The 5.3.0.0 outputs an extra header line -- the ANS message just happens
to be the last line displayed.

Changing the tail +10  to tail +11 and the output is the same between
versions.










Andrew Raibeck <storman AT US.IBM DOT COM>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
08/03/2005 03:10 PM
Please respond to
"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>


To
ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc

Subject
Re: differences between dsmadmc output






I'm not sure I understand what needs to be corrected... I don't know the
history of the ANS8000I message, but from what I can gather, it is working
correctly in 5.3.

If you look up ANS8000I, you'll see it is issued when running a macro or
when running in batch mode. Since that message contains the text you are
grep-ing on, it is displayed.

You can add the -DATAONLY=YES option when invoking dsmadmc to suppress
ANS8000I and other informational messages displayed by the admin client
(barring error conditions, which are not suppressed). Try it and see if
that helps.

Best regards,

Andy

Andy Raibeck
IBM Software Group
Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development
Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/IBM@IBMUS
Internet e-mail: storman AT us.ibm DOT com

The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked.
The command line is your friend.
"Good enough" is the enemy of excellence.

"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU> wrote on 2005-08-03
11:52:38:

> Under dsmadmc  version 5.2.2.0 and earlier, this command issued would
> result in no output:
>
> bash-2.04$ dsmadmc -pa=blah -id=blah -comma "select process_num,
process,
> status from processes where process='Some Process'" | tail +10 | grep ,
>
> Where "Some Process" did not exist in the process table.
>
> Under version 5.3.0.0, the same command results in:
>
> bash$ /usr/bin/dsmadmc -id=blah -pa=blah -comma "select process_num,
> process, status from processes where process='Some Process'" | tail +10
|
> grep ,
> ANS8000I Server command: 'select process_num, process, status from
> processes where process='Some Process''
>
>
> Has this been corrected in the 5.3.1 release?