogaard_1]

VMS732_UPDATE V20.0 patch (aka VMS732_UPDATE-V2000) doesnt install release notes in [vms$common.syshlp], as is/was the custom. So you find them here attached, for the record.

[Jan van den Boogaard_1]

The difference between V20.0 (dec.2009) and V19.0 (june 2009) are these patches:

VMS732_DEBUG-V0300
VMS732_LAN-V0700
VMS732_SHADOWING-V0800
VMS732_SYS-V1800
VMS732_XFC-V0600

[Ian Miller.]

Apparently VMS732_UPDATE-V0200 does not have any release notes in the kit.

The release notes can be found at
ftp://ftp.itrc.hp.com/openvms_patches/alpha/V7.3-2/VMS732_UPDATE-V2000.txt

Do report this to HP

[Ian Miller.]

the kit VMS732_UPDATE-V2000 does contain release note files - I've just downloaded it and extracted them including

VMS732_UPDATE-V2000.RELEASE_NOTES

[Oswald Knoppers_1]

I agree with Jan. Maybe the kit contains the release notes but they are not installed:

$ pipe prod sho hist|sea sys$input VMS732_UPDATE
DEC AXPVMS VMS732_UPDATE V20.0 Patch Install 11-FEB-2010
DEC AXPVMS VMS732_UPDATE V14.0 Patch Install 04-MAR-2008
DEC AXPVMS VMS732_UPDATE V11.0 Patch Install 19-JUN-2007
DEC AXPVMS VMS732_UPDATE V5.0 Patch Install 02-NOV-2005
$ dir sys$help:vms732_update*.release_notes

Directory SYS$COMMON:[SYSHLP]

VMS732_UPDATE-V0500.RELEASE_NOTES;1 VMS732_UPDATE-V1100.RELEASE_NOTES;1
VMS732_UPDATE-V1400.RELEASE_NOTES;1

Total of 3 files.
$

Oswald

[Ian Miller.]

I've just installed this kit and now have
SYS$HELP:VMS732_UPDATE-V2000.RELEASE_NOTES;1
4-DEC-2009 23:03:33.61

[Oswald Knoppers_1 · Accepted solution]

Maybe there are two versions of this patch floating around. My version doesn't contain release notes for update v20.0. See attachment.

Oswald

[Jan van den Boogaard_1]

Oswald, there could be two versions floating around ....

MASTER ECO_LIST says
CURRENT UPDATE KIT RELEASE DATE
------------------ ------------
VMS732_UPDATE-V2000 04-DEC-2009

I downloaded "my version" on december 7.

But today, ftp.itrc.hp.com shows creation date 01/22/10 12:29AM [GMT] so January 22.

[Ian Miller.]

Could this be Another case of a patch kit being fixed but the version number remains the same :-(

[Malcolm Wade]

Ian,

The same happened for the latest VMS83I-1H1 Update 7 kit; the version I had was dated 5/12/2009 but the latest kit, which also contains the new HPC file plus the release note file is dated 21/1/2010!

As I said to my local support specialist and OpenVMS Ambassador, "NOT GOOD ENOUGH!"

Malcolm

[Bob Blunt]

Not all kit releases are significant enough to require that a full new kit be developed and released. There are several issues that can be resolved that are, generally, invisible to everyone. Full releases are usually reserved for required replacement of something like image(s) that cause problems (crashing systems for instance).

There are a fair number of kit corrections that can be performed without affecting the actual contents of the kit itself.

[Ian Miller.]

Bob,
this is true but how will people know there is a updated kit?
Perhaps a minor version number could be incremented to indicate a small change.

[Volker Halle]

Hi,

some amount of time has passed since the transition of OpenVMS engineering to India, but especially the quality problems related to OpenVMS patch kits still seem to persist ! And these are the more easily visible problems.

If you look at the text of the VMS732_UPDATE-V2000 release notes, it cleary says:


Note that OpenVMS Patch kits are cumlative and that they contain all changes that have been released in earlier versions of the kit.
The issues addressed by these kits can be found in the following Release Notes files after the VMS732_UPDATE-V2000 kit is installed:
...


Does anybody read this ??? This requires, that ALL release notes for ALL previous patches for the same facility are included in each patch ! For an UPDATE patch, this mean ALL patch release notes of all the patches incldued in the UPDATE patch.

The people who've been doing OpenVMS patches for the last 30 years have strictly followed these rules. This knowledge seems to have been lost in the transition. And it seems to be an organizational and process problem, that allows these - probably unwritten - rules to be ignored.

Volker.

[Hoff]

It's much easier if you start with the working assumption that an analog of an open-source project fork has occurred with OpenVMS.

Applying the old project rules, expectations, norms and assumptions to any new project fork can lead to disappointment and frustration; outside the "fork and stall" case, these forks always have associated disruptions.

As with an actual project fork, you'll see decisions and designs and solutions revisited, and new and different choices, new and different tools, and you'll see existing and new people in various and often different roles.

You'll see change. Some will be concerning. Some may well turn out to be interesting and useful. Hopefully more of the latter, going forward. Time will tell.

In my case, realizing that I was working with what amounts to a fork, and that I now had to evaluate my assumptions, helped me grok the situation. This was at the core of the realization that I'm going to be learning more about the new OpenVMS on a daily basis.

In aggregate, you'll (still) have (the same) choices to make. Choices that you've always had. The calculations are up to you.

We live in interesting times.

[Vivek Sharanappa]

The changes in these kits were related to adding the missing release notes. As per our process for release notes changes, we don't increment the kit number. In case any image identification changes or there is any other problem ( apart from release notes) reported on a particular kit we increment the kit number and release a new kit. As this is causing confusion, we plan to add an additional NOTE before the "KIT DESCRIPTION" section so that there is clarity on what changed in the kit.

[Volker Halle]

Vivek,

thanks for the clarification.

A simple note in the Release Notes about WHY a new kit with the same number has been released, would certainly help reduce confusion and discussions.

Thanks,

Volker.

[Ian Miller.]

Any suggestions about how people will know the kit has been updated, apart from knowing the date has changed?

[Volker Halle]

Ian,

update the Comments column for the patch in the master ECO list, e.g.

ECO KITS NOT INCLUDED IN UPDATE KIT: RELEASE DATE COMMENTS
------------------------------------ ------------ -----------------------
VMS731_DRIVER-V0300 2-JUN-2005 Added missing release notes

This has been done in the past !

Volker.

[Ian Miller.]

Volker, that would mean fetching the master file and comparing it with the last one to see if something changed. It does not seem a good way of doing things.

What about a minor version number so VMS732_UPDATE V20.0 would become VMS732_UPDATE V20.1 when the release notes were fixed?

[Volker Halle]

Ian,

I download the master files every night and check for changes. It has worked fine for me for the last 5+ years.

The master file is the 'official' list of all current patches and it has a field for comments. This field has been used for these kind of changes in the past.

If you check for patches in the master file first, you should see the release date of the most recent patches and a comment, if some patch had been re-issued. Once the patch procedures are fully understood and correctly implemented, re-issueing patches should nearly never have to happen.

Changing the version number is a 'technical change' in the kit. Can you predict what kind of effects this has on the PCSI database ? There may also be tools around, which use this version information. This would need to be researched first. You wouldn't want to start changes on the OpenVMS systems themselves ...

E.g. what happens if you install VMS732_UPDATE-V2001 over VMS732_UPDATE-V2000 ?

Volker.

[Ian Miller.]

"E.g. what happens if you install VMS732_UPDATE-V2001 over VMS732_UPDATE-V2000 ?
"

I would expect most of the files to be unchanged (PCSI does not replace files of the same or lower generation).