IBM Mainframe Forum

Hi friends.
We have a problem.
Anyone is here that who copy members in our PDS and due to change our program so that is work incorrectly.
How I can find "who that copy a member(such as a load module) in a PDS? " Is there any capability to solve this problem.
With must regards.

Source code management systems such as Librarian, Endevor and Panvalet track changes to components and allow backout of changes. That is one of the basic reasons that sites install source code managers.

You might be able to get this from the SMF data -- I'm not sure SMF tracks individual member changes but it will let you know that a data set was changed (which would include members being copied). Check with your site support group to see if MICS or MXG is installed -- these tools make using SMF data much easier.

All you can do is determine that someone opened a dataset for output using SMF type 15 records. You cannot determine what was actually done.

Hello,

Is there any capability to solve this problem.

Implement proper promotion processes - and make refusal to use them grounds for termination.

How I can find "who that copy a member(such as a load module) in a PDS? "

Why does anyone copy load modules? The compile/promotion process should accomplish this.

It sounds like your organizaton is on a "who-dun-it" mission rather than correcting a dangerous way of working. . .

I want only to know who is coping a load module in my PDS?
Can any body help me?
Thanks a lot.

Mehdi shri wrote:I want only to know who is coping a load module in my PDS?
Can any body help me?
Thanks a lot.

You've been given an answer, what more do you want?

If it is YOUR PDS then remove all accesses to it - apart from your own, of course. That will stop the copying and maybe someone will come to you asking permission to copy. Anyway, any failed attempt to read will be logged by RACF - or whatever - and you can go to the administrator and ask for a list of violations against that PDS.

I suspect the poster is a simple minded individual who wants an answer appropriate for a simple minded person. Sadly, there is no answer that will meet the needs of a simple minded person. The other possibility is the poster discovered the guilty party is himself or herself, and simply can't deal with the possibility that his or her update is bad.

It sounds like you have a serious flaw in your control and handling procedures. We can not determine how your shop is set up, we can not determine what kind of data sets these are, we can not determine what kind of RACF guide lines you follow.
In our system only a few very clearly defined users can access production libraries. We have merge procedures that document the copy of modules from test to production. Our auditors are very strict about these procedures.