Re: SMS Feature Pack

From: Fred (hush_at_dontspamme.com)
Date: 04/28/04


Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 14:12:48 +0100

Hi Richard,

Thanks for the reply. I've been reading up on it and am fairly sure I'll go
ahead with it. I've looked through the White Paper Enterprise Software
Update Management using SMS 2.0 SUS and downloaded the files. I have 2
questions.

1 Would it be better to install SMS SP5 before or after installing SUS?
2 Are there any detailed instructions on how to install and operate the
Software update services functionality, outside of the .chm files included
in the download. A search of the MS Webpages related to the Feature Pack
doesn't seem to have anthing relevant

Regards,

John
"Richard Threlkeld <MVP>" <pleasenospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uCh1BXGLEHA.2236@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> A lot of SMS Administrators use it today and have found it helpful. I
think
> it Rocks!
>
> Yes, MBSA is the backend scanning engine used for patch determination.
SMS
> actually has many advantages over SUS such as reporting, targeting, etc.
>
> You can make your packages in about 15 minutes with the SUSFP, and spend
as
> much time as you want after testing.
>
> --
> Richard Threlkeld
> Microsoft MVP - SMS
>
> Looking to get more involved in the SMS community?
> Join the SMS email discussion list today:
> http://lists.listleague.com/mailman/listinfo/mssms
>
> "Fred" <hush@dontspamme.com> wrote in message
> news:#qjgc0ELEHA.628@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > Hi Guys,
> >
> > I have a question re the SMS2.0 Feature Pack. I'm investigating how to
> best
> > automate Security Patch management, and am looking at the Feature pack.
> > Does anyone use this? Is it any good? I understand that it integrates
with
> > MBSA to determine the requirement for patches on a given machine, is
this
> > correct?
> > Is there any advantage over using SUS instead of Feature Pack
> functionality?
> >
> > Currently I spend 2 days configuring and testing the patches as MS
release
> > them, then manually setting up the collections and queries to perform
> this.
> > Can anyone recommend a better solution?
> >
> > Many Thanks
> >
> > John
> >
> >
>
>