On Tuesday, September 17, 2002, at 04:01 PM, Dave Watts wrote: > Yes, it's a very common problem. A server might be on an internal > network, > with no external access. Or, it may be configured to deny external > access > except when done to and/or through a specific port by a specific > application. Or, you might have a change management program which > requires > you to closely track what patches are added, and how they're added > (which > this updater might not do - I haven't seen how it actually fetches > multiple > updates, or whether it lists those updates a la Windows Update).
OK, humor me (I have no real server experience). Why is an updater like CFMX at a disadvantage when compared to a service pack. The service packs (MS Windows) I have installed all had a GUI that operated similar to the updater. (Only you'd download 1 service pack only to find out it had another service pack as a prerequisite)... My last experience was when windows was updated to incorporate the browser into the os & then remove it -- what a mess! As I recall, one or more of these service packs required an internet connection as part of the install process. I can understand that if you have a change management program that you would want to furnish the replacement modules and instructions to it, rather than let some foreign program apply the changes. What advantage does the service pack have here? Anyway, is there something I am missing regards service packs vs updater. TIA Dick ______________________________________________________________________ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
