Re: sms 2003 patch management is brutal!
From: James (lee.james_at_spartan.ab.ca)
Date: 11/13/04
- Next message: Kim Oppalfens: "Re: Client deployment using logon script"
- Previous message: Daniel E: "RE: this functions i miss in SMS 2003"
- In reply to: Cathy Moya [MS]: "Re: sms 2003 patch management is brutal!"
- Next in thread: yaba daba doo: "Re: sms 2003 patch management is brutal!"
- Reply: yaba daba doo: "Re: sms 2003 patch management is brutal!"
- Reply: Cathy Moya [MS]: "Re: sms 2003 patch management is brutal!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 13 Nov 2004 13:42:18 -0800
Hi Cathy,
I seriously hope you meant to say 'will have to wait for SP2 or a
forthcoming add-on'.......I would be seriously choked if I implement
SMS with it's less than ideal patch management only to find if I want
it to work properly I'll have to upgrade to SMS 2005.
J.
"Cathy Moya [MS]" <camoya@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:<ebMO0VPyEHA.2892@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>...
> You did, it just isn't called a synch host in the setup interface.
> <restraining myself from a tirade on interface design>
>
> It is screen #7 of the setup process and the text is:
> ----------------------------------
> Database Updates
> If you have internet acces, setup can configure a task to automatically
> obtain the latest database. Please specify the NetBIOS name of an existing
> SMS client computer to run this taks. This computer will be added to a
> collection, and a weekly assignment will run while you are logged into the
> computer you specify below. Leave the space below blank if you do not want
> to use this feature.
> Obtain updates using:
> <field>
> -------------------------------------
> Look ma, no synch host mentioned, but that's what it is. Office uses exactly
> the same setup wizard, and the same screen. There may be slight improvements
> in the screens when we release the WUS scanner (believe me, we're trying),
> but the real improvements will have to wait for another version of SMS. And
> we're working on it.
>
>
> --
> Cathy Moya, MCSE: Security
> Technical Writer, Enterprise Management Content Group
>
> Check out the SMS Technical FAQ:
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sms/sms2003/techfaq/default.mspx
> This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties and confers no rights.
>
>
> "yaba daba doo" <yabadabadoo@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:EB574130-5307-4DD6-98F1-CF11DE5A6EFE@microsoft.com...
> > Cathy,
> >
> > I never got the option to setup synch host during installation of scan
> > tools.
> >
> > "Cathy Moya [MS]" wrote:
> >
> >> The sync host is only selected once, during installation of the scan
> >> tool.
> >> You don't re-select it when running the Distribute Software Updates
> >> Wizard.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Cathy Moya, MCSE: Security
> >> Technical Writer, Enterprise Management Content Group
> >>
> >> Check out the SMS Technical FAQ:
> >> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sms/sms2003/techfaq/default.mspx
> >> This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties and confers no rights.
> >>
> >> "yaba daba doo" <yabadabadoo@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> >> news:B649B4D0-B6BA-43AB-B65D-E0A9CAA73260@microsoft.com...
> >> >I am actually going thru implementing Patch Mgmt myself and I am running
> >> >into
> >> > alots of problem. Specially the wizard is not giving me the options
> >> > that
> >> > it's suppose to give me. I am not able to select a synch host, it
> >> > never
> >> > gives me that option in the wizard.
> >> >
> >> > But I do have to say that people on this newgroup are quite helpfull
> >> > with
> >> > answering the questions. I haven't given up on it yet.
> >> >
> >> > "Allan Tee" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> i agree, i would rather also use SUS than SMS's software updates. but
> >> >> then
> >> >> again, SUS can only handle OS/IE patches. SMS patch management is
> >> >> extremely
> >> >> hard to implement!
> >> >>
> >> >> "Kim Oppalfens" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > inline
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > I just started to play with patch management. I created an
> >> >> > > advertisement for the latest IE cumulative update (834707) using
> >> >> > > the
> >> >> > > Software Update Wizard. I then targeted it at my 'servers'
> >> >> > > collection.
> >> >> > > In the options I told it to defer rebooting for servers.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Here's my experience with it:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > - The program ran on servers that already had the patch installed
> >> >> > > previously (isn't that the point of the scan tool, to determine
> >> >> > > what
> >> >> > > patches are needed?)
> >> >> > Yes, it is, are you sure the patch was installed and active? That
> >> >> > means
> >> >> > was the machine rebooted after the patch if needed? If a patch that
> >> >> > requires a reboot is installed without rebooting the patch isn't
> >> >> > really
> >> >> > alive and the scan tool will report it as such. By consequence the
> >> >> > patch
> >> >> > will reinstall.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > - Despite telling it to not reboot the servers, lo and behold all
> >> >> > > the
> >> >> > > servers tell me they are rebooting and gave me the countdown timer
> >> >> > How did you tell it not to reboot the servers? I assume in the
> >> >> > distribute software updates wizard. Did you also use the suppress
> >> >> > reboot
> >> >> > switch on the patch? The wizard actually waits for the result of
> >> >> > every
> >> >> > patch you install if you suppress the reboot in the patch it will
> >> >> > write
> >> >> > to a log file that the reboot was suppressed. Once all patches have
> >> >> > installed the wizard will check the log file and verify whether any
> >> >> > reboots were suppressed. If so, the wizard tool might trigger a
> >> >> > reboot,
> >> >> > unless you suppress that reboot during the wizard.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > - There's absolutely no logging in Event Viewer on the clients to
> >> >> > > say
> >> >> > > that the patch was installed
> >> >> > Not really an sms issue, this is something that the patches should
> >> >> > take
> >> >> > care of if we want that. Sms does generate a log file called
> >> >> > patchinstall.log and registers in wmi.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > I think I'll stick with SUS........it's free, it's intuitive in
> >> >> > > comparison, and it works as it's designed.
> >> >> > I agree with all your observations on SUS, just want to add that sms
> >> >> > works as designed as well.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I think Microsoft is well aware of the not so intuitive way sms
> >> >> > patch
> >> >> > management works.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > J.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Kim Oppalfens
> >> >> > Proud father of Lennart Oppalfens
> >> >> > Since 05/11/2004 08.53 GMT+1
> >> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
- Next message: Kim Oppalfens: "Re: Client deployment using logon script"
- Previous message: Daniel E: "RE: this functions i miss in SMS 2003"
- In reply to: Cathy Moya [MS]: "Re: sms 2003 patch management is brutal!"
- Next in thread: yaba daba doo: "Re: sms 2003 patch management is brutal!"
- Reply: yaba daba doo: "Re: sms 2003 patch management is brutal!"
- Reply: Cathy Moya [MS]: "Re: sms 2003 patch management is brutal!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|