I'm a little more lenient with SCCM (and most other System Center products)
due to the fact that if it goes down for a little while while I restore
from Veeam backup, users generally wouldn't notice or care.  Now Exchange
CUs----I usually let the "IT Marines" out there storm the beach first and
soak up all the enemy fire before I deploy my troops.

On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Juelich, Adam <[email protected]
> wrote:

> Hey Satch,
>
> Generally it seems that the consensus is to do the CU's as soon as
> possible for everything.  That's what I've followed and was relayed to me
> from some of the MVPs.
>
>
> *-----------------------------------------------*
>
> *Adam Juelich*
>
> Pulaski Community School District <http://www.pulaskischools.org>
>
> Client Management Specialist
>
> 920-822-6075
>
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Al Corsi <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Good thread, thanks for the info...
>>
>> On a side but related note, and for the CUs, the download notice
>> indicates "this hotfix has not undergone full testing.". At what point
>> are you comfortable with deploying to your production sites?
>>
>> We're just standing up a new R2 site, and figure go straight to the
>> latest! Regards, Al
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 03:08 PM, ccollins9 wrote:
>>
>> @Jeff Spengler,
>>
>> These links to MS's website explain it more.  I am going to look into
>> using the SCUP method instead of messing with and figuring out x86 vs. x64,
>> etc.
>>
>> https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/907423
>>
>> http://blogs.technet.com/b/jamess_configmgr_blog/archive/2012/02/11/installation-of-configmgr-client-hotfixes-during-client-installation.aspx
>>
>>
>>
>> Also, I forgot to mention, using the package MS gives you produces this
>> in the execmgr.log, which in turn treats the install as a failure because
>> the upgrade causes ccmexec.exe to restart.  So, yeah, probably the least
>> best way of deployment IMO. With an application, it would use the
>> deployment criteria to check for actual installation afterwards and report
>> correctly.
>>
>> Running "C:\Windows\ccmcache\2d\ccmsetup.exe" /noservice SMSSITECODE=AUTO
>> with 32bitLauncher execmgr 4/30/2015 2:57:47 PM 49104 (0xBFD0)
>> Service stopped while program Configuration Manager agent silent upgrade
>> is running execmgr 4/30/2015 3:04:16 PM 58384 (0xE410)
>> OpenProcess failed for process 45504, error 80070057 execmgr 4/30/2015
>> 3:04:16 PM 58384 (0xE410)
>> Can not continue monitoring the program after service restart because the
>> process exited.  Assume failed execmgr 4/30/2015 3:04:16 PM 58384
>> (0xE410)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:18 PM, ccollins9 <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Remember, I am not only deploying CU4, but I am also deploying the
>>> upgrade for the R2 client at the same time.  Slipstreaming an update into
>>> the initial install of an application is usually preferable to most people,
>>> otherwise we as admins wouldn't be bending over backwards to often find
>>> ways of doing it for various MS products.  Their also wouldn't be blog
>>> after blog on technet explaining how to do it.
>>>
>>> I get that MS provides a CU4 package, but I really don't understand why
>>> everyone is being so dogmatic about using it when we all know that
>>> applications are better in most every way.  Just because MS provides us the
>>> bare minimum to update the clients (packages), it doesn't mean we can't
>>> that and improve it.  Packages are archaic and require babysitting and many
>>> times redeployment or recurring deployment.  I stopped using them years ago.
>>>
>>> I do like the SCUP idea, I am going to look into that as well because
>>> using Software Updates would afford the same level of automation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Azeem Patel <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> As metioned earlier CU4 update on server creates a deployment package.
>>>>
>>>> If you want to do in controlled manner, few systems at time. THEN
>>>>
>>>> Create collection for CU4 update and deploy CU4 package on the
>>>> collection.
>>>> moving systems set by set for installation.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 10:05 PM, ccollins9 <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Justin!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Justin Chalfant <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>  Guide here:
>>>>>> http://blogs.technet.com/b/jchalfant/archive/2013/06/23/installing-configuration-manager-sp1-cumulative-update-2-patches-using-scup.aspx
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Justin Chalfant*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Premier Field Engineer - Configuration Manager
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Public Sector
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Microsoft Services
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tel : (303) 846-2701
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Email:     [email protected]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you have any feedback about my work, please let either myself or
>>>>>> my manager Rusty Gray know at [email protected]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
>>>>>> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Jason Sandys
>>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, April 30, 2015 10:28 AM
>>>>>> *To:* [email protected]
>>>>>> *Subject:* RE: [mssms] 2012 R2 CU4 update
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because it's a patch and not an application. Honestly, the best
>>>>>> option for this is SCUP and Software Updates because that's designed for
>>>>>> patches.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> J
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* [email protected] [
>>>>>> mailto:[email protected]
>>>>>> <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *ccollins9
>>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, April 30, 2015 8:34 AM
>>>>>> *To:* mssms
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [mssms] 2012 R2 CU4 update
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, I know it creates those packages.  I don't like using packages
>>>>>> when I can avoid it. I'd be curious to know why MS has the CU4 installer
>>>>>> create packages instead of applications, but that's now really germane to
>>>>>> this discussion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I got it figured out---seemed to be just an issue with that one test
>>>>>> machine.  I ended up rolling the patch into the install/upgrade with
>>>>>> (ccmsetup.exe PATCH=xxxx) and having the application's detection criteria
>>>>>> check for both the R2 productID and the 5.0.7958.1501 (CU4) patch level.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://blogs.technet.com/b/jamess_configmgr_blog/archive/2012/02/11/installation-of-configmgr-client-hotfixes-during-client-installation.aspx
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's working well so far on other machines and I get the added
>>>>>> benefit that if it fails it will retry because it's an application.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 3:11 AM, Mawdsley R. <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Yes, providing you selected the option when you upgraded the
>>>>>> server, it would have automatically created client (and server) update
>>>>>> *packages* for you located under:  Software Library>Application
>>>>>> Management>Packages>Configuration Manager Updates.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just deploy these (remember to distribute), it's what they are there
>>>>>> for J.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You could even make device collections with a query to automatically
>>>>>> show you what machines have or have not been upgraded.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rich
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
>>>>>> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *ccollins9
>>>>>> *Sent:* 29 April 2015 23:33
>>>>>> *To:* mssms
>>>>>> *Subject:* [mssms] 2012 R2 CU4 update
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This has been kicking my butt all day.  Our system was SCCM 2012
>>>>>> SP1.  I upgraded the site server to 2012 R2 CU4. I now need to update the
>>>>>> client systems
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know I can do automatic upgrade, but I also want to create an
>>>>>> application for the new client to target machines during a maintenance
>>>>>> window before turning on automatic updating.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I created an application basically just using the same install
>>>>>> command that the built-in update package uses after installing R2.  I 
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> the detection criteria set to look
>>>>>> for {8864FB91-94EE-4F16-A144-0D82A232049D}.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyway, it's doing something I've NEVER seen in all my years working
>>>>>> with SCCM 2012.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The application starts and I'm viewing the AppEnforce.log:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Waiting for process 6920 to finish.  Timeout = 15 minutes"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And there it sits, FOREVER. Long past the 15 minute timeout.
>>>>>>  ccmsetup.exe is tied to process 6920 in this case. It starts, uninstalls
>>>>>> ccmexec.exe, reinstalls it, then ccmsetup.exe closes, meaning process 
>>>>>> 6920
>>>>>> closes from the list of running processes.  Yet there it sits.  So the
>>>>>> client is successful, but it never seems to "finish" properly.  My 
>>>>>> initial
>>>>>> thought is that it is getting messed up because it's the client and it's
>>>>>> reinstalling, so who knows how that will make the logs look to me. I
>>>>>> knocked down the timeout down to 15 minutes to at  least see if it
>>>>>> terminates itself with an error, but no, it just sits.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How are others deploying UPGRADES to SCCM 2012 R2 clients?  And for
>>>>>> that matter, how are folks handling the subsequent client update to CU4?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are y'all just using the built-in packages and hoping they work? I
>>>>>> wanted to try it as an application because:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A. it would check for failure and try again until it was successful
>>>>>>
>>>>>> B. I created an app for the R2 upgrade and another one for the CU4
>>>>>> patch, then made the CU4 patch application depend on the R2 Upgrade
>>>>>> application
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am I just making this all harder on myself?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -Regards
>>>> Azeem
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> +91-9892411957
>>>> Linkedin Profile
>>>> <http://qa.linkedin.com/pub/azeem-patel-mcsa-mcts-exchange-vcp-itil/33/2aa/510/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>


Reply via email to