Sure. On XP or 2003, when you open an admin. Template policy, you see at the bottom that it says, "Supported On" and then shows the minimum OS or app level required that supports that policy. Those are the supported tags. In GP Editor you can do View, Filtering and filter by Supported level so that, for example, you see only policies that support XP, SP2. It's a handy feature that was intro'd in XP.
The good (or reasonably good) news on all of this, is that with the introduction of Vista, the whole ADM and ADM management story changes. No longer will ADM (called ADMX in Vista) files be stored within each GPO and no longer will they be automatically updated. You will have a "central store" that holds all ADMXs and you can update it centrally and purposefully. Darren -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Graham Turner Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 10:35 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] adm file management Darren, i value your (and all others who help me) correspondence from the mailing list and also the content of your web site. 'clear as mud' sums it up !! final qu - you referenced a concept of 'supported tags' - is it easy 4 u to explain in a nutshell GT > Graham- > Yes, the dates can be confusing. I typically take these as groupings. > So, all of the ADMs that ship with a given OS/Service Pack should stay together. > The reality is that the two conf.adm files you list below are > identical in content (windiff is a good tool for this), even though > their dates are not identical. In the case of system.adm 2003/SP1 > added some additional policies for the secure mode IE stuff that > wasn't in XP,SP2, but otherwise it was identical (I list out the > differences between the XP,SP2 and 2003, SP1 ADMs at > www.gpoguy.com/admdiffs.htm). To answer your question, yes, if you are > managing GP from a 2003 server machine, then you could certainly have > ADMs from XP, SP2 in your GPOs. By default, the ADMs in 2003's > c:\windows\inf folder will auto-update each GPO you edit so over time, > unless you change that default behavior, your GPOs will be "upgraded" > to 2003,SP1, but in general, as long as you are on 2003, SP1 or XP, SP2, you should be good to go. > > Clear as mud? > > Darren > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Graham Turner > Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 8:21 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] adm file management > > Darren, thanks 4 mail back > > in the interim i dug into the 'versioning' of these ADM's and it seems > that "most recent" versions are not always in the same OS > > i cite comparison of ADM version (ie dates) on different OS > > conf.adm - 22/2/03 (2003/SP1) - 17/7/04 (xp sp2) system.adm - > 18/02/05 > (2003 / sp1) - 17/07/04 (xp / sp2) > > so if i read this tight it would seem the rule of latest OS is not > strict - hence my view to come back to the 'most recent' ?? > > i assume if the 'admin' workstation is running windows server 2003 we > are ok to put in the ADM files shipped with say XP sp2, assuming of > course as above they are more recent ? > > > > > >> Graham- >> You are correct on both counts. ADMs are typically supersets of each >> other--2003, SP1 is a superset of XP,SP2, XP is a superset of 2000, >> etc. And it is definitely best to manage such a mixed environment >> from the latest platform (e.g. XP). The key of course, is to pay >> attention to the "Supported" tags in the newer ADMs. >> >> Darren >> >> Darren Mar-Elia >> For comprehensive Windows Group Policy Information, check out >> www.gpoguy.com-- the best source for GPO FAQs, video training, tools >> and whitepapers. Also check out the Windows Group Policy Guide, the >> definitive resource for Group Policy information. >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Graham >> Turner >> Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 7:41 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [ActiveDir] adm file management >> >> quick question (hopefully not too daft) ref ADM file management >> >> it seems different OS's ship with different versions of the 'standard' >> ADM files that include conf.adm / interes.adm / system.adm ... >> >> say if you are maintaining policies that link to containers holding >> say XP , 2000, >> 2003 computers it would not be unreasonable to manage them all from a >> single host on which you edit policies. >> >> am i correct to say that in maintaining the settings in these files >> are always cumulative - if that's the right word >> >> if so then it is correct working practice to always use the MOST >> RECENT version of an ADM file with no fear of breaking previously >> functional GPO's ??? >> >> GT >> >> >> >> >> >> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx >> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx >> List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx >> >> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx >> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx >> List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx >> > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.activedir.org/ml/threads.aspx
