HP3000-L Archives

August 1999, Week 4

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Johnson, Tracy" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Johnson, Tracy
Date:
Tue, 24 Aug 1999 23:19:30 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (38 lines)
Well I guess HP is "absolutely sure" they'll never
overwrite a newer file on THAT one!

From: Lindholm, Scott - Broomfield, CO
>
> Tracy,
> I just went through this as well.  If you look through the
> qualification
> screen you will see that each superceded patch will not
> qualify and the
> reactive patch will.  I have been working with an HP engineer
> on another
> Patchix problem (I will post the details when the fiasco is
> fixed) and I
> have confirmed that the qualification process does work.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:       Johnson, Tracy
> >
> > I was going throught the Patchix routine and I had
> > check BOTH PowerPatch and Reactive Patch when selecting
> > what patches to apply.
> >
> > Patchix loads the reactive patch first.
> >
> > It strikes me as odd, but if you have both, wouldn't
> > you assume the Reactive patch would be loaded AFTER
> > the Powerpatch?  Especially since the Reactive patch
> > fixes a problem that comes with the Powerpatch?
> >
> > If this is the default it seems I'd have to load
> > the Powerpatch and the Reactive patch one-at-a-time
> > to get it in the preferred sequence.
> >
> > Tracy M. Johnson
> > TRW Automotive
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2