We currently have an upgrade path to get to supported levels of CA DELIVER and VIEW but we must do upgrade to z/OS 2.1 first due to various reasons. We are currently running CA-DELIVER 1.7 on z/OS 1.13. On our z/OS 2.1 Test system we were able to start the RMOSTC without issues but when we upgraded to z/OS 2.1 on Production system RMOSTC abended on startup with S0D3. Therefore we backed out z/OS 2.1. We now have customer commitment to proceed with our first jump in our DELIVER/VIEW upgrade path and upgrade to R11 of DELIVER (and VIEW) on Jan 29th on Production system (will still be at zOS 1.13). We found the fix RO10954 when looking into the S0D3 abend and have applied the fix to our Deliver R11 ( genlevel 0803 - the last available genlevel for this release) SMPE environment. Has anyone else run DELIVER R11 (genlevel 0803) with RO10954 on z/OS 2.1 environment? Have you encountered any other issues? We do have an aggressive plan to get to Deliver and VIEW 12.2 (including database conversion etc.) in the next few months but getting zOS upgraded is our 1st priority so would appreciate anyone that was in similar situation sharing their experience.I read this thread in the Community Ca-Deliver - Upgrade question - Banner pages . I assume that the the following Fix RO10954 - ABEND S0D3 DURING THE STARTUP OF RMOSTC OR SARXTD - was not applied and that is why they had the issue. It doesn't say in the thread what was done to resolve the S0D3 abend.
Regarding the post for View/Deliver: I would like to be sure that you have the proper order of loadlibs ( View first, then Deliver), which should resolve the problem.
If you have further questions, feel free to open a case.
Hi Roxanne, Thanks. We have Deliver loadlib in the LINKLST before VIEW loadlib with our current VIEW 2.0 and Deliver 1.7 environment in the environment that was upgraded to z/OS 2.1 (and where the RMOSTC task abended with S0D3). We have them in this same order on our z/OS 1.13 environment and never had this issue. We have them in this order as our understanding is that the loadlib with the higher level of EBC Common Component must be 1st in the search order. In our current environment Deliver 1.7 is at higher level of EBC Common Component (CHC2300) than View 2.0 (which is CHC2200). I will open a case to provide further details on our questions related to Deliver R11.